parish commissioners, with power to purchase and hold
lands and hereditaments for the purposes of the act.—
The bill, as amended, was reported.

On Thursday, August 2, in a committee of supply, a
vote of £3,711 was passed for the Statute Law Commission,
and subsequently a resolution moved by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, granting a credit vote of
three millions for the General Purposes of the War,
was agreed to.—The supplemental vote for Commissariat
Services was then brought forward by Mr. F. PEEL,
who explained the causes which had led to this large
expansion in this item of expenditure. Among these
causes he mentioned the heavy charges incurred on
account of the provisions and supplies furnished to the
Sardinian and Turkish contingents. The result had
been to occasion a gross outlay on the year, as now
estimated, of £8,700,000, of which £2,500,000 remained
to be voted. The discussion of the grant for this
department of service occupied the committee during
the greater part of the early sitting.

The Sale of Beer Bill and the Militia Ballots
Suspension Bill were severally read a third time and
passed.

The house afterwards went into committee, and
resumed the discussion on supply. Mr. MONSELL, in
moving the votes for the Ordnance Establishment, as
organised upon the new system, explained the principles
on which the recent changes in the department had
been framed. Two objects, he observed, had been
chiefly kept in view—centralisation and responsibility.
To secure the former result the artillery and engineer
corps were placed under the control of the Horse
Guards. All plans for fortification and other military
constructions were to be submitted to the Commander-
in-Chief, the Inspector of Fortifications, and the
Director-General of Artillery. The general departments
of the Ordnance were to be placed under the
Secretary of State for War. On the question of
responsibility he stated that the chief of each department
would be held strictly responsible for its working, and
would consequently possess the corresponding privilege
of appointing clerks and other employés in their
respective offices. Important results would, he believed,
attend the adoption of the new system.—The successive
votes set forth in the estimate for this and other branches
of expenditure were then agreed to, after a miscellaneous
discussion, which lasted for several hours.

The vote of £15,000 for the erection of a temporary
building at Kensington Gore as a Museum of Art and
Science, was opposed by Mr. SPOONER, on the ground
that it pledged the house to a vast consequent expenditure
for edifices of which no plans were yet prepared.
—Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Disraeli, and Lord Palmerston
argued the expediency of providing some place where
the large collections of artistic and scientific productions
already in the possession of the country could be exhibited.
—On a division the vote was carried by a majority
of 85 to 33.

The second reading of the Charitable Trusts Bill was
moved by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, who proposed to
reserve the formal discussion until some future stage of
the measure.—Mr. KNIGHT objected to this summary
mode of procedure with respect to so important a
measure.—After some remarks from Sir G. Grey, Mr.
Disraeli, the Solicitor-General, Mr. Malins, and other
members, the motion was agreed to, and the bill read a
second time.

The house having gone into Committee of Ways and
Means, the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved a
series of resolutions, authorising the treasury to raise
£7,000,000 in Exchequer Bills or Bonds, and proceeded
to explain the causes which rendered this additional
provision of financial resources necessary. In April
last he bad estimated the revenue of the year at
£86,339,000, including 16 millions to be raised by loan,
and three millions of Exchequer Bills, and reckoning
also £200,000 as the anticipated receipt from the proposed
stamp on banker's cheques which he had subsequently
found it expedient to abandon. The estimated expenditure
at that time was £81,899,000, leaving a computed
margin of £4,240,000. These computations had been
verified by the result, so far as the revenue was
concerned, but the outlay on the various branches of
military service had swelled far beyond the original
estimate. The several increments had been already
stated and explained but he briefly recapitulated their
amounts, stating that upon the army, commissariat, and
militia the expenditure had augmented from £16,221,000
to £18,789,000; on the navy and transport service from
£16,653,000 to £19,378,000; and on the ordnance from
£7,803,000 to £8,644.000. This gross charge for military
departments, which had been reckoned in April at
£43,677,000 must now be estimated at £49,812,000; and
the actual cost for the four months of the financial year
already passed had been almost precisely in that proportion
—namely, £16,512,000. The nett result would be
to overrun the original margin of surface by nearly two
millions. To fill up this chasm he asked the house to
enlarge the power of issuing Exchequer Bills from three
to seven millions, with an added proviso empowering
the treasury to raise some part of that sum by
Exchequer Bonds. This supply he computed would leave
a surplus in the Exchequer of something over two
millions, but of that excess a considerable portion had
been already absorbed. The right hon. gentleman stated
in conclusion that the outstanding amount of the
unfunded debt was now £17,099,400 of Exchequer Bills,
and six millions of Exchequer Bonds, and he argued
that although the total might appear large, it had been
much exceeded at several periods both during and since
the last war.—Mr. GLADSTONE, without opposing the
resolution remonstrated against the system of resorting
to loans for the supply of war expenditure without
attempting to raise any augmentation of revenue from
taxation.—The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave
some explanation, and after a few remarks from Mr.
DISRAELI and Mr. GLYN, the resolutions were successively
put and agreed to.

The Limited Liability Bill was read a third time and
passed, after a miscellaneous discussion.

On the order of the day for the second reading of the
Crime and Outrage (Ireland) Bill, Mr. BOWYER
objected to its proceeding any further. He observed that
the very title of the bill was offensive to the feelings of
Irishmen.—After a discussion the house divided, and
there appeared—For the second reading, 42; against it,
19; majority, 23.

On Friday August 3, Mr. LAING called attention to
the Recent Conferences at Vienna, and moved for
copies of the correspondence which had subsequently
taken place. He knew that almost all the great bankers
and various other mercantile firms in Europe were of
opinion that the proposals submitted by Count Buol
were such as might have been accepted without any
disparagement of national honour.—Sir George GREY
said her Majesty's government would not be justified
in laying the papers before the public without first
obtaining the concurrence of the French government.
The right hon. baronet then contended that the government
were justified in insisting upon the limitation of the
naval power of Russia in the Black Sea, as that appeared
to be the most effectual means which could be adopted
by the Western powers with a view to securing the
independence of Turkey, and at the same time insuring
the peace of Europe. (The right hon. baronet then
read extracts from Lord Clarendon's instructions to
Lord J. Russell, for the purpose of showing what
were the views and intentions of her Majesty's government.)
The house would recollect that the government
had been blamed in not having broken up the conferences
when it became obvious that Russia declined to submit
to terms which limited her aggressive policy, but her
Majesty's ministers were unwilling to break off the
negotiations so long as there appeared to be any hope of
bringing about an honourable peace. The French
government had taken the same view. But even
assuming that the proposition had been accepted by the
governments of England and France, and rejected by
Russia, there was no certainty that Austria would place
itself side by side with the Western powers. Had the
government accepted the proposition it would have been
necessary to keep up a fleet in the Black Sea, without the
prospect of even securing a safe, permanent and
honourable peace. But, independent of these considerations,
it should be borne in mind that her Majesty's government
would not be justified in acceding to the Austrian