ITEMS BY THE MAIL.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5463, 30 September 1878, Page 3

ITEMS BY THE MAIL.

. The intelligence contained iu the Home News of August 15, received by the last mail, has to a great extent been anticipated by the European Mail previously received. The Home News of the date above quoted, speaking in reference to the position of the Premier, says ; It is worth noticing that of the noble and eminent political personages who are at present united in the closest ties of friendship and admiration to Lord Beaconsfield it is not Lord Salisbury only who has been won to amity and good-will from estrangement and hate. Of the other distinguished peers whh surrounded the Prime Minister on Saturday night, the Duke of Abercorn—a duke of Mr. Disraeli’s own creation—was .generally classed with the Whigs twenty years ago, and denounced Mr. Disraeli as untrustworthy and unscrupulous ; the Duke of Buccleuch, who took the chair at the banquet, was not only a strong Peelite throughout the whole time that Mr. Disraeli was pouring forth the venom of his invective against Peel, but was personally opposed to Mr. Disraeli and personally attached to Mr. Gladstone ; the Duke of Northumberland eleven years since was Mr. Disraeli’s uncompromising antagonist, and took an active part in the intrigues against the Reform Bill of ’67, of which Northumberland House, then standing in the Strand, was the focus. His Grace was also a political friend of Mr, Gladstone, and would probably have acted with Mr. Gladstone up to now had not his extreme views struck apprehension into the dued mind. Listly, there is this crowning fact : in 1852 Mr. Disraeli was made Chancellor of the Exchequer, not because he had any aptitude for the office, but because, had he been appointed Secretary of State, he would have been liable to the duties of per-.u-i.vl attendance on the Queen, and the Queen entertained towards him a strong personal objection. Yet now no Premier was ever more of a Court favorite than Lord Beaconsfield.

The occupation of Cyprus seems to be very generally regarded by the Press and public at home, as indeed it is in the colonies, with very general satisfaction. “We have shown,” said Lord Salisbury, at a banquet on the 27th August, “ in govering India that where English rule and English influence extend, peace and order revive, wealth and prosperity increase.” Hence he argued the readiness and joy with which the people of Cyprus accepted the new rer/ime , and the best omen we could have for success iu our new venture. This sentiment appears to be echoed throughout the country.

Mr. Plimsoll, in the speech in which, on Wednesday, July 31, he proposed that the BUI brought forward by the Chancellor, of the Exchequer for supplying the Duke of Connaught with a proper marriage portion, made himself the exponent of the dissatisfaction which is springing up in some quarters with the new development of the claims of prerogative asasserted by the occupation of Cyprus and the conclusion of the Angio-Turkish Convention. Mr. Plimsoll sdmired and loved the Queen, admired and loved a Monarchical Government. But if treaties were to be ratified without the consent of Parliament, by the will of the monarch alone, we were threatened with a state of tilings more fatal to constitutional liberty than in the time of Charles I. This line of argument did not meet with much approval. Sir Charles Dilke briefly repeated his demand “ that returns should be laid before Parliament of the increase of the Duchy of Lancaster and of the amount by which the Privy purse was increased by the savings in the other departments of the Civil List." The result of the debate was a foregone conclusion, and the third reading of the Bill was carried by 151 votes to 13. As regards the recent naval review, it was not, in the popular sense, a success, because it was held amid storm and rain, which at times completely obscured the prospect. But as a demonstration of our naval strength, no success could have been ibore complete, and no exhibition more impressive. The fleet at Spithead, under the comraoud of Sir Astley Cooper Key, which is only a part of our naval resources, may be estimated as equal in strength and fighting capacity to the collective fl-et of any other nation. On Tuesday there were uo temporary crews : nothing was done for display ; all was conducted in a spirit of stern practical workmanship. Twenty-six men-of-war took part in the mighty spectacle, representing a total of 219 gnus, 72,350 horsepower, 99,549 tons, 6691 crew. The speech in which Mr. Stanhope brought forward the Indian Budget was an excellent specimen of clear and close statement, and secured for him the compliment of so severe a critic as Mr. Fawcett. The estimates of expenditure for 1877-8 amounted to £58,636,000, the actual expenditure was £62,000,000, leaving a deficit ef more than three millions. The total expenditure on the famine in Southern India was 9£ millions—in all 1,350,000 lives were lost. To obtain a surplus of 1J millions a year, as proposed by Sir J. Strachley—to meet famine expenses in the. future—there must be' new taxation or reduction of expenditure. Mr. Stanhope denied that the latter alternative was practicable. On the other baud, Mr. Fawcett in his speech declared that such reduction could be effected with advantage and without delay, denounced the military expenditure in particular as excessive, and concluded with a motion, negatived by 59 to 20, that in view of the power claimed by the Crown to employ any number of Indian troops in all parts of her Majesty’s dominions, there is uo sufficient security against the military expenditure of India being unduly increased. Two sotial causes edehre have been recently tried. Vice-Chancellor Malius has decided that the care of the children of Mr. and Mrs. Agar Ellis —the father being a Protestant, and the mother, who is a daughter of Lord Camoys, a strong Catholic —belongs to Mr. Agar Ellis, notwithstanding a pledge made by the gentleman that Mrs. Ellis should lie permitted to bring up the offspring of the marriage in the Catholic Church. Secondly, the irrepressible Colonel Dawkins has altogether failed iu his action for libel against Dr. Russell, as proprietor of the Army and Navy Gazette, iu which he laid the damages at £IO,OOO, the jury accompanying their verdict for the defendant with a declaration that Dr. Russell’s conduct had been without reproach. The Westminster Review contains, says the Examiner, an article on “the. House of Lords” by some one who has been at paius to master the statistics of division lists for more than a century, and has deduced from them some striking results. He finds that it is not from the hereditary peers that the most determined opposition to liberal measures has come, but from the bishops, and the Scotch and Irish representative peers. The hereditary peers, occupying “a position which gives them wealth and leasure to cultivate and improve their minds] and imposes on them the obligation to use them for the good of the country,” have shown a greater openness to new ideas than the elected members of the Chamber; the symptoms of a want of sympathy with ditions of thought have appeared chiefly not in the heart of the House of Lords, but in the limbs. We had an instance of this last session in the attitude of the Lords towards the Burial Bill, To rob the House of Lords of the sting of its obstructiveness, the Westminster reviewer would propose to out off the tail ; he would exclude the bishops altogether, and ho would abolish the “ representative” system in the Schotoh and Irish peerages, and allow every peer to sitas his own representative. Obituary of the Month.—Oapt. Sir G. Biddlecome, R.N., C. 8.; Admiral Sir H. R. Yelverton, G. 0.8.; Mrs. Julia Oecilie Stretton; E. C. Middleton, J.P. and D.L. for Leicester; W. F. White, J.P, and D.L. for Middlesex; Rear-Admiral P. A. Helpman ; Dr. Wilkinson, President British Medical Association ; W. Purdy (Bank of South Australia) ; Lady Parker ; the Hon. C. A. Berkeley ; RearAdmiral A. H. Gardner, C. 8.; Lady Dalliug and Buiwer; Viscount Chelsea; Lord Dynever; Sir S. Mainwaring, Bart.; the Hon. Catherine Maud Spencer Churchill; the Hon. Mary Eliza Henniker ; J. U. Taylor, Mayor of Bedford ; Sir John Ennis, Bart,