The Week.

however , thafc this was not a fitting time to deal with the question , and thus the matter dropped . —The Earl of Denbigh succeeded in eliciting from the Earl of Derby a most important statement in reference to the Eastern question . The Earl of Denbigh apparently is anxious that England should interfere actively in tbe East for the preservation of Turkey . He wished

particularly to know whether England had joined with France and Russia in urging upon Turkey the cession of Candia to Greece . Tbe Earl of Derby ' s reply was that she hacl not . The French ambassador had called upon Lord Stanley , ancl told him that the French Government was about to instruct its representative at Constantinople to advise the Porte to cede Candia ;

but Lord Stanley only replied that if the Porte chose voluntarily to cede Candia England would not interfere , but she Avould take no step to induce the Porte to do so . A similar answer had been given to a similar representation made by the Russian Ambassador . There was a short discussion in the House on the 2 Dth ult . in reference to the militia , but it and the

subsequent proceedings ivere without much interest . The proceedings on the 1 st inst . had little interest . The chief topic of discussion was the possibility of employing soldiers in industrial occupations . The Duke of Cambridge said the military authorities were anxious as far as possible to promote such employment ; but there were insuperable difficulties in the way ,

so far as the soldiers in this country were concerned , owing to the constant moving of regiments . ——On the 2 nd inst . the ' only business of much interest was a question asked by the Earl of Clarendon in reference to the reported cession of Russian America to the United States . The Duke of Buckingham said corroboration had been received from St . Petersburg !! of the report that Russia and the United States AA'ere in treaty for tbe cession to the latter of Russian America . His Grace

added that he did not believe , were such a cession to take place , it would have any ill effect on our colonies . On the 28 th ult . the questions in the HotrsE ou ComiOKS were very numerous . Not many of them , hoivevev , had much interest . Mr . Darby Griffiths asked a foolish question as to the manner in which Mr . Walpole intended to deal with persons convicted of murder . Mr . Walpole ' s reply was dignified and

manly . In effect , he told those who questioned his action in these matters that it Avould be better for them to have full information respecting them before they found fault . —There were several notices of amendments to the Reform Bill , and the Chancellor of the Exchequer for once gave a straightforward reply in reference to the bill . Mr . T . Cave wanted to

know if persons who had £ 30 in a friendly or building society might have a vote as well as those having that sum in a savings ' bank . The Chancellor of the Exchequer said emphatically tbey might not . —The first order of the day was the proposed guarantee of a loan of £ 3 , 000 , 000 to the new dominion of Canada , to enable the great inter-colonial railway to be constructed . Mr .

Adderley introduced the question in a long speech , in which he pointed out the advantages of the proposed railway , ancl contended that there was little fear of any ultimate loss to this country . The proposal was strenuously resisted by Mr . Ayfcoun Mr . T . Cave , and Mr . Lowe , and strongly supported by Mr . Gladstone and Mr . Watkin . Eventually the resolution was

carried by 2-17 votes to 67 . —The House then went into committee on the Mutiny Bill , and the question of flogging ivas discussed . Sir J . Pakington moved his amended flogging cause , and a lengthy discussion ensued . On the 29 th ult . the first note of the coming Reform battle was sounded . Mr . Gladstone gave notice of a question , the character of which showed that Mr . Disraeli would have to tell the House clearly ivhat was

to be retained and what gii'en up in the Reform Bill . The question was , whether the Government would , before going into committee , lay upon the table of the House the alterations which they proposed in the bill . Before this notice had been given the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated in reply to questions put to him that the Reform Bill for Ireland

could not be introduced until after Easter . —On the motion for going into committee of supply , several interesting questions were discussed . The first was introduced by Mr . Goldsmid , who complained of the manner in which the architects who had competed for the neiv National Gallery had been treated . Tbey imagined that one of their number would be

chosen to carry out the building ; but Lord John Manners declined to accede to this , and said there was no official undertaking that the successful architect should superintend the erection of the building . This was corroborated in the course of the debate by Mr . Coivper , late Commissioner of Works . He saicl that when he was in office he mentioned , in

conversation with one of the competing architects , that it was his intention to employ the architect Avho might be successful to superintend the erection of the building , but he never thought it necessary to make an official memorandum of the fact . —Sir Francis Goldsmid called attention to the persecutions endured by the Jews in Servia , and called upon the English

Government to make such representations as would induce more tolerance upon the part of the Servians . Sir Francis showed that the Jews ivere treated with most abominable cruelty . Mr . Gregory supported the appeal of Sir Francis Goldsmid , and Lord Stanley promised to do what he could . He added , that he believed the persecutions were attributable more to the , bigotry of the Servian people than of the Servian Government , which was averse to any persecution of the Jews .

—Sir John Gray , in a lengthy speech , brought under the attention of the House a matter which , on the face of it , has an exceedingly ugly look . At the recent Tyrone Assizes several men ivere brought up for trial for rioting at Donoughmore . With one exception they were all Roman Catholics . A constable called as a witness sivore that the rioting ivas caused by the persistence of several Orangemen , who , notwithstanding

his endeavours , would march with colours flying and music playing party tunes to where the Roman Catholics were . He identified several of the Orangemen as well as the Roman Catholics , ancl they were all brought before the magistrates in petty session at Donoughmore . The magistrates , however , dismissed the aggressors with a single exception , and sent the

Roman Catholic for trial . Mr . Justice Keogh , who tried the case at Tyrone , elicited these facts from the constable , and then denounced most heartily the conduct of the magistrates , premising to call the attention of the Lord Chancellor to their conduct Sir John Gray wanted to knoiv ivhat steps had been taken in the matter . The defence set up by the magistrates was thafc

the Orangemen had not been identified , and that Mr . Justice Keogh , in the observations he made , had been led by mis-statements . On the 1 st insc , the most remarkable business was the question of Mr . Gladstone as to the Reform Bill , and what followed it . Mr . Gladstone simply asked whether the Government would lay upon the table the alterations in the Reform

Bill to which they were willing to agree before going into committee . To this the Chancellor of the Exchequer replied thafc he was going to give notice of the dual voting clause . As to the other parts of the bill , they must be left for the committee , the Government being most anxious to co-operate with the House in bringing the whole question of Reform to a satisfactory settlement . This statement brought cheers from the Ministerial