The Week.

no objection to an inquiry'into another ecclesiastical grievance , the use of the Apocryphal writings in the service of the Church . The Bishop of London suggested that the matter should be left in the hands of the Government , and , after a few remarks from Lord Granville and other peers , the motion was withdrawn . — Several bills were advanced a stage . On Tuesday , Lord Russell , in reply to a question from Lord Shaftesbnry , said he

had received information from Berlin assuring the Government that the reported massacre of 400 Swedish volunteers at Alsen was a pure fiction . The noble earl added that the Danish loss in killed in the retreat from Alsen did not amount to more

than 400 men . Lord Shaftesbury said it was expected at Berlin that he should apologise for the remarks he made when he first called attention to the report of the murder of the Swedes ; but , considering the general character of the proceedings of the Prussians , he did not think that they had anything to complain of . —Several measures were advanced a stage . In the HOUSE OE COMMONS on Thursday , the 7 th inst ., the adjourned

debate on Denmark and Germany was resumed by Mr . Layard , who justified the administration of foreign affairs by the department of which he is the organ , and spoke at great length in vindication of the Secretary of State , against whom he said the attack of the Opposition Avas almost exclusively directed , aud who had been greatly misrepresented ancl wrongfully accused

npou garbled and falsified extracts from despatches . Mr . G . Hardy indignantly repudiated the charge that the Opposition had garbled and falsified the extracts they had quoted from the despatches , and pronounced the statement a calumny . This remark had hardly escaped the hon . gentleman ' s lips , when Mr . Layard sprung to his feet , and amid the cheers of the

Ministerialists , demanded that the words imputing calumny to him should be taken down . A " scene " then ensued of a highly exciting character . The Speaker intimated that he saw no reason for calling upon Mr . Hardy to retract . Lord Palmerstoh rushed to the aid of his lieutenant , and condemned the language of Mr . Hardy as disorderly and censurable . This elicited a retort from Mr . Disraeli , that the Under Secretary AA-as guilty of an unparliamentary ancl indecorous exhibition , and

that Mr . Hardy had a perfect right to describe his language as calumnious . The Chancellor of the Exchequer ancl Sir John Pakington successively interposed , but the effect was the reverse of that which is produced by throwing oil on the troubled waters . At length Mr . Bernal Osborne rose , and put it with all the gravity of which be is capable , Avhether the House was not imperilling its "just influence in the

councils of Europe , " by allowing lion , members to get up and endeavour to overrule the decision of the Speaker . A slight lull in the uproar gave the Speaker an opportunity of hinting that the language used on both sides had somewhat exceeded the ordinary rules of debate ; but from what he knew of Mr . Hardy he was sure that lion , gentleman did not mean to impute

motives . Under the circumstances , hoivever , it was not necessary that he should interfere ; and after what had occurred he trusted the harmony with Avhich their debates were usuall y conducted would be restored . Regret was expressed by Mr . Layard at having used the word " falsification , " mutual explanations followed , ancl Mr . Hardy then resumed his speech , and

the debate was continued to a late hour , and again adjourned . On Friday , Mr . B . Osborne resumed the adjourned debate . Having referred to the proceedings at the Conference , in the course of which he described the proceedings as a combination of blarney and bluster , and he ridiculed tbe statement that had been made as an interchange of ideas between the plenipotentiaries at the Conference , but what these ideas Avere which rendered an interchange he did not pretend to undersland . He

said that this country Avas most fortunate in being relieved from the responsibility of the guarantee proposed hy the obstinacy of Denmark . The position of the noble lord at the head of the Government was most anomalous , for while his home policy was that of stagnation , his foreign policy was progressive and pugnacious . The policy of the Government had been that of injudicious interference . The Danish Government had not attempted

to help them . Mr . Whiteside contended that after the debate that had taken place the house must vote for the motion , althou gh they might the next moment vote that they had no confidence in the members of the Opposition side of the House . "He then referred to the correspondence that had taken place on the subject , and compared the conduct ancl policy of

Mr . Canning with that of Earl Russell , and pointed out that the former would hot interfere in foreign matters unless the Government Avas prepared to support its council and advice by active operations iu the event of its being rejected . That had not been the policy of Earl Russell , for he had interfered , and his interference had been

repulsed hy Austria and Prussia , ancl submitted to with humiliation by this country . He denied that the Opposition was an accomplice in the crime with which the Government was charged , because they were in ignorance of the despatches which were being carried on ; but if they had remained silent after those facts came to their knowledge then they would

have to consider whether the conduct of the Government had lowered the influence of this country in the councils of Europe , and if they were satisfied that it had they must support the motion , Avhich he was sure would be ratified by the approving voice of an indignant country . Mr . Monsell contended that the Opposition was equally responsible Avith the Government for what had occurred , because they were the first to sound the

trumpet of war . The hon . member defended the policy of the Government , ancl declared his intention to support them . Mr . B . Cochrane maintained that the meddling conduct of Earl Russell had been most mischievous to the interests of Deumrrk , as it had been one of the first to suggest the dismemberment of Denmark . Lord Palmerston rose at a few minutes to twelve , and defended the course pursued by the Government , followed by

Mr . Disraeli in reply , and the Hou ? e divided , when there appeared for the original motion 2 SS , against it 313 , giving the Government a majority of 18 . On Monday , Mr . Lefevre gave notice of a motion relative to the recent proceedings of Convocation , and Mi ' . Dillwyn intimated that he intended to postpone his resolution respecting the Irish Church until next

session . —Mr . O'Hagan withdrew his bill for reforming the Irish Court of Chancery—a measure which had provoked much opposition on the part of the Irish Tory lawyers . —Mr . Ferrand complained of the state of the reservoirs belonging to the Avater companies in the manufacturing districts of Lancashire and Yorkshire—especially those belonging to Bradford—and

urged that it was the duty of the Government to have these works carefully inspected , and to compel the proprietors to maintain them in a secure and efficient state . Sir George Grey said that Mr . Rawlinson , Mr . Hawkshaw , and Mr . Bea . rd . morehad declared that it was impossible by inspection to guarantee the security of such works , and the Government must decline

to undertake a duty which it could not adequately discharge ,, ancl which would have the effect of relieving waterworks companies of their legal responsibility . After some remarks from Mr . XV . E . Forster , the subject dropped . Her Majesty's reply to the address relating to the Conference was brought down by Lord Proby and read . It stated that her Majesty regretted , the unsuccessful termination of the Conference , but that she [ received' Avith satisfaction the assurance that the