In the House of Commons attention was called to the case of the black steward of a British vessel who had been taken out of the ship at Charleston, S. C. and imprisoned for two months simply because he was _a Man of Color_.--LORD PALMERSTON said that the case was not new; that such a law as that mentioned existed in the State of Carolina; and that the British government had remonstrated against it as a violation of the principles of international law, as well as of the treaty of 1815: but the reply had been that the Federal government was unable to revoke the law, and that, if England insisted, the American government would be compelled to terminate the treaty of 1815. The English government, therefore, had not thought it expedient to press the matter further; but it should be remembered that the law is known, and that those who go there expose themselves to it voluntarily. This acquiescence of the British government in a law and practice of one of the United States, directly in violation of the rights of British subjects, has not escaped severe animadversion. The subject of a sinecure office in the Archdiocese of Canterbury has attracted some attention. It seems that the emoluments of the office of Register of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, have been from L9000 to L12,000 per annum, and that the office itself is a sinecure. The usage has been, that the archbishop for the time being should nominate the incumbent of the office and two successors. Archbishop Moore appointed his two sons, and they in succession held the office. Dr. Manners Sutton appointed his grandson, the present Lord Canterbury, to the reversion of the office--that grandson being then ten or twelve years old. The late Dr. Howley made a communication to the government, that, in the conscientious fulfillment of his duty he could not fill up the reversion of this sinecure when it became vacant in 1845; and it remained vacant at his death. When Dr. Sumner, the present archbishop, succeeded, he found the reversion of the office vacant, and immediately filled it up, by appointing his son, a young gentleman studying in the Temple. Lord John Russell stated that the matter was under inquiry and that the office would either be abolished or greatly altered.--The general subject of reducing the salaries and wages paid in every department of the public service, has also been discussed. The general sentiment seemed to be that the servants of government were not overpaid, and the motion for an address upon the subject was negatived.