On this page

• Text (1)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    ]$O. 4»25,-'. MA.T lt> , JLSQg.J x jl Ji...

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    I Imperial Parliament. 1 ¦ Monihty, May ...

    elected , that the election is void , the said Major Gavan having been guilty , by his agents , of several acts of bribery ( which were enumerated ) ; but tlie committee also found that such acts of bribery had . taken place without the knowledge or consent of Major Gavan . . rTHE GOVERNOK-GENKRAL OF INDIA . VOTK OFCKSSURE . Mr . Cardwelt . gave notice that on the ensuing Thursday he should move a resolution in the following terms—" That this House , while it abstains from

    expressing any opinion upon the policy of any proclamation of t"he Governor-General of India in relation to Oude , has seen with / regret and serious apprehension that her Majesty ' s Government have addressed < o the Governor-General , through the Secret Committee of the Board of Director ? , a , despatch condemning , in strong terms , tire policy of the Governor-General , ami are of opinion tliat such a course must , under present circumstances in India , produce a most prejudicial effect , by weakening the authority of the Governor-General , and encouraging the further resistance of those who are still in arms against us . "

    THK OATHS , BIT , L . Lord Johx RtrssEtx moved that the House disagree with the Lords' amendment on the Oaths Bill , by which the clause affecting members of the Jewish faith was omitted . — Mr . Netoegatr defended the amendment ,, and denounced the chaise as founded on revolutionary principles . Consequent ^' , the Hoaise of Lords—a set of men . the most intellectual , the most wise , and the most enlightened- —had refused its sanction to the clause . If the House of Commons should take upon themselves to he the sole authority in the kingdom , as once before the Long Parliament had done , they would ft nil that ; they Lad outstepped the bounds of discretion and the patience of the country . ( A laugh . ' )

    Sir Bichard BEruBLTj said that , should it become necessary , he should feel it to be his duty to suggest a course , perfectly constitutional , by which the great object of the bill might be accomplished . He might appeal to every constitutional lawyer whether usage did not -warrant the conclusion that , when a particular measure had been adopted by that House in a series of Parliaments for many years , and which * represented the voice of the nation , it was not the duty . of the other House to yield to the often-repeated wishes of the House of Commons . If all their appeals , however , were iu

    vain , and if the exclusion of the Jews from that House depended , as lie insisted it did , upon a perverted and fraudulent application of the law , then he conceived it to be the duty of that House to consider whether there , was any constitutional course of proceeding left for it to adopt . He deprecated any course that would produce a collision with the courts of law , and hoped that no member would rashly bring forward a resolution of that kind . His proposition would relieve the House from any apprehension of a controversy with the established courts of justice . The bill as amended imposed a larger amount of disability upon tlic Jews .

    Sir John Pakington denied that the course which he took last year in the select committee pledged' him to bring forward liis previous resolution iis a distinct motiun on the present occasion . —Mr . Wahbi : Ji observed that only two constituencies had elected Jews ; and the law of the land was not to bo altered on that account . If a . constituency chose to elect a woman ( ti lauyli ) , or a minors of a foreigner , it did not follow that the legislature was to admit them . N " ot a single Jew had petitioned , for the admission of Jews to Parliament ; and he believed that public opinion is adverse to the change . Tlie House then divided , when it was decided to disagree with the Lords' amendments by 2 ( 53 to 150 . Lord John Kusskli ., moved that the House disagree with the Lords' amendments to Clause 0 ; and the motion was carried .

    Lord John llussETX , then moved tho appointment of a committee to draw irp reasons for disagreeing withiho Lords' amendments ; the committee to consist of Lord John Russell , the Chancellor of the Exchequer , Sir John Fakington , Lord Stanley , Sir Fit / . roy Kelly , Lord PnlmerBton , SirG . C . . Lewis , Sir George Groy , Mr . Labou - cheie , Sir JamcH Graham , Mr . Gladstone , * Mr . Cardwell , Sir Richard Betlvcll , Mr . " right , Mr . Milncv Gibson , Mr . Horaman , Mr : Thomas Buncombe , Mr . Hcndlnm , Mr Jtocbuck , Mr . Moncrieff , Mr . Fitzgerald , Mr . Serjeant Deasy , and Mr ; Abel Smith . —Mr . DuxooMmc moved that the return for the City of London of Baron Rotliscluld bo read at the table . —The certilicntc of th « Clerk

    of tho Crown was read accordingly . —Mr . Di : ncombk then moved that linron Nnthan do Hothschild lie sippointed a member of that committee . The Houso hud a precedent for ao acting . That a member of that House , though ho had not been sworn at the taWo , could serve j , on committees , had bcou decide ^ by ^ 26 votes against 117 ) in 1735 . —Mr . Diij ^ vyn seconded tho motion . The House would thus show tho practical absurdity of u law which allows a Jew to discharge a portion of his duties as a . member , and not tho wholo ol it . —After Homo desultory discussion , it was agreed ( at the suggestion of some members of tho Government und of . Lord Pai . micuston ) that , the motion should lie adjourned to tho following day .

    NW ZKA 1 . ANO LOAN . On tho motion for going into eominilUc of . supplv , Sir John Jukiawmy called the attention or tho llourio to I >« a » ugo 3 in the evidence given by one of the witnesses

    ( a Mr ; Sewell ) before the New Zealand Loan ( 500 , € OO ? . ) Guarantee ' . Coinrnittc

    wishes of the Government . When land is purchased from natives , it should be recollected that the value de > - pends , in a great measure , on what is afterwards done with it by -the-purchaser ; and , therefore , it is not to be expected that a large sum . should be given . But , ¦ with regard to the promise of schools and hospitals , although there was no doul > t that Mr . ilanteU held out , as he believed lie was authorized to hold out , promises to th . e natives * yetha- believed that nothing , in . the . nature of a contract could be said to have been entered into , anti for . this plain reason , that nowhere could he fiud the

    slightest approximation to a statement of what was the amount to be expended for these objects . It was quite clear that a general promise to provide hospital accommodation and schools , no fund being , set aside for the purpose , could hardly be said to have assumed tlie definite form , of a contract , although it . ' might , be an obligation in point of morality . But he must remind the hon . baronet that the . power had been taken out of the- hands of the- Imperial Legislature . The moment the control of the waste lands passed into the bauds of the Colonial Legislature , that Legislature took upon itself all those obligations . . After some farther discussion , the motion was withdrawn . THE ARJIY . General CormiNGTcxN , previous to the House going into Committee of Supply , called attention to certain defects in the management of the army . Our forces are to consist of 200 , 000 . men , and for this we must have large recruiting establishments , as the supply of men must ' 'be '; -between twenty and thirty thousand a year . The manner in which recruiting is carried on is disgraceful , and recent regulations have tended to prevent

    the enlistment of men from agricultural districts . Regiments should be named from towns , and be recruited from the neighbourhood of those towns : there would then be no-difficulty ' iu inducing men to join the service . The military train should be kept to its original purpose , and should be stationed in the vicinity of Aldershot . Another point to which he-wished to draw attention was , that English officers in tlic Ionian Islands have to pay duty on the wine they drink , and he hoped the Government would take the matter into consideration .

    Mr . Moxsej-X ., referring to an explanation giveu by the Secretary for " War on a previous occasion , stated that the income of the Carshalton Academy is 50 . 00 Z . a year , and the- expenditure -LoOOI ., so that at present there is no charge upon the State for this establishment . Hut , if they stopped admission to the Academy , the number of students would gradually decrease , and the State would be called upon to contribute to the expenses . Perfect faith would be kept with the Students , if , without charging the country with their education , tlic Government allowed them , after passing a certain examination , to enter the academy at Woolwich , lie appealed to the Secretary for War to take into consideration the expediency of building an additional barrack in connexion with the Military College at Woolwich , in order that the young men might ifot . be compelled to sleop several in one bed .

    General Peel , said that he had given great consideration to the subject of recruiting , and , with respect to Mr . Monsoll ' s suggestions , ho promised to nay every attention to the subjects involved . He then made some statements with reference to the . Army Estimates . Defore the Indian mutiny broke out , the military force consisted of 157 , 000 men , of whom . ' 30 , ( 100 were on service in India . The present force is 223 , 000 men , showing an increase of GG , 000 within the year . To supply the auurmentation already arranged , and to fill up the loss froni casualties , & c ., at least 50 , 000 recruits must bo provided during the current twelvemonth . lie apprehended no dillicuUy , howover , in obtaining this number , large as it was , since not fewer than 48 , 000 men had been enlisted within the lust eight months .

    After sumo further discussion , the House went into Committee of Supply on tho Army Estimates , when various votes wore nyrecd to , and the Chairman was ordered to report progress . Tho House , having resumed , next went into Committee of 'Ways and Moans , mid voted 11 , 000 , 000 / . out of tho Consolidated Fund for tlic . service of the country . 1 MUNCH KIWAIuVh ISLAND T . OAN . Tho lloum > then went into Committee upon this subject , and Lord Staxmiv moved a resolution , granting the guarantee , of this country to a loan not exceeding 100 , 0 () i ) / , at . four por cent . —Tlio motion was agreed ( u , and the . House resumed . CIlKI . SKA-lUtliKJK ACT AniKNI ) . MI £ N'l . * . Lord John Maxnkus moved for leave to bring iu a

    bill to amend the- Act of the 9 & 10 Viet :, cap-. 39 , relative to Chelsea-bridge . The object of the bill is , that , - when tiie- sum borrowed from the Exchequer loan Commissioners lias been returned , the toll on the bridge shall cease . The House adjourned at- a few minutes after one o ' clock .

    1 uesday , May \\ ih . In the House of Lords , the Royal assent was-given by commission to several bills . LORD CANNING ' S PROCLA . MA . TION . —HESIGKATION OF LORD KLLliNBOIiOUCrlt . The Marquis of Lansdowne corrected an error into which he had fallen on tho previous night with reference to rlie note received by BIr . Vernon Smith from Lord Canning . " What he should have stated was that Mr . Vernon Smith had observed that there was no use

    showing the letter after the censure on the Proclamation had gone out . He wished to add , in answer to any question that might naturally be asked on- the subject , that no communication , whatever from Lord Canning had been received by M > . Vernon Smith since that to which he * had already alluded . That letter was almost wholly a private letter , aaid contained , only one paragraph of public interest , expressing Lord Canning ' s annoyance that the pressure of public business prevented his giving a full explanation of his Proclamation .

    The Earl of Derby said the explanation given by the noble Marquis made a great difference in the circumstances of the ease ; because it appeared that , i £ the contents of' this note had been communicated to- Lord Ellenborough , as they might have been , on the 10 th of April , they would have been in ample time to produce an effect on his noble friend ' s mind before the answer to the Proclamation was . sent out . The Proclamation was dated the 19 th . of April , and was sent out on . the 26 th ; consequently , if Mr . Vernon Smith iiad communicated to the Board of Control the contents of Lord Canning's note , the object contemplated by Lord Canning would have been attained , and Lord Ellenborough , would not have sent out to India a ¦ " premature condemnation of the Proclamation . He was unwilling to impute improper motives to Mr . Vernon Smith ; but the course adopted by him was not that which should , be pursued by an ex-Minister towards his successor .

    Earl Gra . > ville explained that , on the return of Mr . Vernon Smith from Ireland , where he was attending the marriage ; of . his . son , lie found this private letter awaiting him ; but could he suppose that immediately after the receipt of the Proclamation , one of the strongest censures that could be expressed would be sent out to the Governor-General ? The Earl of Ellenrorough said that the letter enclosing the Proclamation was received on the 12 th of April ; the answer was not written until the 18 th ; it was dated on the 19 th , and it was not sent out until the 26 th . " There was , therefore , ample time for consideration , and the more he reflected on it the- stronger he felt to be the necessity of sending out the answer . He was

    not accused for writing the letter , Ivor- had he heard any one defend the-confiscation of the proprietary rights ; the only question raised was—was it or was it not right to publish that letter ? ( Jfear , / tear . ) As far m- lie understood , the resolutions to be moved , on Friday related to that subject only . Tire publication of tho letter was wholly his act , and he took upon himself the entire responsibility . Some time before , he had - written a secret letter to the Governor-General , in contemplation of the captnre of Lueknow , in which he directed him to temper justice with generosit } ' , and to establish an amnesty and the ordinary administration of the law as soon as possible , lie apprehended that obstructions would be offered to the Governor-General , in the execution of those orders

    the subordinate officers , maddened by tiic scenes they had-witnessed ; and he told the Governor-General to persevere in what lie thought was right , and that he should have the unqualified support of the * Government . Soon after that letter was sent out he received this Proclamation , hmktiny confiscation , and framed in direct contradiction of the principles-of liis letter ; Tho principle of confiscating the entire proprietary rights of the people of India was not clemency—it was not amnesty ; it was persecution after defeat ; it was contrary to every principle laid down in the letter he had written ; it was contrary to the feeling * of tho Government ; and he l'Mt it to bo his duty to express as he liad doiv © Iris sentiments respecting it , He should have been unworthy ol a seat in that House if he had acted otherwise . '" Tire letter was n message oH peace to the people of Indiii ,

    and it would give consolation to thoao who are living in fear of retribution . Probably , ho ought to . have * obtained the sanction of his colleagues to the publication of the letter ; but he had not done so , and therefore it wns absurd to nuike the Government generally responsible for the act . He waa alono accountable-for tho publication . - ' The question would be viewed very diJl ' urciuly in thin country and in India ,. Iutlu . i country it is a question between one party and another ; In it . in India it would bu understood to * bu a . question between the coutlictiug principle * of confiscation and cli ' tiutucy . l . Ki felt satisfied that , according an the decision of that and of th ( s other' lluii . se ; of Parliament inclined to the one or the othor of thorio principles , there would lie sown broadcast throughout India tlio scuds of pcrpolual Avar , or there would bo givon to tlio people of that country and of Engluiid the hoped of pormunent reconciliation and

    ]$O. 4»25,-'. Ma.T Lt> , Jlsqg.J X Jl Ji...

    ] $ O . 4 » 25 ,- ' . MA . T lt > , JLSQg . J x jl Ji JJJiii . Ju _ cj xv . < hq \ j

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), May 15, 1858, page 3, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_15051858/page/3/