The Press. — London, England, 1857-06-27 00:00:00

JUNE 27, 1851. that great improvements here only concerned the inhabitants of the metropolis." A division was taken upon the question that the debate be adjourned, which was carried by •114 to 128. This decision was understood to be adverse to the principle of granting public money towards such objects. FISCAL AFFAIRS (IRELAND). Sir D. NORREYS, in moving for leave to bring in a bill to provide for the management of the fiscal affairs of counties in Ireland by electoral boards, described in strong condemnatory terms the existing grand-jury system of management, and from its character he inferred the necessity of an entire reform. A large sum of money, upwards of 1,000,0001. a year, he observed, was collected and disbursed under this faulty system, and he proposed to substi tute electoral boards or a system analogous to that of the poor law : There was no protection to the poor ratepayer under this system. A district in Wexford had paid rates for forty years, and could never get a single presentment. He found that the poor•law guardians, who expended about the same amount of money as the grand juries, worked very harmoniously in Ireland ; and lie wished to apply similar machinery to the county expenditure. Let the ratepayers elect their own county boards, as they did their guardians ; then every part of the county would be repre sented, and none would have reason to complain. The oards thus elected ought not to be ephemeral, like grand juries, but to sit for three cr four years ; by this means they would feel their responsibility to their constituency. Colonel FRENCH, meaning to meet the motion by a dieect negative, defended the grand jury system, which, he said, was simple and economical, whereas the system proposed to be substituted was cumbrous in its machinery and expensive. Mr. BAGWELL considered the grand-jury system to be one of the greatest anomalies ; but he cuuld not vote for bringing in the proposed bill, which would, in his opinion, make a bad system ten thousand times worse. _ _ _ The motion *as supported by Mr.: APlLknox and Mr. COGAN. Mr. H. HERBERT admi►ted that certain imperfec tions did exist in the grand-jury system, and would be glad, he said, to be instrumental in remedying the defects ; but he did not believe that the system was such as would justify the vivid description of Sir D. Norreys. He was ready to accede to a liberal modification of the grand-jury system : In saying that, he hoped he would not be understood as adopting he views of his hon. friend with regard to that part of the subject The commissioners to whom his hon. friend r ferred suggested alterations, but they did not recommend the violent and extensive change which his hon. friend proposed. The want of continuous action between the grand jury of one year and the grand jury of another was no doubt an evil, but that could be remedied by the creation of a financial commission intrusted with certain powers without sweeping away the grand jury system altogether. Mr. MAGUIRE, Mr. GREER, and Mr. BOWYER spoke in condemnation of the grand-jury system, and Lord C. HAMILTON in its defence. Sir D. NORREYS withdrew his motion. COTTON IN INDIA. Petitions were presented from Manchester and other places, praying for an inquiry into the obstacles which impede the application of British capital and skill to the improvement of the productive powers of India. Mr. J. B. SMITH then moved, — That, in the opinion of this house, it is expedient that Parliament shall direct its immediate attention to the best mode of removing the obstacles which impede the applica tion of British capital and skill to the improvement of the productive powers of India. A serious obstacle to the improvement of India and to the resort of Europeans thither consisted, he ob- served, in the tenure of the land, and the manner in which the land revenue was assessed. There was abundant evidence that India was capable of pro ducing not only cotton, but sugar, tobacco, flax, hemp, and other articles, and if obstacles were re moved, and the condition of the people ameliorated, the consumption of our manufactures, he believed, would be enormous,—equal to our exports to the rest of the world. These obstacles the Government had the power to remove, and public works for that object realised a profit in India, which in some cases amounted to 200 per cent.—a result that would, in his opinion, justify the borrowing of money for the purpose, and India might thus be covered with public works. But what was the state of the country? There were no bridges, and few roads, and irrigation was grossly neglected except at Madras, where the average profit was 100 per cent. in return. Mr. Smith cited authorities upon all these points, and to show that the poverty of the ryots was so abject that they could not cultivate without advances, for which an interest of thirty to seventy per cent. was exacted. In conclusion, he animadverted upon the manner in which charges against the East India Company's government were usually met, by denials which eventually proved to be groundless. Mr. T CANER seconded the motion, and urged the immense importance of the cotton trade, in which THE PRESS. the demand for the raw material had overtaken the supply, and that we must look to India to make up the deficiency. If the cotton was raised from the American instead of the indigenous seed, the quantity as well as value of the wool would be greatly increased. Mr. R. MANGLES stated that the productive powers of India were such that it was sending to England a much greater amount than England could pay for. India would supply England with all the cotton she wanted, if the Manchester men would take care to send their agents to India to seek it ; in fact, if they would take the same pains as were taken with regard to indigo, sugar, coffee, jute, Sze. As to the cry of Indian poverty, was that reconcilable with the fact that the balance of trade was constantly against us ? If those who wanted cotton from India would, in stead of calling upon Jupiter to help them, help themselves by adopting the same means which were taken by those who wanted other articles,—sending agents to India,—there was no amount of cotton they might not get, and within a short time. He asked why the tenure of land should affect the culti vation of cotton more than that of indigo or sugar. He pointed out certain misapprehensions of Mr. Smith regarding the proprietorship of the land in India and the survey about to be introduced into the Madras Presidency : The tenure of land which had been so much talked of was by no means so simple a question as some hon. gentlemen imagined it to be. Hip authorities had held, and among them Mr. J. Mill, that the land assessment was not a tax at all. The hon. gentleman who moved the resolution said that the Indian Government claimed to be the owners of all the land in that country ; but such was not the case. A. great proportion of the land of India had ever been set apart for Government uses, and to give up the assessment in favour of the occupiers of land would render it necessary to inflict taxation upon the shopkeepers and artisans. The hon. gentleman had attacked the land survey ; but Mr. Mackay, the commissioner of the Man• chester manufacturers, spoke highly of the survey in the north-western districts, saying that it had conferred great benefits upon the ryots. It was the same kind of survey which had been introduced into Madras, and he had no doubt that it would prove equally advantageous to the people there. He stated that 30,000,0001. had been expended upon public works and roads already executed, one rail road carrying a pound of cotton 650 miles for a farthing. Of works for irrigation, besides the Ganges canal, 810 miles in length, the Government had constructed the Jamma canal ; while in the Madras Presidency works of irrigation covered the area of 20,000 square miles. The real causes of the deficient supply of cotton from India lay fir tin the neglect of the Indian Government—for though he admitted the shortcomings of past Governments, yet now a new era was established—but in the low ness of pike, the want of energy and honesty in the people, and the uncertainty of the demand. That day was the 100th anniversary of the battle of Plassy, by which England acquired dominion over a people which had never known what good govern ment was ; the Company were now prosecuting their work of improving India with vigour and energy; and he hoped the house would not believe that gentlemen, on becoming directors of the Company, were transformed not only into tyrants, but into sots and fools. Lord STANLEY confessed be did not exactly see how it followed as a logical consequence that because the day was the 100th anniversary of a great victory in India by one member of the Indian Civil Service it was the duty of another member of that service to set himself to oppose the development of the internal resources of India. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Mangles) had taunted the gentlemen of Manchester with asking the Government of India to help them out of their difficulty. But the Government of India being the landlords were hound to take upon them selves those works and improvements which in other countries were executed by individual landlords. The house had been told that the real drawback to an increased cultivation of cotton in India was the absence of a sufficiently continuous demand. India was available as a cotton market in times of extreme scarcity, because in those times, and then alone, the high price enabled the Indian cultivator to overcome the artificial obstacles in his way. But the Indian Government had no right to take advantage of its own wrong. There would be a continuous demand for Indian cotton if it were grown in districts so open to the seaboard that there was a possibility of carry ing the cotton at a sufficiently low rate to enable it to compete with American cotton in the ordinary state of the market. With reference to the works we had executed in India, if we took the native States as they passed into our hands, he observed, and compared the works made therein and the pro portion they bore to the resources and population of their dynasties with those of our Government, giving the latter credit for the Ganges canal and other similar works, he was much mistaken if, on a fair comparison, it would not be found that many of those dynasties had provided better for the material wants of the country. The noble lord remarked upon the aggres. 621 sive tendencies of the Indian Government, and ob served that if works of internal improvement were to be postponed until there was a surplus of Indian revenue he apprehended the delay would be a very long one. In conclusion, he remarked that at this moment we had a demand for cotton which exceeded the supply. During the last lorty years our productive powers with respect to the cotton manufacture had increased forty per cent., and there was no reason to suppose that either those powers or the demands of foreign countries for our produce would diminish; on the contrary, they were likely to increase. Although the price of cotton was now double what it was a few years ago, the cotton manufacture in this country had increased to an unprecedented extent. No fact could be stated more significant than that, and it could therefore hardly be disouted that the Indian Government, which was, in fact, the landlord of the soil of India, ought to exert itself to the utmost to promote the growth of cotton in India, in order that the constantly increasing demands for our cotton manufactures might be amply supplied. Mr. SEYMOUR observed that recent returns would show that of late about one-eighth of the whole revenue of India was expended upon public works, while the condition of the people was improving year by year. No one had said what the Government of India should do in the matter of roads which they had not done. What was wanted to promote the growth of cotton in India was capital and European superintendence. He moved the previous question. On the motion of Sir E. PERRY, the debate was adjourned till Tuesday next. Lord RAYNHAM obtained leave to bring in a bill to amend the Act 12th and 13th Victoria, for the more effectual prevention of cruelty to animals. Mr. GRIFFITH obtained leave to bring in a bill to alter and amend the Railway Traffic Act. Mr. WARREN moved for leave to bring in a bill to empower the House of Commons and its committees to take evidence upon oath. He noticed the distinc tion between the evidence as given before the com mittees of this house and that taken in the other house, where the witnesses were more guarded. Lord PALMERSTON had no objection, and leave was given. Mr. MASSEY likewise obtained leave to introduce certain bills, and he withdrew the Highways Bill. The Wills tfcc., of British Subjects Abroad Bill was read a second time. _ _ _ The Alehouse Licensing Bill was read a third time and passed. The Charitable Uses Bill passed through com mittee. The report of the Committee of Supply was brought up and agreed to. Other bills were advanceci their respective stages, and the house, after some further business, ad. journed at about half•past one o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMO!sIS—.WEDNESDAY• JUDGMENTS' EXECUTION, &C., BILL. The committee on ;this bill was resumed. After a debate of a very discursive character, which lasted upwards of four hours, and related principally to the question what should be done with the bill— whether it should be taken up by the Government, or committed pro Jona' and afterwards recommitted, or postponed until next session, or, lastly, as the opposition came almost entirely from Irish members, whether Ireland should not be excluded from the bill,—a motion that the chairman report progress, upon which divisions had been repeatedly taken, was at length agreed to, only two clauses of the bill having been passed. The Chairman had leave to sit again on Wednes day next. The house then went into committee upon the Scientific and Literary Societies Bill, but before the second clause could be disrosed of the time for dis cussion had expired. HOUSE OF LORDS.-THURSDAY. Lord REDe9DALE - movedthefirst reading of a Divorce Bill, the purport of which was to remove some of the objectionable features of the Divorce Bill proposed by Government. OBSCENE PRINTS AND PrIBLICATIONs. Lord Gimmixtr. moved the second reading of the Obscene Prints and Publications Bill, when eon siderable discussion arose as to what prints and publications were to be regarded as obscene; in the course of which Lord LYNDHURST exposed with great force the extreme difficulty of defining the word " obscene," and proposed, as an amendment, that the bill be read a second time that day six months:— Suppose now a man following the trade of an informer or a policeman, sees in a window something which he con ceivea to be a most licentious print. He goes to the magistrate, gets a warrant, and then goes in with it to the shop, and says to the shopkeeper, " Let me look at that picture of Jupiter and Antiope." "Jupiter and what?" says the shopkeeper. "Jupiter and Antiope," repeats the man. "Oh! Jupiter and Antiope, you mean,' says the shopkeeper: and hands him down the print. He sees the picture of a woman stark naked, lying down, and a satyr standing by her with an expression on his face which shows Jh