The Press. — London, England, 1856-11-01 00:00:00

1052 NEPACL AND TILIBET. THE following translation of a letter in the Khai language from Jung Bahadoor, Prime Minister of Nepaul, to the late British Minister at the Court of Kattmaundu, has been published this week. Jung Bahadoor, it will be remembered, was the Nepaulese Ambassador who visited London some few years since. The letter details the events of the late Nepaulese war with Thibet:— The royally descended Prime Minister and Commander in -Chief, General Jung Bahadoor Kunwar Ransjee, sends his compliments to the illustrious -. The Minister is quite well, and hopes that - is the same. The news of this ploce is all good. Your letter of the dark half of May reached me on the light half of the same month,on Monday, and I understood the contents of it. . . I was very glad to hear from you that you continue to be in good health, as for a long time I had not received any letter from you. I have already written to you about the war with Thibet. We won thirteen battles, and took poi session of Keroong. Jhmigit, Katy, Dhakling, the Bhaira blanggur, Chewar•Goomba, and Tuklakhar. In the meantime, as the Thibetans often wrote to us about making a treaty of peace, we also wrote to them about it. During these discussions about peeve, and while we took the occasion to recal the garrisons kept to guard the different places conquered by us, and to place therein fresh soldiers, the four Thihetan Rajas of Kwomho, and Kham, and Dharma, and Bhot got up a treacherous plan to expel us from Thibet, and, with 9,000 infantry and 1,600 cavalry, attacked us suddenly in the fort of Jhunga, which they environed and besieged, while 4,000 or 6,000 more of their troops attacked ours at Pangsingtar of Ke roong : and a third division of them, consisting of 9,01)0, marched on our post at Katy, where they killed 901) of our soldiers, sick, women, and coolies, took nine cannon, all the ammunition, treasure, and provisions, and expelled our troops from the fort of Kitty. Soon after my youngest brother, l)heer Sham Share Jung Kunwar Ranajee, went with 7,000 soldiers, defeated the soldiers of the four kings above named, and recovered Kuty, Dhakling, &c., as far as the lihairablanggur. J h ungs was then under the com mand of my youngest but one brother, General Jagat Sham Share Jung Kunwar Ranajee. In the former cam paign lie had fought, and gained eight battles at Pangsingtar of Keroong, two at the village of Rama, one at Kookoor Ghaut, and one at Ghorma. But, in his absence at Katt maundu, his troops were besieged for twenty-eight days in the fort of Jungha, during which time they fought every day. On the 29th day he arrived from Kattmaundu with fresh troops, defeated the besieging soldiers of the four kings, and drove them beyond the Ithairablanggur. On the west, at Taklakhar, the 4.000 Thibetans who had come there to fight were defeated by my paternal cousin, Major- General Krishna•dhoj Kunwar Ranajee. At length, on account of our being victorious everywhere, the Lamas wrote to the effect that they were unable to fight against the Gorkhalees, and wanted to make peace ; that the country belonged to men of religion ( Lamas); that 100,000 of them would always pray for the Prime Minister. They agreed to give back our nine cannons, our men who had been taken prisoners, and also the Sikh soldiers who were taken prisoners in the Sikh war. Also they said that they would not hereafter take the customs, duties, and tolls taken formerly by the Thibetans from Nepaul mer chants and subjects ; that they would pay 10,000 rupees as an annual tribute ; that the Gorkhalees should be per mitted to establish two new factories at Lhasa and Digarcha, besides the thirty-two old ones, and keep a chief ( Bharadar) in the former city. Having agreed upon these ten articles, the representative of the Potala Lama ( Lhasa), the Lamas of other Goombas (Convent Monas tery), and several Thibetan chiefs came to Nepaul, where they sought our protection, and, by kneeling down and prostrating themselves before us, entreated us to make peace. As the four kings, our enemies, thus implored our protection and forgiveness, we thought it Improper to continue the war, and consequently made peace with Thibet. There is no mischief to us in the articles of treaty ; and if the Thibetans violate these articles we wili, of course, act to them as they do to us. You have written about the good behaviour of Major Captain Gajraj Thapa, and i know that ire will derive great benefit in every respect by being under your kind care. I have told Ameer Moon shee Lachimidas and Ghannanand Banda about drawing the pictures of the Buddhist gods. As the cholera has been raging violently since the conclusion of the war, the birds and beasts you require cannot be sought for at present ; but whatever may be procured hereafter shall without fail be Kent. Dated Nepatil, Sambat, 11113. Akhad Sully I:3th, on the light half of July, cn Monday. PS.—I hope you will continue to write to me about your health, remembering me as sour friend. AN INTERESTING EXPERIMENT is at present under trial in Egypt with respect to the cultivation of rice. Mr. Lattis, a Venetian, has undertaken to produce two crops of rice in the year in the place of one. The Viceroy has placed a certain quantity of land and a sufficient number of labourers at his command. Lord Canning having heard of the experiment on his passage through Egypt to India, and perceiving the enormous advantage that might be derived in our Indian possessions from the experiment if successful, equested our consul at Alexandria to watch the result. ?4r. Lattis brought his first crop to maturity in July last, and it is understood that he has been equally suc cessful with hi s secon d crop. The British Consul will prepare a f u ll report on the subject, and forward It to the Home and Indian Governments. i,___ THE PttESS. CprztsponDtitte. ELECTORAL INEQUALITIES. TO THE EDITOR OF " THE PRESS." Sir,—The letter of your correspondent J. A. G., as given in your impression of the 1 lth ult., seems to indicate a new feature in the world of politics at this crisis of political parties (if such a designation can be applied to any section of the State at the present time); but be that as it may, such a state of things cannot last long. The tenor of your corre spondent's letter seems to aver:-Ist. That the Re• form Bill was incomplete, and that a further equali sation of the right of franchise and representation is needed; 2nd. That this equalisation is attainable, provided it be undertaken by a party having the wel fate of the State at heart, and having the confidence of the country ; and 3rd. That the party best adapted to enter the breach is the Conservative. In other words, he proposes that the Conservatives should hoist the banner of Reform, and effect it in a con servative spirit. Permit me to second this proposal, and at the same time to state that the views of your able corre spondent do not contemplate a change at all impos sible or extraordinary, when we look back at the change which has taken place in the sentiments and measures of parties during the last half-century. In support of this view, let us ask,—What resem blance do the Conservatives of the present day bear to those of the reign of George IV.? or, What Liberal of the present day would not repudiate the Bristol riots, the chartist harangues, or the monster meet ings ? These changes have, as it were, fused society into a different form. Under such circumstances, an opportunity may soon be afforded of calmly considering the best metho,l for preventing revolution, and effecting useful improvements in our representative system generally ; and the Conservative and Liberal Conservative legis lators of the empire should, during the portion of the recess that yet remains, put to themselves a few queries such as the following . _ Since it is inevitable that a reform must come at no remote period, may I not be instrumental in pre venting the enacting of revolutionary measures, by at once declaring myself a Reformer on Conservative principles, and acting up to this declaration by my advice and example ? Since war has now been replaced by peace, may it not be the best time for effecting a permanent reform, by equalising constituencies, extending the right of franchise to the humbler classes, and giving a guarantee to property by a plurality of votes to the high and middle classes? Since the spirit of Conservatism is the protection of institutions connected with property and rank, may not I, by promoting such a reform, establish the basis of both, and at the same time conciliate and establish the claims of the humbler classes of society? And, lastly,—Wera such to appear and demand my assistance, could I not rank myself under the banner of a leader called a Conservative Reformer? By such interrogatories a satisfactory answer may be evolved, which would prepare our legislators for entering on the duties of the coming session, with new views and hopes for the improvement of our parliamentary and national institution.—l have the honour to be, sir, your obedient servant, A CONSERVATIVE REFORMER. TO TIIE EDITOR OF "THE PRESS." [Second Letter.l Sir,—l can anticipate the answer which will he made by the Whigs to my attempts to expose the in equalities of the electoral system. It will be some what in this fashion : " We admit that the right to elect members is un equally distributed among those having the fran chise, though by no means to the extent stated by your correspondent, EI S a simple calculation would easily show; but whatever it may be, it is the best practical solution of the problem in ovr power—like all practical solutions, far from being perfect, but yet tolerably answering the objact in view. But even if the compromise of 1832 were more anoma lons than it is, we must recollect the passions which its adjustment provoked in the country, and not rashly awaken them, merely because it appears to us that the practice might be brought somewhat closer to the theory. For any sake let the matter rest, and don't let us have any more organic changes. More over, the existing system, if indefensible on capita tion principles, is a fairer representation of the intel lect of the nation than would be arrived at if the country constituencies returned as many members as the towns, for in the towns intellect is colleen- SATURDAY,_ trated, whereas it is very thinly diffused among the agricultural population." We believe the above a very fair statement of the Whig-Conservative plea on the subject. Of course it is glaringly inconsistent with their principles, and sounds very like the Tory arguments against the Reform Bill ; but probably it, is all the stronger on that account. Let me now use my privilege of reply. In the first place, my dear Whig sir, will you favour me with your !slight calculation which is to disprove my arithmetical statement of the case. It is not very fair to state that you can give such a calculation, and moreover that it is easy, and yet not give it in black and white. Besides, the arithmetic of the case is of the greatest consequence, for it you can't show an error in my calculations, I tear it will require even more than the current faith in Whig incapacity to believe that the nearest approximation to equity which can be arrived at in England is to give twice the political power to A which you give to B, admitting all the while that A and B have pre cisely equal rights in the matter. Can no justkr distribution of political power be effected than that which gives to the town people the power of return ing two members to Parliament in proportion to their numbers, and to the country people the power of re turning only one ? John Bull, optimist though he is inclined to be now a-days, will not believe that this is the best possible state of things. Even Dr. Pangloss would not have the face to make the asser tion ; and John has some notions of justice and in justice which the doctor did nut possess, and, pro found though his admiration may be of the intellect of the shopkeepers of England, of which he has pain ful experience through the injury inflicted on his ganghouse functions by their ingenious and whole sale adulteration, lie will not see his country tenants, for whose instinctive common sense he has the highest respect, and to whom he feels grateful for confining their chemical knowledge to agriculture, deprived of their rights. But, not to hurt too much the Conservative feelings of the Whigs, nor run counter to certain wholesome prejudices of John Bull of the same kind, for John has a real dread of theoretical perfection, I beg to state that I merely want an instalment of justice, and intend, after all, to leave enough anomaly and inequality in the representation to satisfy the most practical f mortals. For, instead of seeking exactly to square accounts between the agriculturists and the towns, which would require me to deal with 305 members, which is the number the towns return in excess of their just proportion, I will be content with the addition of fifty members to the counties, and in order not to alter the number of the House of Commons, let us balance this fifty by substracting as many from those towns in whose favour the most glaring electoral partiality is shown. Let us turn again to our friend the almanac. We see there that there are in all 1,230,496 electors and 634 members,—that is to say, on an average, one member to every 1,800 electors. Here then is an equitable scale for adjusting the distribution of the representation of the kingdom : give every 1,890 electors one member, and either disfranchise all places of smaller constituency, or lump them on to other places in the neighbourhood until the con joined constituencies amount to 1,800. " But this would be theoretical perfection, and would be revolu tionary and impracticable !" I believe it would, so I have no intentions of going halt so far. It is not necessary that there should be a third, so just I only wish to lop off my fifty members for those towns whose constituencies are most ridiculously under the I,o9o—the average constituency of the country. The places returning members are arranged alpha• betically in the almanac : if their geographical arrangement was the same, the four first places would be a good illustration of what we propose to do. Here they are : Abingdon, with a constituency of 389, returns 1 member. Andover, ~ ft 227 „ 2 „ Arundel, $, 186 „ 1 „ --•— Now, the first county on the list is Anglesea, which with a constituency of 2,s34—that is to say, three times as large as these three towns put together— returns only one member. Nuw, though these towns are not conterminous, still each of them is conterminous with other towns, whose constituencies are not much larger, and with whom they might be easily grouped, so that, at least, a saving of two members might be made who could be added to the county of Anglesea. That this must be practicable is plain from the fact that in the alphabetical list the injustice goes through the alphabet, and is fully as glaring in Y as in A ; for while the West Riding with its constituency of 37,212 returns two members, the town of York with a constituency of 4,291 returns two members also, from which we infer that one av e rage man of the city of York is equal in intelligence and in pro perty to nine men who happen to reside without the walls—a curious fact in natural history, instructive of the advantages of cathedral institutions, and rather