The Sun. — London, England, 1858-05-15 00:00:00

he appears to consider that a period might arrive when the publication of this despatch would be desirable. (Cheers) I cannot help thinking tbat my noble friend believes there is a possibility of such an explanation being given by Lord Canning of the nature and charac ter of the proclamation as might render the publication of the despatch desirable. Aly noble friend was perfectly justified in presenting these resolutions to your lord shipq, under the impression that the publication of this despatch had been an act of her Majesty's Govern ment, and that it was liable to censure ; but I should have thought that after the manly and noble declaration of my noble friend the late President of the Board of Control—(cheers)—the other night, in which he assumed to himself any blame that might attach to that publica tion, and in which be for the first time announced to his colleagues the noble sacrifice which be bad made of him *elf, my noble friend, under one of those generous inx- pulses (loud cries of Hear, hear) wiaieh charac terise him, would instantly have risen to abandon the motion of which he had given notice. (Cheers, and some • cries of " No, no.") My noble friend, on the contrary, bas endeavoured, under the altered state of eircum staneee, to justify himself for persevering in his motion, and has suggested a metaphysical analogy of personal identity, and insisted upon that which nobody ever dis - pnted—the unity and eombination of a Cabinet, and its responsibility for all the acts of all its members, I should appeal from the metaphysics of my noble friend to Four mon sense, to which my noble friend the late President of the Board of Control also appealed. With respect to the responsibility of a Cabinet for the acts of each of its members, I apprehend that responsibility must cease when any particular member of a Ca . binet assumes to himself the blame of any acts, and quits the Cabinet in consequence. (Hear, and also from one noble lord as • expression of dissent.) A noble lord seems to intimate some dissent. I should like to know whether the noble lords on the Opposition benches would like their Govern ments to be tried upon a different principle—whether they think that any errorof an individual member should attach to thet whole of the Cabinet, and that the whole of it should be visited with the punishment of resigna tion. I think that the principle of responsibility can be pushed to this inconvenient and absurd extent—(hear) • ;because to hold that any person who selects the mem• . hers of a Cabinet is to be so thoroughly responsible for every act which they may perform, to be so bound up with them, that if they commit an error in any respect be must justify and adopt it, and in consequence resign, • appears to me to be a principle which would be produc tive of the greatest possible inconvenience to the public, and which could not be carried out without rendering united Government impossible. (Hear.) I pass from this to approach more nearly to the consideration of the question which is immediately behre your lord . ships. I shall not follow the noble duke near - me in any consideration of the propriety or impropriety • of the annexation of the territory of Oude to the British dominion, but there are circumstances con nected with the population of Oude which appear to me to have a most important bearing upon the consideration • of the policy of this proclamation. Tour lordships are aware that the principal part of the Indian army was re ' cruited from the population of Oude ; that they consti tuted the best part of our Sepoy force ; that the greater part of those persons were hereditary landlorders in the territory of Oude ; that they generally left their wives and children, and their native country ; that they joined our ranks, that they served us with apparent fidelity, but - at the same time with a constant reference to the end of • all their labours and all their dangers—namely, when • their service was past to return home, and to settle them selves again upon their native soil. Persons who had - these local attachments and early associations connected with the soil of their country were likely to feel an at tachment to native rule, even although it might not have been such as a European might desire ; and there was • nothing so likely, not merely to shock their feelings, but to irritate their minds as to transfer the sovereignty of their country from the native rulers to the British do • minion. Their country was forcibly taken away from its - rulers, and transferred to British dominion. All their early attachments, all their local associations were rudely invaded, and they were driven into that revolt which has brought so much misery with it and desolated so many of the fairest provinces of India. They fell bef,re the irresistible power of British arms. They were sub dued, and they lay humble and prostrate before us. The principal question was how we were to deal with a people thus circumstanced, how they were to be treated consistently with justice, humanity, and policy. Jus tice, unhappily, required a few terrible examples; but with regard to the mass of the people, I am not - afraid to confess that I think great allowance ought to have been made for men who were driven into revolt by some of the strongest motives whioh - actuate the human breast. (Cheers.) I believe that this • opinion is shared by every member of the Cabinet. • Under these circumstances a proclamation was brought to their attention, which proclamation appeared to them to violate every principle upon which they thought the Governor-General ought to act. That proclamation was - as my noble friend, the late President of the Board of • Control, has described it. It was a proclamation of - wholesale, sweeping, indiscriminate confiscation. It may . . be very easy to criticise the terms of this proclamation, • but it is impossible to assume that it only applied to a • limited extent, or to a limited number of persons. It - declares most distinctly that, with only five or six excep • tions, the proprietary right in the soil, not merely of a portion, but of th 3 whole of the province of Oude is con ' fi-cated to the British Government, which will dispose of that right in such manner as it may think best. Can anybody doubt that to the persons to whom it was ad dressed this would go forth as a measure of irdiperirni nate confiscation f (Hear, hear.) Even your lordships - with all your ingenuity, can put no other certain inter • pretation upon it than that I have stated ; and could - those persons have received any other impression than , that they ley entirely at the mercy of the British Govern . merit—that they were not merely exposed to confiscation, but that the sentence had actually gone forth against - them 1 (Cheers.) The restraining dames adverted to by the noble earl (of Shaftesbury) shows, as my noble friend (the Earl of Ellenborough) distinctly explained, that tie confiscation must have taken place, because it speaks of restitution. (Hear.) What, then, was to he - dune under these circumstances t Here was a procla mation vieleting every prinoiple upon which her Majes ty's Government were di••posed to act with regard to the . natives of India. Were they to remain silent i Were they patiently to wait for explanatiens of which they . had not the slightest intimation 1 (Hear, hear.) I quite admit that if at the time the proclamation was sent over, . or shortly afterwards, Lord Canning had intimated that it required an interpreter—that some explanation was necessary, and that he would furnish it at the earliest . opportunity—the Government would have been much to blame if they had not waited for such explanation be fore they sent out the despatch. But 13 suggestion of - tali kind being received from any quarter, it seemed ne cessary to the Government to prevent immediately the mischievous consequences which they believed would re sult front the issue of the proclamation, and accordingly the despatch which has been so much criticised, bat to which I subecribe in every part, wae, on the 26th of April, sent out to my noble friend. Now the noble duke • is extremely humourous on certain passages of that de spatch. I can only assure him, however, that his light opinions on this subject are not shared in by the pue:te. I believe it is this particular part of the despatch which one person says ought to be written in letters of gold. At the risk of exposing myself to the censure of the noble duke I will read those two passages again, and ask your lordships whether they deserve the character he has • affixed to them We desire to see British authority in India rest upon the willing obedience of a contented people. There cannot be contentment where there is general confiscation. Go vernment cannot long be maintained' by any force in a country where the whole people is rendered hostile by a sense of wrong, and if it were possible so to maintain it it would not be a consummation to be desired." These are the sentiments which aotuate the Govern ment in the despatch so severely criticised or ridiculed by the noble duke. But, my lords, I think a fallacy ' has run through the whole of the disc uss i on t hi s even ing. The resolutions condemn the publication of this despatch. But my noble friend (the Etrl of Elle n borough) has generously, and in the most manly and straightforward manner, assumed the w h ole blame of that publication. Surely, then, common sense and fairness and justice require that the Govern meet, as a Government, should be exonerated from re sponsibility. (Cheere ) If this is so, then it must be assumed that they did not intend is publish the docu• meat, and that it was a secret despatch. Yet the whole argument of my noble friend (the Earl of Shaftesbury) has turned upon the mischief which would arise from its publication in India in weakening the authority of ' the Governor• General, whereas if it were intended as a - secret despatch it was not open to criticism at all. Of course some of your lordships, if the duty had devolved upon them, might have written the letter with a great deal more mildness and forbearance. Many who did feel the danger of this proclamation so stronghly as my • noble friend might have expressed themselves in more guarded language. But my noble friend felt the neces sity of immediate action, and he expressed himself in the manly and honest manner which characterises him. (Hear, bear.) I have admitted that the Government would have been to blame if, expecting any explanation from Lord Canning, they had not waited to ascertain! the real grounds on which he issued the proclamation. Now, there was one individual, at:least, in this country who ea•l received notice of his lordship's intention to furnish such an explanation, but who most unbal pily did not think it part of his du' y to communicate it to the Government. My noble friend the Foreign Secre tary made the other evening a graceful acknowledgment • of the readiness of the noble earl near me (the Eail e f - clerendon) in communicating any public letters received by him afte r hi s re ti remen t from office ; and I appre hend that it i s th e d uty o f a m i n i s t er t o presen t t o hi s suers ser all the information which he thus receives - The con d uct of Mr. Vernon Smith, owever, to m; • noble friend (th e Earl of Eilenborough)certaiely presents a remarkable contrast to what seems to be the practice in these caeee. A. noble marquis, nut now in his place (the Marquis of Lansdowne) explained t o y our l or d s hip. & the rcurnetanc esa under a vetlnthe which the communicatis a of this important p io letter ;n may base e taped the attention of th e r i ght allowanc e , how. gentleman. Making every sort domestic affairs in which he was engag es , for the p th a t the right hon. gentleman actually eeamtuanrs cated with Lord Palmerston as to the p ro priety of tray.: • mitting this particular passage to the President of the • Board of Control. [Earl Granville here interposed an observation which did not reach the gallery.] The noble earl says that the right hon. gentleman stated nothing of • the kind. Eearl GRANVILLE—No ! I said that the right hon. ' gentleman stated something of the kind. The LORD CHANCELLOR —I am quite content with "something of the kind." (Cheers and laughter ) THE SUN, LONIYON, _SATURDAY EN ENING, MAY 15, 1858. Just let us see what is the course taken by the right hon. j gentleman. He had a l e tt er w hi c h con tain e d th ese 1 words :—"I intend to issue a proclamation to the talookdars and landowners of Onde, which will reach you by the mad. I did hope to have accompanied it with a full explanatory despatch, but more urgent business has prevented my doing se from hour to hour." And then, it appears, he consulted Lord Palmerston, or "something of the kind," as to the propriety of com municating this passage to my noble friend. See, then, 1 the situation in which ho places himself. It was not through forgetfulness or inadvertence that he failed to communicate it, but through deliberate purpose and in tention. He took counsel on the subject— [Earl GRaNviLLE : "No, no !"] At any rate the right hoe. gentleman took his own counsel (laughter) ; and he con sidered it not at all necessary to communicate this passage to his successor in office. Now, I cannot help thinking even the noble lords near me must think that in neglecting this the right hon. gentleman failed in hie duty. (Hear, hear.) What, then, was the situation in which my noble friend was placed 1 That despatch was not sent to Lord Canning until the 26th of April. The right hen. gentleman (Mr. V. Smith) bad received the letter eight days before ~ he had therefore ample time for bringing it under the notice of my noble friend ; and, no doubt, had my noble friend heard that any ex planation was expected from Lord Canning, he would have withheld his despatch. Who, then, is answerable for the sending out of that despatch! My noble friend, who objected to the proclamation, who thought it was dangerous who had no idea that any explanation • of it was to be given, and who therefore sent out his despatch to arrest the progress of the mischief which he anticipated ; or the right hon. gentleman (Mr. V. Smith), who might have prevented all the difficulty which has ensued by a timely communication of the important fact that an explana tion would be furnished, for such a statement would un doubtedly have prevented the despatch being sent out I (Cheers.) What, then, is the situation of your lord ships under these circumstances, when you are called upon to decide, not whether the publication of the de spatch is to be disapproved, but whether its premature publication by her Majesty's Ministers is a matter which you ought to reprobate ? Your lordships have it before you distinctly that her Majesty's Government were not as a body responsible for such publication. Is it not, then, a most surpising thing that this distinguished assembly should be debating during a whole night a matter which has been conceded by the regret expressed by my noble friend (Lord Eilenborougb) that the despatch has been published ? Are we not placed in a most extra ordinary position by the resolutions of my noble friend, which call upon your lordships to consider whether you will condemn a supposed act of her Majesty's Govern ment which is now admitted on all hands to have been an act of that Government ! I feel, my lords, that a most unfortunate course has been adopted in this instance. I had hoped, as I have already said, that after the manly declaration of my noble friend the bite President of the Board of Control, the noble earl (Shaftesbury) would have felt it his duty, not merely to himself but your lordships, to abstain from pressing his resolutions. I believe t his discussion is wholly unnecessary, and I think the best mode of meeting the resolutions is by moving the previous question. (Cheers.) Lord CRA.NWORTH contended that the greater portion of the speech of the Lord Chancellor was a covert defence of a great portion of the army of Oude, which came with a peculiar bad grace from any genv e • man who occupied the woolsack. He thought it was ' clearly demonstrated that the publication of the de epatch was the act not of the noble earl (Ellenborough) alone, but that of the united Government, and he would prove it from the statements made in the other house. (Cheers.) It was irregular to refer to what transpired in another house, but it was rendered necessary in this instance, an hon. member in that house having been made the mouthpiece of her Majesty's Government on this question. (Rear.) The noble and learned lord then referred to the various questions that had been put in the other house to members of her Majesty's Govern meat in that house in reference to Lord Canning's policy in India, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer remarked last week that the Government disapproved of Lord Canning's policy in " every sense." That, he contended, was an adoption of the despatch by the Government. Beyond that, he was prepared to express his opinion that it was a despatch nothing could justify—(cheers)— and however wrong Lord Canning might have actel, it was the duty of the Government to have remonstrated with him in a private and not in a public manner, or have recalled him if they thought his proclamation indi cated a policy disastrous to the country, but nothing, however, could justify the sending out what he could scarcely refrain from calling an insulting despatch, which the tenor of this despatch indicated. (Cheers.) If the tone and temperature of the letter had been in accord ance with the remarks of the noble earl on a former oc casion, it would have been a justifiable one, but the pub lished despatch went far beyond that. He considered the complicity of the whole Government had been estab lished in publishing a despatch which nothing on the part of Lord Canning could have justified its writing. He felt persuaded, when it was examined, it would turn out that it was the sucrainty of the land that was con• fiscated, and not the holders or the occupiers. The Earl of DONOUGHMORE, to use a vulgar ex pression, believed it would turn out the noble and learned lord (Lord Cranworth) had found a mare's nest, fir he had mixed up in his remarks two separate despatches. In the speeches of all the noble and learned lords on thy- other side tf the house there was a condemnation of the despatch itself, whilst at the same time they condemned annexation ; but why, instead of adopting that °our:o, had they not brought forward a motion to that effect / Any person who read the paragraph in the despatch r,- lativa to confiscation, must see that it referred to the whole of the people and the soil of the country—(hear)— and in the explanatory despatch accompanying the pro clamation into Oude instructions were given how the people, who were divided into three classes, were to be dealt with. Any person who bad watched the late occur rences in India must be aware that the least disturbance of British authority and greatest obedience to cur autho rity in the most critical circumstances existed in those dis tricts where we had least interfered with the owners of the soil. It was confiscation in Ireland that had caused so much ill-feeling towards England. Earl GREY intended to vote for the motion of his noble friend, bat in doing so he must disclaim being actu ated by any party feelings. Ever since the Whig party was broken up in 1852 he had kept himself free from all party ties. On that account he had never been the partisan of the late Government ; and for the same reason, when that Government fell, so far from his determining to op pose the incoming Administration, he was most anxious they should be afforded every opportunity of establishing themselves in power, for he felt that such frequent changes of Government were attended with great public inconvenience. But, above all, he desired it to be under stood that the vote which he was about to give was in no ways influenced by a feeling of hostility towards the noble earl recently at the head of the Indian Board, far he entertained the highest opinion of that noble lord's knowledge of India, as well as respect for his personal character. However, therefore, it was that he felt the deepest regret at what occurred last week in another place, foreseeing that the effect must be to weaken the stability of the Government. For it seemed to him impossible, no matter how great the consequent in conveuience that the House of Commons c :uld over look what then happened. Now what he (Earl Grey) objected to was the premature publication of the de spatch of the noble earl. At the Fame time, although undoubtedly they were not in a position to firm an exact opinion with respect to the proclamation itself, he must express his total disbelief that its effect would be 1 what was described by the noble earl. (Hear, hear.) He found men who had had great experience of India, and who understood the laws and habits of India, gave a different interpretation to the proclama ion from that put forward by the noble earl. However, as to that point, they must wait for the explanations of Lord Canning himself. But Lord Canning had been blamed for not sending home those explanations already. Now, remembering how Lord Canning had been oppressed by the weight of affairs—how every moment of his time had been occupied—above all, that the Government of India must mainly be carried on India, they ought not to have been in a hurry for those explanations. (Hear.) They had no right to expect full explanations until they received the documents actually issued. When he was at the head of the Colonial-office he invariably treated such documents as that forwarded to the noble earl by Lord Canning as the expression of an opinion which was liable to be altered. But, adopting the view which the noble earl did of the proclamation of Lord Canning, did he find fault with the writing of such a despatch ! No, certainly not ' • although, perhaps, " the noble earl might have assumed a different term in the communication of his views. What he did disapprove of was, the unhappy determination to lay the despatch before Parliament. (Cheers.) He believed it was impossible to exaggerate the ill effects of that publication. (Renewed cheers.) At the same time there was one paragraph in the de spatch which ought not to nave been introduced into it. He alluded to the paragraph having rderenoe to the annexation of Oude. On the whole, perhaps, his opt nines were unfavourable to the policy of annexation ; but whether it was right or wrong, it was a dereliction o br f a d nd uty in on the th f e ac p e e or t f of a Minister of . the Crown to 1 Europe and of Asia the conduct of the previous advisers of his royal mistress with treachery and injustice. (Loud cheers.) Such a course was utterly unjustifiable. But it was said after the re • tirement of the noble earl they ought not to affix the responsibibity of publication upon the Ministry . Ho believed that der such occasi ons t h ere must be a joie' responsibility, for without is they would h ave Ministers' divided amongst theme lve , , and all the intriguing as of old of one Minister against another—(hear)—i n fact, 0,81 anything like settle d g overnment wou ld be imp • 11 9. However, if a government did not mean to hold itself responsible for the acts of particular Ministers, th ose g ht For n t o li t s t: - , acts must be disavowed at the earliest possible moment, and not after they had become the ,ert , j.. , ct of discussion r i h n eeas si t two to h an e tse ittoa adopt f dp:e u ; r : e e t s dh o et f or P ehs a i I, ral lotioni a thattttet) thet. of his house(C h n e oloe . u) friend, and he must at the same time express his astonishmint th It for the first time in our parliamentary history a motion tantamount to a vote of censure should be met on the part of the Government by Inovieg the previous epee. titer. (Loud cheer-.) The Duke of NEWCASTLE had no desire whatever to see the present Government removed from (,Elite, nevertheless he must vote for the motion of the noble i earl. A t the same time he could not give his entire ap proval to the form in which the motion was brought forward, as be considered it much too narrow, any' framed too much with a view to catch votes. (Hear.) He thought if they were to vote for " the previous ques tion," it would go forth to the world that Parliament was indiff eren t on t h e su bj ect. H e wou ld not enter into. th theme este whether they ought to approve or die approve of y the were proclamation. o attempt to f l o t rm weuld be absurd le absence of all i n f ormation to guide themaa t o o pini ar o i n g h i the right con cou: elusion. He totally disapproved of the language used in the despatch with reference to the annexation of Oude. It was quite evident that all along the de spatch of the Government was intended for publics tion, and it was for its publication that he in tended to support the motion of the noble earl. He had been the intimate friend of Lord Can ning for several years ; nevertheless, if he could possibly support the Government upon such an occasion he would willingly sacrifice his private feelings from consideration for the public interest?. Hence he totally disapproved of the proceedings of the Government, and therefore he must record his vote against them. (Cheers.) The Earl of DERBY—I am not disposed to complain. of the tone or language either of the noble lord opposite (Earl Grey) or of the noble duke who last addressed your lordships, and I readily and freely admit that neither the noble earl nor the noble duke is actuated in the slightest degree by party feeling on this question. I believe that no one in this house is so free from any peculiar bias or party feeling as the noble earl and the noble duke. Least of all do I feel disposed to complain of the clueing observation of the noble duke, in which, with a warmth of feeling which does him credit, he vin dicated (as he supposed it was necessary) the character of his absent friend. ([fear, hear.) For my part, in en deavouring to deal with this question, I can assure the noble duke and the numerous friends of Lord Canning, —and he has many on both sides of the house—(bear, hear)—that nothing is further from my desire than to utter even a single expression against the character or conduct of that noble lord, with the single exception of the Oude proclamation. Lord Canning in his admini , stration of Indian affairs, placed, as he was, in circum stances of great difficulty, exhibited a great amount of firmness, and on former occasions a most laudable spirit of humanity, for which I give him infinite credit in the position in which he found himself. Bat remembering this, the greater is my regret to find that a man actuated by such principles has been led to issue so unfortunate and ill-time a proclamation. While I entirely acquit the noble earl and the noble duke of any political or party motives, I cannot carry my complaisance so far as to assume that this question is to be debated and decided purely and simply on its merits without reference to poli tical or party considerations. (Hear.) It is true the noble earl who opened this discussion announced that be came for ward asone who stood in assort of neutral position where no man could suspect him of bias. "My sym pathies," said the noble lord, "are always on the side of those who sit on the opposite benches." Now, Ido not dispute that Lis sympathies may be on this side, but I must say that his votes are more frequently given on the other. (Laughter,) And when the noble earl declares himself free from all party feeling, I cannot help having it suggested to my mind that if resolutions were to be proposed by a person uninfluenced in this way it might have been better had they been brought for-sand by one not so closely connected with the noble lord who was at the head of the late Administration. (Cheers and laughter.) The noble earl's notice was given on Monday last. I don't know whether he attended it, but I pre sume he had communicated to him the result of that Sunday meeting which I am told was not entirely for religious purposes. (Cheers and laughter) I mention it merely as a singular coincidence. On Sunday last a meeting was held at the house of the noble lord (Palmer ston), at which it is supposed (and I believe on very good authority) that the subject of the motion was discussed ; and it does so happen that the noble earl, intimately and closely connected with the noble viscount, gives on Monday in this house notice of his intention to submit a similar resolution. (Hear.) Now, whether or not the noble earl is so entirely uninfluenced as he is desirous of being considered, I must say this house is very greatly changed from what I ever knew it before if the attendance I see here on both sides does 'not indicate some little idea that a party question is at stake. (Laughter.) If, however, I ever doubted whether any political or party question was involved, I should have been undeceived altogether by the tone of this debate, the whole tendency of which has been to convert the very simple and very innocent motion of the noble earl into one of censure upon the Government. This is put forward broadly, distinctly, clearly ; and after that to tell me this is no political or party question passes even my belief. (Laughter.) My lords, two subjects have been mixed up in this debate which ought to be kept separate. This one is the merits of the original proclamation and of the secret despatch ; and the other is the subsequent publication of that despatch, and the responsibility of her Majesty's Government with regard to it. These are two perfectly distinct and separate questions. As to the substance of my noble friend's despatch, I adopt it, I adhere to it, I stand by it. With regard to the publication of that de spatch, I had no knowledge of it, I was not consulted about ft, and I regret the fact. (Hear, hear.) To begin, then, with the proclamation and my noble friend's com ments upon it. There is one thing which has given me unfeigned satisfaction in the course of this discussion. Several most valuable admissions have been made on the other side of the house. Setting apart certain expressions used by my noble friend, the noble earl who opened this discussion said he should not Sod much fault with this despatch if it were addressed to Lord Canning as a secret despatch for the purpose of guidance or even of reproof. Subs,ciaently we have had more valuable admissions still, for I believe the noble earl (Grey) said that if the proclamation was susceptible of the interpretation glycia to it by my noble friend (the Earl of Ellenborough) ro terms of censure could be too severe for it. (Hear, hear.) This much, then, will, at all events, result from the dis cussion. It will show that, setting aside the meaning of Lord Canning's proclamation, the unanimous opinion of this house. is that wholesale confiscation in Oude would be an unjustifiable course of proceeding, and that clo meecy to the vanquished ought to be the rule adopted. (Hear.) That is the unanimous opinion expressed. Noble lords on the other side of the house put themselves pro minently forward to proclaim this doctrine, and declare that that is Lord Canning's meaning. With all my heart and soul do I desire it may turn out that that has been his meaning. Your lordships are to recollect, however, that the despatch upon which so much criticism has been bestowed was one written by my noble friend, and fully adopted by the Government, upon the receipt of a proclamation which appeared to us to convey in no doubtful terms a doctrine very contrary to that which it is now declared to contain. We received that pro clamation. My noble friend had a month previously laid down in a despatch to Lord Canning what were his own views and the views of the Government as to the course which ought to be pursued. That despatch wes dated March 24, under the belief that before that time the city of Lucknow would be evacuated by the rebels, and that no considerable body would remain in arms against us throughout the country, and it proceeds to intimate the policy which the Government thought it desirable should be adopted : "To us it appears that, whenever open resistance shall have ceased, it wouldbe prudent, iu awarding ponos smeat rather to follow the practice which prevails after the con di a a u s e p s a t r o a f t e a warcountry than w t h h i c a h t w h a h s i ah defended ay itself perhaps t o h t e h l e a last l b l y y adopted after 'the suppression of mutiny and rebellion— such acts always being exempted from forgiveness or miti gation of punishment as have exceeded the licence of legi timate hostilities." After recommending a general disarmament, and as fares possible a general amnesty, it deeares that "in every amnestied district the ordinary administration of the law should as soon as possible be restored." In order to show the animus of my noble friend towards Lord Canning I beg your lordships' attention to this passage : "In carrying those views into execution you may m ee t with obstructions from those who, maddened by the scenes they have witnessed, may desire to substitute their own policy for that of the Government ; but persevere firmly is doing what you may think right ; make those who world counteract you feel that you are resolved to rule, and that you will be served by none who will not obey. Acting in this spirit, you may rely upoi our unqualified support." (cheers.) Tnat was the language used by my noble friend on larch 24th; those were the principles laid down; and then, not of course in answer to this despatch, for it could not have been received, but following on its issue, ca me the proclamation, which undoubtedly appeared to us to be couched in a very different sprit. There is no question that that proclamation intimated to the talookdars, the chiefs, and inhabitants of Oude, that, with a few specified exceptions, the whole proprietary rights of the sod were confiscated to the Crown. Instructions certainly accompany it, addressed to the Commissioner of Oude ; but, as my noble friend most justly remarked in his des-- pa . ch, these instructions did not go It, the poop's of Otvhs. They receive d the bare and naked proclamation, and nothing snore. '(Hear.) Well, then it is said. "On, but this does not at all mean what you suppose it does ; it only means that the talookdars and the great men will be divested of rights of lordship, which thereafter will be vested in the Crown, but it never crossed Lord Can ning's mind to interfere with their private rights." I should like to knew, however, what would be thought by the noble earl or the noble duke if an Act of Parlia ment were passed in reference to their respective cow:- ties confiscating to the Crown all " the proprietary rights of the soil." (Hear, and a lwgh ) Their tenut e being thereafter that ef cop;bolders under the Crown, with no guarantee for the future security of their pos session', I rather suspect they would imagine, seeing such a term in as Aet of Parliament, that they must look sharply about them or else they would soon have not au acre left. (Hear) There may be some abstruse, bidden meaning in this proclamation, intehigible to the people of India ; but my belief is that upon receiving this infor mation they would deem it to be a notice to all the in hab.tants of 011 ,1 e, high and low, rich and poor, thet, with the few exceptions there specified, every roan should be deprived of the laud on which alone he depends fer subsistance. (Hear.) Toe naming of six persons—and six only—who were to be permitted to retain their inhe ritancea as they herd them at the time .gf the annexatien of Ouse seems to me, so far as thoseasorsons were con cerned, hardly a fair mode of procceding. It appears to me that they were placed in a most invidious and, 1 think, hardly in a vary safe position. Yuu had scarcely conquered the country ; you were surrounded by a pc pulatien most hostile to you ; and you select persons who have adhered to you faithfully—who, under groat trials, have reel ted ail tewpation to quit your eau- e out by naese, and telling thirst —singling alone tbeal of all their countrymen shall enter ;n o pes:eeeion of their lands, and that as a signal re , eard for their distinguiehed fi ielity they shall be permitted to retain those lande, "subject only to such moderate asse sment as rosy be imposed upon them." If this is the way lin which you reward your friends I must say I don't know what you mean to. do with regard to your enemies. (A. laugh.) But it is said it was not intended to dispossess these, person of ,their lande. Now, my lords, let us see—apart from the mere terms of the proclamation itself—what was the gloss put , upon it in the letter issued for its explanation. There were three classes of per-one specified in the proclamh time according to their different degrees of guilt and con', la-ative innocence. With ro,,ard to the second class— that is to say persons who have taken up arms against the Government, but who "have done so less heartily, and upon whom f m other causes:the Chief Commissioner may not see reason to put restraint, these, after surren dering their arms, might be allowed to go to their homes, with such security for their peaceable conduct as the Chief Commissioner may think proper to require ;" and the letter goes on to say—l entreat the house to mark this—that "the permission to return to their homes must not be considered as a re-instatement of them in the possession of their lands—(hear)—for the deliberate disposal of which the Government will preserve itself unfettered." Now, if there is any sense or meaning in language, this passage means that although these per sons may be permitted to return home they are not to be reinstated,—net in their territorial rights, but in the possession of their lands. With regard, therefore, to the whole land of Oude, the Government holds itself at per fect liberty to dispose of that land as it may think fit. It was, I think, hope) , sible, in the face of the proclama tion, and of the language I have read, to suppose for a single moment, that her Majesty's Government could put upon it such an interpretation as has now, by way of apology, been attached to it by noble lords oppo site. Having received this proclamation, not as be ing already issued, but as about to be issued, it was the duty of her Majesty's Government to consider what course they ought to pursue. We thought, my lords it was a matter of the utmost importance that no a mo ment should be lost in intimating our apprehensions as to the dangerous consequences wilieh might be produced by the issue of such a proclamation. We were not with out hopes that our despatch, which was in strict unison with the principles we had before laid down, might by possibility reach Lord Canning in time to enable him to reconsider the terms of hie proclamation, and to issue one which was not liable to the construction that might be placed upon it. We are told that we ought to have waited to receive explanations from Lord Canning. lords, if we had ha , ' the slightest idea that such expla nations were coming, I don't say we should have waited because it would have been our duty to notice the pro clamation, but we should very materially have modified the language of the despatch. (Cheers.) We received the proclamation officially, we received no private com munication whatever, we were not likely to receive such a communication, because Lord Canning could not be aware of the change of Government, and if communica tions of that nature had been sent—as private commu nications are sent by every Minister and Governor ex plaining their public acts—it was not to us that such explanations would have come. But such an explanation did come—(loud cheers from the Ministerial side) --and it arrived at a period when its communication to her Majesty's Government might have been of the utmost importance—when if it had been communicated to them it might have materially modified the tone and language of my noble friend's despatch. (Hear.) Why was not that explanation communicated to us I should like to know ? (Cheers.) The noble marquis (Lansdowne) said the other night that Mr. V. Smith received the explana• tion at a very late period, Subsequently, I believe, the noble marquis WAS satisfied that Mr. Y. Smite received it at a period when it might have been communicated to us and have had some effect, but we were told that Mr. V. Smith was in Ireland attending his son's wedding, which was much more important than any subject of this nature. (A. laugh.) That, however, is not Mr. V. Smith's account of the transaction. He says, "I did receive a letter from Lord Conning ; I know it was ad dressed to me as President of the Board of Control. I did not think it utterly unimportant, because the moment I received it I wont"—to whom ? To the Ministry by whom Lord Canning expected it would nave been received ? No ; but to the head of the Govern ment which had just been displaced, and who was in opposition to the existing Ministry. (Cheers.) In the course of this evening it has been denied that Lord Pal merston was consulted on the subject of sending this ex tract of a private letter to her Majesty's present Go vernment. All that I can say is that the report of what appears to have taken place elsewhere gives the following as the words used by Mr. V. Smith I may state, however, that I read it the moment I re ceived it to my noble friend the member for Tiverton, to whom it did not appear, any more than to myself, that it viao necessary to communicate it to the Government." (Loud cheers and laughter.) Now, my lords, Lord Pal merston may or may not have given any advice, but if we are to believe Mr. V. Seeith—and I cannot hesitate to believe a statement which he makes so solemnly—the first thing he did was to communicate this passage to the head of the late Government, who did not think any more than himself that it was necessary to communicate it to the Minister to whose department it related. All I can say is that I think the noble viscount (Palmerston) must have very materially ebanged his views with re gard to the expediency and necessity of communicating information bearing upon public matters which may be contained in !elevate letters, because not long ago I had the honour of receiving a communication from the noble viscount, enclosing a letter which he said had been , resoued from the wreck of the Ava, and which, inas much as it related to public affairs, he thought it his duty to transmit to roe: Now, that despatch, rescued from the wreck of the Ava, which the noble viscount— anxious, as he always is, to discharge his duty to the 1 public—forwarded to me, contained information that a petition for the recall of Lord Canning which had been Gent to this country, and had been returned to India that it might be transmitted through Lord Canning, had been sent to the Governer-General to be so transmitted. (Laughter.) That was the sole in formation contained in the dewatcb, yet that piece of information, three months old, yeas considered by the noble viscount so important—(a laugh)—that be deemed it his dirty not to lose a minute in commuuicitt ing it to me as the bead of her Majesty's Government— (cheers and laughter) —but a statement of the Governor. General, written as be supposed to a Minieter of the Crown, intimating his intention to forward explanations respecting a very important official document appeared to the noble viscounts° utterly insignificant that neither he nor Mr. Smith thought it expedient to make any com munication on the subject to her Majesty's Ministers. Again, I say, this passes the limits of my credulity ? (" Hear," and a laugh.) I know not what other state ments or letters may have been received by Mr. Vernon Smith—(hear, bea r )—b u t thi s I w ill say, that, although it is possible, I think it is barely probable that in the course of two months and a half, or nearly three months, the Governor , General of India should not have commu nicated one single private line with re r pact to public af fairs to the Minister who immediately presided over the Indian department. (Hear, hear.) Ile may have kept that extraordinary silence, but I very much doubt the fact, and I think it is almost incredible. Certain it is, however, thet not one line have we ever seen, nor have we since wecame into office bad the slightest means of judging whit, upon any one question, were Lord Can ning's view, of pol cy. (Loud and continued cheering.) Well, my lords, in the absence of all such information, we were b)und to act upon the proclamation and the public doctmente we possessed ; and reading that pro clamation in the sense in which we regarded it we thought net a moment was to be lost, and the language 'could hardly be too strong to express our apprehensions of its cons , ?quences and our disapproval of its tone and temper. shall not quote the various passages to which reference las been made. I shell not quote the language held in tin despatch with regard to the proclamation as we understood it and as we received it ; but this I will venture to say, without fear of eontradiction, that the tone and tempo. of that proclamation werestron,glydisapproved by the hi;heet and most competent authorities in India, that front its tone and the time at which it was issued, it was regarded as likely to lead to most alarming conse quences— (hear )—that I believe there were remonstrances against in publication, and that I know that many most eminent men have written home expressing their deep regret at the system of apparently wholesale confiscation which b would establish. (Cheers.) If I could men tion tin persons to whom I refer their names would command the highest respect ; but I am at liberty to name ore geetlema.n with whom, until yesterday, I had not the 3lighteet personal acquaintance. When I men tion the name of Sir George Clerk it will, I think, be admitted that no one is m o re com p e t en t t o f orm ajudg ment or this subject. I requested Sir G. Clerk to for ward no a copy of a despatch which was sent out by my noble friend (Lord Ellenborough) only last Monday, and in doing so Sir G. Clerk says : Mae I take the liberty to observe to your lordship that, so far re I know those countries, I should say that the sen timentr with which her Majesty's Government have re gardedit, if allowed to prevail, will right the ship, but a diffeinut course should be persisted in British dominion over it cannot be restored in any degree of security by means of all the Europea n t roo p s England care afford to send to such a climate or to such a distance." These are the deliberate opinions et a man who, more tean any-other, knows the circumstances and feelings of the people of Indi e ; and he interprets this proclamation as we interpret it ; he interprets confiscation as we . in terpretBoyf ,tth,fliGoOf V s e e r v il e n t l i e t rl i t s a h h , o ,u u l l d d bbee persisted to, in and it, erg' he says that, unless the recommendations force that you can send from this country wul enable you permanently to maintain your authority in peace in if this ment for having taken the earliest uoeneent to protest agaiist a course of prec,eniugs which they thought (Cheere ) I I. that a justification ifntla[Guvnetruo-f woud necessarily lead to the most fearful consequences (Heir, hear.) Let us reco ll ec t w hat is the contrition of Oats. There every landholder is a soldier and every , solder is a landh o ld er , an d a system of universal con fiscdtion addressed to a population of armed men—many trailed in your service, and many feudal proprietors, havne numerous armed retainers, tier, I say, appli e d t o suc h a population, with sours ex copeonal indulgence s , ( f w hich no person could feel —uorverel confisca a scoere, was a certain means not to put an end to strife, nutt e r protect a desultory and most embarrassing war, an( to extinguish the hope of peace and security fur worths and perhap s y ears to come. (Cheers) We foind it necessary to protest at the earliest period aetinst the possibility of such lamentable results, and we thought it necessary to point out to the Governor- General that which appeared contrary to the spirit of bit proclamation, that the principle of mildness and for bearance, with occasional nism.ecee of severity, instead of saver-Ay nitheccasional instances of clemency, was the only sound way of bringing bas k the population to alle giance and content. (LI e , r.) I wi.t not use any ex oreseion likely to give offence to the noble duke oppo site, bat I do riot Aare in that laughing tone in which Ye treated the enunciation in the despatch of those great e sound, and h o ly prircii les which I believe it to ho of the uonosit importance should be made known to leae e hear.) ea to r.) call ' the people of India as the principles which guide the I d co e n e d eutc ridicule of f the what,British tGovernment.enebl duke p was plain truisms, nor do I think the country will be inclined to ridicule them. Having expressed my entire concur rence is the statements contained in the de ;patch on the supposed meaning and intention of the proclamation, and having expressed that concurrence in them, nut as a representation addre-sei to the people of India, but as a representation in a secret dispatch to the Go vernor-Gene al, I now proceed to the farther question respecting the publication of the despatch, and the re sponsibility for its publication. But before I go further I must just advert to one observation which has been made—namely, that it is absolutely clear that this de spatch was from the first intended for publication, other wise there would not have been found in it what the noble duke opposite was pleased to call such sonorous phrases. New, whatever may be the character of this despatch, I do not for a moment doubt that it was the in tention and desire of my noble friend that the despatch should remain on record. It was not a private letter, but a secret despatch, not at the time to be communi cated, except to the Governor-General, but to remain on record as an indication of the policy which my noble friend and the Government were prepared to pursue. Therefore, of course, it did not take the form of a mere Private and confidential lett r, but of a recorded despatch, pointing out the views entertained by the Government. (Hear.) I come now to the question of publication, and I confess that I am there compelled to differ from the views of my noble friend the lase President of the Board of Control. (Hear ) I stated at the very earliest op portunity afforded me that I regretted the premature publication of the despatch. I think it was unfortunate that, without any previous notice, a question should have been asked by :e membet of the other house, and answered by a subordinate member without communica tion with any of the Cabinet Ministers, except I presume my noble friend the late President of the Board of Con trol, and that a declaration should have been made pledging the Government to produce the despatch. I will come presently to the question of the limited liability or joint responsibility of the Cabinet, but will now advert to what has fallen from the noble and learned lord oppo site. He said that, setting aside the question whether all the Ministers were bound by one colleague, he would go further back than the Thursday of last week, an/ would revert to a previous Friday, in order to show that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in answer to some question, announced that he would lay on the table a despatch which was by no means intended as a censure on the Governor-General, and the noble lord inferred that that despatch, which cast no censure on the Go vernor-General, was the despatch which he said censured that high officer. But the fact is that it was a prior de spatch. It was the despatch of the 24th of March, with respect to which the discussion took place on the 231 of April, and which was ordered to be printed on the 26th ; and the noble and learned lord has confounded two separate occasions and two separate despatches. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the despatch to which the present motion referred what happened was this :—a question was asked without no tice, and the Secretary of the Board of Control hastily announced his intention of laying the despatch on the table. That question was followed by another question from another gentleman, who asked whether the Government approved the policy of Lord Canning in issuing the proclamation. Mind, at that time the de spatch had been promised to be produced ; and whether the Government stated their approval or disapproval of the proclamation, or left the fact to be disclosed when the despatch should be produced next day, was a matter of indifference. But what was the answer given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer ? He said that the policy 'of confiscation intimated in that proclamation we disep prove in every sense. (Hear.) Great stress has been placed on these words " in every sense," but he was re ferring to the policy of confiscation, and in every sense of justice and policy h e mean t th a t the Government dis approved of that policy. The same night the late Presi dent of the Council came over to me and told me what had taken place in the House of Commons, and further than so hearing that such question had been asked and answered I bad no other knowledge on the subject. The noble earl the late President of the Council, however, expressed his hope that, as the production of the despatch had been promised, it would be laid on the table that night, because, otherwise, there would be no opportunity of discussing before the departure of the mail, which left on the Monday. We replied that we could not lay it on the table that night, but would do so to-morrow, and for the convenience of the noble earl and Lord Canning's friends a copy should be sent to the noble earl, and it was sent before the despatch was laid upon the table. On the following day there was a Council at the Palace, by which we were detained, but when we came to examine the despatch we found in it some paragraphs which we thought it more for the public convenience should not be produced. The sole object of those paragraphs was to point out the circumstances of mitigation which sepa rated the case of revolted subjects from that of mutineers, and, of course, in reasoning the point all the extenua ting circumstances were put forth with a plainness and openness with which they certainly would not have been stated if the document had been intended to meet the public eye. When we saw the character of those paragraphs we desired to have them omitted from publi cation, and with that view we sent down to the House of Commons, but before the messenger arrived, the Secretary of the Board of Control, not having had any previous communication with ns, had, in consequence of the promise of the night before, laid the whole despatch on the table of the House. I regret that the whole des patch was laid on the table, and upon the whole I regret that any part of the despatch should have been published at so early a period, but I cannot say that I regret the character or contents of the despatch. (Hear, hear.) On the contrary, I think the policy indicated in it is a just, sound, and necessary policy, and we should have been neglectful of our duty if we had omitted to take the earliest opportunity of enforcing that policy on the Governor-General, more especially at the moment when we thought he was going to abandon it. Now, with respect to the liability of all members for the act of a single member, I wish to say that no man can put forth more distinctly or clearly than I do the constitutional doctrine that every member of the Government is re• sponsible for the acts of every other member, whether those acts were previou , ly known or not, provided the members of the Government continued to act together as a Government. Remaining in office and acting to gether, all the members of the Government take upon themselves a retrospective responsibility for what their colleagues have done, which they can in no way attempt to shake off, But the case is very different when the Government are charged with having done a certain act, and they say " We did not do it, it was done without our knowledge by one of your colleagues." "Never mind," it is then said, "you are all responsible for the acts of your colleague." "But,".we reply, ," in conse qience of the very act which you impugn, he has ceased to be one of your colleagues." "Never mind," it is said again, "you are still responsible; when you knew nothing about the act he was your colleague, and you were thorebre responsible for that of which you know nothing ; and now that be has ceased to be your colleague you continue responsible for enact of which you knew nothing when it was done, and which you con demned as soon as it was brought to your knowledge.' (Hear, hear.) My lords, that may be constitutional law, but to me it appears to bathe grossest and most absolute absurdity—(hear)—and sure I am that if it is the consti tutional law, it is not, and never has been constitutional practice. (Oheere.) I need not go back a long way to place before your lordships a circumstance which I think is somewhat parallel. But before proceeding further I may notice a remark which fell from a noble earl oppo site, "That excuse," be said, " would have answered your purpose very well if upon the instant the promise of publication was made in the House of Commons you had jumped up and disclaimed it, and said to the Presi dent of the Board of Control, " You are no longer a member of the Government.' " " But," continued the noble earl, " it was not till 48 hours afterwards, and when a notice of motion had been given in one if not both Houses of Parliament, that you bethought you of patting upon one of your number alone the entire re sponsibility of what had taken place." Now, my lords, it was not the Government whi c h placed up 'n the President of the Board of Control, but my noble friend himself who, with characteristic straightforwardness, assumed the whole responsibility, which in truth and justice simply attached to himself. (Hear, hear.) But may I ask noble lords opposite to have the goodness to carry their recollection back to the month of June, 1855 1 If my memory does not greatly deceive me, at that time the noble viscount the member for Tiverton was at the head of the Government, and the noble lord the member for London was Secretary of State for the Colonial Department. As Secretary of State for the Co lonial Department the noble lord was sent upon a mis sion to Vienna. In his capacity as Plenipotentiary at Vienna, he entered into certain engagements for a treaty, which he brought h ome and reported to his Cabinet. His colleagues did not approve the art raogement which he had made, and I suppose they signified to the noble lord that they did not so approve. Did they imatediately insist upon hit quitting office I No such thing. Time went on until notice was 1 given of a motion in Parliament charging the Govern ment with the responsibility of the treaty which had been negotiated at Vienna. (Hear, hear.) What fol lowed / I am not in the secrets of the late Government, but report at the time certainly stated that a round robin was sent to the noble viscount the member for Tiverton insisting upon the retirement of Lord J. Rus• sell. In point of fact, Lord J. Russell ceased to be a member of the Ca ,suet, and the Government then dis avowed the treaty to which he had been a party a con- 1 siderable time previous, repudiating in the face of a hos tile mention against the whole of them their joint respon sibility, and throwing the entire blame upon their late colleague. (Cheers.) The Opposition of that day, being somewhat more forbearing than the Opposition of the p resen t — (cheert!)—withdrev r the hostile motion against the Government in consequence of the retirement of a single member. (Renewed cheers ) I have thus given the noble lords opposite a precedent for not imposing the strict rule of joint and universal responsibility, not in reference to a matter of which all the members of the Cabinet except one were ignorant, but with regard to a subject which, although it was well known to them, they I did not disavow until a hostile motion was directed against them in the House of Commons. (Cheers.) But, my lords, I am asked by the noble earl opposite, " It you mean to oppose trey reeslutiocs, why do you do so by means of the preview. question ?" lie never, it seems, knew an occasion on which a vote of censure upon the Government Was met on the part of the Go vernment by the previous question. My answer to that is that, although the debate has been a debate of cen sure upon the Government, the vut-2 , to which your lord ships are asked to carne i 3 not a vote of censure upon the members of the Govern:neat, but upon an act which the members of the Government disavow and repudiate. (Cheers.) What was the Government to do in these eircuaismanees / The last roiolution, which is the only one of any prsc icel importance, asks the House of Loris to express its regret at the premature publication by the Gevernment of the despatch of the 19. h of April, which was calculated to weaken the au th or ity o f th e Governor-General, and to encourage those still in arms against us. To someol he phraseology o f th a t reso lution I certainly must de mur. I do not admit that the publication took place with the sanction or by the• authority of the Govern ment ; on the contrary, I contend that it took place without their knowledge, and contrary to their wish or intention, (Hear, hear.) Nor do I admit, although undoubtedly the publication—not the writing—el Oat. despatch may put Lord Canning in a fearful position, from which I sincerely hope that his explanations, when received, may have the effect of relieving hiin, that the premature promulgation of the despatch will produce any results such as those which have been ascribed t ) it. (Hear, hear.) I regret especially the publication of that part which relates to the annexation of Odd°, because it is liable to be misapprehended by the natives of India ; but I cannot regret that an intimation should go out in the most anthoritative manner from the crown —approved, as I hope, by the Parliament and people of England—that the system upon which hereafter the Government of India should be conducted, when the present unhappy revolt has been suppressed, is not to be a system of general confiscation, but a system of general toleration and mercy, and that we hope the instances may be few in which it may be necessary to make use of severity. (Hear, hear.) But, my lords, if I were to op pose the resolutions, it would appear as if I sanctioned and approved the publication of the despatch. My noble and learned friend on the woolsack had no alterna tive, then, if he meant to express the feelings and wishes of the Government, and to avoid a vote which would be liable to misconstruction, but to move the previous question, which simply imports that upon a point on which your lordships have not sufficient information you will not at the present moment undertake to pronounce a judgment. Such is the meaning of the previous ques tion. It involves no censure upon Lord Canning or upon the character of his proclamation, but it means that yell will not express a hasty opinion upon imperfect evidence or arrive at a decision which, whatever may be its effects here, will be liable to be misconstrued in India. The motion of the noble earl opposite is, and was an nounced to be, a vote against the Government. Carried in that sense, it will be construed by the people of India as meaning that the Government have been condemned for promulgating a policy of mercy and toleration. Although I am satisfied you would regret such an inter pretation as much as we should, yet the inference is clear and obvious that your adoption of a vote of censure upon the Government, after a debate in which the question of toleration or confiscation had been the main subject of discussion, would be held in India to be your adoption of the opposite principle to that maintained by the Go vernment. (Hear.) It is upon these grounds, my lords, while I cannot defend the prematere publication of the despatch, while I nevertheless hope that the promulga tion of some parts of it may not only be productive of no injury, but may go forth as a message of peace to India, announcing the kindly and beneficent intentions of the British Parliament with respect to the administra tion of Indian affairs, and I entreat your lordships not, by affirming the motion of the noble earl opposite, which must be construed into a vote cf censure, to place the Government in a most painful and embarrassing posi tion, and at the same time produce in India an impres sion the very reverse of that which we all wish to create. (Cheers.) Earl GRANVILLE hoped their lordships would not allow the Government to get rid of the motion of censure by a technical amendment. The noble lord who had brought forward the motion could not be charged with party motives. (Oh, oh, and hear, hear.) The noble earl had alluded to certain political meetings, as if hon. mem bers of the other house were not to meet on grave politi cal questions, and be had even descended so low as to in sinuate family motives, but he (Earl Granville) should have thought it unworthy of the notice of the noble earl on this occasion. The meetings were, however, perfectly legitimate. He (Earl Granville) owned that whilst the case was in a nutshell he was at a loss for some time to imagine the arguments that would have been advanced by the Government in support cf their policy. He denied that he had any personal feeling against the noble earl (Ellenborongh) whom he respected for many noble quali ties, but he must say the noble earl bad assumed a false position. As to his remonstrance against the proclama tion, he (Lord Granville) never heard a speech that appeared to convey less we;ght and conviction than that of the Lord Chancellor, though he admitted his great ability and acquisition in that house to the party whose principles he espoused. He appeared to have defended the conduct of the sepoys as being legitimately at war with the Indian Government. The LORD CHANCELLOR explained. The noble earl was in error in that respect. Earl GRANVILLE—The noble earl at the head of the Government had argued that the letter of the noble earl (Ellen borough) was likely to do good in India ; but what he (Earl Granville) contended was, that the Go vernment were at liberty to send out such remarks on the proclamation as they thought right, but that their pub lication ba the present state of affairs was likely to create much mischief in India. (Hear.) It had been stated that the despatch was not intended to be published, but but from the observations that had been made by the noble earl the late President of the Board of Control, it appeared that it was intended for publication. If it was intended otherwise, he thought it would have been writ ten in a different tone. He referred to a statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with reference to the annexation of Oude and the course Government ought to pursue, viz., that the Queen of England was not a Sovereign Who would violate treaties, but observe them, &c., and be went on to say that they should not de it in a corner, but in a manner to attract attention. He did not, however, say that it was wrong for her Majesty's Government to entertain an opinion that the annexation of Oude was wrong; but if they considered that the kingdom of Oude should be returned to the King, it ought to have been done opanly, by instructions to that effect to Lend Canning, and not in an indirect manner, as inferred by this despatch. Would the noble earl lay on the table of the house the letters he bad mentioned from India in opposition to this proclamation, that their lordships might see if they were written be fore its issue or after. (Hear, hear.) He could not concur in the assertion, that their lordships would consider this a proper despatch, and as the noble earl had given up a part of it, it was uoneceasary that he (Earl Granville) should enter into it. He now came to its publication, and he dissected generally from the proposition laid down by the noble earl as to where the joint responsibility of a Cabinet commenced and where it ended, and he denied that the case of Lord J. Russell, alluded to by the noble ear], was a case in point. So far as he understood it, there had been a communica tion between the noble earl and Mr. Baillie in respect to the publication of the despatch, and the Chancellor of of the Exchequer had said that the Government disap proved of Lord Canning's policy in every sense: When he referred to the subject on a former occasion, he put a question to the Government, not being so cognizant of the policy of the Government in this respect, as Mr. Bright appeared to have been. (Hear, hear.) The ques tion, however, did not rest en that. The despatch was however, published the next day ; and he called the at tention of the noble earls (Lord Ellenborough and Lord Derby) to it, who promised him (Earl Granville) he might, have it, and show it to his friends, but not to publish it. That injunction was strictly followed out by him (Earl Granville) • but why had not th e G overnmen t before layi ng it on the table, read it over, and considered the evils it might produce in India 1 He had no doubt that was done; and the most honourable course for the Government to have pursued would have been to have come down to the house, and refused its publication, though with some little obloquy. Tuey, however, bad left out a part of the despatch in publication, which made them responsible for the whole. Her Majesty's Government fully participated in that despatch, and by its publication were accomplices to it. He contended her Majesty's Government could not escape from the joint responsibility of the publication of this despatch, and he was afraid their lordships' house would stand a false po sition in agreeing to the motion of the previous ques tion. After this despatch it was impossible to say what policy the Government intended to pursue towards In dia, and therefire he trusted the house would give an opinion on declarations it was impossible to deny ; and however much the Opposition might be taunted by party feelings, it would be seen that their lordships had a po licy to defend, and that great mischief would result in India by the treatment the Governor-General had re ' ceived. (Hear, hear.) Their lordships then divided, when the numbers were Contents—Pre;ent Proxies --158 Non contents—Present P 1 oxies 49 —167 DMajority for the Government O. (Loud o'aeers.) The other orders were disposed of, and the house ad journed shortly after one o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS.--{YESTERDAY. ) Ti3e SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. THE ATTENDANCE OF HON. MENIBERS.. The anticipated debate on Mr. Cardwell's motion, in volving a vote of censure on her Majesty's Government, drew au early and numerous attendance of hon. ere, and mern t long before the hour for prayers thehouse was d c t i h rc e n q m u s e t s a t n io c n e' relt f i t v e e r three parts f Owen m Stanley n u r s a l a s e l prayers Mr. to the right of hon. members to certain seats, in replythe to which the Speaker read th e standin g order of house, which was to the effect that no hon. member could take his eeat before prayers, and it was the duty of the Speaker to give such instructions to the door-keeper. He had failed to do so, and if any misunderstanding had arisen on the subject, he was to blame for not having given the requisite orders to the door-keepers. (No, no.) Mr. Owen Stanley said that in accordance with the standing order referred to ho had removed the card of an honourable rcetnber from the seat placed there some time previous to prayere, and the hon. member had complained of his want of courtesy in removing it. Mr. J. Ewart, the hon. member re ferred to, said that he had certainly placed his card there before prayers—an usual practice, and he had called upon the right hon. gentleman not to remove it, and die turb the usual and recognised practice adopted by boo. members. He had no desire to r:in counter to the: standing order of the house. The subject then dropped. Lord J. Russell. and Mr. M. Gibson left their seats on the opposition side of the house, and went over to Sir J. Graham, on the ministerial side, just be'ow the gang• way, asd had a lengthened conversation with the right hoe. baronet previous to the commencement of the busi ness on the paper. The Chancellor of the Exchequer and Lord Vane Tempest also had an earnest conversa tion on the Treasury Bench. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Norwich Gas Bill was read a third time and passed. The following bills were further conaidtred, and or lered to be read a third time :—Chiswick Improvement; Edinburgh and Glasgow and Stirling and Dunfermline Railways ; North Yorkshire and Cleveland Railway ; Salisbury and Yeovil Railway ; Staines, Wokingham, and Woking Railway. ARCEDEACONR.Y OF MIDDLESEX. Mr. BOUVERIE moved an address or copy of the form of citation issued by the Archdeacon of the Archdeaconry of Middlesex to the churchwardens of the several parishes and district parishes therein ; and of the letter and articles o inquiry accompanying the same :—Statements of theTumber of the said forms and letters and articles of inquiry issued at Easter 1858; and of the foes demanded in each case, showing by what authority such demands are made, and who is entitled to receive them.—Agreed to. METROPOLITAN POLICE. Sir J. SHELLEY moved an address for return of the number of officers of the Metropolitan Police Force, distinguishing the number, rank, and pay in each class employed on special duty, and not in the ordinary duties of the police ; the number of such police officers to whom the issue of the usual police uniform has been discontinued, and who are allowed a sum of money in lieu thereof; also, of the number of police constables, sergeants, inspectors, and superintendents employed at the several docks, dockyards, public buildings, mmeumg, institutions, and theatres, and what portion of the pay of the several officers so employed is defrayed by the several public companies and institutions ?—Agreed to. POOR-RATES. General CODRINGTON gave notice that he should at, an early day call the attention of the house to the new rating of Government property to the poor-rake. THE ORDERS OF TUE DAY. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, the orders of the day were postponed till after the motion on the Governor-General of India. THE WHITSUN HOLIDAYS. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave notice that on Friday next, the 21st, be should move the adjournment of the house till Friday the 28th, for the Whitsun holidays. NEWFOUNDLAND FISHERIES. On the motion of the adjournment of the house till Monday. _____ Mr. ITANBITRIC asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether any change had taken place in our position relative to Fiance or the United States, by treaty or otherwise, with regard to the Newfoundland Fisheries ; and whether the British squadron bad been increased on that station ? Lord STANLEY said no change bad taken place be tween the above Governments relative to the Newfound land Fisheries. The noble lord's answer to the latter part of the question was inaudible in the gallery. GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF INDIA.—VoTE OF CENSURE. Mr. CARDWELL then moved the following resolu• tion " That this house, whilst in its present state of infor mation it abstains from expressing an opinion on the policy of any proclamation which may have been issued by the Governor-General of India in relation to Oude, has seen with regret and serious apprehension that her Majesty's Government have ad dressed to the Governor-General, through the Secret Committee of the Court of Directors, and have published, a despatch caedemning in strong terms the conduct of the Governor-General ; and is of opinion that such a course on the part of the Govern ment must tend, in the present circumstances of India, to produce the most prejudicial effect, by weakening the authority of the Governor-General, and encouraging the further resistance of those who are in arms against us. He said, he rose to bring before the notice of the house what he believed to be one of the most remarkable occurrences that had been wit nessed in the history of the British Administration. Ho did not intend to occupy the attention of the house for any lengthened time, because he did not mean to say anything that did not rest entirely on facts patent and indisputable, or upon the statements of those whose conduct it was his painful duty to impugn. (Loud laughter from the Ministerial benches, and loud cheers from the Opposition.) It appeared that on the 12th of last month there was received in this country a letter from the Secretary of the Government of India to the Commissioner in Oude, concerning the draft of an intended proclamation, which it was announced was in tended to be proclaimed in Oude as soon as the fall of Lucknow had occurred. That important document was, immediately taken into the consideration of her Majesty's Government, and in order not to mistake it he would state it in the language of the advisers themselves. The Chancellor of the EX chequer said—" I think it right to take this opportunity of stating that when we received notice of this intended proclamation we took the subject of it into our considera tion. (Hear, hear.) There was full time for reflection. Toe document was receive I on the 12th April, and the despatch in answer to it was indicted on the 18th, bit the answer was not despatched till the 26th from this country. The Earl of Ellenborougb, however, said, " reisction only the more strongly induces, ale to think it was absolutely necessary to send the letter as originally written, and then when I read that proclama tion I felt it was my duty to express my own sentiment s on the subject, which were adopted by my noble friend. So that he apprehended there was no doubt with regard at least to the writing , approving and transmitting of the despatch, it we'l the deliberate act of her Majesty's Government collet' tively. (Opposition cheers.) It was known to the house the manner in which the Government of India was conducted, that of sending to the secret committee despatches concerning the treatment of the native princes arid states, which, in their judgment, required secrecy. That course was pursued on this occasion, and that despatch collectively adopted by her Majesty's Government wag sent to India on 26th April through the secret commit tee of the Court of Directors of the East India Cow' pany. With regard, then, first, to the document itself, it was clear that it was the collective act of her Ma jesty's Government—(loud cheers from the Opposition) ---and that it was sent to India through the particular channel of the secret committee of the Court of Directors, What were the terms of that despatch he shoull here' after describe, not however in his language, but excle' sively in the language of th ose who indited, or were, responsible for the despatch. Fro m th e 26th o f A p ril to the 6th of May the important information came within his knowledge— (hear, hear, and cheere)—but on the 6th of May it having become known through the channels of the press that a proclamation had been proclaimed in Oude, which was not the identical draft of the proclamation to which he bad before referred, bu t a proclamation, in the language of Lord Derby, mode' rattly modified from the draft of that proclarer tion. That being the position of things, the hon. m ember for Birmingham put a question to the hon. member lot Inverness. The right hon. gentleman then read the, question and answer, and also that of the Chancellor et the Exchequer, who stated that the Government dieter proved of Lord Canning's policy in every sense—(hea r t and cheers)—and referred to the publication o f the despatch which had had the effect of raising in th e public mind an apprehension that Lord C ann i ng won't' be recalled, and in consequence of there being no valid reasons given for such conduct he had put the present motion on the paper. After referring to th e manly course of Lord Ellenborough in taking upon bier self the responsibility in this matter, and,resigned in ten' sequence, the right hon. g en tl eman sa id th a t it Wl' clear the writing and sending of the despatch was the collective act of her Majesty's Government, and not the separate act of any one member of the Governmen t ' (Cheers from the Opposition.) It was not his intentio n to ask the judgment of the house on the despatch is re' ference to the policy of Lord Canning—(cheers from th e Opposition)—but to condemn its publi cat i on . He e'" jetted to such a document going forth to the world in reference to a responsible Minister of the Crown , as being likely to weaken his authority, especially in a foreign land. (Hear, bear.) The right hon. g en tleman defended the clemency of Lord Canning's govern; merit, which had gained for him th e nam e °` "Clemency Canning," and said that it was the cluti, of the home Government toward s its GOVerliOrGene re` of India, if they were dissatisfied with him, to recall him ; but if they were sati s fi e d w i t h him, it was thei r duty, in difficult circumstances, to sustain and cordially encourage him. (Hear, hear.) Such conduct as the Government had pur sue d, i n pu bli s hi ng t hi s despatop was likely to spre a d dismay amongst the Europ ean ! i in India, and encourag e our enemies to every kind of re sistance. ( Hear h ear .) Th e res i gna tion of Lord Ellenborough did not affect the question in t he manner in which he ( Mr. Cardwell) had laid It before the house. Th• language of the head 01 the Government had relieved him of the necessity o f arguing in favour of impugning the conduct of the Go vernment in this respect, he having stated it was not capable of a perfect defence. The question was o f greet mportance to the country and the colonies. Tnes", first passed a resolution to ent rus t th e G overnmen t 01 India to a responsible Minister, but bearing this matter in view, he asked if for the future there was to be "limited liability" in the Cabinet—(cheers)—and wag there to be no solid ar ity i n t h e Government to wh° .. "" the greatest interest s o f th e world were to be entrus ted' The right hen. g en tl eman, i n conclusion, sa id the 38 India Comp an y h a d set the Government an example i¢ reference to this matter, and he called up on the house t o re li eve L or d C ann i ng ' s c° A t it duet from the censure under which- 5 , laboisred from the publication of the d es patch in rg a . tion, and the statements that had been made by her jesty's Government in respect to his policy. Mr. DEASY seconded the motion. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL.—Sir, I was at soul° when I read the resolutions which the right hon ge n _ c t man has pub into your hands, to know whether the Aua of it was to support, however, indire c tly, th e p o licy of r ef Canning in this proclamation whether it was by 11 1 helping those operations in India, the opposition to v: 6 0 , the right hon. gentleman considers the conduct of th i t vernment is calculated to prolong —or whether, was rather to facilitate those operations in this enu _ against the Treasury bench—(cheers)—the oppositeenro_ which the right hon. gentleman considers had been P h epee ° longed too much. I confess that after hearing the 400 of the right hon. gentleman, I have come to the conel . n . °_ es , that it was neither the first or the second of these n a kl e_ er . that he has in view. (flair.) The first objectis feetly legitimate one, and the furtherance of it has , into no unskilful hands ; but he must remember thavvrch in an assault upon a Ministry there are rules of strife f o ' ur require you boldly and manfully to state and pre" th a t case. And from those rules I will show to the hons s o t firs t the hon. gentleman has widely deviated. I T it % s ight lastly' ask the house to observe that the resolution Of hon. gentleman is what is called a complex prop th r oe. It must be resolved into its parts, and its parts se e , on on In the first place, it asks the house to pass no olnIP,„ . Tn the proclamation, or upon the policy of Lord Can for the second place it is a censure on the Governnr having, as is alleged, published the despatch which fir tamed that censure. Now, I maintain, in , 1113 ar t of place, that if the house is to accept the firs t P