The Sun. — London, England, 1858-02-17 00:00:00

to do in the first place was to show the house what had been the policy of our Government, and the reckless manner in which that policy had been carried out. Such a policy muetnecessarily have caused great dissatisfaction among the native princes. They naturally feared that if annexation was the 'policy of the British Government there was not one amongst them who would be safe. If, however, the British Government was determined at all hazards to carry out such a policy, prudence would have suggested that they would have adopted those precau tions which men usually took then they undertook diffi cult and dangerous operations. Let them consider the number of native states which had been annexed since 1833. They commenced with the small territory of the Rajah of Coorg, then with the more extensive dominions of the Rajah of Sattarab, then the vast territories of the Ameers of Scinde, then the Punjaub, then Pep, and, last of all, the large territory of Oude. All these states had been annexed to the British dominions within the period he had named, without the addition of a single British soldier. Of course, it was impossible for us to occupy these newly-conquered territories without the presence of large bodies of European troops. The Pun jaub required little less than 10,000 men, nearly one-half of the British force in India, and in order to supply them and those which were wanted for the other newly-ac quired territories, it was requisite to withdraw nearly all the British troops from the garrisons and great arsen als in central India, so that when the mutiny broke out there were only two European regiments between Delhi and Calcutta, and the great military stations of Delhi, Allahabad, and Benares, were handed over to the guardianship of the sepoys of the Bengal army. And yet this was considered a favourable opportunity for the annexation of Oade and the expedition against Persia, which one would naturally have thought would be deemed a sufficient reason for increasing the number of troops in India. The Government had surely had sufficient grounds for knowing the great dissatisfaction which had been created in the Bengal army by its con duct with regard to Oade. They ought, at least, to have known that no great dependence was to be placed in a body of men who had shown their dissatisfaction in so unmistakeable a manner whenever they had a grievance. When Sir C. Napier was in India he found that thirty battalions had entered into a mutual engagement to rise in open mutiny—a mutiny which had only been prevented by the wise policy of that distinguished officer. And what was Sir Charles's reward ! He received a re. primand from the Governor-General, and was forded to give up the command in India, although he was un doubtedly the greatest general of modern times, with the exception of the Duke of Wellington. The annexa tion of Oude was not a simple annexation of territory, but it involved the dislocation of all the machinery by which the government of the country had been carried on. The chuckildars or feudal chiefs were not likely to submit quietly to the loss of their authority while they had arms in their hands. Besides, the change, affecting as it did the tenure of the land, could not but give dis satisfaction to nearly every sepoy in the service, for a great majority of them were sons of small proprietors of land in Oude. No sooner did the chiefs learn the de termination of the Government than they petitioned the Zing to allow them to resist ; bat he refused, and announced his submission to the British Government. That for a time baffled the chiefs, but immediately after wards they entered into communication with a force of 14,000 aepoya, who were under the command of Sir T. Ontram on the borders of Oude, and who promised that they would never fire a shot against their countrymen. The Governor-General and his advisers remained, how ever, in a fool's paradise ; but there was one man that was not at his ease, and who warned Government of the danger that threatened them. That man was the lamented Sir H. Lawrence, who wrote an article in the Ca/euita Revive, from which he would read an extract :—" The King of Oude employed 50,000 soldiers ; his chiefs and officials at least as many more. Of these vast numbers one-fifth at the utmost have found employment in the police and irregular corps. Yet these levies, with half a-dozen regular corps, form the whole army of occupa tion. This seems a grave mistake. Why not at least make a change ! Why not move some of the Punjaub regiments that have been keeping constant watch and ward on the Indus for seven years to Oade, and send some of the King's people to the north-west l The King had some 8,000 artillery ; of these about 500 may have obtained employment, the rest, old and young, are on the world. Surely, if there was danger in employing Sikhs in 1849 it would be well to remove some portion of the Oade levies from Oude, where such materials for mischief still remain. In the province are 256 forts, besides innumerable smaller strongholds, many of them sheltered within thick jungles. In these forte are 466 guns. Forts and guns should be in the hands of Government, or the forte should be razed. Many a foolish fellow has been urged on to his own ruin by the possession of a paltry fort, and many a paltry mud fort has repulsed British troops. . . The 80,000 or 90,000 disbanded Oude soldiers are the brethren of the British sepo ys . The earliest days of anne x a ti on are no t the safest . " (Hear.) The warning voice of Sir Henry Lawrence was raised in vain ; but what could be ex pected from men who, while the rebellion was raging, actually sent home for six weeks or two months misre presentations of the real state of the case to her Majesty's Government, and thus prevented the Government from despatching troops to the scene of the mutiny—those troops who, if they could have arrived six weeks earlier, would have saved so many disastrous occurrences. He (Sir. Baillie) did not blame her Majesty's Government —they could only act upon the information they had received—but he did feel a little surprise that after such an exhibition of incapacity such men should be allowed still to wield the destinies of India. (Hear, hear.) Hitherto he said nothing about the justice of the course which had been adopted by the government. There was a time when justice to India was a favourite theme for discussion in this house—those glorious days of the Whigs when they had men worthy to be their leaders. What said Mr. Fox in 1806 . in refer. once to the course which should be adopted towards the native princes, and towards this very King of Oude ! "af the hon. gentleman opposite thought that the Indian princes were not entitled at our hands to the same jus tice as other independent sovereigns, he hoped that the number in this house who agreed with him were but small. There was no proposition more universal than this, that you acknowledged the right of a sovereign with whom you treated. It was true when an ancient sovereign fell, and another came in his place, the feelings of regret for the fate of the sufferer might be more acute, and the indignation against the more recent sovereign more strong and general. Yet this must be confined to thirst persons, for those who treated with him must by that act be considered as having acknowledged his autho rity. But if ever there was one case where the breach of treaty ought to occasion more indignation than another it was where there was no power but the power of the sword, especially in India, where, as had been stated, that sword was the British. If ever there could be a case where a breach of treaty could be defended, it was only in support of the weak against the strong. But in India the British ought to be bound by their compacts the more closely the more it was in their power to break them. This he hoped asd believed would be the general senti ments of the house." But Fox did not stand alone among statesmen who had given utterance to such sentiments. There was another great statesmen whose opinions ought to have no less weight, at least with the noble lord — viz., Mr. Canning. In 1319 Mr. Canning was President of the Board of Control, and he was strongly urged to coerce the King of Oude into payment of certain sums alleged to be due to certain native bankers narnedDhos. On the 12th February in that year he wrote a despatch in which he stated that his Majesty's Ministers felt themselves precluded from interfering by the existing state of relations between the two Goveininente. Mark the considerate delicacy of this accomplished man ; how different from the tone of bluster and menace they bad heard of late from the press and even from Cabinet ministers, not only with reference to the native p rinces of India, but even with res p ec t t o th e weaker powers of Europe. (Hear.) Let them see how this country had dealt with India. He would not speak now of the Rajah of Sattara, the Ameers of Scinde, the annexation of Pegn, or that of Nagpore ; because all these were subjects which had been often debated in that house. All that he would now say was that they were none of them acts re quired by the necessities of self-defence, in which respect they differed altogether from the annexation of the Pun jaub. (Hear, hear.) The policy of annexing Oude was not the policy of Lord Dalhousie—it had long been the policy of our Indian Government. It had been an object of the Government so far back as 1831, when authority was sent out to Lord William Bentinck to annex the kingdom of Gude. Lord William did not think fit to carry out th° B6 instructions, and in 1833 or 1834 more positive orders were s en t ou t t o him to the same effect. Shortly • afterwards Lord William Bentinck returned to this a° lll 'try, sad was succeeded by Lord Auckland, who went out in 1835, carryin g with him instructions from S ir J . Hobhouse to carry the secret orders which had been transmitted to Lord land's arrival Bentinck. On Lord Auck. patches had in lodia he found that those secret des of Oude. otion. fallen laugh') into the h an d s o f th e p r i m e minister The gl cin That created, of course, a great comm King of Oud e h a d b een a d v i se d by Lord William Bentinck to ds end a very m agn ificent an ' present to Willi am IV , • what h a d occurre d w i t h reference to the secret order, d became it necessary to decline that present. Of course it the circumstaner me requisit e t o ; give an explanation of and his Majesty thought them of so meac to the Ki ng n importance • that he determined to ask the advic e of the Duke of Wellington, Lord Wellesley, and Sir Goreo a who had been for many years command er iff el " . ' King of Oude's Body Geard . The opinion of thos e distinguished men was, that the annexation of Oude would create a mutiny in the Bengal army. (Cheers.) It was under these circumstances, and by the interference, as he (Mr. Baillie) believe 1, of his Majesty WARain IV., that the annexation of Chide bad been at that time prevented. Soon afterwards a aeries of wars broke oat, which lasted for 13 or 14 years—the Affg han war, the war in S c i n d e , t h e campa i gn in Gwalior ,, tun first and second Punjaub wars, and the war in Gwalior. When peace was again restored the project of annexing Oade was again revived ; and in carrying out that pro. ject Lord Dalhousie had shown him , elf a willing inet ru• ment. -They all knew the result. (Hear, hear) Oude was the richest and most fertile portion of India ; and that fact; perhaps, accounted for the pertinacity with Which the object of the Government had been punned. Oade had been called the Garden of India. It contained a population of five millions, a martial race, who were soldiers by profession. The Nawabs of Oude had borne th e hereditary title of Viziers of Mogul, since the days of Timour the Tartar,.who had placed his title,nwhich geeralissihad mo, a relative of his own, in Oude, with the since descended to his successor. rhe a t title naturally gave them great influence a,mon g s'. Gnnatrecprineces; and Lord Hastings, when Governor- e the project of inducing of compromising him the Nawab to assume tha title of King of Oude, with the idea with the King of Delhi. The result was thus described by Lord Hastings ;—" The offensive animadversions were keenly resented by the court of Luck now, and a s irreparable breach between the two Afahomedan states THE St7N, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENI NG, FEBRUARY 1 1 7, 1858 is avowed. Had it not been for this public reparation and the renunciation of all connection the sovereign of Oude might on some day have found himself, contrary to his most earnest wish, involved in warfare against us by the general sense of his nobles as well as by the pre judices of his people. While the hostility of the country would have had the inconvenience which I have already described, the character of the sovereign, admirable for uprightness, humanity, and mild elevation, would have bestowed colour on the adverse cause, and his treasury m ight have been e ffi caciously employed in the payment of troops assembled against us in other quarters." The family of Oude had always been most attached to the British crown. (Cheers.) They assisted us with their arms and with their treasure. They aided us in carrying supplies to Gen. Pollock's army, and their fidelity was admitted to Lord Dalhousie even in the book in which he had collected everything he could against them. (Hear.) Thus—" The rulers of Oade have ever been faithful and true in their adherence to the British power. No wavering friendship has ever been laid to their charge. They have long acknowledged our power, have submitted without a murmur to our supremacy, and have aided us as best they could in the hour of our utmost need." And again—" After the picture which I have given of the administration of affairs in Oude, it is my duty to state that since the days of Vizier Alee none of the sovereigns have, either from disposition or habit, been cruel or tyrannical ; they have been all gen tlemen, humane, and generous." (Hear.) Ths only charge brought against the King of Oude was the alleged mismanagement of his territory ; but the barefaced hypocrisy of this accusation was even more disgusting than the open violence which had been so discreditable to the nation. (Hear.) He would ask the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. V. Smith) whether, when he signed the order for the annexation, the misgovernment of Oude was greater than it was in 1801, when Lord Wellesley signed a solemn treaty on the part of the Bri tish Government, by which, in consideration of having received a portion of territory, which then produced a revenue of two millions, and which now yielded four millions a year, be bound the British Government to maintain for ever the integriq of the remaining portion ! Attempts had been made to show that we had a right to interfere under the treaty ; but it happened that Lord Wellesley himself, in 1812, furnished an explanation of the document. In a volume of Indian treaties published in 1812 the explanation to which he referred would be found. (The hon. gentleman read an extract in which Lord Wellesley stated that the reserved territories were to be guaranteed to the Nawab, and that the British Government would never depart from its engagements.) He (Jr. Baillie) would ask the right hon. gentleman another question—was the misgovernment in Oude greater than that which prevailed in other native states ? Was it greater, for instance, than that which existed in the territory of the Nizam ? Were they to understand that when events in India should have resumed their natural course the Government intended to select the Yearn for the next victim I (Hear, hear.) Were they going to forget the services the Nizam had rendered to this country, as they seemed to have forgotten those which had been rendered by the family of Oude. (Hear.) These were questions for the house and the country. They could no longer be left to the ministers of the Crown or to the East India Company, for they were ques tions upon which the future prosperity and tranquillity of India would mainly depend. But he (Mr. Baillie) would not stop here. He would proceed to inquire whether such a thing as mismanagement or misgovern ment did not exist in the British territories ? (Cheer.) They had been so long accustomed to look with favourable eyes upon the government of India, so long accustomed to regard it a mild and paternal despotism exercised for the good of the people, that their minds had been quite shocked by recent revelations. Sir C. Napier warned them that they were sleeping on a volcano in encouraging a Bengal army, and. Mr. Halliday, speaking of the administration of justice under our rule, stated that nothing could be worse, nor was there anything more to be condemned in the kingdom of Oude. Mr. McLeod Wylde gave a most woeful description of the internal condition of India, which was really almost heart-rending; the administration of justice neglected, and the poverty of the people of the most distressing character. He believed that in annexing other states, and extending their territories, they neglected the true interests of that country. They were told by East India reformers that all these evils would be remedied if the East India Company were got rid of, and power placed in the Ministers of the Crown. But was it not well known that the India House, of late years, had been made the scapegoat of the Government, that in the case of Scinde they were notoriously overruled, and that the annexation of that country was solely the work of Lord Ellenborough. He certainly was of opinion, that a change was necessary, that perhaps it would be better to place the government of India in the hands of the Crown, but he saw no reason why the East India Company should be abolished altogether, and their functions en tirely handed over to a Minister of the Crown. Changes undoubtedly were necessary, but they were not those now proposed. In 1833, when the subject was before Parliament, the directors desired, in cases where the President of the Board of Control acted unconstitution ally or against the interests of India, that there should be an appeal to Parliament against such a proceeding, but that suggestion was rejected. They desired that appeal, because they wished for publicity, and, in his opinion, if their recommendation had been carried into effect they would have had no Affghan war, no war in Scinde, no Persian war, no annexation of Oude, and none of those horrors and atrocitielwhich since unhap pily took place. (Hear.) Unfortunately the neglect of, and distaste for Indian affairs in that house ren dered ran Indian Minister practically irresponsible. They had been in consequence signally chastised as a nation; but he hoped that after what had occurred they would not in future be so neglectful of a solemn duty, and that they would remember that kings, and princes, and Parliaments had a responsibility cast upon them from which they could not recede, and would be held account able hereafter by a higher Power. Mr. VERNON SMITH observed that before the hon. gentleman who just addressed them rose to bring forward his motion, his noble friend at the head of the Govern ment asked him to postpone it, in order that they might proceed with the other Indian debate. That request was declined by the hon. gentleman, because he said he was in a position to give such information to the house as would induce hon. members to make up their minds with respect to the course they should feel it their duty to take on the bill now before the house. lie (Hr. Smith) re gretted the hon. gentleman did not comply with his noble friend's request, because he might as well have introduced the facts he brought forward into the debate on the East India Bill itself, as to bring them forward in a separate motion. Mr. BAILLIE observed that he had given notice of his motion before the bill was brought in. The hon. gentle man concluded by moving for copies cf a secret despatch, signed by the President of the Board of Control, in the year 1831, addressed to Lord William Bentinck, and or derine him to annex or otherwise assume the administra tion of the kingdom of Onde. Of the despatch of Lord William Bentinck, explaining his reasons for not car rying these orders into effect. Of the correspondence which took place, through the Secret Department of the India. House, between the President of the Board of Con trol and the Governor-General of India, in the years 1833, 1834, and 1835, in reference to the annexation of Ouda. And a copy of a note or minute, signed by Sir Henry Ellis, when a member of the Board of Control, explaining his reasons for dissenting from the projected annexation of Oude. Mr. VERNON SMITH knew that very well, and again he could not help expressing his regret that the hon. gen tleman did not comply with the request made by his noble friend. From the observations which the hon. gentleman made, he (Mr. Smith) rather collected that they would have his vote in favour of the bill, for he found as much fault as it was possible to find with the government of India. When any hon. gentleman found fault with the Board of Control, and the intervention of the Ministers of the Crown, and said he found fault with the bill, it was a very great mistake, and not true in point of fact. Those who found fault with them found fault with the present system, and supported the bill because it propcs3d to change it altogether. The lion. gentleman was unable to assign any cause for the mutiny but the annexation of Oude. All the arguments brought forward towards the close of the last session of Parliament by the right hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire were alto gether overlooked by the hon. gentleman, anti it was a singular circumstance that since August last they made no advance whatever in elucidating the cause of the mutiny. The most eminent men in India were not able to assign any grounds for the outbreak. Sir J. Lawrence himself admitted that he was ighorant of the cause, and declared that he could not satisfy himself any organised conspiracy had existed. The hon. gentleman went into an historical disquisition affecting the policy of India, and he commenced attacking that policy from the year 1833 ; but from that period down to the present time, so far as the Government of Oude was concerned, no fault had been found with the policy of Lord William Ben tick, Lord Auckland, the Earl of Ellenborough, and Lerd Dalhousie, who filled the office of Governor-General under successive administrations. The hon. gentleman contended that the Government had adopted a new policy as regards the annexation of Oude. He believed the hon. gentleman was mistaken in saying that any such thing as a policy of annexation had been laid down. There might have been a policy of acquisition, and it was most desirable that, from time to time, additions should be made to our territories. In the recent outbreak great advantage had resulted from our having acquired the Punjaub, for, if that district had been in a state to attack us when the mutiny broke out, we should have been much worse off than if it had not been in our hands. It was to the maintenance of troops in the Punjaub that they were chiefly indebted for the quelling of the mutiny. To the general policy of annexation he was opposed. It had been opposed by the Government of India; but in spite of the orders issued by the Crown and the Court of Directors, it too frequently happened that Governors-General sent ' out from this country ware, with the view of ac quiring fame, tempted to add to their terri tory. Th e h on. gentleman had failed to show that against that aug mented bymp tation the Government at home had neglected to exert it se lf . The hon. gentleman was no t correc t in alleg ingthat, w ith t h e annexat i on o f O u d e, th ere h a d been no increase of European troops: Th e number had been 5,000 men. The policy of the Government of India had be en , th a t w h enever t h ey conquere d t h ey ma d e he n 4tivo3 suba.Tv'ent to them, and that policy had been the 'toast and glory ' t In d ia auct . ti.a wimiration of all man kind. The Government o° o * . lndia not onlylconquered tLe n h a o t n i . on g s e , n b t u le t m m a a n d , e t p h r o o e ee nLieus maintain themselves. The became with his history, said the mutiny broke out had occurred, but thatwefoeppthoortuugnhittya opportunity,a accuracy , favourable forh and he (Hr. Vernon. Smith) questioned its an opinion, ho n . Crimean Gentlemanw war, had happenedpp supposed it to o v r o , lt he mutiny ; much more favourable withdrawn fur the Persian the first to assist in quelling the satisfaction that those troops h ad wl a i r o' mutiny, a.:41:0r discreditable a t odb I h e e t: r and when the place because troops were he as, wouldfo r returned state a: tteearnefitoeMOhhlai Rear, hear.) ( of the terri. The hon. gentleman said that the anne xa tion tory of Oude was made in a manner moat ) os w t Lord Dalhousie. He (Mr. V. Smith that statement. It was novel both in the house r else where, and he thought Lord Dalhousie had not been w l I treated by the hon. gentleman. It was totally and entirely incorrect to say that the Court of Directors had nothing to do with the an nexation of Oude. The Court of Directors thanked and voted a pension to Lord Dalliousie, and one of the reasons g iven for the vote of th an k s was the acqui awn i d th h he r(.elfart. discretion,caoundteinudesducthhaat mar Da usOfiooaUcttioe,d nor as entitled him to the gratitude of this country. Lord Dalhousie annexed that territory in the best manner in which it could be done; but it was not his own notion, for Lord Wellesley and Lord Hardingo and every successive Gover nor-General of India had entertained it. Oude was not the richest territory in India, and the reason why it was annexed was because it was in the neighbourhood of our own territory, and was one of the most misgoverned nations on the face of the earth. The blue book, to which he would refer the hon. g entleman, detailed all the horrors of the government of th at country. Tho hon. gentleman said that the Government had dealt unfairly by the King of Oude ; but it should be remembered that he was sup ported on his throne by British troops and received British money. He had a warning in 1831, when Lord W. Ben tinck warned him to govern his people in a better manner or the Britith Government would assume the direct man agement of his dominions. The King of Oude had another warning, in 1847, from Lord Hardinge, who told his Ma jesty that if he procrastinated in putting his dominions into batter order he should be compelled to force him to do so. Lord Hardinge gave him two years to make a change and Lord Dalhousie gave seven more, but nothing was done. The oppression of his people was the sole cause of our interference, and it was carried on to such an extent and rose to such a pitch that Lord Da!housie felt bound to annex the territory. How was that oppression main tained, and how was it that the King was enabled to op press his people? Why, it was by our keeping him sup plied with British bayonets. The question came to be discussed whether they should withdraw those troops, and leave his kingdom to anarchy and confusion, or whether they should take the management of his territory. Lord Dalhousie adopted the latter, and as he (Mr. V. Smith) thought, the better course. In assuming the government of Oude in that manner, the hon. gentleman said that since that act the course for the troops to take was to mutiny. That might be. The annexation might be justi able in itself, although it might lead to a result unforeseen. He (Mr. V. Smith) wanted to know who did foresee what had happened. When the hon. gentleman said the annexa tion of Oude was the cause of the mutiny he should re member that it was not in Oude where the mutiny broke out. It did not appear there until after it broke out at Meerut. The hon. gentleman said it arose in consequence of the number of sepoys employed from Onde in the army ; but there were Onde sepoys in the Bombay army, and there were some in other places, but Bombay and these places remained quiet. The Onde army had fattened upon the plunder of the people of Oule, end no doubt when the annexation took place that army was broken up and became discontented. The hon. gentleman did not deny that the first accounts from Oude showed that everything proceeded tranquilly and well, and that the transfer of Oude itself to the British dominion passed over without the loss of a drop of blood or a single murmur 1 being heard. The hon. gentleman said that in 1853, there ware secret orders sent out for the annexation of Oude. Now he (Mr. V. Smith) did not know from what book the hon. gentleman gathered his information, and he evidently had, studied the subject so closely that he (Mr. V. Smith) was loath to contradict him ; but when he saw the hon. gentleman's motion on the notice paper, he desired that every inquiry should be made in his office respecting the secret despatch, but it could not be produced, although the inquiry was made by one of the ablest and most experienced clerks under the Crown. He also remembered that Lord Glenelg, who was President of the Board of Control in 1853, seeing the hon. gentleman's notice, called upon him (Mr. It . Smith) an stated that he could not recollect any such secret despatch. Further inquiry would be made, and if the despatch were forthcoming, he certainly should have ne objection to its being produced. It was not true that her Majesty's Ministers had ordered the annexation of Oude. Lord Dalhousie suggested the annexation himself. In one of his despatches he pointed out the desirableness, for the reasons already stated, of annexing the territory, and he declared that he was ready to undertake the duty. The hon. gentleman, therefore, was hardly justified in assuming that the Government had originate' the notion of annexing Oude ; but they wore responsible for in com mon with the Court of Directors, and they felt that no option or alternative but the annexation was left them. The opinion of General Lowe was in favour of annexation. The right hon. gentleman read the opinion of the gallant general to that effect, and it was chiefly founded on the necessity of preventing misrule. That was also the opinion. of General Outram, who, of all others, had been the advo cate of the native princes, and of almost every person of eminence who was consulted upon the subject of annexa tion. But coming to another subject, namely, who were responsible for the wars in India ? As to the war in Aff ghanistan, there was only one gentleman, Mr. Prinsep, who opposed it. The Indian Government were as respon sible as the home Government. He thought the Board of Control, being fully responsible to the Crown and Parlia ment of this country, might safely be trusted with the go vernment of India. As to the production of the papers, as far as was in his power, they should all be produced ; but the letter of which he spoke was to him a perfect novelty ; but, if it was in existence, it should be produced. He was extremely anxious that every possible information on this subject should be given to the house. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL said—l am not going to enter into the general question of the cause of the mutiny in India. Still less am I going to discuss the question, which stands as an adjourned debate, of the futuregovernment of India. But it seems to me that an impression has been made by statements and comments raspecting the conduct of Lord Dalhousie which it is but just to that noble lord to endea vour to settle. Lord Dalhousie governed India for a con siderable period of time—for six or seven years I think — with great ability. (Hear.) He devoted the whole of his time and his great ability to the duties of his high office, and exhausted his health in the performance of those duties. (Hear.) I think, therefore, it is unfair, now that hie health is broken down, and he has not the means of coming forward in Parliament to defend his own character and proceedings, that there should be imputations cast from day to day on the character of that noble lord, which it appears to me are not deserved. I do not pretend to speak from any intimate knowledge or from any recent at tention to the government of Lord Dalhousie, but I col lect from papers laid before Parliament that the accusa tions made against Lord Dalhousie with regard to Oude, on which the hon. gentleman dilated at considerable length, are made in ignorance, if not in misconception. The case of Oude is one which, as my hon. friend has ob served, is of half a century's duration. At the end of the last century the state of Oude was so extremely bad and notorious that Lord Wellesley thought it necessary to in terfere, and the manner in which he interfered was by the adoption of two measures—one taking away half the ter ritory of the Vizier of Oade, and the other making a treaty, by which he allowed a subsidiary force of British troops to support the vizier against all dangers external and inter nal, for which he received in return a promise that the vizier would tako the advice of the East India Com pany and act in conformity thereto. That article has been read by my right hon. friend, but the house will perceive that the whole virtue of that part of the treaty lies in the words that " the vizier was to act in conformity thereto." He could not observe the treaty if he departed from the advice given by the East India Comp my. I think it is Mr. Mill who observed that this proceeding of Lord Wellesley was not founded on good reasoning, because it was impossible for the Naval, to rule well the territory which was to be governed by his own vizier. The whole territory ought to have been taken ; but if, on the other hand, sufficient security was taken for the good govern ment of that territory, it was unjust to deprive him of half. It is not my business to say whether Lord Wellesley acted right or wrong, but such was the treaty framed at that time. From 1801 to 1854 there was hardily a year in which that treaty had not been violated by the government of Oude, because the course of proceeding was this : —The East India Company appointed a gentleman of rank and respectability as a minister, and the vizier accepted this person as his minister. But the vizier undermined the minister, and the minister was dismissed. The court re lapsed into a corrupt and profligate course, and to obtain the immense sums necessary to support its luxurious and corrupt practices the people were reduced to the last degree of poverty, and when any resistance was made to the col lection of the taxes British troops were sent to enforce the collection, The consequence was that a system of robbery, oppression, and anarchy prevailed, and it was a great dis grace that such a system should be enforced by a contin gent of British troops, that the rroopsof her Majesty should be employed to enforce that corrupt and vicious system. The minister represented that the treaty was not observed, that he could not allow it to be violated, and that some course must be taken to put the affairs of the nawab on another footing. That advice was listened to for two or three months, but after that the old course was followed by the Court of Oude. In 1835 Lord W. Bentinck, who could not be accused of a violent spirit, and who used his great power with as just a spirit of benevolence as any Governor-General ever used power, said it was disgraceful to any British Government, to the East India Company, and to the monarchy, that this system should go on, and he proposed one of two courses, either to withdraw the Brit il troopsentirely and declare the treaty at an end, or to annex the territory and administer it by their own officers. I think Lord Wm. Bentinck advised the former of these courses, but the result of his correspondence with the Court of Directors was that they should endeavour to reform : he Government, and not put an end to the treaty. From 1335 to 1817 there was a succession of viziers. One was made King, but stilt there was no essential change in the go vernment of the country. Lord Hardinge went himself to Lneknow after the conquest of the Punjaub, he was so seriously impressed with the state of thing s there. He gave the most serious warning to the King that this state of things could not continue. He placed before him the annexation of Nagpore and others that had taken place, and told him the British Government would feel itself forced to take measures of a similar kiwi if some change were not made. It was not till eight or nine years after this that Lord Dalhousie, having succeeded to the govern ment. had time and leisure to consider the affairs of Oude, after having been engaged with the affairs of the Punjaub. The hon. gentleman made no attack on Lord Dalhousie with respect to his conduct in the Punjaub. He admitted that the war in the Punjaub was a war in self-defence, and its conquest, instead of weakening our position in India, had been a source of the greatest strength during the late period. Lord Dalhousie considered the treaty with regard to Oude. The hon. gentleman quoted what Lord Dalhousie says in fairness of the King of Onde ' • but the hon. gentle man, without the fairness of Lord Dalhousie, does not quote anything of what is said by Co'. Sleemau and Gen. Outram, men who were connected with Oude. Lord Dal housie, with the greatest fairness, placed everything for and against the government of Ouclo before the home authorities; but the hon. gentleman omitted to refer to whole pages of evidence against the King and government of Onde. What is the first conclusion to which Lord Dal housie come ? He drew a conclusion similar to that which Lord W. Bentinck drew in 1835, namely, that the course for the British Government to take was to declare the treaty at an end, not to take the administration into the hands of the company, but to withdraw the whole of the British troops, and to leave the King and government of Oude the shame, confusion, and misgovernment which re sulted from their system, but leaving to ourselves the right of interieriug if our frontiers were Lite. f,roe a ith or rue le,ted. I w:11 not say whether that was a proper course or not; bat such is the course Lord Dalhousie recommended in pegs 147 of the blue-book: —" The King's consent is indis pensable to the transfer of the whole or of any part of his sovereign authority to the government of the East India Company. It would not be expedient or right to endeavour to extract this consent by means of menace or compulsion. It must be sought by leading the King to perceive that a simple regard ferhis own interests and for the maintenance of his family and throne, should of itself be sufficient to induce him to give his consent to those measures which a w l ia o t r i l ico e_ u c s ah wi s t a h ve tli h e i s kingdom and house from the misfortunes wishichtt he eill hassu r s e o ly l 0 follow na p er3 i s h t i e s d refusal to pursuance alter o t f h t e h i c s o ura e i policy,n Icoloteestibrarioreee that, as soon as the sanction of the hon. ;,a jr.„.i :0 jualrayt pr:rote.:teereeredei y itat,; : irtt b , obt a in e d r n ; e i i rd.. t G o , e t an h ne Britishedr 1 neces sa ryfro n tier." o : u :withdraw Kra,wi,changeKing. in our IC - ; , :ee:edi : .the c, Co urt of Lucknow, a letter should be ad quit the to state that the resident ha g i dl h 0. declare treaty of 1801 at an to zSuchlin The twi end, 1 0 es accordingly,t,b i r; proposal after an elaborate investigation of everything that took place since 1801. But others differed from him, and said that Oude should be taken into the hands of the Com pany. Gen. Lowo stated particularly that he differed frOna Lord Dalhousie, and thought that the kingdom of Oude should be annexed to our dominions. When the matter was referred home, Lord Dalhousie said it was necessary to take some decision upon it. The Board of Control and the Court of Directors said that the best course was not to re move the British force, as Lord Dalhousie hadadvised, but to maintain their force there, and assume the administra tion of the kingdom of Oude. I am now speaking of the policy which Lord Dalhousie originally advised; but when he received these instructions, he carried them into effect in the best manner he could, as it was his duty to do. He pursued that duty, and carried the whole of the coun cil with him in the proposal he then made, namely, that the king must sign a new treaty by which the administra tion of 0 ude was to be conducted by the company's officers. It would be impossible for Lord Dalhousie to refuse obe dience to instructions of this positive character. I do not wish to discuss the question whether or not this original motion of Lord W. Bentinck and of Lord Dalhousie of withdrawing the troops, or that of assuming the govern ment 'ourselves, was the right course to pursue, but for 35 years the treaty we made having been constantly violated by the sovereign of Oude, we were surely perfectly justified in declaring that treaty at an end. It is said that we have not observed our treaties with the King of Oude, but the fact is that during the course of half a century we had done that which was the unfortunate consequence of Lord Wellesley's treaty, and which could not fail to tarnish the , British name—namely, using British troops in support of ' a corrupt court, which was oppressing the people of Oude, and this with a view if posible of carrying this treaty into effect. After 55 years I think the time was come for put ting an end to that treaty. Such was the course which Lord Dalhousie pursued, and notwithstanding what the hon. gentleman said against him, it appears to me that he acted with the greatest deliberation, that he gave his ad vice according to his conscientious view of the case, and that in annexing it at last he did nothing but what he was bound to do, being at the time the servant of the crown, andof the East India Company. (Cheers.) Bat whatever may be the justice of this proceeding with regard to its po licy, it appears to me that there was some want of prudence in the mode of carrying that policy into effect. If it was de termined that the time was come when we must annex Oude I think seeeing what was the nature of the population of the country that the Zemindars could easily collect a number of armed follower., it was the duty of the government whether that government is the Board of Control or the Court of Directors, to see that a sufficient force wag colleoted not only to prevent resistancein Oude but to see that obedience was enforced by a sufficient number of British troops, and to tread out at once any sparks of rebellion that might arise. In that respect it was most unfortunate that at this very moment we should have proposed the Persian war. Fresh troops should have been sent from this country. I do not admire the policy of the Persian war, but if the Govern ment decided that it was necessary, they should not weaken the force in India, especially in Oude, at the same time that they were carrying into effect the energetic policy which they directed Lord Dalhousie to pursue. It was un fortunate and ill -j edged that they should carry into effect these two modes of policy at the same time. I wos sorry to hear again from my right hon. friend that unfortunate " prestiee." We were told last year, and again to-night we hear, that the appearance of our troops in the Persian Gulf was a proof of our prestige; but the appearance of a dread ful mutiny in India has done more, I am afraid, to shake that prestige than any success in Persia is likely to gain for us. In reading the history of Europe I cannot but recollect the instance of a great man giving up everything to pres tige. When Napoleon went upon the Russian campaign he took with him an army of 600,000 men, and when he ad vanced to Smolerisko every one of his marshals and gene rals recommended him to go into winter quarters. "Bat," said he " if I do that, what will become of my prestige ? If I remain a whole winter my prestige in Paris will be gone." The unfortunate campaign of Moscow followed. Next year, by the efforts of his extraordinary genius, he got together a new army; he was master of two fields of battle, and con fronted the whole power of Europe. Terms of peace were offered to him which would have left him master of nearly all of Europe ; they w ou ld h ave l e ft hi m mas ter of France, Italy, and Roland. But he said, " If I surrender anything —if I give up my titl e of 'Protector of the Confederation of the Rhine prestige, he' I lose my prestige." Well, he fell; he lost his lost his empi re , an d wen t an exile to St Helena. Such is the con sequence of resigning true an d su b s t an ti a l honour, in order to follow the vain phantom of prestige. (Hear.) We h ave seen what it has done f or us i n India— we see wh a t it i s d oing for us in China. ( C h eers. ) I ns t ea d of followi ng thi s vain delusion of prestige, l et us f o ll ow th e old Engli s h course of doing that which is right, that which is due to our own c h aracter, it is sure t o f o ll ow, a course of pol i cy pursue d i n suc h a spirit. (Loud c h eers.) and let reputation follow, as t ord JOHN MANNERS, notwithstanding that he had greatly admired the concluding sentiments of the noble lord, must remind him that if the health of Lord Dalhousie bad been impaired in India, a Queen Mother of Oude had died in the city of Paris, that thousands of lives had been sacrificed, and millions of treasure expended in conse quence of the policy of annexation. The right hon. gen tleman the President of the India Board bad charged against his noble friend that although for two whole years the kingdom of Oude had been annexed to the company's dominions, neither he nor any of his friends had thought of questioning that policy until after the news of the mu tiny reached England. Now he would grapple with that statement at once, and 113 would appeal to the records of both Houses of Parliament in proof of his denial. Why at the very moment the news of the mutiny reached this country, there were actually on the votes of both houses notices impugning the annexation of Oade ; but owing to the altered position of affairs, it was deemed advisable not to persevere with these motions. Bat after all, the main question was, the policy of annexation, in accordance with treaties. It was said that ever since the treaty of 1801, ruler after ruler had systematically violated its provi sions. Well, in that contingency, what he was prepared to contend for was that the sole penalty which, according to treaty, the company was justified in imposing upon the sovereigns of Oude was the withdrawal of British troops from the territory of Oude. But was it so true that the present King of Oude did regard the advice which bad been tendered to him ? He was prepared to prove that it was a total misstateneeni of the facts of the case to say that the present king had violated the treaty. The king ascended the throne in 1847, and hardly had he done so when he received a visit from Lord Hardinge, Well, scarcely had Lord Hardinge quitted his dominions than he took a most decided course to prove that he in tended to act up to the advice that had been given to him, by sanctioning a most elaborate scheme of Government for a considerable portion of his kingdom, a scheme which was submitted to the Governor-General at Calcutta. But mark - that plan was rejected on the ground that if his Majesty would give up the whole of his dominions the company would think of it, but it was not necessary to take so much trouble about a portion of them. Well, then, let it not b e told that the king most irraecibly rejected to listen to the advice which was tendered to him. They must come down with particulars, and show what he refused to do. (Hear.) Another reason alleged for annexing Oude was that danger would arise to European interests from the disorganization of the Oude frontier ; but it was remarkable that the most ample testimony was borne to the efficiency of the Oude frontier police. When criminals escaped over the Oude frontier, the police of the king bad been most assiduous in delivering them up, but nothing like reciprocity appeared to have marked the conduct of the police of the British dominions. (Hear, hear.) These charges of non-compli (Hear.) Bat what &NO with a treaty which bound the King of Oude to fol low the advice of the Eaglishfresident were vague, and had moat surprised him (LordJ. Manners) was, that neither the President of the Board of Control nor the noble lord the member for London had made any allusion to the sup pressed treaty of 1837. It had not been alluded to. (Hear, been most triumphantly reuted. o r departed statesmen. impugning tdwieniptchaulpating the conduct both hear.) That treaty was as binding on the Government of England in 1855 as it was in 1837 ; and it was impos siblethe conduct Auckland and of Lord Dolhousie. (H hear.) The tre aty of 1837 can, et t. •u d e ear, n contingencies it was provisions which made the annexation ot f of any portion of Oude territory a matter of n o n Lord boternoal referred 0 e f f oe e firr livingetod t h o a that treaty aitthoo uf • - d that the British Government should for a time appoint its own government for Gude, but this was all con templated in the interest of the King of Oude, and was impossibility.provide In the . event . of certain subordinate to the preservation of his kingdom. The an nexation of Oude in the teeth of that treaty was a flagrant and indefensible act ; but while, on the one hand, the treaty received a universal acceptance, its disallowance was known to only a few of even Indian statesmen. It appeared that even Lord Auckland himself was not aware of the disal lowance of the treaty until two years after it had been s i gne d ; and in a communication which Lord Auckland ad dressed to the King of Oude in 18e9, he complimented his Majesty highly upon the mo de in which he had adminis tered(Hear.) Ther e was g o od e d kw e in i g n idh E t i * 9 was not aware o f th e di e - Lord H ar di nge, w h en h e for he r em i n d ed the King of the consequences internalollanoiswteeqad t nu h tce e hene e a vco ff ei ids a te i ihn r n getoorftfeoahotsi treaty, which would follow misgovernment—those consequences involving the handing over of the administra tion of the affairs of Oude to the temporary custody of the Indian Government. (Hear, hear.) Last year the Earl of Ellenborough denied that the Board of Directors had dis allowed the whole of the treaty, and asserted that the only portion annulled was that which imposed en the King of Oude an obligation to contribute a certain sum for the maintenance of troops. That view of the ease was sup ported by Lord Broughton, who at that period was Presi dent of the Board of Control ; and Lord Hardinge clearly acted in the spirit of that conclusion. The noble lord the member for London had asked the house to deal lightly with Lord Dalhousie, and he (Lord J. Manners) had en deavoured to do so; but he confessed the task was a diffi cult one. The blue-book disclosed language held by Lord Dalhousie with reference to this annulled treaty, which reminded one more of the chicanery in vogue at the Old Bailey, than of language which the Go vernor-General of an important empire might be supposed to address to a distinguished sub rJinate. The code of instructions issued by Lord Dalhousie to Sir James Outran was a model of duplicity. Our prestige in India had been spoken of. That prestige might b 3 of two kinds ; one derived from military glory, and the other from the sense of faith preserved and justice done. He hoped that the Government would not thwart a motion the tendency of which would be to strengthen our prestige in India. He hoped the house would take a course which would tend to therestitution of Oude to its insulted and deceived sovereign. (Oh, oh, and hear, hear.) The noble lord concluded by moving (as an amendment to the mo tion) for the production of correspondence which had taken place between the secret department of the East India Company and the Governor-General of India in re ference to the treaty of 1837. (Hear.) Mr. V. SMITH said that this correspondence had already been produced in compliance with a previous requisition. Mr. R. D. MANGLES was prepared, as an East India director, to take his full share of the responsibility attach ing to the annexation of Oude. Both the hon. gentleman who had introduced the motion, and the noble lord who had last sp,kon, seemed to think that the only person to be considered was the Sovereign of Oude, and that the suffer ings of a misguided people weighed as nothing in the scale. Ever since the family whose acts hid been criticised had come to the throne, the government of Oude had been the worst that coted be named in Indis. From 1801, down to the time of annexation, nothing could exceed the mis chief arising from this misgovernment. But neither the hon. gentleman nor the noble lord (Lord J. Manners) had refeirad to that part of the treaty of 1801 which stipulated for the well-government of the people of Oude. From the time that treaty CaRIO into force no Sovereign of Oude hal ever given effect to this most important change ; and the omission was early brought to the cognizance of the Governor-General of India, Lord William Bentinck, proverbially a statesman of peace, informed the King in 1331 that matters had come to Id a ` pass, that UME393 reform was effected the company would loss its position. (''dear.) In 1'47 Lord Hardinge himself went in person and gave him a still stronger warniug, and giving him tee years' grace to effect the necessary reforms. Of the enorwity of the oppression of Oudee no man who was not acquainted with it could have any conception of it,, Col. Richmond, Gen. Lowe, and Col. Sleaman all used the same language with regard to .the oppressions and enormi ties of Gude. Those representations were made time after time, and yet no attention was given to thorn by the Go vernment of Oude. - --Col. Sleaman said in his despatch that the King of Onde had utterly disregarded the warning given by Lord Hardinge. He had given no attention to the Government, and had relinquished no indulgence. Now, Gen. Sleaman was not an advocate of annexation, but the conviction was forced upon his mind that nothing but an nexation would avail. Gen. Lowe declared his deliberate opinion that the corruption of Gude was so general, that there was no other remedy but annexation. Gen. Outram said, and yet the noble lord said no charge had been made against the King of Gude— Lord J. MANNERS —I said that no charge had been substantiated. Mr. MANGLES—What evidence, then, would the noble lord require after the authorities he (Mr. Mangles) had quoted. General Outram showed in his despatches that the government of Oude was getting worse every day, and he said that he had no hesitation in declaring his opinion that the duty imposed upon the government was that of annexation. Now General Outram said that he gave this opinion with great pain, because he had ever advocated the maintenance of the independence of the remaining states of India. Colonel Sleaman, in his diary, detailed acts of atrocity which were of daily occurrence in Oude. Plunder and murder were the trade of all the great landowners of the country. That was the state of the country under the native government. Colonel Sleaman gave instances of the general atrocities which he spoke of. All the principal people of Oude were robbers at that time. He (Mr. Mangles) when a very young man travelled through the whole of ,Oude, and fur nine days there was cannonading going on on either side of him; and that was the state of things which the noble lord thought ought to be restored. He then came to the treaty of 1837, on which the noble lord had laid so much stress. If the noble lord believed that that treaty was not abrogated, ho must believe that Lord Dalhousie had deliberately forged extracts from the despatches of the Court of Directors. The Court of Dii ec tors distinctly told the Governor-General to fall back upon the treaty of 1801, thereby showing that the treaty of 1837 had ceased to exist. If the noble lord would call for the whole correspondence with regard to the annexa tion of Oude it would be seen that the company wore most reluctant to annex that kingdom until they were absolutely driven into it. Their strong desire was, that the King of Oude should so reform his administration, that no step approaching annexation wor.ld ha necessary. The whole treaty of 1837 was abrog ated the moment it arrived in England, and the Court of Directors never recognised it, or considered themselves in any way bound by it. The noble lord said that the recent mutiny had been caused by the annexation of Oude. He (Mr. Mangles) did not share that opinion. He believed that the original annexation of Oude had had nothing at all to do with it. Oade was the last rallying point of the mutineers, simply because the great body of the sopoys came from that country. Sir John Lawrence, writing in September last, said the Hindoo population were strongly in favour of annexation. He was strongly of opinion that the mutiny rose with the sopoys, and its approximate cause was the cartridges. The hon. gentleman who had opened this discussion said the mutiny in India was a rebellion. There was nothing what ever to justify that assertion. The chiefs had stood aloof from the mutiny, and the entire body of the population had done so also. Where there had been no sepoys there had been no rising, not even in the most warlike districts, and where the people were all armed. To show the feeling which ex isted amongst the people thehon. gentleman related the pro ceedings which took place at Patna. The mutineers attacked the Treasury and the public offices, bat they were beaten off by the people and •then the treasury without the loss of a single rupee was handed over by the people to the civil officers. This had been purely a military mutiny from beginning to end, and had in no way been caused or sup ported by the disaffection of the people. He believed that the people had no desire to get rid of the government of the company, and he did not believe that they were de sirous of coining under the direct government of the Ckown. (Laughter.) Colonel SYKES said the kingdom of Oude was at the time of the annexation governed by an indolent and volup tuous king. He leased out the lands to persons over the Zsmindars, who were like our ancient barons. The con sequence was, that there was constant pillage, and in the space of seven years no less than 11,000 persons were killed, 566 villages burnt, and 1,490 persons wore carried off, while there had been 34 suttees. That was the state of things which the noble lord would see restored. Mr. D. K iNNAIRD agreed with the speech of the hon. gentleman who had opened the debate, and he did not think the hon. chairman of the company had in any way answered it. He hoped that when the unfortunate mu tiny was put down, the management of India during the last few years would be rigidly inquired into. Up to the time of the mutiny it was with the utmost difficulty that the subject of India could be brought under the considera tion of the house. He thought it was most unjust to throw the blame of the annexation of Oude upon Lord Dalhousie. He was driven to it against his own conviction. and when he did annex it, he cautioned the Government to see that it was properly protected. Sir J. PAKINGTON said that when the hon. and gal lant gentleman the member for Aberdeen rose ho hoped that he was about to relieve the Court of Directors from the diffi- culties in which they had been placed, but all the hon. and gallant gentleman attempted to show was that the King of Oude was an indolent and voluptuous sove reign, as though the justice of this case could be met by the indolence and voluptuousness of that king. (Hear, hear.) He might as well tell the house that every indolent and voluptuous gentleman in the country ought to be de prived of his estates. He (Sir J. Pakington) confessed that he came down to the house fully expecting that the general debate on India would be resumed, and he was not there fore prepared to take part in this interesting question of Oude. He could not refrain, however, some comments on what fell from the hon. gentleman the member for Guild ford (Mr. Mangles). Every one who had studied the question of Conde knew that it turned mainly upon the proper construction of the treaty of 1837. Tho President of the Board of Control, in reply to the member for In verness-shire (Mr. Bantle) never referred to the treaty of 1837. The noble lord the member for the city of London. who had sought to justify the annexation of Onde, had not referred to it. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord (Lord J. Manners) had dwelt upon the treaty in just and proper language, and to that the hon. member for Guildford had replied that the treaty was abrogated at home. There was another question. Was the abrogation of the treaty ever communicated to the King of Oude. If it never was, was there any man who world rise and say that it was morally or legally an abrogation? (Hear.) And how did the hon. gentleman explain the communication of the abrogation of the treaty to the King of Oude ? He said that at that time there was no intention of annexing the territory of Oude. He did not think any member of that house could have used language more strongly condemnatory of the annexa tion than that which was used in this apology. (Hear.) He thought that upon such a statement the house had a right to say that there was no vindication of the policy of the Government. Then the hon. gentleman sought to justify the annexation on the ground of the disgrace ful state of the people of that country. Might he for a moment refer to a despatch of Lord Auckland thee lying before him, in which, addressing the King of Oude, he said that from the time his Majesty ascended the throne he continued the improvement of his kingdom, and that he had the full authority of the Court of Directors for making that acknowledgment. (Hear.) That seemed to him to prove two things—first, that the government of Oude had improved under the king ; and secondly, that in 1839 Lord Auckland himself, who was the Governor-General, was not aware of the abrogation of the treaty. He might refer also to Bishop Heber, who in one of his letters said, that after what he hat heard of Oude he was surprised to find so large and so orderly a popu lation, and one which displayed so much industry. (Hear.) Let him remind the house that the treaty of 1837, of which the hon. gentleman opposite had been so shy, provided for temporary assumption of the Government by England, in order that abuses might be corrected, but that it could never be quoted in defence of the act of spoliation. He would not argue] upon the necessity of the case. He presumed the East India Company had views of their own upon the necessity with which probably he should not agree, but when they argued that it was a just measure they had adopted he must protest against it, for so far as ho had been enabled to make himself master of that un happy passage of our Indian history, he believed that the annexation of Oude was one of the most unjust and un righteous acts that ever throw a stain on the history of a' civilised country. (Cheers.) General THOMPSON said that himself and others thought they could see into the origin of the mutinies, and they were surprised that Ministers had not the same dies comment. He thought much of it had arisen from the indiscreet attempts that had been made to force our religion upon the natives, Who were not prepared to receive it. One complaint had beenthat persons of Indian extraction should rise to honour and power. The spirit there was pure Virginian partisanship, where a limited number of Europeans were antagonistic to 150 millions of native inhabitants. How did this mutiny break out ?An officer was preaching to his Mahomedan regiment, and because a man under the influence of liquor, probably, shot the adjutant's horse, he was hanged for it. That was pro bably right; but an officer, who was not sufficiently sen sible to arrest the man, was hanged also, which was a most monstrous injustice. The honourable and gallant member denounced_ the conduct of _the authorities in reference to the greased cartridges, and spoke of the slaughter of the native princes at Delhi es the foulest murder on record. He sometimes wondered what we could have done that the great punishment should be inflicted upon us of having such men as our countrymen who had the rule in India. (Cries of " oh, oh.") Mr. PALK considered that many wild theories had been advanced on the other side of the house, but he had never had his feelings shocked so much as by the speech which had just been made. He never expected to hear the pollu ters of our countrywomen and the torturers of their chil dren had a defender in that house, more especially he never expected to hear one who had borne a distinguished com mand become the advocate of the brutalities of the sepoys. General THOMPSON explained that he was not the defender of these outrages, but he simply disbelieved them. Mr. P. O'BRIEN did not understand the gallant general to express any sympathy with the atrocities that had been committed in India, for he believed no British officer would ever have adopted such a course. Lord J. MANNERS withdrew his amendment, and the motion was agreed to. VACATING PARLIAMENTARY SEATS. - - - Mr. WRIGHTON moved for ,leave to bring in a bill to alter and amend the act of the Gth of Queen Anne, chapter 7, so far as relates to the vacating of seats in Parliament on the acceptance of office. There was no discussion, and the house divided. The numbers were— For the motion 9l Against it Majority against it The motion wai therefore negatived. BANK ACT. Mr. GflEEf M6V611 that it b.) a•n in Aruclion to the committee to inquire into the operation of all the laws affecting the currency in Groat Britain or Ireland, and re port what amendments, if any, they may consider desir able. One of the questions now before the committee, but which they might tb.ke up, was that of limited liabi lity, and another was, that the circulation of small notes was beneficial, for ha believed it could easily be shown by competent witnesses that their introduction into this country would be a great advantage. That would add to the gold reserve in the Bank, which would be ready for any emergency that might arise. The crises of 1847 and 1857 demonstrated that the act of 1844 was not sufficient to provide for the wants of the country in emergencies of that kind. Ho apprehended it must be considered that the act of 1841 had failed. The fluctuations in the value of the currency had been exceedingly mischievous, caused by the act of 1344. From 1821 to 1844 there were ony nine changes in the strnd•srd of value, whilst from 1814 to 1856 there had been thirty-seven changes. He consi dered that an additional proof of the failure of the act of 1844. Mr. CARDWELL declined to follow the honourable member into a discussion of the currency question at that late hour. The operations of the committee had been restricted by that house. The committee would not be guilty of such manifest neglect in not inquiring into the laws affecting the currency, but it was not desiraable the committee should enter into the question of standard. (Hear, heat.l Mr. GREER withdrew his amendment. TENANT FARMERS' (IRELAND) COMPENSATION. Mr. MAGUIRE moved for, leave to introduce a bill to provide compensation to tenant farmers in Ireland for im pro-raments made by them upon lands in their occupation ; and to limit the power of eviction in certain cases. He reserved discussion on the bill till the second reading. Agreed to. MORTALITY (FOOT GUARDS). Captain ANNESLEY moved an address for copy of the report of the medical officers of the Foot Guards which states the average mortality . in that brigade. Mr. S. HERBERT said the commissioners had not cast blame on any one in their report, but merely had stated facts. Some censure had been cast on the officers of the Guards for the present state of things, but they were not answerable for the defects complained of, but the Govern ment, and since the production of the report, Lord Pan inure had taken means for carrying out the recommenda tions of the committee. The e 3mmissioners stopped in their statistics in 1853 because their information on the mor tality of the army was derived from reports laid before Parliament by the officers of regiments, end had laid on the table of the house unchallenged since 1853. It would have been improper to have included the mortality subse- quent to that date, because it would have included the mortality in the Crimea. It was not to be supposed that the Guards had net showed a higher degree of mortality on their return from the Crimea because they were a young and healthy brigade, and returned in a healthy state. It would have been an error to have taken the returns of mortality since then (coupled with the healthy state of the last two years) as showing an improved condition of the army. There would be no objection to make the return asked for from 1839 to 1?_ , 53 inclusive. Captain ANNESLEY said he asked for the returns ex tending over a period of 15 years previous to the war. Mr. S. HERBERT proposed an addition to the return asked for, for completing the return ; he thought his re part would be the means of remedying the condition of the army. The only object the commissioners had in view was to obtain that object. (Hear, hear.) Col. NORTH defended the officers of regiments from the charges that had boon made against them, and com plained that copies of the report had been furnished to the press before they had been laid on the table of the house. Sir J. RAhISDEN, on the part of the Government, had no objection to the return asarnended. The report referred to did not contain reflection on regimental officers. He explained the delay that had ariseni n the non-delivery of the report to hon. members. The Government intended to carry out the suggestion of the commissioners as early as circumstances would permit. General CODRINGTON spoke in favour of the report. There must have been some mistake either in taking the War-Office returns, and the medical returns, and it was necessary it should bo cleared up. He considered it was batter for that house to discard anonymous statements, be cause all were aware that the officers of regiments did all they could for bettering the condition of their troops. Col. KNOX defended the regimental officers from the remarks that had been made on them by the press in re ference to the subject. He could speak from experience that for thirty years past officers of zegiments had endea voured to remedy the defects complained of, and he had never failed to bring it before the house when the army estimates were under consideration. After some remarks from Col. PENNANT, The motion as amended was agreed to. TENANT FARMERS' IRELA.ND) COMPENSATION BI 1.. L. Mr. MAGUIRE brought in this bill, which was read a first time. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. BILL. The adjourned debate on this bill was adjourned till Thursday. Lord PALMERSTON said the hon. member for Shef field had consented to give way on that day that it might be brought on, and the noble lord expressed a hope that other lion. members would do the same. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned at ten minutes to o'clock. PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES. TRANSPORT OF TRH OPS AND STORES TO INDIA. Yesterday the select committee of the House of Conn mans met for the first time to inquire as to the transport of troops and stores to India (appointed on the motion of Sir De Lacy Evans). The committee consists of Sir De Lacy Evans (in the chair), Lord Godeiich, Sir J. Peking ton, Lord Stanley, Mr. Crawford, Mr. Danby Seymour, Mr. Osborne, Captain Vivian, Mr. Hors n, Mr. Wil loughby, Sir E. Colebrooke, Mr. Byng, and Sir J. Elphin stone. Mr. P. Melvill, Secretary to the Military Department of the East India House, was called as the first witness. He said that in February last year, there was a deficiency of about 5,000 men. There had been a number of men with drawn in 1854, and remonstrances had been addressed to Lord Dalhousie on the subject. The events in the North Western Provinces, including the outbreak at Meerut, oc curred on the 10th of May, and as the communication by telegraph was then complete, the intelligence would be re ceived by Lord Canning and Lord Elphinstone the follow ing day. Lord Canning sent word that he did not con sider it necessary to send out a steamer. The news was received by the Court of Directors on the 27th Jane, and immediately the directors asked her Majesty's government to place at their disposal 4 regiments to be sent out, in ad sittion to 4 regiments of infantry and 2 cavalry regiments which were then on their way. The Board of Control in stantly acquiesced in the application. Lord Canning lost 10 days by not despatching a steamer with the news. Ever since 1854 there had been a deficiency of European troops in ludia, and the government promised to make up the defi ciency as soon as possible. The troops were sent out by sailing ships, because it was considered there was not suffi cient depots of coals at Mauritius and other places to facilitate the journey by steam vessels. It was decided to sent out four regiments of infantry in June ; but two of those regiments were intended to supply the deficiency of two regiments withdrawn during the war in the Crimea. That was the time the Court of Directors first thought it necessary to increase the force, They were not sent away for ten days after the time appointed. No communications had taken place between him and the Court of Directors as to sending our troops by the overland route. It was always the practise to send out troops by sailing ve3sels, except in one case where they had to send out a steamer to ply between Madras and Calcutta, and as it was empty. tjiey used to send out a body of 300 troops by it, but that was completely an exceptional case. A remonstrance was made in 854 against the withdrawal of troops from India for the Crimea. When the demand was made f or more troops in June, the Government of India were informed that they might retain the troops that were about to be relieved. The 29th of June was the first day when the East India Company reeeived a demand for additional troops. The chief reason why troops were sent by sailing ships was the difference of expense ; the difference be tween steam and sailing chips was 501. and 101. a man. There was a deficiency of two regiments in 1854, and they were not replaced ti 111857. The troops were not withdrawn from the Crimea until the end of 1856, for although the peace with Russia occurred in August, the treaty of Paris was not signed until the end of the year. It would have been unwise to send out troops in the winter, as they would arrive in India at an unhealthy season. Under ordinary circumstances, the latest period that troops should be sent out to Bengal would be in August. Lord Elphinstone offered to Lord Canning to send a steamer to Aden to °atoll the previous steamer, so that the vessel might have brought the news to England of the outbreak of the mutiny in India, but Lord Canning declined to employ it, as it would have been attended with the expenses of 4001. or 5001. Six requisitions were made by the Court*of Direc tors to the Board of Control for additional regiments to be sent to India. No delay had occurred in making these requisitions, and three of them were made entirely by the Court of Directors without any application for them from India. There was delay in complying with those requisitions on the part of the India Board. In February the number of European troops in India was 40,000, and they were then short of 5,000 mon. About 4,000 men were withdrawn from Persia. Up to the 29th of June, he, as Secretary to the Military Department of the East India Company, felt no anxiety about the mutiny. No part of the force sent to Persia was withdrawn from Bengal. A letter was addressed by the Board of Directors to the Board of Control, on the 31st of August, respecting the convey ance of troops by the overland route. There was no dan ger in sending out troops in September or October, but it was considered desirable generally that troops should get there in the cold weather, so the,; they might become ac climated before the hot weather set in. Witness could not say when they first began to make arrangements for send ing troops through Egypt, as that did not come within his department; but he knew that they began to snake ar rangements for sending them by the overland rout, in Sep tember, and that route had been partially adopted since. He did not consider that it would have been prudent to send troops from the Crimea to India, as they would have arrived there in a disordered state, and would have arrived to be equipped. There was always a deficiency of 1,000 men at that particular season. At the time of the outbreak in India there was a deficiency of *4,008 men. Mr. Mason, Secretary to the Marine Department of the East India-house, said, with reference to the employment of steam-vessels in the transport of troops to India, it was decided on the Ist of July that two regiments should go out by clipper sailing ships and two regiments by screw steamers. lie vindicated generally the arrangements which had been made by the Company in connection with her Majesty'. Government, but stated that as there was but a small supply of coal at the depots it was not considered safe to send troops in any great numbers by steam-ships. The committee then adjourned. [ADVERTISEMENT.] — SIGHT AND HEARING -- SPECTACLES= POWERFUL TELESCOPES -- OPERA, RACE, AND PERSPECTI VE GLASSES. —S. and B. Solomons, opticians, 39, Albemarle street, Piccadilly. Observe—opposite the York Hotel, W. By her Majesty's Royal Letters Patent for valuable and ex traordinary improvements in the most powerful and brilliant Telescopes, Camp, Race-course, Opera, and Perspective Glasses, to know the distances. These Telescopes possess such extraordinary power that some, three and a-half inches, with an extra eye-piece will show distinctly Jupiter's moons, Saturn's ring, and the double stars ; with the same telescope can be seen a person's countenance three-and-a-half miles distant and an object from 16 to 20 miles. For the waist coat-pocket, and are of larger, and all sizes, with increasing powers accordingly. The Royal Exhibition, 1851. —A valu able, newly-invented, very small, powerful, W4tcoat-pock et Glass, the size of a walnut, by which a person can be seen and known one and a-half mile distant. They answer every pur pose on the Race-course and at the Opera-houses. Country scenery and ships are clearly seen at 12 to 14 miles. They are invaluable for shorting, deer-stalking, yachting, to sportsmen, gentlemen, gamekeepers, and tourists. Opera Camp, Perspective, a n d R ace - course Gl asses, w ith won d er f u l powers. - * lnvaluable preserving Spectacle Lenses of the greatest transparent pqwer. The groat advantage deriv e d from this invention is, that vision impaired becomes pre served and strengthened and very aged persons are enabled to employ their sight at the most minute occupation —can see with tho.se lenses of a much less magnifying power— an d they do not require the frequent changes to the dan. germ effects of further powerful assistance. Persons can be suited at tho moan remote part of the world by send. iug one of the glasses out of their spectacles iu a letter, and stating the distAuce from the eye they can read small print with it, and those who have not made use of spectacles by stating their ago. Deafness.—Now Discovery. —Th e Os ranie Vibrator, an extraordinarily powerful, small, newly-invented instrument for deafness, entirely different from all of hers. surpassing anything of the kind that has been, or prob ably can be, produced. Being of the same co l our as the skin, i s - not perceptible. It enables deaf persons to hear distinct iy a church and at public assemblies, the unpleasant sensation of singing noises in the ears is entirely removed, and it afford: all the assistance that possibly could be desired.-39. Alto- Dario-Arcot, Piccadilly —OppoWto tin Xork 11901, W, POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—Feb. 16. MANSION-HOUSE.---The solicitor to Mr. John Car vell, of No. 132, Leadenhall-street, appeared to answer the summons issued by the direction of the Board of Trade against Mr. Carvell, for having unlawfully demanded and received of and from Maria Daw, on behalf of Edwin Hussey, her son, a seaman, the sum of 10 guineas, as a remuneration for providing the said Edwin Hussey with employment on board the Windsor merchant ship, against the Merchant Shipping Act. Mr. E. H. E. Coleman, the clexk to the Registrar of the Merchant Shipping office, appeared for the prosecution. The solicitor to Mr. Carvell stated that his client pleaded guilty. The Lord Mayor fined the defendant 31., which added to the penalty inflicted upon Mr. Heirons, of Leadenhall. street a few days ago, made up the sum of ten guineas, which his lordship ordered to be handed over to Mrs. Daw. The L' - x I Mayor expressed his hope that the decision would have an effect upon those who were in the habit of charging seamen unlawfully for employment which they could procure for nothing, and intimated that upon every fature occasion he would tine to the extent allowed by the Aot. SOUTHWARK.—A foreign gentleman waited on Mr. Burcham for his advice. Applicant said that he had been in London for several years, and had for a long time re• sided in the vicinity of this court. Since the late murde rous attack on the Emperor and Empress of the French himself and several of his friends had been followed about from morning till night by spies. Mr. Burcham asked him of what country he was? Applicant replied that he was an Italian, and a native of Genoa. Mr. Burcham asked him how he obtained his livelihood? Ho replied that he was a professor of languages, and had numerous pupils all over London. On Monday, as scou as he left his house at 9 o'clock, he was followed about where ever he went until he returned at night. Mr. fiurcham inquired who were the persons he com plained of ? Applicant said, from their appearance, he imagined they wore French spies, connected with the Paris detective police. Mr. Burcham asked what they had done to annoy him ? Applicant replied that they followed him about, dodg ing his footsteps wherever he went. When he entered a house they remained walking backwards and forwards until ho came out, which was likely to do him considerable injury in his business, as people might think he was a thief. Could he give the parties in charge ? _ _ _ _ _ Mr. Burnham told him he coal not, as they had com. milted no breach of the law. As he had stated that he was unconne :ted with the conspirators there could be no doubt the parties were on the wrong track, and they would soon find that out and leave him alone. He should recom mend him to take no notice of them. LAMBETH.--Mr. William Charles Taylor, an alai tioneer, appraiser, sod broker, carrying on business at No. 7, Albany-road, Camberwell, appeared to answer a sum mons, alleging that, while being the broker employed in levyiug a distress for taxes upon the goods of Mrs. Mary Ann Webb, he charged for an act not really done by him as the said broker. Mr. Lewis, juu., who attended on behalf bf the com• plainant to support the summoe , s opened tha case as one of considerable oppression on the part of both the defend ant an the collector of t- xes, and called Mrs, Mary Ann Webb, a respectable woman, residing at No. 15, Trafalgir-square, Peckham, who deposed that at Christmas last she took possession of the house, and a notice having been served on her by Mr. Davis( the collee• tor of taxes, for an arrear of 1/. ?s. 4d. property, and 63.5 d. other taxes, she consulted her landlord, and was told by him that she was to pay them, and she was prepared to do so. On Friday foreno o n, th e sth inst., there was a knock at the door, and on her daughter opening it the defendant and Davis, the tax-collector, presented themselves, and the latter said, "It ia lucky you opened the door, for if you had not done so I should have burst it open, as I have done two or three others this morning." He then asked for 1/. 9s. 4d., an arrear of property tax, and if she was pre pared to pay it, and she told him she was, and went up• stairs to get the money. While returning with the money her daughter called out to her, and said they were taking an inventory of her goods, and on reaching the parlour Taylor, the defendant, handed her the inventory procluced• in which 3s. for levy, and 2s. Gd. for a man in possession, were added to the original amount of 1/. 9e. 4d., makingit 1L 14s. 10d., the sum then claimed. She handed him two sovereigns, and Taylor gave her two half-orowns, and 2d. in change. Mr. Elliott—Are you certain you, told the collector Davis, in the presence of the defendant, that you were prepared to pay the I/. 9s. 4d. ? . _ Are. , •Veleli-ZI am quite certain, sir, and went upstairi for the money, and returned within two or three minutes. In reply to the charge, the defendant said the fact was that Davis, the collector, was himself the broker in the case, and he (Taylor) only went to assist him, and called Davis as a witness. When sworn he deposed that Mrs. Webb had refused to pay him, and referred him to Mr. Wiz, the landlord ; but this Mrs. Webb positively denied. The witness further said ho had distrained on three or four other persons on tho same morning that he distrained on tho complainant, and in two of those cases he had carried away the goods distrained on, and in the others he left men in possession, but he could not give the names of the men he had so left. After a severe cross-examination as to his proceedings on the day in question, the witness said, The fact is, I/a the broker myself." Mr. Elliott—What ! collector of taxes and a broker ei well ? Is it usual for collectors of taxes to be brokers? Davis—l can't say, sir ; but I have the broker to assist me, as he knows the value of the goods better than I do. o Mr. Elliott said—There can be no doubt whatever the' this is a scandalous fraud, and that in this case there is not the slightest reason whatever, nor even a pretext, for an execution on the goods of the complainant. Such for cee lings are scandalous and cannot be tolerated and W e defendant must pay treble the amou n t o f the overcharge' and the whole of the expenses. The penalty and expenses were paid, and Mr. Davisleft the court indignantly declaring he should make the Com missioners of Inland Revenue acquainted with the treat ment to which he had been subjected. Country hiarxets. LIVERPOOL, FBn. 16. There was a small attendance this morning of conntri buyers, and only best qualities met with any demand the fall rates of Friday, while the lower qualities were neglected at late prices. Flour in poor request, wittier any alteration in value. Barley and beans more freely ur quired for. Indian corn met a retail demand ; Black 335, mixed American 33* 3d to 338 6d, white 31s to ill" 6d. LEEDS—FEB. 16. There was a middling trade in wheat, with a UMWiki, supply, and all good qualiti e s h e ld fi rm . A s li g h tin d Y r o from Friday is obtained, in s ome eases t o the eztestih" °f i' ta per qr. Barley steady, at a b ou t l as t wee k' s rates. v beans, and other articles unaltered. Averages for the week : Wheat, 46s 6/d I Oats, 22s —d Peas 430 4d. Barley, 36s lid Beans, - 41s lid Rye, —II Od. —IV NEWCASTLE—FEB. 16. tr * al , Farmers' wheat in moderate supply, but large s ro I from abroad and the north. Sellers firm at itisturag_ rates, at which th ere i s a f a i r b us i ness d o i ng . Fl o ur u" . altered. B ar l ey an d oats steady. Beans an d pea s *IP without change. COURSE OF EXCHANGE.-YiSTERDAL - • m5terdam............ 11 15 Gibraltar •• ••• •• ••2t ▪ 914 Ditto, three month s .. 11 17 L eghorn ..... • •••• • 65 Rotterdam 11 17% Genoa ...... •• •• •• " JS Antwerp .............. 2 5 ? 7% Milan - Brussels .... • • ........ 25 37 Venice.. .• •••• ••• 41% Altona .• ilgh •• •••••• 13 5% Naples •• •• •• ••••• • 123% •• ,„ • P a l ermo ...... •• 1 Paris •••• • • • • ••• • • .... 25 15 Messina .. 23r e51% Do. three months ••25 45 Lisbon ... •'. 52% Marseilles ............ 25 45 Oporto Bourdeaux .. • • •. ) Rio Janeiro ..... ••••• •• •••▪ • Frankfort-on-Maine..,. 118 1 4 Buenos Ayres..•• ••• • •• Berlin .. New York,6o days' Bight Vienna • • .... 1036 Philadelphia ...... • a st trieste •••••••••• •• e • •• 10 38 PILICEB OF BULLIONs ", 7 9 Petersburg 4 35 ,Foreign Gold in Bars £3 0 0 Madrid 48% [ Portugal Gold Coin •• 0 0 Cadiz ......... • • 49A, !Mexican Dollars ••.• 0 0 0 Barcelona ............ New Dollars 0 5 Seville.. FATAL QUARRELLING IN WORKHOIISES.—An •W O was held at Homertoo, yesterday, on the body of Sou; Webber, aged 64. The deceased was an inmate of 0. EVIL London Union Workhouse, and was in the hub of calling out in the night, to , the annoyance of didli occupants of the same ward. On his doing this 0 0 Wednesday eight, a man named Pausen, who 9110 i° the next bed, got up and turned the deceased's bed overt so that ho fell on the floor. He died the nett The surgeon said that he had no doubt that, the ceased, being in ill health, h a d di e d f rom the infiiries re' eeived from falling on the floor. The jury returried t aver o ; dint of " Mansla ug ht er " aga i ns t Pause:). japes The _ another pauper was held yesterday at Horsleyd.own. deceased Christopher Wright, was an inmate of St. 0104 rn 7 . workhouse, Southwark. He was paralysed on one 11. and another pauper, named Moulton, was tr 3 asing bl .P when Wright got up to strike him, whereupo n Mou lt° l who was a much younger man, seized hint by the °la and strnak him several blows in the face. Decea° I became insensible, and died on Thursday, A. W 6(14 ° ortnsisugl.ter was also returns l in this case.. ler BIRTHS. DE ROTHSCHILD—On thel6th inst., d _in the VueSt. ° Paris, the Bareness Alph onse e Batlamobl ia ' daughter. t MAXWELL -On the 14th inst., in Alfred-0 3 e° " I" wife of Lieut.- Colonel C. F. Maxwell , of • son. e n', PETO—On the 14th inst., at Kensington Falace-P Lady Pato, of a son. 0 14 RIISHBROOKE—On the 14th in s t., at Rushbrookegoo- Bury St. Edmund's, Suffolk, the wife of major brooks, of a son and heir. MARRIAGES. Ort ; MOM—JORDAN-0n the 10th inst. , Jaoob youngest on of Ab ra h am M oses , E sq , of n Y o ird:" , square, to Mari a , fifth daughter of Lewis J . - Esq., of 6, Bedford-square. tw ns' SIIRTEES — CITAPMA.II—On the 16th inst., a t St...rbitta , bone Chu rc h, G or d on E. S ur t ees, E sq of 1: 3 " - ptcr place, to J a n s , e ld er d aug ht er o f Wm."ChaPlu an ' of Wimpole-street. DEATHS. 31 0 ' ALLECOCK—On the 14th inst. at Rushohoe - P lace ' cheater, S amue l All ecoc k, Esq., aged 63. 0)7, of BOSSEY —On the 1.1t,h inst. , at Woolwich, Ur . B°ll. the Royal Arsenal, aged 74. c43l('' CLARKE—On the 12th inst., at 9, Fonthill-place' in /3 ' well, suddenly, Mr. Thomas Clarke, late of r4,01' Strand, aged 72. ft°' DA.RTON— On the 12th inst., at Temple Dineleft Thomas H. Darton, Esq., aged 47. t DUNLOP—On the 10th inst., at flyeree, in the sosiy,4 France, Major Sir James Dunlop, of the cola G A (Guards. STONE On the 14th inst., at Streatham-ha l, UP Stone, Esq., of Austinfriars. zi SixEs —On the 12th inst., at Castlehill, Eng legel" Admiral Joha Sykes, ;* LONDON Printed and Published by MIIRDO I ° .„ 2 11 j; of No, 112, Strand, Printer, at 2'h.s Sul* o ', lo ', al 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy. I % t a he of Middleklax, WCillieklay, February 17,