The Sun. — London, England, 1860-06-29 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS—(YEsTEBDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. ;PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Farringdon Railway and Hay Railway Bills were read a second time. The following bills were read a third time and passed : Hamilton and Strathaven, and Hereford, Hay, and Brecon Railways. POPISH KIDNAPPING. Viscount DUNGANNON presented a petition from a place in Ireland complaining of the frequent violation of the liberty of the subject by the forcible ;detention of young children by persons professing the Romish religion. The petitioners stated that the law as it at present stood was not sufficient for the 'protection of the subject or the punish ment of the offenders. The petitioners prayed that their lordships would immediately take the subject into their consideration, with a view to adopt some remedy for the evil complained of. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that by the law as it at present stood;persons committing such offences could be punished. ST. GEORGE'S-IN-THE-EAST. Viscount DUNGANNON gave notice that on Friday, the 6th of July, he should call attention to the serious riots said disturbances that continue to take place week after week in this parish. He should more particularly allude to the riots of the 17th and 24th of July, and afterwards he would inquire what steps the Government had taken to suppress the disgraceful proceedings. MASTERS AND OPERATIVES BILL. Earl GREYpresentedapetition from Sunderland against this bill. The noble lord said he agreed in general with the petitioners, and he hoped their lordships would pay parti cular attention to the bill when it came under their consi deration. Lord BROUGHAM agreed with the noble earl, and said men might legally combine for certain purposes, but it was illegal for them to combine to compel others to adopt views in consonance with those they entertained on any particu- lar subject. Lord CRANWORTH, said within the last few hours a deputation had waited upon him, who pointed out several inconsistencies in the measure. VALE OF CLWYD EXTENSION BILL. The standing orders were considered and suspended, in order that this bill might be proceeded with. ADULTERATION OF FOOD BILL. This bill, on the motion of Lord REDESDALE, was read a third time and passed. SHELTER FOR SHIPPING. Tho Marquis of CLANRICARDE called attention to the unprotected state of the coast with respect to any shelter for shipping during storms. He should like to know how far it was practicable to afford better shelter for those ships upon our coasts than was at present afforded by the adoption of some plan for the construction of break waters and harbours less costly and better adapted for certain localities than the system of solid masonry hitherto in use, and he wished to know whether any such plan appeared likely to be also service able for the improvement of our national defences. The loss of life and property on our coasts during the last few years was very great, and it was much to be regretted that it was on the increase. The mercantile marine he looked upon as the nursery of the navy, and such being the case it was the duty of Parliament to do everything that was calculated to be of service or protection to them. Year after year large sacrifices of human life occurred, and many hundreds of poor fellows left England who never returned ; and the misery and destitution that was occasioned by such a calamity was enormous. The noble lord then alluded to the report of the commission which had sat upon the subject, and quoted some remarks of Sir J. Burgoyne, which he said was clearly against the plan proposed in that report, yet Parliament had voted sums of money for the carrying out these recommendations, totally disregarding all other plans but solid masonry. The system of running out solid blocks of masonry was per fectly useless, and experience had proved that to be the case, and he thought it would be a waste of money to con tinue such a system. Where there was silt, this masonry did not prevent the formation of bars, and the stone was found to be far from durable. The harbour at Dover he thought was the greatest failure that had ever occurred, and after the vast sums of money that had been ex pended, the result had been so very far from the object intended. There were several other places beside Dover, where extensive works were going en, but he feared the same useless result would follow. The only ground he could see why these works were being carried out was because they were very large and expensive, and unfortunately any engineer in this country who was connected with any very extensive work obtained a great reputationfrom that fact. His own opinion was that the persons to be employed in constructing these works should be scientific men, thoroughly acquainted wi th the natural laws regulating the movement of the waves and their reflux ; that they should be engineers who had been in the habit of constructing such works ; and that, above all, nautical men should be combined with them. At present there was no want of engineers, but it was too much the habit to employ men without having due regard to the nature of the works upon which they were to be engaged. No doubt he opinion of nautical men was taken even under the present system ; but what he complained of was that the value of that nautical opinion was invariably determined by the engineer. Before proceeding to expend such enor mous sums of money as £BOO,OOO, which he believed was proposed to be incurred in one instance, he thought it would be more economical to try an experiment elsewhere, even if it involved the cost of one, two, or five thousand pounds. He thought that a great responsibility at present rested on the Government and both houses of Parliament, if they did not without delay thoroughly inquire into the question ; and in conclusion he begged to move for the appointment of a select committee to investigate the matter. The Duke of SOMERSET was of opinion that no amount of expenditure would be refused by Parliament when the object was to secure protection for the lives and property of our seamen ; but it was not merely by considering the ques tion of harbours of refuge and breakwaters that knowledge could be obtained upon the subject. The question had been considered by many former committees, and especially by the committee on sh;pwrecks, and the result arrived at was that so long as the shipowners could recover from insurance com panies the amount for which their vessels were insured they were careless as to what became of them. As regarded the number of schemes which had been proposed for harbours of refuge, their lordships were aware that they had been most extensive and costly ; and the more the evidence upon the question was examined, the more perplexing the whole subject became. The most distinguished engineers differed very materially from each other in the opinion upon every scheme hitherto pro posed. By the terms of the noble marquis's motion ho peered to object to every harbour and breakwater construc ted of solid masonry, but he (the Duke of Somerset) was not aware, from any infornaat - on he possessed, that any better system could be adopted. Floating breakwaters had been proposed by Admiral Taylor and other naval officers, and their proposals were submitted to a select committee in 1843, who came to the conclusion that there was not sufficient evidence to justify the expenditure of the public money in the experimental construction of a floating breakwater. Floating breakwaters were open to this serious drawback, that ix the event of any casualty the consequences must be most disastrous to :any vessels riding in the harbour. There was a breakwater at Dover, but it had failed. There had been another at Brighton, built by Admiral Taylor, but in consequence of a gale of wind it came on shore, experi mentally exemplifying what the commissioners had said would happen in such a case. Last February a company had proposed to erect a floating breakwater at Hastings. After taking legal advice as to how far the Admiralty would be responsible for the consequences of such a struc ture, he wrote to the company, stating that the Admi ralty were prepared to give assent to its construction , upon the distinct understanding that they were not to be held in any degree responsible for any damage or injuries that might occur to • vessels trusting to the protection of the breakwater. How far the company were satisfied with that answer, or prepared to take the whole responsibility upon themselves, he could not say, ksiving since that time had no communication from them ; but he believed their lordships would be most unwilling to undertake the establishment of a breakwater upon any such terms. No v, all the light vessels along shore were fastened in what was supposed to be the most secure manner that could be devis,a , /, but in 1841 the three light vessels in the North Sea par ted their anchors and went to sea ; and was it not probable' that if there had been a floating breakwater at the th 'ne it would also have gone out to sea ? lie was aware that br vakwaters had not been successful in a nY respects, and oce reason was that engineers dif teroedv se much as to plans, and so also did successive emin ent'. Last year he (the noble duke) went to Alderney to lo o k re ,. at thie breakwater there, accompanied by luary Lula come under r d vil engi ears. About 14 different plans had der the e mmidieration of successive Gove rnmen t s course would fc , that breakwater, but as far as he could judge the best be t o a kw .don the project, even after all th e money th at ' had b een- *Vent upon it. Then as to the harbour of Holyhead it was true it had net been carried ou tu on such a scal e as *it s h ou l d have been. Portland harbour p was one of solid w wk, proceeding fr o m the sh or e ; b u t th en there was ever 'facility and material on the s p o t f or con structing a had bour ther e . The noble marquis had sa id Dover harbour vas an unsu ccessful one. Nellitwasso furthera t present ; but wh en the pier w as carried out a little trr ver eat bar • it would be }fount.}fount. very useful. Th ere were 1 2 hours of refuge p. ropcised, but it r equ i red the Government to pause before it .adop,ed any one o f th em, and he should be very sorry to p te edge himself to a n y one of these harbours uid without further ii .srmation. The nobl e marquis wishedf,r ' committee, but,; if it was merely a committee to consider the construction o: f breakwaters and harbours at a less cost than at present, hi ) could net see the wisdom of entering upon a new inqui rJ , and ho did not think such a comm i ttee would be of any is 3 at the present time. He thoug ht it I , would be much b ett er that the question mto t brin g d fo be left ard w h a t upon the responsibility " the Gover nment t hey thought won fel be the b e st en plan for the g eonstruetion of harbours of refnge, ( Hear , hear.) The Earl of IfX4 IVICKE said, as the zioble , ciao had .....,....—,..,...... stated that it was not the intention of the Government to propose any vote of public money for breakwaters without very !grave considerations as to the manner in which that money was to be expended, he should not enter upon that part of the question. But the proposition of the noble mar quis was totally different. All the noble mar pis proposed was to inquire whether floating breakwaters W( re not better than those of solid masonry. He himself (the Earl of Hard wicke) was of opinion that a breakwater of that description should be tried upon a scale which would not require any large outlay, and that when it was secured with proper anchors it would be found to be perfectly safe. He should like to see an experiment tried, say at Hastings, of a float ing breakwater to secure the beaching of fishing boats, which would render most essential service to the persons engaged in that oeoupation, lie thought, if a committee was granted, it would be the means of laying kofore Parlia ment precise information as to what would be the best form and materials for such constructions. The Earl of BANDON wished to take that opportunity o f drawing the attention of the Government to the fact that the south-west coast of Ireland vns perfectly defenceless. Not a single gun was to be found either , at the lial bour of Long Island or the magnificent Bay of Bantry. The Duke of SOMERSET was understood to say that in case of any emergency ships of war would be the best de fence of that part of the coast, The Earl of DERBY said, without wishing to take any part in the discussion as to the construction of coating breakwaters, he would take that opportunity of putting a question with reference to an important subject. The re port of the CoXamission on National Defences had been lying on the table of the house for a considerable time and had in volved an enormous expense, and he considered it was very important that the intentions of tho Government on the sub ject should be known. The session was now far advanced, and he hoped the noble earl opposite would be prepared to state the intentions of the Government upon this question. Earl GRANVILLE said whatever measures the Govern ment decide upon would be introduced in the other house of Parliament. He was not prepared at that moment to state what the nature of those measures might be, but he should make inquiries on the subject. Lord BROUGHAM said that all who had witnessed that grand and magnificent spectacle in Hyde-park on Saturday last must have been convinced that our best defences were to be found in our troops. In that term fie included volun teers, for he could see no difference between troops and volunteers. He conceived that the existence of a large armed force, and the facility with which they could be moved from one part of the country to the other, was a most important element in national defence. He would suggest to the Government that some such scene as that of Saturday last should be repeated in other parts of the country, and that reviews of a similar kind should take place in Yorkshire, Lancashire, Devonshire, and the eastern and south-eastern parts of the country, which would pro duce the happiest effect upon the volunteer movement, and the best effect also in other countries. (Hear.) The Earl of CAITHNESS said that engineers, generally speaking, omitted from their calculations one of two ele ments with which they had to deal in the construction of solid harbours. They took the water only into account, and not the air also. The harbour of Wick, which had stood the most severe tests to which a harbour could be exposed, had only given way in those parts where limen was used. Next month the herring fishing on that coast would com mence, in which there would be 1,000 boats and 5,000 men engaged, and if any storm arose it would be from the north and north-east, and those boats would be left entirely at the mercy of the sea, whereas if such a floating breakwater as had been suggested was constructed the whole of the lives and property embarked in the fishing would be pro tected from...such storms. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said he did not envy the noble duke or his colleagues the responsiblity they took upon themselves in ab taming from carrying out what had been proposed by the harbours commission, and in refusing a committee to inquire farther into the subject. Earl GRANVILLE said the noble marquis was mis taken in supposing that his noble friend refused his propo sal ; and if the noble marquis could find that the peers, who we e best qualified to inquire into this subject, were pre pared to investigate it in committee, the Government would not oppose a motion for that purpose. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE was understood to withdraw his motion for the purpose of introducing another to-morrow. HONG KONG. Earl GREY presented a petition from Newcastle, setting forth that certain legal proceedings had taken place in Hong Kong, by which it appeared that a person had been convicted of being engaged in transactions of a piratical character, and apparently with the countenance of an officer of the Colonial Government, and praying for inquiry. He (Earl Grey) expressed his own opinion that the state of things in Hong Kong of the local government required serious attention. The Duke of NEWCASTLE said he had received no ac count of the piratical attack, or of the indictment to which the petition referred, though perhaps the despatches which arrived yesterday, all of which he had not time to peruse, contained some account of the matter. He could assure the noble earl that there was not that neglect in the Colonial office which, according to the petition, was supposed to exist. It was not to be inferred because the Colonial•office did not pay immediate attention to the questions and in quiries of a body of persons calling themselves the " Com mittee of Foreign Aff tirs," sitting at Newcastle or Sheffield, for they seemed to be a j , ,int concern, that grievances in the colonies could not be inquired into or redressed. He con fessed he did not feel bound to communicate either the de spatches he received or the instructions he sent out to these persons. his noble friend was in error in supposing that these things were not inquired into. An enormous blue book had been presented by the Colonial-office this year, which reflected very little credit on many of the parties concern:A, and showed that the state of society in Hong Kong was anything but satisfactory. He instructed Sir 11. Robinson verbally to inquire into the charges raised by Mr. C. Anstey with regard to the transactions that occurred in Hong Kong, at the same time telling him to avoid stirring up the filthy mud which surrounded the state of society there. There was no part of her Majesty's dominions where libels seemed to be so rife and flagrant. Every man libelled another in the most reckless manner, so that libelling seemed to be the normal state of society in Hong Kong. Everything .that ap peared in the newspapers there must therefore be re eeived with caution. The matters referred to in the petition would be inquired into, and everything possible done to redeem that colony from the bad reputation which it had acquired in consequence of the behaviour of some of those who he was happy were now removed from it. The Earl of HARDIVICKE said that the Foreign Affairs Committee deserved to be mistaken if they expected an an swer to all their communications, as it would be altogether impossible to answer correspondence of that kind. He re collected receiving a deputation from them, and they ap peared to him to be artisans who instructed themselves, to the best of their ability, in foreign affairs. But they must not suppose that they were treated with indignity because their communications were not attended to. EVIDENCE IN CHANCERY. The LORD CHANCELLOR laid on the table the report of the commissioners appointed to inquire into the mode 01 taking evidence in the Court of Chancery. EXAMINATION OF DEFENDANTS IN CRIMI- NAL CASES. Lord BROUGHAM introduced a bill for the purpose of enabling defendants to be examined in certain cases in cri minal prosecutions. Last year he introduced a bill on this subject, the object of which was to enable all defendants in criminal cases to enjoy the same privilege as defendants in civil actions, viz., that of being examined. The examina tion was to be voluntary, and not compulsory. He with drew that bill, however, in deference to the objections of bis noble and learned friends, the Lord Chancellor, Lord Chelmsford, and Lord Cranwerth. In doing so he confessed he yielded to their reluctance rather than to their reasons ; and he still retained his own opinion of the value of the bill of last year. He changed it, however, materially, so as to meet the objectionsthen urged. Ho proposed by the present bill to confine the right of defendants to be examined as witnesses in their own behalf to cases of misdemeanour only. He did not propose to extend it to cases of felony. He also restricted it to those cases in which the prosecuting party was himself examined, in which case he proposed that the defendant should be examined. A recent trial (the noble lord referred to the Hatch case) had very much in creased the desire to have some such bill as that which he proposed last year passing into a law. Verdicts were found for the prosecuting parties in that case, although they had been found guilty as defendants. He believed that such an examination as he proposed was the best defence of inno cence, and therefore he moved that the bill be read a first time. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the formor bill would have completely subverted the ordinary administra tion of justice in cases of high treason, felony, and misde meanour ; and it would have rendered it necessary for every accused person either to submit to be examined or admit his guilt. The modified proposal now made was w rthy of consideration, but it would require to be carefully exa mined. Some misdemeanours were as grave as felony, and were punishable with transportation ; but in the lighter cases of mi demeanour, as assaults and libels, the principle might admit of application. Still he had a strong objection to violating the established principle of the law that no man should be his own accuser, which he might be if he were subject to be examined. Lord BROUGHAM said that the way in which French criminal jurisprudence was conducted was sufficient to raise the strongest objection to the cross-examination of accused parties. That system was more objectionable, from being conducted by the judge. Anything more preposterous, cruel, or inhuman, could not be conceived. But it was not surprising that it should prevail in a country wheee the con nexion of a despot and a mob was considerA the perfection of government, and what was more, of free government. It would be impossible for such a principle ever to be admitted here, unless this country should come to the conclusion that the power of a s i ng l e individual and a mob was the most eligible form of government. The bill wan then read a first time. NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT BILL. The Duke of NEWCASTLE laid on the table a bill for THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JUNE 29, 1860. the better government of New Zealand, and for the =zap ment of the crown lands. The bill was read a first time. REPORT OF THE FORTIFICATIONS COMMIS SION. The Earl of DERBY repeated a question which he had put on a former evening, as to the course which the Go vernment meant to take in pursuance of the recommenda tions of the commission on fortifications. He hoped that the noble earl (Granville) would be prepared by to-morrow or by Monday at the latest, to inform the house whether it was the intention of the Government to bring forward any measure in connection with that subject during the present session, more especially as regarded the security of oux naval dockyards and arenal , i. , also when tlle 37 4 t4;3 0 - for that purpose would l aia t)etite thu other • Bari G RAN VILLE said he had stated on the former occasion that he was not aware of the course proposed to be taken by the Government in the other house ; but he woull make a point of ascertaining; and he hoped that by the be ginning of next week he should be able to give an answer to the noble earl's question. The house adjouined at teu minutes after 7 o'clock. ITOIJSE OF COMMONS.--(YESTERDAY.) The SHARER took the chair at four o'clock. NEW MEMBER. Mr. GETTY took the daths and his seat for Belfast. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Lords' amendments to the Leeds Township Bill were considered and agreed to, and the bill was ordered for third reading. The amendments to the following bills were considered and agreed to :—Mid Wales Railway ; Newcastle-upon- Tyne and Carlisle Railway, and Port Carlisle Dock and Railway, and Carlisle and Silloth Bay Railway and Dock Companies; Stockport, Disley, and Whaley Bridge Rail way. The gilkenny Junction Railway Bill was read a third time and passed. PETITIONS. Several petitions were presented against the Sunday Trading Bill, in favour of the Census Bill, against the clause requiring declaration of religious profession in the latter bill, against the Highways Bill, in favour of amend ment of the Poor Laws, &c. VESSELS, TONNAGE, &c. Mr. HORSFALL moved for a return showing the num ber of vessels and tonnage entered inwards and cleared outwards at each of the twelve principal ports of the United Kingdom; also, the official and declared value of imports, for each of the said ports, during the year 1858 (in con tinuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 173, of Session 2, 1859.) —0 rdered. THE PAUPER MARY CARTER. Mr. LANIGAN moved an address for copies of a letter (and its enclosures) addressed by the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department, on the 19th day of June, 1860, to two justices of the St. Pancras division, respecting the removal of Mary Carter from the parish ofikt,T4lncras to Ireland, and of the reply from the clerks to the Atid jus tices.—Ordered. cretary of State, so that two successive ministers had acted towards the council in a similar manner. (Hear, hear.) It therefore should be known that no formal resolution of the Council of India was necessary. Another objection which had been made was against the way in which the bill was brought in. Now, he (Mr. J. G. Baring) was of opinion that it was more respectful to the house to bring in the bill first, and then go into the consideration of the details. Then there was the objection that the plan proposed by the Go vernment would cut off_ thethe supply of officers for the mili tary, civil, and other occupations. He was at a loss to un derstand upon what ground that objection was taken, as he could state the authority of Sir Patrick Grant and other Officers who had a real knowledge of the qualitications ne -6;46Qy for oitleers serving. in India, that there would be no difficulty in getting officers from the line well qualified for the various duties for which they would be required. (Hear, hear.) He thought there could be no career which held out greatsr inducements to an ambitious young man than the service in question. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member then cited:the instance of Sir Herbert Edwards, who had himself raised levies and commanded them, and afte' referring to other instances, he asked whether young men would not be glad to have opportunities of distinguishing themselves as Edwards had done. (Hear.) There were ahout 2,500 offi cers in the local army of liengal, and of these about 1,000 held civil and other appointments, while only about 150 offi cers of the line held such appointments, but no t one o f them . was a civil appointment of any impoTtence. He thought that the officers of the local Bongal ar m y h a d a r i g h t to those appointments; but what he wi s h e d to say was tllat at present these inducements did not exist for the line. As to the training of officers he had the authority of Si.r Thomas Munro and Sir C. Napier, and other officers, for saying that the essential thing was that an officer for India should have his training in an European regiment in India. Now when officers had received that training they would then have to study the native language of India. There was scarcely an officer there who did not study the native language, and none would be put upon staff appointments till they had passed an examination in the native language. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Taunton (Mr. Mills) asked why they should change the system, which hal not failed ; but gentlemen who made such statements could not have read the evidence which was taken before the com mission in which the 'present mode of appointing staff officers was condemned. (Hear.) Tho officers to be con nected with the future Indian army would be selected for their talents, and its organisation the same in every respect as that adopted at home. It was urged against the bill that it would diminish the power of the Governor-General of India, but that was a mistake. The Governor-General at present had nothing to do with the appointments in the army. He stood in the same relation to India as the Crown did in this country. He controlled the expenditure, had the power of appointing commanders in certain districts, but all that would remain the same as it did at the present moment. The staff appointments would be made in India. The Commander in-Chief in this country will have no power to appoint generals of brigade, and only ten divi sional generals would be placed at his disposal. At pre sent a double staff had to be kept up in that country, but when the new regulations proposed by the bill came into force, the adjutant-general would be appointed in this country, and the quartermaster found in India. The Horse Guards would not, as it was said, have an unlimited patronage placed at its disposal, because, as he already said, the Government of India would alone decide upon these questions. The authority of Lord Corn wallis was quoted against the proposed amalgamation of the India with the Queen's army, but the opinion so given was promulgated after the short experience of a few months, for that nobleman arrived in India in the autumn of 1786, and the minute quoted was dated in the early part of 1787. But in 1790, when he acquired a great deal of Indian e pe rience, he proposed the plan now proposed, and would have gone out to carry it into effect as Governor-General of India had not the then Court of Directors interfered and prevented his appointment. Sir John Shawe, afterwards Lord Tyne mouth, another eminent Indian authority, was of the same opinion, that European troops serving in India should be relieved after a very few years. The principle of the bill was that European troops should be managed on European principles, and Indian troops according to the custom of In dia. The additional expense would only be about £114,000, from which they must deduct the expense now incurred of a double staff amountin g to £20,000 a-year, and he need hardly say that if they could secure an efficient force in a country like India, with a revenue of £38,000,000, a few thousand pounds additional ought not to make any differ ence. Mr. H. BAILLIE reminded the house that the Govern ment took 12 months to consider the present measure, and afterwards produced a very imperfect plan, and had not as yet decided on the details. The measure proposed was one fraught with the most galling injustice to the officers of the Indian army. He (Mr. Baillie) believed his right hon. friend the Secretary of State for India would not willingly be a party to it, but they would rather see the question settled by that house than leave it in the hands of any Government. The expense of conveying troops to India was enormous, and while there they cost double that of a native force. Colonel Tulloh, an officer of ex perience, in his evide ce before the commission for the organisation of the army, was of opinion that 80,000 Euro pean troops sent out to India would cost £150,000, exclu sive of the officers, whose expenses were enormous. The system was a most dofeetiva one in relation to the number of men in the service; and if the Indian Council were to re monstrate against it, the right hon. gentleman the Secretary of State for India would say—" Mind your own business, and do not interfere in matters which do not concern you." The country was fixed with a sum of fifteen millions a-year for the maintenance of the army, yet there was no depart ment worse managed than the War Department. But if the matter rested there it would not be so serious ; it was now proposed to unite the Ordnance with the War Depart ment. Could anything be more injudicious ? Let the house reflect upon what it was proposed to do by the proposed scheme. It was proposed to add 80,000 men to the army, which, with the men stationed in the colonies, would amount to about 115,000 men ; and to keep up a standing army of that kind they should keep up at least 35,000 men a-year in this country. The result of the proposed change would in time, he believed, be that regiments should in future, as formerly, remain twenty-five years in India, to which even a system of negro slavery would be preferable. He asked the house to reject this bill, as a measure by no means suited as a remedy for the requirements of the case. And the house should bear in mind that the most distin guished Indian officers, and Queen's officers, and states men, and well-informed men at home, were in favour of the maintenance in India of a local European army. Then, looking to the general officers who commanded the Indian army. He would take Sir William Gomm for instance. Sir William Gomm was,Com nander in-Chief of the army in Bengal, and when he was retiring from his command he issued an address paying the highest tribute to the army which he had commanded. He would take another authority—a distinguished Indian officer—Sir John Lawrence. That gallant officer passed the highest eulogium on the Indian army, and recommended that it should be maintained as a local force. He might also refer to the authority of Sir James Outram on the question; and it was well known that the Duke of Wellington entertained the highest opinion of the local army in India. The hon. gentleman here read an extract from the written opinion of the Duke of Wellington of the Indian army, in which he stated that the men wore brave, and that there was no in stance wherein any one of them had disgraced himself in the field. It was clearly fhe opinion of the Duko of Wel lington therefore that frequent changes of the troops were not desirable. The house would no doubt be disposed to attach a high value to the opinion of Lord Clyde, but he much feared that that great and gallant officer had allowed himself to be prejudiced by those around him. If Lord Clyde had written home that he would not entrust a divi sion to an Indian officer, he must have done so in ignorance of what Indian officers had done. But he could not have forgotten the names of Sir James Outram and Sir Archdale Wilson, who had accomplished the most astounding results, nor could he have forgotten those either of Nicholson or of Hobson. (Hear.) The question was one, however, to be solved with calmness and deliberation and a due regard to the mutual interests of England and of India, with a view to the permanent welfare of our Indian empire, and in that spirit he trusted it would be approached. Sir H. VERNEY said that having come to a conclusion directly contrary to that of the right hon. gentleman the Secretary of State for India, he desired to state the grounds upon which his opinions were-founded. He would ask the house, in the first place, whether this question was to be looked at as a question of patronage simply, without refe rence to the great interests of the Indian army. One of the principal questions involved in the subject before them was that connected with English officers who had taken service with the Indian Government. Mr. Wilson expressed his entire concurrence in the opinion of the President of the Council in reference to English officers; yet he was by no means disposed to disparage the native army; and he forci bly pointed out the contrast between the manner of treatmen of officers of the Queen's army and the Company's officers. The selection of proper officers for service in India wasamost important consideration, for the treatment of the natives by the officers was a fertile source of discontent among them. When Sir W. Peel was asked his opinion concern ing the cause of the mutiny, he replied that he saw enough to cause a mutiny every day in the want of consideration with which the young officers generally treated the natives. (llear.) As regarded the term of service, and the cost of sending men home, the house should remember that it would not be a question of sending home a whole regiment, but of sending home every man as soon as his time of service was over. Ent er t a i n i ng t h ose opinions,_ he_ felt it his duty to give to the bill all the opposition in his power. Sir J. ELPHINSTONE said in India, the local army was the link of connexion between the line and the native army, and as we could not do away entirely with the latter we should preserve that necessary link of connexion. Would you depend upon mercenary troops to supply any deficiency in this country's resources ? He thought that would be an unsafe forco to place reliance upon. For these reasons he would cordially support the amendment. Mr. VANSITTART said the present time was the most favourable opportunity for amalgamating the two forces into one. Many eminent men were of that opinion, and advocated the fusion of the two armies. Being convinced that legislation was necessary, he should, in accordance with the recommendation of the right hon, and gallant mem ber for Huntingdon, vote for the second reading of the bill. Sir WM. RUSSELL was of opinion that the bill was a good one, because it would have the effect of acclimatising their troops, and making them acquainted with the habits of the people of India. As to the expense, it had very little weight with him, because he believed the ad vantages to be derived would far outweigh any such con sideration. In his opinion, 50,000 European soldiers and 50,000 natives would hold that country against the world. As to the officers of the Indian army, they were, to his own knowledge, a highly educated and distinguished body, with who: those of the Royal army would be glad to associate. Sir M. FARQUHAR thought that the Council for In dia ought to have been consulted with respect to the plan now proposed, bectrj t se they were not only men of great ex perienco:of India, but of European renown. Re could not understand why it was the right hon. gentleman brought it forward ; because, so late:as the autumn of last year he was entirely opposed to it. He did not mean to institute a comparison between the local army and the regiments of the line; but he asked, was it desirable to do away with the local army, ewi amalgamate them with the regiments of the line ? In his opinion it was by no means desirable to effect such an amalgamation, Colonel PERCY HERBERT said the bill was one which would tend to consolidate more firmly our empire in India, by preventing combinations among the governed, or at least dealing with them more easily if they should occur, and for these reasons he should vote against the amend- Mr. C. BUXTON said if they passed this measure at all they should have an assurance from the Government that the appointment of officers should not be left in the power of an individual, thousands of miles distant, but in the hands of the Governor-General, who was responsible for the government and the welfare of India. (Hear, hear.) Mr. HORSMAN said the house had a right to complain of the course adopted by the promoters of this bill, in not laying before them all the papers and information upon the subject ; and they had a still stronger right to complain that the Government should attempt to make so great, impor tant, and vital a change by a vague abstract resolution He did not believe that in the whole history of Parliament there was any other instance of Ministers of the Crdwn making such a propcsal. Because the question was one of great difficulty—because it was one with which the Secretary for India had been unable to grapple because it was one on which he was entirely beaten—because he knew he could not devise a measure for carrying out the change, the right hon. gentle.. man therefore said, " I will shirk the House of Commons, I will dodge the House of Commons, I will degrade the House of Commons into abandoning its functions, and I will get it to pass an abstract resolution." By that means all the difficult and delicate complications on which depend the peace and the safety of the Indian Empire were to be entrusted to the legislation and the discretion of the Horse Guards—(hear)—which of all the departments of the State was the most incompetent to deal with a question of mixed military and political institutions, because it had a direct interest in every change which the bill proposed to make. (Hear.) Two years ago Parliament had passed an act transferring the Government of India from the Company to the Crown. It was a hasty, ill matured, and incomplete measure. (Hear, hear.) At that time Government found it impossible to give them any information upon this point of the organisation of the army, upon which the whole transfer of power depended, (Meer, hear.) The Secretary of State for India in introducing the measure had told them that it was all contained in one resolution, but that in the execution a great many details would have to be con sidered, and tbat if hon. members would look into the papers on the table, they would find a letter addressed to himself by an eminent Indian officer, in which he recom mended that those details should be referred to a military commission. The right hon. gentleman did not even tell them whether it was his intention to adopt that recom mendation. He told them nothing, but they were to pass a vague general resolution. But let them suppose that this novel method of dealing with difficult, intricate, and important subjects had been adopted earlier in the ses sion, how much time would have been saved—whether beneficially or not was another question. Suppose the noble lord the Foreign Secretary had framed his Reform Bill on the same model, and simply said in his bill, " Whereas it is expedient the Parliament of Great Britain should be reformed, be it enacted therefore that it shall be reformed." (Hear, hear, and laughter.) He supposed in that case the details as to the removal of the franchise and the redistribution of seats, all the real and practical ques tions, would have been referred to a commission of old Whig gentlemen who would have settled them to their own satis faction, if not to that of the country. In this case, the Sec retary for India having shown the helpless and almost culous ignorance in which he was with regard to what would follow, was content to throw everything over to a commis sion, that commission having the power to revolutionise the whole GovernMent of India. What ground had been assigned for this great change ? The Governor-General was against it. Lord Clyde and Sir W. Mansfield would be found, in their earlier letters on the subject, to be most decidedly against it. The late Secretary for India was op posed to the measure, and the Council of India was also against the change. Upon what new and strong ground, then, did the right hon. gentleman base a measure to which he himself was opposed last year, when he brought forward and carried the act he now proposed to repeal ? He (Mr. Horsman) put it to the house, if the right hon. gentleman had not made the mutiny of the local European army as the sole cause for this change of opinion, and the sole justifica tion for introducing this bill, which would establish in India not only a divided authority) but a double Government of the worst character. One of the greatest and wisest men connected with Indian affairs, Lord Metcalfe, gave this warning :—" Our hold of India is so precarious that a little mismanagement may endanger it, and our downfall may be short work. When that commences it will be rapid, and the world will wonder more at our loss than of our con quest of the country." (Hear, hear.) If to-night the house adopted the exceptional proceeding ',proposed by the right hon. gentleman it would be the first fatal step to wards the accomplishment of that wise prediction. (Cheers.) Mr. S. HERBERT said his right hon. friend who had just sat down was not prepared to offer any opinion as to the policy or impolicy of amalgamating the local with the Imperial army of India, and yet he complained of the Go vernment for introducing a measure in which a decided opinion was expressed. He said the Government had not given sufficient information ; he went further, he said the Government had suppressed information. (Hear.) The Government had put on the tables of the house the papers moved for in February this year. They were presented on March the 22d, and printed on the 23d. That did not show any desire on the part of the Government to withhold in formation. An Hon. MEMBER—Where are the papers? Mr. S. HERBERT—Ask the officers of the house. The Government have laid them on the table and ordered them to be printed, and if hon. members have not received them the - Government are not responsible for that. (Oh.) Last year a pledge was given that this subject should be brought under the consideration of the House of Commons, There- fore, there was time enough for consideration, and the Government could not be fairly accused of taking the house by surprise or passing the bill by a smuggling process. Why, if th e G overnmen t h a d any suchin tention, they could have effected their object without coming to the House of Commons at all. But the Go vernment thought it would not be proper to make the alterations proposed by this bill without taking the opinion of the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) The right honourable gentleman said that they were going to incur heavy expenditure for India, although it was a fact that that expenditure must be paid, not out of the taxes of this country, but India. Now, he could not see how that was to be done, for in India they could refuse to pay, and they could refuse to accept any officer they might not approve of. The whole thing and power were in their hands ; and the Horse Guards had no power whatever over the outlay, not even to the amount of a single sixpence. The right hon. gentleman said that they were in this country going to vote half a million of money for barracks in India; but that was not the fact, and he could not con ceive how any man could have laid hold of any such absurd idea as that. (Hear, and laughter.) What additional power had the Governor-General got in this matter? Not one jot. If the right hon. gentleman were to write to the Secre tary of State for India, or to the Horse Guards, on such a subject, he would probably get a reprimand. The Governor- General was a despot in India ; and he must continue to be so if he intended to preserve India and to maintain their power. He confessed, that of all the subjects which had over come under his consideration, he had never found one which was so beset with difficulty and in which he had so much trouble and anxiety in coming to a conclusion. H e said, frankly and solemnly, that his bias in the first instanc e was in favour of a local army—(hear)—which he believed would sup/Ay the public service, civil and military, with better and more qualified men than the Queen's army. l le believed that it was important that for the preservation of the Indian Government we should have men of that class. He had tried to look in an independent and impartial manner at this subject, and had consulted authorities which were not likely to be biassed in their feelings upon it. His right hon. friend opposite read a letter the other night from Lord Mel ville, in which he stated that the opinion of that distinguished man was in favour of a local army. Now, he (Mr. S. Her bert) would also mu' opinions expressed by the Dukeof Wel lington of a contrary tendency. Ho found that in 1828 he expressed opinions about the local army which were not so favourable as hon. gentlemen supposed, The right hon. gen tleman here quoted from the evidence given by the Duke of Wellington before a Parliamentary committee, wherein his grace said that it would never answer to make the Queen's officers a colonial corps, and that there was a great difference between them and the officers of the local army. He en treated the committee to lay aside the plan which they pro , posed altogether. And with regard to the local army, he said that w h a t ever the description of troops, their efficiency depended much upon the character and bearing of their offi cers. His right hon. friend also quoted Lord Clyde as in favour of a local army. Now, that was not so. For whatever Lord Clyde's opinion might formerly have been, he certainly had changed his mind. A great many hon. gentlemen had spoken with great lightness of the mutiny ; but those who originated the mutiny had not themselves taken any active part in carrying it out. And one noble lord who took part in the debate said the mutiny was exceptional, But how could it be exceptional ? It was not prudent to speak lightly of mutinies by armed men. He was not going now to enter into considerations of the jealousies which existed between the local army and the Queen's army. The question had been fully discussed. He had heard that night reasons against the amalgamation of the local army with the Queen's army, and of the jealousies that existed between them. No doubt if they looked calmly into both, they would find that neither was free from faults. The question of discipline had been referred to, and upon that part of the subject he would read a statement to the house from experienced authority. The right hon. gentleman here read an extract to the effect that the Indian officer had to deal with a class of men who were apparently the most docile soldiers they could have ; but that was not the school in which an officer of the Queen's troops could be trained. They had to deal with a race of Anglo-Saxons, who were altogether different in their feelings and habits. The good feeling that subsisted between the officers and non-commissioned officers of the British army was remarkable. True, the officers did not trust everything to them, but they reposed the greatest confidence in them, and the interests and comfort of the non-commissioned offi cers were well looked after by their officers. The most per fect friendship was kept up between them, and if the non commissioned officer became ill, his officer looked after his comfort, tried to alleviate his condition, and even his offi cer's wife did not fail to feel an interest in him, and to have him paid proper attention to. (Hear.) But, if English officers were not able, as was 'alleged, to discipline the na tives, that was the natural result of the system. There were various causes in operation in the Indian army which tended to relax discipline. Sir Hugh Rose, for example, in a letter written by him to the Adjutant-General, said, that 96 officers were then serving away from the staff of their regiments. Now, how was it possible that discipline could be maintained in anything like an efficient state under such a system? He says, that those officers are drafted away to fill civil employments, and that the Postmaster-General is a medical officer, and the best men were those generally taken away from their regiments. It had been said that the Queen's officers would never consent to take the places of the officers of the local army ; but, with the inducements of the service they would, without doubt, not hesitate to seek service in India. The right hon. gentleman here referred to a letter written by Lord. Canning, in relation to the local army, and said that great stress had been laid upon that letter by hon. gentlemen in the course of the debate, as indicating that Lord Canning was not in favour of the abolition of the local army. Now, as he (Mr. Sidney Herbert) read that document, he found many passages in it of a qualified tendency. The right hon. gentleman here quoted several passages from the letter of Lord Canning, and argued that they showed he was not disposed to view unfavourably an amalgamation of the local aray with the Queen's regiments of the line. He the n advertedro a letter which he had seen in that day's Times, from General Hancock, proposing a scheme for the disbandment of the local army, and a mode of amalgamating them with the Queen's forces ; but he must say that he could not approve of the plan proposed by the gallant general, and viewed it as one that would be at.. tended with much expense, and that would fail to give satis faction. Sir Charles Trevelyan had expressed an opinion favourable to the impression that the officers of the Queen's forces of the line would speedily apply themselves to the study of the native languages, and fit themselves for native command. Others however said the Queen's officers would never apply themselves to the study of the native lan guages. Now, what had been the system which had been carried on ? Ho asked a gentleman who had recently come from India, if he had formed an opinion on the subject of a local army, and he said "The opinion I have formed is this. So long as you have a local army having a monopoly of all places that were high and valuable, so long will that army ' be held in high estimation ; but if the officers of the Queen's ' army only once found those lucrative employments open to ' them, they will speedily evince a desire for service in India. The right hon. gentleman here quoted from a letter written ' by Colonel Durant in 185). The hon. baronet behind him had spoken of the advantages of a local army, as it was not subjected to the drawback of not being acclima tised, but the authorities were against the oonclusion of the ' hon. baronet. He then quoted from statistics to support the view in opposition to the hon. baronet's opinion. The posi ' tion of the troops in India was frequently so different that it was very difficult to institute a satisfhctory comparison. He admitted, however, that upon the whole the health of the local troops was superior to that of the European. Then it had been argued that England might be so denuded of troops as to be unable to furnish the necessary force to India :—but it should be remembered that during the mutiny the great and successful exertions which were made to send the reinforcements to India, furnished the best answer to that objection. He now came to a question which was raised by the hon. member for Stroud, as to the patron age to be given to the Horse Guards, but he was entirely mistaken in forming that opinion. The rights of Indian officers were guaranteed by act of Parliament until the present men died out. It was not intended in the case, then, of the Indian officers, to make any change in the present system. It was necessary to retain a certain number of regiments where purchase would not be allowed. The Duke of Cambridge said, and he knew something of the matter, "if there be any increase of patronage, for God's sake do not force it upon me." But he (Mr. S. Herbert) could not for a moment be led to the conclusion that the changes proposed were made with a view to a question of patronage, either by the Secretary of State or by the Indian Council. It was for the Secretary of State and the Council to recommend appointments to the Commander in -Chief, and he hoped that would satisfy his right hon. friend that he was in error in the conclusion he had arrived at as to the increase of patronage to be given to the Horse Guards. An objectionhad been raised that patronage was placed in the hands of the Council which ought to be long to the Crown, but that objection was disposed of by the provision which was made in the act that the patronage of the Council was to be subject to the approval of the Secre tary of State. The noble lord the member for King's Lynn (Lord Stanley) had stated that it was a matter of policy to endeavour to attract men of high birth to enter the service, but he (Mr. S. Herbert) thought there was no reason why they should endeavour to hold out attractions to that par ticular class to enter the army. It was quite sufficient that they could get good officers. He had shown that members of the Indian Council and the Indian Government were against having a preponderating local army, and he thought it a wise opinion. It was said that the Queen's army would mutiny under circumstances such as occurred to other forces in India. It was no such thing, and he would give them an example. Some time ago a detachment of that army was ordered to China, and by some inexplicable mistake, the officers were paid the usual allowances, but the men received nothing. Well, did they mutiny ? No such thing. They appealed to their officers, who told them some mistake had been committed, which they would rectify, and having con fidence in them, they left the matter to them, and were satisfied. That was the manner in which the Queen's troops acted, and not like the local force in India, which deserted them in their hour of need. Mr. RICH moved the adjournment of the debate. Lord PALMERSTON hoped the house would decide on the question that evening, and not adjourn it to a future day. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY thought an adjournment ought ,o take place, the more especially as he had reason to know that the Indian Council were against the Government on this question. He believed the house was bound to see that justice was done to the 6,000 officers and 15,000 Eu ropean troops which had been in the Company's service, and would be seriously injured by this bill. The house then divided, when the numbers were— For the adjournment ....... . .......... 83 Against it .......................... 262 Majority ...................... —179 Mr. SEYMOUR hoped the Government would not press the bill on in the absence of necessary papers, and if they did he should move the adjournment. Lord PALMERSTON hoped the hon. member would not persevere. There were other stages of the bill in which members would have an opportunity of addressing the house, and he hoped the bill would be allowed to proceed. Mr. HORSMAN said papers had been moved for on the 17th February, which were not delivered until March, and other documents were wanted. Under these circumstances he hoped an adjournment would take place. Sir J. PAT INGTON was for supporting the Govern ment, but he thought under the circumstances they ought to consent to an adjournment. Cel. SYKES moved for documents on the subject which had not been as yet delivered. Lord PALMERSTON said that the papers which were in the hands of the printer could not be ready by to-morrow, and he hoped there was no desire to postpone the bill until that period when the House of Lords had determined they would not enter upon the consideration of bills sent up from this house, A division then took place upon the question " that the house do now adjourn"-- For the motion 5l Against it 229 Majority .. Mr. HENNESSY moved that the debate be now ad journed. Lord PALMERSTON said he would consent to the adjournment of the debate to this day. (No, no.) Gen. PEEL t h oug ht t h ere would b e no advantage i n an adjournment of the debate for a few hours, as the papers e would not then b e rea dy. H e recomm ended thatth amoMment should be withdrawn, on the understanding that before the next stage of the bill was taken all the papers required would be produced. Palmerston, Mr. Hursman, and Mr. Mills took part, th e After some conversation, in which Sir C. Wood, Lord house again divided on the question of the adjournment of the debate, when there appeared — For the adjournment 9 10 Against —147 Majority against Mr. MILLS moved the adjournment of the house, thmathhereN,v but they as prepa re d to remain n d there A a l‘ s iN long S T a s ° any a should recollect that there was to be a morning sitti ng that day, PE R s other i em and they ought to consult the convenience of the Speaker. He recommended the house to assent t o th e adjournment of the debate. The motion for the adjournment of the house waq with drawn, and the debate was adjourned to this day. Several hon. members pressed upon the Government ti importance of doing all that lay in their power to have the papers placed in the hands of members as soon as possible. They were most essential to a complete and proper conside ration of the entire question. MAIL PACKET SERVICE. Mr. LAING asked the house to go into committee of supply for the purpose of taking a vote for the mail packet service, exclusive of the Galway packet service. Colonel Dunne, Colonel Dickson, Mr. Hennessy, Mr. Roebuck, and Mr. Williams objected, and the consideration of the vote in supply was postponed until this day. LOCAL TAXATION RETURNS BILL. This bill was read a second time. ANNUITY TAX ABOLITION (EDINBURGH) BILL. This bill as amended was recommitted and considered. UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGE ESTATES BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. ISLE OF MAN HARBOUR BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. PROFESSIONAL OATHS ABOLITION BILL. The house went into committee on this bill, but Lord E. THYNNE objected to the consideration of the measure at so late an hour—two o'clock. He moved that the chairman report progress. Mr. STEUART supported the motion, which was agreed to. The house adjourned at ten minutes past two. ORDERS OF REMOVAL. Mr. WHALLEY moved for a return, made up to 1,860, showing the number of orders of removal from parishes, signed by Justices, and executed in England and Wales (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 436, of Session 1856). FOREIGN AFFAIRS. Sir R. PEEL gave notice that, on the motion for adjourn ment to-morrow, he would draw attention to the proposed annexation of Sicily to Piedmont, and ask whether Govern ment would afford any information as to what might be the demand of France in consequence thereof. He would also ask whether any intimation had been conveyed to the Sar dinian Government that the unconstitutional policy pur sued by the King of Sardinia was viewed s ith disapproba tion by this country. DESPATCH OF M. THOUVENEL. Sir R. PEEL inquired of the noble lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs when the despatch of M. Thouvenel would be submitted to the house. Lord J. RUSSELL said that the despatch alluded to would be laid on the table in the course of next week. EUROPEAN FORCES (INDIA) BILL. On the motion for the second reading of this bill, Mr. A. MILLS said it was most desirable that the ques• tion raised with respect to this subject should be settled The matter at issue between those favourable and those opposed to this measure was whether they should continue an ancient military machinery or not, and one that had rendered essential service in moments of peril, and to which this country was indebted for the dominion of India, without providing any adequate substitute. The abolition of this local military force, as proposed by the bill, would have the effect of burdening the re venue of India with an annual impost of £200,000. It should be recollected also that the mortality amongst natives of this country was much greater during the first five years of their residence in India than during sub sequent years, so that there was the strongest ground for maintaining an acclimatised army. Having cited the authority of several military writers in support of his views, the hon. member proceeded to con tend that, on political grounds, the proposed alteration was most inexpedient. They could not argue from analogy in regard to India, because our relation with that ' country was altogether different to those with other coun tries. He admitted that a speedy settlement of this ques tion was of the first importance, and if ho thought this bill would have that effect he would abandon his oppo sition, but he denied that it would produce such a result. He considered this bill - was a hasty and ill-considered at tempt to determine a question that, fora considerable time, had occupied the attention of those best ac quainted with the subject without any satisfactory solution of the problem involved being obtained. He repeated that the bill proposed to abolish one system with out the slightest substitute, and that it intended to violate the rights and privileges guaranteed to the officers of the Indian army by the 56th. 57th, and 58th sections of the Indian Bill, passed in 1858. His firm conviction was that this bill would do far more injury than any good it could possibly effect, and he denounced it as a dangerous and most unconstitutional measure. He concluded by moving that the bill be read a second time that day three months. Sir T. COLEBROKE said that if this question was one that merely affected the organisation of troops in India he would not have taken an active part in this debate, not withstanding that he was in favour of the maintenance of a local army in India. He considered, however, that the matter at issue was far more important, and was intimately connected with the financial position of India, as well as with the Indian patronage of this country. It involved further Parliamentary and political interests whose import ance could not be exaggerated. If the question was merely whether they should have a force composed solely of royal troops in India, he admitted that he would be in favour of such a proposition, but the measure did not make any such proposition. He contended that, on the ground of economy, it was most desirable to continue the local force, because if they adopted a different course they would have to maintain their home garrisons in this country to enable them to afford the necessary military reliefs to India. He strongly objected to the increased patronage which the measure would confer on the military adminis tration. The bill in the outset proceeded on the principle that it was necessary to maintain a European force of 80,000 men in India, in order to secure the tran quillity of that country, which was illustrated by the recent mutiny of the native troops. Circumstances, however, had led to that mutiny which were not likely to occur again, as it was not to be supposed that this country would repeat the folly of confiding too largely to the local force, and that there would be an efficient number of garrisons of British troops maintained in India. However, there was a large margin between the force in the garrisons at the time of the mutiny and that increase now proposed. Besides the advance in military science, and the extension of railways in India rendered unnecessary the maintenance of so large a force as that proposed. As to the causes of the mutiny Lord Clyde and Sir James Outram respectively stated that the grossest exaggerations of facts had been made ; under those circumstances he (Sir T. Colbrooke) thought the house were entitled to some further information before they proceeded further with the bill. Although it was ad mitted that the discipline of the troops of the local force was not, in some respect, equal to that of the troops of the l'ne, yet that was an evil which could be remedied with outs applying this extreme measure. The gallant gr.eral who was about to succeed Lord Clyde brought Crge and sweeping charges against the whole army of India, both the local forces and those of the line, and was very severe both on officers and men; but, admitting the correctness of his allegations, it was not likely that any ef fective remedy could be obtained by the proposed change. h S i i s r s li ta . t ß em os e e nt t ad ha e t a th can ore di w d o c id onmf d e b ss e io a n, g i r n ea t t h d e e b a e l g o i f n p n ri in v g at o e f v i n o t l e v r e e d s . t bro Thereug h t w t o e r b e e a fdyo r s __uw w r a i t t shd h iet ffo r Be e ur g reni a nti r . itt d sehi ei all t t t hna h ger e sayel p , a a i ,r t im r ao systems,idnerasaguse,naadinnneddr fßo o u m r b d a i different r en ct The criffi ni cu an it one head. The events of the last few years showed the im possibility of uniting, under one head, all those forces. But the experience of Sir Hugh Rose showed what could be done by a local force. He commanded the Bombay column, and with the assistance of that army he advanced from Bom bay into the territory of Bengal, and powerfully assisted in suppressing the revolt in that part of the country. If with these facts, so patent to him, he supported the proposal to place all the forces under one system, implicit reliance should not be placed on his opinion. The evidence of recent events was quite opposed to such a proposal. Upon the grounds he had stated he deprecated the change which the Government proposed to make in the bill before the house. Mr. J. G. BARING said with reference to the charge which had been made against the Secretary of State for India, of his not having consulted the Council of India, he would observe that, in the papers which had been laid be fore the house, they would find the opinions which were ex pressed by the members of the council on the subject in in question. He, therefore, regretted to hear what had been said by an hon. member about the Council of India being a mockery. (Hear, hear.) When the opinions of the coun cil had bee* given it mattered not in what way the opinions were taken. The noble lord (Lord Stanley) who had appointed the members of council, had pursued a similar course to that which had been followed by the present Se • PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION. HOUSE OF COMMONS—RINE 28. EUROPEAN FORCES (INDIA) BILL. Order for second reading read ; motion made, and question proposed, " That the bill b e now read a second time :" Amendment proposed, to leave out the word " now," and at the end of the question to add the words " upon this day three months :"—Question proposed, " That the word ' new' stand part of the question :"—The house divided; Ayes 83, Noes, 262. AYES-83. Adam,W. P. Geor ge , J o h n Parker, Major W. Adderley, C. B. Grogan, Sir Edward Repton, G. W. J. Astell, J. 11. Hamilton, Major Ridley, Sir M. W. Baillie, H. J. Hassard, M. D. Roebuck, J. A. Baring, A. H. Hennessy, J. P. Rowley, Hon. R. T. Baring, Thomas Hope, G. W. Salt, Thomas Beecroft, G. S. Hopwood, J. T. Selater-Booth, G. Bernard, W. S. Borstal], T. B. Seymour, Digby Blackburn, P. Horsman. E. Smith, J. B. Bridges, Sir 8., Bt. Humberstone, P. S. bmith, Abel Brooks, R, K ennard, C. S mith, P. Bruen, Henry Kinnaird, Hon. A. Spooner, R. Buxton, C. Knatchbull, W Stanhope, J. B. Cartwright, Col. H. Knight, F. Stirling, Wm. Cave, S. Lidd e l l, Hon. H. G G. Steuart, A. Cayley, E. S. Longfield, Robert Taylor, Colonel Codrington, Sir W. Lovaine, Lord Tollemache, J. H. Colebrooke, Sir T.E. Lyall, G. Tomline, G. Cubitt, Aid. Lyon, Hon. F. Trefusis, Hon. C.IL Dodson, John G. M'Cann, J. Vance, John Du Cane, Chas. Malins, R., Verney, Sir Harry Dunne, Col. Marjoribanks, D. C. Whalley, G. H. Egerton, Sir P. Miller, T. Willoughby, Sir H. Estcourt, S. Mills, A. Woods, Henry Farquhar, Sir M. Mowbray, Rt. Hn. J. Wynne, W. W. IL Fellowes, Edward Mure, David Finlay, A. S. Newdegate, C. N. TELLERS, Gallwey, Sir W. P. Pakington, Sir J. S Sykes, Col. W. H. Gard, R. S. Papillon, P. O. Rich, H. NOES-261 Acton, Sir J. Forster, Charles North, F. Agar-Ellis, Hon. L. Foster, W. 0. O'Connell, D. Agnew, Sir A. Fortescue, Hon. D. Ogilvy, Si r J. Alcock, T. Fortescue, C. S. Onslow, Guildford Arnott, Sir J. Freeland, H. W. d H. Ashley, Lord Galway, Viscount Padmore, R. Atherton, W. Garnett, W. J. Paget, C. Ar+nn, A. S. Gavin, Major Pag - et, Lord A. Bagwell, J. Gibson, T. M. Paget, Lord C. E. Baines, E. Gifford, Earl of Pakenham, Col. Baring, Thos. Geo. Gilpin, Colonel Yalmerston, Vied. Beach, W. W. B. Gladstone, W. g. Patten, J. W. Beale, Samuel Glyn, G. C. Paxton, Sir J. Beamish, F. B. G o dd ard, A., L. Peacocke, G. M. Beaumont, W. B. Goldsmid„ Sir F. Peel, Gen. Bellew, R. M. Gore., 5. R. 0. Peel, F. Bentinck, G.C. GOWer, F. L. P e t o , Si r M . Berkeley, F. Greenwood, J. Pevensey, Viscount Bethell, Sir R. Gregory, W. H. Pilkington, Jamea Black, Adam Greg - son, S. Pinney, Wm. Blencowe, J. G. Greville, Col. F. Portman W. H. B. Bonham-Carter, .1* Grey Rt. Hn. Sir G. Po w y s , L . P . Bouverie, E. P. Griffith, CD. Pritchard, John Bouverie, P. P. Grosvenor, Earl Proby, Lord, G. L. Bowyer, W. Gurdon, B. Pugh, D. (Mont.) Brady, John Hadfield, Geo. Puller, C. W. Bramston, T. W. Hanbury, R., jun. Redmond, J. E. Bright, J. Handley, John Ricardo, J. L. Brooklehurst, John Hankey, Thomson Ricardo, 0. Brown, James Hayter, Sir Wm. Ridley, G. Browne, Lord J. T. Headlam, Thos. E Robartes, T. J . A . Bruce, Lord E. A. Heathcote, G. H. Robertson, D. Bruce, H. A. Henley, Lord Rothschild,BaronL: Buckley, Maj.-Gen. Herbert, H. A. Roue W. W. Bulkeley, Sir R., Bt. H er b ert, S. Russell, Hastings Buller, Sir A. Herbert, CoL P. E. Russell, F. W. Butt, Isaac Hervey, Lord A Russell, Sir Win. Caird, James Heygate, Sir F. Salomons,AlderMan Calcutt, F. Hill, Hon. R. Salt, Titus Calthorpe, F. H. Holland, E. Scott, Sir W. Cardwell, Rt. Hn. E. Hood, Sir A. Sel wyn C P. Carnegie, Hon. C. Hornby, . Selwyn, C. J- Cavendish, Vist. Howard,Hon C. Seymer, Cavendish, Hon. W. Howard, Lord E. G. SeymouSi M. Cavemlsh, Lord G. Hutt, W. Shafto, R. D. Cholmeley, Sir M. Ingham, R. Sheridan, H. B. Churchill, Lord A. Jackson, W. Sibthorp, Major Clay, James James, Edwin Slaney, R. A. Clifford, C. C. Jermyn, Earl Somerset, Col. B. Clifford, H. M. Jervoise, Sir J. Stacpoole, W. Clive, George Johnstone, Sir J. Stanley, 0. Close, 31. C. Kendall, N. Stuart, Major W. Cobbett, J. M. Kershaw, J. Stuart, Col. Cogan, W. H. Kinglake, A. W. Sturt, H. G. Cole, Hon. H. A. Kingscote, Lt.-COL Sturt, Capt. C. N. Cole, J. L. Laing, S. Talbot, C. R. M. 05wper, Hon. W.F. Langston, J. H. Thornhill, W. P. Corry, H. T. an Craufurd, E. H. J LLanfgnaon, H Lord E. Thynne, Lord H. j. . G. Thynne, Crawford, R. W. Lawson, W. Tite, Wm. Crossley, Frank Leatham, E. Trollope, Sir John Dalglish, Robert Legh, W. Turner, J. A. Dalkeith, Earl of Lennox, Lord G. C. Vandeleur, Col. Deasy, Rickard Lewis, Sir G.C., Bt. Vansittart, Win. Deedes, Wm. Lindsay, W. S. Villiers, Rt. Hon. e. Denman, G. Locke, John Vivian, H. H. Dent, John Dent Locke, Jos. Waldron, L. Dickson, Col. Lockhart, A. E. Walker, James it, Douglas, Sir C. Lowe, Rt. Hon. R. Walpole, S. H. Duff, M. E. Lysley, W. Walter, John Duff, Major. Mackie, J. , Warner, Edward Dunkcllin, Lord Maguire, J. F. Watkins, J. L. Y. Egerton, W. March, Earl of Way, Arthur E. Einlyn, Viscount Marshall, W. Wemyss, J. Enfield, Viscount Martin, P. W. Western, T. S. Ennis, John Martin, J. Westhead, B. Esmonde, John Massey, W. N. Whitbread, S. Euston, Earl of Matheson, A. Willcox, B. M. Evans, T. W. Mitchell, T. A. Williams, W. Ewart, William Moncreiff, J. Winnington, Sir T. Ewart, J. C. Monsell, Rt. Hn. W. Wood, Rt Hn. WC. Ewing, H. E. C. Monson, W. J. Wrightson, W. B. Farrer, James Montgomery, Sir G. Wyld, James Fenwick, Henry Morris, D. Wyvill, M. Ferguson, R. Mostyn, Hon. T. E. Filmer, Sir E. Napier, Sir C. Fitzwilliam, C. W. No e l , G . J. TELLERS. Foley, J. H. Norris, J. T. Brand, H. B. Foljambe, F. J. S. North, Col. Dunbar, Sir Wm. LOU NTRY MARKETS. MANCHESTER,.—JUNE 28. A moderate attendance, and English and foreign wheat brought quite as much money, with a fair demand. Oats and oatmeal as before. Flour a slow sale, and something in favour of buyers. Indian ernm in better request, at Is per qr. decline. BIRAIINQUAM—JUNE 2S. A limited supply of English wheat, but sales could only be had on lower terms. Barley remains barely unaltered in value. Beans less in request. IDat'a rather cheaper, prices were obtained. MELTON MOWBTAAY—JuNE 26. There was a moderato show of wheat to-day, with a fair business at the annexed prices :—White wheat, new, 54s Od to 58s Od ; red, 48s Od to s`2s per 36 stone ; barley in small supply, at 38s to 43s fo'r malting, and 32s to 36s per qr. for grinding ; oats, 283 to 36s Od per 24 stone ; beans, 50s to 54s for old; new, 4`35 per 38 at. P LYM'OUTII—JuNz 26. Busin&s ware dull to-day, and prices for oats unaltered; barley scarce, and at late prices ; wheats is lower. A fair attendance at market. The quotations are--English white wheat, 62s to 635; red, 59s to 60s per qr ; French do., 56e to 57s ; grinding barley, 32s to 34s • oats, 24a to 26s ; and flour, fine, 43a to 44s 6tl; seconds, 41s to 425. EDINBURGH GRAIN_JUNB 27. Wheat on the top 3s Od down average Os 2d up. Barley on the top le Od up ........ average 1s lld up. Oats on the top Os 6d up.... ..... average Os 2d up. Beau;; on the top Os 6d up average 2s lid up. Averages per Imperial quarter. Wheat.... Barley 0at5.,..., Beans Total Supply and Sales. Wheat ... 895 qrs Sold 70 qrs 8ar1ey........ 97 qrs Sold '6O qrs Oats Bl5 qrs Sold - 545 qrs Beans 9 qrs Sold 8 gra DERBY SMITHFIELD—JUNE 26. There was a moderate supply of fat beasts, but a great part were only of the middling sort; the best quality were in request, and sold well. The supply of sheep larger, but no advance in price was obtained. Fat and store calves more plentiful. Pigs were plentiful, and Fa demand. Beef Bd to 81d 1 Veal . 7d to nd Mutton .. Lamb 9d to 91d Rough fat, 4s 9d per stone. Hides, 3111 to ad ; calf skins, lid to 61d. BIRTHS. Hir on the 27th inst., at So uthampton, the wife of C omm ander H. w Hill, R.N., o f a son. m oofsasEs . o —O . n the 28th inst., the ladyof Forbes Moss*, Esq., Sl a RPE.—On the 24th in s t., a t Norwood, Mrs. Sharpe, of' A daughter. SHAW.—On the 27th irtst., at novereonrt, Essex, the wife. of Commander Shavi, R.N., of a daughter. GA ARRIAGE S. MBLE—PRATT.- -On the 27th inst., at Cambridge,. Francis Gamble, M.A., of Gainsb3rough, Lincolnshire to Jane Elizt-Lbeth, eldest daughter of Mr. Remington Pratt, of Cabrige. PARES—ScoIT.—On the 27th inst., at Aylsham, Willian s, third son shire, to _Helen eldest daughter of Win. H. Scott, Esq.., 'of Thos. Pares, Esq., o Hopwell Hall, Derb3l - Ay's:4am, Norfolk. BOSCAWEN.--- DEATHS. lotto On. the 26th inst., at S a li s b ury, Miss Char-, Boscawen, aged 49. BOWLBIC.—On the 25th inst., the Rey. E. Bowlby, rector of Little Thur% ock, aged 66: GooDMAN —On the 27th inst., at Broomfield Cottage, 1.4 *- grove, Kent, George Goodman, Esq., aged 73. JouNsoN.—Ort the 27th inst., at his residence, Southland In, Isle of Wight, Sir Henry Allen. Johnson, - Bart., K.VV aged 75. PARYER.--011 the 26th inst., Emily Anne, the seco daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Townley Parker, Cuerde u, Lancashire. TONVGOOD.—Ott the 27th inst., at Hillingdon, Frederic Towgood, Esq. LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUN , of No. 112, Strand, Prixiter, at The Sun Office, No. 1/ Z., Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county k Middlesex, Friday, June 29, 1860. e:~~e , ~~