The Sun. — London, England, 1858-05-21 00:00:00

'wieder at the event, that eminent statesmen have ac tually dined together. (Cheers and laughter.) lam very glad to hear that men engaged in the strife of poli tics can dine together without personal hostility. I will say nothing of the viands eaten, or of the beverage drunk front the "loving c up" that went round. One of the oldest and best of beverages wasnepenthe, drink of soverayne grace, devised by gods ;'' bat that drink was given to the wise, who had arrived at that time of life when they were preparei to take their place with heroes in another sphere. (Cheers and laugh ter.) It could not be that liquor which filled the flowing cup, for these ancient and wise statesmen were deter mined to cling to this world, and mix in n l the conten tion and turmoil of politics. (Cheers.) Now, I - ask, is the house prepared to overthrow the Government on this question, which the right kon, mover had placed before it in ambiguous terms, and is it ready to plunge the country into the turmoil of a general election, at a mo ment when the people are only just slowly recovering from the effects of the most tremendous commercial panics ? (Cheers.) Is the house willing to delay all legislation and all discussion on reform till next year ? (Hear, hear.) Above all, is the house willing to take upon itself the responsibility which will attach to it if it avows the policy of the proclamation ? I am terrified for the future of India when I hear of the indiscriminate slaughter which is going on there. A. gentleman—l believe a missionary, who has written a series of very able letters to a most respectable weekly newspaper in London, says it is estimated that more than 10,000 per- Ilene have been put to death in India by hanging alone. (Hear, hear.) When you find that such opinions areex- pressed in India as I have to - d a y extracted from a Cal cutta newspaper, are you willing to do an y thing that can by possibility be suspecte d as confirming a policy of that description t I have extracted this paragraph from the Eregtishetato a Calcutta newspaper, which, speaking of the men of the disarmed regiments, who probably number from 20,000 to BEI,OOO, says - "There is no necessity to bring every Sepoy to a court eaeotiol and convict him of±nuli o n intentions before putting him down as guilty. W not advocate_ extreme or harsh measures . nor are we of e those who would drench the land with blood, but we have no hesitation in saying that were the Government to order the execution of all these Sepoys they would be legally and morall, justified in d o ing so. There would be no injustice done.' I ask the house to remember that these men had com mitted no offence—that their arms had been taken from them—that they were merely suspected of being likely to be tempted to commit offences—and yet an Englishman, one of our countrymen, writing in a public newspaper in Calcutta, publishes such atrocious senti ments as those I have just read ! I believe that the whole of India is trembling with volcanic fires, and that we should be guilty of the utmost recklessness, and of a great crime against the monarchy of England, if we were to do anything which would be an avowal of the procla mation that has been issued. (Cheers,) lam asked on this question to overturn her Majesty's Government. Why, the policy adopted by the Government on this subject is the policy that was cheered by hon. members on this side when it was first announced. (Hear.) It is a policy of mercy and conciliation. False—may I not say ? —or blundering leaders of this party would induce us, contrary to all our associations and all our principles, to support an opposite policy. I am willing to avow that I sin in favour of justice and conciliation—of the law of justice and of kindness. Justice and mercy are the supreme attributes of the perfection which we call Deity, but all men everywhere comprehend them. There is no ,speech nor language in which their voice is not heard, and they could not have been vainly exercised with re gard to the docile and intelligent millions of India. You had the choice. You have tried the sword. It has broken —it now rests broken in your grasp, and you stand hum bled and rebuked. (Some cries of " Oh, oh," from the Opposition.) You stand humbled and rebuked before the eyes of civilised Europe. (Renewed cries of "Oh," and cheers.) You may have another chance. You may, by possibility, have another opportunity of governing India. If you have, I beseech you to make the best use of it. Do not let us pursue such a policy as many men in India, and some in England, have advocated, but which hereafter you will have to regret, which can end only, as I believe, in something approaching to the ruin of this country, and which must, if it be persisted in, involve our name and nation in everlasting disgrace. (Load and pr olonged cheering.) Mr. COLLIER said that all sitting on that bide of the house fully recognised the great powers of the hon. member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright), and ; were willing to cooperate with him on certain questions. However, upon certain subjects relating to peace and war they were completely at issue with the hon. gentleman. For example, had they followed the policy advocated by the hon, member with regard to China, it would have been impossible for England to have held her settlement in that country. (Hear, hear.) Had they again adopted his views with regard to the war with Russia, their policy must have ended in nothing but humiliation and disgrace to the country. (Cheers.) Indeed, upon more than one occasion the question had been raised, did not the hon. member for Birmingham seem to regard more the honour of his country's enemies than his country's ? (Hear, hear.) Now, with reference to the issue raised by the right hon. member for Oxford, he must say, in the first place, that the whole argument grounded upon the keeping back of the letter received by the hon. gen tleman the member for Northampton (Mr V. Smith) was given up when it was announced by Lord Eden borough in another place, and by the right hon. gentle man the Chancellor of the Exchequer in that hou=e, that the proclamation of Lord Canning, announcing a gene ral confiscation, required no explanation, as it was inde fensible; and he ventured to affirm that the despaech sent out in answer to the proclamation was one of the most disgraceful documents that ever issued from a Minister of the Crown. The hon. member for Birming ham had spoken a good deal upon the consequences of overthrowing the present Government. Now he (Mr. Collier) was well aware that there were a great many sitting on that side of the house who wished the present Government to stand, but then the problem of how to enable a Government to stand was a problem more diffi cult of solution than that solved by Columbus. (Hear, bear.) During the short time they had been in office, the Government had committed not one but a series of blunders, and it was apparent, therefore,lthat it was no longer ea a to entrust the administration of the affairs of the country into such hands. (Hear, hear.) Sir W. FRASER said that the noble viscount op posite, the member for the West Riding (Viscount Godericb) had in his most indiscriminating manner con founded the case of the mutinous sepoys and the native inhabitants of Oade. The former of these had undoubt edly been guilty of an enormous crime, and he would aecordingly show them no mercy, but towards the la' ter he would deal out a very different order of justice. He believed that a great deal of time had been lost in dis cussing the meaning of the term confiscation. None he should not reopen any question upon that poict, as he thought gentleme n i n E ng l en d wou ld pretty clearly un derstood what was meant if any were told their estates were all to be confiscated. (Hear, and a laugh.) He could not help thinking, too, that the fire directed from that side of the house against the late right honourable President of the India Board bad been rather too in cessant and too concentrated. In that case it seemed to him the doctrine as to subordinate responsibility bad been overlooked. On the other band, it would have been more becoming in the noble lord the member for 'reser ton if he had come earlier to the rescue of his subor dinate. (Hear.) Captain "VIVIAN had listened with great regret to the speech of the hon. member for Birmingham (Mr, Bright), for be could not conceive bow one, whose talents were so universally acknowledged, could have conde scended to such littleness in his argument. He had tried to find in that speech something appertaining to the merits of the qaestion before them, but so far as he could gather it was entirely confined to attacks upon those who occupied the front ranks of the opposi tion benches. He, for one, should give his vote, when it came to a vote, on the merits of the case, as be had no wish as to who should occupy the Ministerial bench. But he was called upon to say whether Government had rightly issued the despatch. They had been accused of shirking the question of the proclamation, but he had no doubt that when the proclamation came before them there would be many on that side of the house ready to uphold Lord Canning's policy. The word confi sca ti on h a d b een wholly misinterpreted, and any one w h o ua d eretco d the state of the country, or who bad read General Sloan:lan's book, would know that the proclamation did not touch the real cultivation of the soil. The tabokdare and zetn indars of Oude were a set of robbers and rascals who tcok possession of the land, and wanting to get a title to it, called themselves by those names. He would net go in' o the question of the annexation of Oude, though to be• lieved it was forced on us; but when it was annex i d we found there two classes, t he workers and robb e i s —th e beee the 'wasps. Lord Canning had resolved to exter minate the wasps, and in doing so was stung by a bore et. (Hear.) When the papers which had been received that day were before them, they might better judge of that question, but in the publication of the despatch they had committed, if not a dereliction of duty, at least an indis cretion, which was sufficient to deprive them of the con fidence of the house. Mr. K. SEYMER said they had been talking of India but thinking of something else, viz., of the question whether the occupants of the Treasury benches could be sent over to the other side of the hou-e. He was sorry the Indian question had been made a ground of pal ty at tack, but they would find the noble lord (Palmerston) too old to mend. (A. laugh) What he was in Feb, he would be to the end of the chapter. The other side had been pressing legislation for India during the present as 5.0011, and now these Government days had been occupied in this discussion, and it was very probable that would pre vent any legislation on the subject of India this se-siou a result which he should not much regret. If there were any independent Liberal members in the house, he would ask them if they in their hearts approved of the priiey of confiscation. If not, let them place themselves in the position of the Government and ask them what else th , y could honestly have done ? He knew that two nci 1 lords (Palmerston and Russell) thought that whenever they put t the t:l t 3eirbeads together a powerful party c o uld be fidene e o f the ...n.oble lord (Palmerston) had lost thl , con iregain ral party, and w h a t h a d h e d one t o (gear h ear.) If thego noble lords came i n again th e y 9 ,,,,„ 1 , 1n hew window at Ilro o t ok ! Dolt far b e y on d t h e peerage and ihe have a reinauguration . i (Lau g ht er .) Th e y wou ld t L ou what was cane] a spirited foreign policy, viz., th e policy of bi g wor d s an d sma ll deed,. (A laugh.) Whe n t now in office joi n ed in censuring what they considered an nnprovoked at tea on Canton , the noble lord (Palmer ston) ry made them oat guilty as accomplices of the barbarismso committed by the Cninege in reprisal for that attack, and no doubt he would now throw upon them the blame of the na gacre of Cawnpore. ( Hear, bear.) But th e electors even nverton would not again be misled. By the time they went to the country it would no longer Le a question of whether the despatch ought to have been published, but it would be a question involving financial expenditure to an extent of which bon. members had very little idea. (Hear.) The present Government came in I not on their own motion, but in consequence of the want of attachment of the Liberal members to their own leader. (Hear.) They came into a legacy of difficulties. (Hear) They had arranged the diplomatic difficulty maintaining the alliance, which was firmer than ever ; they had settled the Cagliari question favourably ; they had got over the financial difficulty in a budget—which had given the greatest amount of satisfaction, and they had pledged themselves to an India Bill which he thought injudicious, for he did not think any Govern ment would carry an India Bill this session. (Hear.) He did not think the Conservative party were blind to the signs of the times, or deaf to the voice of public opi nion —(bear, bear)—and he believed they were prepared io go steadily forward in a course of political and social reform. (Hear, hear.) He asked them, not for the sake of Government, but for their own characters as indepen dent members, to give them the opportunity. Sir A. ELTON said the despatch was bad in temper and in tone, and in many respects indiscreet, but if the general effect was just, it would be monstrous to throw the country into confusion because it was not polite. Honourable. members talked of confiscation as if it was some pleasant process, like shampooing or some other Eastern luxury, but they would regard it very differently if their own lands were so taken from them. Legal gen tlemen often took great liberties with each other, and in this debate one had attributed dishonesty - to another. He supposed lawyers were used to it. In reference to the mercy of Lord Canning, all the proclamation pro mimed to those who submitted was "life and honour," and for the rest they were to thro w themselves on the clemency of the Government. That was not very en couraging. As for politeness and courtesy, if a robber held a pistol to his head, he would knock his arm aside, perhaps with some violence. Would the right hon. member prosecute him for assaulting the robber ? If he dragged a drowning man from the water somewhat roughly, would he have an action against him for tear ing his coat ? (Hear.) It was said that Lord Canning's feelings ought to be considered ; but they would be suffi ciently so by the amendment. Lord Ellenborough was humbled at the feet of Lord Canning, and politically ruined. Lord Canning and his friends, real or political, ought to be satisfied with that, and not to pursue the Government with a vindictiveness to which party ought to be a stranger. It was said the despatch would weaken the hands of Lord Canning, but these miserable parry squabbles would weaken the character of this house and drag its honour and dignity in the dust. (Hear.) Go vernment had endeavoured to do what was right and just in a manner which was open to censure, but as the thing itself was right, he should support them. He then quoted an article from the Friend of India to the effect that the proclamation would hold us up to the ridicule of the natives as weak and rapacious ; for we gave the lives we had no power to take, and took the lands they could no longer defend. (Hear, hear.) The retainers, he contended, would go with the chiefs and would not lay down their arms, so that the confiscation would in clude all the population. The vote of this house, if adverse to the Government, would create a panic amongst those who were ready to submit, and wool not drive them to take up arms again. He could not understand how the despatch could - encourage the rebels. opened to doors of mercy. But to tell them that if they submitted they .should retain their rights would not encourage them to hold out. He be lieved that hon. gentlemen on the Opposition benches did not think that they were going to stay there so long, and now showed an indecent haste to recross the house. Lord BURY said the hon. member fir Dorset bad asked what they hoped to gain by the motion. He could answer the question very distinctly. They hoped to turn hon. gentlemen opposite out of office. (Cheers and laughter.) In his opinion the despatch would paralyse the hands of the Governor-General. It was ungenerous to censure the conduct of the Governor-General bebre they had received his explanations. Very likely the mail now due would bring a statement of the remont that in duced the Governor-General to issue that proclamation. He thought that some of those who had spoken on the other side had tried to lead them astray on this ques tion. Lord Canning had nothing to do with the annexa tion of Oude. He found it a part of British India, and his duty was to maintain it as such. There was a great difference between the censure passed on Lord Auckland fur his treaty with Oude and that contained in the ds spatch in question. In his opinion the proclamation would do less harm in India than the despatch. In that de spatch Lord Canning had been addressed as if he w, re a fool. (Hear.) Serving his country as he had done, Lord Canning had every right to expect that he would be addressed in different terms. Ho.i. members opposite were going to support the amendment of the lion: Croon her for Swansea, which recognised Lord Canning's ser vices, although they bad objected to including Lord Canning's name in the vote of thanks lately given by Parliament. The noble lord the memberfor King's Lynn bad said that this was a question cf right against wrung. The noble lord did not draw his conclusion, bet the noble lord the member for the West Riding had very naturally asked if it was intended to give back Oude to its native King. The hon. baronet the member for Tawworth had talked of a dissolution in case of a defeat of the govern ment, and coupling that with the statement of the noble lord the member for King's Lynn, be had no doubt the cry of the government would be right against wrong. But if that was meant for anything more than clap-trap, they ought to give back Oude to the natives. (Hear.) Mr. GILPIN said he believed the noble lord the mem ber for Norwich (Lord Bury) had never . spoken trusr words than when be told them that what he and his friends wanted in bringing forward this motion was to turn out her Majesty's ministers. (Hear, hear.) But paving to a subject of a less personal character he should observe that he could not adopt the view taken of the question tbeo before the house by the supporters of the motion, when they contended that hon. members ought carefn ly to abstain from pronouncing any judgment on that proclamation, while they were to express a decided opinion with respect to the d spatcle to which the pro clamation had given rise. Tney were told that they could not understand what was meant by the proclarne tion. Bat the document appeared to be well understood in India ; and as far as he could judge it had been gene rally condemned by the press of that country. The Hurkaru stated that " the wisdom of the measure had been questioned on the ground of its sweeping severity." According to the Calcutta Plvenix, " the temper of the people of India had never been so excited against any , former rulers as it was at present against the British ;' and the Friend of India contained the following pas sage :—" That unhappy document makes every man in India our declared enemy. The British government will be held up as weak and rapacious—weak in offering to save lives which they could not take, and rapacious in seizing estates to which they had no right." He (Mr. Gilpin) had hitherto been an admirer of the just and temperate policy pursued by Lord Canning in LAM, and he could only suppose that the noble lord had been in duced to adopt that measure of confiscation under a pres sure put upon him by the English party in that country, which had before raised a howl of indignation against his display of wisdom and moderation. He (Mr. Gilpin) believed that the present despatoh would be calculated to strengthen his hands, and to enable him to return to the course originally dictated by hie own better judg• ment. If an announcement of confiscation really mean what it professed to mean, he (Mr. Gilpin) eould not help regarding the proclamation as one of the most immoral public documents that had ever been written. But one of the arguments employed by the noble lord the mem ber for London in support of the motion, went very nearly to this—that we never could consider any of our public servants to have been in the wrong. (Hear.) Now, for his part, he should say that he believed that was a most dangerous doctrine. The hon. and learned gentleman for Plymouth (Mr. Collier) had stated that evening that on every question of fereign policy the hon. gentleman the member for Birmingham (Mr. Bright) was always to he seen ranged on the side of the enemies of England. But the hon. and learned gentleman might well congratulate himself if he should find at the close of his career that he had done fur his country a tittle of the good which had leen done by the hon member (or Bir mingham. He felt persuaded that in voting against the motion he should be voting in favour of the principles of justice and of humanity. He had heard a good deal sail in the course of the discussion with regard to the fact that the contents of a certain letter from Lord Ca ning had not been communicated by the right hon. gen tleman the member for Northampton to the noble earl who had succeeded him in the office of the President of the Board of Control. It certainly seemed to him that too much had been made of that c rcum-tance. He be lieved that hon. gentlemen opposite had truth and jus tice on their side upon thatoccasion, and, in his opinion they would do well to take their stand on these prin ciples, and to abstain from dwelling on mere personal considerations. He was led to think that that was an -attempt to raise the somewhat questionable banner of the noble lord the member for Tiverton. (Rear.) He understood that the arms of Bedford e ere to be quart ered on that banner— (hear)—and independent members were called upon to rally round it. (Hear.) But he said that if the independent members deserved that title, the charmer would charm in vain, unless they saw more of benefit than h e cou l d see to the liberal cause from the contemplated change of ministry. A short time ago there bad been held a large meeting of " independent ibat members," and he h a d t h en supposed, in his simplicity, they the w eldest eregoi living politicians, going gto have lit caina d independ withent tpeparty.r But one of discrimination, said to him in reference to that expectation, "You do not know the party as well as I do. They will fall into the very first trap laid for them by the late occupants of the Treasury bench." (Hear.) The fact was that the trap wa s scarcely laid, the P itfell was not covered over to the eyes o f most people, when one part of the Liberal party had followed into it the new opposition whipper-in. (Hear, and laughter.) He should vote against that motion on its intrinsic merits , and he should vote a g ainst still more heartily on accnurit of what he believed to be its real and not its declared spirt--the removal of the ministry, and the transference to their }laces of a number of gentlemen who wore at present in opposition. lie was convinced that such a ohs , ge would not promote the interests of the groat Liberal party throughout the country, and he should therefore offer an uncompromising resistanc-, to a motion which was calculated as he believed, to lead to that resul.. (R AO Mr. LABOUCHERE said he should be prepared to rest his vote en the able and comprobensive s p eech which had been delivered that evening by the roble lord the member for the West Riding (Lord Goderich) ; but he did not wish to give a silent vote on that extremely im portant question. Hon. gentlemen had entered in the course of that discussion into mere party allusions; but he should have thought party considerations must sink into utter insignificance in presence of the great interests to which their attention was then directed. He had always been a party man, and he did not pret , .nd to deny that he bad party predilecti ms which might, without his kno w l e d ge , i n fl uence hi s j u d gmen t. B u t if he knew anything of hie own feelings, hi would give in support of that motion as conscientious a vote as he had ever given in his life. (Hear.) He did not believe that frequent changes of ministry were of advantage to this country ; he was of an entirely different opinion ; and he honestly declared that he should have heartily re joiced if the conduct of hon. gentlemen opposite had been so prudent as to have enabled the house to continue them for a considerable period their present tenure of office. (Hear, and a cry of oh.) But he would leave those personal considerations, and be would pass to an inquiry into the general merits of that question. He believed that her Majesty's Government were deeply censurable for the present state of Indian affairs. They had exhibited to the world Vie rnfortunate spectacle t f Indian Government at borne differing in opinion upon a most important point of policy from the local govern ment in India. Had any one, he would ask, ever before seen members of an administration coming dowel to the house and reading extracts from new-papers, or detail ing scraps of conversation held with persons who had latly returned from India, for the purpose of casting discredit on the decision at which the Governor-General had arrived ? (Hear, hear) He did not deny the right of the Government to express their condemnation of any act of Lord Canning of which they might have disap proved ; but he said that they ought not to have die d' irged that daty in a tone needlessly bitter and offen sive. He had not heard any one attempt to justify the terms employed is the despatch towards Lord Canning, and he could not believe that that portion of the docu ment had been read to the Cabinet before it had been sit out t• India. He said that was the first great error committed by her Majesty's Government. But the course they had pursued had, further,, led to the un happy result of destroying the harmony of opinion and unity of action which it was so desirable should prevail between them and the Court of Directors. The very day after the publication of the despatch the directors had met, and had determined, to their own infinite honour, that the mail which took out that document should also take out the expression of their approval of Lord Can ning's policy. Since the last occasion upon which they had met they had heard with surprise that her Majesty's Government had stated their intention to support the Proposition of the hon. member for Swansea. He (Mr. L.) was utterly at a loss to reconcile that determination upon any.principle of consistency. He -would not then enter into the question as to whether Lord Canning's proclamation was, in its terms, politic or impolitic. He, however, thought that the intention of the noble lord no member in that house could for a moment doubt. It was a policy of clemency rather than one of harshness and cruelty, as some honourable members had the hardi hood to attribute to him. The very circumstance of Lord Canning having no party-connection with the present government ought, in his mind, to have made them much more delicate in doing anything that could in the least degree disparage his authority as Governer-Ge nerad. He (Mr. L.) could not acquit the government of having committed some grave errors in those most im ',portant and delicate transactions ; and, that being the case, he would certainly support the motion of his right hon. friend the member for the city of Oxford. Sir J. GRAHAM.—Sir, for some time past I have abstained from trespassing on your indulgence, for my shattered nerves and drooping spirits dissuaded me from taking part in angry contention, and I would gladly avoid expressing my opinion on this occasion if my sense of public duty had not persuaded me that I cannot avoid explaining, as far as I am able, the reasons which lead rue to the conclusion at which I have arrived. If I may be permitted to refer for one moment to a subject so insignificant as myself, I wish to state that it is by the courtesy of hon. gentlemen that I occupy a seat on this (the Ministerial) side of the house, although I am no adherent of her Majesty's Government. By no en gagement, express or implied, am I their supporter. On the contrary, my sympathies and opinions are with the ' Liberal party sitting on the opposite side of the house (hear, hear), and from a recent kind communication I have resumed those habits of friendly intercourse and confidential communication with my noble friend the member for the city of London which formerly existed between us. (" Speak up.") It is with pain, therefore that on the present occasion, after much deliberation, I have arrived at the conclusion that it is not possible fur me to give my support to the 'motion of my riehb hon, friend the member for Oxford. (Loud cheers.) It has not been my good fortune to be in office contempora neously with Lord Canning. Ido not know him as in timately as many of those with whom I have long acted, but I am bound to say that, considering the circum stances of extraordinary difficulty in which he has been placed since his appointment to the Governor-Ge neralship of India, I have, up to the present time, re garded his conduct with unfeigned admiration. I think, as was well said by noble friend the member for the city of London, that while others trembled, his firmness remained unshaken ; while the passions of almost all those around him were greatly excited, his calmness remained undisturbed, and he refused to shed innocent blood. (Hear, hear.) I think, therefore, the greatest praise is due to Lord Canning for his conduct up to the present moment. This motion is said to be actively promoted by most intimate fiends of Lord Can. aing. Lord Canning was introduced into public life by my noble friend Lord Aberdeen. Lord Aberdeen is no fArwea her or lukewarm friend. (Cheers.) He regards Lord Canning with parental affe_tion ; and while he - ught that, with reference to the present state of this transaction anything was due to toe honour of Lord Canning or to his administration cf Indian affair', he was quite willing to concur in a vote censuring the conduct of the Executive Government. But from the time that Lord Ellenborough withdrew from the Admi nistration, declaring himself the author, as might well be presumed, of the despatch censuring the proclama tion, I am authorised to state, on the part of my noble friend, that he felt that all that was due to the honour of Lord Canning had been achieved—(cheer , )—all that he thought nece,sary for the vindication of Lord Can ning's administration of affairs had been accomplished —(renewed cheers)—and when pressed by a friend of Lord Canning—an old colleague and intimate friend of his own—to concur in the vote of censure in the other house, my noble friend Lerd Aberde3n positively refused, and, to use his plait and emphatic language, he declared that he was not prepared to take part in a faction fight (Cheers again renewed.) I wish, with permission, frankly. to state that my first and strong impression on reading the proclamation was, that it was an impolitic one. (Hear, hear.) lam also bound to state that the publication of the despatch censuring that proclamation in the terms which were implied did appear to me a harsh and u justifiable proceediog. (Hear, hear,) It does so happen that whoa it was announced that the despatch commenting on the proclamation would be laid before the . house, and when it was also announced that that despatch censured the policy indicated in that proclamation in every respect, I sail to my right hon. friend the member for the University of Oxford, who was sitting near nee, I fear that that des patch, so reprehending the proclamation, will cootaireea censure upon the annexation of Oude ;" and I added, "if so, I think it would be most impolitic and inex pedient." (Cheers.) That paragraph which comments on the annexation is even less prudent than I had anticipated. I must say with great regret that it is the paragraphs relating to that subject that I ant most dis posed to reprehend. Let me recall the recollection of the House to the circumstances that attended the publi cation of the despatch. I believe implici,ly the state ment made in this House by my hon. friend the Secre tory of the Board a Control. Tnat statement wag, that on the morning of the day on which the hon. member for Birmingham asked in his place a qua Evion with re spect to the proclamation he himself had a confidential communication with Lord Elenborough. The hon. Secretary to the Board of Control said to Lord Ellen• borough, "If I am asked a question with regard to the proclamation which has appeared in the newspapers what am Ito say r Lord Ellenborou;l3, without con sulting any of his colleagues, at once and on the spot told the Secretary to the Board of Control to promise that a copy of the despatch commenting upon it shoold be laid before the House. When that promise was made it was clear that the publication would take place the following morning. Tee hon. member for Birmingham pressed for further information. Ile asked at nee what was the effect of the d cepatcb, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, rising instantly and without preine litation to answer that question, said that: the deep itch dis• approved the policy indicated in the proclamati n ire every sense. The right hon. gentleman the Chanceil it of the Exchequer will excuse me for saying that I think that answer so hastily and uepremeditet,dly given was an indiscretion—(hear, heal) —but at; the close of a very hang public a,.d official life I cannot forget that I have committed many indiscretions myself—tlaught-r)—and I am not prepared to visit wi•h severe censure what I cannot believe, and do not believe, was anything more than an indiscretion. (Cheers.) The right ho,n, gentleman knew that on the following morning this despatch would be published, and, anxious at once to sa.isfy the house as to the c in tents of that despatch, he anticipated the reading of it by every member of the house in the course of a fee hours by stating what was its nature. Tha', as it ap pears to me, is the front of the offending of any other ' member of the Administration, excepting Lord Else borough himself. Well, what took place in consequence of this ? Within three days of this publication, for which Lord Elienloorough was atone respousible—eo other member of the Cabinet having consented when he gave the order to the Secretary of the Board of Control to publish tee despatch—yietling to the force of public opinion in the two Houses of Parliament, which was very uneq iiyocally expressed, the n ;ble lord, !Jot ashamed of what he bad done, th . nking,on the e ,ntrare, that ho hal honourably fultiled what his sense of public duty prescribed, but a. xieus to relieve his c 1- leagues from all emberraeeeient, and willing to take upon hituse f the whole responibility which really a'- tach,d to him ou account of an ea: performed with ut their concurrence, .withdrew from the s.ervica :04hafu lD eit: f Ly:ii, i (::i e t,agde ti Mai.`AV. These, then, are the facts of the ca e. Toe t p riv a oi ety_nosbfiao tc4t h .ob h yb l let htlahtti most onrnk: r sd 7 4) a r ef ) r, hbi e oy r, ,nn , , i to — heueo :l or n ipo m si tf d h oi n e i ed otecii,i)iriB to w tirm-alliei n confidence rightenceo the hehepna. hier,d ;ha s rtoftheC()ur t f just dressed ue has; referred. And a s re l a t es t o theA Da l i i : r, ministration, I believ e it would he pushing the doctrine of conjoint rAponsiblity of the Ca binet to an extreme bordering open the ridiculous to ineagn pq4totne,d shortly office. ex tend it to their ex rtion from po wer f ir an act done by a colleague without teeir cegniz ince or ceilsent, account and s!b. )i o n f l f titoh which : co actae ir , ) substance ) at , e w a th your the proclamatio n . A n d -go has er m t t( h oC e he c axs a am ; infest and most dispassionate consideration I bake been able to give this matter has led me to the conclusion THE SUN, LONDON, FRInAY EVENIWG, MAY 2l, 1858. that my first impression was right—viz., that the sub stance of this proclamation is impolitic. (Hear, hear.) I beg the house to remember the circumstances under which the proclamation was considered in the early part of April by her Majesty's present advisers. The procla mation is decidedly at variance with an instruction sent out by the Cabinet on the 24th March with respect to the policy to be pursued on the capture of Lucknow. The passage has been read before, bnt still it seems to me so important that if it is not wearying the house I shall quote it again. (Hear, hear.) Here, then, are the terms of the instruction given to Lord Canning by the Cabinet at the date I have named : " To us it appears that whenever open resistance shall have ceased it would be prudent in awarding punishment rather to follow the practice which prevails after the con quest <of a country which has defended itself to the last by deeper ate war, than that which may perhaps be lawfully adopted after the suppression of mutiny and rebellion—such acts always being exempted from forgiveness or mitigation of pu.nishment as have exceeded the license of legitimate hostilities." The despatch next recommends a general disarmament and as fax as passible a general amnesty, and then goes on to decl are that— " Ten every amnestied district the ordinary administration of the law should as soon as possible be restored." Now, try the proclamation as the Cabinet tried it early in April, by the terms of that instruction, and I think you will see that it is diametrically opposed to the spirit of that instruction. (Cheers.) Arriving thus unexpectedly, and violating an instruction already given by her Majesty's Ministers, you must also bear in mind what were the peculiar circumstances attending this proclamation. No covering letter giving any official explanation of it ; all private communications with reference to it, from no fault of Lord Canning—who was unaware of the ehange of Ministry—addrese3d to their political opponents, and from some accident or misconception, on which I should be most sorry to dwell, no portion of those representations to the late Government bearing upon the subject were made known to her Majesty's present advisers. Remember, likewise, that the mitigating passage in the proclamation, which has been advisedly added in consequence of the re presentations made to Lord Canning in India, was unknown to the Cabinet when their despatch was written. (Hear.) Recollect, moreover, that the Cabinet consented to that despatch being transmitted in a particular form which exists only with respect to despatches sent to India —viz.. through the Secret Committee of the Court of Directors. They believed that secrecy would be religiously observed ; and with all my objections to the passages relating to Oude, with which I shall deal presently, I am not of opi nion that, under the seal of secrecy, any of the topics touched upon in that (It watch as a warning to the Governor- General in regard to the danger of the proclamation were improperly introduced. (Hear.) But is this the whole? By no means. At the same time that the proclamation reached the Government information of a very painful— at all events of a very anxious kind—came to hand. It is vain to dissemble it ; a very serious difference has arisen between the civil and military authorities in India. (Hear.) It is quite plain that the entire scheme of the military campaign against the judgment of the Com mander-in-Chief, by the over-ruling authority of the Governor-General, has not only been changed, but in verted. (Hear.) After that most splendid operation which has warmed the heart and gratified the feelings of every Englishman, when by a bold advance with a handful of men Sir Colin Campbell at infinite risk relieved the belea guered garrison of Lucknow, the Commander-in-Chief's own plan was not then to march upon the capital of Oude, but, leaving that capital as thecentre open at a future period to be attacked by his united force, rather to deal first with the insurrection in the extremities, to tread out the mutiny at its furthermost points, and afterwards to return to Lucknow with its concentrated strength. (Hear.) The Governor-General, however, from the purest motives, but from political reasons, interfered with the strategy of the Commander-in Chief, and called upon him instantly to at tack Lucknow, and thus to depart from his preconcerted movements. Now, it is necereary to be just. This intelli gence reached the Cabinet simultaneously with the procla mation. There is a division between the civil and military authorities; the Governor-General, acting on his own re sponsibility, with a high hand directs the military opera tions; and he issues this proclamation, or avows his inten tion to issue it. We know already —to-morrow we shall know more accurately—upon the official information of the Secretary of the Board of Control, that Sir James Outram protested strongly against this proclamation. (Che ers .) Who is Sir James tram ? He was the civil commis sioner of Oude in 1853 under Lord Dalhousie. He had the most intimate kilo reledge at that period of the state of feeling in that country, as well as of its social condition. More than that, dropping his civil capacity, during a later period when the military difficulties became great, he acted as second in comnaand, and was himself exposed to all the dangers of that groat centre of the revolt. He could, there fore, best appreciate what werethe sentiments of the landed proprietors of Oude—he bast understood by experience what had been their conduct. Yet knowing them well, both by his earlier civil and later military experience, he in the strongest and +lost decided manner objected to this pro clamation, an I pressed upon the Governor-General the po licy of abandon:lag it. (Cheers.) So much for the view taken by Sir J. Outreur. Well, who is the next highest military authority ? Sir John Lawrence. (Hear.) We have all heard from the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and are all aware that Sir J. Lawrence pressed for a discriminating amnesty indeed, and also objected to this proclamation. (Cheers.) The statements I now make rest upon official authority. I don't like to mention my own sources of information, but I have reason to know that General Mans field, the chief of Sir Colin Campbell's Staff, has likewise expressed in strong terms his doubts with respect to the policy of this proclamation. (Cheers.) We have reason, also, to belie v3—it has indeed been unequivocally stated by the First Lore of the Admiralty—that General Franks, who has just retuned fresh from most gallant and distinguished military servi:e rendered at Lucknow, declares his indivi dual opinion that this proclamation is an unfortunate step. (Cheese.) So much, then, for the conflict of autho rity as to the expediency of the proclamation we are now discussing ' • so much as to the weight of evidence that would lead ut to pause before. we give an opinion directly or indirectly *suctioning this pro matien and condemn ing the csutian of the Government in taking measures with reference to its revision and limitation. Now, what is the correct interpretation of this proclamation ? We have !vent a great deal of argument meant to prove that confiscation does not mean confiscation—(hear, hear) —that proprietary rights in the soil of Indian pro vinces dues rot imply ownership of the land. (Hear, hear.) Now, in En ;land wo understand English, in India all men may not ; but, although those who i.sued the proclamation might notexectly have understood the exact purport of its terms, what is most important for us to consider is, how will ,he people who read it understand it ? (Hear, hear.) 'The hon. member for Northampton} has read to us extracts 'rem the Indian newspapers, but really there is no newspaper which has arrived from India by the last mail wh.ch does not give to the term "proprietary rights" as broad a construction as has been given to 11 by any gen tleman who has addressed this house. (Hear.) Now, sir, what isthe object of this proclamation? (Hear.) It is suppoesd by some persons to be a gre it stroke of policy, and it s,ertainly has the characteristic of novelty. (Hear, hear.) It is, I must say, a new course of proceeding. No doubt, if what was sought to be effected could be effected without danger, it would be the interest of every conqueror to effiot it. And what was that ? Why, it was simply to covert the tenure of land in a conquered province from tenarey for life, or for a longer period, at a quit rent, to tenancy at will. (Hear, hear.) Doubtless, if that could be efficted without risk it would be a great advantage to any cmqueror, but from the earliest period of history, nei ther u Europe or in India has auy conqueror attempted to pe form so difficult and dangerous an operation. (Hear, hear) Neither Aurungzebe, Tamerlane nor Nadir Shah everattempted such a proceedi ng . (firer, hear.) The righ hon. gentleman the member for Radnor has described theßritiab rule in India from 1764 to 1784 as a period of rapicity sc ‘rcely ever known, and yet during that period no 3ritish conqueror in India ever attempted an operation of his nature. (Hear, hear.) Now, sir, I cannot help thiikieg that, in consequence of difference of opinion be twten the civil and military authorities in India, Lord Celuing in herniae this proclamation has yielded his better jusguient to the influence of certain civilians who surround hie. (Hear, hear.) As regards the value of the opinions of eitilians, I will read to the house the opinion of a great ustitary authority whose frien *ship I had the happiness to enoy, I mean Sir John Malcolm. Sir John Malcolm els : " Listen not to general reasoners, or, what we term here Srcarees. They are always right on paper, and always wrong in action. . . There is not a human being (certainly no Nabob or Maharajah) whcim I half dread so se much as an able Calcutta civilian, whose travels are linited to two or three hundred miles, with a hookah iu ha mouth, some good but abstract maxims in his head, tle Regulations iu his right hand, the Company's charter it his left, and a quire of wire-wove foolscap before him." (iioul laughter.) Now, that was the opinion which Sir J. Malcolm wrote to a Governor-General of India, warning him as to the value to be attached to the advice of civilians on matters of this description. (Hear, hear.) What, too, was the opinion of Lord Wellesley, one of the Oast and holiest Governors-General who ever wielded sower in belie? Was he of opinion that innexing a province was to be followed by confiscation of private rights? (Hear.) What was the advice which the Duke of Wellington geve ? He said, if you conquer a province deal lightly with individuals, but grind the State—that is to say, respect the rights of in tividuels, but deal as harshly as you may think expedient with the sovereign power. 'What did the great commander who conquered &hale ? He, following__ the advice of hie great chief, - 'nester, aria instructor, dealt lightly with in lividuals, but ho ground the Amours. Sir W. Napier has very recently placed on record the actual measures which were adopted by his brother end he describes the course pursued by that dist niuished man in these words : `` He proclaimed at once that all rights and possessions would be safe from confiscation. His expression was that 'the conquest of a country was sufficient convulsion for any people to endure, without adding thereto abrupt in novations en their social habits.' Ho even confirmed all the Government servants in their employments. The only exception he made was the Lugharee chief, and that by an especial order of Lord Ellenborough, on the ground of his having treacherously assailed the Residency. Even this man, because he only acted under the orders of his Sovereign, Sir Charles afterwards restored. No doubt he threatened to confiscate the estates of one or two other chiefs who continued hostilities after the war was virtually over; but this was simply as a war measure to induce them to surrender. "Thus." went on Sir IV. Napier to say, that " Sir Charles Napier's policy was both vitally and literally the reverse of Lord Canning s, and founded upon an essenti illy different state of affairs. Tho one con fiscated tae whole property of the country with but seven or eight mentioned exceptions; the other confirmed all men in their possessions, with one or two exceptions for especial (Hear, bear.) The doctrine of confiscation is the most dangerous which any conqueror call adopt. Villemain tells us that Napoleon on his return from Elba in the first, flush of anger determined to issu a proeatuation confis cating the property of Talleyraad, Augereau, and about 15 of her per.ons, but his honest and faithful friend and follower Bertrana, who true in adversity as in prosperity, followed his gnat waster to St. Helena, and shared his capt:viiy with him, refused to countersign the ordinance. He said to Napoleon that the man who would advise the Env e.or to begin a system of confiscation was his most cruel enemy. Lebadoyere also gave the Emperor similar advice. In the middle ages this doctrine of confiscation was often had recourse to, and, although I cannot pre tend to give the words themselvesal must remind the house of the opinion that was expressed by one of the wisest of mankind, at the same time begging it to remember that human feelings and human p assions are the same i u India that they are in Europe. ([leer, hear.) That philos o ph er said that it is not safe to con fi s cate a man's p ro perty un less you ire also prepared to deprive him of his life. (Hear, hear.) He said that a son could bear with great com placency the death of his father, while the loss of his in heritance might drive him to despair. Now, that is a principal which history has taught us, and I cannot but think that under circumstances like the present it is a most dangerous precedent to depart from it. I have mentioned Scinde. What was the act of Lord Ellen borough himself With regard to CI walior ? That was a case in which there was an undoubted breach of treaty and of compact on the part of the ruler. Lord Ellenborough made war upon him, gained a signal victory over him, but never disturbed the title to the land ; and what has been the consequence? 'Notwithstanding that the army of Gwalior has been unfaithful the ruler and the population o f that state have been oar sure and fast friends. (Hear ) Again, what was the policy of Lord Hardinge in the Pun j sub ? He acted harshly and severely with the governing power, unseated, and 'discrowned the sovereign, but re spected the rights of property ; and the salutary effect of that has been that even in this extremity the Punj aubl has not been the seat of popular insurrection. In Cashmere Lord Hardinge's policy was the same. There he acted with more gentleness towards the sovereign and more for bearance towards the inhabitants. The confidence which Lord Hardinge placed in the ruler of Cashmere, of whom some doubts were entertained at the time, was not mis placed ; on this trying occasion his fidelity has stood the test. (Hear.) You have here Indian experience, you have general maxims and general practice, all converging to the same point, all condemnatory of the policy of this procla mation. (Cheers.) Some hon. members have attempted to make apoint of the proclamation of Lord Dalhousie with regard to Oude, issued in 1856. There is, indeed, in that proclamation a mention of confiscation, but it was well put by the hon, baronet the member for Tarnworth (Sir R. Peel) and it has been repeated this evening by the hon. member for Northampton (Hr. Gilpin) that there is the broadest distinction between Lord Dalhousie's proclama tion in 1856 and that of Lord Canning's of 18 8. (Hear.) Lord Dalhousie's proclamation in 1856 was prospective and menacing, and its consequences might be avoided. Lord Canning's proclamation is retrospective and implies punish ment. But that is not all. Lord D dhousie's procla mation was directed against individuals on proof of guilt. (Hoar, hoar, and cheers.) The proclamation of Lord Canning denounces in the first instance the sentence next in point of severity to death, without proof, against a whole people. (Loud cheers.) I must say there is one passage in the despatch with which I entirely agree; its principle appears to me to be sound. This proclamation is based on the inverse of the correct principle. (Hear, hear.) It makes that the general rule which ought to be the ex ception ; it makes that the general rule wh ch ought to be the exception ; it makes that the exceptiou wh ch ought to be the general rule. (Cheers.) It throws the onus of the proof of innocence upon the entire people, the penalty if they fail in that proof being the forfeiture of their lands. The never , ' ought to be the principle, everything should be presumed in favour of innocence until guilt is proved. Now, these are great principles, English principles—(hear, hear)—universal principles, which are to be maintained wherever the British rule prevails. In my humble judg ment they can never be diverged from without imminent risk. (Hear, hear.) It is impossible to speak in too high terms of the late Sir H. Lawrence. Gallant as were his exploits as a soldier, noble as was his death, so worthy of his life, as a judge of what was politically expedient with reference to the people of India no man ever excelled him. (Hear, hear.) By an odd coincidence, in the very month of April, in which the Government were considering this pro clamation, the Edinburgh Review, an organ which cannot be objected to on the opposite benches, contained, in a re view of " Sir W. Sleeman's Travels in Gude," the follow ingpassage _ . . . "Sir fienry Lawrence was despatched to Lucknow to take the place of Mr. C. Jackson. He was the man of all others who would have done most good in the province if he had b3en sent there at the commencement of our admi nistrative career." The article is now speaking of the action under Lord Dal housie's proclamation in 1856, that to which I have already adverted, and which fell far short of, which was even oppo site in principle to that of Lord Canning :-- "He was a mau of generous sympathies and of an en larged toleration, which would not suffer him to scan toe nicely or to visit too severely the offences of those who wore the victims, rather than the agents, of a vicious state of society. He was specially averse to an over-critical inves tigation into existing rights, which, though acquired some times by fraud, sometimes by oppression, were still only in accordance with the custom of the country, and, indeed often a necessary consequence of the continued misgovern ment of the native rulers. We do not profess to know the precise nature of the settlement operations which were in terrupted by the progress of the mutiny in Oude ; but we have reason to believe that Sir H. Lawrence thought that some of the great landowners had been treated with an in expedient harshness." That is under the former proclamation, when forfeiture was not the rule but the exception. Sir 11. Lawrence demurred to the extent to which the exception was car ried : " On the score of practical expediency and of abstract justice it was desirable that at the outset of the British ad minimtration in 0 ude a more conciliatory policy should have been adopted towards them." Therefore% in addition to the authority of Sir J. Outram, in addition to the authority of Sir J. Lawrence, in addi tion to the authority of Gen. Mansfield, I claim, with re ference to the principle of this proclamation ' the very highest authority —the auth or ity o f Si r H enry Lawrence. (Rear, hear.) Now, sir, I cannot fail *'so to observe—aud it has not been much dwelt upon by the house—that, so far from the covering letter of Mr. Edmonstone in any de gree relieving the anxiety of the Government with regard to this proclamation, I think that, properly weighed and considered, it must have greatly aggravated their appre hensions. (Hear, hear.) That letter, in the first place, distinctly points out that this proclamation is addressed, not to the few, but to the many— (hear, hear)—to the in habitants of ude at large; and there is in it a passage which has not been read, and which indicates extreme se verity, coupled with what appears to me very great impo licy. The 16th paragraph says : ' The foregoing remarks apply to the talookdars and chiefs of the province. As regards their followers who may make submission with them, these from their numbers must of necessity be dismissed to their homes." Intirnatieg that, if possible, there would have been a wish to keep them prisoners. (Hear ) " But before this is done their names and places of resi dence should be registered, and they should receive a warn ing that any disturbance of the peace or resistance, to au thority whieh may occur in their neighbourhood will be visited not upon the individual offenders alone, but by heavy fines upon the villages." I must say that I consider that dangerous in the extreme. I think our Irish experience might have taught us not only that it is unjust, but that when applied to a great nation it is maddening. There is also a threat that there shall bo no reinstatement in their lands under specified circum st,nces. Now, the use of the term "reinstatement in their lands" is a direct assumption not only that confiscation has taken place, but is in force, and shall remain the rule, reinstatement being the exception. (Hear.) Then there is the mitigating clause which has been inserted in conse quence of Sir J. Outram's reprehension of the paragraph in its original form. A word is used in that clause which proves the justice of what I have just stated with regard to restitution. It says, "To those among them who shall he promptly home for ward and give to the Chief Commissioner their support in the restoration of peace and order the indulgence will be large, and the Governor-General will be ready to view liberally the claims which they may thus acquire to a res titution of their former rights." This clearly shows that even after the original harshness of the proclamation had been mitigated the Governor-General regarded the confiscation as general and complete, and only held out to those who should prove themselves the friends of order the restitution of their lands. (Hear, hear.) My noble friend the member for the city of London, in the forcible speech which he addressed to us on a former even ing, assumed that these talookdars had made war upon our soldiers, had killed many of our fellow subjects--(hear)— ha t behaved cruelly to the British. (Hear.) I understood him to say that they had helped to starve our garrison and had made war in a reckless manner. The statement of Sir James Outram positively negatives that assumption. The Secretary of the Board of Control informed us, on his official responsibility, that Sir J. Outram pointed out to the Governor-General that not only had no murder been committed in Oude, but that there the chiefs had saved all the Europeans who had fallen into their hands, and sent them under escort into the British territories. (Cheers ) To-morrow we shall set in official despatches what Sir J. Outram says upon this subject, but in the meantime I am at liberty to presume that the statement made by the Se cretary to thu Board of Control, on his responsibility as a Servant ofithe Crown, is correct. (Hear, hear.) If that statement is correct, it not only negatives all the presump tions against the talookdars, but proves their innocence. (Hear, hear.) I pass gladly from the proclamation to the despatch. I have already said that lam not prepared to approve the language of that despatch. (Hear, hear.) Per haps I may be permittsd to remind some of my classical friends of what is said by a great master of rhetoric— Quintilian—in discussing the relative merits of the Attic and Asiatic style of composition. He says that the Attic is clear, terse, simple, and forcible ; and describes what he calls the Asia gene as "tumida, janctatia, vaniore, di cendi gloria injlata." He then goes on to lay down a maxim which from the time of Demosthenes to the time of Mr. Fox has remained true, and which will remain true, I am satisfied, to the e i d —Attice dicere eat optiene dicere. (Hear.) But we are not here as a school of rhetoricians aud critics. (Cheers.) We are here as statesmen, considering ,what is best for the interests of a great empire, and it is no part of our duty to weigh nicely the exact terms used to convey an idea which in itself is sound. (Cheers.) I cannot agree with all the terms of the despatch, but I am bound to sty that the substance of the despatch, as dealing with the substance of the proclamation, is sound and defensible. (Cheers.) Ido not think,there is a single topic mentioned in the despatch which, under the seal of secrecy, ought not to have been communicated to the Governor-General. I do not except even the matter of Oude. (Rear, hear ) It is vain to dissemble it—there is a flaw in our title to that kingdom. (Cheers ) I regret the exposure, but that ex posure has taken place, and for it the Government are not. collectively responsible. (Cheers.) There was an earnest desire to exclude the pas , agesrelating to Oude from the publication. Accident —unforeseen accident—alone prevented it. But, I rep at, under the seal of secrecy the warning to the Governor-General with respect to Owle was not only not inexpedient, bnt was correct. (Hear.) It ought to be remembered by the Governor-General in dealing with the population of Oude. If under ordinary circumstances' some forbe trance was due to them, I think the facts connected with the extension of our dominion in that part of In lie entitle them to special in dulgence. (Cheers.) Upon the whole, therefore, I am bound to say that every topic touched on in the despatch appears to me juetifia'Ae. Some gentlemen have thought that the despatch of the Court of Directors was only a re dulplication of the despatch of Lord Ellenborougb, and in fact, was written by the same hand. We now know positively that it was not so—that Lord Ellenborough had nothing to do with the preparation of the Leadenhall street despatch, and only altered one or two words in it. You sea how both despatches agree—how every sen t imen t expressed in the one is to be found in the other. (Cheers.) After all, however, Lord C I nning was not roc riled ; the g t r h e (a at t statement with derision. (Hear.) fla, ,rt b4a. r)ni proclamation Nereyt, was f;rice cti xl trtheoevvo,laakrtetelds Lord ho practically , cate treats for the exercise of great powers; my knowledge neistrr-- sG o Pe f Gnn h esri i n ,In); officer rr,eisobcwlfesi With If e ahota t ep o r , k shi Gooei should as n, a o : lta h brte e heeer N pr v rio o . f)i t ro i n l rote l end n l troh) am t et e ,p x as, e tru, r ntr e pdo i a: T r i o ugh s ' eho e . Lions given to him to mitigate what would appear I (Hear, hoer ) The Governor- ' to be undue severity.' General, as I have said, was not recalled. The only order t ‘e isc h te hi whichc thh e severity ser despatch trai ,pt ayh oisfl Nt,h, y e t c h a e ned Cabinet, ord motion appeared ntains g b sh e c eae found °n) mitigate —T i ahninen noble p orderr h c e -1 entertaining i the . ni memberng tha that re London has n and esst decree ft.lattetttlE: confiscation—an t ia h v a e t ab , rei ) ng li g e fo r r i vi gh i, r t d hen. h.th g a e ti n ht t he l eemrea were conductetrhee a t mC o d ae o t nm h p a i t b n i i e l kl rg n .f t:h r f a (O t t t i h x t:l f i 'o' e p ? r d e o bi c i n s: a a m e u n o ti o re' term between recall and throe all% 11% l l% courses. aitD W (t r i. l u rA g - 11 (Laughter.) y s o a t i e d disapprove w as of the Governor-General you must recall him, if you ap prove his policy you must cordially sustain him ; if you partially disapprove you must so express that disapproval as neither to shake his confidence in you nor paralyse his powers in India. (Cheers.) Sir J. GR A.II A M—Like my right hon. friend I am of the Peel school, and feel all the force of the recommenda tion of three courses. (Laughter.) I cannot say, however, that in the present case the choice lies between three, or even two courses. It is not necessary either to recall the Governor-General or to acquiesce in his policy. If the Governor-General is to be his own master what becomes of the responsibility of the Q ueen's. Ministers ? (Cheers.) Al though in a great public emergency they may think that Lord Canning isbetter fitted than any other person —and in that opinion I for one fully concur with them, to discharge the duties of Governor-General, yet exercising the supreme authority, they are entitled to reprehend the policy even of that great proconsul, if they believe it to be inconsistent with the habits and welfare of those to whom it relates and dangerous to the safety of the British empire in India. (Cheers.) Now., sir, I gladly come to the close of the ob servations which I have unwillingly addressed to you. The general conclusion at which I have arrived may be briefly stated. I think the proclamation is substantially wrong, I think the despatch is substantially right. (Cheers.) The error of the proclamation is in its essence ; the error of the despatch is in its form and expression. (Renewed cheering.) Upon a former occasion the right hon. gentle man the member for Radnor said that the neglect of the Government with respect to the publication of the de , spatch almost amounted to design. Was ever a Govern meat dismissed yet for neglect almost amounting to design? (Cheers.) A change of Government being sought, lam bound to ask those who naturally aspire to succeed to the present Ministers, what is their policy ? (Cheers.) Are they for the proclamation, or are they for the despatch ? (Continued cheering.) Iu other words, are they for con tiscation, or are they for amnesty—amnesty in the sense of Sir John Lawrence? (Hear, hear.) The battle still rages in India; that sea of fire is unquenched. Who was the person placed as permanent Secretary at the Board of Control by her Majesty's late advisers? Sir George Clerk. What does Sir George Clerk say upon this subject? He says that the ship cannot be righted unless the proclama tion is thrown overboard. (Cheers.) He goes•further, for he says that you cannot permanently hold India if the principle of confiscation be established by the British Go vernment. (Hear, hear.) So, in the very words of the. despatch which is so much blamed, I say that we shall not be able to hold India if the entire population, on ac count of the principle of confiscation, think they are sub jected to British dominion at the expense of legitimate rights. (Cheers.) Adopting that view, I have to con sider what is the real object of the present motion. (Hear, hear.) I have no friend in whose honour or word I trust more implicitly than I do in the honour and word of the right hon. member for Radnor ; and he has told us that he does not believe that this motion has been brought for ward with any party object whatever. (Laughter.) We all know that men congregate and make treaties of friendly and offensive alliance, deliberate on plans of attack, and probably on the division of the spoil ; and to tell me that there is no party object in this motion is to draw on my small stock of credulity, and make me sceptical and an un believer. (Laughter.) Three months have hardly passed by since by a deliberate vote of this house we expelled the late Government from power ; and are we prepared to rein state them upon such a motion as the present, wherein the principle which has been asserted by her Majesty':, advisers is not explicitly or openly condemned ? Can Ibe a party to any such vote, en.ertaining the opinion I have expressed in this house ? I cannot do it. All my party wishes still linger about (Cries of " Oh I" from the Opposition.) An hon. gentleman on the front Opposition bench sneers at this. I say at once that whatever others may be lam no candidate for power. (Cheers.) I exer cise a most dispassionate and disinterested judgment, and let those who sneer on that bench make the same declara tion. (Loud and repeated cheers.) I never gave a vote with more pain or regret in my life. (Oh, oh l) I never discharged a public duty with a more clear conscience. (Cheers.) I would gladly have voted for the previous question, and I gladly and cordially adopt the amendment of the hon. member for Swansea. If that, however, be rejected, I shall reluctantly, yet unhesitatingly, give my vote against the motion of my right hon. friend the mem ber for Oxford. -(Loud cheers.) Sir R. BETHELL should deeply regret if there were many members in the house who thought that if others spoke on this subject they did so for the purpose of joining in a cabal or party movement. (Oh, oh ; and hear, hear.) Those who cheered such a sentiment were the most likely to fall under the imputation. (Oh, oh.) Of all complaints, this one of the Government, namely, that this was a most factious motion, was the most ridiculous. (Oh, oh, and laughter.) If the conduct of the present administration were reviewed,, it would be seen that no Government had ever, in so short a time, committed so many blunders, or been treated with such forbearance. (Derisive cheers, and cries of epiestion.) Why how many times had the noble lord the member for London drawn them out of the mire. (01r, ob, and ironical cheers ?) The same hand which dic tated the India bill of the Government was visible in the despatch. (Oh, oh.) The Opposition could have tripped up the Government for their blunder in the India Bill, but the noble lord, the member for London, had come to their rescue. (Oh, oh.) The climax of the Government absurdity was reacted in the funeral oration of the Chancellor of the Exchequer over his defunct measure. (Oh, ob.) While the Government were simply ridiculous, the Opposition allowed them to remain i❑ office. Now, however, a question had arisen, by which our Indian Go vernment was imperilled. What was the gravamen of the charge against the Government? Why, that during a fearful rebellion in one of the dependencies of the Crown, a rebuke had been published on a great public officer, and published, too, to the persons engaged in the rebellion. That was in fact casting doubt on the authority of the Crown. In firmer days such a course would have ren dered the Minister liable to an impeachment. This was a matter in which the Government had exhibited to the people of India the Queen at a usurper. Why, under such circumstances could anybody foresee anything but conti nual war in Oude? The doctrines of clemency preached by the Government were mere hypocrisy. Of course the Government never meant to act up to the doctrines enun ciated in the despatch. The right hon. baronet who had just sat down had said that if the despatch had been the act of the whole Government he would have been prepared to visit the act with ce .sure. But the right hon. baronet seemed to forget that the responsibility of the despatch had bean assumed by the Government. The despatch was clearly considered by the whole Government before it was sent oat. The hon. and learned gentleman then proceeded at very considerable length to read the various statements which from time to time have been made in both Houses of Parliament with respect to the despatch of Lord Ellen borough, with the view of showing that by the statements of the members of the Government themselves the despatch was the work and was issued on the responsibility of the whole Cabinet. He submitted that the publication of this despatch was the deliberate and well considered act of the entire Government. Under those circumstances, if the resignation of Lord Ellenborough was inevi table, what about the retention of office by tho e who were his accomplices in the act which had rendered his resignation necessary? Well, that was the first count in the indictment against her Majesty's Government. The next point was that, when the despatch was sent out, the Government were in ignorance as to whether the procla mation had been issued or not. In that state of things the despatch was a most precipitate step. In the next place, he said it was in very intemperate language ; in the next place, it was injurious to the public service, and in the fourth place it was an injustice to a great public servant. The Solicitor-General said that Oude ought to be treated as a conquered province, but if L )rd Canning had so treated it he would have ignored the annexation and have repudiated the authority of -his sovereign. The hon. and learned gentleman then wont on to argue that the procla mation was only intended to apply to the Zemindars and talookdars, and to no others. The object of the proclama tion was not to take away the lands of the people, but to induce them to come and give their allegiance to the Queen. That, he argued, was a policy of clemency. It had been said that Lord Canning had not been recalled. He had not at any time been recalled, i❑ fact; but what could be a more effectual recall than a despatch casting ridicule and obloquy on a public servant. That was the — charge which was brought against the Government, and be could not see how anybody could come to any other conclusion with regard to the act of the G worriment than it would be productive of the greatest mischief in India. (Hear.) Ile, therefore, asked who had done most for the cause of humanity, and begged of them to consider with what a case they would go to the hustings if this motion were negatived The country would see it was the poverty of the Govern ment and not their will that induced them to grant mea sures of a liberal character. He taunted the present Government with giving up their principles in order to keep office. The hon. member for Birmingham hail spoken of the blandishments that had been held out to Liberal members, and reminded the house that the stoutest Liberals had before now given way to such, and he cautioned the hon. memb .r for Birmingham against them, and advised him to steel himself against such lest they might side off the asperities and angles of the de mocratic principles he espoused. (Hear, ant laughter ) The house was bound by every feeling of national honour to say to men who had been guilty of such conduct that they were not worthy of the confidence of the country. Sir E. B. LYTTON moved the adjournment of the debate. Lord J. RUSSELL—I stated,•sir, early in this debate the reasons why I felt it to be my duty to support the motion of my right hon. friend the member for Oxford, and I have now no right, nor indeed have I the slightest inclination to resume my argument upon the question. I am, moreover, perfectly willing to admit that the argu ments which I advanced may be of very little value, but the hon. member for Birmingham,not content with an swering those arguments , has t hou g ht h ti a t t is a subject i n t o mak e an attack upon my personal character. N t which Ido not desire to enter at any length. iedeed, I am sorry to have to trespass upon the time of the h ouse i n respect to it at all, bu t I feel that it will be a b so l I t a l y nocessaty for me to do so; and as I believe the right hen. gentleman the Chancellor of th.e Exchequer proposes to move the adjournment of the hem° to-morrow for the Whitsuntide holidays, I beg to give notice that I shall take that opportunity, when I trust the hoe. member for Birmingham may be present, to make some reference to the remarks to which I have alluded. (Hear ; hear.) Mr. DUNLOP wished to offer some explanation in re ferent: to the amendment which he had that evening given notice it was his intention to move di ruled the mot i in of the right hon. gentleman th, member for Oxford o • the amentneent of the hon. member for Swansea be carried. He heartily concurred with those who condemned the pub ication of the despatch of Lord Ellenborough, as well as deprecated its general tone. He, ho wever, equally agreed with those who disapproved the proclamation of Lord Can ning, and as he was of opinion that the resolutions of the right hon. gentleman the member for Oxford would, if car ried, preclude the house from expressing any %dui( n on that proclamation, and even go so far as to imply an approval of the views which it set forth, he should tin i it impesqele to vote for these resolutions unless they wore qualified in some such way as to meet the objection which he had to them in their present shape. He under these circumstances preposed to add to the resolutions the amendment of which I e had given notice in the early par t of the evening-, which amendment, if accepted by the right hon. gentleman the member for Oxford, would en able him to support the motion of the right hon. gentle man. If, hcwevor, the amen mint were rejected by the right hon, gentleman it would be clear that he meant to put upon the resolutions a construction to which they di , l not seen at present to be clearly open, and he (Mr. Dunlop) - should feel it to he his duty to vote against them. If the amendment of the hon. member for Swanse were carried, it would, he thought., be expedient to mace to it the addition which he proposed in the event of the resolutions being passed, inasmuch as he deemed it to be extremely desirable that the House of Commons should pronounce a ,distinct opiuion as to the course of policy which ought for the future to be phrsued in the adminis• tration of the affairs of our Indian empire. Sir D. NORREYS disapproved as strongly as the hon gentleman who had just spoken the proclamation of Lord Canning, while he was equally disposed to find fault with the tone of the despatch which had been written in rep'''. He did not like to condemn Lord Canning without further information, and he believed that the house, if it wished to do justice, would postpone the debate for a month or six weeks. (Laughter, and cries of" This day six months.l He would raise the question tomorrow on the motion for the adjournment of the ho.use Mr. CARDWELL understood the question of the hon. member (Mr. Dunlop) to be whether, if the motion which he had the honour to introdace were carried, he would have any objection to support a s e p ara t e reso lution, the purport of which was to express the cordial hope that a policy would be adopted towa r d s I n di a . H e s hould en' tirely agree in such a resolutio n . (" Oh !" an d ' conical cheers.) Mr. M. GIBSON wi s hed t o k now w h e th er h e rig htv understood th a t s o me mo ti on con d emn i ng th e proc l a mation was to be tagged on to the motion of the right hon. gentle; man. He was afraid that with so many amendments and proposals the house would get into some dilemma from which it could not easily extricate itself. (Cheers.) Mr. S. HERBERT thought the right hon. gentleman heu misunderstood the course proposed to be taken. He had i ion several times in the hope of catching the Speaker eye, but should not now inflict upon the house his reason for the course he should pursue. But according to his vieew there was nothing incompatible in the resolution of th e right hen. gentleman (Mr. Caldwell) and that of the hoe' member (Mr. Dunlop). There was a precedent for the course proposed, because the Court of Directors, who WI written a despatch to Lord Can n i ng , g i v i ng th e i r adslea that a policy of clemency should be pursued, had passeal vote of confidence in Lord Canning, and had express*: their conviction that the proclamation bore nothing whi a " militated against the adoption of a policy of clemency. , Mr. ROUPEL said the house had c ommenc ed OP' debate with a s lemn exhortation which almost had the character of a funeral dirge. (A. laugh and cheers.) feared, however, that something like a sense of the ludi , emus was stealing over their minds. (A laugh, and Hear' hear.) He saw no reason why th e no bl e l or d (P a l me rston' and the right hon. gentleman (M r . C ar d we ll) s h ou ld no t fel; low the example of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, aIT d adopt the amendment of the hon. member (Mr. Dillifinp (A laugh.) It, contained all that the friends of Lord UAn , ' fling could desire. (" No !") He thought that the 1 22 .; jority of the house were of that opinion. ("No, no I" WI,: " Hear.") He spoke without au th or ity, b u t h e thoug ht that the greater number of the independent Liberals wer e of this opinion. (" No !" a n d "H ear .") Thi s amen dmelli appeared to offer an easy mode of escaping from the die' culty of a ludicrous position. _ Lord PALMERSTON—Perhaps the Chancellor of th i Exchequer will tell us whether the papers on India will bi laid on the table before the houae adjourns to.night„. understand they were moved for in the Lords, and will presented to that house. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I have the papers here. The debate was then adjourned. BISHOPS' TRUSTS SUBSTITUTION (No, 2.1 BID" Leave was given to Mr. Briscoe to bring in a bill enable the bishop of one diocese to substitute the bishop • another as a trustee in certain trust s . Th e bill was rod third time. LORD CANNING'S PROCLAMATION. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER laid UP°, the table papers relative to the proclamation for the sun"' ation of Oude, which were ordered to be printed. The house adjourned at half-past 12 o'clock. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—WIVES, MOTHERS, and DATia ff : , T ERS should read "Tight-lacing and its Consequen cel`,, in tbe next number (No. 5) of the Household Physician', which also contains other articles interesting to eve!' family in the kingdon. Edited by Dr. Denis Ccol M.D., and published every S a t ur d ay , pr i ce ld., by A. Berger, Queen's-Head .passage, Paternoster-row. Country Markets. MANCHESTER ----MAT 20. There was a fair supply of wheat to-day, but the &O il y, was limited, and prices maintained last week's wrap: o f Oats and oatmeal in limited requ e st, b u t canno t b e q_ n o lower. English beans ruled firm, but E g ypti ans , Indian corn, were rather cheaper. LOUTH—MAT 19. At our corn market to-day tiers was a fair 0.- - ance, and wheat met a limited sale, at former ram ', , o f Wheat, red, 39s to 43s ; mixed, 45s ; w hit e , 470; 34s to 375; oat, 24s to 28s; beans, 41. to 451. BOSTON—MAT 19. , 00 4 We had a large attendance o f b uyers t o -d ay , an d 1 !,; supply of grain of all sorts. Wh ea t me t a firm PIO last week's rates. Littl ee Sp r i ng corn on offer, 01 ' prices. Prices :—Wheat, red, 38s Od to 44s Od; new, — at white, 424 Od to 46s Od, extra, 473. Barley, 28s Od 01. Oats 25s to 30 s . Peas, 40 to 45s Od. Od to 44s Od per gr. NEWARK—MAT 19. „ 1 The supply of wheat was liber a l t o -d a y, an d tak e freely at a n a d va n ce o f i s p er qr .. .Oth er ar ti c his at last week's rates. Wheat, white 44a to 48s , red 42s to 465; barleyl,lll 11. 1 - 40s to 425, grinding 33s to 365 ; oats, 12st. 30s to W' iv' —s to - s • beans, 40s to 44s ; malt, 68s to 721; 1 01— ' to 42s ; tares , —s to —s per qr. GLASGOW—MAY 19. 0 8° To-day wheat did not sell so readily as d ur ing the m ri but previous prices may be repeated. Flour rather ;JO Your of buyers. Oats and oatmeal dull, at late 700 , Barley neglected, altho ug h f ree l y o ff ere d a t a de e Beans and Indian cora as before. EDINBURGH GRAIN..--MAT to nth A 19. • A good supply of grain to-d a y. S a l es heavy beans, wheat, and barley, and all a shade back. Wheat, on the top, is Od up, and on the 6 ,110 • Os 9d down. Barley, is Od d own on th e top, doe, down on the average. Oats on the top were 1e ou ta l , and on the average Os 4d down. Beans on the Od down, and on the average Os 3d down. AVERAGES PER IMPERIAL QUARTER. ~,. Wheat £2 1 4 3-1 2 '1, Do. new - 12th hl. Barley 1 13 0 4-1 21 " Oats 1 1 4 6-12thk Beans Total Supply and Sales. 56 4° Wheat 1051 qrs sold 9 to Barley 743 qrs sold 29 64 0 Oats 1345 qrs 8 994 sold a ar o Beans 7B qrs sold 7 ° ' DERBY SMITHFIELD.--KLY 18. Our market well supplied with fat beasts t° 4*l eVit greater part from the North of England ; quality g e j, I v o good, and pric es ra th er d earer , an d rea dil y o btain a p number of sheep was large and i n reques t. Fat o il calves more plentiful. 11 41 The following were the quotations :—Beef, 64 t o ll Y a mutton, 6d to 6id ; lamb, —d to 9d ; veal, 6d t c ni lb. ; pork, sid to 5.d per lb ; rough fat, 6 1 14 per 141 b.; hides, 2d to 3/d per lb ; calf-skins, per lb. LOCAL SHARE MARKR LIVERPOOL—MAY 20. n 4niei 4/ STOCK EXCHANGE—The market t o -d a y has be B but steady. Birkenhead, 71i 2—Leeds Norther o 9 44 Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincoln, 38 to 13 —Lon North Western, 95 Lancashire and Yorkshir o, _"o o s) —Midlands, 93 i—Eastern Counties, 12 1—C 4 1,7. - P . 42 i—Blackburn, 9I 10 —South Eastern, -4 ,.."-virso l if/ . British, 121 2 —Dutch Rhenish, 41 d.—Great gi of Canada, 191 19I—York and North Midlands s i Chester and Holyhead, 18 to 181—Berwicks, /00 , —East Lancashire, 90 to 94—Graxd Trunk 01 121 to 121. --- LEEDS, MAT 20. I A 0 , STOOK EMCITANGE.—North-Westerns, 84—LAL ° 351—North Eastern, Leeds, No. 2,4 i pm. MINCHESTER, MAY 20. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The market opened Wit h 90 ,k in prices, bat only a mod era t e b us i ness . Midlands , „f o tri —Sheffields, 38 3 — Low - ions, 943—Trunks, 12 5-10-;;, 9" Eastern, Le e d s , Q rs, 3} p—Dovers, 20 15-16 Le —Eastern Counties, Iz. BIRMINGHAM, MAY 20. iis ll .xlaf ooi/ STOCK EXCHANGE.—This market was active-to - prices rather higher. South Staffords were done it 0 00 , Great Westerns, Birmingham Guaranteed, 73_ 1 i -4321. 0' ham and Stour Valleys, 8 1-16—Shropshire Unioes, .- 8~ BIRTHS. BARIEWORTH—On the 20th inst., at Beverly, M il. Barkworth, of a son. - BRIDGE—On the 18th inst., Mrs. Alexander Bi/ 410 , plane, of a son. .4 A r , ~:tlll 1 dri's CLARKE—On the 19th inst., at the Royal 3 1 "' fre , P demy, Woolwich, the wife of J. Lardner Clarke, R.A., of a son . 11° 0 1 1h MACPHERSON -On the 16th i ns t., a t Bl a irgovir i ie d of the wife of Allan M ac ph erson , E sq ., yr ., of 131 ' of a son. MARRIAGES. cber cil io l GOODE—REEDER— On the 18th inst., at Hack°o l ,o o, pi William, second son of Mr. J. R. Goode, of 1 10 0 Charlotte Elizabeth, only daughter of Mr. X. "... 0 Victoria-peak. 9 1/4rllo -,. s f TIEYWOOD —GIBSON- On the 19th inst., at ...„. 3 „ 1 :0. - ,V, church, Hants, the Rev. Henry Robinson JeJ o f 1 5W fifth son of Sir Benjamin Heywood, 13 8 7 ': t do" moot, near Manchester, to Ella Sophia, ela e— . of the Rev. Wm. Gibson, rector of Fawley of tO DEATHS. 0 , 8 el d e :o l3 c BANBES—On the 6th ult., at Lucknow, from 7'o P, s - a O , severe wounds received in action on tn e ,lb 0, 1 11 ;04 - William George Hawtrey Banker, Cornet ~..„, w„, i , v and third surviving sou of the late Right J" . " — 0 Bankes, aged 21. R. eR 11°° BENSON—On the 19th inst., at Leamington, V .4.9 0 ' Esq., solicitor, of Cockermc,uth, aged 51. Pl' BUSHE—On the 19th inat., at Folkestone , the ~,, F. Bushe. i 0110 HA , LIDAT —On the 18th inst., at Elm -1 11 0 A grove, George Halliday, Esq., of 51, Fle e ' ffe o aged 2e. O l e SMIRKE—On the 13th ult., from the effects e f e ltyle, Y 1 ht the foretop, on board H.M.S. Leopard, offEirices ' Smirk°, R.N., the second son of Sydney A.R.A. ----- y 01121119: Rib o cos-DoN : Printed and Published by hra---- - 0 00 0 _,0 4 1 of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sit of ow 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savor* of Middlesex, Friday, May 21, 1858 . . - I Colt Th QUID on at place II Pa the taay Th ~~ Place. loans Assu beink and The g slien deliv A said Of tr E ;Igen , •te *II oels +ette / due be Th r or th Sign Pa acrid UPon to th Arer7; Tri sus and from to 1i riag( ICITII nays aria nom] leg!: boo, Oth pari k;411 Ch.(