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

he appears to consider that a period might arrive when the publication of this despatch would be desirable. (Cheers.) I cannot help thinking that my noble friend believes there is a possibility of such an explanation being given by Lord Canning of the nature and charac ter of the proolamation as might render the publication of the despatch desirable. My noble friend was perfectly justified in presenting these resolutions to your lord ships,. under the impression that the publication of this despatch had been an act of her Majesty's Govern mop' t, and that it was liable to censure ; but I should have thought that after the manly and noble declaration. o f my noble friend the late President of the Board of Control—(cheers)—the other night, in which he assumed to himself any blame that might attach to that publica tion, and in which he for the first time announced to his colleagues the noble sacrifice which be had made of him self, my noble friend, under one of those generous im pulses— (loud cries of Hear, hear)—which charac terise him, would instantly have risen to abandon the sagtiOD of which he had given notice. (Cheers, and come cries of " No, no.") My noble friend, on the contrary, has endeavoured, under the altered state of circum stantial, to justify himself for persevering in his motion, and has suggested a metaphysical analogy of personal identity, and insisted upon that which nobody ever dis- Fmted—the unity and combination of a Cabinet, and its responsibility for all the acts of all its members , I should appeal from the metaphysics of my noble friend to com mon sense, to which my noble friend the late President of the Board of Control also appealed. With respe o cpo the responsibility of a Cabinet for the acts of each its members, I apprehend that responsibility must cease when any particular member of a Cabinet assumes to himself the blame of any acts, and quits the Cabinet in oonsequence. (Hear, an d also from one noble lord an expression of dissent.) A . noble lord seems to intimate some dissent. I should like to know whether the noble lords on the Oppositionbenches would like their Govern ments to be tried upon a different principle—whether they think that any errorof an individual member should attach to the whole of the Cabinet, and that the whole of it should be visited with the punishment of resigna tion. I think that the principle of responsibility can be pushed to this inconvenient and absurd extent—(bear) because to hold that any person who selects the mem bers of a Cabinet is to be so thoroughly responsible for every act which they may perform, to bs so bound up with them, that if they commit an error in any respect he must justify and adopt it, and in consequence resign, appears to me to be a principle which would be produc tiie of the greatest possible inconvenience to the public, and which could not be carried out without rendering united Government impossible. (Hear.) I pass from this to approach more nearly to the consideration of the question which is immediately before your lord ships. I shall not follow the noble duke near me in any consideration of the propriety or impropriety of the annexation of the territory of Oude to the British dominion, but there are circumstances con *Noted with the population of Oude which appear to Me to have a most important bearing upon the consideration of the policy of this proclamation. Your lordships are aware that the principal part of the Indian army was re cruited from the population of Oude ; that they consti tuted the best part of our Sepoy force ; that the greater part of those persons were hereditary landlorders in the territory of Oade ; that they generally left their wives and children, and their native country ; th3t they joined our ranks, that they served us with apparent fidelity, but at the same time . with a constant reference to the end of all their labours and all their dangers—namely, when their service was past to return home, and to settle them selves again upon their native soil. Persons who had these local attachments and early associations connected with the soil of their country were likely to feel an at tachment to native rule, even although it might not have been such as a European might desire ; and there was nothing so likely, not merely to shock their feelings, but to irritate their m inds, as to transfer the sovereignty of their country from the native rulers to the British do , minion. Their country was forcibly taken away from its rulers, and transferred to British dominion. All their early attachments, all their local associations were rudely invaded, and they were driven into that revolt which has brought so much misery with it and desolated so many of the fairest provinces of India. They fell bef the irresistible power of British arms. They were sub dued, and they lay humble and prostrate before us. The principal question was how we were to deal with a people thus circumstanced, how they were to be treated consistently with justice, humanity, and policy. Jus tice, unhappily, required a few terrible examples ; but with regard to the mass of the people, I am not afraid to confess that I think great allowance ought to have been made for men who were driven into revolt by some of the strongest motives which actuate the human breast. (Cheers.) I believe that this opinion is shared by every member of the Cabinet. trader these circumstances a proclamation was brought to their attention, which proclamation appeared to thirn to violate every principle upon which they thought the Governor-General ought to act. That proclamation was as my noble friend, the late President of the Board of Control, has described it. It was a proclamation of wholesale, sweeping, indiscriminate confiscation. It may be very easy to criticise the terms of this proclamation, but it is impossible to assume that it only applied to a limited extent, or to a limited number of persons. It declares most distinctly that, with only five or six exo-p • Cons, the proprietary right in the soil, not merely of a portion, but of the whole of the province of Oude id con fiscated to the British Government, which will dispose of that right in such manner as it may think best. Can anybody doubt that to the persons to whom it was ad dressed this would go forth as a measure of discriini- Mate confiscation ? (Hear, hear.) Even yocr lordship with all your ingenuity, can pat no other certain inter pretation upon it than that I have stated ; and could those persons have received any other impression thaa that they lay entirely at the mercy of the British Goveim ment—that they were not merely en-eosed to confiscation, bit that the sentenot had actually gone forth against them I (Cheers.) The restraining clause adverted to by the noble earl (of Shaftesbury) shows, as my nold friend (the Earl of Ellenborough) distinctly explained, that the confiscation must have taken place, because it speaks of restitution. (Hear.) What, then, was to he done under these circumstances ? Here was a procla mation virlsting every principle upon which her Majes ty's Government were disposed to act with regard to the natives of India. Were they to remain silent ? Were they patiently to wait for explanations of which they had not the slightest intimation ? (Hoar, hear.) I quite admit that if at the time the proclamation was sent over, or shortly afterwards, Lord Canning had intimated that it required an interpreter—that some explanation w.s necessary, and that he would furnish it at the earliest opportunity—the Government would have been much to blame if they had not waited for such explanation be fore they sent out the despatch. But no suggestion of this kind being received from eny quarter, it seemed ne cessary to the Government to prevent immediately the mischievous consequences which they believed would re melt from the issue of the proclamation, and accordingly the despatch which has been so much criticised, but to which I subscribe in every part, wa., on the 26th ,f April, sent out to my noble friend. Now the noble duke is extremely humourous on certain passages of that de spatch. I can only assure him, however, that his light opinions on this subject are not shared in by the public. I believe it is this particular part of the despatch which one person says ought to be written in letters of gold. At the risk of exposing myself to the censure of the noble duke I will read those two passages again, and aek your lordships whether they deserve the character he has affixed to them : " We desire to see British authority in India rest upon the willing obedience of a contented people. There cannot be con fi sca ti on . contentment where th ere i s genera l Go vernment cannot long b e ma i n t a i ne d b y any f orce in a countey where the whole people is rendered hostile by a sense of wrong, and if it were possible so t o maintain it it would not be a consummation to ha desired." These are the sentiments which actuate the Govern ment in the despatch so sever e ly cr iti c i se d or ric 'ieiled by the noble duke. But, my lords, 1 think a fallacy has run through the whole of the discussion thi e evee lug. The resolutions condemn the publi cat i on of this despatch. But my noble friend (the E tri of Ellen. borough) has generously, and in the most mails and straightforward manner, assumed the whole blame of that publication. Surely, then, corntnon sense and fairness and justice require that the Goverc ment, as a Government, should be exonerated from re sponsibility. (Cheere ) If this is so, then it must be . assumed that they did not intend to publish the docu ment, and that it was a secret despatch. Yet the whole argum ent of my noble friend (the Earl of Shaftesbury) has turned upon the mischief which would arise from its publication in India in weakinirg the authority Of the Governor-General, whereas if it were intended as a secret despatch it was not open to criticism at all. Of course some of your lordships, if the duty had devolved upon them, might have written the letter with a great deal more mildness and forbear ance, Many who did feel the danger of this proclamation so stronghly as my noble friend might have expreibed thamselves in more guarded language. But my noble friend felt the neces city of immediate action, and he expressed hirrself in the manly and honest manner which characterises him. (Sear, bear.) I have admitted that the Government would have been to blame if, expecting any explanation from Lord Canning, they had not waited to ascertain the real grounds on which he issued the proclatnatioo." .Now, there was one individual, at least, in this country who bad received notice cf his lordship's intention to furnish such an explanation, but who most unhappily did not think it part of his duty to communicate it to the Government. My noble friend the Foreign Secre ,t_tr7 . made the other evening a graceful acknowledgment thef readiness of the noble earl near me (the Earl of Clarendon) i n commun i cat i ng any pu blf c l et t ers rece i ve d by him after his retirement from office ; and I appre hend th a t it is eucce-scr all the the duty of a minister to present to his _ r information which he tbus receives. The conduct of 0.,+ Earl of Vernon Ei Smith, however, to my noble friend th lenhorough) certainly presents a remarkable contrast to what seems to be the practice in these cases. A. noble marquis, not now in his place (the Marquis of Lansdowne) ithe explained l tto your lordships the circumstances under w the lettee"nunicatica of this important paesage in escaped the attention of the right h o e w e r e - g rfi r e a u y ti em h rn e . Making every sort of allowance,h howeve r , for th e domestic affairs in which he was engaged, i t : that the right ho n . g entleman actually eZ,Faetr oated with Lord Palm erston as to the p ro p riet y of trap ' s . - milting this particular passage to the President of the Board of Control. [earl Granville here interposed et , observation which did not reach the gallery.] The noble earl says that the right hon. gentleman stated nothing of the kind. Bear! GRANVILLE—No 1 I said that the right hon. gentleman stated something of the kind. The LORD CHANCELLOR—I am quite content with _`f something of the kind." (Cheers and laughter ) THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EV ENING, MAY 15, 1858 Just let us see what is the course taken by the right hon. gentleman. He had a letter which contained these words :—"I intend to issue a proclamation to the talookdars and landowners of Oude, which will reach you by the mail. I did hope to have accompanied it with a full explanatory despatch, but more urgent business has prevented my doing so from hour to hour." And then, it appears, he consulted Lord Palmerston, or "something of the kind," as .to the propriety of com municating this passage to my noble friend. See, then, the situation in which he places himself. It was not through forgetfulness or inadvertence that he failed to communicate it, but through deliberate purpose and i - tention. He took counsel on the subject—[Earl Gitletinms : "No, no !' At any rate the right hon. _ gentlemansidered it t o n o o k t h at i s own l c n o e u n n e a s s e ( a l ry l a t u o g hter ) a communicate; n rl l e ctohn i 8 passage to his successor in office. Now, I cannot help thinking even the noble lords near me must think that in neglecting this the right h on . gentleman failed in his duty. (Hear, hear.) What, then, was the situation in which my noble friend was placed ? That despatch was not sent to Lord Canning until the 26th of April. The right hon. gentleman (Mr. V. Smith) had received the letter eight days before ; he had therefore ample time for bringing it under the notice of my noble friend ; and, no doubt, had my noble friend heard that any ex planation was expected from Lord Canning, he would have withheld his despatch. Who, then, is answerable for the sending out of that despatch? My noble friend, who objected to the proclemation, who thought it was dangerous who had no idea that any explanation of it was to be given, and who therefore sent out his despatch to arrest the progress of the mischief which he anticipated ; or the right hon. gentleman (Mr. V. Smith), who might have prevented all the difficulty which has ensued by a timely communication of the important fact that an explana tion would be furnished, for sach a statement would un doubtedly have prevented the despatch being sent out ? (Cheers.) What, then, is the situation of your lord ships under these circumstances, when you are called upon to decide, not whether the publication of the de spatch is to be disapproved, but whether its premature publication by her Majesty's Ministers is a matter which you ought to reprobate ? Your lordships have it before you distinctly that her Majesty's Government were not as a body responsible for such publication. Is it not, then, a most surpe:sing thing that this distinguished assembly should be debating during a whole night a matter which has been conceded by the regret expressed by my noble friend (Lord Eilenborough) that the despatch has been published ? Are we not placed in a most extra ordinary position by the resolutions of my noble friend, which call upon your lordships to consider whether you will condemn a supposed act of her Majesty's Govern ment which is now admitted on all hands to have been an act of that Government ? I feel, my lords, that a most unfortunate course has been adopted in this instance. I had hoped, as I have already said, that after the manly declaration of my noble friend the late President of the Board of Control, the noble earl (Shaftesbury) woald have felt it his duty, not merely to himself but your lordships, to abstain from pressing his resolutions. I believe this discussion is wholly unnecessary, and I think the best mode of meeting the resolutions is by moving the previous question. (Cheers.) Lord CRANWORTH contended that the greater portion of the speech of the Lord Chancellor was a covert defence of a great portion of the army of Oude, which came with a peculiar bad grace from any gent: 6 • man who occupied the woolsack. He thought it was clearly demonstrated that the publication of the de spatch was the act not of the noble earl (Ellenborough) alone, but that of the united Government, and he would prove it from the statements made in the other house. (Cheers.) It was irregular to refer to what transpired in another house, but it was rendered necessary in this instance, an hon. member in that house having been made the mouthpiece of her Majesty's Government on this question. (Hear.) The noble and learned lord then reterred to the various questions that had been put in the other house to members of her Majesty's Govern ment in that house in reference to Lord Canuing's policy in India, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer remarked last week that the Government disapproved of Lord Canning's policy in " every sense." That, he contended, was an adoption of the despatch by the Government. Beyond that, he was prepared to express his opinion that it was a despatch nothing could justify—(cheers)— , and however wrong Lord Canning might have acte 1, it was the duty of the Government to have remonstrated with him in a private and not in a public manner, or have recalled him if they thought his proclamation indi cated a policy disastrous to the country, but nothing, however, could justify the sending out what he could scarcely refrain from calling an insulting despatch, which the tenor of this despatch indicated. (Cheers,) If the tone and temperature cf the letter bad been in accord ance with the remarks of the noble earl on a former oc casion, it would have been a justifiable one, but the pub lished despatch went far beyond that. He considered the complicity of the whole Government had been estab lished in publishing a despatch which nothing on the part of Lord Canning could have justified its writing. He felt persuaded, when it was examined, it would turn out that it was the suzerainty of the land that was cen• fiscated, and not the holders or the occupiers. Toe Eerl of DONOUGHM.ORE, to use a vulgar ex pression, believed it would turn out the noble and learned lord (Lord Cranworth) had found a mare's nest, for he had mixed up in his remarks two separate despatches. In the speeches of all the noble and learned lorda,on the other side of the house there was a condemnation of the despatch itself, whilst at the same time they condemned annexation ; but why, instead of adopting that course. had they not brought forward a motion to that effect ? Any person who read the paragraph in the despatch re litive to confiscation, must see goat it referred to the whole cf the people and the soil of the country—(bear)— and in the explanatory despatch accompanying the pro clamation into Oude instructions were given how the people, who were divided into three classes, were to be dealt with. Any person who had watched the late occur rences in India must be aware that the least disturbance of British authority and greatest obedience to our autho rity in the most critical circumstances , xi,ted in those dis tricts where we had least interfered with the owners of the soil. It was confiscation in Ireland that had caused so much ill-feeling towards England. Earl GREY intended to vote for the motion of his noble friend, bat in doing so he must disclaim being actu ated by any party feelings. Ever since the Whig party was broken up in 1852 he had kept himself free from all party ties. On that account he had never been the partisan cf the late Government ; and for the same reason, when that Government fell, so far from his determining to op pose the incoming Administration, be was most anxious they should be afforded every opportunity of establishing themselves in power, for he felt that such frequent changes of Government were attended with great public inconvenience. But, above all, he desired it to be under stood that the vote which he was about to give way iu no ways influenced by a feeling of hostility towards the noble earl recently at the head of the Indian Board, for he entertained the highest opinion of that noble lord's knowledge of Ltd* as well as respect for his personal character. However, therefore, it was that he felt the deepest regret at what occurred last week in another place, foreseeing that the effect must be to weaken the stability of the Government. For it seemed to him impossible, no matter how great the consequent in convenience, that the Huse of Commons c uld over look what then happened. Now what he (Earl Grey) objected to was the premature publication of the de spatch of the noble earl. At the same time, although undoubtedly they were not in a position to firm an exact opinion with respect to the proclamation itself, he must exams his total disbelief that its effect would be what was described by the noble earl. (Hear, hear.) He found men who had had great experience of India, and who understood the laws and habits of India, gave a different interpretation to the preclarnadon from that put forward by the noble earl. However. as to that point, they must wait for the explanations of Lord Canning himself. But Lord Canning ha 1 been blamed for not sending home those explanations already. Now, remembering how Lord Canning had been oppressed by the weight of affairs—how every moment of his time had been occupied—above all, that the Government of India must mainly be carried on India, they ought ne t to have been in a hurry for those explanations. (Hear.) They had no right to expect full explanations until they received the documents actually issued. When he was at the head of the Colonial-office he invariably treated such documents as that forwarded to the noble earl by Lord Canning as the expression of an opinion which was liable to be altered. But, adcpting the view which the noble earl did of the proclamation of Lord Canning, did he find fault with the writing of such a despatch ? No, certainly not ; although, perhaps, the noble earl might have assumed a different tone in the communication of his views. What he did disapprove of was, the unhappy determinatio n to lay the despatch before Parliament. (Cheers.) Re believed it was impossible to exaggerate the ill effects of that publication. (Renewed cheers.) At the same time there was one paragraph in the de spatch which ought not to nave been introduced into it. He alluded to the n ioannexation were ofO unfavourableudeparraph having foresee to the t t o h e the policywhole, o f perhaps, but whether it w as right a or annexation opr it was a dereliction of duty on the part o f brand in the face of Europe and a ster f of the Crown to of the previous advisers of hisoe re or syAasii mistress the conduct with said d Such a course treachery and injustice. (Loud ought not to affix the was utterly unjustifiable. But it was s'a ) upon of the Ministry. He t ty he of no p b o l b e lio e a a , r ,i l on they after the re believed that on such occasions there must be ; joint r t i e r s e p m o e n :i t b i responsibility, for without they would have Ministers divided amongst theme lye-, aid all the intriguing as of old of one Minister agatnet another—(hear)—i n fact, anything like settled government would be impossible. However, if a government did not mean to hold itself responsible for the acts of p articular Ministers, tho se acts must be disavowed at the earliest possible moment, and not after they had I b eco me the subject of discussion in the two Houses of Parliament. (Cheers.) For these reasons it appeared to him that the house ought not to hesitate to adopt the resolution of his noble friend, and he must at the same time express his astonishment that for the first time in our parliamentary history a motion tantamount to a vote of censure should be met on the part of the Govt rament by moving the previous ques tion. (Load cheers.) The Duke of NEWCASTLE had no desire whatever to see the present Government removed from office, nevertheless he must vote for the motion of the nobl - earl. A t the same time he could not give his entire ap proval to the form in which the motion was brought forward, as he considered it much too narrow, an' framed too much with a view to catch votes. (Hear.) He thought if they were to vote for "the previous ques tion," it would go forth to the world that Parliament was indifferent on the subject. He would not enter into the ue • q titian as to whether they ought to approve or dis approve of th e proclamation I would be a b surd in them if they were to at • tempt to form an opinion in the absence of all information to gui • de them to a right con- 4 elusion. He totally disapproved of the language used in the despatch with reference to the annexation of Oude. It was quite evident that all along the de spatch of the Government was intended for publica tion, and it was for its publication that he in tended to support the motion of the noble earl. He had been the intimate friend of Lord Can ning for several years ; nevertheless, if he could possibly support the Government upon such an occasion he would willingly sacrifice his private feelings from consideration for the public interests. Hence he totally disapproved of the proceedings of the Government, and therefore he must record his vote against them. (Cheers.) The Earl of DERBY—I am not disposed to complain of the tone or language either of the noble lord opposite (Earl Grey) or of the noble duke who last addressed your lordships, and I readily and freely admit that neither the noble earl nor the noble duke is actuated in the slightest degree Ly party feeling on this question. I believe that no one in this house is so free" from any peculiar bias or party feeling as the noble earl and the noble duke. Least of all do I feel disposed to complain of the closing observation of the noble duke, in which, with a warmth of feeling which does him credit, he vin dicated (as he supposed it was necessary)the character of his absent friend. (gear, hear.) For my part, in en deavouring to deal with this question, I can assure the noble duke and the numerous friends of Lord Canning, —and he has many on both sides of the honse—(hear, hear)—that nothing is further from my desire than to utter even a single expression against the character or conduct of that noble lord, with the single exception of the Oude proclamation. Lord Canning in his admini stration of Indian affairs, placed, as he was, in circum stances of great difficulty, exhibited a great amount of firmness, and on former occasions a most laudable spirit of humanity, for which I give him infinite cr edit . in the position in which ho found himself. But remembering this, the greater is my regret to find that a man actuated by such principles has been led to issue so unfortunate and ill-time a proclamation. While I entirely acquit the noble earl and the noble duke of any political or party motives, I cannot carry my complaisance so far as to assume that this question is to be debated and decided purely and simply on its merits without reference to poli tical or party considerations. (Hear.) It is true the noble earl who opened this discussion announced that he came for ward as one who stood in a sort of neutral position where no man could suspect him of bias. "My sym pathies," said the noble lord, " are always on the side of those who sit on the opposite benches." Now, Ido not dispute that his sympathies may be on this side, but I must say that his votes are more frequently given on the other. (Laughter,) And when the noble earl declares himself free from all party feeling, I cannot help having it suggested to my mind that it resolutions were to be proposed by a person uninfluenced in this way it might have been better had they been brought for s and by one not so closely connected with the noble lord who was at the head of the late Administration. (Cheers and laughter) The noble earl's notice was given on Monday last. I don't know whether he attended it, but I pre sume he had communicated to him the result of that Sunday meeting which I am told was not entirely for religious purposes. (Cheers and laughter.) I mention it merely as a singular coincidence. On Sunday last a l meeting was held at the house of the noble lord (Palmer ston), at which it is supposed (and I believe on very good authority) that the subject of the motion was discussed ; and it does so happen that the noble earl, intimately and closely connected with the noble viscount, gives on Monday in this house notice of his intention to submit a similar resolution. (Hear.) Now, whether or not the noble earl is so entirely uninfluenced as he is desirous of being considered, I must say this house is very greatly changed from what I ever knew it before if the attendance I see here on both sides does not indicate some little idea that a party question is at stake. (Laughter.) If, however, I ever doubted whether any political or party question was involved, I should have been undeceived altogether by the tone of this debate, the whole tendency or which has been to convert the very simple and very innocent motion of the noble earl into one of censure upon the Government. This is put forward broadly, distinctly, clearly ; and after that to tell me this is no political or party question passes even my belief. (Laughter.) My lords, two subjects have been mixed up in this debate which ought to be kept separate. This one is the merits of the original proclamation and of the secret despatch ; and the other is the subsequent publication of that despatch, and the responsibility of her Majesty's Government with regard to it. These are two perfectly distinct and separate questions. As to the substance of my noble friend's despatch, I adopt it, I adhere to it, I stand by it. With regard to the publication of that de spatch, I had no knowledge of it, I was not consulted about it, and I regret the fact. (Hear, hear.) To begin, then, with the proclamation and my noble friend's com ments upon it. There is one thing which has given me unfeigned satisfaction in the course of this discussion. Several most valuable admissions have been made on the other side of the house. Setting apart certain expressions used by my noble friend, the noble earl who opened this discussion said he should not find much fault with this despatch if it were addressed to Lord awning as a secret despatch for the purpose of guidance or even of reproof. Subsequently we have had more valuable admissions still, for I believe the noble earl (Grey) said that if the proclamation was sw.'ceptiele of the interpretation given to it by my noble friend (the Earl of Ellenborough) no terms of censure could be too severe for it. (Hear, bear.) This much, then, will, at all events, result from the die Cussion. It will show that, setting aside the meaning of Lord Canning's proclamation, the unanimous opinion of this house is that wholesale confiscation in Oude would be an unjustifiable course of proceeding, and that cle mency to the vanquished ought to be the rule adopted. (Hear.) That is the unanimous opinion expressed. Noble lords on the other side of the house put themselves pro minently forward to proclaim this doctrine, and declare that that is Lord Canning's meaning. Witb all my heart and soul do I desire it may turn out that that has been his meaning. Your lordships are to recollect, however, that the despatch upon which so much criticism has been bestowed was one written by my noble friend, and fully adopted by the Government, upon the receipt of a proclamation which appeared to us to convey in no doubtful terms a doctrine very contrary to that which it is now declared to contain. We received that pro clamation. My noble friend bad a month previously laid down in a despatch to Lord Canning what were his own views and the views of the Government as to the course which ought to be pursued. That despatch was dated March 24, under the belief that before that time the city of Lucknow would be evacuated by the rebels, and that no considerable body would remain in arms against us throughout the country, and it proceeds to intimate the policy which the Government thought it desirable should be adopted "To us it appears that, whenever open resistance shall have ceased, it 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 desperate war, than that which may perhaps be lawfully adopted after the suppression of mutiny and rebellion— such acts always being exempted from forgiveness or miti gation of punishment as have exceeded the licence of legi timate hostilities." • After recommending a general disarmament, and as far as possible a general amnesty, it declares that "iu every amnestied district the ordinary administration of the law should as soon as possible be restored." In order to show the animus of nay noble friend towards Lord Canning I beg your lordeblps' attention to this passage "In carrying these views into execution you may meet with obstructions from those who, maddened by the scenes they have witnessed, may desire to substitute their own policy for that of the Government; but persevere firmly in doing what you may think right ; make those who would counteract you feel that you are resolved to rule, and that you will be served by none who will not obey. Acting in ' this spirit, you may rely upon our unqualified support." (Cheers.) Teat was the language used by my noble friend on March 24th; those were the principles laid down; and then, not of course in answer to this despatch, for it could not have been received, but following on its issue, came the proclamation, which undoubtedly appeared to us to be couched in a very different splrit. There is no question that that proclamation intimated to the talookdars, the chiefs, and inhabitants of Gado, that, with a few specified exceptions, the whole proprietary rights of the soil were confiscated to the Crown. Instructions certainly accompany it, addressed to the Commissioner of Oude ; but, as my noble frig-nd most justly remarked in his el( in pa•cb, these instructions did not go t i the people of Oushia They received the bare and naked proclamation, and nothing more. (Haar.) Well, then it is said. " Oh, but this does not at all mean what you suppose it does ; it only means that the talookdare and the great men will be divested of rights of lordship, which thereafter will be vested in the Crown, but it never crossed Lord Can ning's mind to interfere with their private rights." I should like to know, however, what would be thought by the noble earl or the noble duke if an Act of Parlia ment were passed in reference to their respective coun ties confiscalng to the Crown all " the proprietary rights of the soil." (Hear, and a laugh ) Their tenure being thereafter that of copybolders under the Crown, with no guarantee for the future security of their pos sessions, 1 rather suspect they would imagine, seeing such a term in as Act of Parliament, that they must look sharply about them or else they would soon have not an acre left. ) There may be some abstruse, hidden meaning in this proclamation, intelligible to the p-ople of India ; but my belief is tbat upon receiving this infor mation they would deem it to be a notice to all the in habitants of Oude, high and low, rich and poor, that, with the few exceptions there specified, every man should be deprived of the land on which alone he depends fir aubsistance. (Hear.) The naming of six persons—and o S ocmht 13felat Ontovni ite e n t uh: o y eaur — ;he, adhered w riam h y: o ytsinha w t a e : r t ntv e :e: ympt o sol sooa, byadceyfof:eatpdl position.e ; rmitted to 'retain their babe ritancestasthtehyeywheerled them at the time of the annexation e o f i r a uu s da t proceeding.h oB you select mostspn?ndphsti eao a rd w us p so e s p r nea e e as a nr e r dwc s: e l l t l think, hardly y t er h e e d co t u:itr y y ou . foauithwfuerpey_suvvrrhoou,nduenddebry great a r p ea o t COL trials, have resi it—nbtotinfLpli:nysg4o42.o.hinoeenm aud by na me, and telling them that h hall enter imposed ll ll j Y t o e i l o f u a a t ht-et:ihra:Pi their at countrymeno to quit your cause signal reward for their distinguished fi a l!h a shall be permitted to retain those lands, "sin heYct oily th e m," e s al c moderateis atsisiee s w a a le y n i t in as w t h n i a c y be ia you reward uponyour friends I must say I don't know what you mean to do with regard to your enemies. (A laugh.) But it is said it was Lot intended to dispossess these person of their lands. Now, my lords, let us see—apart from the mere terms of the proclamation itself—what was tke gloss put upon it in the letter issued for its esplauation. There were three clas , es of per-one specified in the proclama tion according to their different degrees of guilt and cone s tarative innocence, With regard to the second oIASS that is to say persons who have taken up arms against the Government, but who "have done so less heartily, and upon whom for other causeslthe Chief Commissioner may not see reason to put restraint, these, after surren dering their arms, might be allowed to go to their homes, with such security for their peaceable conduct as the Chief Commissioner may think proper to require ;" and the letter goes on to say—l entreat the house to mark this—that "the permission to return to their homes must not be considered as a re-instatement of them in the possession of their lands—(hear)—for the deliberate disposal of which the Government will preserve itself unfettered." Now, if there is any sense or meaning in language, this passage means that although these per sons may be permitted to return home they are not to be reinstated,—not in their territorial rights, but in the possession of their lands, With regard, therefore, to the whole land of Oude, the Government holds itself at per fect liberty to dispose of that land as it may think fit. It was, I think, impo-sible, in the face of the proclama tion, and of the language I have read, to suppose for a single moment, that her Majesty's Government could put upon it such an interpretation as has now, by way of apology, been attached to it by noble lords oppo site. Having received this proclamation, not as be ing a'ready issued, but as about to be issued, it was the duty of her Majesty's Government to consider what course they ought to pursue. We thought, my lords it was a matter of the utmost importance that no a mo ment should be lost in intimating our apprehensions as to the dangerous consequences which might be produced by the issue of such a proclamation. We were not with out hopes that our despatch, which was in strict unison with the principles we had before laid down, might by possibility reach Lord Canning in time to enable him to reconsider the terms of his proclamation, and to issue one which was not liable to the construction that might be placed upon it. We are told that we ought to have waited to receive explanations from Lord Canning. My lords, if we had had the slightest idea that such expla nations were coming, I don't say we should have waited because it would have been our duty to notice the pro clamation, but we should very materially have modified the language of the despatch. (Cheers.) We received the proclamation officially, we received no private corn .munieation whatever, we were not likely t ) rece i ve suc h a communication, because Lord Canning could not be aware of the change of Government, and if communica tions of that nature had been sent—as private commu nications are sent by every Minister and Governor ex plaining their public acts—it was not to us that such explanations would have come. But such an explanation did come—(loud cheers from the Ministerial side) —and it arrived at a period when its communication to her Majesty's Government might have been of the utmost importance—when if it had been communicated to the m it might have materially modified the tone and language of my noble friend's despatch. (Hear.) Why was not that explanation communicated to us I should like to know (Cheers.) The noble marquis (Lansdowne) said the other night that Mr. V. Smith received the explana tion at a very late period. Subsequently, I believe, the noble marquis was satisfied that Mr. Y. Smite received it at a period when it might have been communicated to us and have had some effect, but we were told that Mr. V. Smith was in Ireland attending his sou's wedding, which was much more important than any subject of this nature. (A. laugh.) That, however, is not Mr. V. Smith's account of the transaction. He says, "I did receive a letter from Lord Canning ; I know it was ad dressed to me as President of the Board of Control. I did not think it utterly unimportant, because the moment I received it I went"—to whom ? To the Ministry by whom Lord Canning expected it would have been received I No ; but to the head of the Govern ment which bad just been displaced, and who was in opposition to the existing Ministry. (Cheers.) In the course of this evening it has been denied that Lord Pal merston was consulted on the subject of sending this ex tract of a private letter to her Mejesty's present Go vernment. All that I can say is that the report of what appears to have taken place elsewhere gives the following as the words used by Mr. V. Smith : "I may state, however, that I read it the moment I re ceived it to my noble friend the member for Tiverton, to whom it did not appear, any more than to myself, that it was necessary to communicate it to the Government." (Laud cheers and laughter.) Now, my lords, Lard Pal merston may or may not have given any advice, but if we are to believe Mr. V. Sa.ith—and I cannot hesitate to believe a statement which he makes so solemnly—the first thing he did was to communicate this passage to the head of the late Government, who did not think any more than himself that it was necessary to communicate it to the Minister to whose department it related. All I can say is that I think the noble viscount (Palmerston) must have very materially changed his views with re gard to the expediency and necessity of communicating information bearing upon public matters which may be contained in private letters, because not long ago I had the honour of receiving a communication from the noble viscount, enclosing a letter which ha said had been rescued from the wreck of the Ava, and which, inas much as it related to public affairs, he thought it his duty to transmit to me. Now, that despatch, rescued from the wreck of the Ava, which the noble viscount— anxious, as he always is, to diseharge his duty to the public—forwarded to nee ' contained information that a petition for the recall of Lord Canning which had been tent to this country, and had been returned to India that it might be transmitted through Lord Canning, had been sent to the Governer-General to be so transmitted. (Laughter.) That was the sole in formation contained in the despatch, yet that piece of information, three mouths old, was considered by the noble viscount so important—(a laugh)—that he deemed it his duty not to bee a minute in communicat ing it to me as the Lead of her Majesty's Government— (cheers and laughter) ,-but a statement of the Governor- General, written as he supposed to a Minister of the Crown, intimating his intention to forward explanations respectingaa very important official document appeared to the noble viscount so utterly insignificant that neither he nor Mr. Smith thought it xpeclierit to make any com munication on the subject to her Majesty's Ministers. Again, I say, this passes the limits of my credulity ? (" Hear," and a laugh.) I know not what other state ments or letters may have been received by Mr. Vernon Stnith—(hear, hoar)—but this I will say, that, although it is possible, I think it is barely probable that in the course of two months and a half, or nearly three months, the Governor-General of India should not have column eicated one single private lino with re , pest to public af fairs to the Minister who immediately presided over the Indian department. (Hear, hear.) Ho may have kept that extraordinary silence, but I very much doubt the fact, and I think it is almost incredible. Certain it is, however, that not one line have we ever seen, nor have we since we came into office had the slightest means of judging what, upon any one question, were Lord Can niag's views of pol cy. (Loud and continued cheering.) Well, my lords, in the absence of all such information, we were bound to act upon the proclamation and the public documents we possessed ; and reading that pro clamation i n th e sense in which v e regarded it we thought not a moment was to be lost, and the language could hardly be too strong to express our apprehensions of its consequences and our disapproval of its tone and temper. I shall not quote the various passages to which reference has been made. I shall not quote the language held in the despatch with regard to the proclamation as we understood it and as we received it ; but this I will venture to say, without fear of contradiction, that the tone and temper of that proclamation werestronglydisapproved by the highest and most competent authorities in India, that from its tone and the time at which it was issued, it was regarded as likely to lead to most alarming conse quences—(beat)—that I believe there were remonstrances against its publication, and that I know that many most eminent men have written home expressing their deep regret at the system or apparently wholesale confiscation which it would establist (Cheers.) If I could men tion the persons to whom I refer their names would command the highest respect ; but I am at liberty to name one gentleman with whom, until yesterday, I had not the slightest personal acquaintance. When I men tion the name of Sir George Clerk it will, I think, be admitted that no one is more competent to form i 6 judg ment on this subject. I requested Sir G. Clerk to for ward mo a copy of a despatch which was sent out by ray noble friend (Lord Ellenborough) only last Monday, and in doing so Sir G. Clerk say, : " May I take the libel ty to observe to your lordship that, so far as I know those countries, I should say that the sous titnents with which her Majesty's Government have re garded it, if allowed to prevail, will right the ship, but if a different course should be persisted in British dominion over it cannot be restored in any degree of security by means of all the European troops England can afford to send to such a climate or to such a distance." These are the deliberate opinions sit a roan who, more than any other, knows the circumstances and feelings of the people of India; and he interprets this proclamation as we usterpret it ; he interprets confiscation as wa in terpret it, and he says that, unless the recommendations of the Government should be attended to, and if this system of severity should be persisted in, no amount of force that you can send from this country will enable you permanently to maintain your authority in peace in India. (Cheers) h that a justification a the Govern ment for having taken the earliest moment to pretest agalest a course of proccedinge which they thought would necessarily lead to the most feariul consequences ? (dear, bear.) Let us recollect what is the condition of Oade. There every landholder is a soldier and every soldier is a landholder, and a system of universal con fiscation addressed to a population of armed men—many trained in your service, and many feudal proprietors, having numerous armed retainers,—universal confisca tion, I say, applied to such a population, with SOM.) ex ceptional indulgences, of which no person coued feel secure, was a certain means not to put an end to strife, but to protect a desultory and most embarrassing war, and to extinguish the hopo of peace and security for months and perhaps years to come. (Cheers.) We I fonnd it necessary to protest at the earliest period against the possibility of such lamentable results, and we thought it necessary to point out to the Governor- General that which appeared contrary to the spirit of his proclamation, that the principle of mildness and for bearauce, with occasional instances of severity, inttead of severity with eccasional instances of clemency, was the only sound way of bringing hack the population to alle giance and content. (Hear.) I will not use any ex pression likely to give offence to the noble duke oppo site, but I do not share in that laughing tone in which he treated the enunciation in the de-catch of those great, sound, and holy prieciples which I believe it to be of the utmost importance should be made known to the people of India as the principles which guide the conduct of the ,British Government. (Hear, hear.) I do not ridicule what the noble duke was pleased to call plain truisms, nor do I think the country' will be inclined to ridicule them. Havitg expressed my entire concur rence in the statements contained in the despatch on the supposed meanin g an d i n t en ti o n of the proclamation, and having expressed that concurrence in them, not as a representation addre•sel to the people of India, but as a representation in a sterol dispatch to the Go vernor-General, I now proceed to the ferther question respecting the publication of the despatch, and the re sponsibility for its publication. But before Igo further I must just advert to one observation which has been made—namely, that it is absolutely clear that this de spatch was from the first intended for publication, other wise there would not have been found in it what the noble duke opposite was pleased to call such sonorous phrases. Now, whatever may be the character of this despatch, I do not for a moment doubt that it was the in tention and desire of my noble friend that the despatch should remain on record. It was not a private letter, but a secret despatch, not at the time to be communi cated, except to the Governor-General, but to remain on record as an indication of the policy which tiny noble friend and the Government were prepared to pursue. Therefore, of course, it did not take the form of a mere private and confidential letter, but of a recorded despatch, pointing out the viewe entertained by the Government. (Hear.) I come now to the question of publication, and I confess that I am there compelled to differ from the views of my noble friend the late President of the Board of Control. (Hear.) I stated at the very earliest op portunity afforded me that I regretted the premature publication of the despatch. I think it was unfortunate that, without any previous notice, a question should have been asked by a member of the other house, and answered by a subordinate member without communica tion with any of the Cabinet Ministers, except I presume my noble friend the late President of the Board of Con trol, and that a declaration should have been made pledging the Government to produce the despatch. I will come presently to the question of the limited liability or joint responsibility of the Cabinet, but will now advert to what has fallen from the noble and learned lord oppo site. He said that, setting aside the question whether all the Ministers were bound by one colleague, he would go further back than the Thursday of last week, and would revert to a previous Friday, in order to show that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, In answer to some question, announced that he would lay on the table a despatch which was by no means intended as a censure on the Governor-General, and the noble lord inferred that that despatch, which cast no censure on the Go vernor-General, was the despatch which he said censured that high officer. But the fact is that it was a prior de spatch. It was the despatch of the 24th of March, with respect to which the discussion took place on the 231 of April, and which was ordered to be printed on the 26th ; and the noble and learned lord has confounded two separate occasions and two separate despatches. (Hear, hear.) With respect to the despatch to which the present motion referred what happened was this :—a question was asked without no tice, and the Secretary of the Board of Control hastily announced his intention of laying the despatch on the table. That question was followed by another question from another gentleman, who asked whether the Government approved the policy of Lord Canning in issuing the proclamation. Mind, at that time the de spatch had been promised to be produced ; and whether the Government stated their approval or disapproval of the proclamation, or left the fact to be disclosed when the despatch should be produced next day, was a matter of indifference. But what was the answer given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer ? He said that the policy of confiscation intimated in that proclamation we disap prove in every sense. (Hear.) Great stress has been placed on these words "in every sense," but he was re ferring to the policy of confiscation, and in every sense of justice and policy he meant that the Government dis approved of that policy. The same night the late Presi dent cf the Council came over to me and told me what had taken place in the House of Commons, and further than so hearing that such question had been asked and answered I had no other knowledge on the subject. The noble earl the late President of the Council, however, expressed his hope that, as the production of the despatch had been promised, it would be laid on the table that night, because, otherwise, there would be no opportunity of discussing before the departure of the mail, which left on the Monday. We replied that we could not lay it on the table that night, but would do so to-morrow, and for the convenience of the noble earl and Lord Canning's friends a copy should be sent to the noble earl, and it was sent leefore the despatch was laid upon the table. On the following day there was a Council at the Palace, by which we were detained, but when we came to examine the despatch we found in it come paragraphs which we thought it more for the public convenience should not be produced. The sole object of those paragraphs was to point out the circumstances of mitigation which sepa rated the case of revolted subjects from that of mutineers, and, of course, in reasoning the point all the extenua ting circumstances were put forth with a plainness and openness with which they certainly would not have been elated if the document had been intended to meet the public eye. When we saw the character of those paragraphs we desired to have them omitted from publi cation, and with that view we sent down to the House of Commons, but before the messenger arrived, the Secretary of the Board of Control, not having had any previous communication with us, had, in consequence of the promise of the night before, laid the whole despatch on the table of the House. I regret that the whole des patch was laid on the table, and upon the whole I regret that any part of the despatch.should have been published at so early a period, but I cannot say that I regret the character or contents of the despatch. (Hear, hear.) On the contrary, I think the policy indicated in it is a just, sound, and necessary policy, and we should have been neglectful of our duty if we had omitted to take the earliest opportunity of enforcing that policy on the Governor-General, more especially at the moment when we thought he was going to abandon it. Now, with respect to the liability of all members for the act of a , single member, I wish to say that no man can put forth ) more distinctly or clearly than I do the constitutional ' doctrine that every member of the Government is re ' eponsible for the acts of every other member, whether those acts were previously known or nit, provided the 1 members of the Government continued to act together as a Government. Remaining in office and acting to gether, all the members of the Government take upon themselves a retrospective responsibility for what their colleagues have done, which they can in no way attempt to shake off, But the case is very different when the Government are charged with having done a certain act, and they say " We did not do it, it was done without our knowledge by one of your colleagues." "Never mind," it is then said, "you are all responsible for the acts of your colleague." 'put," we reply,' "in conse quence of the very act which you impugn, he has ceased to be one of your colleagues." "Never mind," it is said again, " you are still responsible ; when you knew nothing about the act he was your colleague, and you were therefore responsible for that of which you know nothing ; and now that he has ceased to be your colleague you continue reseonsible for an act of which yea ' knew nothing when it was done, and which you con demned as soon as it was brought to your knowledge." (Hear, hear.) My lord?, that may be constitutional law, but to me it appears to betbe grossest and mostabsolute absurdity—(hear)—and sure I are that if it is the consti tutional law, it is not, and never has been constitutional practice. (Cheers.) I need not go back a long way to place before your lordships a circumstance which I think is somewhat parallel. But before proceeding further I may notice a remark which fell from a noble earl oppo site. "That excuse," he said, " would have answered your purpose very well if upon the instant the promise of publication was made in the House of Commons you had jumped op and disclaimed it, and said to the Presi dent of the Board of Control, " You are no longer a member of the Government.' " " But," continued the noble earl, " it was not till 48 hours afterwards, and when a notice of motion had been given in one if not both Houses of Parliament, that you bethought you of putting upon one of your number alone the entire re sponsibility of what had taken place." Now, my lords, it was not the Government which placed up 'a the President of the Board of Contra?, but my noble friend himself who, with characteristic straightforwardness, assumed the whole responsibility, which in truth and justice simply attached to himself. (Hear, hear.) But may I ask noble lords opposite to have the goodness to carry their recollection back to the month of June, 1855 ? If my memory does not greatly deceive me, at that time the noble viscount the member for Tiverton was at the head of the Government, and the noble lord the member for London teas Secretary of State for the Colonial Department. As Secretary of State for the Ce lotdal Department the noble lord was sent upon a nni,-, sion to Vienna. In his capacity as Plenipotentiary at Vienna, be entered into certain engagements for a treaty, which ho brought home and reported to his Cabinet. His colleagues did not approve the ar rangement which he had made, and I suppose they signified to the noble lord that they did not so approve. Did they lin-net:lately insist upon his quitting office No such thing. Time went on until notice was given of a motion in Parliament charging the Govern ment with the responsibility of the treaty which had been negotiated at Vienna. (Hoar, hear.) What fol lowed 1 lam not in the secrets of the late Government, but report at the time certainly stated that a round robin was sent to the noble viscount the member for Tiverton insisting upon the retirement of Lord J. Rus• ,sell. In point of fact, Lord J. Russell ceased to be a I member of the Cabinet, and the Government then dis avowed the treaty to which he had been a party a con- I I siderable time previous, repudiating in the face of a hos tile motion against the whole of them their joint respon sibility, and throwing the entire blame upon their late colleague. (Cheers.) The Opposition of that day, being somewhat more forbearing than the Onposition of the present—(cheers)—withdrew the hostile motion against the Government in consequence of the retirement of a single member. (Renewed cheers ) I have thus given the noble lords opposite a precedent for not imposing the strict rule of joint and universal responsibility, not in reference to a matter of which all the members of the Cabinet except one were ignorant, but with regard to a subject which, although it was well known to them, they I did not disavow until a hostile motion was directed I against them in the House of Commons. (Cheers.) But, my lords, I am asked by the noble earl .opposite, "If you mean to oppose my reselutions, why do yod do so by means of the previous question ?" He never, it seems, knew - an occasion on which a vote of censure upon the Government was met on the part of the Go vernment by the previous question. My answer to that 1 is that, elthough the debate has been a deba'e of cen sure upon the Government, the vote to which your lord ships are asked to come is tot a vote of censure upon the members of the Government, hut upon an act which the members cf the Government disavow and repudiate. (Cheers.) What was the Government to do in these circumstances'? The last resolution, which is the only one of any prscical importance, asks the House of Ler is to express its regret at the premature publication by the Government of the despatch of the I.9th of April, which was calculated to weaken the authority of the Governor-General, and to encourage those still in arms against us. To some of the phraseology of that resolution I certainly must de mur. Idu not admit that the publication tools place with the sanction or by the authority of the Govern ment ; on the contrary, I contend that it took place without their knowledge, and contrary to their wish or intention. (Hear, hear.) Nor do I admit, although undoubtedly the publication--not the ivriting—of the despatch may put Lord Canning in a fearful position, from which I sincerely hope that his explanations, when received, may have the effect of relieving him, that the premature promulgation of the despatch will produce any results such as those which have been a , cribed to it. (Hear, hear.) I regret especially the publication of that part which relates to the annexation of Oude, because it is liable to be misapprehended by the natives of India ; but I cannot regret that an intimation should go out in the most authoritative manner from the Orown —approved, as I hope, by the Parliament and people of England—that the system upon which hare.fter the Government of India should be conducted, when the present unhappy revolt has been suppressed, is not to be a system of general confiscation, but a system of general toleration and mercy, and that we hope the instances may be few in which it may be necessary to make use of severity. (Hear, hear.) But, my lords, if I were to op pose the resolutions, it would appear as if I sanctioned and approved the publication of the despatch. My noble and learned friend on the woolsack had no alterna tive, then, if he meant to express the feelings and wishes of the Government, and to avoid a vote which would be liable to misconstruction, but to move the previous question, which simply imports that upon a point on which your lordships have not sufficient information you will not at the present moment undertake to pronounce a judgment. Such is the meaning of the previoum ques tion. It involves no censure upon Lord Canning or upon the character of his proclamation, but it means that you will not express a hasty opinion upon imperfect evidence or arrive at a decision which, whatever may be its effects here, will be liable to be misconstrued in India. The motion of the noble earl opposite is, and was an nounced to be, a vote against the Government. Carried in that sense, it will be construed by the people of India as meaning that the Government have been condemned for promulgating a policy of mercy and toleration., Although I am satisfied you would regret such an inter pretation as much as we should, yet the inference is clear and obvious that your adoption of a vote of censure upon the Government, after a debate in which the question of toleration or confiscation bad been the main subject of discussion, would be held in India to be your adoption of the opposite principle to that maintained by the Go vernment. (Hear.) It is upon these grounds, my lords, while I cannot defend the premature publication of the despatch, while I nevertheless hope that the promulga•• tion of some parts of it may not only be productive of no injury, but may go forth as a message of peace to India, announcing the kindly and beneficent intentions of the British Parliament with respect to the administra tion of Indian affairs, and I entreat your lordships not, by affirming the motion of the noble earl opposite, which roust be construed into a vote of censure, to place the Government in a most painful and embarrassing posi tion, and at the same time produce in India an impres sion the very reverse of that which we all wish to create. (Cheers.) Earl GRANVILLE hoped their lordehips would not allow the Government to get rid of the motion of censure by a technical amendment. The noble lord who had brought forward the motion oould not be charged with party motives. (Oh, oh, and hear, hear.) The noble earl had alluded to certain political meetings, as if hon. mem bers of the other house were not to meet on grave politi cal questions, and he had even descended so low as to in sinuate family motives, but he (Earl Granville) should have thought it unworthy of the notice of the noble earl on this occasion. The meetings were, however, perfectly legitimate. He (Earl Granville) owned that whilet the case was in a nutshell he was at a loss for some time to imagine the arguments that would have bee❑ advanced by the Government in support of their policy. He denied that he had any personal feeling against the noble earl (Ellenborongh) whom he respected for many noble quali ties, but he must say the noble earl had assumed a false position. As to his remonstrance against the proclama tion, he (Lord Granville) never heard a speech that appeared to convey less weight and conviction than that of the Lord Chancellor, though ho admitted his great ability and acquisition i❑ that house to the party whose principles he espoused. Ho appeared to have defended the conduct of the sepoys as being legitimately at war with the Indian Govornnjent. The LORD CHANCELLOR explained. The noble earl was in error in that respect. Earl GRANVILLE—The noble earl at the head of the Government bad argued that the letter of the noble earl (Ellenborough) was likely to do good in India ;but what he (Earl Granville) contended was, that the Go vernment were at liberty to send out such remarks on th© proclamation as they thought right, but that their pub lication in the present state of affairs was likely to create much mischief in India. (Hear.) It had been stated that the despatch was not intended to be published, but but from the observations that had been made by the noble earl the late President of the Board of Control, it appeared that it was intended for publication. If it was intended otherwise, he thought it would have been writ ten in a different tone. He referred to a statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with reference to the annexation of Oude and the course Government ought to pursue, viz., that the Queen of England was not a S overeign who would violate treaties, but observe them, Ste., and he went on to say that they should not do it in a corner, but in a manner to attract attention. He did not, however, say.that it was wrong for her Majesty's Government to entertain an opinion that the annexation of Oude was wrong; but if they considered that the kingdom of Oude should be returned to the King, it I ought to have been done openly, by instructions to that effect to Lord Canning, and not in an indirect manner, las inferred by this despatch. Would the noble earl lay on the table of the house the letters he had mentioned from India in opposition to this proclamation, that their lordships might see if they were written be fore its issue or after. (Rear, hear.) He could not concur in the assertion, that their lordships would consider this a proper despatch, and as the noble earl had given up a part of it, it W2lO unnecessary that he (Earl Granville) should enter into it. He now came to its publication, and he dissented generally from the proposition laid down by the noble earl as to where the joint responsibility of a O►binet commenced and where it ended, and he denied tkat the case of Lord J. Russell, alluded to by the noble earl, was a case in point. So far as he understood it, there had been a communica tion between the noble earl and Mr. Baillie in respect to the publication of the despatch, and the Chancellor of of the Exchequer had said that the Government disap proved of Lard Canning's policy in every sense. When he referred to the subject en a former occasion, he put a question to the Government, not being so cognizant of the policy of the Government in this respect, as Mr. Bright appeared to have been. (Hear, hear.) The clues. tion, however, did not rest en that. The despatch was however, published the next day ; and he called the at tention of the noble earls (Lord Ellenborough and Lord Derby) to it, who promised him (Earl Granville) he might have it, and show it to his friends, but not to publish it. That injunction was strictly foil twed out by him (Earl Granville) ; but why had not the Government before laying it on the table, read it over, and considered the evils it might produce in India I He had no doubt that was done; and the meet honourable course for the Government to have pursued would have been to have come down to the house, and refused its publication, though with some little obloquy. They, however, had left out a part of the despatch in publication, which made them responsible for the whole. Her Majesty's Government fully participated in that despatch, and by its publication were accomplices to it. He contended her Majesty's Government could not escape from the joint responsibility of the publication of this despatch, and be was afraid their lordships' house would stand a false po sition in agreeing to the motion of the previous ques tion. After this despatch it wau impossible to say what policy the Government intended to pursue towards In dia, and thertf)re he trusted the house would give an opinion on declarations it was impossible to deny ; and however much the Opposition might be taunted by party feeling•, it would be seen that their lordships had a po licy to defend, and that great mischief would result in India by the treatmeut the Governor-General had re. calved. (Hear, hear.) Their lordships then divided, when the numbers were Contents—Present Proxies ... —153 Non contents—Present Proxies 49 —167 [Majority for the Government 9. (Loud cheers.) The other orders were disposed of, and the house ad journed shot tly after one o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YEsTERDAy.) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. THE ATTENDANCE OF BON. MEMBERS. The anticipated debate on Mr. Cardwell's motion, in volvine a vote of censure on her Majesty's Government, drew an early and numerous attendance of hon. mem bers, and long before the hour for prayers the house was three parts full—a most unusual cirquinstance. After prayers Mr. Owen Stanley raised the question relative to the right of hon. members to certain seats, iu reply to which the Speaker read the standing order of the house, which was to the effect that no hon. member could take his seat before prayers, and it was the duty of the Speaker to give such instructions to the door-keeper. H e had failed to do so, and if any misunderstanding bad arisen on the subject, he was to blame for not having given the requisite orders to the door-keepers. (No, no.) Mr. Owen S anley said that in accordance with the standing order referred to he had removed the card of an honourable member from the seat placed there some time previous to prayers, and the hon. member had complained of his want of courtesy in removing it. Mr. J. Ewart, the hon. member re ferrecrte,*eaid that he uad certijuly placed his card there before prayers—an usual practice, and he had called upon the right hon. gentleman not to remove it, and dis turb the usual and recognised practice adopted by hon. members. lie had no desire to ten counter to the standing order of the house, The suject then dropped. Lord J. Russell and Mr. M. Gibson left their seats on the opposition side of the house, and went over to Sir J. Graham, on the mini3tcrial t,ido, just beiow the gp.n,g way, and had a lengthened conversation with the right hon. baronet previous to the commencement of the busi ness on the paper. The Clialcellor of the Exchequer and Lord Vane Tempest also had an earnest conversa tion on the Trea. , nry Bench. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Norwich Gas' Bill was read a third time and passed. The following bills were further considered, and or dered to be read a third time :—Chiswick Improvement; Edinburgh and Glasgow and Stilling and Dunfermline Railways ; North Yorkshire and Cleveland Railway ; Salisbury and Yeovil Railway ; Staines, Wokingham, and Woking Railway. ARCHDEACONRY OF MIDDLESEX. Mr. I3OUVERIE moved an address or copy of the farm of citation issued by the Archdeacon of the A rchdeaoonry of Middlesex to the churchwardens of the several parishes and district parishes therein ; and of the letter and articles of inquiry accompanying the same :—Statements of the number of the said forms and letters and articles of inquiry issued at Easter 1888; and of the fees demanded in each case, showing by what authority such demands are made, and who is entitled to receive them.—Agreed to. METROPOLITAN POLICE. Sir J. SHELLEY moved an address for return of the number of officers of the Metropolitan Polio@ Force, distinguishing the number, rank, and pay in each class employed on special duty, and not in the ordinary' duties of the police ; the number of such police officers to whom the issue of the usual police uniform has been discontinued, and who are allowed a sum of money in lieu thereof; also, of the number of police constables, sergeants, inspectors, and superintendents employed at the several docks, dockyards, public buildings, museums, institutions, and theatres, and what portion of the pay of the several officers so employed is defrayed by the ' several public companies and institutions ?—Agreed to. POOR-RATES. General CODRINGTON gave notice that he should at an early day call the attention of the house to the new rating of Government property to the poor-rates. THE ORDERS OF THE DAY. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, the orders of the day were postponed till after the motion on the Governor-General of India. THE WHITSUN HOLIDAYS. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER gave notice that on Friday next, the 21st, he should move the adjournment of the house till Friday the 28th, for the Whitsun holidays. NEWFOUNDLAND FISHERIES. On the motion of the adjournment of the house till Monday. Mr. H•ANBURY asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether any Charge had taken place in our position relative to France or the United States, by treaty or otherwise, with regard to the Newfoundland Fisheries ; and whether the British squadron had been increased on that station ? Lord STANLEY said no change had taken place be tween the above Governments relative to the Newfound land Fisheries. The noble lord's answer to the latter part of the question was inaudible in the gallery. GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF INDIA.—VTE OF CENSURE. Mr. CARDWELL then moved the following resoln. tion : " That this house, whilst in its present state of infor mation it abstains from expressing an opinion on , the policy of any proclamation which may have been issued by the Governor-General of India in relation to Oude, has seen with regret and serious apprehension that her Majesty's Government have ad dressed to the Governor-General, throu g h th e Sec r et' Committee of the Court of Directors, and have published, a despatch condemning in strong teems the conduct of the Governor-General ; and is of opinion that such a course on the part of the Govern ment must tend, in the present circumstances of India, to produce the most prejudicial effect, by weakening the authority of the Govtrnor-General, and encouraging the further resistance of those who are in arms against us. He said, he rose to bring before the noting of the house what he believed to be one of the most remarkable occurrences that had been wit• nessed in the history of the British Administration. He did not intend to occupy the attention of the house for any lengthened time, because he did not mean to say anything that did not rest entirely on facts patent and indisputable, or upon the statements of those whose conduct it was his painful duty to impugn. (Loud laughter from the Ministerial benches, and loud cheers' from the Opposition.) It appeared that on the 12th of last month there' was received in this country a letter from the Secretary of the Government of India to the Commissioner in Oude, concerning the draft of an intended proclamation, which it was announced was in tended to be proclaimed in Oude as soon as the fall of Lucknow bad occurred. That important document was immediately taken into the consideration of her Majesty's Government, and in order not to mistake it he would state it in the language of the advisers themselves. The Chancellor of the Ex chequer said—" I think it right to take this opportunity of stating that when we received notice of this intended proclamation we took the subject of it into our considera tion. (Hear, hear.) There was full time for reflection. Tne document was received on the 12th April, and the despatch in answer to it was indicted on the 18th, but the answer was not despatched till the 213th from this country. The Earl of Ellenborough, however, said,. " r€4l-ction only the more strongly induces me to teink it was absolutely necessary to send the letter se originally written, and then when I read that proclama tion I felt it was my duty to express my own sentiments on the subject, which were adopted by my noble friend. St.) that he apprehended there was nn" doubt with regard at least to the writing/ approving and transmitting of the despatch, it wall the deliberate act of her Majesty's Government collec tively. (Opposition cheers.) It was known to the house the manner in which the Government of India was conducted, that of sending to the secret committee despatches concerning the treatment of the native princes and states, which, in their judgment, required secrecy. That course was pursued on this occasion, and that despatch collectively adopted by her Majesty's Government was sent to India on 26th April through the secret commit teo of the Court of Directors of the East India Com. pany. With regard, then, first, to the document itself, it was clear that it was the collective act of her Ma jesty's Government--(loud cheers from the Opposition) —and that it was sent to India through the particular channel of the secret committee of the Court of Directors. What were the terms of that despatch he should here after describe, not however in his language, but exclu sively in the language of Unite who indited, or were responsible for the despatch. From the 26th of April to the 6th of May the important information came within his knowledge---(hear, hear, and cheers)—but on the 6th of May it having become known through the channels of the press that a proclamation had been proclaimed in Oude, which was not the identical draft of the proclamation to which he had before referred, but a proclamation, in the language of Lord Derby, mode rately modified from the draft of that proclama tion. That being the position of things, the hon. member for Birmingham put a question to the hon. member for Inverness. The right hon. gentleman then read the question and answer, and also that of the Chancellor of tee Exchequer, who stated that the Government disap proved of Lord Canning's policy in every sense—(near, arid cheers)—and referred to the publication of the despatch which had had the effect of raising in the public mind an apprehension that Lord Canning would be recalled, and in consequence of there being no valid reasons given for such conduct he had put the present motion on the paper. After referring to the madly course of Lord Ellenborough in taking upon him self the responsibility in this matter, and:resigned in con sequence, the right hon. gentleman said that it was clear the writing and sending of the despatch was Os collective act of her Majesty's Government, and not the' separate act of any one member of the Government.- (Cheers from the Opposition.) It was not his intention; to ask the judgment of the house on the despatch in re ference to the policy of Lord Canning—(cheers from thee Opposition)—but to condemn its publication. He ob jected to such a document going forth to the world its reference to a responsible Minister of • the Crown," as being likely to weaken his authority, especially in ete , foreign land. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentlemara defended the clemency of Lord Canning's geeerre-e ment, which had gained for him the name eg "Clemency Canning," and said that it was the dutl of the home Government towards its GovernorGeneris of India, if they were dissatisfied with him, to recall bitu ; but if they_ were satiefie.d with him, it was the;er duty, in difficult circumstances, to sustain and cordial l lY encourage him. (Hear, hear.) Such conduct as t Government had pursued, in publishing this despatch,' was likely to spread dismay amongst the Europeans int India, and encourage our enemies to every kind of rep sistance, (Hear hear.) The resignation of Lo Ellenberough did not affect the question in the manner in which he ( Mr. Cardwell) had laid it before the house. The language of the head of the Government had relieved him of the necessity of arguing in favour of impugning the conduct cf the Go vernment in this respect, he having stated it was n,ot capable of a perfect defence. The question was of grt pet mportance to the country and the colonies. Th first passed a resolution to entrust the Government ®f India to a responsible Minister, but bearing this matt sr in view, he asked if for the future there was to ,be " limited liability" in the Cabinet--(cheers)—and w.l ll there to be no solidarity in the Government to who 0 1 the greatest interests of the world were to be entrusts The right hon. gentleman, in conclusion, said the Es India Company had set the Government an example i° reference to this matter, and he called tip , g l the house to relieve Lord Canning's CO P.; duct from the censure un d er w hi c h 1 ' laboured from the publication of the despatch in eln. o ' . tion, and the statements that had been made by her M fit. jesty's Government in respect to his policy. Mr. DEASY seconded the motion. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL.—Sir, I was at some to el l when I read the resolutions which the right lion gent l:l3. ,; man has put into your hands, to know w h e th er the obje of it was to support, however, iudireetly, the policy of Loi 1 Canning in this proclamation whether it was by way helping these operations in India, the opposition te whim , the right hon. gentleman considers the conduct of the G l4 veinment is calculated to prolong —or whether, lastly, 5 , was rather to facilitate those operations i n this counig.l against the Treasury bench—(cheers) -the opposition. 1 which the right hoe, gentleman considers had been Pr' ) 4 longed too much. I confess that after hearing the sweet ( of the right hon. gentleman, I have come to the conelusi 4 that it was neither the first or the second of these oNe° i s that ho has in view. (ile:r.) The first object is aPe r, fectly legitimate ono, and the furtherance of it has fall t 0 into no unskilful hands ; but he must remember that ev,:s in an assault upon a Ministry there are rules of strife vinl! pi require you boldly and manfully to state and prove 9.;'' case. And from those rules I will show to the house tri ht the hon. ask the house to observe that the resolution of the!! R,O. gentleman has widely deviated. I must n. c 1 h hon. gentleman is what is called a complex proposi . i 9. It must be resolved into its parts, and its parts arc tu••_, In the first place, it asks the h ouse t o p a ss no opinio n the proclamation, or upon the p o li c y o f Lord Canning.., ;,'Ol. the second place it is a censure on the•Governrhente_ o l,. haying, as is alleged, published the despatch wbech Lot tamed that censure. Now I maintain, in ill° Ti o f place, that if the house is to accept the fire pan'