The Sun. — London, England, 1848-08-31 00:00:00

trb Vabitto3n SUN OFFICE, Seven o'Clock. THE WEATHER. SUN OFFICE, Six o'Clock. The weather has changed. We have now very vivid flashes of lightning, and thunder, with heavy rain. The wind has gone round to south-east. The Thermometer has gone down to 56, but the Barometer, after going Crin to 30.08, is now up to 30 12. REMOVAL OF THE CHARTIST PRISONERS TO NEWGATE.—(THIS DAY.) At a quarter past four o'clock this afternoon the Chartist prisoners committed to-day for trial, at Bow street, were removed to Newgate. For nearly an hour before the time of tbeir removal the police prevented all except the most respectably attired persons from passing along the street. Nearly 200 constables were occupied in discharging this duty. In passing along our reporter stood for a few moments in the midst of the solitude created in Bow-street, for trade sod traffic were for more than an hour all but suspended opposite the court, taking, however, the precaution to place himself in a doorway—whilst in this position an impertinent officer, named Inspector Dodd, an unfit person to hold such an office, ordered him in the most uncourteous terms to be off. He told him that be was connected with the press and was there as a reporter. " I don't care," replied this impertinent officer, " you must be off." Mr. Dodd seemed desirous of getting up a row instead of wishing to quell it if one had arisen. We never saw so unuecesarily and useless an attempt at display; the misguided and silly men were thereby endowed with a notoriety of which their power, whether for good or evil, rendered them unworthy. .31any of the police wore cutlasses. The prisoners were placed, after much delay, and much ceremony, and much parade, in three police vans, and each was fol lowed by two mounted police. They were driven ra pidly off to Newgate. At either end of the street seve ral hundreds of people had congregated, who gave no utterance to feelings of any kind as the vans passed. ELECTION COMMITTEE. ( THIS DAY.) HORSHAM. Mr. PICKERING having summed up on behalf of the sitting Member, The Attorney-General was called on the side of the petitioners. He said he had only been twice to Horsham. The first time was on the 29th of May, 1847, when be stayed at the Nunnery. Having a bad foot, be borrowed Mr. Edwin James, the barrister's, pony chaise and drove into Horsham. On that occasion , while talking to Mr. Medwin, he was joined by Mr. Edwin James, who intro duced Mr. Padwick to him. Mr. James said, " Mr. Attorney-General, this is Mr. Padwick; he is a man of very great influenee in Horsham, and hitherto he has been acting for Mr. Hurst, but he is now unfortunately against us." He (the Attorney-General) said to Mr. Padwick, " I am sorry you have changed your aide;" whereupon Mr. Padwick replied, "It can't be helped, sir; I am acting for Mr. Fitzgerald, but upon another occasion I shall have no objection to hold a retainer for your son." To which he (the At torney-General) added, " I dare say I *hall give you a breathing; I am always lucky at elections." This closed the evidence of the petitioners to prove the agency of Mr. Padwick. 'Mr. CROWDER, Q.C., then replied upon the whole case, after which the. Committee deferred their decision till to-isiorrow. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS EVENING.) HOUSE OF LORDS. ROYAL ASSENT. The House met_to-day shortly after Four o'clock, in order to give the. Royal Assent to the following fifty-eight public and private Bills : Public Health Bill. Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Bill. Churches Bill. Parliamentary Electors Bill. Money Order Department Post-office Bill. Criminal Law Administration Amendment Bill. Borough Incorporation Bill. Steam Navigation Bill. Bankrupts Release Bill. Loan Societies Bill. Poor•law Union District Schools Bill. Parochial Debt and Audit Bill. Payment of Debts out of Real Estate Bill. Turnpike Acts Continuance Bill. Militia Pay Bill. Militia Ballot Suspension Bill. Out• Pensioners Bill. • Proclamation on Fines (Court of Common Pleas) Bill. Petty Bag Office (Court of Chancery) Bill. Insolvent Debtors' Court Bill. Stock-in-Trade Exemption Bill. Assessionable Manors Commissioners (Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster) Bill. Highway Rates Bill. Wolverhampton Curacy (No. 2) Bill. Unlawful Oaths Acts (Ireland) Continuance and Amendment Bill. Ecclesiatical Patronage Suits Compromise (Ireland) Bill. Tithe Rent Charge (Ireland—No. 2) Bill. Constabulary Force (Ireland) Bill. Corn Markets (Ireland) Bill. Fisheries (Ireland) Bill. Trustees Relief (Ireland) Bill. Turnpike Roads (Ireland) Bill. Court of Justiciary (Scotland) Bill. Register of Sasines (Scotland) Bill. Farmer's Estate Society (Ireland) Bill. Dundee and Perth Railway (Lease of Dundee and Arbroath Railway) Bill. Paisley, Barrhead, and Hurlet Railway Bill. Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland Junction Railway Deviation and Branches Bill. Exeter and Exmouth Railway Acts Amendment Bill. Great Western Railway (Loop Line from Birming ham and Oxford Junction Railway through Lea mington) Bill. Great Western Railway (Birmingham and Oxford Junction and Railway Purchase) Bill. Edinburgh and Glasgow and Edinburgh and Bath gate Railway Companies Amendment Bill. Walsall Improvement Bill. Clerkenwell Improvement Bill. London City Small Debts Bill. Sandbach Charity Estate Bill. Duke of Bridgewater's Estate Bill. Greenlaws' or Woolwich Glebe Land Estate Bill. Ramsden's Estate Bill. Weld, Blundell's Estate Bill. Earl of Sheffield's Estate Bill. Marquis of Londonderry's Estate (No. 1) Bill. Marquis of Londonderry's Estate (No. 2) Bill. Fawcett (or Alderson's) Estate Bill. Marquis of Bute's Estate Bill. Virgin Mary Hospital (Newcastle-upon-Tyne Estate) Bill. Lugard's Divorce Bill. Jervis's Divorce Bill. The Lords Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor, Lord Campbell, and the Earl of Shaftesbury. Their Lordships then adjourned during pleasure. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at Five o'clock. POSTAGE OF NEWSPAPERS (CHANNEL ISLANDS) BILL. On the motion of the Marquis of CLANRI CARDE, this Bill was read a second time. MARSHALSEA COURT. Earl FORTESCUE moved for a return of all the salaries and emoluments received by the officers of the Marshalsea Court since 1838, and also the num ber of cases disposed of since that period by the Court.—Agreed to. SUGAR DUTIES BILL. On the motion of - Earl GREY, the Sugar Duties Bill was read a third time and passed. - CITY OF LONDON SEWERS BILL. - Lord CAMPBELL moved that the standing orders be dispensed with with respect to this Bill. The motion was agreed to, and the Bill went through all its stages. DEALERS IN SPIRITS BILL AND BRITISH SPIRITS WAREHOUSING BILL. On the motion of Earl GRANVILLE these Bills were read a second time. Several other Bills were advanced a stage, and their Lordships adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Two o'clock. Mr. MUNTZ gave notice that he would, next sessioa, move a resolution to the effect that, as the Legislature had fully determined to carry out the monetary sy s t em , which would speedily reduce the value of all property to the level of '95, it was only requisite and expedient that the salaries of all officers and servants of the Government, which were raised upon the war system, should be reduced to their original amount. EXCHQEUER-BILLS BILL. The Exchequer-bills Bill was read a third time and passed. CONSOLIDATED FUND BILL. On the question that this Bill be read a third time, Sir J. HOB lIOUSE, in answer to a question from Mr. G. Thompson, stated that there was certainly an understanding between the Government and the lion. Member that his motion with respect to the Itaja of Sattara should come on upon the motion for the third reading of this Bill ; but it would be more con venient, and more in order, if he would consent to postpone it until the other orders of the day had been disposed of. Mr. G. THOMPSON said, all he wished was to make a statement on the subject to the House, and he trusted that he would not be frustrated by de ferring to the wishes of the Government. The Bill was then read a third time and passed. COPPER AND LEAD DUTIES BILL. The report upon this Bill was brought up and agreed to. POOR- LAW AUDITORS' PROCEEDINGS RESTRICTION BILL. This Bill went through Committee. REPRODUCTIVE LOAN FUND INSTITU TION (IRELAND) BILL. The consideration of the Lords' amendments to this Bill was postponed until to-morrow, at twelve. SAVINGS' BANK BILL. On the motion for the third reading of this Bill, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was the intention of the Government to limit the measure entirely to Ireland, and not to apply its provisions to savings' banks in England and Scotland. Lord GEORGE BENTINCK expressed his sin cere gratification at this determination of the Go vernment, but would have been better pleased if the Chancellor of the Exchequer had announced it the other night, instead of keeping the House sitting until half-past three in the morning. After a few words from Colonel SIBTHORP, Mr. REYNOLDS begged to correct an error which had been fallen into by the press, when it was reported that he expressed his satisfaction with the management of savings' banks in Ireland. He was of opinion that they were badly managed, and trusted that another Bill of a more adequate nature would be introduced next session. It was his inten tion to give notice that at an early period next session he should move for the appointment of a Select Com mittee to inquire into the fraud which had been com mitted in St. Peter's Savings' Bank, Dublin. The amount of money lost at that bank exceeded 50,0001., and all the available money to meet the loss was 87i. After a few words from Mr. Henley, Mr. Herbert, Mr. Hume, and other Hon. Members, the Bill was read a third time and passed. POOR-LAWS. Mr. C. BULLER moved for leave to bring in a Bill to provide for the more equitable dis tribution of the charge for the relief of the poor in certain cities and towns. He stated that during the recess he should circulate the Bill, and send it to all boards of guardians, and if it were approved of by other towns not included in the Bill, he should extend it to them. He did not in tend to include those towns and cities which were governed by Local Acts, unless they wished him to do so_ RAJA OF;SATTARA. Mr. GEORGE THOMPSON then rose to bring before the House the case of the Raja of Sattara. The Honourable Gentleman said—Sir, in rising to address the House on the motion of which I have given notice, it is my intention to be as brief as pos sible, and to avoid, if I can, giving occasion for con troversy or debate. In renewing, at this late period, the discussion of the Sattara question, I yield to a sense of imperative duty, conceiving the subject eminently entitled to the consideration of the Go vernment, and of this assembly, bound as that Go vernment and this House are, to watch over the exer cise of the power which has been entrusted to the hands of a chartered company, to govern a hundred millions of the subjects of her Majesty. If I may be permitted to refer to the past debates in this House, I will do so to observe, that in my opinion this ques tion has never yet been fairly dealt with. It has al ways been capable of solution, by a reference of the papers in the case, to the calm and judicial investiga • tion of an impartial Committee, aided in their labours by the evidence of persons in this country, who have from time to time been concerned in the proceedings. Such a tribunal would have found no difficulty in determining every point on which there has been a difference of opinion ; nor any difficulty in reporting to the t House the course which justioe and good faith require should be taken. Such an investigation would have been of the highest importance, not only as tending to the just settle ment of this particular question, but as contributing to the knowledge, so much needed, of the manner in which our vast possessions in India are ruled, and the treaties which have been concluded with native states are observed. Since this question was first brought forward by my Hon. Friend the Member for Montrose until the present time the only request ever preferred has been, that the subject should be taken out of the arena of party conflict in this House, and be submitted to a Committee, to be decided ac cording to the pature and value of the evidence pro duced. As far as the character of the late Raja is concerned, and the fate of his family and subjects is affected by the opinions entertained of his guilt, I am prepared to demonstrate his entire and absolute innocence, by the exposure of the falsehood and worthlessness -of every particle of the evidence col lected to criminate him. The assertion, that " every opportunity was afforded to the Raja of defending himself from the charges brought against him," is contradicted most flatly by the official documents which have been laid upon the table of this House. In the case of the first charge, the Raja heard the depositions of two of the witnesses read to him in the Hindustanee language, but never was permitted to see a copy of the depositions in the Alahrattas, and consequently never had the slightest chance afforded him of rebutting the testimony given against him. This was in 1836. Of the other charges he never heard a word until the 23d of August, 1839, when he was called upon to sign the paper submitted to him by Sir James Carnac, the Governor of Bombay, and for refusing to do so, was dethroned eleven days afterwards. Now, Sir, if the friends of the late Raja in this country have been able by an examina tion of the ex parte evidence, to unravel every part of the conspiracy against his Highness, and to prove the charges against him to be utterly false, how much more would the accused himself have been able most triumphantly to vindicate his character and conduct, if there had been an observance of the simplest rules of justice, by placing the evidence taken against him in his hands. Sir, a memorial sent by the late Raja to Lord Hardinge, the Gover nor-General in 1844, and for four years kept back by the Indian authorities, has been described as a preposterous 'humbug," because it was drawn up by a gentleman in this country, and sent to his Highness at Benares. For the truth of the contents of that document (which has at last been brought to light and laid before the House), I hold myself individually responsible. Sir, it was not until 1843 that the mass of secret papers in this case were or dered to be printed. It was not until the spring of 1844 that they were published, and they could only then be of service to the Raja, by being examined by a person who could read them in the English, and was competent to analyse their contents. I devoted myself to the study of those papers, and drew up such a statement of the facts of the case as I thought would, if placed in the hands of his Lordship the Governor- General, convince him that justice had not been done to the Raja of Sattara. His Highness approved of my statement, and sent it through the hands of the official agent to the Governor-General. That document has been denounced as " a humbug," but, Sir, it has never been answered. It has been de nounced as a " humbug," but no single fact which it sets forth has been questioned. It has been de nounced as " a. humbug , ' but by those who dare not meet me either here or elsewhere to debate its accu racy. •I—challenge the whole of the Ministerial bench to show that there is a statement in it which is conttary to truth.. 'lt - is to this document that the agent of the Governor-General (Major Carpenter) refers, in the following extract, from a dispatch in the Secret department, addressed to the Governor- General " When the Raja was consigned to my charge, early in 1840, I considered it necessary, for the effi cient discharge of my duties, to make myself fully acquainted with the causes of his dethronement, his general reputation for intrigue, and other circum stances connected with his character and conduct, to enable me to form a just estimate of the man with whom I had to deal, and to guard against the conse quences which might arise from any laxity of sur veillance on my part. To this end I carefully studied the whole of the voluminous documents connected with his case, and the result was, a belief in his inno cence ; and this belief has been confirmed, beyond a doubt, by subsequent disclosures, and by his pledging himself to prove it, if permitted to do so, in his letter to Sir Henry Ilardinge, of the 12th December, 1844, forwarded through me, and which pledge I am fully persuaded he is able to redeem." Had the prayer of that memorial been granted, I believe the Raja would have been alive at this time, and sitting upon the throne of Sattara. But, Sir, the deposal of the Raja was not the only act of injustice which was done. He was also stripped of his private property, and this brings me to a part of the subject connected with the present circumstances of the sur viving family. The Raja, though denied the op portunity of proving his innocence, guilt. It call h e a d s upon to sign a paper admitting his stated, that all his Highness was required to do was to renew the treaty of 1819. This assertion is en tirely at variance with the official papers. The articles submitted were perfectly new. The Hon. Baronet shakes his head. Well, I will quote from an Hon. Director, Mr. Shepherd, who has in his Minute of Dis• sent truly observed, that " The preamble of the con ditions which his Highness was called upon to sign entangled him in an admission of guilt ; it also in volved the Government in the glaring inconsistency of propounding a principle, which required the strongest proofs of the Raja's unworthiness to reign, as a necessary condition on which he was to continue on the guddee. Who will deny that his rejection of the proposal f u r n i s h es presumptive evidence of his innocenc e , and raises him more in the estimation of the world, than if he had ignominiously complied for the sake of re t a i n i ng h i s so vereignty ?" This rejec tion of the article and preambles submitted by Sir James Carnac led to the determination on the part of the Bombay Government to dethrone the Raja, and ac cordingly, orders to th a t e ff ec t we re sent to the Re isident on the 30th of August, 1839. These instrucw ties were from the pen of the Governor, and bore his signature. I entreat the attention of the House to the eighth paragraph of this letter : " 8. You will be careful to provide, in the most effectual manner, for the personal comfort and con venience of the Raja and his family, and to require the Sattara Government to furnish everything that may be necessary for their accommodation. He is, in fact, to be regarded and treated as an object of sympathy, and not of punishment. You will inform him that he will be permitted to reside within the Hon. Company's territories, at such place as may be selected by the Right Hon. the Governor-General of India, and that an annual allowance will be assigned from the Sattara revenues for the support and respect ability of himself, and those members of his family who may choose to accompany him. Further, that all property belonging to him, bona fide private, and not appertaining to the state, will, on his peaceable subnzis sion, not be interfered with." _ In this paragraph two things are distinctly and solemnly guaranteed; firstly, an annual allowance for the support of the Raja and his family ; and secondly, the retention of all property not appertaining to the State. The condition on which the second pledge was given was strictly observed by the Raja. Not only did the Raja not offer any resistance, but he adopted the most effectual means of preventing any disturbance or conflict. For a time it appeared to be the intention of the Government to redeem the pledge respecting the private property, for the Raja, while encamped a short distance from Sattara, re ceived three official notes from the Resident, Colonel Ovens, in conformity with that pledge. I will read a brief extract from one of these notes, which is dated the 13th of September : " With reference to your Highness's private pro perty, I beg to observe, that that will be at your own disposal, as distinguished from the public property of the State—namely, jewellery, robes, dresses, 6-c., money, furniture, plate, and other necessaries which your Highness may require. On your Highness in timating the same, I will order the articles to be sent to you." In order that no doubt may exist respecting the authenticity of these documents, I will quote an ex tract from a dispatch written by Major Carpenter at Benares to Sir T. Maddock, the Secretary to the Supreme Government, Nov. 15, 1840. Major Car penter says— " Par. 8. The ex-Raja has in his possession three letters, signed by Colonel • Ovens, the Resident at Sattara, and dated the sth, Gth, and 13th of Sep tember, 1839, respectively, to the effect that his private property would be surrendered to him ; and suggesting that lists of such portions thereof as he wished to take away, as well as of those articles he desired to leave in his palace, might be furnished, that which properly belonged to the State being retained." Major Carpenter then adds, in the next paragraph— " 9. I have carefully examined the documents re ferred to in the preceding paragraph, and therefore believe the statements it (viz., a letter from the ex Raja to the Resident, remonstrating against the claims of Appa Sahib to his private property), contains to be substantially correct ; and it it be the pleasure of the Right lion. the Governor-General in Council; the originals or translations thereof shall be sub-, mitted to his Lordship's further consideration." In addition to these proofs of a solemn engagement to respect the private property of the Raja, I may be permitted to quote from the minute of Sir James Carnac, forwarded to the Governor-General and the Court of Directors, dated the 4th of September,' detailing his proceedings and intentions. In this he distinctly refers to the pledge given, that the Raj should retain his private property, in addition to re , ceiving an allowance for his permanent support. Tho Governor says— " 32. My instructions to the Resident enjoin, that, every effort should be made to obviate collision, but that should such unhappily occur, that every precau , tion should be taken to prevent injury to the well.: disposed, and to guard against irregularities on th 4, part of our troops. They likewise enjoin that every attention be paid to the personal comtbrt and convei, nience of the Raja and his family, and secure to him his private property and a suitable maintenance for! his future support. The question of his future dis-! posal is left for consideration hereafter. I have every confidence in Lieutenant-Colonel Ovens' judgment and discretion, that he will secure that these instruc-: tions are scrupulously attended to." I am satisfied that no Member of this House, having these official documents before him, would conceive it possible that the Government of Bombay would ; afterwards confiscate the whole of the Raja's pro-1 perty, and leave him without a shilling beyond the ; allowance fixed for his maintenance. Yet, in a I dispatch to the Supreme Government, dated the 25th; of November (eighty-six days after the pledge of Sirs James Carnac), we find the determination expressed by the Council of Bombay, to consider the whole of the private property of the ex-Raja forfeited, and the pension as satisfaction in full of all demands. The. fact that the Raja of Sattara was possessed of a very' large amount of private property is not disputed. The Resident, Colonel Ovaus, while under the im pression that the pledge of the British Governor would be redeemed, described in his dispatches the manner in which the ex-Raja had become possessed; of his large wealth, namely, by appropriating a stated' sum for the private expenses of himself and his; family, and then laying aside the balance, which he either allowed to accumulate, or expended in jewels.' Every previous Resident at the Itaja's Court is ablel to confirm the truth of this statement, and to prove; that so scrupulously and accurately were the publici accounts separated from the private, and the pro-. perty belonging to the State distinguished from that; which was personal, that no difficulty at any timei existed in the way of accounting to the Raja for; that which was bond fide his own. The following the view taken of this transaction by a member of the court of directors, Mr. Shepherd : " There can be no question but that the treasure! and jewels found in the palace were the fruits of the' economical management of the Raja's resources. Uni like the generality of native princes, be had governed' his people with prudence and moderation, and re-r strained his own expenses within the limits of his in-; come. The Bombay Government decided, however that the property should be made over to the present Raja, and that the ex-Raja be informed that the pension is assigned to himself and his family in satis-i faction of all demands whatever on the Government of Sattara. Such is likely to be the climax of the unhappy. Raja's fate. A prince who bad been for many years, and up to a very late period, the deserving object of the Court's and the Government's highest favour and admiration, stripped of his ra, and his property, he is now the degraded pensioner, of that brother who assisted in his overthrow. To me, it appears that the confiscation and transfer of his property to the present Raja is an additional' penalty inflicted on this unfortunate Prince, not' warranted by any considerations whatever. Indeed,' in the absence of professional opinion, I must con tend that the act is illegal; the regulations of our. Government guaranteeing to all our subjects the free; possession of the property held by them until they' shall be deprived of it by the judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction. If I lamented the extreme; measure of his deposal, more deeply do I lament this aggravated severity. It is the great prerogative of the home authorities to hold the balance of justice between our local governments and the natives (A* India. Removed far from the scene of action, they can review, with dispassionate calmness, every turn and movement of the actors; and whilst they are bound to afford every proper support to their own servants, it is equally their sacred duty to protect their native subjects, and to withhold their sanction: from acts of oppression and injustice." Mr. Tucker, Sir C. Forbes, Mr. Cotton, General) Robertson, Colonel Sykes—all took the same, view of that question. Sir, on the arrival of the Raja at his place of exile, he called upon the Governor-General's agent to take an inventory of the articles he had brought with him, which, with the exception of the personal ornaments of the female members of his family, were of very incon siderable value ; he also handed to the same agent a schedule specifying the property left behind him at Sattara, and I have no doubt that an inquiry would have established the perfect accuracy of the Raja's statement. According to that schedule, and to all the other information whic}i has reached me, the Raja was deprived of property, bona fide private, of the value of not less than 300,0001. sterling. What then, Sir, becomes of the boasts which have been uttered in this House of the liberality of the East India Company ? From the time the Raja was dethroned until his death, he received (during a period of eight into him—or banishment, abeut e u aen-dthiwrdere the en tirely amo utde pendent ef years) about 100,0001. i n all, for the support of him self, his family, and 1,20 0 persons of all ranks w h o followed upon him his private property, the savings of twenty reyears,v and about one-fifteenth or sixte e nth part of the revenues of the territory from which he had been driven The liberality of the company has cost them. nothing, for every farthing has been taken from the treasury of Sattara—(Sir John C. Hob house nodded assent)—while they have secured to themselves, by the second treaty, the sever siou of Jagheers, yielding 50,0001. a year. In sinuations have been thrown out calculated to lead uninformed persons to suppose that the late Raja had it in his power to expend lavish sums upon agitation in this country. It is true, that out of of his allow ance he found the means of supporting a native gen tleman as his representative in this country; but it hisadneittsince his dethronement, has had felt the wish, to for the advancement of his spend any large sum if the have been which trueinh his power, a t the Baja, since cause in England. The efforts made in his behalf have been, of the most spontaneous and disinterested character. No one in this assembly.. THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, AUGUST 31, 1848. will imagine that Sir Gore Ouseley, Sir Charles Forbes, Sir Harford Jones Brydges, Alderman Sa lomans, General Briggs, Mr. John Sullivan, Mr. John Poynder, Mr. Charles Norris ; and East India directors like General Robertson, Mr. Tucker, Mr. Shepherd, Mr. John Forbes, Colonel Sykes, Major Oliphant, and Mr. Cotton ' • or gentlemen like Ser geant Storks, Sergeant Gaselee, and Mr. Lewis, were in the habit of receiving bribes from the deposed Raja of Sattara — (" Hear , hear," from Sir J. C. Hobhouse)—yet all these gentlemen, and many more, have been strenuous advocates for the re opening of this case, and for its adjudication upon just and upright principles. Let the Right Honourable Baronet the President of the Board of Control cite, if he can, such a list of names from amongst those who, being free from any connexion with the proceedings against the Raja, have come forward to oppose the claims of that Prince to justice. It is true that, previous to his deposal, the Raja expended a large sum of money in his endeavours to send agents to this country to cemplain of a breach of treaty by the company ; but that expenditure was necessary, because the Bombay Government refused a port clearance to the ships that w,,uld otherwise have brought those agents, and the Raja was driven to the expedient of purchasing a vessel to convey his representatives to these shores. The following extract from one of the dispatches of Major Carpenter, to the Government of India, will show how far the Raja possessed the means of keeping up an agitation here, and will also throw some light upon the question of his private property : " The Raja informs me that since his deposition he has been much distressed for want of funds, which I really believe to be the case, and I know he has not even had the means of purchasing necessary clothing for his family since their arrival in Benares, as my advances to him have been merely sufficient to sub sist his family, followers, and cattle, lest I should exceed the spirit of your instructions.' With regard to the private property Major Carpenter ob serves, 'I have taken pains to ascertain from what source the said property was derived, and it appears that in Capt. Grant's time two treasuries were established by that officer's advice, the one private, in which the sums allotted for the support tof the Prince and his family were deposited the other for the public purposes of the State, wherein there were upwards of six lads and 40,000 rupees, at the time the Baja was dethroned, which form no part of his claim ; but he declares the whole.of the money, jewels, and other property, claimed by him as private, are the savings of his privy purse, or surplus of the private treasury. But I may be asked to show in what way these facts bear upon the present state of the case, and I will, therefore, briefly describe the condition of the Raja's family and followers who are now at Benares. Since the death of the Raja, on the 13th of October last, not a shilling has been received by the Raja's widow, or the adopted son, from the British Govern. ment. Application was made to the Agent for the means of defraying the funeral expenses, and the President of the Board of Control, in answer to a question which I put to him stated, that 50,000 rupees had been offered for that purpose, and had been re fused, because not accompanied by a pledge to con tinue to the family the ten thousand rupees, monthly allowance, made to the late Raja. Sir J. C. HOBH.OUSE—He would not give a receipt. Mr. GEORGE THOMPSON—Such, I under take to say, are not the real facts of the case. The money, I admit, was offered and declined ; but not for the reason stated, but because the agent would not take a receipt in the name of the adopted son, who was the only person entitled t o receive or to acknowledgel the proffered sum. lam also informed that other moneys have been declined for the same reason. I can scarcely suppose the Right Hon. Gentleman to be so ill-informed respecting the laws and usages of the Hindoos, as not to know that neither the Ranee nor the Minister could receive the money, except in the name and by the authority of the son ; or that he can fail to be aware of the fact that the youth who has been adopted stands in pre cisely the same position as a son born of the body of the late Raja. Sir, I see no reason why 800 persons should be left without the means of sub sistence, because those upon whom they depend re fuse to violate the immemorial and universal custom of their own country. If I have been rightly in formed, the sum of 2,500 rupees, monthly, have been offered to the Raja's widow for the maintenance of her establishment. This, if it be the case, cannot be re ceived, except on behalf of her son, and in his name ; and if it could, it would be utterly insufficient for the support of the family and their 800 dependents. But, Sir, why is this course of treatment adopted, while the company are accountable before man and before God for the whole of the private property of which I have been speaking, and are at this moment in possession of the territory and revenues of Sattara ? It may be said that the Itaja bad no rights, or that having died, his rights have died with him. But, Sir, the pledge that he should enjoy the possession of his private property, was given before his deposal—it was part and parcel of the measure decided upon—his private property was guaranteed in the very document that described him as a guilty man, and directed that he should be dethroned, and there is not a lawyer, either in this country or in India, who would dispute the Raja's right to adopt a son as his heir to the personal property of which he died possessed, or to which he might be declared legally entitled. We ask, therefore— and we have reason, and justice, and the solemn pledge of a British governor, and all law human and divine on our side—that the property taken from the father at the time of his deposal be accounted for to his son and heir. We ask, too, that, pending the question of succession to the raj, the living and legal representative of the late Raja shall enjoy the stipend assigned to his father. To what purpose more just and lawful can the revenues of Sattara be applied? But we ask more, and we think we do not ask too much. We ask that the adopted son of the late Raja be placed on the guddee,and succeed to the sovereignty of his father, according to the treaty of 1819, by which the territo r y of Sattara, as an independent' ceded to P er t au b Sh een , his " heirs perpetuity." Wh a t s ays one of the; s a o n v d e r s e u i c g c n e t s y s , 0 r w s a i s n highest authorities on this subject, the late Chairman of the Court of Directors, Mr. Tucker : " Admitting that the Raja was guilty of an infrae= tion of the treaty, it does not follow that it was mat as to cause his bl o od to be attainted. If the Raja should have no legitimate issue, it w as competent to him to adopt, and his heir m i g ht b e p er fectly inno cent, and be justly entitled to the inheritance under the treaty." And again he says : " The Government of Bombay seem to anticipate that the principality may escheat at no distant period I to our Government by'the demise of Appa Sahib ; but the principality is hereditary, and should the Raja leave no issue or natural heirs, he may adopt, and adoption with a Hindoo is not only a right but a duty. I have the highest authority for stating, that even in the case of a fief or dependency, a legal adoption cannot be barred by the Government or Lord paramount." These opinions I know to be those of gentlemen profoundly versed in questions relating to adop. tion amongst the Hindoos. Let me quote one other passage, taken from the petition presented by the Hon. Member for Montrose the other night, and signed by a number of respectable and influential East India proprietors. They say by their petition, " That the, raj (kingdom) of Sattara having re cently become vacant by the death of Appa Sahib, the late Raja, theyhirie heard with the greatest surprise and concern that the assumed guilt of the Raja Per taub Sheen is advanced as a pretext against the ad mission of the claims of the rightful heir under the treaty of September, 1819. But they trust and humbly pray that such member of the Raja's family as fills the character of heir' in the terms and ac cording to the true !meaning of the treaty, may be re cognised and admitted as his successor, and that this House will not permit the violation of that treaty, by sanctioning any act, in contravention of the rights of such ' heir,' secured and guaranteed as those rights are by the faith of the British nation." Sir, I must now beg permission to trespass upon the attention of the House for a few moments, while I attempt to show, as I believe I shall he able to do, that the dethronement of the Raja was a direct and flagrant violation of statute law, made and provided in such cases ; and that the whole of the proceedings of the Indian authorities are null and void, when tried by that law. By the 33d Geo. 111., chap. 52. sec. 43, it is enacted, " that forasmuch as to pursue schemes of conquest and extension of dominion in India are measures repugnant to the wish, the honour, and the policy of this nation, it shall not be lawful, either for the Governor-General of India, or for the governor of any presidency, to make or issue any order for commencing hostilities, or levying war, or to negotiate or conclude any treaty with any Indian prince or state (except in cases of sudden emergency, or imminent danger, when it shall appear dangerou s to postpone such hostilities or treaty), unl ess in pursuance of express orders from the Governor. General in Council, or from the .Secret Committee, by the authority of the Board of Control." Had Sir James Cerium the " express orders," which by this Act he was required to possess, before he was competent to commence hostilities, or conclude a treaty ? He had nothing of the kind, He was sent out expressly to assure the Raja of the friendly feelings of the home authorities, and to treat him with the favour and re spect shown to him in former years, before the con spiracy against him commenced. There may be those , in this House who are ignorant of the view taken of the proceedings against the Raja by the Supreme Go vernment of India, after the whole of the evidence had been laid before them, and I will therefore read a brief extract from one of the last dispatches on the subject, addressed from Calcutta to the Govern ment of Bombay, and leave Hon. Gentlemen to judge whether it points to the dethronement of the Raja and the seizure and confiscation of his private peo- I perty :—" His Lordship in Council would close the proceedings, apprising the Raja that, although several suspicious circumstances regarding his Highness had been elicited during the progress of this inquiry, yet the British Government is unwilling, without the clearest proof of guilt, to condemn any of its allies, especially one who has been so pre-eminently the ob ject of his favour and generosity; that farther investigation is deemed inexpedient with reference to the general inconvenience it creates ; and that the Right Hon. the Governor in Council is therefore pleased to close the inquiry, with the expression of his hope that the Raja will so conduct himself for the future as to avoid the predicament (no less painful to the British Government than to his High ness) in which he has been recently placed." Here, then, is the deliberate judgment of the Supreme Government, ignorant at the time, altogether, that the Resident at Sattara had in his possession the in - dubitable and conclusive proof that the very evidence upon which this judgment was pronounced was a mass of perjury, and that the Raja of Sattara was its innocent as the Governor-General of India of the crimes laid to his charge. After the dispatch already cited, we have one addressed to the authorities at the India House, expressing the Governor-General's pain at the proceedings of the Bombay Government, and stating that he had ordered those proceedings to be brought to a close. In perfect sympathy with the Government of India, we find the Court of Directors writing a dispatch, dated the 22d of January, 1839 — at a time, be it remembered, when the whole of the evidence was before them, save the proofs of the Raja's innocence, and of the plot to destroy him, which were in the secret keeping of Colonel Ovens, in which dispatch, they (the directors) say, that it is their " decided opinion that it would not only be a waste of time, but seriously detrimental to the character of their Government, to carry on any further in quiry into the matter." One of two things was want ing to make the deposal of the Raja a legal act, an express command from the home authorities, or open and declared hostility on the part of the Raja. Sir James Carnac had no authority from home, and the Raja had never been charged even with anything worse than a secret design to injure the British Go vernment. The deposal of the Raja, therefore, was in direct contravention of the Imperial statutes f this realm, and a violation of the unrepealed provisions of the charter, granted in 1793. It will be equally a violation of the charter and the law of the land, should the local Government in India place any other Prince on the throne, or make any disposition of the Sattara territory, without the express command of the home authorities. Sir, I have before, when discussing this question, laid considerable stress, and I think properly so, upon the fact that the intercepted correspondence be tween the Raja and his most confidential agents and friends, for three years previous to the dethronement, was found to contain nothing contrary to the letter or spirit of the treaty which placed the Raja on the throne. It has been imputed, however, to the native gentleman who represents the family of the Raja in this country, I mean Rungoo Bapojee, that when at Bombay, in 1838, he wrote certain letters to his sovereign, which contained treasonable matter. Now, Sir, I hold in my hands the correspondence, ex tracted from the blue books which have been laid on the table, and I challenge the most skilful lawyer in this House to lay his finger on a sentence that can be made to show that E a feeling of hostility towards the British Go vernment dictated the writing of any one of these letters. They refer, it is true, in some parts, to the political events then occurring, or anti cipated ; but they merely convey the information which was furnished to the writer in conversation with two of the company's officers, Mr. Baber, a magistrate, and Dr. Milne, the medical superin tendent of Bombay. Yet, these are the documents and the only ones selected out of hundreds, to prove that the late Raja carried on a treasonable correspond ence. The Hon. Member concluded by moving— that in the opinion of this House, it is required by justice and good faith, that the said property should be transferred to Shahoo Maharaj, the adopted son of his late Highness, or compensation to be made in lieu thereof. The Hon. Member was interrupted in the course of his speech by a message from the Lords requiring the attendance of the House of Commons to hear the Royal assent given by Commission to several public and private Bills (for which see Lords' report). Mr. HUME seconded the motion. Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE defended the course that had been pursued by him on this subject, and appealed to the House whether the matter had not been fully and fairly discussed, and the decision of the House of Commons and the India Board taken with respect to it after great deliberation. After some observations from Mr. Hums and Sir H IWILLOUGHBY, Mr. G. THOMPSON shortly replied, and with drew his motion. The House adjourned at Half-past Six. FRAN CE. Beyond the intelligence given in another column, we are now enabled to explain a few more particulars respecting the negotiation of peace in Lombardy. The Central German Power sent, about a fortnight back, plenipotentiaries into Lombardy to effect an understand. ing between them. The overtures made to King CHARLES ALBERT were well received, and on the 23d inst. M. RADICE presented to the Lieutenant of the German Empire his credentials appointing him representative of King CHARLES ALBERT at Frankfort. Thus the latter Monarch was the first who officially recognised the Arch duke Jour; as Lieutenant of the German Empire. It is on this more friendly feeling between Austria and Sar dinia that the former bases her hopes of cor.cluding peace without foreign interference ; but Baron WESSEMBERQ declared to Lord PONSONBY and M. DE REIZET that if, at the expiration of the armistice of the 9th instant, peace were not concluded, Austria would have recourse to the good offers of England and France. The news of the intervention of the Central German Power will of course interfere with the admission of M. BAUMER as representative of the German Confederation at Paris. The French Government raises some difficulties against receiving him officially, under the plea that, except the King of SARDINIA, no foreign Government has officially recognised the new German Central Power, and that 'before she does scr France wishes to consult the British Cabinet. The Marquis' tir RThour, Minister of the Interior of Tuscany, is appointed Minister Plenipotentiary at the Court of St. James's ; the papers had therefore erro neously attributed his departure from Italy to an extra ordinary mission to France and England. It appears that amongst the insurgents transported to Belle Isle is an individual—who had been appointed a sub prefect by M. SENARD, the Minister of the Interior. General LE FLO, appointed Envoy Extraordinary from the French Republic to the Court of St. Peters burgh, embarked at Havre on Saturday last for Brittany, .where he. is about to pass a few days to arrange some private business, previous to his departure on his mission. We are rejoiced, for a thousand reasons, to observe the following announcement in the Bien Publique, proclaim ing a fact which must solace the wounded heart of LA MARTINE in the midst of ungrateful calumnies : " M. de Lamartine has been elected a member of the Council-Geaeral of the Saone et Loire by the two Can tons, north and south, of Macon. This double nomina tion will occasion a new election; an inconvenience which the electors did not hesitate to incur when they wished to give to M. Lamartine, no w out of power, the same testimony of esteem and confidence that they had given to him in other times." TATTERSALL'S-THIS EVENING SIR O'CLOCK. GREAT YORKSHIRE HANDICAP. 8 to to 1 a Igsgts. agst v x e a c m u t p o y r r — e tak en 8 10 to 1 agst Cawrouch 10 to 1 agst Lady Wildair 12 to 1 agst Yardley 12 to 1 agst Alliance 20 to 1 agst Prince Charlie LEAMINGTON STAKES. 5 to 2 agst Doctrine 7 to 2 agst The Cur ST. LEOER. 5 to 2 agat Canesou 3 to 1 agst Justice to Ireland 5 to 1 agat Surplice—taken 5 to 1 agst Flatcatcher 8 to 1 agat Springy Jack Pooß-LAW AUDITORS.--A Bill brought from the Lords, entitled " An Act ;to ;prevent di str i ct aud i tors . from taking proceedings certain cases," proposes to enact that " nothing contained any Act passed in this present session of Parliament for making provision for the payment of parish debts, the audit of parochial and union accounts, and the allowance of certain charges therein, shall authorise any district auditor to proceed to recover any sum certified by him to be due, in respect of which proceedings in any court, or before any justice or jus tices, shall have been taken and determined before the passing of this Act." - - IMPkRIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COMMONS, August 30. REVIEW OF THE SESSION. Mr. DISRAELI (in continuation from our Third Elition of lest night) proceeded to say—l ask the House if I have not given you some information to enable you to form a judgment why the repeal of the navigation-laws, after having been affirmed by a ma jority of this House has not passed this year, and whether the fault lies with the House of Commons or with some body else? I must here remind the House that during this year—during these ten eventful months—there has been sedition in England, insurrections in Ireland, and revo lution all over Europe. I should like to have seen the Whigs in opposition with such advantages.—(Loud cheers.) I think thatin that ca&e, if the House could nave sat twenty months instead of ten, the time would have been expended in attacks—for what purpose I need not describe.—(Hear, hear.) I must admit that I have already obtained the acknowledgment of the Noble Lord the Secretary for 'oreign Affairs that, in as far as foreign policy was concerned during the most important year I have been in Parliament, the forbearance and good sense of the House have been distinguished. In j tact, the desire has been not to press upon the Govern ment; and as to wasting the public time, so far as I my self am concerned, I have some twinges of conscience for ' not having brought forward the affairs of the River Plate; but having had some experience of the inexpediency of discussion, at a moment when the Noble Lord had all his time occupied, I could not think of forcing him to turn over the history of six mis.-.iuns that had tailed, anti therefore I gave up the question. Then as regards England, I do not think that the conditiou of England question has occupied much of the time of the House of Commons.—(Hear.) There was an occasion most le gitimate for such discussion, and that was the time when the monster petition was presented. There was then bat one feeling in the House, and that was that it would be for the advantage of the country that the subject should be fairly discussed. I do not now ester into the question. Why? I only recal the great fact, to show that with regard to the state of England, sedi tion being very prevalent, there was yet no discussion. Therefore, as regards England, Europe, there was no waste of time. Was there, then, any waste of time as regarded Ireland ? Early in the year our attention was called in the Queen's speech to that subject. Go vernment brought forward a measure which was fairly discussed; it passed both Houses, and I believe was a very good measure, and has worked well. Nevertheless, it is not to be forgotten that in another place a noble friend of mine asked whether it would not be advisable to do more—whether it would not be advisable to suspend the Habeas Corpus and to pass a law making treason felony. In time 'Government followed my Noble Friend's suggestion—it only shows what a friendly op position there is in another place.—(A laugh.) But it was shown in another way, for a Noble Duke suggested that they might revive the Alien Act. They said they did not know, but, after a little time, they did revive it. But I put it to the House, with the insurrection in Ireland, with the most unconstitutional of necessary measures, what has been the conduct of the House of Commons? How inconvenient have been those forms which were framed for the defence of the minority and the preservation of the public liberties ! (Hear, hear.) How inconvenient were those forms found when the question was to rescind all the civil liberties of Irishmen! The necessity being felt, I want to know was the opportunity taken by any Honourable -Member to make speeches to annoy or hamper the Government? Were there even any demagogues to avail themselves of the occasion to excite the passions of the dis tant multitude?—(Hear, hear.) I rest the vindication of the House of Commons upon their conduct on that occasion. Lett without leaders, split into sections, committing, perhaps, some indiscretions, what was the conduct of the House of Commons? I say that it was a model for any constitutional assembly in the world.— (Hear.) The traditionary good sense, and instinctive courage of the English nation showed themselves on that occasion, and that old English constitution, which , it is the fashion now to vilify and rail against as ineffi cient, unable to work, and not suited to this enlightened statistical age, gave an example to Europe, and proved that our system of government could, if necessary, corn. bine the energy of a despotism with the enthusiasm of a republic.—(Loud cheers.) I have now tested the two. causes which have been alleged for the present unsatis factory state of affairs. I have tested them through all the real business of the session. There is not a topic of . any great importance which I have omitted, and I think I have shown that the two causes alleged were not , founded in fact, and that if the public time was wasted, it was not bythe conduct of Members or through the forms; of the House. But the time has been wasted, and it now' remains for me to tell you' what have been the consequences of that waste. I am now going to' read the bills of mortality of the session of 1848. The obituary is now almost complete—(Continued laughter) —being drawn up to last Saturday night. This is what' the country has lost—forty-seven Bills, all upon impor tant subjects, some upon most important, and many upon' interesting subjects. More than two thirds of these were Government measures, and therefore ought not to have been brought forward, unless they were demanded for the public weal. I say nothing for the Jewish Disabili ties Bill or the Repeal of the Navigation-laws—they have consecrated monuments of their own. In this list I find— Outgoing Tenants (Ireland); Borough Elections; Elec tive Franchise and Registration of Electors (Ireland); Pol ling Places (Ireland); Audit of Railway Accounts; School masters (Scotland); Tenants at Will (Ireland); Metropolis Police; Agricultural Tenant-right; Poor-law Union Charges; Qualification of Members; Tithe Rent Charge, &c. (Ireland); Borough Elections (No. 2); Horsham Bo rough; Lunatic Asylums (Scotland); Qualification and Re gistration of Electors (Ireland); Election and Polling Places (Ireland); Light Dues; Scientific Societies; Roman Catho lic Charitable Trusts; Roman Catholic Relief; Sale of Bread; Highways; Waste Lands (Ireland); Poor-law Officers Superannuation Allowances; Landed Property (Ireland); Bakehouses; Life Policies of Assurance; Cruelty to Animals Prevention ; Clerks of the Peace (Dublin); Appeals in Criminal Cases; Smoke Prohibition; Remedies against the Hundred ; Registering Births, &c. (Scotland); Marriage (Scotland); Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) ; Provident Associations Fraud Prevention ; Chancery Pro ceedings Regulation ; Charity Trusts Regulation ; Fees (Court of Chancery) ; Legacies to Charitable Institutions;, Officers of Courts of Justice (Ireland) Assimilation of Ap pointments; Poor Removal (England and Scotland); Re newable Leasehold Conversion (Ireland) Bills. Now these various Bills occupied our time for six months, and here again I trust I have shown that the causes which have been alleged for the unsatisfactory state of public affairs are not just ones.—(Hear, hear.) I hope I have shown that if there has been vacillation, it was not the House of Commons which vacillated; that if there has been weakness, it is not we who ought to be charged with infirmity of purpose. I have endeavoured to vindicate the House from the oppro brium of being the cause of this great public evil. I call it a great public evil. although I think that a weak phrase—it is a great national calamity, because—what is it ?—it is neither more nor less than this, that the sys tem of Government which prevails in this country is a system incompetent to pass those laws and to carry those measures which are necessary for the public welfare.-- (Hear, hear.) Now I cannot imagine a state of circum stances more grave or more perilous. I think it but right, having endeavoured to persuade the House that the alleged cause of delay is not the true one, to state what in my belief is the cause. In my mind it is not difficult to discover it—it is not hard to find or difficult to recognise. I have no personal feeling in the matter. I am willing to admit that Hon. Gentlemen opposite, in so far as their personal qualities are concerned, need shrink from no comparison with any body of men in this House who might be called upon to ad minister the Government.--(Hear, (Hear, hear.) But if I am asked the cause of this great public calamity —of this avowal of political incompetence in the institu tions of this country—l must say that the great cause lies there.—(The Hon. Member here pointed to the Treasury bench amidst the loudest cheers.) I see there a body of men who acceded to power without a Parliamentary majority. I think that they were justified by the exi gency of the case in acceding to power ; nay, that their conduct was in accordance with the practice and genius of the constitution, but, though they were in the first in stance justified in taking office without a PaParliamentary majority, they are not justifiable in retaining it under such circumstances, and their having done so has occa sioned two results, both of a very serious description. In the first place, we have a Cabinet which cannot pro pose their measures with a conviction that they will be carried.—(Hear.) After all their deliberations—after all their foresight—after all their observation of the times—after ail their study of the public in terest, when their measures are launched from the Cabinet into this House, they are not re ceived here by a confiding majority—confiding, I mean, iri their.belief in the statesmanlike qualifications of their authors, and in their sympathy with the great political principles professed by the members of the Administra tion.—(Hear, hear.) On the cont rary , the success of their measures in this House depend s on a variety of s mall parties who in their aggregate exceed in number and influence the party of the Ministers. The temper of . otie leader has to b e watc h e d — i ndication of the opinion of another has to be observed—the disposition of a third has to be suited; so that a measure is altered, re modelled, patched, co bbl e d, pa i nte d , veneered, and var- Ivar nished, until, at l as t, no t race i s l e f t o f i ts original scope and scheme; or it is withdrawn in disgust by its origi nators after having been subjected to prolonged and elaborate discussions in this House.—(Cheers.) This is one of the great causes of that waste of public time which, in these days, is as valuable as public treasure. There is another inconvenience resulting from the present position of the Government, in my opinion more serious if not so flagrant, and that is, it is impossible to expect from the Ministers those mature, finished, and com plete measures which, under other circumstances, we . should have a right to d eman d f rom th em . M en i n t h e i r situation will naturally say—" What is the use of be stowing care, study, and foresight on the preparation of a measure, when the moment it is out of our hands it ceases to be the measure of the Cabinet, and becomes essentially a measure of the House of Commons?" and therefore measures are thrown before us with the fore gone conclusion, that we are to save the Administration much care and trouble in preparing the means of govern ing the country. Thus it happens that the House of Commons, instead of being a purely legislative body, is every day becoming a more administrative assembly. The House of Commons, as now conducted, is a great Committee sitting on public affairs, in which every man speaks with the same right, and moat of us with the same weight—(Hear, bear)—no more the disciplined array of traditionary influences and hereditary opinions —the realised experience of an ancient society, and of a race that for generations has lived and flourished in the high practice of a noble system of self-government. —(Loud cheers.) That is all past. The . future is to provide us with a compensatory alternative in the con ceits of the illiterate, the crotchets of the whimsical, and the violent courses of a vulgar ambition that acknow ledges no gratitude to antiqu it y —to posterity . no duty— (Loud cheers) --until at last the free and famous Par liament of England is to subside to the low-water mark of those national assemblies and those provisional con ventions that are at the same time the terror and the derision of the world.—(Loud cheers.) I t race a ll this evil to the disorganization of party. I know that there are gentlemen in this House who affect to deprecate p ar ty government. lam not going to enter into a dis cussion respecting party . government, b ut t hi s I will tell you, as I told you before, in a manner which has nut yet been met by any of the gentlemen who oppose my views on this subject, that you cannot cho ose b etween party govern ment and Parliamentary govern ment, you cannot have the latter without the former; and, therefore, when gentlemen denounce party government they strike at that scheme of government which, in my opinion, has made this country great, and which I hope will keep it ;;rear.—(Cheers.) I caa foresee, though I dare not con ternplete, the consequences of the system that now pre vails. They are w ea k wor d s that would describe them as prejudicial to the realm, perilous to Parliament, fatal to that high tone of public life that is the best security for national grandeur and public liberty. It's more than this. It is the finis futorum of the great D ardanian house.—(Loud cheers.) 1 really believe that if you persist in this system, it will realise results which no revolution has yet succeeded in accomplishing - 77 which none of those conspirators that you have latell arrested in their midnit:ht conclaves have had, the ,au da,?.iv to devise.—(L, ud creers.) I know ne institution in the country that can long withstand its sapping and deleterious influenc,. As for the class of public then that have hitherto so gloriously administered the affairs. of this country, I believe they will be swept off the face of our political world. For my part, I protest against the system. I denounce it. Even at the eleventh heer I call upon the country to brand it with its indignant, reprobation.--(Loud cheers.) But, whatever may the consequences—whatever may be the fortune of in 1..; viduals or the fate of institutions, I at least have had the satisfaction of calling public attention to this political plague-spot— I at least have had the satisfacuon of attemptinp, to place in a clear light the cause of this. great national evil. More than that, I have had the consolation of justitying this great assembly, in which it is my highest honour to hold a seat, and of v indicating , . in the face of England, the character and conduct of the House of Commons.—(Enthusiastic cheering.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I must, in the first places thank the lion. Gentleman for consulting my p e rsonal , convenience as to the time of bringing this question before the House; I will next thank him, as a Member of this House, for the very diverting speech he has made although in what it originated, or to what object it Wet' directed, lamat a loss to discover. With respect to the origin of his speech, indeed, the Hon. Member• read a paragraph from a Sunday paper, referring to the day fixed for the fish dinner. I asked the Hon. Member whether he was reading from the London Gazette. The Hon. Member replied in the negative, but said that the information contained in that paper was of a more sacred and confidential character than any which appeared in the Gazette.—(Laughter.) This certainly was new infore ,nation to me. At any rate, I can state that the whole, story as given in the paragraph about the fish dinner being postponed from the 19th to the 26th is fabulous; that story, however, such as it is, seems to have formed the foundation of the Hon. Member's address to the House. In commenting on what has passed during this session, the Hon. Member seemed to imagine that he had to defend the House of Commons from some charge which the Go- . vernment had made against it. When I heard the Hon. Gentleman pursuing this course, I was disposed to soh, like the person who was told that reflections bad been cast upon Hercules,—Quis vituperavit f I can state, oa the part of the Government, that no such charge beg been made. During the session we have received sup-, port in many instances, which were quoted by the' Hon. Member for Montrose yesterday. The measures which . we have been able to bring before the House have been generally supported, and indeed some of those which have been abandoned or postponed, such, for example, as the proposed repeal of the navigation• laws, were supported by considerable majorities. The Hon. Member seems to suppose that we have attacked the House because some observations have been made about time being wasted in prolix and tedious debates. Now, I do not wish upon this occasion, when there is no proposal before the House for a change in our forms. to enter into a discussion whether any and what alterations in those forms may be useful for our present habits and practice. But this I will say, that there was formerly no practice more sane' tioned and encouraged by usage than the practice of discussing the subject of petitions at the time when they were first presented. Hon. Gentlemen who pre. sented petitions usually defended the sentiments eV pressed in them at some length, and I have heard debates go on till nine or ten o'clock at night, in consequence 01 the speeches made by various Members on the presents' tion of such petitions._ And yet that practice has been • abolished, nor has any complaint been made of a bin' drance to free discussion. If that be the case, it shows that there may be some alteration in the forms of this House without injury to the essential rights of discus sion, and without impediment to the freedom of debate. Hon. Gentlemen resisted when the proposal for the alte ration was made, and I remember that one statesman, by whom freedom of debate was certainly valued as much is any man, I mean Lord Brougham, loudly protested against the change, and declared that freedom of debate would be lost if the alteration were made. No evil come' quences, however, have resulted from it; so little true is it that by a change of 'forms you sacrifice that freedom 0 1 debate which is essential to fair discussion. The Hon. Gentleman has gone into a commentary on the prO• ceedings of this session, and has led the House through • various measures, to some of which I shall allude. BPt let me, before I do so, remark upon one sentence which fell from the Hon. Gentleman towards the conclusion of his speech. He said that in this year there had been sedition in England, incipient rebellion in Ireland, and revolution in Europe. Now let me call the attention of the House to the fact that the Ministers of the Crown are chiefly appointed to administer the affairs of the empire, and when we see that sedition in England has been met with a vigorous arm by the Secretary of " State for the Home. Department—(Cbeere)—assisted by his colleagues—when we see that rebellion in Ireland has been suppressed by the measures taken by this House and the energy shown by the Lord-Lieutenant in Ireland—(Hear)—when we find that the revolution on the continent has no shaken the institutions of this country, and that, however convulsed the state of Europe may have been, we have preserved peace hitherto in the midst of these convulsions—l must say, as a member of the Government attacked, that the Administration of the empire cannot have been so very defective; sedition having been quelled, rebellion suppressed, and peace preserved in the midst of European convulsion.— (Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) lam the more ; induced to make this remark, because,however the Hon. Gentleman may praise the ancient constitution of this country—in which I shall be happy to second him, though perhaps my panegyric may be less eloquent than his own—l must yet remind the Honourable Clem , ber and the House, that this supposed duty of the mem bers cf a Government to introduce a great number of measures to Parliament, and to carry those measures through Parliament in a session, is a duty which is new to the Government of this country. That duty may have been more or less well performed by the present Government; but it is a duty which was hardly known and recognised by the Governments and Ministers which this country has produced. I will mention three Ministers who have been supported by as large majori , ties as any which can be found in Parliamentary his- tory. The first of these is Sir Robert Walpoke jt would be really difficult to name the_ legislative men' sures which Sir R. Walpole introduced. There was, in . ' deed, a measure which he brought forward involving an alteration in the excise laws, but he failed to carry (Hear, hear.) I may mention also Lord Chatham, w" ° was supported by a P ar li amentary majority for ell sessions almost without debate, and with hardly a dill' sion, and yet, with the exception of a Bill which pro' sided that soldiers' pensions might be paid in advance, with a deduction of five• per cent., I do not know ant Act to which th e name o f L ord Chatham is attache • Another Minister of the Crown, who was supported 1 1 • large majority, and of whom his supporters used to say that he was born to maintain the institutions of the countrt",. I allude to M r . Pi tt — stau d s i n the same position. Wi t, the exception o f hi s great measure f or the union of all country with Ireland, f ew l eg i s l at i ve A cts can b e folio," to which th e name o f Pi tt i s attached, and it is well known that he attempted, but was not able to car*: measure on the subject of tithes , which was not t lll4. macely carried till the period of Lord Grey's Administrs' • tion. I say,- therefore, that it is not the sole or prinel' pal duty of a Government to introduce legislative Men' sures, or to carry them through Parliament. I l un bound to declare that in times of great difficulty and pressure the chief portion of the time and attention of Ministers must be given to those questions of adwinit tration, which devolve upon them in the exercise of 1 . 11 discretionary power given t o th em b y t h e C rown .' "and which every day may call forth. When, therefn these questions of admini s tr a ti on h ave to b e attene7 to, it is more difficult th an u sua l to watc h t h e details of every measure which may be brought before EiS 'lament And yet, notwithstanding this state things, and the difficulty which we felt in - , 00 ",...r ing them, I find th a t ou t o f 125 Bill s intro' duced by the Government during the present sit' sion, 105 Bills have been already passed, or have received so much of th e sanc ti on o f t h e H ouse as t o ow': it probable that they will receive the assent of the Crown; during the present session. Many of th ese Bills are 0 " the utmost importance. The Crime and Outrage (Ire land) Bill has produced most important effects in e° 1) ; pressing the system of assassination which prevailed 0(1, before the Act passed. The Evict e d D est i tute Poor Bil l is likely, on the other hand, to be of great use in mitt' gating the cruelties of those evicti ons w hi c h sotnetio r e ,, take place in Ireland. With reg a rd t o t h e mea sure 1 % the sale of incumbered estates, I own I cons ider tha t while it requires the utmost att ent i on to i ts d e tails, it still a measure which may lay the foundation for ,2 1 sounder state of society i n I re l and, and I trust t hat . t h e ji incumbered estates whi c h may b e sold may come lt: the possession of landlords who may be sensible of I ° . , policy of attending t o th e i mprovement of the esta te and the wants of the population.. But the Hon. Gentleman has gone through a num b er of measures, with regard; t which he says that the vacillation, or change of purigll,' of the Government has produced the most injuricels e facts. The fi rst quest i on to which he referred was ghetto": tion relating to commercial distress. Now, every one what was the course pursued with regard to ass sob' ject. We were obliged, in the course of the last autuso,.. to take a step which might have led:to a violation of st o law, and which was certainly not justified a ccording the letter of the Act of 1844. We thought it necessary to summon Parliament to meet in consequence of o ur having taken that step. It was not for us to prop ose any measure approving of the conduct which we pursued, but we summoned Parliament for the purr': of meeting any v o t e o f cens ure which might be proP° s ,,,, ei t The party to which the Hon. Gentleman belongs , cause be declares himself to be not only the advocate! 0 _" . : a member of a party, had just at that time obtained.n.: accession to its ranks in the person of the Right 11 „ ° , m g, Gentleman the Member for Stamford. In the yes e s...Mu t when that party seceded from the support of th Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, they dise v ig ic u b very great ability in assailing the measure " f they had then to deal, but it was theirem insi not to have amongst them a gentleman grtn w as acquainted with t h e official acting sines . With - bu Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for the new parliagn en of t, .tbranovs.: ever, they bad the good fortune —a gentleman turn er of great practical experience , of g. re et s , official knowledge, and who had particularly t h e country. a ttention to w t e h l e l, find tb financial g h a n t m Hu n o . n G e t e a n s concerns n was brought b e fore le! That House, moved—" , looking to the state of di stress question of commercial d istress wimer distrust a nd cial classes, and to the g eneral feeling of a e have which has for some tim e p revailed amon g the 0 alarm by which the embarrassments .. of tr_d use h aggravated, it is the opinion of this House sit mw ~.