The Sun. — London, England, 1824-05-26 00:00:00

great change in the sate of the press took place upon the aieparture of the Marquis of Hastings. He was succeeded by Mr. Adams, formerly one of the censors of the Press, and who performed the functions of the Governor-General until the arrival of his successor from England. One of the first Acts of this Gentleman had been to reverse all that the Mar quis of Hastings had done, with reference to the emancipation of the Press, and to revive a criminal prosecution against Mr. Buckingham, which had been quashed the year before, and which was considered by Sir F. M'Naughten as so cruel and oppressive, that he had refused to try it. The licence. or Mr. Buckingham was annulled, and he was ordered to quit India garithin two months. Nothing could be more despotic than this treatment. The reason assigned for it was some severe re marks made by Mr. Buckingham upon the appointment of a Dr. Price, a Presbyterian Minister, to supply the Government with . paper, pens, ink, and various articles of stationary. — The appointment appeared to Mr. B. as incompatible with the holy calling of the individual, and it was remarkable that ialad since been annulled as such `by the East India Com pany; and severe animadversions cast upon Dr. Price by the general Assembly of Scotland for having accepted the situa tion. Yet it was for censuring this appointment that Mr. Buckingham had been ruined. He, had committed no one illegal act to render him obnoxious to such treatment. Im mediately upon his return to England, he applied to the Board of Controul, and to the East India Company for a Li cense. This he was refused. He then commenced legal proceed ings against Sir. Adams ; but such was the tardines of his soli citors in India, and so great the reign of terror where Mr. Adams presided, that he was obliged to abandon the suit. It might have _been expected that Mr. Adams would have been satiated with the ruin of Sir. Buckingham, but it was not so—he pursued his hostility to the last remnant of his property. Upon quitting the country Mr. B. hall made over his paper to an individual born there, and who, therefore was not required to have a licence to remain. To meet this difficulty, Mr. Adams made a sweeping regulation that all should have licences. By one stroke of the pan he had reversed all that the Marquis of (last ing* had established, and considered requisite to the welfare of India. His success in this respect was followed up by another arbitrary act ; for he actually prohibited all English subjects from circulating, vending, or even giving away any unautho rised publication. Such despotism in India could not fail; he thought, to ensure the interference of that House. In the other measures of active hostility against Mr. Buckingham, his interests wera never lost sight of. He was denied permission to convert his collection of books into a circulating library, nor was he allowed ttnhave any mercantile intercourse with the country. This was the state of things when Lord Amherst ar _rived ; since which, the same process of tyranny had been' carried on to its conclusion. Mr. Buckingham's successor (Mr. Arnold) was imprisoned ; but obtained his release by Habeas Corpus, when the Court decided upon the arguments of his Counsel, that he could not legally be imprisoned. The use he made of Isis freedom was, to take refuge in a foreign settle ment. There he was followed, seized by a military force, and put on board of ship to be sent home. Such was the spirit of this proceeding that he was unable to obtain leave to take his passage in any other vessel, which he was alone anxious for in order to avoid the unhealthy settlement of Bencoolen, by which the ship, in which he was forced to em bark, was to proceed. The next act of arbitrary government was directed against the work of Colonel Leicester Stanhope, who, he was proud to say, was now gloriously , engaged in the cause of Greece. His work was devoted merely to record the speeches of the Judges. Lord Aniherst had the justice to sup press this work. The Journal of Mr. Buckingham was per mitted to be published, provided it was edited by a person ap pointed by the Indian Government. This was actually done; Mr. Buckingham's property being assigned over to the Editor thus appointed, 1,0001. a year paid as his salary, with the addi tion of Mr. B.'s house, which he had let for 5001. a year to a merchant. Thus had he been lured on by the pretended liberty of the press to his destruction, whilst his own means were made subservient to the propagation of principles which he abhorred, and to oppose which lie had actually commenced his 'ander taking. - He had thus presented, he hoped, a clear analysis of the case, unencumbered with any unnecessary details. He should use no argument upon the policy or impolicy of a free press in India, as it was his intention to bring the question be fore Parliament early next Session. At present he should rest upon the particular case of this Petitioner, which, together with that of Sir. Arnott, he contended-was marked by wanton and aggravated despotism. If it were passed over in silence, it would .he nonsense to talk of the responsibility of the Indian Government hereafter; for that responsibility would be power . less where the rights, the properties, and the persons of English men were at stake, and where the very existence of the empire was threatened.—( Hear, hear !)—The lion. Gentleman con cluded by moving for leave to bring up the Petition. The petition was accordingly brought up. Upon the ques tion that it be laid on the talae, Mr. WYNN said, that the House was indebted to the Hon. Member for the clear manner in which he had stated the con tents of the petition, which, bad it been read, would , from its extreme length, have occupied much longer time than the -speech of the Hon. Member. Ile should ce-tainly follow his example in abstaining from discussing the great question in • volved in this subject, upon which the Hon. Gentleman had notice for next Session. Whenever it came before the house lie should lae ready to meet it, and maintain that the e very principles which made a free press the safeguard of liberty -in England, proved it to have a contrary tendency in India. With regard to the facts of the case, he confessed he was in :this embarrassment as regarded Mr. Adams. Mr. Bucking ham was under heavy recognizances to prosecute a suit against Mr. Adams in the English Courts. Any information, there afeee, which he (llr. Wynn) might give in making the defence of that Gentleman, would be placing him at a disadvantage with his opponent when the question came to be tried by another tri bunal. He could only state that Mr. Adams was ready to make ' his defence, and from what he (Mr. Wynn) knew of him he had no hesitation in saying it would be satisfactory with regard to i . ,the case now made out against him ; one statement would be sufficient for him to notice as a sample of all the rest. He understood the lion. Gentleman to have declared that up to the period of the Marquis of Hastings quitting India no pro - ceedings had been taken against Sir. Buckingham. The fact was, that he had been told that he had forfeited all claim . upon the protection of the Indian Government. It was said - that Mr. Adams was the first to institute proceedings against the petitioner. He could only state, in answer to this as • section, that he had been five times previously warned of -the danger of his course. The last letter lie received prior to this period concluded by informing him that his licence, - would be immediately annulled, and he was ordered to de part immediately for England. In this the whole Council `had been agreed. With respect to the conduct of Mr. Ar nott, he should decline going into that question, as it was now under the consideration of the Supreme Council, and he -vests sure the House would feel the propriety of his pursuing that course. The last part of his case referred to Lord Am herst. The individual was residing in India without a licence, • and his Lordship was bound, in discharge of his duty, to order him to depart. With reference to Bencoolen, he really could say nothing at all about the matter—he could neither athrm nor deny, having no knowledge one way or the other. • From the - well-known mildness of his Lordship's character he could not believe that lie had acted harshly but where he considered it absolutely necessary to the discharge of his duty. He had no objection to let the petition be brought up and printed, but he should reserve. what he had to say-on the other topics touched - upon by the Hon. Gentleman till he brought forward his gene .gal motion next Session. Sir W. DE CRESPIGNY spoke,but could not be'distinctly -heard in the gallery. . Mr. HUME trued on the House not to be satisfied with the testimonials offered as to the general character of the party complained of, but to look at the . facts charged, which, having remained for two years uncontradicted, he could not help -re zarding as well founded. Ile dwelt on the hardships which Mr. Buckingham had sustained, and on the absolute ruin which had overwhelmed every one at all connected with him from the exercise of arbitrary power in England, and hoped the :time was not very remote when the principles of the British Constitution would be extended to every British Colony. The Governor-General had no right to remove an individual but on grounds which he could well justify, and he felt it right to say that Mr. Adam's conduct towards , Mr. Buckingh a m appeared Through Mr. premeditated malice. et wished onep t a o p k e n r o , know if to him to be marked by Adams that gentleman had been ruined. He principle H the Government were to act on one ther One paper on a different principle towards ano mast t er had been outrageous himself encouraged to malign Mr. Buckingham.in the manner, and when that Gentleman defended was sent • out of the country like a felon. He ' v i - r wo uld challenge . an dual to go over the files of Mr. Buckingham s paper for s th e io years during which.he had conducted it, him to u prove and defy . that it contained one hundredth pa 46 John Bull" of the scurri ity to be found in "--John . Bull"—(A laugh.)— The Indian . h Indan i he meant. Government, to its credit, had discla im ed any con nection with the " John Bull" in this country; but t e John Bull" had been set up, as he believed , by tary of th e G over nment and Mr. Adams, for the purPos! of the .tl_ ecre.. ,writin g Mr. Buckingham down. Mr. Buckingham liadclann ed no exemption. Ileliad only claimed to be treated as an Engi -Rahman, an d to be put on hi s tr i a l f or any o ff en ce charge( - against him. H e h a d been put on his trial and acquitted. -He . then brought an action against the Editor of the John Bull,but was prevented from following it up by his removal from India. He was confident that the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Secre tary for Foreign Affairs, could not give his sanction to proceed ings like these. Of that he was convinced, from the course that Right lion. Gentleman had pursued when he was at the Board of Contxoul• While he was there the Directors of the East India compa nj, had come almost unanimously to a resolution for re ,eitablisllinga censorship over the press in India. This resolu,' tion had been forwarded to the Right Hon. Gentleman, who had returned it to those from whom it came. He called upon the House to look into the documents connected with this subject, and to examine the restrictions which had been imposed on the Press in India. He hoped the arbitrary power now exercised there would be restrained, and tiovernment would consider how deeply many millions of their fellow-creatures were interested in their decision on this subject. By allowing Governors to -abuse the powers entrasted to them, the loss of that import ant Dependency would be risked, and he therefore entreated the Right Hon. Gentleman to take effectual means to restrain them. .. ..... . _ Mr. ASTELL complained of the improper motives imputed to Mr. Adams, and begged that the House would not without ' further proof take up the idea that he deserved to be so men tioned. He proceeded to shew that the Government of India had not been indisposed to countenance Mr. Buckingham. That Gentleman was in India ire 1818, without a licence. One was granted to him as a free mariner, or merchant. This would have enabled him to pass 7 as a mariner from place to place, but he had been permitted permanently to reside on shore, and to pub lish his Newspaper. In May 1819 he was warned to be more careful in what he published on pain of being sent from India. He received. similar warnings in Nov. 1820, and in July 1821. This was during the administration of Lord Hastings. Scarcely had he received the last warning, when he commenced an inde cent attack on the Bishop of Calcutta. lie was again warned that lie would lose his licence, but continued his attacks. In May 1822, in consequence of his persevering in the same course, a proposition was brought forward for his removal from India, and under the circumstances it appeared to him that acting thus Mr. Adams had only performed his duty. Mr. Buckingham having neglected the repeated warnings which he had received, it became necessary to remove him at last. He thought it would not be equitable for the house to take up this subject, while those legal proceedings which Mr. Buckingham had commenced were still pending. With ree sect to Mr. Arnott, as he had no license, he had no right to complain of ' being removed. If the present Court of King's Bench in India were of opinion, that an indiv idual so circum stanced was not liable to be removed at any moment, Sir W. Jones, and other eminent persons, had been of a different opinion, and therefore in this instance the y ou g ht to p ause be fore they censured the step taken by Mr. Adams. The ques tion as to the importance of the liberty of the press iii India, he had no hesitation in saying, was too large to be entered upon by him; but as the Hon. Gentleman who opened this business thought India, of all other places, was the place where a free press was of the first importance, he felt disposed to give his [ opinion that it was there of least value. Sir C.FORBES read some letters of recommendation which he had received from Mr. Palmer; which spoke in very high terms of Mr. Buckingham. After these lie thought any man would pause before he believed that Gentleman to deserve the severity with which he had been treated. It would have surprised him if the Indian Government had borne with patience any stric tures on its conduct. He bad known natives sent from some parts of India for slight offences. Once it was intimated to a native that he would be sent away because he had had the good fortune to make an advantageous bargain with the Government which they wished him td abandon ' and found little disposed to comply. The individual he alluded to wrote to the Gover nor with a spirit worthy of an Englishman—a spirit which the natives frequently manifested when not ceushed to the ground, which he was sorry to say was too frequently the case. - He wrote to this effect :—" Sir, I am told you intend sending me off. I believe this is said to intimidate me, but I trust you know the laws of your own country too well- to treat me so, and II shall therefore disregard the intimation." Ile thought nothing done by Mr. Buckingham deserved such a tremendous punishment as had been inflic;cd, and he therefore hoped that the- Hon. Gentleman who had, brought this subject forward would follow it up. Sir F. BURDETT hoped that his Hon. Friend, who had brought this subject forward with so much perspicuity, would not content himself with a general motion in the next Session on the advantages of disadvantages of a Free Press in India, but trusted he would bring forward a motion in the course of this Session, to give the petitioner the benefit of his talents, and call on the House to punish what seemed to be the violent conduct 'of the temporary Governor. Ile did not feel the force of that common-place argument, viz. that Mr. Buckingham might seek redress in a court of law. Whether he did so or not, violent and arbitrary conduct on the part of a Governor ought not to pass unnoticed in that House. It had not been proved by the Hon. Gentleman who had spoken of the repeated warnings received by Mr. Buckingham, that at that time he was not fairly, pro perly, and laudably emproyed in commenting on the conduct of the Indian Government. His having censured the appointment of Mr. Adams, seemed to have led to the vielence which was the subject of complaint. Mr. Buckingham, it appeared to him, had been entrapped into that situation which had caused his removal from India. -Ile had been encouraged by the more liberal views of Lcrd Moira, who thought a free press would be a great benefit to India, to act as he did. But for this he would perhaps never have incurred censure. Ile pointed out the evils resulting from the exercise of - arbitrary power, which left the subject no security under successive Governors, or even udder the same individual Governor. Ile therefore hoped the case of Mr. Buckingham would again be bought bee fore the House separate from the question respecting the Press in India, and also from another great question, that with re gard to the situation in which British subjects were placed gh ing there. If the House wished to encourage a free trade to India, they ought to insure those who went thither the protec tion of English laws, and put down the despotic power which at present existed. Colonization ought to be encouraged ra ther than prohibited, and this subject lie also regarded as en titled to their most serious attention. Mr. Secretary CANNING would not detain them by going into those topics which, by the common consent of the House, as well as of the Honourable Gentleman who had brought the subject forward, it was agreed to reserve for consideration in a future Session. He would confine himself to the petition, and decline entering upon the great question relative to-the advantages or disadvantages of a free press in India, and the still larger question adverted to by the Hon. Baronet, as to the policy of encouraging colonization in India. These were matters which in his judgment ought not to be discussed collaterally, when they were entertained at all, Should the Honourable Gentleman follow up the present proceeding, by bringing forward that motion on the individual case which the Hon. Baronet hoped to' sec made in the course of the pre sent Session, the cause now pending between the parties would, he doubted not, weigh materially with the House, and incline them not to go into a debate which must prejudge a question to be disposed of elsewhere. Whether it was originally wise in the framers of a Constitution - for India to impose any peculiar restrictions on Englishmen going thither, was a point not now to he debated. It might with propriety he considered, when the question how Far it would he proper to put the Constitution of India on a new footing after the expiration of the present Charter of the East India Company, came before Parliament, whether or not the present guards should give place to unlimited freedom, or whether the restric tions heretofore .deemed necessary should be maintained in their present vigour, or modified to meet the altered circani stances of the times. But those who were in the administration of India at present had a right to have their conduct judged by existing laws, and it was not fair to them to consider their con duct was faulty, because the system on which they were hound to act was wrong. The conduct of those individuals must neces sarily be faulty with those who identified them with the system which they disapproved, because it was conformable to the laws which the authorities in India were bound to observe. But who was to blame for this, if blame must fall somewhere ? Not the individuals now in the Administration of lndia,—not the East India Company,—not the Executive Government,— but the Legislature who had framed that law which they deemed necessary for carrying on the Government of that great, anoma lous, and astonishing empire. As to the conduct of the Indian administration, repelling as unfair and invidious the use made of the word transportation, as applied to the removal of an indi vidual from one country to another, he would consider whether the conduct of Mr. Adams towards Mr. Buckingham was justi fiable. The Act of Parliament, which gave the Governor-Ge neral the power of removing an individual from India, pointed out the specific means by which redress could be obtained where , that power was unjustifiably exercised. But here was a case in which the Governor-General was complained of, because , he had acted on a law granted, not in his own behalf, but for the security of India, which prescribed the punishment of sending from India persons guilty of such offences as had been imputed to the present Petitioner. If Mr. Buckingham were not guilty, lie would readily .agree that he was a most aggrieved individual, and for this case the Act of Parliament, which gave the power, provided for the punishment of the party misusing it. He was reminded by his Right Hon. Friend that this was not provided for in the same Act, but in one which had preceded it, which however had been incorporated with the last Act for renewing the exclusive privileges of the East India Company. By that law, an individual complaining of the abuse of the power in question was enabled to seek red ress, ho r t t before an Indian, but before an English tribunal, an d the first steps towards obtaining such redress had, in the present Icase, been taken by Mr. Buckingham. Such being the fact, he would ask with what propriety that House could interfere in this il have a Country,_ cause at present, any more than they could between individual and o f Kin individual,es Benchwho might se ending a case was made out I, on had commenced should be brought could not, with propriety, in because prima a C i y a u c r i ; J e of theni. Till the proceedings wnich st b ro e n to g re p . to a conclusion, the House interfere. Those terminated, the case would' be wholly different, and it would be open for con sideration how far the present system was favourable to the interests of British subjects, and whether or not, after the period to which he had alluded, it ought to continue.. He should then be ready.to givelhe question -his best coneider ation; but he could not consent to discuss a great political ques tion now incidentally on the ease of a particular individual, and while legal proceedings were pending, to the prejudice of the accused, and for the benefit of the accuser.- He had certainly manifested much - surprise when. Lord Amherst was mentioned as he had been on this occasion. When he heard. him described to have become a tyrant since he went to India, he was astonished. From what he knew of that Noble Lord, he should as soon have expected that through being removed to India, he would become a tyger.—(A laugh.)—He was sur prised at what he had heard, and certainly looked at the state. went with the greatest incredulity, but still open to convic tion, as lie held it to be his duty, in the case of a friend as in the case of an indifferent person —in the case of the highest as in that of the most obscure individual. It might prove true.. Power had a tendency to change men from what they had been wanting power. It was possible, that a character, the mildest the noblest, had become savage and ferocious. This might be so, but if such should prove the case, it would to him appear among the most extraordina r y physical phenomena of which he had ever hear4.--,(A laugh.) sr ',rite respect to another point, it was due in forbearance for himself, and in justice to others, to restrain within moderate limits the kind suppositions of the Honourable Gentleman opposite, as to what his conduct had been. He would do this by stating facts. It seemed to him that a mistake prevailed as to what the conduct of Lord Hastings had been. It was supposed that all the guard of the Press had been thrown down by that Nobleman—that he had perMitted, nay, that he had almost offered prizes to en courage free discussion in India on all the most delicate and dangerous subjects that could be brought into debate. Lord Hastings had done- no such thing. Ile had withdrawn one set of guards, but for these he had su b s tit u t e d an oth e r. The ques tion which had come before him was not whether there should he any restrictions on the Press in India, or none, but whe ther the restrictions devised by Lord Hastings, which, without betraying any secrets, he might mention, or whether those which had previously been in force should be restored. Ire was- not responsible for either, but would state how the case had stood. After the destruction of the old restrictions the East India Company had certainly wished them to be restored, in place cf those which had been substituted for them, and the draft of a regulation on this subject had been sent to the Board o f Controul, from he unquestionably had withheld the sanction of the Crown. If proved to be equally efficient, he should certainly prefer the latter to the former regulations—a course of admonition to one of supervision and restraint. He had no hesitation in saying, that in the first instance he did not know that he should have recommended the abolition of the cen sure on the Indian press, but being abolished, and a new set of regulations in force, he did wish that their efficacy should be tried before recourse was had to the old system. As far as he could recollect, it was in 1820 that accounts were received of what Lord Hastings had done. The draft of the order on this subject which the East India Company wished to he sent out was then sent to the Board of Controul. This came to him about the middle of the year; he kept it by him unapproved tili.the end of it, when he ceased to have any farther responsibility on the subject. He had wished the new plan to be fairly tried before peremptory instructions should be sent out to rescind them, and to restore/those which had previously been in force.— But when such unqualified panegyrics were bestowed upon him and the Marquis of Hastings as had been pronounced on this occasion. Gralemen ought to knew the true state of the case and understand exactly what had been done. When Lord Hastings went to India, he found regulations in force which. had been framed by Lord Wellesley, who, in his judg ment, was no great enemy to the press in the abstract, and who had in many instances been found the friend and, the patron of literature. These were as follow : " Every Printer to put his name at the bottom of each news paper he publishes. Every Editor and Proprietor of a Newspaper to give in his name and place of abode. " No Newspaper whatever to be published on a Sunday. " No paper to be published at all till inspected by the Go vernor-General, or by some one for him. The penalty of breaking any of these regulations, immediate embarkation for Europe." Those restrictions Lord Hastings certainly abolished, and then the idea was that the Press became " free as air," and was-re lieved from all restraint. Such was not the case, but other checks were devised which he would now repeat. The restrictions of Lord Hastings were these —First, " Editors of Newspapers were prohibited from 'publishing any thing under the heads of anim adversions on the proceedings of the Hon. Court of Directors, or of any other public body connected with the Government of In dia—Disquisitions on the political or local administration, or offensive remarks on the conduct of Mealiers of Council—the Judges of the Supreme Courts, or the Right Rev. Bishop of Calcutta.—(A laugh.)—Secondly, They were prohibited from publishing any thing calculated to create alarm or suspicion among the Natives, that Government had it in contemplation in any way to interfere-with their religion.—Thirdly they were restrained from reprinting from English newspapers articles that came under any of the above heads ; and fourthly, they were prohibited from giving p:lblicity to private scandal or remarks on individuals tending to create dissensions in So ciety."—(A laugh. )—These were the regulations of Lord Hast ings.. He was not defending or inculpating them, but they were not exactly what they might suppose who represented that Noble Lord to have made the Press free as air," and to have en couraged free and uncontrouled debate throughout India. — When it was urged that a free press might do good in India, he should certainly be inclined to say, " give me a free press re gulated by Lord Hastings, and there can be nothing to fear from its excessive license."—(A laugh.)—lt was necessary that these things should be known. Ire stated them at a great sa crifice of reputation with those who had included him in the Panegyric bestowed . on Lord Hastings. He however wished it to be fully understood, that the qUestion which had come before him wits merely this —whether the change being al ready made, it was necessary to send out a peremptory or der to rescind the new resolutions. Ile certainly thought it not worth while to do so till they had had a further trial, a nd if they were found to succeed, then certainly Ile should not have advised rescinding them at all. But he did not re main long enough in office to know whether they succeeded or not, and therefore could not say what course he might ultimately have pursued. What he did do was to negative the draft of a new order on the subject, which had been sent to the Board of Controul.by the Directors of the East India Comrany. Great as his attachment might be to liberal principles, when he saw two such men a s Lord Wellesley,and Lord Hastings concur in thinking some controul over the press in India necessary, differing only in degree, he did not say that they must necessarily be right, but this he would say, that the wisest among them might well pause before lie pronounced an una qualified condemnation en that which they had approved.— He had considered it due to Lord Wellesley, and even to Lord Hastings, as reputation gained on false grounds could never last to state these facts. When the case- which he con sidered to be pending between Mr. Buckingham and Mr. Adams should be decided (when that would be he could not say) lie would admit the utmost attention ought to be . given to some of the subjects which had now been touched upon. He, how ever, would not consent to . discuss it on abstract principles, and with reference to the happy and enlightened state of society in this country, but practically, and with reference to a state of society, not only different, but opposite, were the untrained manners of the natives had only given way to the restraints of a succession of conquerors. The question, as he had said, ought not to be disposed of on the abstract merits of the case without regard to the peculiar circumstances by which it was surrounded, guided by such practical information, as they could obtain, and where would they find greater au thorities than the two Noblemen he had named to assist them in the performance of their task. Whatever M r. Adams had done under the law of India, his conduct must be judged by that law and not by those superior laws which England en joyed, however we might wish that the liberal principles on which they were founded should, When practicable, be extended to every place where our authority was acknowledged. With Mr. Adams he had no acquaintance, but it would be injustice -not to say that he was a man who had raised himself by the most undoubted merit, acknowledged not only by one favour ing superior but by a succession of distinguished individuals who had witnessed his exertions. He himself could truly say that in situations dsingular difficulty, Mr. Adams had in a great degree distinguished himselfby the manliness and integrity ofhis conduct, which impressed upon him a belief that the leading de termination of his mind was to act with honesty and uprightness, cost what it might. He might nevertheless have overstepped his duty—he might have been guilty of violence and oppression. If this were so, the case was in course of being brought to trial beitbre that tribunal which Parliament had appointed to take cognizance of such misdeeds ; and if he were guilty, God forbid that he should not be punished ; but he thought it would be most improper for that House to step in and prejudge the question to be fried in another place. He objected to enter upon the case there, where the system would be confounded with the conduct ctf the individual. The party accused ought not to be censured for the a d m i n i strat i on of a law which was dis a pproved, and exercising un d er t h at l aw a power which it was now th e i r opinion ought to be restrained. There, the two subjects of con siaeration could not be separated, as they would be in a Court of Justice, but the case of the individual disposed of he should not only not object, but should desire that the advantages of a free press in Indi a s h ou ld . b e fairly considered, t oge ther with those restriction s w hi c h m i g ht be necessary to regu l a t e our in tercourse with th e I n di an E m pire, with a vi ew to ap ply th ose principles which were acted upon here so far as they should be suitabie to the progress of wealth and civilization in those re gions. —(Hear, hear !) .. Mr. DENMAN thought the close of the speech of the Right Honourable Gentleman who had just set down, and the opening remarks of th e President of the Bo ar d o f Controul, were founded on a mistaken view of the case before the House. They supposed Mr. Buckingham to have offended the laws now in force, but the fact was, he had 'contravened no laws at all. Mr. Buckingham, on coming to England, had done him the honour to take his opinion on the case, and considering legal proceedings completely at an end, he now spoke as he should not otherwise have felt himself .at liberty to do. He had no intention of going on, and if after presenting the petition which was before the House, in which tkiis was stated, he were now to bring the case into a CourtkoNustice, he would do under 'circumstances disgraceful to liThiself, and he (Mr. Denman) would on no account be connected With it as a legal advocate. He wished to 'knot* how long the circum stance of Mr. Buckinghain'a having - entered into recognizances at Calcutta was to preclude him from the benefit of having his case taken into consideration in that House. He wished to know if it were to operate against him next year as well as this. He for one had advised Mr. Buckingham not to go on, conclud ing the remedy held out to persons in his situation to be but no ' moral. There were laws for protecting Authorities against abuses of the press, and Wl.:y were they not to be resorted to in India ? He had heard the defence made by the Right Hon. Gentleman with horror. It was introducing an Indian atmosphere into that House which he was not prepared to breathe. If restrictive laws were to exist, such laws were to be resorted to : and as the Hon. Baronet had said, nothing could tolerate the existence of this enormous and cruel power but some overwhelming emer gency, such as the law could not reach. With regard to what had been said of the influence of arbitrary power upon the minds of men, it happened to him that he was a schoolfellow of Mr. Adam, and remembered him as possessing a most mild, humane and amiable disposition. But here was an illustra tion of the principle that no man could be safely intrusted with such a power; for he declared most conscientiously that he believed Mr. Adam to have done a most cruel and unjusti fiable act. He was sincerely thankful that this discussion had taken place, because it exposed the system under which the colony of India was governed, and sheaved the necessity of re vising it from top to bottom, and of afibrding protection from its oppressive character to our Indian fellow-subjects. Mr. LAMBTON replied. Ile had satisfied himself that the proceedings alluded to were abandoned, or lie should not have presented the petition.. He would not , have been a party to obtaining this discussion under false pretences, for the purpose of prejudicing a question which was afterwards to be decided by law. After some further observations by the Hon. Gentleman, the Petition was ordered to be printed. FIRST FRUITS. Sir J. NEWPORT rose to bring before the House the ques tion of First Fruits in Ireland. The Right lion. Baronet stated the origin and object of those funds, and complained of the abuses which had existed. One object prescribed for the First Fruits was that of repairiog Churches ; but, instead of their having been so applied, immense taxation bad been im posed upon the Roman Catholic population for that purpose by- means of parochial assessments. He impressed it upon the attention of Gentlemen, that every diminution from this fund must be made good by public taxation, and therefore would have to come out of the pockets of the people of England. He read various opinions corroborating his own views of the question. His present intention was to move for the appiiintment of a Select Committee to inquire into the whole subject, before which he should submit a series of resolutions to the House, differing in some measure from those which he brought forward, and which were only re jected by a very small majority. The Right lion. Baronet then read his resolutions, which were declaratory of the oei gin of first fruits, and of the Acts of Henry VIII., by which they were conceded to the Crown, and that of Anne,_ which afterwards restored them to the Church, together with his con struction of the law for taking the valuations. The new resolu tions stated that it appeared just and equitable to the House that this branch of royal revenue should be rendered applicable to benevolent objects for which it was originally intended, and that no further deficiency should be supplied by the people.— The Right Hon. Baronet, in remarking upon his resolutions, made the following comparison between the first fruits of Ire land and those of England. The Archbishop of Armagh, Pri mate of Ireland, paid for first fruits, 4001. ; the See of Canter bury, 2,13fi01. ; the See of Derry, about which they had heard so much of late, 250/. ; that of Winchester, 2,800/. 7 • the See of Cork and Ross, 50/. • that of Norwich, 854/. The first resolu tion was then moved and put from the Chair. Mr. PLUNKI..;T'r said, thatAhis question was highly im portant as affecting the interests, and peculiarly important as affecting the character of the Church in Ireland. His Right Hon. Frienel had expressed himself anxious to uphold the cha racter of that Church, and could not therefore but rejoice when be (Sir. P.) should shew to his conviction, and he believed to the conviction of every member of the House, that the charges which he had made against the Church, were all of them unfounded. If it were true that the Clergy had taken and appropriated to their own use, funds which ought to have been applied to the purposes stated by his Right Honourable Friend, then there could be no language too strong to characterize such scandalous proceedings. But he was confi dent in being able to shew that such was not the case. The Right Lion. (;entlernan then entered into an examination of the Acts of Henry the Bth, stating that though incorporated in England, they were still two diStinct statutes in Ireland, namely the 26th and 28th of that King ; that one of these Acts related o the valuation of benefices, tiie other to the valuation of first fruits ; and he contended, that there was a distinction in the wording of the two, which showed that the original valuation was to be binding upon the one, though not upon the other. This was a question of law only ; and the law alone could ope rate upon it. He had no fear of being able to show from these and subsequent Acts of Parliament, to every mind accustomed to the construction of statutes, that no rational doubt could be entertained as to the spirit and meaning of the law. His Right Hon. Friend, though not a practising lawyer, knew very well that the best possible commentary upon statutes of doubtful construction was the general usage and practice. And if he was wrong in the construction which he now put upon these Ads, his opinion was at least backed by the experience and usage of three hundred years. The Right Hon. Gentleman then quoted the Acts of Charles and of Gfiorge the First, as corroborative of his opinion. The latter distinctly limited the payment of first fruits to the " former rate, and no more." The Right Hon. Gentleman having explained the Statutes of Ilenry VIII. stated that the value put on first fruits in that reign had been paid by the Clergy of Ireland. He could not suppose the Law Officers of the Crown were to blame for giving the opinion they had given. As an honest man and a Law Officer of the Crown, he could not have given a different opinion. The Church of Ireland, in his opinion, had been ill used. He had formerly said that instead of 130 Non residents as stated by an Hon. Gentleman, there did not appear to be more than thirty. He was enabled again to say that statement was substantially correct. If all the circumstances were consi4red, there was scarcely a Non-resident Clergyman, in the obnoxious sense of the word, in Ireland. Mr. SPRING RICE defended the speech of his Right Hon. Friend. His Right Hon. Friend said the law allowed a re valution of livings, and that re-valuation had not been made.— That conveyed no imputation on the Clergy. The Goverment was only censured. He might ask the Right Hon. Gentleman why those benefices which paid nothing to the Crown, were not to be re-valued ? He was ready to admit that the Clergy of Ireland, in some instances, had not subscribed towards public education; but those cases should not be urged as argument against the liability of the Church to pay any thing. He wished for the sake of Ireland to have the whole question, re-considered. The'more it. was considered, the more it would press on public opinion. Mr. GOULBURN said the Hon. Gentleman's speech had wandered into many topics which did not apply to the question. —lt was impossible to hear the speech of the Right Hon. Bart. without seeing that tire intention was to prove the Clergy of England was liberal, and the Clergy of Ireland illiberal. It was however nothing more than a question of law. He left the law to the statement of his Right Hon. Friend. The Hon. Gentle man had endeavoured to shew that the Churches of England and Ireland stood upon different footing. He protested against that doctrine, because the law said the Church of England and Ireland were united. Their interests were not distinct and dis similar. In the Church of Ireland there was unabating zeal to , discharge the duties of their station not exceeded by any cart , on the part of the Clergy in England. Mr. HUME said he had never calumniated the Clergy of Ireland—he only opposed the system. The Clergy had been described to be a meritorious body of men. They were known by their works, and he might ask whether they had not long been losing members of their flock ? Sir J. NEWPORT replied. If it was a question of justice, what was to become of the NO benefices which had never been valued. The House then divided— For the motion - - 71 For the previous question - - 85 Majority against the motion - —l4 Mr. S. WORTLEY moved for leave to bring a Bill to re gulate Superannuation Allowances.—Leave given. Mr. BROGDEN brought up the Report of the Beer Bill. — The resolutions were agreed to, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time on Thursday. The . House went into a Committee on the Excheq uer Bills' Bi Mr. HERRIES moved to add the Appropriation Clause, which was adopted. The report was ordered to be received on. Thursday, . The Wool Exportation Bill was read a third time and passed. The Combination Laws Repeal Bill was read a second time, and committed for Thursday. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and at OKL O 'CLOCK the House adjourned. FRENCTI PAPERS. We have received all the Paris Papers of Sun day (except the Moniteur), and the Eioile of Monday. They are chilly filled with the conti nued debate on the admission of M. BENJAMIN CONSTANT. A fter a long discussion, in which M. de la BOURDONNATE 7 aleading Ultra De puty, had the magnanimity to support the bility of a formidable opponent—and after a speech of M. CONSTANT himself, the debate was closed.—A proposition was next made that the Members should vote publicly, and not by pri vate ballot, which was rejected. Upon counting the ballots," there appeared for admitting M. CONSTANT 214, against him 168. He was ac cordingly admitted, and took his place amidst the congratulations of his friends. [From the _Voile qf Monday.] Panes, MAY 23.—A letter from Toulouse says—" Private letters from Paris affirm, that the Count of Carthagena Morillo), who has arrived in that capital, has furnished the Government with information of an import..ot nature relative to tile French deserters, who are to be tried in our city on the. 21st of next month, as we have already announced. It Is well known that most of these deserters were at Corunna where Gen. Morillo commanded," Fito3l PERPIGNAN.—The passage of prisoners of war, , subalterns, and soldiers, ended on the 11th of this month, on which slay the last column. of 147 men left the city to proceed to Boulou, and to enter Spain the following day.—The stran- - gers who were among these prisoners have been necessarily re tained at La Junquere; whence they were afterwards sent to .Rosa. In this new depot they will wait tbr the decision of the Spanish Government respecting their further destination. Man v efliders, also prisoners of war, daily arrive, travelling separately with passports marking their route. mong them we have seen Col. Fernandez, Commandant cf . La Junquere, who was at the head of the famous expedition of biers. The Etoile quotes from the Aesirian Observer the official news of the speedy evacuation of Moldavia and Walachia, in the same terms as given in the 411,7,7meine Zcitung. Pious, MAY 22.—Sir 11. Wellesley,. English Minister at •i Vienna, has received. a courier from Constantinople, expedited by Lord Strangford, and who announces that in a conference Which had taken place between him and the Reis Effendi on the 27th of April, the evacuation of Moldavia and Walachia has been formally decided. .MAY 23.—The,Prince Polignac, Ambassador at the Court of St. James, is expected to arrive to-morrow or the day after at. Paria.-13rochetti was executed to-day at the Place de Greve. AM ERI CIN PAPERS. W e have received New York Papers to the 25th of April, from which we extract the fol.. lowing : NEW Yonx, APRIL 23.—Francis S. Cox,'Esq., bearer of dispatches from the American 11linister at Buenos Ayres, to our Government, has arrived at Philadelphia in the Argus- All was quiet at Buenos Ayres, and the Government had adopt ed measures to concentrate the forces and resources of the coun tries on the La Plata, in the event of any landing of European troops. C. A. Rodney, Esq., had recovered from a severe indis position, and was considered out of danger when Mr. Cox left that country. BERMUDA.—By an arrival at Norfolk, Bermuda Gazettes to the 3d instant have.been received, by which it appears that the troops stationed there were fast imbibing the same hostile temper that the Governor had long manifested towards the people of that island. The Commissariat had formally with drawn its patronage from the Gazette, as is intimated, in con sequence of its uncourteous language respecting their master, Governor Lumley. PIRATES . HANGED.—The Captain of the brig Jane, ar rived at Boston from St. Croix, reports that information was received' there on the 30th ult from St. Thomas's, of an American brig and a Spanish schooner having been boarded on the 24th in Sail Rock Passage, by an open boat full of pirates, and all hands murdered except a boy, who saved his life by swimming, being near Porto Rico. He reached land, and gave information. The next day the pirates began to circulate the money which they took from the vessels in Porto Rico, and were apprehended, confessed their guilt, and seven were hanged." [From the Gillorut Chronicle of March 24.1 'We are sorry to learn, by a private letter, (lated Februall 13, that intelligence had reached St. Vincent's of Lieutenant- Colonel Dawson having been put to death in St. Domingo, whither he had gone on a visit, through the agency of the Go vernment of that island, in consequence of a suspicion attached to him of being a spy. Lieutenant-Colonel Dawson held the office of Colonial Secretary in St. Vincent's, and was b ro ther, we believe, to Lord Portailington ; but we sincerely trust the report is premature. WASHINGTON, APRIL 21.—The Tariff has, at present, a majority against it in the Senate -of one vote'. The yeas and nays on committing it to the Finance Committee, are no test of the final vote, as Mr. Chandler, who is opposed to the Bill, voted on that occasion with the other side, not being willing to smother the Bill by a measure of that kind, but being de sirous it should have a fair and honourable discussion. The new-Senator from Illinois, will, however, be in favour of the Tariff. His vote will then balance Chandler's, and there being. a tie, the Vice President will give his casting vote in favour of the Bill—such is the present circulation. It is not very likely that any votes will, at this, time of day, be altered by argu ment. Both sides understand the whole affair, and it must be settled by hard voting, and not by long talking. The Senate have fixed on the 15th Slay for aajournment, but the House will take a later day ; some say Ist of June—others • 25th May. Joseph Lancrater, together with his family, sailer. from Phi ladelphia yesterday, in the brig Ann, Miercken, for Laguira; also Mr. John Meyers, and Mr. Boyd, of New York. We have perused in- the Baltimore Patriot, a letter from an officer on board the United States ship Franklin, dated Val paraiso, Dec. 3, by which it appears that the interests of the Patriots in Alto. Peru are declining, and which country, it is believed by the writer, will ultimately fall into the hands of the Spaniards. General Bolivar was at Lima, at the head of the Peruvian Government, with about 7,000 Colombians, 2,50 0 Chilians, and all the Peruvians under his command, and still expecting more. On the 4th of December the Franklin was at Valparaiso , getting caulked, whence she was to proceed to the Intermedios , thence, as before, to Callao. The patriot ex'peditions which sailed from Callao and Valparaiso have failed, and all the coast of Upper Peru is again in the hands of the Spaniards. The National Gazette, of Saturday, contains a letter from an Officer, dated Lima, November 2, from which we gather the following :—At a battle fought near the Desagu a dero river, at a place called Zefita, in Alto Peru, between the Patriots under Santa Cruz. and the Royal Army, under Baldez; though the Patriots claimed the victory,. yet Baldes gained his object—which was to effect a junction with Alanete, an officer stationed in the neighbourhood of Potosi, with about 3,500 men. It was asserted that this officer, in his advance to Oruno, marched sixty leagues in three days and a half, by which the destruction of the Patriots was effected. Santa Cruz , after having vainly endeavoured to prevent the junction of Bal.° dez and Alanete, began to retreat, and upon their approach within three leagues of him, six days sooner than he expected, his retreat became a flight. The.infantry threw away their arms, and fled towards 1110. About five hundred of the cavalry were kept together by. Col. Brae son, a French officer, who stated that a body of Baldez's Infantry kept within musket-sho t of them for ten leagues, although their horses were -on ' s full trot. Out'of an army of 6,000, 1,500 only have bee- saved' About 700 had arrived at Lima. After thus dispel ei.ig the army of Santa Cruz, Baldcz marched upon Arequipa, whence the Colombian General disgracefully fled to Quilca, and eii barked his troops. He has since arrived at Pisco, where 13011' var will concentrate his forces with the division of Chili, in al l about 9,000 men. The Royal army is about 18,000 strong; . 0 that, upon the whole, his success was considered doubtful. From these ancounts the reader will perceive that the recen t intelligence from Peru, of the dis a stro us state of affairs in Clc. tober and November, is confirmed. And in addition to the a bove, the Editor of th e N at i ona l G azette announces a file 01 the Gazette of Colombia, published at Bogota, as late as the 15th of February, which contains an official acknowledgmen t from Lima, dated the 26th of November, of the retreat of Sand Cruz. The Bogota Gazette, of the 25th of January, furnishe s advices - from Bolivar as late as the 26th December. Riv e Aguero's defection, and Santa Cruz's retreat, are said to hale prevented him from opening the campaign ; but it is a dded:, that the divisio n o f auxili a ries from Chili, con s i s ting of 2,5 0 1; men, to be followed by 600 horses, had arrived at Callao, an d that Santa Cruz remained in Arica with a strong column. Th e attention of the enemy was occupied by.him and the divisions of Colonels Lanz and Urdiminea, who were operating in the provinces of High Peru. PRICES OF STOCKS, APRIL 23,—U. S. Sixes, 1812, 102 i; 1813, 105 a • 1814, 1815, 110—Fi ves , 1820, 110 ; 1811 1 1094—N. d. Sixes, 1024—Canal Sixes, Il—Canal Fives, IP —United States Bank, 11 1 g 114. P., xtoaD St.; The X ct " u il i Lei tab b4p, alld arid ‘oAti a l ' ;. A mil IN,tv] to I Jok I/ ao, b lea a t Pi Lt () ; Pe Dig. do lair di, •‘Xc W t I /AN 4:Ss 11/3 E E x.iAs last 0 1131 itic b„ tit late R Q y limn char Ilea/ 1• s 2. 11 3 Pi 1), BA u 4p