The Sun. — London, England, 1844-02-09 00:00:00

em 110tt use for tw' s till is W YR rtiV led by ul if, that her to her is Amoco' Hate restoo, ' estates, ,ance as 101' ..;.ene" the ;p 0 s i ' id b e 160* signal for the British troops taking possession of Shikar poor—(Hear, hear)—and as much of the country as Might he necessary for carrying on military operations. There was a threat held out by Lord Auckland. to -take Possession of the Ameers. He would follow those nego tiations step by step. He would now read to the House tt letter from Sir Henry Pottinger to the Governor-Ge neral, in which that ": old friend" of the Ameers, as he called himself, recommended the Governor-General to take forcible possession of the territory of the Ameers. The lion. and Learned Gentleman then proceeded to read this letter, which advised the Indian Government to Place a large body of troops in Sinde, for the purpose of creating a " novel effect."--(Laughter.) That phrase I "' a specimen of that "rhetoric called rigmarole." It was the ph ys i ca l effect that was signif i ed. An d the letter went on to say, that if the Ameers should seem backward the - military preparations would probably in n,tleore them. Sir henry Pottinger charged the Ameers of Sinde with writing to Shah Soo- Jab; although at the time they 'Wrote they they were an independent power, and had a right to communicate with any foreign potentate. But yet the fact of this communication with the Shah of Persia \vas units a. pretext for usurpation and for tyranny. The "`- n to n• and Learned Member then referred to the Blue "theoeork, 'Page 89, a letter of Sir Henry Pottinger's, who expressed his opinion that the British Govern• ment should demand from the Ameers a cession of all that territory lying on the right hank of the Indue, by 1 1 1 1 imaginary line drawn to the Beloochistan territory. -"e• further recommended that a large quantity of Native and-British troops should be placed at Latta, thus 7feaking of the Sinde as if (said the Hon. and Learned entleman) it had been already subjugated. Yet this w as the Sir Henry Pottinger who called the Ameers his "old friends," and on whose communications the Noble Lord t, had placed so muc h re li ance , a nd by which he had eee n so much imposed upon. Lord ASHLEY—I believe they are correct. Mr. ROEBUCK—I have no doubt whatever that the Voble Lord believes them, nor have I any doubt. that he h as been imposed upon.—(A laugh.) A great deal had firesetn by y aiil about the communication of the Ameers with . the Shah of Persia. That crime had been punished, making them pay a large sum of money, and ec nildly by Occupying their country with troops. But Was this ace—was all their talked of deceit, tree illecn and mi s d ee d s a t a ll comparable to' the ritish going up the Indus with an armed t„ force, and telling them that if they did not give up cer -portions of their territory, they would annihilate Weni•?—(Hear.) Why it would be comparing a mole ill to Mcomt • Ossa. Under the pretence of carrying on ne gotiation s w i t h t hi s d e f ence l ess peop l e , t h e Indian Go 7, .oc/curnent was, like on e of th e h uge s n a kes of their own • °Illt tc)•• folding its mi g hty coil s round its victim. The Conduct of the Indian Government was most disgraceful, f) n d iMprinted an everlasting stain upon this country. 1 PPressing a poor helpless, abandoned, people, Lord Auck .;lld..eommitted injustice—blunderieg injustice. Shah flab was made the puppet, and the Ameers the victims. 1" 1 e year 1841, we were at peace with Affghanistan, ,41t. the.:-tribute became due, and a mortality oc curred i our army, of which the Affghans took advan ofge• They rose and destroyed the miserable remnant t 4 _ g the army, and the example which was given was Prly regarded by others of our Indian tributaries. The Atueers of Sinde raid the Feringhece were thrust °lit of Affghaniatan, and why should they not be thrust °tit of Sind e ? (Th e Hon. and Learned Member ae a read an extract from the Report, chiefly consistin f • tion from Colonel Arthur; but, f ro g o communication ea the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, it was utterly itn ljo.ssible to guess at the purport of the extract, or even o ne persons who were mentioned in it. His running ; ° _,nntenta r i es , as h e procee d e d , were, if poss ibl e more t i nn • l 'itinet, and l ess i nte lli g ibl e , th an th e rea di ng of th e ncument itself.) He proceeded to contend that, in r.nsequenee of the position in which Lord Auckland had borou g h successor, t was impossible for Lord Ellen- Of ",_tigh to adopt any other course than that complained fiction, the Noble Lord who brought forward the - r - n un n• The Hon. and Learned Member then 4i. ‘ w e , e eded to read with the same rapidity and in ,,",nietness a very long extract from the corres rndences interspersed with remarks -which were unintelligible in the gallery.) 'With the excep ✓" one cession by Lord Ellcnborough nothing more i lls proposed to be granted to the Ameers. Major Out eflll Proposed that Bukkur and the town and harbour tn Kurachee shou:d be ceded to the British Govern beenent• Much had been said about the Ameers having deprived of their hunting-grounds. There was a in stinc t P.position made by Major Outram, that the Ile , within 100 cubits of the river bank should be al .:‘3‘ted for . that purpose, and that beyond that limit the L ta eers sho u ld not trespass. Th ose propos iti o ns of Ma tie c Ou trana were in effect adopted by the Governor (\f and carried out by Major Outram himself. He c• and was not ta cki ng o f th e Ameers or their nslastice. Ile did no t mean t o say 'that they had not iPerfect right to drive us out of Sinde. His only el e !, ti cul was, inasmuch as they were in that position, i n was the proper conduct to be pursued by the com e Governor, at the time he found himself surrounded by b i °3 c enemies. He would now briefly give them the story of those t r a nsac ti o n s which the Noble Lord had ee • t given- Roostum Khan, a Prince of eighty-five years t Th e and w under the control of a Minister.— Learned Gentleman here detailed the Areur ns tances connected with the treaty which Major 1-I . ll r tr ani prop ose d, i n case o f his driving out Roostun - Cs )▪ ,uritQ Minister, to conclude with lloostum Khan, then t sa that he could point out 20 1 ;:,_• %,il e ages in the correspondence of Lord Ellenborough, in o u t :, h his Lordship said he did not think that the treaty iise l4 Possibly be carried out, and he (Mr. B.), now • ned.the House, givin •every consideration to the mis t;ertttnes of th ose Princes, to look at the matter with l e4 - itti ness, and tell him whether the consummation that had happened was not the inevitable fate of Sinde as a l:otected State ? Was it not the inevitable destiny of trade, such as Lord Auckland had made it, to be ab sorbed in the Anglo-Indian empire ? And was it then pot better that it should be done at once ? been- done at once, J ong agony, If it had not and confusion, constant disputes, riot would be the consequence, and the end of all would be as it was at present, namely, Sinde would become what she now was, part and parcel of the e normous dominion w hi c h we—successful traders—had c reated in India. Why at the p resen t momen t did th e y 11 0 see that another portion of territory would ac ,,,t11_411)•• in spite of us, "become ours ? He knew it 4 ,"1i1d be said to be unjust.—(Hear.) Why did I:_e.Y not then get out of India?—(Cries Hof " , v r° ,l l ll both sides of the House.) Our possession it • One great injustice from beginning to end. He thebe a prophet.—(Laughter.) They would possess vunj aub before two years would elapse, in spite of "ecoselves Hon. Gentlemen might laugh ; but he re -11,410e.ru. bered . that two years ag.i he had said they would ku ' r 3 i e r ss Sinde, and Sinde they. now had; and let them words, before two years should have passed the th at they would possess. He had no more doubt of t i . 4, ,than he had of our whole Indian policy being a I"ljustiee, as well as an unwise one. The Hon. • arned Gentlemen then detailed the circumstances and l ed to Sir C. Napier's advance upon Hyderabad, procteoMmended that gallant officer's wisdom in not b a ,, n "bug to Hyderabad without his army, as be had b eii __ advised t o d o b y Major Outram, who was led to 1 . 4 . 0•u ;ve th at at the time the Ameers had 20,000 men their command, they had not one soldier under tb o 5 Napier (he said) followed, di sns 4 te d ice of Al a j or O utram, a scene o f t h e greatest eep e i s w ould have ensued, and terror and alarm from t4„ e ',ornorin to the Himalaya would have been the Isields,34cY consequence. He CMr. Roebuck) gave the tile s e Lord eve r y credit for his humane feelings towards c Ilil' g th unhappy Princes, but he asked his countrymen to e s e j u at gccat meed of praise to Sir C. Napier which R,n just' deserved ; and that not scrupulously, but with jueerui.rQuafdeeli for the heavy responsibility . which he tnad• due c • Ma j or Outram thought that his personal. Pie r _ _vt-:.' s VOUld stop the 20,000 men ; but Sir C. Na seWo:l4.er soldier and politician said, No ; arm your trekok and be aware, because you have to deal with ,here '; u e r r _ c lu_s, foes. The lion. ad Learned Gentleman d oin 'leg round for a paper on the seat behind, and which li g - so made some o b servat i ons as to somet hi ng Re eoti , Kl ! alleged h a d f a ll en from Lord Ashley, which Lo r d not catch. unles s ' l na l t k.. }!l,Ey begged t o sa y, th a t w h a t b e h a d s t a t e d ~.%3 th e e Production of those foot-notes was unjust, f Rro 3',„ . 'lad been submitted to Maj reaor Outram. g• r a 3 UCK proceeded, and d a lengthy letter i c . , u " . e a ti er , or a . pier . to Ma•or Outram, giving an ex tl/4ked 1 1 4, (s ;t r u the eir . eumst j ances and motives that influ en wi th C. apter N ' ) conduct in the course he had Ye a h g respect to the march to Hyderabad, and also thel l natur e o f • coulhis correspondence with Lord El d on the subject, and pointing out why it was :nth eal remain silent while the newspapers were filled tr. tousreports relative to his conduct in the mat `,n`tlharn,dnn had been made to the negotiations with Share radi n , o. _ At the moment those negotiations were eurceesi:'e_Arneers were gathering that army which h ear d %k -diaries Napier to fight the battle.—(Heac, baPier' s o n Noble Lord had complained of Sir Charles 7 t )'dero utt ndll,et to the Ameers after the conquest of Kith t i ttle 1 1 1 Su. Charles Napier durin , the whole of id lived in a tent. He had newer interfered ;Vi • e, ou,,t--,s-adm.eiers more than was necessary to insure . them he 'cowl the moment of their capture until that she n i d Tarture for Bombay. That was only what zo "kne w i l l'ave expected from the character of the man. ei• ()t kralu ro m n w ells and he knew that as he was one of the 1 14 11 , e11 . -- -(c e s° was he on e o f t h e mos t kind-hearted_ Of and hi sel's.) Nothing could exceed his fearless plan' Cluirages but the n h e h a d a heart like that ~t t led of (llear, h ear. ) The Noble L or d h a d corn 'oncileneed e tre atment which the Ameers had cx ha exceed gig deprived of their women. Nothing l u t tylie e d to the h orr ib le cruelty- which the Ameers had fretfuland, ‘_k_ards the women. They were luxurious, er ,M ,, , t th e i r ' I ll& Many of these women had been torn ;, -_pfrents, and subjected to the most horrible peuost"i_iiill General Napier had at this moment in bid deliv ered and w f o l e ta4 u n fr a , cruel instrument of torture which had IT; in t :d of bras s zenana of the Ameers, which was Of bltwhich was used to beat the S atisfactory to know that our conquest i." 1 1 „ 46 had • ad ydsetlivered that country from one of' the e ev er begins- !cos of tyrannical government which tPecies ofnflicted on a people. There were three 4a_en. siudianZoPle inhabiting Sinde—first, there were 1 1 4 . ; who were recent converts to Mahomme eirdi , there were the llindoos ; th a,tnere rt ; n o e N f .ei t . h we e g ovo e er e ihe and, or Tuntry. e oochees. The Beloochees were The 13elooehees were lhl/41.1 e.slaves to ' worked the kept slaves, and they o hailed work for them. 0 s a blessing by • ur conquest , had xtra e ... Lear ne d g the inhabitants. (rile the fro m Gentlenaa a lette • n hero read several ( ell -41 " which r, in which it was stated that C IUNit 'ad falle n prof At • cee shortly after the English considered ‘ll t p • , er by the inhabitants as th .'e Arn "Ice apnroved f at the s• k'ers }designs n f o our proceedings, for ered the Colve- • ' it R S thus '-u4113 t h e t e tonquest of the country by the Ameers : no rain had fallen for six years, and that the reduction of taxation which had taken place had secured to us the affection of the people ; that five months before our conquest every Beloorliee had strutted about armed, but that now none except the chiefs were armed.) Sir Charles Napier had been ac cured of insulting the Ameers, while it appeared fron these letters that although he had disarmed the Beloo chess generally, he had returned to the chieftains then arias, because he did not wish to wound their honour.— (Hear, hear.) The letter then went on to state that Sir Charles Napier was endeavouring to get rid of the military tenures ; to give the jaglievrilars a property in their jagheers, which they did not possess under the Ameers, and to turn the military chieftains into farmers. The: body of the Sindian people were glad to escape from the tyranny of the Ameers. Colonel Pottinger bore evidence to the happy effects efour conquest of Sinde. The inhabitants were becoming industrious, and labourers from Kandahar were flocking into Sinde to ol,tain employ ment. Would it be just after all to the Sindian people to bring back the Ameers ?—(Cheers.) He agreed with the Noble Lord that every consideration should be paid to them, that everything that could be done should be done to alleviate their misfortunes—(Cheers)—but he could not consent to the restoration.—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord had spoken of the sons of Tippoo Saib. It should be recollected that their father had been slain in battle, and that they had lost a throne. The conquest of the country was a fatal necessity, but the same kind treat ment which they as captives had received from the Marquis of Cornwallis the Ameers, he doubted not, had received from Lord Ellenborough.—(Cheers.) He was convinced that they had not been subjected to more restraint than was absolutely necessary to prevent them from escaping and returning to Sinde.—(Hear.) He believed that lie had travelled over most of the topics which had been alluded to by the Noble Lord. He had shown that the negotiations of Lord Auckland with the Ameers had been conducted with unnecessary harsh ness and cruelty. Ile believed that the position of Lord Ellenborough had been one of the greatest difficulty, but that he had adopted the wisest course of policy that he could have pursued. He believed that the steps which Lord Ellenborough had taken were the fatal, but necessary, consequences of the policy which had been pursued by his predecessor.—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) The people of Sinde were glad to escipe from the rule of the 'f alpoore family ; and he believed that the people of England would never consent to place the Sindians again under the cruel tyranny of the Ameers. The subject was one of immense importance, and he hoped it would not go off without a vote. If the House nega tived the proposition of the Noble Lord, then Isis (Mr. Roebuck's) resolutions could be submitted seriatim, and the House would decide upon each step which had been taken—they would decide first, whether the policy of Lord Auckland was right or wrong ; secondly, whether the policy of Lord Ellenborough was right or wrong ; and thirdly, whether it would he right to restore these unhappy Princes who had by force of arms been corn= pelled to surrender their territories.—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches ) Mr. EMERSON TENNENT considered the House aH most unsatisfactory tribunal for the decision of questions of this stature. In order to come to a proper judgment on the sub ject, Hon. Members should have given all the papers relating to the case, nut only an attentive perusal, but a careful consi deration; and he thought the House was scarcely qualified to decide, considering that those documents had scarcely been one week before them. The Noble Lord and the Hon. and Learned 'Member for Bath had both gone into a mass of details to which he did not think it necessary to allude. There was no necessity for alluding to the early policy of Lord Auckland. The justification of the policy of the present Governor- General rested not upon the condemnation or the acquittal of Lord Auckland, but upon the circumstances which had occurred since he had assumed the Government of India.—(Cheers.) By those alone was Lord Ellen borough to be judged.—(Loud cheers.) With regard to the policy of Lord Auckiand, that had been completed in 1839, and the detheonement of the Ameers had been occasioned by their conduct since that period. The Noble Lord had alluded to what he called the previous meritorious conduct of the Ameers in relation to this country—he could fol low the Noble Lord step by stilt, and could show that throughout those negotiations the conduct of the Ameers had been marked by the same treachery and false hood which had led to their ultimate downfal. The Noble Lord alluded to the treaty of 1809, len this country took every security to strengthen themselves against the attempts of Napoleon. About this time Colonel Pottinger appeared in connection with these negotiations, and he more than once expressed his unwillingness to proceed in conse quence of the conduct of the Ameers. The presence of five thousand men was necessary to compel the Ameers to observe the provisions of the treaty. Then came the treaties of 1532 and 1834, which conferred mutual advantages on both sides, but the Ameers were unwilling to permit, not on l y any English,. but any European agent, to reside in the Intlus.—( Hear, hear.) Then came the treaty of 1836, when Runject Singh threatened to destroy the country, and when this country inter posed. Then they received a British Resident, but they entered into negotiations with the Durbar of Lahore fur the purpose of opposing British interests. The Noble Lord had referred to what he believed was an apocryphal letter of Col. Pottinger's, for there was nothing to show that Col. Pottinger ever published such a document, and there was external evidence of all kinds to show that he did not. No one living so well understood the character of the Ameers as he did. He would be able to show, from the correspondence of Col. Pottinger, that the Ameers were a wicked and vicious race, and that they even predicted the fate which overtook them in their destiny. (The Hon. Gentleman then quoted several passages from the correspondence of Col. Pottinger, to show that the Ameers were unworthy of being trusted and full of perfidy.) With regard to the treaty of 1839, there were circumstances to prove that it was not cal culated to be oppressive, and was not even unpopular in Snide. For two years after the treaty, and when there was time to consider its operation, Noor Mahomed, one of the enemies of British connection, applied to have a similar treaty and even submitted to be placed on a similar footing with those who were parties to the treaty of 1839.—( Hear, hear.) Sir Charles Napier, writing in 1842, says, that the treaty, if rigidly adhered to, would render the Ameers more ; rich and powerful, and even more happy than they were before but it was rendered abortive by violence on the part of the one and by bad faith on the part of the others. It was but justice, not only to Lord edlenborough, but also to Lord Auck land, to insist upon those effects of the treaty of 1839. There was nothing whatever in his correspondence to show that its provisions had been set aside by the British Government, whilst on the other hand the Ameers of Hyderabad entered upon a persevering course of violence to violate the treaty. It was but justice to the policy of Lord Ellenborough to say that he was bound to defeat the machinations set agoing to destroy British connections, which had been put into more active motion in consequence of the reverses they had met with in Caubul. The Noble Lord then referred with great confidence to the testimony of ;Major Outram, who, as a resident in the counrry, had every opportunity of observ ing the conduct of the Ameers. The Noble Lord had com mitted a most material error in supposing that some of the Ameers only were guilty. He (Mr. E. Tennent) was pre pared to show that all of them hail been guilty, though there might be some shade of difference in their conduct with regard to this country, and that the conduct of the Government was in every single instance approved by Majot Outram himself. It was quite true that Major Outram mentioned that there was a difference of feeling existing among the chiefs, but he says that the entire family were promiscuously involved in the transaction of which the British Government complained. He says that at first the Meer Soojah professed open friendship for them, but when the crisis arose, he became hostile to them, and was found associated with the rest of their enemies.—( Hear, hear.) Major Outram said that all the Khans of Hyderabad were con. scions of their guilt, and that all of them were, more or less, guilty of treasonable practices. The Hon. Gentleman then referred to the correspondence of Major Outram, which suggested the measures which the Government ought to pursue with regard to the Ameers who had im peded the commerce on the Indus, and violated the treaty which had been agreed upon between them. These, then, were the facts of the case ; that not (as stated by the Noble Lord) on a mere opinion, or a mere allegation of treachery by the Ameers, but on proof of falsehood and of crime, the Governor-General had taken such measures as at once awarded punishment for the past and promised security for the future. The integrity of the Ameers was an integrity in appearance only—it was external but totally unsubstantial. The treaty had been signed without any one of its prov;sions being even objected to, and at the same time we were attacked by ten thousand armed Beloochees, stirred ult, to do so by the Ameers themselves, which led to that action, than which a more brilliant or glorious one could not be found in the annals of this or any other country. The enemy was signally overthrown—those who had encouraged and brought it into existence, were subjected, and properly subjected, to imprisonment. Now one word with regard to the transaction of depriving the families of the Ameers of their possessions. his (Mr. Tennent) thought that Major Outram was the last man in the world that ought to make any complaint on that subject. Why he was the very individual who started the idea of their misconduct and merited chastisement. In passing, let him say one word in regard to Sir Charles Napier. It was obvious on the face of events that he was perfectly innocent of the charges which had been attempted to be fastened on him, and that he was called upon to act upon the exigency of the moment.—(Hear, hear.) There was one point on which the Noble Lord had strongly appealed to the feelings of the House. It was in reference to Meer Soojah. Why, he (Mr. Tennent) was prepared to prove that a foul murder of a British officer had taken place, and that Meere Soojah was a party to it. This Meere Soojah came insi diously to Major Outran, warned him and other British officers of their danger, and next morning was found at the head of the very assassins who had murdered this officer. It had been asserted by the Noble Lord and the Hon. Member for Bath, that treachery and design were ever at work by the English in India, on purpose to get hold of more territory and more power than that which we already possessed. Now he denied this, and he most strongly asserted that the conquest of Sinde, from first to last, had not been the result of any scheme or preconcerted plan whatever, but the na tural consequence of events. On behalf of Lord Ellenborough especially, he could &dare that he neither desired, approved, nor practised any scheming whatever, and this was further proved by his own declarations, made from time to time, that with all the native chiefs who kept faith and honour with Eng land, every friendship should be exercised and every reason able concession made. With regard to the immediate ques tion before the House, and also to the amendment of the Hon. Member for Bath, he was not prepared to give any support to either of them.—( Hear.) He was authorised, however, to state that in all the instructions sent out for the guidance of Lord Ellenborough the strongest injunctions had been given to treat the Ameers with every respect and con sideration consistent with their safe custody.—(Hear, hear.) Every provision was made for their personal comfort, and every regard was paid to their rank. Twenty-four thousand pounds per annum was awarded for their maintenance, and no in terference was made in any way that might in the slightest degree impair their comforts. As to their restoration to liberty, he ceuld hold out no hope of that —for it was wholly incompatible with the fu ture peace and tranquillity of India. The House might rest assured that the Ameers would never be debarred from any comfort er enjoyment they might desire to have, provided it was compatible with their safe custody ; for it was not to be supposed that the British authorities would permit them to re turn to the scene of their former treachery, intrigue, and crime, only to repeat what it had cost us so much to struggle with and suppress.—( Hear, hear.) (The Hon. Gentleman, who turned his back on the reporters' gallery all the time he was speaking, was most indistinctly heard throughout, and at times was wholly inaudible. ) Sir JOHN HOBEIOUSE and Sir C. Napier rose to gether, but the John Hothouselatterliono said, beforeurahleAle he addressedmberimmediately gave way s . • rat o h r er, B t a o th th ( e m a r. sse n rt o i e o b n u s , e Roebuck), , t h h e ft him selfH ont.o and d e argumen ts, Learned Member , fallen from that Hon. Gentleman as to his (Sir John's) being must take the opportunity of ref errin g to a remark which had then in the House, and of making to him and to the House an apology for notisbeisnsigon, in subject was under dnu • he must be permitted to say for himself tha t, ha v i n g i n t he hip But, placei n mak last ing that apology, year when this previous session of Parliament made a long—he feared a too long—defence of the Affghanistan expedition, and the attempt which had been made by two Honourable Members to impugn that policy having received so cold a recep'ion from that House—he did not think it so very likely that the subject would, in the last session of Par liament, have been again brought on. Ibis was his sincere excuse for not being present, though he did not choose to admit that a man was to be bound on a notice given by an Hon. Member to attend, or, failing to do so, was to be looked upon, or charged, with shrinking from taking part in the defence of his friends or colleagues.—( Hear, hear.) For he found that the Hon. Member for Bath, last session of Parliament, gave notice that he would bring the subject before the House, and he appeared somewhat to complain of the Noble Lord the Member for Dorsetshire for taking up the subject, and pre suming to poach on his manor—( Laughter and cheers)—as if he (Mr. Roebuck) had a sort of freehold in grievances— ( Laughter)—and as if it was a kind of offence in any one but himself to address the House in regard to wrongs or to wrong doers—(Cheers and laughter)—and as if he, the lion. Member for Bath, could manage all these sort of things with much more force and dignity that► either the Noble Lord or any other Member of that House.—(Loud cheers.) The Hon. Gentle man (Mr. Roebuck) must excuse him for stating that in giving his notice the other day, it was impossible for him (Sir John Hobhouse) or his colleagues to guess exactly what he meant, for kis notice then was something to the effect—that the House, while giving the due meed of praise to the skill of the Generals and the valour of the troops by whom the terri tory of Sinde had been conquered, nevertheless deemed it necessary to condemn that selfish and meddling policy which forced upon our arms the necessity of such a conquest. Why, that notice was in fact an implied attack and censure upon the whole history and policy of the East India Company. When he read the motion of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman he had no idea that he intended to make a long, detailed, and perhaps he might say able, charge against the late Governor- General. In all his experience as a member of the House, and it extended now over a space of twenty-five years, never was that House, from a notice of 48 hours, called upon to decide upon three questions of such importance as the present. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman asserted that, whatever was done by Lord Ellanborough was done in consequence of the impolicy and injustice of his predecessors ; and he further stated that to restore dominion to the Sindians was im- possible. The Honourable Gentleman should not have said so, for whatever is right is possible. By an ingenious— he would not term it fraud —no, by an ingenious artifice— he laid upon the table of the House three propositions, which, in point of injustice, unfairness, and disingenuousness, were un paralleled in the history of Parliament.—( Hear, hear) And, somehow or other, the House seemed to entertain the same opinion.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") The Hon. and Learned Member had room enough for the race—he had no body to back him. The imputation of injustice, impolicy, or, in the Hon. Gentleman's own language, of monstrosity against Lord Auckland, he thought could hive scarcely entered into the imagination even of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. The Hon. Gentleman was, at all events, singular in his opi nion, and (turning to the chair) you, Mr. Speaker, will be freed frog► the trouble, the disgust, of further listening to an accusation which has not found in this House, and I believe would not find in this coun try, a seconder. The Hon. Gentleman made a variety of accu sations, but they were not founded on fact. Hardly any asser tions he made, except a just tribute to the character of the gal lant Napier, were just and well founded. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman, after the fashion of a certain French au thor, said that he would begin at the beginning, and accord ingly he went into the history of our early intercourse with Sinde, and mentioned some of the treaties, amongst other treaties that of 1809. Up to that time he said our policy towards Sinde was of a voluntary description, which signi fied that they might not do anything that they did not wish. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman further stated that our policy towards them was subsequently of an involuntary character. But what was the t rea ty o f 1609 ? What was the 4th article of that treaty ? It was to the effect that no Frenchman should be allowed to settle in the territory of Sinde. Was that voluntary? The Hon. and Learned Gentleman said that we deprived Sinde of its inde pendence, and oppressed it because the Ameers wrote a friendly letter to the Shah of Persia. A friendly letter it cer tainly was to the Shah of Persia, but most unfriendly to us. Why what was that but the stronger imposing upon the weaker ? Surely no country would voluntarily adopt such a restraint. The fact was, that Sinde was not then an independent nation. In 1820, at a suggestion of Shah Mahomed, a chnuse was inserted in the treaty with the Indian Government, that Europeans and Americans should not settle in the Sind° terri tory. This country had all along in their dealings with the Sindian people, treated them not as an independent tribe, but as subject to the King of Caubul, and they were subject to him until we made them independent. They never were free from the control of Shah Mahomed. The Honourable and Learned Gentleman after going through the treaties of 1829, 1832, and 1834, came to the treaty of 1836, of which he gave a most completed misrepresentation from beginning to end.--( Hear, hear.) lie charged Lord Auckland with trickery and treachery, which if his Lordship were guilty of, he would deserve to be instantly impeached, and he pretended to derive his information from garbled extracts from the Blue Book. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman said that Lord Auckland had conveyed to the Ameers, that Runjeet Singh was about to invade them, and thereby induced them to sup plicate the aid of the British Government. That was not the fact. Lord Wm. Bentinek, in 1831, had become acquainted with the intention of Runjeet Singh to take the first opportu nity of invading Sinde. The Indian Government had endea voured to dissaude him from it, and in 1336 he marched upon Sinde from the Punjaub, and encamped in the neigh bourhood of Caubul. Shah Mahomed sent a messenger to Colonel Pottinger in Cutch to require his interference, and, what was very singular in that communication, he did not confine his request to Affghanistan, but requested that a British force might be sent to Shikarpore. Was that baseness and treachery ? In assisting the Ameers, did not the Indian Government assist the weak against the strong ? Did they . not assist the Sindians, and save them from the grasp of Runjeet. Singh ? The Hon. and Learned Gentleman said that in the tripartite treaty the Indian Government had all at once die. posed of Sinde by the sixteenth article of that treaty. Dis posed of Sinde ! Why that was the first acknowledgment of the independence of Sinde—acknowledged to be a nation whose influence was paramount in the east. They had been ele vated from dependence on Caubul into an ally of the British nation. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had asked what reason was there to suppose that Lord Ellenborough could be guilty of any baseness. He (Sir John Hobhouse) knew no reason why Lord Ellenborough should be guilty of baseness, and he knew no reason why Lord Auckland should be guilty of it. He believed they were equally free from the charge of baseness, and he believed Lord Auckland to be as honourable and as upright as Lord Ellenborough, and at !east as well ac quainted with Indian affairs as the Hon. and Learned Gentle man. He said that Lord Auckland took money from the Ameers of Sinde. Twenty-one lacs of rupees were received, but it should not be forgotten th a t t h e A meers obstructed our march into Affghanistan, which was delayed five weeks by them. Fifteen lace of rupees had been given to Shah Soojah, and if Shah Soojah had remained upon the throne, as Lord Auckland contemplated, that payment would effectually have prevented future demands on the Ameers. He considered that the independence of Sinde, and freedom from the control of the Affghan Sovereign, was cheaply purchased by twenty-one lacs of rupees. The other six lacy were paid to Runjeet Singh, and were no more than sufficient to liquidate the ex penses of one regiment. The Learned Gentleman recapitu lated what he termed the horrors of the Affghan expedition, and besprinkled himself and his Noble Friend Lord Auckland with blood. The policy of that invasion had been already fully discussed, and he would not revert to it further, than by saying that it was then deemed judicious, and, having been deemed so, Lord Auckland was perfectly justified in marching his troops through the Sindian territory. We had the same right to call for the assistance of the people of Sinde as from the others of our allies ; and we were justified in the course which we had taken. But the Learned Gentle man had said that Lord Auckland took the wrong route—that t h o e r ought ieso f t a o h p a r v i e n e p o m w s e i d i t h into h o A m ffg t hn h a e i a British t h r G o u o g e h the t e rnm en e t r - in India was in friendly relations. He (Sir J. H.) had a right to say that Lord Auckland was bound to consider his Govern ment as being in as friendly relations with the . Ameers of Sinde as with Runjeet Singh—( Hear)—who, instead of assisting us, was doing all he could to oppose us.—( Hear.) The Learned Gentleman said that they ought to have taken the way by Khyber Pass ; but he might as well have said that they ought to have taken the way by the Gulf of Mexico. — ( A laugh.) At the time, Runjeet Singh had a large army, and there was no more reason for relying upon his friendship than upon that of the people of Sinde. Besides, the British army took the route through the countries in which there was the greatest prospect of a sufficient supply of provisions, and they rejected the other route, because, in the words of the Learned Gentlemen himself, it was impossible.—(Cheers and laughter.) The course taken by Lord Auckland's Govern ment, and the measures taken by them, were forced upon them by the exigency of the times.—( Hear, hear.) With respect to Sir Henry Pottinger—he ( Sir J. Hobhouse)—mast say that he had now heard, for the first time, the accusation brought against him, that he was one of those Indian servants who thought too much of their own importance.—( Hear.) But he might remind the Hon. and Learned Gentleman that Indian servants were not the only persons who thought too much of their own importance.—(Laughter and cheers.) He would undertake to say that the Gallant Officer was not more likely to be led into hasty expressions or unconsidered state ments than the Hon. and Learned Member himself.—(Laugh ter and cries of " Hear, hear.") The Government, however, had not acted upon that officer's communications, without well considering the grounds upon which his suggestions were offered. He ( Sir J. H.) had not distinctly heard all that the Hon. Gentleman had said ; and, therefore, it might be that he was obliged to pass over some of his assertions upon that part of the question. He could, therefore, only say, that, what they had really to look to, was what the Governor-General had done ? In fact, he had not acted upon the suggestions of Sir H. Pot tinger; but, on the contrary, departed from them, as a refer ence to the Blue Book would show. Now, with reference to the ,alleged aggressions of Lord Auckland in Sinde—the lion. Gentleman seemed to think that they consisted not only in forcing an army across the territory of the Ameers ; but in his interference with the navigation of the Indus. Now, the Honourable and Learned Gentleman would see, by re ferring to the papers (pages from 110 to 180), that Lord Auckland did not ask anything, which the Ameers were not bound to by treaty.--( Hear, hear.) And, further, that they never objected to that treaty, or objected to carry out its provisions. More than that, the Indian Government did protect the interests of Noor Mohamed, and the people of Sinde approved of all that had been done by the Government. —( Hear, hear.) The Learned Gentleman was entirely mis-- taken as to what had been done in respect to the ports of Kura chee. We never did take possession of them. All that we had done was by agreement with the Ameers that we should not take possession of them, but that we should have troops there during the period when they were necessary. The Ameers never made the slightest objection to our having troops there. 'f he Hon. Gentleman said that when Lord 'Ellenborough came into possession of the Government of India, he had to contend with great difficulties. Certainly he had, and he (Sir John Hobhouse) did not feel called upon to say more in reference to what was proposed by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman than that what had been done by Lord Ellenborough was net the necessary consequence of what had been done by Lord Auck land.---( Cheers.) The dates of the Hon. and Learned Gen tleman did not bear him out in his own statement that the conduct of Lord Ellenborough was occasioned by the affair of Caubul. He had received the news of the success in Aff ghanistan before he had taken those steps respecting Sinde which the motion of the Noble Lord was intended to impugn. Certainly the Governor-General had much to contend with. There was the most unscrupulous Press that ever existed. There were persons at home who were scarcely less scrupulous; and he had also to contend with gentlemen in Parliament who had thought proper, after four or five years, for their own amusement, and that of the public, to bring forward charges which might possibly be seconded..—(Cheers and laughter. ) He did not feel called upon to say more of Lord Ellenborough's conduct than that it was not the same or continuous with Lord Auckland's. Lord Ellenborough objected to the employment of agents, even to that of such a distinguished man as Sir Charles Napie r , w h ose name cou ld never b e ment i one d b u t with respect, not only on account of his own merits, but on ac count of the associations with which that name was connected, and no man in that House could deny that we owed more to that officer, perhaps, than to any other in India.—( Cheers. ) In concluding what he had taken the liberty to say to the House he might be allowed to state that he had risen to give an unnecessary defence against unnecessary attack.—(Laughter.) } He !could 'only put it to the House whether when justice was required for the Ameers, they were to forget what • was THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 9, 1844. due to our own functionaries who took upon themselves those tremendous duties, and who were distant from the per sons who could advise them ?—(Cheers.) They held in their hands the balance of the fate of this empire, and in justice to them, those attacks which had no object, and could serve no purpose but the gratification of spleen and vanity should be received with caution at the least. Indeed, he believed that the time had come when they would never hear of such charges brought forward after the lapse of years, except from the Hen. and Learned Member himself.— ( Hear, hear.) Let them only see when this charge was brought. In 1839 the treaty with Sande was laid on the table; in 1840 it was discussed, and in 1844 the Hon. Member brought forward his charge. The only reason why the charge was not sooner mode was, that it was not tenable. It required more speaial pleading than an every-day Member of Parlia ment could make anything of.—( Cheers and laughter.) With respect to the motion of the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Ashley), he was inclined to think with the Right Hon. Secre tary for the Board of Control, that it was not right to inter fere with these matters, and that, in the present situation of the Ameers, every attention should be paid to them, and their personal liberty should not be interfered with more than was necessary for the preservation of the peace of India. As a general rule the legs interference there was on the part of the Members of Parliament, or of that House, with the Indian Government, the better. That was his opinion ; but at the same time he would not say a case might not arise, and if such a case should arise he would go a great deal farther. He should not content himself with casting a side-wind upon the Government. Ile should make a positive charge which should end with something like a conclusion, and a serious one too. Bet he owned he would Rot interfere while there was a Government to regulate the affairs of India. On this account he was sorry to say, and with the greatest respect for the Noble Lord who made the motion, that it was impos sible to come to the conclusion that he ought to vote for it. Sir C. NAPIER said that he rose, not to pass any judg writ on the conduct of Lord Ellenborough or Lord Auckland, he left that to gentlemen who were better acquainted with India than he was ; but he was about to say a few words relative to what had fallen from the Noble Lord (Ashley) respecting his (Sir Charles Napier's) gallant relative. The Noble Lord had stated, in one of his observations that had Sir C. Napier followed the advice of Major Outram, there would have been no war in India—that things would have been brought to a safe and satisfactory conclusion. Ile (Sir C. Napier) differed entirely from the Noble Lord, and he was decidedly of opinion, after having read all the correspondence, that he could only compare his conduct to that of Mr. Frere, relative to Sir John Moore, when the latter commanded the army in Spain. Ifs was astonished that a military officer like Major Outram should have given the advice he had to Sir C. Napier. lie was of opinion that if any blame whatever was to be attached to Sir Charles Napier, it was for his having delayed his march on Hyderabad so long. It was clearly stated that Major Outram had asked him to delay three days, and it appeared he had delayed four days with the prospect of hot weather coming on, and thus exposing his army to destruction. In another part of his speech the Noble Lord had fallen into error. There was not an Hon. Gentleman who admired the Noble Lord more than he (Sir C. Napier) did. as a just and humane man ; but still it showed how even such a man, when he took up such a sub ject, might be swayed by erroneous opinions. 'The Noble Lord had quoted the letter of Sir C. Napier to the Ameers ; but the Noble Lord ought also to have quoted another letter of the Gallant General to show in what condition he was when he penned the letter to the Ameers. On the 18th of March, 1t143, the position in which the Gallant General, as appeared from his letter to the Governor-General himself, was that he had but 1,500 men without any reinforcements ar riviog. He was in the midst of an insurgent population with all the magazines and hospitals filled with wounded men, and having a large. fortress,and immense treasure to guard, and treacherous Ameers to deal with. Now, he (Sir C. Napier) would ask the Noble Lord, placed in the situation in which the Gallant General was, with only 1,500 men, in a hostile country, and in a climate enough to destroy any army—whether it was fair or just to excite the feeling of the House against him in the manner in which he had done ? lie compared the conduct of Sir C. Napier to. wards the Ameers to that of Lord Cornwallis with the sons of Tippoo Saib. It was impossible for a single moment for any lion. Gentleman in that House to make the slightest compari son between the conduct of the two. The Noble Lord had defended the intentions of the Ameers. New, had the Ameers gained the victory, what would have been the fate of the Bri tish forces ? Every one of them would have been massacred.—( Hear, hear.) So the confidential servant of of one of the Ameers stated, on his examination before Captain Browne. He believed that to be true. Every soldier would have been put to death with the exception of the Gallant General, who would have been towed to Hyderabad with an iron ring in his nose.--( Laughter.) The House of Commons would then have said that General Napier was a vacillating, undecided man, that he had not courage to go on, and that he had foolishly listened to the political agent, who ought never to be employed in war. For God knows, mid the lion. and Gallant Member, those political agents do mis reehaidef all e n o t u h g e h p i n a p i e v r a s , c e h a e b l wase t i m a e n s — p r i ( s e Laughter. h ) e Aft Noblee r having Lord could have, made the declaration that the Ameers had no in ut e n n a t t ! o l e n t of n eattackingthe the B el o ll o e e s h i d e e e s n . t 's T h i o ie u s e e o , n b t u r a t r t y h a w t as they e Vi ca 'e s r e e . He would not detain the House longer, nor would he have made any observations, but for the attack that had been made notdid not ad e these think h o e h w s e o r u v l a d t i havee been n doing ga h l:: n d t oty relative. i f he h e With respect to the motion before the House he thought the Ameers had been sufficiently punished—that they ought to be detained at Bombay, but with perfect liberty, and a sufficient allowance, but he certainly would not allow them to go back to Sinde. Lord JOCELYN said that if he had been aware that the letter of Sir C. Napier to Major Outram would have been read he would have been prepared with an answer, which he trusted he would have an opportunity on a future occasion of reading. He would support the motion, because he thought it a just one. The Noble' Lord then entered at some length into a defence of the conduct of the Ameers, whom he thought ought not to be made responsible for the acts of their Ministers. He could not pass over the treatment which had been experi enced by the unfortunate Meer Roostum. He had been our trusty friend in times of danger—and he, an old and unfortu nate man, when he asked for the protection of the British Ge neral, was refused it. The terms which we had sought to exact from the Ameers were such as it was impossible that they could grant. It had been shown that the Ameers could not possibly exist upon the allowance which would then have been left to them. The Ameers had signed the treaty', which was all but rati fi ed, when Sir Charles Napier made fresh demands upon them. He demanded that the Ameers should quit the country. What right had he to make such a demand ? He then marched upon one of their forts, and committed other acts of aggression. He (Lord J.) however, made no charge against the General, he was merely carrying out the policy of the Governor-General of India at that time. Sir Charles Napier had received a letter from Lord Ellenborough congratulating him upon what he had :tone, and urging him to thb commission of fresh aggressions. The history of our connexion with Sinde was the history of a continued series of unjustifiable acts. Lord Ellenborough in his letters brought it as an accusa44 o s, against the Ameers, that they were collecting troops w i t h out l eg i t i ma t e cause ; but he had forgotten the letter of the 19th February, which stated that these troops had been collected solely for the pur pose of defence. Lord Ellenborough's letters were full of vague generalities, intended to draw away public attention from the real question at issue.—( Cries of " Hear, hear.) How were those great lines of c ommun i cat i on of w hi c h he had spoken to be formed? the expense of their formation could not be defrayed from the revenues of Sinde ; for while the revenue of that country was only forty lass, the expenditure amounted to eighty lacs. He trusted the House would see the same justice a d m i nistered to As i at i cs that was ad ministered to English men!--( Cheers. ) Sir EDWARD COLE BROOKE had expected that the Secretary of the Board of C ontrol, in supporting the case of the Government would have relied for the defence of Lord Ellenborough upon something more than the vague and general statement s of Maj or Outram. He did not believe that the Ameer s had been anxious for the overthrow of the British power, and he did not believe that any of the more enlightened of the natives of India, who were aware that it was necessary that that country should be under the rule of some great power, were really desirous that the British empire should be overthrown. He had been in India in 1t136, and he had then wondered ho - s - it had happened , that the Ameers of Sinde had rema i ne d i n d e pendent so long. Those Ameers formed a confederac divided by family quar rels. In 1836, if they had n o t rece y ived our assista nce, the y must have been conquered by Runjeet Singh, and after 1836 any attempt of theirs to achie ve for themselves indep endence was regarded by themselves a s h ope l ess an d impossible. On our meditating an hostile atta c k on Aff g hanistan, the occupa tion of Sinde was necessary as a basis for our militar y o perations beyond the Indus. Shortly afterwa r d s our Resident was withdrawn from Hyderabad, the Ameers were at a loss to understand the meaning of this—some of the Ameers thought it was preparatory to a hostile attack upon them —while others, knowing that we were withdrawing our troops from Affghanistan, imagined that we were about to withdraw from Sinde also. Here was independence within their reach had they desired it, but so tar from desiring it it appe a red that every day Major Outram was receiving a tne." l .s r i e e si t d r en m t one or other of them, begging that some English It might be left at Hyderabad, because if the Engl ish were they to withdraw entirely, the Ameers felt convinced that ...e could must soon come to a rupture amongst themselves. H could believe that they were plotting our overthrow while th e y were fur nishings not but recollect the great services they had rend e red to us us with the means of carrying on a succes s ful warfare warfare was quite beyond his comprehension.--( Hear.) Sir ROBERT PEEL cordially agreed in the sentiments which had been expressed by the Right Hon. Gentleman, that in discussing questions relating to Indian policy the House ought to put a liberal construction upon the motives and the conduct of public men who were entrusted with such immense responsibility, and who had the destinies of an empire com mitted to their charge.—( Hear, hear.) No consideration on earth should induce him to rest the vindication of Lord Ellen borough on the charges which had been preferred against Lord Auckland.—( Cheers.) He could not, therefore, support the motion of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bath.—( Cheers. ) He must extend to Lord Auck land the same credit which he asked for Lord Ellenborough.—( Cheers.) He had not hesitated freely to express his opinion of Lord Auckland's policy in invading Affghanistan ; but from his own personal knowledge of Lord Auckland he felt bound to say that he believed that Lord Auckland had always exercised his political functions to pro mote that which he deemed to be the best interests of the country—(Cheers)—and that Lord Auckland's motives had always been of the highest and purest nature.—(Cheers.) But although he would not vindicate Lord Ellenborough by attack ing Lord Auckland, yet without giving any opinion on Lord Auckland's policy, he had a right to consider the position in which Lord Ellenborough found himself placed with regard to the Ameers at the time that he assumed the office of Go vernor-General of India. It was impossible to regulate Indian politics by European rules.—(Cheers.) They might pass Acts of Parliament interdicting Governors -General from ex tending their empire; but he was afraid there was a great principle at work-whenever civilisation and refinement came into contact which made it difficult to apply those principles.— ( Hear, bear.) He was afraid that there was a necessity for the extension of our empire in India—( Hear, hear)—and that it was utterly impossible to adopt the same principles with re gard to the independence of small States in India on which we acted here. Let them take the case of Affghanistan. Let them assume that it was necessary for the security of our Indian empire, and to counteract the designs of Persia and Russia, that that expedition was necessary. They found Sinde a country no minally independent, interposed between them and Affghanistan. Would it be possible for the Governor-General to act on the principle that. unless the people of Sinde voluntarily permitted the troops to pass, their territory was to be preserved inviolate ? —( Cheers. ) Would it be right for the Governor-General to look to his Yattel and Puflendorff for precedents, and if he could not find them there; to give up the expedition ( Cheers.) There was a principle at work by which the small States in India were necessarily absorbed into our empire. Perhaps we did not conquer them by forc e , b ut we took posses sion of them by means equally effectual, we had R es id en t s a t their Courts, we subsidised their troops, and then gai ne d a con trol over their territorie and they look e d to t h e proceedings of . of other civilised nations when they came into conta c t w ith savage nations, it would be found that the same principle whi c h f t o e r o ce th d e u r us e t o o t e e x tr t i e e n 3 Lou tna our Indian hear.) ianEm l Empire applied with equa l truth He would not rest his vin dication of Lord Etlenborough - upon the inculpation of Lord Auckland. He had already given his opinion of the policy of the Affghan war, but he could not join in a vote of censure on that policy at the present moment, awl to bring the whole weight of Government to bear against those whom he had succeeded in office.—(Cheers.) It was not necessary for his purpose to question the policy of Lord Auckland, but in vindi cating the policy pursued by Sir Charles Napier and Lerd Ellenborough, it was impossible to forget the position in which they found themselves placed at the close of 1842. What was the position in which the British Government was placed with regard to the Ameers of Sinde ? It was described in a dispatch which Lord Auckland addressed to the Government at home. That dispatch was No. 166, and in it he stated that he congratulated the Directors of the East India Company, upon the results of the policy of the Indian Government as the political and military ascendancy of this country was esta blished in Sinde. He said that the confederacy of the Ameers was dissolved; and now that each would be respon sible for his own individual acts. A change had been produced in the constitution of Sinde. It was placed under British pro tection. It was brought within the circle of our Indian relations, and a British force was to be placed in Tette, or to such other place west of the Indus as Government might think fit. Lord Auckland stated that their empire would be consolidated by, and their c‘nnmerce extended through, Affghanistan thereby. He recommended to have 2,500 men placed in Sinde, which might then be looked upon as a frontier station. These passages from Lord Auckland showed that the independence of Sinde was at an end, for he says, " your military and political supremacy is established." But they gained these great advan tages, not only for themselves but for the sake of civilisation, whieh would be advanced in consequence of the opening of the Indus. Such were our relations with Sinde when Lord El lenbourgh went to that country. They had met with reverses in Cauhul, and Lord Ellenborough found it necessary for thesecurity of their Indian Empire to make a retrograde movement, and to evacuate Caubul. They could not do that without raising an opinion, through the Nepaul, Bundelkund, and Gwalior coun tries, possessing betwixt 30,000 and 50,000 troops, that their military supremacy was drawing to a close. How was Lord Ellenborough to deal with Shute in such circumstances ? Caubul was evacuated by the Khyber Pass, an operation of great danger. There was at the same time a simultaneous evacuation of the Lower Indus. What impression would this leave upon the minds of the public of India, if they saw them thus abandoning their hold upon the Indus? Could they, under these circumstances, make their retreat in security.—(Hear, hear.) Would not their rear be pressed on by an enormous force, which would have rendered their retreat difficult ?—( Hear ' hear.) They must have aband one d a ll t h e advantages which the previous policy of Lord Auckland had obtained. They must have abandoned Kurachee, and given up their security for the free navigation of the Indus.— ( Hear, hear.) The treaty had been violated by the Ameers. Sir Charles Napier gives an account of their constant ob struction of boatmen—of the duties imposed on the traffic, and there was a disposition manifest to close the Indus. Suppose the country had been abandoned, would it be contended that there was any guarantee that the Ameers would observe the stipulations of the treaty. It became absolutely necesaary for I.,rd Ellenborough to do what he had done, as a means of securing the observance of the treaty. The violation of the _ treaty on their part j us tifi e d hi m i n in flicting a penalty on the Ameers, which left them no alternative but to submit. His Noble Friend said that the charge brought against the Ameers, and the treachery of Roostum Khan, was not proved, because it was not satisfac torily shown that the letter which was said to convict him was written by him and that it would not be satisfactory in a Court of Justice. That might be so, but if they were to wait in their dealings with Indian Governments till they had proofs which would be satisfactory in a court of justice, he was afraid they must be prepared to receive very serious blows. —( Hear, hear.) His Noble Friend would find in the papers that the Minister of Roostum Khan was disposed to act treacherously to England. And would they establish the prin ciple that the Minister may intrigue as he pleased, but that the imbecile Ameer was never to be punished unless the guilt was brotight home to him"' If that. principle were once established, he was indeed afraid that their supremacy in India was held by a very slender thread. If the doctrine was esta blished, that an old Ameer of 85 was to be considered innocent, while his Minister was engaged in intrigues hostile to them, they might take us by surprise and overwhelm us.--( Hear, hear.) When a charge was brought, in 1839, against the same Ameer for treasonable correspondence with Persia, it was very difficult to bring h om e th e fact to him. There could be no doubt that one of the Ameers was guilty, and strong suspicion rested upon the others. With regard to questions of treachery, they should act upon moral conviction, and unless they did so they would not be able to carry. on the Government of India. Lord Ellenborough wrote to Sir Charles Napier to procure the best evidence he could of the intentions of the Ameers, and he did not know what better means they could adopt than the course Lord Ellenborough took on that occa sion. With regard to Sir Charles Napier, he should have oc casion, on Monday, to move a vote of thanks, which was justly due to the character of that most distinguished individual. He should only say on this occasion that, if he took the advice given him, and trusted to the information of the Ameers to displace his force —if he separated himself from that army, which he not only led to victory under the ex traordinary and unparalleled circumstances in which he was placed, but to whom he set an example not only of military skill but of personal courage—(Cheers)—and of desperate fidelity to the cause of his country—(Continued cheering)-- his firm belief was, that nota man of that army would have re turned alive. Throughout the whole of these transactions Sir Charles Napier showed not only the highest personal courage and the greatest military skill, but an admirable civil capacity ; but, as he had said before, it would be his ditty on another occa sion to attempt to do him justice, when he trusted they should all come to an unanimous vote, for it was his intention studiou s ly to avoid any reference to political matters.—(Cheers.) With respect to the motion of his Noble Friend, it was quite out of the power of the Government to acquiesce in it. His Noble Friend ( Lord Ashley) did not propose a condemna tion of the present Government, or of the policy of Lord El lenborough, but to address the Crown to take into its conside ration the condition of the Ameers, with a view either to give them their liberty and the enjoyment of their estates, or such a maintenance as might make an eqaivalent for their loss. He (Sir Robert Peel) trusted the House of Commons would not consent to lay down rulea which would have to be followed out at a distance of five thousand miles.—he sincerely trusted they would not sanction a course so fraught with inconvenience and danger. In respect to the proposed measure, the immediate restoration to liberty of the Ameers must be the necessary con sequence of passing this resolution. Why, he (Sir R. Peel) declares! that he could not profess confidence even in their present allies—(Cheers)—but the result of the adop tion of this resolution must be the release of these Ameers, whose first act, on their return, would, perhaps, be, to coalesce with those already not too faithfully disposed towards us, in order to re-commence intrigues which must again end in trea son against us.—( Cheers.) He trusted the House of Com mons would undertake no such responsibility.—(Loud cheers. ) But the Noble Lord proposed, not only that they should be restored to their liberty, but to the enjoyment of their estates also. It might be fairly open to consideration if they would establish these Ameers in some humbler station than that they formerly enjoyed, and so allow them liberty ; and to this an earnest consideration had already been given by the Executive, to whom he thought the subject had much better be left. The opinions which he (Sir Robert Peel) had formed on this point, were that it would not be safe to allow the Ameers to return, in this humble capa city, to their nati ve country. The restoration of their estates, depriving them of political powei, might leave them with feelings of mortified pride to suggest, and the means to work out fresh intrigues. But the Noble Lord proposes an alternative—to give them a just equivalent for their estates. He ( Sir Robert Peel) answered, "No r and he called on the House of Commons to give them no power, no means, no opportunity by which they might again involve the British arms in fresh struggles.—( Hear, hear.) One sentiment there was of the Noble Lord's, in which he entirely concurred, and that was th a t t h ey should yield to these Ameers every com fort and consideration that...was-possible. Whatever were their misfortunes they ought net, and they should not be ex cluded from every indulgence and every species of liberal treatment consistent with their proper custody.—( Hear, hear.) The height from which they had fallen would not, he could venture to assure the House, be forgotten either by her Majesty, th e Government athome, or the Government in India—(Loud cheers)—and there should be no restraint on them fer the mere purpose of punishment, and no restraint OR their personal liberty which was not justified by considerations of policy.—(Hear, hear.) It was now the subject of their consideration, whether their removal to some other part of India, distant from Sinde, might not admit of less restraint being placed upon them.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") With respect to their personal treatment, he would with truth de clare that no narrow notions of economy should be permitted to interfere with their comfort and happiness.—(Cheers.) At present the sum allowed to the officer for the expenses of the aggregate of them was not less than twenty thousand pounds ,• and if that were deemed by them insufficient to obtain any of m a ed llow t e e d.— he e e that every the w(eh :Hhoui ueledash comfortsthe} )ehi ge t they Trusting House us sthadeing that h h e e a r h e fa t u o dr f t o sha r e e t fibr stemee satisfied shhe a o c Hu e l accustomed s ub t s o thing that could be done consistently with prudence would be done for these unfortunate Princes, and warning the t things, hereafter not deeply o 'assumedeplo rhe should responsibility co n - elude the observations he felt it his duty to make, by giving his decided opposition both to the motion of the Noble Lord ( Ashley) and the amendment of the Honourable Gentleman the Member for Bath.—( Hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL said, the Noble Lord who had brought forward the resolution before the House, had done so entirely irrespective of the original policy of the war, and of the annexa tion of the territory of Sinde to the British empire. In what had fallen from the Right Honourable Baronet in refer ence to it, he pretty generally agreed, and he was highly pleased to hear his declaration that no con siderations of economy should stand in the way of every safe indulgence being conceded to the unfortunate Ameers. lie quite agreed that it would be most inconvenient for the House of Commons to require from the Government any as surance that the Ameers should be restored to the enjoyment of their liberty and their estates. He was not aware what might be the actual state of Sinde at that moment. The lion. Member for Bath had read a letter to the House, from, he believed, Sir Charles Napier, in which he said he had found it necessary to disarm a considerable portion of the inhabitants of that country. Why they could not be sure that if the immediate liberty of these Ameers took place, that, although the country might be getting tolerably quiet, their re-appearance might not be the signal of immediate anarchy and confusion ; and, therefore, he (Lord John Russell) fur one would have nothing to do with a re sponsibility which might have such consequences.—(Loud cheers.) After the assurances of the Ministers of the Crown, he could not give his support to any portion of the resolution of the Noble Lord, though he gave to him (Lord Ashley) the fullest credit for his motives, and concurred in several of the observations which had fallen from him. The Right Honourable Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) had, however, entered into another question which was not before the House—the question of the policy pursued in India by the present Governor-General, Lord Ellenborough. He felt the force of the observations made by the Mon. Gen tleman, the Secretary to the Board of Trade, that the supple mentary papers had been only a month in the hands of the Alembers. Those papers threw great light on the occurrences in India, and it was very difficult to come to a conclusion justificatory or condemnatory of the policy of Lord Ellen borough at the present time. He wished to avoid giving any opinion assumingthe policy t h e pursued Gov G ov Government m L e o n r t d of s l h e position of great difficulty, he might have con ceived it necessary to make an impression in order to rem ove the opinion then prevalent that British power placedNobleinregarding in India was on the decline. On the other hand. he 'must say that his confidence in the present Governor-General had been greatly shaken by the inconsistency of his policy with the declarations which he made on arriving in India.—( Hear, hear.) One of his first declarations was that his policy was to keep within the Indus, which he said was the natural boundary of the British empire, but as far as he (Lord J. Russell) knew, our empire was not natural there in any sense of the term. On the Ist of October he made this proclamation; but a month after, on the 4th of November, he decided upon seizing additional territory West of the 'lndus.—( Hear, hear.) It seemed to him perfectly clear that Sir Charles Napier had acted accord mg to his instructions, and with a moral courage, and a personal bravery, which deserved nothing but conimendation. He acted with regard to the safety of the army and maintaining the supremacy of British arms—( Hear, hear)—and he be lieved the Gallant Officer could not with those considerations have acted otherwise than het had date ; and as an humble Member of that House, he was willing to bestow upon him ample commendation. The Right Hen. Gentleman had laid down certain general opinions with respect to civilisation to the inapplicability of all the laws of nations, very loose as these laws generally were, and very favourable as they had been to conquest anti aggression of all kinds. The Right lion. Gen• tleman, he repeated, made certain observations upon that subject which seemed to admit a latitude of aggression in which he (Lord John Russell) would be very sorry to participate.— ( Ilear, hear.) It would seem that the next conquest was to be the conquest of the Punjaub. There was no doubt that the treachery of the Ameers—the dread of their conspiring with the Russians or Persians against, British power might induce the Governor-General to direct an advance across the Indus. It was said with respect to the Punjaub, that it was in a state of anarchy, that its native princes had been dethroned and assassinated, and that the country was torn by dissen• sions. It was further alleged, with respect to the State of Sinde, that it had been immersed in barbarism, arid that much was to be expected from the progress of civili sation there, and the Right Hon. Baronet observed that the regulations which controlled European nations could not be applied to Sinde. All this would lead one to expect that we opposed civilisation to their barbarism, and the successful in troduction of the former was sufficient to justify aggression. If such principles were acted upon, it was hard to say where British conquest would stop—they would go on conquering one country after another, but they might depend upon it that the extent would cause irremediable weakness.—( Hear, hear.) He wondered that none of the Directors of the East India Company had spoken. The Noble Lord who introduced the resolution had at all events elicited the opinion of that House that the Ameers, in whose defence he stood up, would be treated by the Indian Government with liberality and kindness. Sir ROBERT PEEL explained. The Noble Lord had not represented what he said truly. What he said was, that he was afraid it would be impossible to decline inter ference in the affairs of Sinde on the same grounds as might be urged by the nations of Europe. Mr. HUME said that the tsoble Lord seemed to wonder that no member of the East India Company had spoken on the present subject. Why, the late Government had de stroyed their power, and therefore it was perfectly farcical to ask them why they did not interfere.—( Laughter.) The whole conduct of Lord Ellenborough towards the Ameers had been founded upon one single letter, and on that account he thought the policy of the Governor-General in this case was the most unjust that ever had been pursued since we first made footing in India.—( Hear, hear, and " Question.") At the same time he saw in the statement of the Right Hon. Baronet a desire to alleviate the condition of the Ameers. But so far did he consider their power of no avail against the influence of India, that he thought there would be no danger whatever ira restoring them to their dominions.—( Hear.) And he be lieved that the expense of maintaining the authority of England in Sinde would cost four times as much as any advantage that could be derived from the possession. Mr. V. SMITH, ( who spoke amidst loud cries of ";Question, question," " Divide, divide,") was understood to say that he thought there could be no objection whatever to liberating those unfortunate Ameers, and allowing them t o re t urn t o their own country.—( Question, question.) Lord ASHLEY said that, at this very late hour of the night, he would not trespass at any length upon the House, even if it were necessary to make any reply to the objections offered to his motion. But as it was, he had heard nothing to make it necessary. Yet one thing which had been said by the Right Hon. Baronet, to the effect that this House ought not to interpose, required him to ask— what redress was there in cases of oppression, if the House was not to interpose?—(Cheers.) What became of the responsi bility of the Governor-General ? ( Cheers.) What became of the controlling power of the House ?—(Cheers. ) The whole argument of the lion. Member for Bath, and of his friend the , Prime Minister, was, that the conduct of the Governor-Gene-. ral was founded upon reasons of state. If that argument were of any weight, was it to be said that those unfortunate princes should be robbed of their dominions, torn from their homes, and, incarcerated ?—( Hear, hear.) lie could not sit down with out saying, in explanation to the Gallant Commodore opposite, the Member for Marylebone, that, in referring to the letter of that Gallant Officer's distinguished relative (Sir C. Napier), he had no intentlin of lowering his character, for he held him in the highest esteem.—( hear, hear.) He was happy to hear the sympathy of the House so strongly expressed, and it led him to hope that the Ameers would be restored to liberty. But, unwilling as he was to vote against the friends with whom he was in the habit of acting, he felt bound to divide the House, because he was convinced that the policy of which he complained was injurious to the character of this country, and inconsistent with the religion which this country professed, The House then divided. The numbers were— ..- ..-.....-..., ..... For the motion A gainstit Majority against the motion —134 MR. BONHAM. Mr. DIVETT then rose to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice, "That an humble address be presented to her Majesty, praying that she will be graciously pleased to dismiss Francis Robert Bonham, Esq., from the office of store-keeper of her Majesty's Ordnance." He said he had always considerable reluctance in venturing to trespass on the attention of the House, and if that was the case in reference to a public concern, it was much more so with a matter that concerned himself personally, and therefore it was only from a sense of public duty that he had put his motion on the books respecting 111 r. Bonham. He thought he had great reason to complain of the conduct of that gentleman, in reference to certain pro ceedings at the last London election. Mr. Bonham, who held a public,situation, was the general electioneering agent of the Conservative party.—( Ironical cheers and laughter from the Ministerial benches.) Honourable Gentlemen might laugh at it, but it was notorious to all the political world, and should be made notorious to the whole community. It was notorious that, as political agent, that Gentleman did things for which he ought to be made responsible, and, on the occasion of the last London election, the services which he usually rendered to his party were more particularly called into play. He (Mr. Divett) might be allowed, in passing, to ad vert to the language of the Attorney-General on the matter, which was somethinr , in the shape of a menace, namely, that his (Mr. Divett's) having put that notice on the books in re ference to Mr. Bonham, was not decent—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches)—just as if he said he would move his (Mr. Divett's) expulsion from the House. At the time of the election for the City of London in October last, he (Mr. Divett) was residing in Devonshire. His name was on the register of electors for the City of London, and Sir Gregory Lewin had proposed to pair off with him. Sir Gregory ' had written to Mr. Bonham on the subject, and Mr. Bonham had written down to state that his ( Mr. Divett's) name was not upon the register.—( A laugh.) He (Mr. Divett) told Sir Gregory he was sure it was a mistake; that he would go to London with him. They did go to town, and they had voted.—( A laugh.) There had been no difficulty; when he came to the poll-book, his name was found on the re gister at once.—(A laugh.) Sir Gregory Lewin had written to Mr. Bonham for an explanation, but no explanation had been afforded him from that day to the present.—( Hear, hear. ) Had Mr. Bonham written to say that it was a mistake, he (Mr. Divett) should have thought nothing further of it, but he felt that Mr. Bonham had cast an imputation on his honour by re presenting that he (Mr. Divett) was capable of saying that his name was on the register when it was not.—( Cries of " No, no," cheers, and laughter.) He felt justified, under these cir cumstances, in bringing the matter before the House.— (A laugh.) Hon. Members might laugh, but he considered the honour of public men should be scrupulously guarded; and he hoped never to see the day when it would be otherwise.— (Cries of " Move ! move !") The Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving, amidst roars of laughter, that an address be pre sented to her Majesty praying her to dismiss Mr. Bonham. The SPEAKER—Who seconds the motion? No one seconding the mo'ion, it fell to the ground. Sir ROBERT PEEL rose, not to second the motion, but to move the adjournment of the House. As, however, the Hon. Gentleman had made his statement, he (Sir R. Peel ) felt it his duty to come forward and defend an honourable and high-minded man—(Cheers)--a man he was proud to call his friend—(Loud cheers)—from the charges which had been brought against him.—( Hear.) The Hon. Gentleman, according to his own showing, was not actuated by any sense of public virtue, because he himself had said that if Mr. Ban ham had written to him, the House would have heard nothing of the matter.—( Cheers and laughter.) The state of the case, as he understood it, was this :—Sir Gregory Lewin had called upon the Right Honourable Gentleman in Devonshire, and had proposed to him to pair off for the City of London election. The Right Hon. Baronet then read the letter, which stated that he and Mr. Divett bad paired off for the City of London election, and that he went to Mr. Bonham to inform him of the fact, that Mr. Bonham sent him a letter stating that the name of Mr. Divett was not to be found upon the register ; that he ( Sir Gregory Lewin) informed Mr. Divett that his name was not to be found on the register, at which Mr. Divett seemed annoyed. He (Mr. Divett) said it was a trick that his name was not on the register, and that he would go to London to vote. There was nothing in this letter (said the Right Hon. Baronet) to show that Mr. Bonham had ever charged the Hon. Gentleman with not having a vote at the election. He only stated the information that he had re ceived himself from the Ge nera l C omm itt ee , th e c h a i rman o f which was Mr. Russell Ellice, a gentleman well known to be of the highest character.—( Hear.) He would now read a liter from Mr. Ellice to Mr. Bonham, written after the notice of the Hon. Gentleman. The letter stated that, on the pro duetion of Sir Gregory Lewin's letter by Mr. Bonham, the Committee had, ac cor di ng t o t h e i r invariable rule, looked into the register for the name of Mr. Divett. No person could regret more than he the mistake whichi had occurred, and which he believed arose from not knowing to what Livery Mr. Divett belonged.—( Loud cheers.) Mr. Bonham, in a letter to Sir Gregory Lewin, also expressed his regret for what had occurred ; it was a mistake, and he could say no mor e .—( Ch eers .) If h e ( Si r R. Peel)had been told that his name was not on the register for the City of West minster, he should be sorry to impute a bad motive to any gen tleman for saying so. The only complaint against Mr. Bonham was that he made an apology to Sir Gregory Lewin arid sot to the Hon. Gentleman—(Cheers)—and yet for this the lion. Gentleman gave notice of a motion for the first day of the session, without any communication with Mr. Bonham, which would lead the friends of that gentleman to suppose that he was guilty of some gross official misconduct.—(Cheers.) But, considering that the Hon. Gentleman had not even found a seconder, his speech would very little diminish the estimation in which Mr. Bonham was held by his private friends.—( Hear. ) After a few words from Mr. DIVETT, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that he rose for the purpose of apologising to the Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Divett). He did state to the lion. Gentleman that, in his opinion, it was not right to obtrude private m a tt ers upon t h e House—( Hear, hear)—and that it was about as proper a pro ceeding as if an Hon. Gentleman, in order to make his speech, should move for the expulsion of another Hon. Member.— ( Hear, hear.) He was in habits of more than ordinary ac quaintance with the Hon. Gentleman, and he told him frankly, and with good will, what his opinions were upon the subject. The Hon. Gentleman appeared to receive the information with a smile, but he begged to apologise to him if he misunderstood the terms upon which he stood towards him. Ile (the At torney-General) had meant no offence, and he merely stated, in perfect good humour, what he thought was the character of the motion. He begged to say that anything like menace was equally foreign to his thoughts and intentions. Ile little expected that that short conversation would have been made the subject of complaint against him. And now he would just throw in, by way of parenthesis, that a gen tlemen of more independent mind did not exist either in that House or out of it, and, having stated this in a parenthesis, he would conclude by expressing his opinion that he did not think the Honourable Member (Mr. Divett) was the most fit judge of those matters which he had so rashly ventured to bring before the House.—(Laughter and cheers.) Mr. LEADER said that the gentleman who had been described as the confidential servant of the Government in certain matters—the manager and dis burser of their Secret Service money—would not, he (Mr. Leader) would venture boldly to assert, ever do anything re pugnant to propriety and honour—( Hear, hear)—and that he was not a very virulent politician might be gathered from the fact that he had voted for him at the last election. Sure he was that a more honourable man did not exist, and he really thought it rather too bad that a man should be exposed to the surmises which such a notice as that on the paper was sure to produce in the public mind from a mere mistake in an election vote. Mr. 11. COCHRANE said he had one more to add to the many mistakes already committed by the Hon. Member for Exeter (Mr. Divett ). Ile had said or insinuated that at the time alluded to Mr. Bonham had gone into the coun try, in order to settle some business in which he (Mr. Cochrane) was concerned. Now Mr. Bonham neither went down nor was sent down to arrange these matters for him, nor had he ever had anything to do with them.—( Great laughter and cheers.) The House thew adjoutnedi at Five Plinates• to Tyro o'clock. WEEKLY ANTI-CORN-LAW LEAGUE MEETING AT COVENT -GARDEN THEATRE. The weekly ireeting of • the Anti-Corn-law League was was hell eCtioavtesnety-,u u Theatr e Gar . deelunukhyGeorge yeste wrdayilseuvue, Esq even in g.. , ,Taht which t l im h f t ( l , l e o w t u e g a t i r s e awlai lists no of less semcrowdedet h p a r n i n o e n i p f u o l r pe m e r r s u o u c s c a o s n i o t n h s e . platform •—George Wilson, Esq., Chairmain ; Hon. Charles Pelham Villiers, M. P. ; Richard Cobden, Esq. , M.P. ; Thomas Milner Gibson, E sq ., M.P . ; Sir William Baynes, Baronet ; George Moffatt, Esq. ; Richard Moffatt, Esq. • John ; Potter, Esq., Manchester • Richard Baxter, Esq. F. R icardo, Esq. ;;11. L. Ts eedale, Esq. ; ft. R. R. Mo ore , Esq. ; F. H. Toone, Esq. ; John Egan, Esq. ; R. W. Cole, Esq. ; J. T. Norris, Esq. ; John Williams, Esq. ; P. Wells, Esq. ; M. B. Sampson, Esq. ; S. Lees, Esq., Manchester ; J. E. Parry, Esq., North Devon ; J. B. Smith, Esq., Manchester : E. W. Squarey, Esq., Salisbury ; A. T. Squarey, Esq., Salisbury ; Crosby, Esq., Liverpool ; Bridges Harvey, Esq. ; J. Ero therton, Esq. ; Cowden Clark, Esq. ; General Sir De Lacy Evans, K.C.R. ; W. A. Wilkinson, Esq. ; Samuel Lucas, Esq. ; Ralph Ricardo, Esq. ; William Leaf, Esq. ; J. P. Burnard, Esq. ; Foster, Esq ; John Lyons, Esq. ; J. Ivimey, Esq. ; Richard Napier, Esq. ; .1. Coppock, Esq. ; Dr. Cooke Taylor ; Francis Place, Esq. ; D. Dewar, Esq. ; P. A. Taylor, Esq. ; -- Keeling, Esq. ; Thomas Ilodgkin, Esq. ; J. D. Cummings, Esq. ; A. Pattison, Ems. • P. 11. Le Breton, Esq. ; Arthur Adams, Esq. ; John M‘Leed, Esq. ; Joseph Fletcher, Es. ; M. Andrews, Esq. ; George Wansey, Esq. ; Ifemmant, Esq.; Alexander Morris, Esq. ; George Moore, Eq. ; Thomas Harbuttle, Esq., Manchester ; Charles Lattimore, Esq., Wheathampton, Herts ; J. B. Scott, Esq., Manchester. The minutes of the last meeeting having been read by the Secretary, on the motion of Mr. Leaf, seconded by Mr. S. Lees, of Manchester, they were confirmed. The CUAIRMAN then said—Ladies and Gentlemen, another week had rolled away, opening up and developing events which although, perhaps, not of a striking character, would have no unimportant influence upon this question at some fu ture day.—( Hear, hear.) Parliament had been opened—her Maje.ty's speech had been read, and he did not know whether or not any one there present had expected that it would con. tain an announcement that the corn-laws were to be abolished ; but if any did he had certainly been doomed to great disap pointment. The Premier had stated, in his place, that it was not his intention to make any - alteration in the corn-law ; and a Ministerial journal said that the announcement was received with loud cheers from a great majority of the House of Com mons. Now, that such should be the fact, and yet that Act' not by . any means overwhelm them with astonishment, could surprise no one who had paid the slightest attention to the sub ject.—( Hear.) They never expected that Sir Robert Peel, as a great statesman, was going to put forth his hand to heal the wound which monopoly had inflicted, and was in flicting, on the industry of this country. They never con ceived that, situated as he was, placed in power by the very parties who now told hi m th ey wou ld remove him from power the moment he abused the confidence they had reposed in him, pledged to maintain their interests intact, watched en every hand, all his speeches conned by rote to be cast into his teeth should any change take place; they never supposed that, under such circumstances, Sir Robert Feel would come forward and abolish the corn-laws.—( Hear, hear.) He had consented to serve his party, a party which a single word from him could shatter into a thouaand fragments in a moment. Ho had con. sented to become the instrument of a party which distrusted him.—( Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) A party which placed ne reliance on his word, as they might gather from the minis terial journals and the speeches made at the protection meetings. It would not be long, he trusted, before another party would rise up in this country, which would be able to put an end to all the merles polising factions which had ruled over it for so many ages. —(Cheers.) Monopoly was a hard task -master ; it spared neither young nor old, neither rich nor poor. It would -not spare Sir Robert Peel if he consented to serve it, and became its willing instrument, any more than it would spare those who were its unwilling instruments. It had no respect for talents, however high and commanding ; it exacted from all, rich and poor, high and low, all that they could cod tribute to swell its enormous gains, and it made no restitution on account of the poor and the defenceless, according to the principles of mercy. '1 he monopolists, the rent-leaguers, had, no doubt, been well satisfied by the declarations in Parliament, and yet they had had their field days in the country since those declarations were made.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The tenant-farmer's farces had been acted over again during the present week. They had seen how suddenly the tenant-farmers had become conversant with literature, how anxious they were to engage in correspondence with their - brethren, who were tenant farmers in all parts of the kingdom, and; at the same time, they had seen that the tenant-farmers had no complaints to make at these meetings. They had heard of special burdens on land, hut, there appeared to be no burdens under which the farmers were labouring, neither rent, nor tithes, nor tenure, nor any other burden which might have been supposed to affect the tenant-farmer. The only expressions which were heard at these meetings were denunciations against the Anti-Corti-law League.—( Hear.) Why the whole thing was extremely well managed, well dressed up for stage effect • but it would scarcely pass muster for all that.—( Hear, hear.) The hand was the hand of Esau, whatever hand might be presented for examina tion. Strip any one of these meetings of all deceptive appear ances; take from the speakers the landlords, the parsons, the land stewards, the bailiffs, and all those who we re interested in maintaining the present law ' • and what would be th e ro ll o f the tenant farmers, who took part in this movement ?—( Hear, hear.) They had had, from all the parts of the country, letters giving them information as to these meetings. Nine out of ten were scarcely worth notice on account of the smallness of numbers. He had a letter in his pocket respect ing a meeting, in Lincolnshire, where it was said in a morning paper, one hundred tenant-farmers were pre sent. The writer of this letter said he counted the parties in the room. There were forty-nine persons. There were two clergy men--( Laughter )—there were four lawyers—( Great cheering)—there were six publicans—(Roars of laughter)— there were four butchers, there was a banker, there were two reporters and the writer, all, of cou rse , tenant-farmers.—( Con tinued laughter.) The speakers were gentlemen who had taken an interest in a meeting held on the previous day, in a distant part of the cou n ty. The chairman was the gentleman who, on the previous day moved the first resolution at the other meeting ; and the gentleman who moved the first resolu• tion at this meeting took the chair the day before.—( Loud laughter.) There was a complete change of persons ; and some one in the room, more indiscreet than the rest, ob served that " it was better that this arrangement should take place, in order that it might appear as though it were another meeting."—( Laughter.) That was a sample of the meetings of which they saw such glowing descriptions in the newspapers. —( Hear, hear.) The landlords and squires were not satisfied with their majority in the House of Commons, or their still greater majority in the House of Peers; but they were ob liged now, in acknowledgment of the power of the League, to prepare against the next general election.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) They knew they were growing weaker day by day ; that, array their forces as they might, all they could muster were canvassers, candidates, the old electioneering Com mittees, and the political parties wisp were most interested in the results of an election. They knew well enough that, when the question was stripped of a political character, in the counties, as in the boroughs, the landlords were in a mi nority.—( Cheers. ) Since they last met, there had been an election for the borough of Devizes. Under ordinary circum stances it would have been held to be one of the most absurd things in the world to contest that borough with the mono polists ; but Mr. Temple, a leading member of the legal profession, and Queen's Counsel, declared that if there were but twenty good men and true in Devizes, he would meet them on the day of nomination, explain his opinions in reference to free trade, and abide the result. —(Cheers.) Mr. Temple stood, and, as was expected, lost the election. But good seed had been sown. The monopolists might learn, that if they contested Devizes, a town in the middle of North Wiltshire, they would certainly contest those boroughs where they were more likely to .he successful.— ( Hear, hear.) They would contest all boroughs.—( Immense cheering.) They might have a Devizes next week, and next week a Mr. Temple would be found to contest that borough on the principles of tree trade.—( Cheers.) They knew what was the case at Durham, at Walsall, and at Stockport ; in each of which places the advocates of free trade, after being once re jected, were eventually successful.—( Loud cheers )--Sinee they last met a number of Anti-Corn-law meetings had taken place in some of the smaller towns in Lancashire and York shire, where considerable subscriptions had been received for the League Fund. A meeting had also been held in the Town hall, Birmingham, to receive a deputation from the Council of the Anti-Corn-law League. The meeting was open to all ; it was held in the middle of the day, and 4,000 people attended ; Mr. Cobden, Colonel Thompson, and Mr. Moore, addressed the audience, and upwards of WV. was collected in the room towards the great League fund.—(Cheers.) Birmingham had now taken up its proper position, and joined the other towns which, allied together, composed the National Anti-Corn-law League. Everywhere independent local efforts were being made in support of the League. They would noe'deceive themselves, they would neither over estimate their own strength, nor underrate the strength of those who were banded together by interest against them ; but they knew that the time was gradually approaching when the commerce of this country would be unfettered, and the labour of the people re• ceive its just reward.—( Loud cheers.) - The Hon. C. P. ViLt.zeits, M.l'., then rose to address the meeting. He said that when he saw the pro gress of their cause, he felt with the Chairman that there was little cause for dismay, at the new and would-be threatening attitude which their opponents had recently assumed. If their cause were based on truth and jus tice, he anticipated no disadvantage from the general discus• sion of the subject which they were inviting, and if it were true that those who were doomed by Heaven to fall were doomed to become foolish first, he did think that in this recent movement their opponents had some intimation of their fate.— ( Hear. ) They were making themselves known to the coun try; they were telling the people who they were, and what they were, for whom such great sacrifices hail been, and were yet being, made, in their trade, their industry, their wealth, and their greatness.—(Bear, hear.) They seemed to forget how much their power was rooted in rho imaginations of men, and how much they profited by a confusion in men's minds between what was great and what was good—what was rich and what was respectable. There were many who thought that men of high station and descent would be above sacri ficing the interests of the community at large for their own pri vate purposes ; but how could these people remain longer un der that delusion, when these men declared, in fact, that they would serve their own interest at the expense of every other, and that they would, under all circumstances, adhere to a law passed to the injury of the community at larges—( Hear, hear.) They had now entered the lists with those whose proceedings they had pretended to condemn, and he ventured to predict that they had not the qualities which were essential for the struggle.—(Cheers.) They were strong in rank • strong, it seemed, in language ; and un l ess monopo l y had foiled them, they would be strong also in pecuniary means ; but, strongest of all must they be, in thsir imagination, if they fancied that by mere bluster, by the use of no better weapon than vulgar diction, they could dissipate a power which had been brought to light by necessity and a sense of wrong, and which received its support from that indomitable love of justice which bad ever pervaded, as he trusted it ever would per vade this nation.—(Loud cheers.) He believed their opponents would first disagree and then disappear,—( Laughter. ) It was a most diverting scene, he heard, to see these great men in their waggons and at their windows, teaching their tenants, what it seemed they had yet to learn, how much good they had done them, how much they had been protected by Parliament, how prosperous they were, and, above all, what a vast advan tage would accrue to them from suppressirigmen who ven tur ed tthe to dispute these things. They had, in fact, found as . whole machinery for maintaining monopoly vrasdgitvombge the way, chida d that part of it which they distrusted most l b see m e d e ee Lo e rd told a meet screw of the Prime Minister. A labourers of Essex were , n au H d er th tf e ordshire that the farmers i t n eegthiteeth„Nwotoouslidhdotuorl adiiirsenoawkthosehuotpwrictmehoe:irf the farmers " showing their ~_ls precisely the use of the corn, or whether " s peaking t w )d t pretend to say.—(Laughter. l ) most wish to ma•e, mouth which di k e la b to w ur o e u rs i n n o their present condition woud lately to de s c ribe held in the the purposes e o unt yo f e Dorset, the gen tlemanaAuti. Co t A r :law - public had League.undertaken meeting He said— " These persons," alluding to those who attend these meetings, are reviving a society which arose wider Dir. Fitt; it was originated by the bloody