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

A weeP a. the° [1 Goa a nd moi" ,er Ylv T C On' lgerS 0 f 'estoril• ,tes, or i t s Will signal for the British troops taking possession of Shikar poor---(Hear, hear)—and as much of the country as might be 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 Howe a 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 was a specimen of that " rhetoric called rigmarole." It was the physical effect that was signified. And the letter went on to say, that if the Ameers should seem backward the, military preparations would probably in fluence them. Sir Henry Pottinger charged the Ameers of Sinde with wrifing to Shah Soo jah, although at the time they wrote they they were an independent power, and had a right to c ommunicate with any foreign potentate. But yet the fact of this communication with the Shah of Persia was Made a pretext for usurpation and for tyranny. The I b il - on. and L earne d M em b er t h en re f e rred to the Blue aeziok, page ea --, a letter of Sir 'Henry Pottinger's, who there expressed his opinion that the British Govern. ment should demand from the Ameers a cession of all that territory lying on the right bank of the Indus, by an imaginr line drawn to the Beloocistn territor. Ile furthera recommended that a large qua h ntit a y of Native and British troops should be placed at Latta, thus speaking of the Sinde as if (said theand Learned Gentleraan) it had been already i s Yet this was the Sir Henry Pottinger who called the Ameers his "old friends," and on whose communications the Noble Lord had placed so much reliance, and by which he had been so much imposed upon. Lord ASHLEY—I believe they are correct. Mr. ROEBUCK—I have no doubt whatever that the Noble Lord believes them, nor have I any doubt that he has been imposed upon.—(A laugh.) A great deal had been said about the communication of the Ameers with fist t h r eShah of Persia. That crime had been punished, by making them pay a large sum of money, and secondly by occupying their country with troops. But Was this act—was all their talked of deceit, trea chery, and misdeeds at all comparable to the British going up the Indus with an armed force, and.tellir t' es them that if they did not give up cer tain portions of their territory, they would annihilate l nem?—(Hear.) Why it would be comparing a =Ac hill to Mount Ossa. Under the pretence of carrying on n egotiations with this defenceless people, the Indian Go vernment was, like one of the huge snakes of their own country, folding its mighty coils round its victim. The conduct of the Indian Government was most disgraceful, a nd imprinted an everlasting stain upon this country. oPPressing a poor helpless, abandoned, people,Lord Auck• committed injustice—blunderieg injustice. Shah 2 oejah e as ma d e the puppet, an d t h e A meers th e v i c ti ms . In the year 1841, we were at peace with Affghanistan, but the tribute became due, and a mortality oc curred in our arm y, o f w hi c h the Affghans took advan tage; They rose and destroyed the miserable remnant of the army, and the example which was given was e n `lgerly regarded by others of our Indian tributaries. he Ameers of Sinde said the Feringhecs were thrust o ut of Affghanistan, and why should they not be thrust cut . of Sinde ? (The Hon. and Learned Member then read an. extract from the Report, chiefly consisting of a communication from Colonel Arthur; but, from the extraordinarily low tone and indistinct manner of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman, it was utterly im possible to gue4s at the purport of the extract, or even the persons who were mentioned in it. His running . ? °o3 Mentaries as he proceeded, were, if possible more Mdi .. „stinct and less intelligible, than the reading of the d ocument itself.) He proceeded to contend that, in r,,,, , ,nee of the position in which Lord Auckland had e„ ; i t his successor, it was impossible for Lord Ellen °rough to adopt any other course than that complained of by- the Noble Lord who brought forward the 14.3t i°n• The Hon. and Learned Member then proceeded to read with the same rapidity and in distinctness a very long extract from the corres- Dondence, interspersed with remarks which were e l n ally unintelligible in the gallery.) With the excep tioo.,„, of one cessio n by Lord Ellenborough nothing more ,"as prop ose d to h e gran t e d t o th e A meer s. Major Out a'Pl proposed that Bukkur and the town and harbour of Rurachee should be ceded to the British Govern :et:it. M uc h h a d b een sa id a b out t h e Ameers having ,?ell depri ve d o f th e i r h un ti ng g rounds. There was a distinct proposition made by Major Outram, that the lo S P tt ICO within 100 cubits of the river bank should be al gid for that purpose, and that beyond that limit the ,Ameers should not trespass. Those propositions of Ma -Rr Outram were in effect adopted by the Governor tLeneral, and carried out by Major Outram himself. He Cam'. Roebuck) was not talking of the Ameers or their anjustiee. He did not mean to say that they had not perfect right to drive us out of Sinde. His only question was, inasmuch as they were in that position, What was th e p roper con d u ct to be pursued by the com lug Governor, at the time he found himself surrounded by t hose enemies. He would now briefly give them the history of those transactions which the Noble Lord had not given. Roostum Khan, a Prince of eighty-five years age, now under the control of a Minister.— 'Re Hon. and Learned Gentleman here detailed the V i r cumstances connected with the treaty which Major utram proposed, in case of his driving out Roostum's favourite Minister, to conclude with Roostum Khan, 4 nd then proceeded to say that he could point out 20 IPassages in the correspondence of Lord Ellenborough, in Which his Lordship said he did not think that the treaty QOUld possibly be carried out, and he (Mr. R.), novv a sked the House, giving every consideration to the mis i , ertun es of those Princes, to look at- the matter with L calainess, and tell him whether the consummation that "ad happened was not the inevitable fate of Sinde as a protected State ? Was it not the inevitable destiny of Sinde, such as Lord Auckland had made it, to be ab sorbed in'the Anglo-Indian empire ? And was it then not better that it should be done at once ? If it had not been done at once, long agony, constant disputes, riot ;and confusion, - all would b e th e consequenc e, and the end of Would be as it was at present, namely, Sinde would become what s h e now was, part and parcel of tho created in India. Wh y at t h e present moment did t h ey _ °t ,see that anot h er portion of territory would ac - Wny, in spit e o f us, b ecome ours ? He knew it ;fey =not said to be unjust.--(Hear.) Why did not then get out of India?—(Cries of " Oh, oh," Z ra s both s id es o f the House.) Our possession of it one great i n j ust i ce f rom b eg i nn i ng to en d. H e oldthe be a p rop h et.—(Laughter.) They would possess Punjaub before tw o y ears wou ld e l a pse, in spite of .!,rtetelves. Hon. Gentlemen might laugh ; but he re ;sins bered that two years ago he had said they would 344 , s s Shale, and Sinde they now had; and let them ra his words, before two years should have passed the ",nttjaub they wo u ld possess. He had no more doubt of t_baet than he had o f our w h o l e I n di an p o li c y being a a injustice, as well as an unwise one. The Hon. w i ll Learned G ent l emen then detailed the c i rcumstances a , sl ch led to Sir C. N a pi er ' s a d vanc e upon Hyderabad, d it_ commended that gallant officer's wisdom in not ,vceeding to Hyderabad without his army, as he had .1 ._,0n advised to do by Major Outram, who was led to 7_seve that at the time the Ameers had 20,000 men r t 4t i ca - their command they had not one soldier under _Pad Sir Charles Napier (he said) followed di„ advice of Major Outram, a scene of the greatest r.,°_,ster would have ensued, and terror and alarm from ZelPe Comerin to the Himalaya would have been the s i. o c t sary consequence. He (Mr. Roebuck) gave the , tito tne Lord every credit for his humane feelings towards • v ' e unhappy Princes, but he asked his countrymen to • gt e a that great meed of praise to Sir C. Napier which 'es justly deserved; and that not scrupulously,but with tgen..trous feeling for the heavy responsibility which he ad ist v-urred. Major Outram thought that his personal Na- Pier, Would stop the 20,000 men ; but Sir C. Na wyr) a wiser soldier and politician said, No ; arm your tre. e s and be aware, because you have to deal with Ocherous foes. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman i Zre d turned rouod for a paper on the seat behind, and 'whit t h lg so made some observations as to something he alleged had fallen from Lord Ashley, which could not cat c h. that th e r d ASHLEY begged to say, that what he had stated u r l , ht 2 production of those foot-notes was unjust, they hael b e en submitted to Major Outram. I\ae la — V l3 EßLlClf proceeded, and read a lengthy letter Plia a ,.'f 4 ' C. Napier to Major Outran], giving an ex staiLea"oll of all the circaldences and motives that influ takie„ h is. (Sir C. Napier's) c onduct in the course he had de,...,.with respect to the march tr/ H i derab ! id, and also leir n g the nature of his correspon once with Lord El tee,„cir,°ugh on the subject, and pointing Dui why it was ss not remain silent while the newspapers were filled ' a laraitous reports relative tohis conduct in the mat -o.ll,44:_ision had been made to the negotiations with Shen) tnd• tt- At the moment those negotiations were in g t h e s Ameers weregathering that army which h e - a ' d Sir Charles Napier g to fight . the battle. - -(Hear, $' 1 ";) The - lieble Lord had complained of Sir Charles bler's Conductera. to the Ameers after the conquest of th at Sir Charles Napier during the interfered saf Ameers more than was necessary to insure them of the st ody, from the moment of their capture until that he r Parture for Bombay. That was only what u 'mould h a , e kn ew ve expected from the character of the man. most v „, ha well, and he knew that as he was one of the of us so was he one of the most kind-hearted nes a * -- (cheer a , - ) Cif and. 4 claT hl Nothing could exceed his fearless courage, but then he had a heart like that , Plaiaed l ",:"(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had cora , Veri enee P the treatment which the Ameers had ex conhl e _" c being deprived of their women. Nothing practised eted the horrible cruelty which the Ameers had pfrarents aufirdowards the women. They were luxurious, their r ucl- Many of these women had been torn bee n taken and I and subjected to the most horrible .Possessin General Napier had at -this moment in a crud instrument of torture which h a d : 11Qe bra°lll the zenana of the Ameers, which was os? Ece n• It was wire, and which was used to beat the most horrible s had ever been inflicted Si n d, haessatisfactory to know that our conquest delivered ee that country from one of the system s of tyrannical government which ries . of don a people. There were three t s mtii PeoPle inhabiting Sinde—first, there were heain•es:eirle°thwe were recent converts to Mahomme 't seenn dlY, there were the Hindoos ; and, Zbeovernors Beloochees. The Beloochees were of the country. The Beloochees were ttl the slaves never worked —they kept slaves, and they ayes to work u nail e d as for them. Our conquest had on. sad ~. a blessing by the inhabitants. (The froittLearn,ed Gentleman here read several extracts f ro m 4is e ' acts _ rains whici i , 7 , etter, in which it was stated that nil(Plest were roof that Proviernsci had fallen shortly after the English by the inhabitants as e de a r pp ed rov e d of our proceedings, for : l er the A meer mem the s had murd ere d the Colves, It was thus Pluthans designated the conquest 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 Beloochee had strutted about armed, but that now none except the chiefs were armed.) Sir Charles Napier had been ac cused of insulting the Ameers, while it appeared fron these letters that although he had disarmed the Beloo chees generally, he had returned to the chieftains their arms, 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 jagheerdars 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 of our conquest ofSinde. The inhabitants were becoming industrious, and labourers from Kandahar were flocking into Sinde to obtain 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 Lorel 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 he 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. He 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 escape from the rule of the Talpoore 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 his (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 be right to restore these unhappy Princes who had by force of' arms been com pelled to surrender their territories.—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches ) Mr. EMERSON TENNENT considered the House a most unsatisfactory tribunal for the decision of questions of this nature. In order to come to a proper judgment on the sub ject, Hon. Members should have given all the papers relating to the case, not 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 dethronement 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 step, and could show that throughout those negotiations the conduct of the Ameers had been marked by the same treaehery and false hood which had led to their ultimate downfal. The Noble Lord alluded to the treaty of 1809, when 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 1832 and 1834, which conferred mutual advantages on both sides, but the Ameers were unwilling to permit, not only any English, but any European agent, to reside in the Indus.—(Hear, hear.) Then came the treaty of 1836, when Runjeet 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 for 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 Sinde. For two years after the treaty, and when there was time to consider its operation, None 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 in 184 hetreatyof2, says, that lI 1839.— ( Hear, hear.) Sir Charles Napier, writing 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 Ellenborough, but also to Lord Auck land, to insist upon those effects of the treaty of 1839. There MU 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 ageing 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 had 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 iavolved 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 scious 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 agread 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 up 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. He (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 Outram, 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 declare 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 Eflepboroagh 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 ss's paid to their rank. Twe n ty.fou r thousand pounds per annum was awarded for their maintenance, and no in terference was I:ad? in any way that might in the slightest degree impair their comforts. As to their restoration to liberty, he could hold out no hope of that —for it was wholly iiixompatible with the fu ture peace and tranquillity of 1°42. The House might rest assured that the Ameers would never be debarred from any comfort or 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 h r e e ar po . r ) ters ( , T s h a e lle H ry on ali Gentleman,the etime he who was speaking, was mos t indistinctl y beard throughout, and at with turned andsuphpirseshs. back on (Hear, the r' times was wholly inaudible. ) Sir JOHN HOBH OUSE and Sir C. Napier rose to gether,he latter Honourable Member i m m ediately g ave way. Sir John H obbouse said, before he addressed him self but t rather, to the assertions, of the to the arguments , or, (5 must take the opportuni t y of Hon. and Learned M ember for Bath Ir. Roebuck), he referring to a remark which had fallen from that Hon. Gen tleman as to his (Sir John's) being then in the House, and of makin g to him his place last year when this subject was under discussion. But, an apology for not being in and to the House himself that, having in the be must be permitted to say for . in making that apology, THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 9, 1844. 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. This was his sincere excuse for nut 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 Hon. Member for Bath, could manage all these sort of things with much more force and dignity than 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 his 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 Govei nor- 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 k llunborough 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 have 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 front 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 treaty of 1809 ? 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 i a nd the Americanstre aty with soul nation. In 1820, at a su ggest i on o f Sh a h M a h omed, a clause was in hd not the Indian settle in Government, siSinde that sEuropeanserte d nterri tory. This country had all along in their dealings with the Studien 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 misrepresentatiou from beginning to end.—( Hear, hear.) He charged Lord Auckland with trickery and treachery, which if his Lordship were guilty of, be 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. Bentinck, 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 dis 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 lace of rupees were received, but it should not be forgotten that the Ameers obstructed our march into Affghanistan, which was delayed five weeks by them. Fifteen lacs 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 lace of rupees. The other six lace 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 Sindiau 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 he ought to have passed into Affghanistan, through the terri tories of a Prince with whom the British Government 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 Khjber 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)—most 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.—(Bear.) 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 lion. 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 linger ; 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 Hon. 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 160), that Lord Auckland did not ask anything, which the Ameers were not bound to by treaty.—( Hear, bear.) 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. The 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 Napier, whose name could never be mentioned hut 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 would only put it to the House whether when justice was required for the Ameers, they were to forget what was the Affghan war, but he could not join in a vote of censure on that policy at th e present moment, and 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 Lord Egenborough, 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 Tatta, 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 commerce 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 gaine i these great advan tages, not only for themselves but for the sake of civilisation, which 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 Caubul, 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 Silvia 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 abandoned all the 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 Lard 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 justified him in 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 Aineers, and the treachery of Roostum Khan, was not proved, because it was toot 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 brought 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 home the fact to him. There could be no doubt that one o 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 not a 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 duty 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 studiously 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 equivalent for their loss. He (Sir Robert Peel) trusted the House of Commons would not consent to lay down rules 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 resoluiion. Why, he (Sir R. Peel) declared 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 th e i r nat i ve country. The restoration of their estates, depriving them of political powel, 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 I" 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 th ey should yield to these Ameers every com fort and consideration that was possible. Whatever were their misfortunes they ought not, 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 G overnment at home, or the Government in India—(Loud cheers)—and there should be no restraint on them for the mere purpose of punishment, and no restraint on 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 .o 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 the comforts they had heretofore been accustomed to, he could assure the House that a further sum should be allowed.— (Hear, hear.) Trusting he had satisfied the House that every thing that could be done consistently with prudence would be done for these unfortunate Princes, and warning the House, above all things, not to assume a responsibility which they might hereafter deeply deplore, he should con clude 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. He quite agreed that it would be most inconvenient far 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 Hon. 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) for 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 non. Gen tleman, the Secretary to the Board of Trade, that the supple.. mentary papers had been only a month in the hands of the Members. 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 regarding the policy pursued by Lord Ellenborough. I he Noble Lord, assuming the Government of India was placed in a position of great difficulty, he might have con ceived it necessary to make an impression in order to remove the opinion then prevalent that British power 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 Indus.—(Hear, hear.) It seemed to him perfectly clear that Sir Charles Napier had acted accord ing to his instructions, and with a moral courage, and a personal bravery, which deserved nothing but commendation. 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 he had done; arid as an humble Member of that House, he was willing to bestow upon him ample commendation. The Right Hell. Gentleman bad laid 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 Sinde 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 made was, that it was not tenable. It required more special 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 less 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. He should ma k e a positive charge which should end with something like a conclusion, and a serious one too. But he owned he would cot 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.- wlt 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. He (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. He was astonished that a military officer like Major Outram should have given the advice he had to Sir C. Napier. He 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 tilted him to delay au,e days, and it appeared he had delayed four days with the prospect of hot weather coming on, and thus exposing his army to destruction. Tu another part of his speech the Noble Lord had fallen into error. There was not au 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, 1843, 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 riving. 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 No'ole 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 crone ? He 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 Hon. 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 1 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, said the Hon. and Gallant Member, those political agents do mis chief enough in peaceable times.—( Laughter.) After having read all the papers, he was surprised how the Noble Lord could have made the declaration that the Ameers had no in tention of attacking the Resident's house, but that they were unable to control the Beloochees. The contrary was the ease. He would not detain the House longer, nor would he have made any observations, but for the attack that had been made •upon his gal'ant relative. He did not think he would have been doing his duty if he had not made these observations. 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 ware 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 lesigth into a defence Lf the conduct of the Ameers, whom he thought ought not to be made responsible for the acts of their Ministers. Ile 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 g rant. it had boon shown that thr 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 ratified, when Sir Charles Napier made fresh demands upon them. He demanded th a t th e A mee rs 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 he c onl Napier ns. ho h o r uf e p c fo e rn i e v s congratulating tot w e h d h aa what he aggressions. h letter e h ad f r 4 ? m e nTe Lord n history s t l oernyb urgingo orfo himug ourh connexion with Sinde was the history of a continued series of unjustifiable acts. Lord Ellentiorough in his letters brought it as an accusation against the Ameers, that they were collecting troops without legitimate 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 Ell en b oroug h' s• l e tt er s were full of rt li _ :e ti oa e nt s , al lines t ei e ss n s u d o e ef d . _c t o o (i fi d e : r a iu w e ns uo w af a t n p H u e b oaf l ri which hh t t ie e oa n hr t . i ) o h n e from Hhon t w vha e eg r u e ree t ag h le o nq s e eurea g : d spoken to be formed? the expense of their forma t ion could not be defray e d from the revenues of Sinde; for while the revenue of that country was only forty lacs, the expenditure amounted to eighty lacs. He trusted the House would see the same justi ce a d m i n i stere d t o Asiatics that was ad ninistered to English men,—( Cheers.) Sir EDWARD COLEBROOKE had expected that the Si,icernebtaorryonogfhthe uponßoard of Control in supporting the case of the Gevernment would h ave relied' for the defence of Lord E something more than the vague and general statements of Major Outram. He did not believe that the Ameers 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 b e overthrown. He had been in India in 1836, and he had then wondered how it had happened tihhaotsteheAAmmegeregrfsoormf e S d in a de co h n ad fed r e e r m ac a y in , eddiviidneddepbeyndentso long. quar rels. In 1836, if they had not rece i ve d our assi f s a t mi anc ly e,the y must have been conquered by Runjeet Singh, and after 183(1 independence was attempt of theirs to a c hi eve f or themselves was regarded by themselves as hopeless and impossible. On our meditating an hostile attack on Affghanistan, the occupa tion of Sinde was nece ssary as a basis for ou r military operations beyond the Indus. Shortly afterwards 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 ouF troops from Affghanistan, imaginedithat we were about . withdrawto a ap e from h fr a o rth S e i y nd d e e a si l r s e o d . that every day Major Outram was receiving Ea lt _g glis e h ss Resident Here but wasso tar independencefrom desiringsvi one or other of them, begging that some. thrt it theirperearaecdh to withdraw entirely, the Ameers felt convi He could might be left at Hydertaubraed,amboecangusstethief themselves. not must soon come to a rupture during the war in Affghanistan, and how any one could believe that they were plotting our overthrow while they werefur nishingl not but recollect the great services they had rendered to us us with the means of carrying on a successful warfare was quite beyond his comprehension . .—(Hear.) . Sir ROBLRT PEEL cordially agreed in the sentiments convinced Het t w t h e e l. ; 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. ) H e 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 o f L ord Auckland's policy in invading Affghanistan ; but from his own personal knowledge of Lord Auckland he felt bound to say . that he believed that L or d Auckland had always exe rcised his political functions to pro mote that which he deemed to be the best interests of the giving any opinion on Lord country—(Cheers)—and that Lord Auckland's motives had d w atg u h t t . to consider the position in always been of the highest. and purest nature.—(Cheers.) But although he would not vindicate Lord Ellenborough by attack ingwhichAuckland's Lorditileinbhoreohueagt h found himself placed with regard to Lord Auckland, y the Ameers at the time that he assumed the office of Go vernor-General of India. I t 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 th ere was a grea t principle at work whenever civilisation a n d re fi nemen t came into contact which made it difficult to appl y t h ose pr i nc i p l es .— ( Hear, hear.) He was afraid that there was a neces s ity 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 the pr troopsinipl principle that, pass, their territ?ry wag to b e preserve d i nv i o l a t e ? at, unless the people of Sinde voluntarily permitted —(Cheers.) Would it be right for the Governor-General to look to his N'attel and Puffendorff for precedents, and if he could not find them there, . to give up the e x p e dition?— ( 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 force, but we took posses sion of them by means equally effectual, we h a d R es id en t s a t their Courts, we subsidised their troops, and then gained a con trol over their territories, and if they looked to the proceedings of of other civilised nations when they came into contact with savage nations, it would be found that the same principle which forced us to extend our Indian Empire applied with equal truth to other countries.—( Hear, hear.) He would not rest his vin dication of Lord Ellenborough . upon the i ncu lp a ti on o f L or d Auckland. He bad already gi ven his opinion of the policy of U MTY-- 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 and aggression of all kinds. The Right Hon. 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.— ( Hear, 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, and 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 Simle. 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 Briti-h 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 liber a lity and kindness. Sir ROBERT PEEL exp l a i ne d . The Noble Lord had not represented chat 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 Noble 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 eel: them why they did not interfere.—(Laughter.) The whole conduce. 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 saine time he saw in the statement of the Right Hon. Baronet a desire to alleviate the condition of the Ameers. But so far did lie consider their power of no avail against the influence of India, that he thought there would be no danger whatever in 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 he 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 to return to their own country.—(Question, question.) Lard 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— is hat 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 Hon. Member for Bath, and of hi 3 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.) He could not sit down with out sat ) ing, in explanation to the Gallant Commodore opposite, the Member for Maryiebone, that, in referring to the letter of that Gallant Officer's distinguished relative (Sir C. Napier), he had r o intention of lowering his character, for he held him in the highest esteem.—( Hear, hear.) He was happy to hear the s) repathy 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 !louse then divided. The numbers were— =i For the motion Against it Majority against the motion —134 MR. BONHAM. . Mr. DiVETT then rose to bring forward the motion of which he had ' seven 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 Mr. Bonham. He thought he had great reason to complain of the conduct of that gentleman, in reference to certain pro ceedin,!;i at the last London election. Mr. Bonham, who held a public situation, w s the general electioneering agent of the Conservative party.--( Ironical cheers and laughter from the Ministeri,l 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. lie (Mr. Divett) might be allowed, in passing, to ad vert to the language of the Attorney-General on the matter, which was something in the shape of a menace, namely, that his (Mr. Divett's) having put that notice on the books in re ference to Mr. Bonlyan, was not decent—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches)—just as if he said lie 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.) Ile (Mr. Diseit) told Sir Gregory he was sure it was a mistake; that he would ge to London with hint. 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 M. Bonham for an explanation, but no explanation had be, n afferded him front that day to the present.—( Hear, hear. ) flail Mr. Bonham written to say that it was a mistake, he (Mr. Divett) should have thought nothing further of it, but lie 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," (heirs, and laughter.) He felt justified, under these cir cumstances, in bringing the matter before the House.— ( A leugh ) lion. 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 l aug ht er , th a t an a dd ress b e pre sented to her Majesty praying her to dismiss Mr. Bonham. The SPEAKER—Who seconds the motion? No one seconding the motion, 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, ace ,riling to his own showing, was not actuated by any sense of public virtue, because he himself had said that if Mr. Bon 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. Ihe Right Hon. Baronet then read the letter, which stated that he and Mr. Divett had paired off for the City of London election, and that he went to Mr. Bonham to inform him of the fret, that Mr. Bonham sent him a letter stating that the name of Mr. I ivett was not to be found upon the register; that he (fir 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 lion. Baronet) to show that Mr. Bonham had ever charged the lion. Gentleman with not having a vote at the election. He only stated the information that he had re ceived himself from the General Committee, the chairman of 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 duction of Sir Gregory Lewin's letter by Mr. Bonham, the Committee had, acco r di ng t o th e i r invariable rule, looked into the register for the name of Mr. Divett. No person could regret more than he the mistake which] had occurred, and which he believed arose from not knowing to what Livery Mr. Divett belonged.—(Loud cheers.) Mr. Benham, in a letter to Sir Gregory Lewin, also expressed his regret for what had occurred ; it was a mistake, and he could soy no more.—(Cheers.) if he (Sir 11. 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 and not to the lion. 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. DIV ETT, The ATTORNEY- GENERAL said that he rose for the purpose of apologising to the Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Divett). He did state to the Hon. Gentleman that, in his opinion, it was cot right to obtrude private matters upon the I louse—( Hear, hear)—and that it was about as proper a pro ceeding as if an lion. Gentleman, in order to make his speech, should move for the expulsion of another Hon. Member.— ( Ileac, 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 bugged to apologise to him if he misunderstood the terms upon which he stood towards him. He (the At torney-General) had meant no offence, and ho 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. He little expected that that short conversation would have been f~f~~, ) t.-..,-----, . 70 . 7\0 :,„:,,, ii:::,;:,•7 4 . 12 WEEKL AN TI-CORN-LAW L'A.`GUE !!‘ MEETING AT COVENT -GARDEN THEATRE. :~',~ `.~; The weekly meeting of the Anti-Cornelaw League was held at Covent- Garden Theatre yesterday evening. The chair was taken at seven o'clock by George Wilson, Esq., at which time the theatre was no less crowded than on former occasions. The following is a list of some of the principal persons on the platform :—George Wilson, Esq., Chairmain ; Hon. Clearles Pelham Villiers, M.P. ; Richard Cobden, Esq., M.P. ; Thomas Milner Gibson, Esq., M.P. ; Sir William Baynes, Baronet ; George Moffatt, Esq. ; Richard Moffatt, Esq. • John ; Potter, Esq., Manchester ; Rich ar d B axter, Esq. F. Ricardo,, Esq. ; . R. L. T eedale, Esq. ; R. R. R. Moore, Esq. ; F. H. Toone, Esq. ; John Egan, Esq. ; R. W. Cole, Esq. ; J. T. Norris, Esq. ; John Williams, Esq. • P. Wells, E sq . ; AI . 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. Bro therton, Esq. ; Cowden Clark, Esq. ; General Sir De Lacy Evans, K.C. B. ; 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. ; J. Coppock, Esq. ; Dr. Cooke Taylor ; Francis Place, Esq. ; D. Dewar, Esq. ; P. A. Taylor, Esq. ; Keeling, Esq. ; Thomas Hodgkin, Esq. ; J. D. Cummings, Esq. ; A. Pattison, Esq. ; P. H. Le Breton, Esq. ; Arthur Adams, Esq. ; John M'Leod, Esq. ; Joseph Fletcher, Esq. ; M. Andrews, Esq. ; George Waneey, Esq. ; Hemmant, Esq. ; Alexander Morris, Esq. - George Moore, E sq . ; Thomas Harbottle, Esq., Manchester; Charles Lattimore, Esq., Wheathampton, lierts ; 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 CHAIRMAN then said—Ladies end 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 Majesty'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 fact 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 f or th hi s h and to heal the wou n d whichi monopoly had inflicted, and was in flicting, on the industry of this country. They never eon ceiveerthat, situated as he was, placed in power by the vary parties who now told him they would remove him from power the moment he abused the confidence they had reposed in him, pledged to maintain their interests intact, watched on 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 Peel 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. He had con. seated to become the instrument of a party which distrusted him.—( Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) A party which placed, no reliance or, 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 mono , policing 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 aed commanding ; it exacted from all, rich and poor, high and low, all that they could contr ib ute to s eel! its enormous gains, and it made no restitution on account of the poor and the defenceless, according to the principles of mercy. The monopolists, the rent-leaguers, had, no d ou bt, b een 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 corresponder,ce 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, but 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-Corn-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 tl.e 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 were interested in maintaining the present law ; and what would be the roll of 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. Niue out of ten were scarcely worth notice on account of the smallness of numbers. Ile 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 clergymen—(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, a ll, o f course, 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 tho county. 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 who 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 legak 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 be successful.— (Hear, hear.) They would contest all boroughs.—(lmmense• cheering.) They might have a Devizes next week, and next week a Alr. 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 c which places the advocates of free trade, after being once re jected, were eventually successful.—( Loud cheers.) Since they last met a number of Anti-Corn-law meetings had taken, place in some of the smaller towns in Lancashire and Yorks shire, where considerable subscriptions had been received "far the League Fund. A meeting had also been held in the Town hall, Birmingham, to receive a deputation from the Coemcil of the Anti-Corn-law League. The meeting was open, to all ; its was held in the middle of the day, and 4,000 peoe l ,e attende,t; Mr. Cobden, Colonel Thompson, and'Mr. Mo'ere, addressed the audience, and upwards of 8501. 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 not deceive; themselves, they would neither over estimate their (r a n strength, nor underrate the strength of those who were banded together by interest against them ; but they knew chest the time was gradually approaching when the commerce of this country would be unfettered, and the labour of the pe e ve, re• ceive its just reward.—(Loud cheers. ) The Hon. C. P. Vreereas, M.P., then rose, to address the meeting. He said that when he ealii the pro gress of their cause, he felt with the Chairman that there was little cause for disarray, 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 tall were doomed to become foolish first, ho did think that in this meent movement their opponents had some intimation of their fete.— ( Hear.) They were making themselves known to tt,e coun try ; they were telling the people who they were,, and what they were, for whom such great sacrifices had hem, and were yet being, made, in their trade, their industry, their wealth, and their greatness.—(Hear, hear.) They seemed to forget how much their power was rooted in the imaginations of men, and how much they profited by a eenfusion in men's minds between what was great and what rims good—what was rich and what was respectable. There were many who tbougit that men of high station and deseer.;t would be above sacri ficing the interests of the community at large for their own pri vate purposes; but haw could th ese 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 al! circumstances, adhere to a lave passed to the injury of the community at large.—( 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, Le seemed, in language ; and unless monopoly had foiled theta, they would be strong alto in pecuniary means ; b u t, s t rongest of all must they bet In their 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 necessity and a sense of wrong, and which received its support from that indomitable love of justice which had ever pervaded, as he trusted it ever would per vade this nation.—( Loud cheers.) He believed theirs 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 e d done them, how much they had been protected by Parliament , vast; advan tage would accrue to them from suppressing how prosperous they were, and, above all, c what en a who ventured to dispute these things. Theyehain f t, m found that the whole machinery for maintaining monopoly was giving way, ant e A Noble Lord told a me e t. most seeraed to be the, ch 4( that the farmers ' z ihould now sh ow th e i r ing in Hert fo rdshire screw Prim o t f h i e t which pritee T j y hti d s i t s e t s r . iiited their teeth would raise the pric e o f teeth, and the laboure rs of Essex wet e told to speak out. H o w the farmers " sh owin g corn , or w h e ther speaking out ' was precisely th e use o f t h e mou th which the labourers in their present conditi on wou ld most wish to make, he wo'ald not pretend to 5ay....-(Laughter.) At a public meeting lately held in the county of Dorset, a gen tleman had undertaken to describe the purposes Anti- Corn-law League. He sa id—" Th ese persons? ," alluding to who attend th ese meetings, " are re +tyi ng a s arose under Alr. Pitt ; it was tE the .idledd by t h e bio omety d, 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 HonouraMe Member (Mr. Divett) was the most fit judge of those matters which he had so rashly ventured V,' bring before the House.— ( Laughter and cheers. ) Mr. LEADER said that the gentleman Who had been described as the confidential serv!':nt of the Government in certain matters—the P . L'anager and dis burser of their Secret Service monty—would not, he (Mr. Leader) would venture boldly to assert, ever do anything re pugnant to propriety and honour—(Hear, hear)— an d th a t 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 snore 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 o n th e paper was sure to produce in the public mind from a mere mistake in an election vote. Mr. B. COCHRANE said he had one more to add to the many mistakes already committed by the Hon. Member for Exeter (Mr. Divett). He 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 (Air. Cochrane) was c onc erned. Now Mr. Bonham neitherr went down nor was sent down to arrange. t h ese matters fo him, nor had he ever had anything to do with them. (Great laughter and cheers.) The Neuss then adjourned, at Five Ninutet to TWQ o'clock. • 1K,...7;111