The Sun. — London, England, 1853-07-01 00:00:00

wSl'll'l4.l* ' -1 1, . _ 1,: ~ '_,; - ::--,:. . fI::14 . ..4-..,- f t , rgt- ,, --‘-: \----:- -' • A _ N, . THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 1, 1853, the questior s the more shame for them. (Hear, hear.) You may rest a' seared that if the House of Commons does take no intere . A in the good government of India, the time is not far d . 4stant when they will lose that in which they take so at) e interest. (Cheers.) If I were a minister and had it irre f iressed on my conviction that the House of Commons to& i. no interest in discussions on India, I would not, night aft sr night, as her Majesty's Ministers do, triumph in he oir cumstance. I would not take an opportunity of letting E• arope and America know that this house took no interest in - the affairs of India. (Loud cheers.) This only proves —what is only too much proved already—that we are be coming yearly more and more a meeting of delegates and less ambitious, and, perhaps, less competent, to enact the part, of imperial legislators, which was once our pride. (Hear, hear.) I say then that under these circumstances, the House of Commons, the Parliament of this country, is 'bound to discover what is the cause of the misgo ye rnment of India a misgovernment which is ac ln ley the very witnesses who are brought forward to. substantiate the claim of the Ministry, that the same authority should be allowed to exercise the power as before, and who conscientiously give an opinion to that effect. I do not n-ouble myself to fix upon one cause as the cause of what is called the misgovernment of India. I do not - mean to say that several causes may not be fixed upon as the causes of that misgovernment ; but what I do say is, that, generally speaking, if a country be misgoverned, it is a prime/ facie proof, at least, that the constitution of that country is an injurious constitution. (Hear, hear.) Misgovernment—chronic misgovernment—cannot exist, in my opinion, unless the general scheme of adminis tration has in it something essentially defective. Now, has the Government of India, as it at present exists, some thing in it essentially defective? When I consider that form of government of which we have all heard and read and thought so much, and of which such contrary defences have been given in this debate, by members of equal and high authority, I find that that government is cumbrous—(hear, hear) ; that it is divided—(hear, hear) ; that it is tardy and deficient in that clear and complete responsibility which is the essential source of all efficient government. Now, these are charges which I don't make rashly ; nor have I used a word of which I don't think the justice can be demonstrated. Lob us advert for a moment to the description of the Indian government which has been given in this debate; and observe what this debate has con sisted of, for although we have been told, night after night, that a house could hardly be collected to listen to the obser vations of members on this subject, I have remarked it as a characteristic of the present debate that no member has taken part in it who has not had either administrative or local experience in India. (Cries of oh.) I should be ex tremely glad to be corrected if I am wrong. It is possible that in the course of four nights' debate I may have fallen into a mistake ; but still I am not conscious that I have done so. (Hear, hear.) I repeat that I do not know a single gentleman who has addressed the Speaker in this debate who has not had either administrative or local ex perience of India. Perhaps the First Lord of the Admi ralty and myself may seem to be exceptions, but I believe we have both been commissioners. (Hear, hear.) Well, whom have we had ? We have had gentlemen who have served on the Board of Control ; we have had gentlemen who have served as military men in India ; we have had East India Directors we have had gentlemen who have occupied nearly all the highest civil posts in India • and at this moment I do not remember a single individual who has addressed the Speaker who does not come within the category I have described. (Renewed cries of oh.) Well, I am not going to quote any gentleman who has not been in India or had official connection with it. We have had thi Government of India variously described. One hon. gentleman —and he certainly comes under my category, for he is an hon. director—got up and said—" It is a great mistake to suppose that the East India Company do not exercise a bond fide and virtual authority in India." That happened on one night of the debate, but what happened on another ? A gentleman of equal authority then got up and said—"Of what use is thi s t a lki ng o f t h e East India Company? It is"—(to use the classic phrase that now taints the rhetoric of the House of Commons)—"it is a sham ; the Government of India is the Board of Control and the President of the Board of Control." What hap pened next? A right hon. gentleman who ought on thi s question of all others to be th e very highest authority, for he was once Secretary to the Board of Control,and wards a member of the Council in India, says— " You are wasti ng your b reath and time ; neither the East India Directors nor the Board of Control have anything to do with the matter ; the Govern ment of India is the overnor-General." This is a subject of very gr ea t interest, have three high authorities rise in the house and entirely contradict themselves on this subject. (Cheers andlaughter I mention thi s t o s h ow the difficulty there is in fixing where .) the Gove rnmen t of India can be found. (Hear, hear.) Now,. observe, h ere i s the right hon. member for Edinburgh de ! daring that neither the East India Directory nor the Presi dent of the Board of Control is the Government of India. Well, a very few years ago, when many members I am now addressing were members of this house, or, if not, the event must be still f resh in their memory—the state of India was most perilous and critical. We had to contend with the greatest military disaster which the English arms have experienced in recent times. At that period England was governed by a strong Ministry, consisting of some of the ablest men that this country ever produced ; and they were under these circumstances summoned to Council to consider. what steps should be taken in this moment of unprece dented peril for our Indian empire. Now, fortunately for this country, two of the most eminent statesmen the coun ti7 had ever produced at that time directed the councils of the State. Sir R. Peel and the Duke of Wellington had to consider what, in the greatest crisis of the Indian em pire, was the wisest and most prudent step, and the step the most absolutely necessary to be taken. They selected a Governor-General for India, and they selected him at the greatest personal sacrifice, for in choosing him they deprived themselves of a colleague of great talents.and commanding . eloquence, whose talents and eloquence were wanted in the other house, where their cause was not so well supported as in this. They sent him to the scene of Imperial danger, with all the advantages of accumulated and previous know ledge, for he was at the time Minister of India. He went to that country. I shall not enter into a criticism of his career, but this I know, that he gave entire satisfaction t o his colleagues, and that he succeeded in all he undertook ; and this I know also, that in the very heat of his enter prise he was rudely, abruptly re-called. And by whom ? By his Sovereign ? By her Majesty's Ministers? By the President of the Board of Control ? Not at all. But, by the Court of Directors. (Hear, hear.) We saw this strange and startling thing that Lord Ellen borough, selected for such office by such men and under such circumstances, was recalled by the Court of Directors with all the circumstances of shame, and the very next day he was elevated in the peerage and de corated with the Red Riband. (Hear, hear.) Now, I want to ask who is the Governor of India ? Where is that clear responsibility which ought to exist, and the want of which I lament ? Have the Court of Directors the same Power under the present bill ? I have not had the advan tage of the counsel of my learned friends, whom I wished to consult, but I have read the bill, and, as far as I can draw a conclusion, it appears to me that the Co urt of Directors could under it recall any Governor-General to-, morrow. Then to tell me that the Court of Directors that recalls the Governor-General does not govern India, is ab surb, because the directors can in an instant change the whole policy, which a Wellington or a Peel approved of. (Hear, hear.) I think I have shown that the Government of India is not that simple instrument of polity which we have bee n i n f orme d , during the debate, it was. (He ar, ' hear.) W e h ave been told that the President of the Board of Control was really the Governor of India ; and I have , shown you a memorable instance—one of recent experience' —in which the Sovereign and the Sovereign's Ministers adopted a certain course, which was entirely counteracted by the Court of Directors. (Hear.) I am not making this a charge against the directors. If they have the power they have a right to exercise it ; but when I am told that the directors have no power, and when I show that th e y , exercise the greatest act of power, and when, so far as I can gather from this bill the same power is reserved to them, then I say these are important points when we come to consider the elements of which this Government is to be formed. Now, remember it is not the question (so conve niently thrust forward in debate) whether you have to de cide on maintaining the present form of Indian government or adopting some great change. You cannot sooner or later avoid this organic change, which we are taught to consider so perilous. (Hear.) You may, if you like, termi nate the power of the Court of Directors to-morrow, but whether you choose to do so or not, at a stated period, which is prepared, the Court of Proprietors ceases to exist, and of course with the constituency the representatives must also vanish from the political scene. Sooner or later, therefore, you must make an or ganic change, and the question for you to decide, therefore, is not whether you will make the organic change, or adhere to the existing system, but whether this is the time to make the change, or whether by postponing it you may not be placed in a much worse position than you now occupy. (Hear, hear.) I think you may place yourselves in a worse position. If it be true (no matter whose the fault may be) that the condition of India is not a satisfactory condition ; if it be true that the system that prevails leads to a vast expenditure, which the resources of India cannot main tain, and that consequently the condition of the people and of the country is not only not improving, but deterio rating every day—if it be true that all those objects which you consider of great importance in the government are not in consequence attained—then you must remember, and even her Majesty's Ministers must know this, that there is no reason why in the next twenty years any of those causes which have tended to the degradation of that coun try and its population should be diminished under the bill which her Majestys Ministers have placed on the table. (Hear, hear.) But what would be your position in 1874 ? You must take into calculation that, whatever the debt of India may be, you must adopt that debt as your own. India, with all its obligations, perplexities, treaties, and part of England (hear) ; and, encumbrances, will become therefore, it is matter of urgent and eminent interest that we should decide at once whether we can afford for the sake of India, and for the sake of England particularly, another twenty years like those just passed. (Hear.) If the house will permit me, I will proceed to touch on the bill upon the table ; and to examine whether it makes those changes in the government of India which may be some remedy in the circumstances to which I have ad verted. Remembering the hour of the night, I will cur tail as will as possible the observations I have to make, and will riot touch, therefore, on the changes proposed to be made in the local government of India. With respect to them there are many clauses to which I have ob jections, but Dot such would make me oppose the second reading of the bill, and virtually, as the right honourable gentleman has said , this amendment is in opposition to the second reading. I will, then, concentrate my criticism upon the plan Draw:sled for the home govern ment of India, and I find on that h ea d suc h objections in the plan proposed by t th e Ministers as alone, in my opinion, fully warrant foe offering a complete resistance to •the measure ; 'o r I shall show to the 46 ebittad appearslhe to house that the plan aggravat es all the disadvantages of the existing system, and is dePrive 4 ' me, of many of the advantages whic h uncle ex isting system possesses. (Hear.) In the first Vis es I must call the consideration of the house to the new c.oy.t itution which is made in respect to the Court o f Direc t ore,The first objection I make to this scheme, which is of a peculiar nature, is that by the introduction of Governmen t nominees that Court becomes immediately dependent. (Hear, hear.) Now, whatever the faults of the existing system may be, the Court of Directors, though the ma chinery may be cumbrous and tending to delay, and even to corruption, has one, if only an isolated virtue —it is inde pendent. I greatly object, then, to the principle of intro ducing Government nominees into the Court, and I will remind the house, as authority has been so often appealed to, that this is not a new proposition. Mr. Chas. Wynn, in 1833, proposed that there should be a certain number of the Court of Directors nominated by the Government, and serving for four years. That was virtually the iden tical proposition of the Ministers contained in the present bill, so eloquently supported by the right hon. member for Edinburgh. But how did that right hon. gentleman meet in 1833 the proposition of Mr. Charles Wynn? The house should recollect that the right hon. gentleman in 1833 was as great an authority upon India as at present, for he had delivered a *each of surpassing power, and his words were regarded , with all the consideration they deserved. Well, Mr. Macaulay then said— " The plan suggested by the right hon. gentleman the member for Montgomeryshire is, I think, the very worst that I have ever heard. He would have directors nominated every four years by the Crown. Is it not plain that these directors would always be appointed from among the sup porters of the Ministry for the time being—that their situations would depend on the permanence of that Ministry—that there fore all their power and patronage would be employed for the purpose of propping that Ministry, and, in case of a change, for the purpose of molesting those who might suc ceed to power—that they would be subservient while their friends were in, and factious when their friends were out I How would Lord Grey's Ministry have been situated if the whole body of directors had been nominated by . the Duke of Wellington in 18307 I mean no imputa tion on the Duke of Wellington. If the present Ministers had to nominate directors for four years, they would, I have no doubt, nominate men who would give no small trouble to the Duke of Wellington if he were to return to office. What we want is a body independent of the Government, and no more than independent ; not a tool of the Treasury, not a tool of the opposition. No new plan which I have heard pro posed would give us such a body. The company, strange as its constitution may be, is such a body." (Cheers.) Well, sir, it is unnecessary for me to remind the house of the particular arrangements by which the num bers of the Court of Directors are to be reduced. I advert to it of course with reluctance from the presence of the gentlemen who are members of that body, but the freedom of discussion warrants the allusion. The Court of Directors consists of 30 members. They are to meet and select from their body 15 to be directors of the company. At first there was an idea that the President of the Board of Con trol had dealt hardly with the Court of Directors. It was considered a device on his part of so ruthless a character that there was some public sense of indignation expressed towards her Majesty's Ministers on that score; but after considering this clause I entirely acquit her Majesty's Min isters of this imputation. I am sure the original idea of this clause must have been formed in Leadenhall-street. (Hear.) I know there is a very valuable body of papers there—they have been examined by a friend of mine—in the records of the Court of Directors, relating to a subject in which the Indian Government greatly distinguished them selves, and that was putting down the system of Thuggee. (Hear, and a laugh.) Now, a Thug is a person of very gentlemanlike manners, even of fascinating manners (a laugh);—he courts your acqua i n t ance, dines with you, drinks with you, smokes with you ; not only does he share your pastimes, but even your pursuits ; whatever you wish done he is always ready to fulfil it ; he is the companion of your life, and is possibly a member of the same direction and of the same joint-stock company ; but the very moment when he has gained your confidence, when you are repos ing, as it were, on the bosom o f f r i en d s hi p, th e m i ss i on o f the Thug is hailed, and you cease to exist. (Laughter.) I confess I shall be curious to see who are the fifteen Thugs. (Laughter.) I want to know who will be the first victim. Sometimes I fear it may be the venerable member for London. (A laugh.) I will not pursue this hypothetical anticipation, but when we meet next session I think there will be a thrill of curiosity and horror when certain hon. gentlemen who are members of the first new Court of Di rectors enter this house. (A laugh.) And practically what what will you gain by this process ? You are going to have 15 gentlemen of the old Court, to whom the Crown, in the first instance, has permission to add tbree and ultimately six. Now, the object is to secure a certain superiority of knowledge of India and its necessities. Do you gain that? I looked this afternoon over the list of East India Direc tors. I took the 24 whose names are down, and I observed the majority of them were gentlemen who had local and official experience of India. More than one-half of the pre-. sent directors are men who have been eminent as lawyers, as my hon. friend the member for Honiton, or men who have had great experience in either the military or civil service of the company ; so that at present, with this ex tremely criticised Court of Directors, you have a mass of Indian experience and knowledge represented by more than one-half of the members of the Court. But if the arrange ment contemplated by her Majesty's Ministers is com pleted, you will only secure one-th!rd of the members who possess that knowledge and information. It is perfectly obvious, therefore, when the change you have projected takes place, none of the 12 members of the company will ever be elected with any regard to their Indian experience; they will always be men of Lombard-street—the directors of insurance societies ; and remember, when a city director is wanted, you go on 'Change to find him ; there will be no obligation on the proprietors to elect a man of Indian experience ; and the result of the change, therefore, will be, as I have said, that instead of one-half or more than one half of the directors being men of Indian experience, you will have under this new-fangled scheme only one-third. How will this act ? Try it with the three new members nominated by the Crown. For some time it may remain. Probably the 15 best lives will remain in office, and you are to have three men of consummate Indian experience added to the Government. What do you gain by that ? At this moment you have three, and more than three, equal to any men probably the Government, with the greatest anxiety and the most praiseworthy motives which I give them credit for in this respect, could possibly select. I might take my hon. friend the member for Honiton, twice chairman and a great authority in this house. Her Ma jesty's Ministers cannot suppose they will be able to select a more experienced man in Indian matters than my hon. friend. Is it probable you will get a better man than Sir R. Jenkins, or a man of more Eastern experience than Sir H. Willock? t(Hear.) Therefore, I say, by the very plan you are now pursuing, if you wish to make it a council of Indian experience, you are doing that which is most fatal to anything pretending to be a council—losing the im portant element of independence. (Hear, hear.) The two great elements of an Indian Council, whatever form it may . take, whether a Court of Directors or a Council, are inde pendence and the knowledge of the members, and you can only obtain them by making the members permanent. For those reasons, were there no others, if I were to choose be tween the existing system and that curious one proposed by her Majesty's Ministers, I would really prefer the ex isting one. (Hear, hear.) The existing system gives an independence which is the first element in such a body, and it secures apparently a great mass of Indian know ledge, probably at least half, if not more, of men of as great experience as the Crown could probably obtain. That is the great objection which I have to this plan of the home government. It appears to me to possess all the evils of the old system and none of its advantages. (Hear, hear.) I must remit many objections to the prin ciple of the bill, because I feel time is precious, and I am bound to answer the defence set up to this bill by those who have preceded me. There is one curious feature of this debate,—not a single member has risen on either side of the house to defend the bill of her Majesty's Ministers except gentlemen in office—(hear, hear)—and what is the worth of their defence I will proceed to ascertain. Re member this, there are particular gentlemen who will not vote for the amendment ; but there is not one of those who spoke and opposed the amendment who did not tell you at the same time he entirely disapproved of the bill. (Hear, hear.) That is a very remarkable circumstance. The honourable baronet the member for the University of Oxford is not going to support the amendment. He very rarely does support any amendment of ours. (A laugh.) But he looks upon the bill with a spirit of devout re probation ; and says he never saw a bill of which he more entirely disapproved, and that he votes for the second reading in order that in committee he may move to strike out all the principal clauses of it. (Hear, and a laugh.) Then there is the hon. member for Hun tingdon—and I always regret to differ from him ; he is not going to support the amendment ; but he says he very much disapproves of the bill. Then the hon. member for Rochester, a great Indian authority—he seemed inclined to support the amendment, but is not going to vote for it ; but he entirely disapproves of the bill. (Hear, hear.) Then there is my right hon. friend the member for Stam ford ; he is a very staunch, opponent of the amendment ; but when he goes into committee he shall feel it is duty to show you that the bill is one of the most pernicious pieces of legislation that could be conceived. The cata logue is much longer, but I cannot proceed through such a list, because I have men of mark before me to whom I must proceed. I said no hon. member had defended the bill except those who were in office ; but there was one right hon. gentleman who is not, but who ought to have been in office, who defended it—he spoke not of his col leagues, but of his clients—(hear, hear)—but I appeal to the house, who listened to him with that attention which he always commands. whether they ever heard a more agreeable speech or a more feeble defence. He laid it down that the real government of India was in the Go vernor-General ; he said he had seen how the home go vernment worked in England ; and, as a member of the Council, he had seen how it had worked in Calcutta ; and he told us that four important measures were passed by the Council of India when he was at Calcutta, none of which were suggested, and some of which were after wards disapproved by the Court of Directors ; but still they were passed ; those measures were—the measure for native education, the measure for altering the transit duties, the measure for unlicensed printing, and the mea sure for a uniform coinage ; and the right hon. gentleman argued from this that there was no substantial power in the Court of Directors. I think I have shown the house there is reason to believe there is very substantial power in that Court. (Hear, hear.) I should like to have obtained from the right hon. gentleman, in the moment of that unguarded frankness, when he gave us all the secrets of the system, some information from him as to whose fault it may be attributed that we have not a code for India. (Hear, hear.) Remember, the right hon. gentleman is peculiarly connected with that subject ; for in the year 1833 the right hon. gentleman said, " I believe no country ever stood so much in need of a code of laws as India, and I believe there never was a country in which that want might be so readily supplied." I do not tell you that it is ray opinion. I think that was a very bold assertion of the right honourable gentleman, though it was received with loud and enthusiastic cheering ; but 20 years have elapsed ; that code has not yet passed, and I want to know what prevented it. Was it the Coun cil of India or the Court of Directors? (Hear.) But the right hon. gentleman proceeded further. He said " Nei ther the Court of Directors nor the Board of Control have anything whatever to do but to choose the Governor-Ge neral." If the only business of this elaborate and compli cated home government is to select a Governor-General, then I maintain that we want no such home government neither Board of Control nor Board of Directors. To se lect the Governor-General is a function which the First Minister of the Crown may most fitly and most efficiently perform of himself, and for himself. The First Minister of the Crown is the best judge of the man who should be Go vernor-General of India, or he is himself not fit to be the First Minister of the Crown, Warne an accurate know ledge of character is the chief quality for a First Minister of the Crown, and that is the quality which should pr es id e over the selection of a Governor-General of India. This argument, then, of the right hon. member tells against the home government of India altogether, both Board of Con trol and Board of Directors. It is unnecessary for me at this late hour to touch on other topics in the speech of the right hon. gentleman. The right hon. gentleman in that speech demonstrated many points which no one questions, and illustrated many things which are not at all obscure— (hear) —he did this, indeed, in so charming a manner, that I could have listened to him for hours—in a fine conversa tionalexhilarated dinner a t w o u l ; d h uhta,v ase c i h t e s e e r e e in d e a d b t r o e a m l e. f e , a s h t e table, eare f u l o l y r avoided the real question at issue, except on these points where he made admissions, fatal, as I conceive, alike to the Board of Directors and the Board of Control. (Hear.) 01 , °41 1„ now advert to the speech of one, not exceeding in the right hon. ge ntleman, for no one can exceed him in ability, s but tat n e o , t o l f es m s able. importance t h a o h ; ee an in d , dfireoemueshioish—pothsie that r o tii n g o e hn o ti f L t tlll :" 4 e rn ,t , be_r_ for Carlisle . That speech consisted of vernment of jee".° ) P late p I a n e e g v y e r r i c s listenedo t he e t x o i s t o i r n g e v g eor read. Not in ssg ral la pamphlets that have taken the shal, o _ in all the historiea b ' e .....u p o a t mp in hle a t l s t on the the subject,—not z n e de a d na of form late , —nee which, ill listory lee t o m w po ll s i i c t h ions h , av o e f „t.„03, °f h f e th s e t ee udi (lu r i ng the last three or four e so ver a y bo si u months, have been shower hmaevmeblerreoafdPaatorloiarme unqualified e l d n t i : , productions Company, ! of . the East India pCti.oreetoparonT,thitasußthoaartdswohif Cehonfterioil,froof , out , 1 Ci i , o a i n d the f right hon. baronet. (Hear, hear.) It appeared to me that rheto rical inconsistency never arrived at a more culminating point than at the close of the right hon. baronet's speech, when the right hon. gentleman produced on every mind the effect of a rapid rider who finds himself, after a furious, a blind career, on the verge of an abyss, not perceived by him until that very moment ; for the result to which the speech of the right hon. baronet must needs have brought him was clearly the conviction that he ought to be the first man to vote against his own bill. (Hear, hear.) The Home Government, the right hon. baronet insisted, was a perfect Government, and therefore he was prepared to alter it. (Hear, hear.) " The army of India is an heroic army," said the right hon. gentleman ; " its Pollocks, its generals, its Notts, are heroes—are men of whom any nation may be proud, and therefore" concluded the right h on . bart , " we will pass a bill which, for the first time, will degrade these heroes, and make them subordinate to a Treasury officer." (Oh, oh !) Oh, oh ! Do hon. gentlemen mean to say they have not read the clause in the bill which makes the Pollocks and the Notts of the Indian army subordinate to the Treasury-office ? If hon. gentlemen mean this, they admit they are going to vote for a bill they have not road. (Hear, hear.) This is not all : the right hon. baronet acknowledges that the state of the Indian finance is not satisfactory, and he cannot deny that there is a debt, a great debt, though he contends it is not so great as Indian reformers represent it to be. The right hon. baronet, however, says the bill will settle all that, for that we shall have, in future, an Indian budget, an Indian financial statement. It must, doubtless, be very gratifying to the house thus to be promised, for the ensu ing year, an Indian statement from one who, being now President of the Board of Control, has been also Chancellor of the Exchequer, and who will thus, of course, combine in his statement all the magnificent imagery incidental to the one capacity with the perspicuity of financial detail appurtenant to the other—(laughter)—but still there remains the question how far Parliament will be satis fied with a yearly Indian Ways and Means which does not give them control over a single shilling of those ways and means. (Hear, hear.) Nothing, I appre hend, can be more dreary in itself than a budget ; the only thing that reconciles us to its dreariness is the natural anxiety to know what we are going to receive and what we are going to pay with it. But of this promised Indian budget we are to receive not a sixpence, and we are not to have the smallest control over its expenditure. The power of a Government to retain a house is certainly won derful; but I think the house-collecting or the house retaining powers of Government will be sorely taxed to collect or to keep a house on the night when the Indian budget of the right hon. gentleman opposite is coming on. (Laughter.) Let me briefly touch on the arguments which have been used against delay. The first arguments employed a g ainst delay are those urged on the ground of authority. Now, arguments drawn from authority, how ever efficacious they may be up to a certain point, are of a limited character. We all of us acknowledge the force of authority, and are daily influenced by it, but we can not bow to mere authority against the conviction of our reason. The first authority that was brought forward against us is that of the present Governor-General of India, to contend against which is an Homeric contest, in which one has to encounter a cloud. We cannot straggle against the authority of Lord Dalhousie, for we know not th lan guage in which it is couched, nor the precise conclusions which it recommends. It used to be held very unparlia mentary, not to say unconstitutional, for a government to appeal to state papers which are not within the public cognizance of Parliament, but, waiving that particular point, I protest against authority such as that put forth in the name of Lord Dalhousie being set up in this house, when not a member of the house, except those who rely upon it, knows what the language of Lord Dalhousie's opinion is, what are the grounds on which it is based, or what are the precise conclusions at which it arrives. Such authority, I repeat, is a cloud. Another Governor-General of India has been brought forward as an authority for im mediate legislation—Lord Ellenborough. The authority of Lord Ellenborough, under any circumstances, is of course of no light weight, but still, when I bear in mind that only three months since Lord Ellenborough was decid edly in favour of delay, I cannot consent to bow in implicit compliance to the opinion which his lordship now thinks proper to give in favour of no delay. We have no means of knowing on what reasoning the noble lord has changed his opinion, and we are not called upon to follow him in what may be nothing more than an assumption on his part. Next, we have the authority of Lord Harding() directed fo it n had the subject against w u s a , s b n u ot t ao th g e iv a e u n t i h n ori hof ty ore of Hnge been, some member of the committee might have obtained from the noble and gallant general the grounds of his opi nion, which it is peculiarly expedient we should have be fore we adopt his expressions of opinion as authority. My hon. friend the member for Huntingdon has also been ad duced as an authority. I admit that my hon. friend is an authority on the subject, as chairman of our committee, and who, in that capacity, exhibited his well known talents; but then bear in mind my hon. friend is a warm supporter of the home government of India, as it now exists, and we can therefore easily comprehend that he thinks the more rapidly we legislate the better is his chance of keep ing that home government, or something very like it. (Hear, hear.) My right hon. friend the member for Stam ford has been especially relied upon over the way as an au thority; my right hon. friend stated, so far as I could col lect his statement, that he approved of immediate legisla tion himself, and that the late Government also approved of immediate legislation, and had desired immediate legis lation. This observation, or admission, has been made a great deal of over the way, where it has been repeatedly and triumphantly asserted, on the authority of my right hon. friend, that the late Government intended immediate legislation for India, and that, therefore, our arguments for delay are of recent adoption. I am satisfied that my right hon. friend would make no statement of the accuracy of which he was not perfectly convinced in his own mind; but, I am bound to state, with the utmost courtesy to my right hon. friend—this being a point on which no miscon ception should prevail—that what he so stated I heard for the first time from his lips in this house, and I will add, that, having spoken to the othermembers of the late Govern ment on the subject, I am authorised by them, and, among them, by the nobleman without whose sanction no such course as that stated could have been adopted or an nounced—by Lord Derby, that none of them ever be fore heard of such a proposition as that the late Govern ment, intended immediate legislation for India. (Hear.) 1 would point out, further, with reference to my right hon. friend, that he, too, like my hon. friend the member for Huntingdon, is decidedly in favour of the present sys tem of home government. I must now touch on the argu ments of the right hon. baronet opposite in favour of im mediate legislation founded on the state of India. The state of India has been urged as a state which did not per mit of any delay in legislating for its government. Well, now, sir, I entirely differ—with great respect let me say it —from the right hon. gentleman upon that point. There may be good reasons for not delaying this measure for the government of India, or there may not; but I deny that any good reason can be found for precipitate legis lation in this respect derived from the state of India. (Hear.) Gentlemen in this house speak of India as if it were some small country in which an insurrection would occur the moment the second edition of the 'newspapers had brought word that this bill for immediate legislation had been thrown out ; but just remember that India is a country more than one-third of Europe in size, and inha bited by 25 nations differing in race, differing in religion, and differing in language. (Hear, hear.) What are the elements of combination among the people of India under these circumstances ? Why, sir, take the case of Germany four or five years ago. Here you have a considerable country, but a country not to be compared in extent with India. You have a country occupied by seven or eight nations of the same religion, of the same race, and of the same language. You have that country with all the ad vantages which modern science has produced for the inter communication of man and for the communication of in telligence. You have railroads, you have telegraphs, you have a universal press, and yet, what did the efforts, five years ago, to attempt a combination in Germany end in ? It was found totally impossible to make Austrians, Prus sians, Bavarians, and Hanoverians combine in any man ner there. Though the people were of the same race and of the same religion, and speaking the same language, it was found that their prejudices were so great, that their interests were so different, arising from different con figurations of the soil and other causes, that the whole thing blew up like a delusion ; and yet you are afraid of an insurrection in India, a country nearly the size of Europe, and inhabited by 25 different nations. (Cheers.) But then, Sir, the right hon. gentleman warmed with his subject, and taking up the statement of the hon. gentleman the Secretary to the Board of Control (Mr. Lowe)—which otherwise I should not have noticed, because it was only one of those dashing statements with which the hon. gen tleman sometimes concludes his speeches—adverted to the state of Asia. It is not merely the state of Asia, but the unprecedented and peculiar state of Asia, which, we are told, renders it the more important that our legislation with regard to India should be immediate. Now, I say, the state of Asia is not peculiar, is not unprecedented, and that every circumstance alleged by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Lowe), and sanctioned by the high authority of the right hon. gentleman, is totally unfounded. (Hear, hear.) What was the statement of the hon. member the Secretary to the Board of Control ? It was a statement in great de tail, not a mere general allusion. He adverted to the con dition of Arabia, to the condition of the Turkish empire, to the condition of Central Asia and China, and he said they were peculiar and unprecedented; that Arabia was in a state of uncontrolled fanaticism, and that the position of the Turkish empire was most perilous and critical. I am very sorry to hear that. I am sorry that, with the coalition in power, Arabia is in such a state, and the posi tion of the Turkish empire has become perilous and critical; but it is a rule of law that no man has a right to take ad vantage of his own wrong—(hear, hear)—and it is no argu ment for the misgovernment of India that you have mis governed our foreign affairs. Then we are told that Central Asia is in a critical state—that the Khan of Bokhara is making war upon the Khan of Kokand, or some other Khan—daughter) —as if there had not been war from all time between some one or other of the Khans. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) The fou r th point was about the state of China, which is now ravaged by a successful insurrec tion. Well, take the year 1833, when the bill of 1833 was brought in, and in every one respect the circumstances to which the hon. gentleman referred existed in far more extensive and aggravated a state, and yet they were never brought forward as an argument for imperfect and pre cipitate legislation. (Cheers.) What was the state of Arabia in 1833? It was not merely in a condition of fanaticism, but you had a new religion, which arose in the desert— a religion of conquest, —and you had the invasion of Egypt by the Wahabees. What was, then, the condition of the Turkish empire, which now we are told is critical and perilous ? Why, the Pasha of Egypt at the head of 100,000 disciplined troops was invadirg ;;he Turkish empire. (Hear, hear.) While the right hon. gen tleman, the member for Edinburgh, was delivering his eloquent speech on the state of India, the Pasha of Egypt had already fought that great battle which rendered him complete master of the Turkish empire ; and there was a Russian fleet at the entrance to the Bosphorus, and a Rus sian army on the heights above Constantinople, six weeks before the bill was introduced by Mr. Charles Grant. (Hear, hear,) No one, h o wever, spoke then about the state of Arabia an d o f the Turkish empire as proofs of the im mense danger which existed with regard to India as rea sons why we should not act like statesman towards that country, and as reasons why we should at once pass a law for its government for the next 20 years. (Cheers.) As to Central Asia, instead of a mere contest between Tartar Khans, had you not in 1833 the commencement of those mysterious combinations in Central Asia which afterward ended in the invasion of Affghanistan, as the only means by which you could terminate those terrible and impend ing perils ? (Hear.) As for China, instead of an insurrec tion against the reigning d ynas t y in 1833. already those misunderstandings had commenced, which made every man, acquainted with the state of affairs there, sure that war only could terminate our disputes with that country, and a very few years afterwards war with China com menced, and gave rise to a motion brought forward by the right hon. gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty. Taking, therefore, the state of Arabia, the state of the Turkish empire, the state of Central Asia, and the state of China in 1833—in all these instances the circumstances of peril were considerably greater, but no man then, and no man ever will, again come forward and support an argu ment for an imperfect and impolitic measure for the go vernment of India on the ground that there is danger in that or in any other part of Asia. (Cheers.) I have only one more observation to make, and I am deeply grateful to the house for the patience with which it has listened to me—there is one other reason given why we should not sanction delay in legislating for India. I have adverted to the argument drawn from the state of India and of Asia. There is one more argu ment urged why we should not delay—that is because next year we are to have a measure of parliamentary re form. I know well that her Majesty's Ministry are bound —not merely as statesmen, but as men of honour—not only to propose a measure of parliamentary reform, but also a large measure of parliamentary reform. I know that the right hon. gentleman (Sir J. Graham), with a candour which quite became him, informed the country that the only condition on which he could be induced to serve his Sovereign and the State was, that the present Prime Min ister should introduce, as soon as was convenient, not later than the commencement of the session, a large measure of parliamentary reform. And I know we have the autho rity of the right hon. gentleman—an authorityunimpeach able —that the Prime Minister completely consented to his condition—that he virtually formed his Government on the principle of parliamentary reform—and that he en gaged with the right hon. gentleman that a large measure of parliamentary reform should be introduced, (Hear.) Well, Sir, one word upon that, as a reason why we should not delay legislating for India. The subject of parliament ary reform, let me remind the house, is not of that com plicated character that it was in 1830; the nature of the suffrage, the elements of the franchise, the principles of representation—all these things now are pretty well known and understood. There is hardly a combination with re spect to these things which the Ministry would not be an ticipated in, and though we may have a measure of parlia mentary reform—a large measure—l have no idea that it need take up the whole of the session in discussion. I think the Government may introduce a well-matured project as to the government of India in February, and may dispose of it and bring in a measure—a large measure—of parliamentary reform before Easter. (Hear, hear.) But, Sir, I hope the house will remember the circumstances under which this engagement of the Minister was made. It is two years ago since the noble lord, then the First Min ister of the Crown, announced that there ought to be a measure of parliamentary reform—not in theo .7. but as a practical opinion which he had arrived at, and upon which he was prepared to act. Let it not be said that while, from motives of personal convenience, a measure of reform. said to be necessary for England, is to be put off for two years, not the slightest delay can be brooked in regard to a mea sure which concerns the good government of 150,000,000 of people. (Loud cheers.) Are we to be told that India is to continue to be misgoverned, or that India is not to have the chance of better government because the noble lord who thought a measure of Parliamentary reform was necessary two years ago for England, has deemed it necessary to postpone that measure, from political or per sonal reasons, until next year? (Hear, hear.) The argu ments drawn from the state of India and Asia are power ful, valid, and respectable arguments compared with this argument, that the political convenience of a Government will not allow them to bring in such a measure. (Hear.) No, Sir, I will not believe that the House of Commons will sanction such a proceeding. (Hear.) lam sure that they will hesitate before they authorise such conduct on the part of the Government. (Hear, hear.) I have now, placed before the house the principal reasons why I support the amendment of my noble friend. It is au amendment brought forward, not in compliance with any new-fangled ideas in connection with this subject,—it is brought for ward in deference to the highest precedents—it is sup ported by the conduct of the most eminent men. It leads necessarily to a substantive measure for providing a future government for India. Before the existing act terminates, there is no reason why a government in India should not be provided by Parliament which shall be worthy of the exigencies of the occasion, and which shall show that the Parliament of this country is not entirely unworthy of its office, or unfit to do that which circumstances require. Sir, I am told this is a party question. Ido not hesitate to say that it would be no discredit to the Government if they sometimes availed themselves of the suggestions of this side of the house. (Cheers.) They have been in office only for a few months, and the right hon. gentleman the President of the Board of Control had not been peculiarly attentive to the knowledge required by his office until he came to fill it. These are valid reasons why the Govern ment might have agreed to postpone legislation. I know not the fate of this motion, but when I am reminded of party questions and party feelings, I remember how often we have to struggle here animated by those feelings on questions of passing and transitory interest. (Hear, hear.) We may have causes of struggle which may be soon con signed to oblivion, but we are now struggling for something that will not soon be forgotten; and, however I may go to the lobby, I shall be supported by the consciousness that on this great occasion I have attempted to do my duty to those who have deemed me worthy of their political confi dence, and that I shall connect their names with a course of policy which I think will be honourable to themselves and beneficial to the country. (Loud cheers.) Lord J. RUSSELL—I am sorry that in the present ex hausted state of the House I shall have to trespass on its attention before a division is taken on this subject. But I feel that the question before the House is one of so much importance, and that the observations of the right hon. gentleman are directed so much against the measure of the Government, that I must ask the House to listen to some observations from me. (Cheers.) In so doing I will pro mise the House that I will make no reference to the ques tion of Parliamentary reform. (Cheers and counter-cheers.), This great question of India seems to me sufficient on the present occasasion to engage our attention. (Hear, hear.) My right hon. friend the First Lord of the Admiralty said that, in fact, this discussion was directed towards two branches—the one, the question of delay, and the other, of the double government. These are, in fact, the two ques tions which the House has to determine. Before I address myself to these two questions I cannot avoid remarking upon the lesson that the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Dis raeli) seemed disposed to give to his party in his address to the House. (Cheers.) From the general observations which the right hon. gentleman made upon party I should be one of the last to disagree. I can conceive nothing dis honourable, and nothing discreditable, when two parties have a difference of principle, and one party takes one side and another the other, conscientiously believing that the welfare of the country will be promoted by the struggle for the ascendancy of those principles. But the right hon. gentleman's position has its difficulty in this,—that a party ought to have some settled purpose and some decided policy in, favour of which their friends and supporters are united when they call upon parliament and the country to aid and assist them. But this is a political occasion in which the noble lord (Stanley) who brought forward this motion, and whose candour and fairness I admit, and the right hon. gentleman who closed this debate on that side of the house, are both entirely wanting in the prefer ence of any policy that they can recommend. (Cheers.) They tell us to delay the passing of this measure. The noble lord's address was characterised by an inconsistency that has been pointed out by my hon. friend the Secretary to the Board of Control (Mr. Lowe), and I will now discuss the measure before the House. Upon the great question, whether we will continue the government of India in the hands in which it has already been placed by Parliament, we have scarcely any light from the noble lord, and very little more from tho right hon. gentleman, and therefore it is that in adopting the motion of the noble lord the righi; hon. gentleman had to endeavour to prop it up by dimi nishing the authority, by weakening the influence, and combating the arguments of a right hon. gentleman of great knowledge and experience, whom the Earl of Derby entrusted with the Ministry of India, and pitched upon as President of the Board of Control, and who therefore is the man of all others to whom the Earl of Derby and his Cabinet would have listened when he proposed his views on legislation for India. (Hear.) That is the first autho rity which the right hon. gentleman has endeavoured, but unsuccessfully, to weaken. (Cheers.) The next authority on this subject whom the late Government would have been disposed to consult is the hon. gentleman the member for Huntingdon (Mr. T. BA:ng), whose unwearied atten tion to this subject, as c'-ait.man of the India Committee, whose experience and whose sagacity the right hon. gen tleman (Mr. Disraeli) ought to be the last man to call in question. (Hear, hear.) And yet his case is that the au thority of these two persons, pre-eminently the highest authorities of his party, are to be neglected and set aside in order to accomplish some object which the right hon. gentleman has in view. (Cheers.) That is the way in which a great party is weakened. (Cheers.) It is not that a party will cease in England, but that when the leader of a party like the right hon. gentleman has no clear and settled policy to state, the more intelli gent members of that party, who have considered this subject, find it necessary to act for themselves, and express such opinions as we have heard in this debate opinions which, if they do not agree with this bill, yet derive much strength from the fact that, while the hon. gentlemen who express them are not wil ling to support the bill, yet they have a decided opinion on this subject—that we ought to proceed to legislate for India during the present session, and that legislation for India is the main principle and the first clause of the bill of the Government. (Hear.) Why, sir, it was difficult to find out by whom the motion of the noble lord was adopted. The noble lord's motion states that the house requires further information before they will be prepared to legislate permanently for the government of India. That is the first and main part of the noble lord's amend ment. But is that the meaning of the motion ? (Hear, hear.) By no means. We have had four nights taken up in discussinc , question, that view of the but can it be con ceived that hon. gentlemen are in that position, that they have not made up their minds upon the great question whether the government of India shall be continued or altered ? But that is not the situation of those who have spoken on this subject. There is hardly one of them who has not stated a clear and decided opinion as to the nature of the course to be taken. (Hear, hear.) Therefore, in fact, the motion is entirely fallacious in its terms, and does not mean that which it would lead the house to be lieve it does. But we have an explanation of the noble lord's motion from the leader of Cie Opposition to the measure, when my right hon. fiiend asked for leave to introduce the bill. The hon. gentleman the member for Manchester has explained the meaning of this motion. (Hear, hear.) He told the house it was intended, if the motion succeeded, to introduce a bill to continue the Go vernment as it is for the space of two years ; and he ven tured to affirm, and I think well he might venture to affirm, that if two years were allowed he was convinced that, at the end of that period, no Government founded on the existence of the East India Company would be adopted by the house. (Hear.) I do not find fault with this decla ration of the honourable gentleman. His conduct upon this subject has been frank, direct, and intelligible. (Hear, hear.) I differ from him in some of his opinions, but I am disposed to agree with him in the opinion that, if for two years you have continual agitation, excited hopes, and inflamed opinions on the subject of the government of India, if for two years you should support throughout India the notion that the pre sent Government of India should be displaced, and that something more grateful to the popular feeling, some repre sentation of all classes, something wild and impracticable, should be put in its place, and if you find every man who has not been successful as a lawyer, or who has been dis appointed as an applicant for office, if you find these all adding to the agitation in this country, and endeavouring to indispose the people of India to expect and approve of a continuance of the present system of government, I own I am willing to avow -that the enactment by Parliament of such a Government would be highly problematical, (Hear, hear.) But is that all ? Will nothing else be seen in that time ? It is only the continuation of the Government that would be in question ? Would it not be the very empire itself. (Cheers.) Could any man tell me that at the end of the two years there would be any surety that British rule would still exist in India? (Cheers.) Well, then, I think the noble lard is lending the aid of his arm to shake India, and that he has little considered what fruit he might be scattering on the ground, what branches he might shake, what roots he might loosen, if not absolutely destroy, by being successful with his motion. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman for Manchester thinks he could stop short when he had secured his object of destroying the East India Company. I doubt his power to do so. I can understand his proceedings, for he has employed his strength in oppos ing us in the course which we propose ; but I cannot un derstand the tactics of the noble lord. If the noble lord will permit me to parody a declaration of his own, I should say, "that his motion is neither conservative nor reform ing." It is not conservative, becauses it proposes for a long period of time to maintain existing agitation—a pur pose more opposed to Conservatism cannot well be imagined; it is not reforming, because the noble lord has not shown us even a single feature of any plan of reform. (Cheers.) Well, then, the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) says, " Oh, but you talk of dangers to India. The First Lord of the Admiralty talks of the state of Asia, and of China, and of other dangers that surround this question." I will show that in 1833 great, if not greater, dangers existed. Can the right honourable gentleman say that, in the face of those dangers, the Government of Lord Grey postponed for two years, or even for two months, to legis late on the subject 7 (Hear, hear.) No, Sir, in the face of those dangers , comprehending the full peril of the case, they introduced a bill into the house, which was read a second time on the 9th of July, which was read a second time in the House of Lords on the 2d of August, which passed through Parliament, and every danger was averted by the promptitude and decision of Lord Grey. Then I ask the right hon. gentleman to complete his precedent, and, as he has adverted to the circumstances, to admit that we in 1853 should follow a similar course to that pur sued by Earl Grey in 1833. (Hear hear.) This seems to me to be the great fact of the question of delay. I cannot but think that if the house agree to adopt that course, it would be a course attended with grave dangers (Hear, hear.) I say that circumstances themselves ought to be sufficient to convince the house that the authority of the Earl of Dalhousie and of Lord Harding° may fairly be acted upon as the opinions of persons of actual experience in the government of the country. I think their opinions add additional weight to the force of the arguments which the question itself affords. (Hear, hear.) Well, next comes the important question which my right hon. friend has called the double government. In speaking on this question, I beg the house to recollect what the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) does not seem to have kept in mind—the general argument used on former occasions, used by my right honourable friend the member for Edin burgh, and used by Mr. Mill in his evidence in favour of what has been called double government with respect to India. I beg to call this fact to the attention of the noble lord who brought forward the motion, that no one has pro posed any system of government for India which is any thing- else but a double government. No one has said that it would be sufficient to have a Minister of the Crown en trusted with the affairs of India without the assistance of some council, or the advice of some persons who had ex perience with regard to India, and who might give that knowledge of details which persons coming into office, when Ministers change from time to time, must necessarily want. (Hear, hear.) Let us see whether you can have any other government for India. Let us see whether you cannot have in this country some change which shall temper and guide the Governor-General, however wise, however able, and however temperate he may be—nay, let him have the abilities of a Lord Wellesley, all the virtues of a Lord William Bentinck—and which shall act as a check in cases where his power might require control ; and then let me ask whether you can have any better check than a body of persons independent in their positions—men thoroughly acquainted with the affairs of India, and who would be able to explain to the Governor-General the de tails of every measure proposed or adopted in India, and who would thereby oblige the Governor-General to feel that every act of his must be well considered, and that if at any time he should do an unadvised or inconsistent act, he would be liable to check and rebuke. (Cheers.) Well, Sir, I must say I think a government of India, supported as it is by 70 years of experience, ought to have considerable weight with the house. I do not say it must be at all times the best government, or that you may not find, as you proceed with the mechanical improvements of the present day, that some of the machinery may be sim plified and replaced by better. That may be so ; but I say the course is at the present time to adopt that govern ment which is sanctioned by such authorities, up held by such arguments, and confirmed by such experi ence. There were, however, two defects, which have been constantly pointed out, and pointed out by those who now find fault with us for attempting to correct those defects. One of these was that the process of being elected to the Court of the Directors was one which occu pied considerable time, and which exposed the person seeking that honour to great solicitation, and which de terred many of the ablest servants who come from India from seeking it. Another injustice was, that there was so much patronage in the hands of the directors, and that, above all, the civil patronage was an object among so many of the proprietors, that it had great influence in the election of directors. As regards the first of these, we have provided that a certain number of directors should be named by the Crown—and could be named by the Crown, provided they had had ten years' service in India —without going through the process of election by the Court of Directors of the East India Company. I own, I think, the objection quite done away with by that proposal, nor do I think the objection once stated by my right hon. friend the member for Edinburgh would apply to this proposal. It was no doubt the proposal first made by Mr. Chas. Wynn, and he put a limitation on it, which we have adopted, and which, I think, nullifies the objection which has been made against it—namely, that the persons nominated should have passed a certain num ber of years, and we have proposed that the number should be 10 years in India. We all know persons who come home after long service in India are not extreme partisans or party men ; that they consider India always present in their minds, and, whether they are appointed by one Min ister or the other, that they regard the welfare of India above all other objects. There was another proposal made by Mr. Wynn at the time, which we have adopted, and which my noble friend Lord Glenelg wished to adopt in 1832, which is that of diminishing the number of the directors, and Mr. Wynn gave an admirable reason for it—" You had," he said, " twenty-four directors divided into four - committees, but three of these committees were engaged on subjects connected with trade. You are now about to deprive the com pany of all business connected with trade or commerce, and, therefore, you-have no need of more than the number of directors for one of those committees—or, at least, have not so much need of them as when you had three commit tees sitting on trade," I think that the plan we have sug gested is a very reasonable proposal, and one which should receive your assent. I now come to the other proposal to meet the other defect I have mentioned, and here I think the proposal we have to make is not only founded, as my right hon. friend the member for Edinburgh showed, on sound principle—that those who go out as candidates for civil officers should be exposed to general competition—but that it may be hereafter of the greatest importance as re gards the government of India. In the first place I think it will serve to connect the people of all classes in this coun try more with India—that there will be a more general concern—a more general interest in the welfare of India 'in this country, where young men are taken from all classes of society here. But, in the next place, it will altogether put an end to the fears which, I confess, I have always en tertained, that some day or other it might please the Par liament to give to the Crown the. Government of India, and, with that Government, the vast patronage connected with it. I believe there could be nothing more dangerous for India and nothing more injurious to the Constitution of the country than that course. (Hear, hear.) But I have always apprehended that, without some change, such a proposal would be made. One who has written on Indian reform—a gentleman of very considerable ability, who has written on the subject last year and this—l mean Mr. Camp bell—says he thinks it would be a good distribution of the patronage of India if the offices were given to persons recom mended by members of the House of Commons. I entirely differ from that proposition. (Hear.) I can conceive nothing more dangerous—nothing more injurious than that we should adopt that plan. If the plan we propose should succeed—and, mind, I don't say it will succeed, because it is only an experiment—whether we continue the govern ment in the company or confer it on the Crown, you have provided a great mode of dispensing this great patronage. I have heard hon. members speaking in this debate with a view to amend, either with or without alterations, the present mode of the government of India, and I have heard them speaking with a resolute deter mination to put an end to the government. Some of those who have taken that line are favourable to the government of the company, but there is one extra ordinary exception—my hon. friend the member for Montrose. I confess I was quite astonished that the hon. member, who was wont to extol the government of India, and to praise so highly the mode in which its affairs were administered by the Company, should give his support to a motion of which the end was to weaken and finally to subvert the government of India. I will not now go into the mode in which the government of India has been conducted. I think the general result of that govern ment—and I state it in opposition to the right hon. gentle man opposite—has been a flourishing condition of India— an improvement in the revenue, and an improvement in the trade of the country—greater facilities of transit than were ever known before, and, generally speaking, a flou rishing and prosperous empire, whose fate you have now to consider. I have seen it Wed that we have not in India those great public works which the former sultans and princes of India founded, and that if we were to depart from India, we should leave no monument of our power. I entirely differ, sir, from that opinion and from that state ment. (Hear, hear.) For my own part, when I look back to the government of great empires, especially in India and in other parts of the East, I can see little to admire or ap prove—l see undoubtedly powerful empires, having esta blished their power by a disregard of all obligations, found - lug great works for some purposes of vanity and ostentation, and erecting those works by the labour of those who were, as we see by the accounts of the sculptures of Assyria, lately published, slaves, who were prisoners of war, and taken in battle with foreign nations. Those works were in fact records of the misery, the endurance, and suffer ings of those prisoners of war whom we now treat with humanity and kindness. (Hear, hear.) But are there no monuments which we should leave behind us ? Will his tory tell no tale as regards the last seventy years of our Government in India ? Will it not, Sir, be recorded that in that time we have put an end to those devas tating wars in India in which the neighbouring princes attacked and destroyed each other to the total ruin of the people, and that the scene of the ravage of the Carnatic so eloquently described by Mr. Burke has not been repeated? (Hear, hear.) Will it not be told that, instead, of this, our language has been introduced, that better notions of law and justice have been spread among the people of India, and that if we have not done what one hon. mem ber seemed to think, strangely enough, it was the duty of the East India Company to have done in less than a single century, and changed the whole character of the people, we have at least laid the foundations for that change of character by which the people will learn that in English estimation truth and justice are to take the place of falsehood and venality ? We have introduced to the cultivated minds of India a knowledge of the science and literature of Europe, and we have thereby enabled them in future, whether they may be governed by England or by other authority, to judge that Government by a better test than by the old barbarous rules by which one per fidious conqueror was wont to estimate another. (Hear, hear.) My belief is, that, if our rule in India were to be destroyed, we should possess that consolation—a consola tion better than that of having built any of those palaces or having raised any of those stately works which Sove reigns formerly erected in India. I believe and hope that the Government of this country will long continue in India, and I can see no other power so likely to maintain peace among the various nations of India, and no other power so likely to introduce improvements from time toitime tend ing to the civilisation of India ; r m d believing that such is our great mission, I shall decid ei fly, so far as I am con cerned, not put that power in j e, >pardy by consenting to two years' agitation and the unce rt ainty of delay, and shall certainly vote against the ame at lment of the noble lord, and I trust that the house will as sont to this measure. The house then divided on the question that the words proposed to be left out stand part of the question : Ayes Noes Majority The bill was then read a seco n d time without a divi sion. The Savings-bank Annuities 1 all went through com mittee. The Leasing Powers (Ireland) 'B ill was read a third time and passed, as was also the Paris h Vestries (No. 2) Bill. LIVERPOOL 'WRIT. On the adjourned debate being resumed, Lord D. STUART moved tlitil; the writ be suspended till the 20th of July, his object being hereafter to move that the votes at the election be taken by ballot. Mr. HINDLEY moved the a djournment of the house, but ultimately withdrew the motion. Lord PALMERSTON though.t , the issuing of the writ should be delayed till the evid.e nce was in the hands of members, and proposed that th a issuing of the writ be postponed for a fortnight. Lord J. MANNERS hoped no delay would take place in the issuing of the writ. Mr. MALINS also supported the immediate issuing of the writ. Lord PALMERSTON, under n'Anding that the commit tee had distinctly recommended the issuing of the writ, would not press the postponement. The gallery was cleared for a. division, but none took place. The amendment was then withdrawn, and the motion for the issuing of the writ was ag need to without a division. The house adjourned at 10 minutes to 3 o'clock. SHIPPING INPA'LLIGENCE. CUSTOM-HOUSE , JUNE 30. ENTERED INWARDS.—The Caroline, from Cherbourg ; Australasia, Hobart Town ; ]Bliram, Tarragona ; York Town, New York ; Lady Hilda, Barbadoes ; Confiance, Caen ; Pegasus, Sierra Leone ; Fanny, Oporto ; San Gui seppe, Barletta ; Capella, Ceylon ; Augusta, Constan tinople ; Brooksby, Port Adelaide ; Diana, Ibrail ; Wa nata, Bombay ; Clara Maria, Oporto ; Gueditta, Logos ; Nautilius, Mauritius ; Esmerald:‘, Oran ; Amelia, Roueu ; Louise, Callao ; Anna Maria, Hai , ifax ; Adelaide, Tobago ; Lady Peel, Geel ong ; P r i am: Calcutta. ENTERED OUTWARDS FOR LOADING.—The Australasia, for Hobart Town. CLEARED OUTWARDS WITH . : CARGO.—The Talbot, for Newfoundland ; San Jose, La gos and Accra ; Hamlet, Port Philip ' • Oscar, Stettin ; Warner, Hamburgh ; Duchess of Sutherland, Sydney, New South Wales ; Emanuel, Hambro ; Marieta, Saville ; Miranda, Hambro ; Orator, Madras. VESSELS SPOKEN WITH. The Camilla, from London, May 29, lat. 20 N, long. 34 W. Tho Ann Dashwood (ship), Liverpool to Australia, June 24, lat. 18 N, long. 9 W. The Mozambique (barque), Cork to Australia, June 15, lat. 39 N, long. 14. The Resolution, outward-bound, June 6, lat 37 N, long. 12 W. The Sussex, bound S.W.,lsth, lat. 42 N, lon g. 13 W. The Manchester, Callao to Que evstown, June 1, lat. 13 N, long. 21 W. The Lively, of and for London, 24 days out, lat. 46, long. 11. The Witte Corn, J. de Witte, London to Melbourne, June 16, lat. 44 N. long. 11 W. The Boreas, Cardiff to Panama, May 8, lat. 7 N, long. 22 W. The Kennaway (qy. Lady Kennaway?), for Port Ade laide, with passengers, May 30, lat. 8 N, long. 25 W . The Charles, apparently an emigrant ship, outward bound, June 27. The King William, Arracan to Falmouth, April 24. The Rothesay, Newfoundland to Cape de Verds, June 7, lat. 25 N., long. 37 W. The Mary, Coast of Africa to Bristol, 9, lat. 30 N., long. 39 W. The Lord Elgin, Callao to Liverpool, 11th, lat. 35 N., long. 40 W. The Camilla Callao to Queenstown, Jun e 13, l a t. 3.8 N., long. 39 "W l The Alexander Forbes, Calcutta to Liverpool, June 15, lat. 39 N., long. 31 W. The Polynesia, June 25, lat. N., long. 8 W. The Elenora, same day. The Walter Bain, Pernambuco to Liverpool, June 14, long. 35 W. The Emperor (brig), standing to the East, April 23, lat. 35 S., long. 25 E. The Westerwick (Swedish barque), Akyab to Falmouth, May 16, lat. 12 S., long. 11 W. The Tay (s.), standing to the south and westward, May 27, lat. 8 N., long. 28 W. The John Prott, from Calcutta, May 29, lat. 12 N., long. 32 W. The Mauritius, from Mauritius, June 16, lat. 42 N, long. 29 W. COUNTRY MARKET& DERBY SMITHFIELD—JUNE 28. • There was a limited supply of fat beasts to-day. Some were only of an inferior sort. High prices were realised for all kinds of beef. The number of sheep and lambs was less than 'that of last week. The demand for both was good. Fat and store calves plentiful. Few fat pigs. Prices :—Beef, 6d to 60 ; mutton, sid to 6p.; lamb. lid to 8d ; veal, 53d to 6d per lb. • pigs, 9s to 9s 6d p er score ; rough f6A, 4s 6d p er 1 4 1 b. ; hides, d to 2d per lb ; calf skins, 3id to 4d per lb. EDINBURGH GRAIN— JUNE 29. We had a largo supply of grain in to-day's market. There was a goo d d emand for wheat, which advanced generally. Barley was very dull, while oats sold readily. Beans nominal. Wheat on the top 6d, and the average 18 3d, up. Barley on the top 6d, and the average 1 8 7d, down. Oats on the top 5d down, and the average 2d up. Boans on the top is 6d, and the average 6d, down. Top of Wheat ... . 8ar1ey..... . . - Oats Beans Total Supply and Sales. Wheat 987 qrs sold 952 qrs Bailey 7O qrs sold 55 qrs Oats 514 qrs sold 471 qrs Beans 4O qrs sold 33 qrs AVERAGES PER IMPERIAL QUARTER. Average of wheat £2 12 2 3-12ths Ditto of Barley Ditto of Oats -12ths Ditto of Beans BOSTON—JUNE 29. At this day's market we had a moderato supply of wheat for the season, but a short delivery of both oats and beans. Good fresh samples of wheat sold freely at an improvement of is per qr., but stale gr , naried parcels cannot be quoted any dearer. Oats met a ready demand at 6d to is per qr. advance. Beans firm. Prices were as follow :—Wheat, rod, 42s to 48s, white, 49 s t o 51 s, extra, 535; barley, ON to 00s ; oats, 183 to 21s ; beans, 40s to 43s ; peas, 00s to 003 per qr. NEWARK—Jux E 29. Our market this morning Was only moderately supplied with wheat, and prices may be considered fully is per qr. higher. Other grain as before. Price s as follow:—Wheat, grindi ng , 28 s t o 42s to white,3o3, n 1 n t g o 5 0 7 0 5 5 . r to e d 0 4 0 85 s ; to oa t s s 2 , s 2 ; 4 b s a r t l o ey 2 , 6B; 443; peas, 38s to 40s; malt, 56s to 60s ; tares, 00s to 008 per qr. DUBLIN-JUNE 28. White wheat, 26s Od to 30s Od ; red ditto, 25s Od to 28s ; barley, 13s Od to 16s 6d ; oats, lOs Od to 12s 6d ; rapeseed, 21s Od to 23s per brl ; oatmeal, lls Od to 13s Od ; bakers' flour, 14s Od to 18s Od per cwt ; Indian corn, 28s 6d to 32s Od per 480 lbs. CORK -JUNE 29. Bris. Currency. 4 White wheat 25s Od to 00s 04 Os od-20 stone, Redwhoat 00s 04 to 00s 0:1 Ditto 00s Od to 00s 0 4008 Od-20 d o . --Ditto 00s Od to 00s Od 3 Barley l2s 8d to 13s Od Ditto OGs Od to OOs Od 003 Od-16 do. Ditto OOs Od to OOs Od Bore oos Od to OOs Od Os 0(1 27 Oats ........... 108 5d to 12s Od Ditto oos Od to 00s Oct 00s Od do. Ditto oos 04 to 00s Od Pigs oos Od to 00s Od 00s Od per owt„, Quantity sold at the highest prices :- 00 barrels white wheat ; 00 red ; 1 barley; 00 berg ; 23 oats ; 0 pigs. Quantity of grain and number of pigs sold bust week : . Wheat, 3. Barley, 29. Bere, 00. Oats, 240. Pigs, 00. Return of cattle sold for week ending June 25 : Pigs, 174. Sheep, 372. Cows, 85. PRICES OF BUTTER. cm. CURRENCY. First quality Second quality Third quality 74s Third quality 6ss Fourth quality Fifth quality 69s Fifth quality 6os Sixth quality 62s Sixth quality ~, 53 CORR.—Flour—First, 13s 6d to 14s 6d ; extra, 16s Od ; seconds, 12s 041 to 13s Od ; households, 9s to lls Od ; thi r d s, 7s to 9s Od per cwt. Meal—lndian meal, 7s 3d to 7s 9d ; 0, Ameal, 10s 6d tolls ; wheatmeal, 9s 6d to 10s 6d per cwt. In dian corn, 61 lOs Od to 71 58 Od per ton. Bran, 41 15s Od to t. , 1 Os Od per ton. Hay—Farmers, 30s Od to 00s Od; average, OOs; dealers, OOs Od to 00s Od ; average, Os per ton. Straw Farmers, 24s Od to 33s Od ; average, 005 ; dealers, OOs Od to OOs Od ; average, Os. per ton. Bread—Wheaten loaf, 61 dto Od ; household ditto, 5d to 041 per 41b.—Fresh butter, 9d to lld per lb. Eggs, 48 4d to 4s 6:1 per hundred. Meat —beef, 4id to B'd ; mutton, 6d to bid ; veal, 5d to 8d ; pork, 5d to 64:1 ; 7d to 8d ; sausages, 641 per lb.-- Fish, Newfound.. land, 001. Os to 001 Os per ton ; Scotch herrings, OOs to 00s ; Red, do., 300 per brl.—Potatoes, whit e , 'l2 d to 13d ; 14d to 16d.—Coals, Newport, 19s; Lydney, 19s; Culm, 15e Od per ton.—Whiskey, 25 0.p., 6810 d per imperial gall on ._ Hides, market, 30s to 365; Salted, 30s to 38s per cwt. Calf skins, 3Ad per lb..—Bangor slates 2/. 17s. 6d to 31. per ton.— Fleece wool, 20s to 21s per stone.—Hemp, 381. to 421. per toa—Timber, Memel, 31. 15s; red pine, 31. 15s; yellow do., 3/. ss. per ton ; duds, 191. to 201. per hundred.—Bark, red, 8/. to 101.10 s. per ton..—Tallow, 495 6d to 50s per cwt.—Hops, 71. lOs to 01. per cwt.- Tar, Archangel, 19s. per brl.—. Guano, Peruvian, 121. Os to 004'. per ton. —H s. d,t0331. t P o er 42 t° l. p •- ; PLYMOUTH SAILORS' HOME.—The Admiralty have s 'l k i i " n7,'3ll/e ' r ' 'lb. " . ''' Ban 'u u" Or i srai-e-sui,..)lr6a" per cwt, n c it i f liberally forwarded to the Plymouth Sailors' Home a Fleece wool, 20s to 21s per stone. valuable and interesting library for the use of the in- toa—Timber, Memel, 31. 15s' red pine, stone.—Hemp, 81. mates, consisting of 315 volumes, the estimated cost of 3/. ss. per ton ; dells, 191. to 201. per hundred.—Bark, red, which is 791. 13s. sd. The selection comprises works 8 /. to 101 . 10 s. per ton.. — Tallow, 49 s 6 d to 50s per cwt.—Hops , of standard literature, in addition to Scott's Bible, the 71. 10s to 01. per cwt.- Tar, Archattge 119 , s. per brl.— Guano, Pictorial Bible, and many other books of a religious Peruvian, 121. Os to 00• 7 • per ton. tendency. The list includes the Society's Atlas, valued at six guineas, . standard.'dictionary, Knight's Pictorial History of England, with most of Dickens productions. R A "LW - AY 2'.I7APPIO .RETOI2M, " The Home" is in excellent order, and we recommend an inspection inspection to all who feel interested in the sailor's SCOTTISH CENTRAL RAlLWAY.—Traffic return for the week ending June 26, 1853 welfare.—Plymouth Journal. 22,171 0 31 ti week last year POSTAL ANOMALIES.—THE PENNY POSTAGE.—The .... 2,019 11 '6 postage on a letter exceeding an ounce in weight by the THE GREAT NORTHERN RAlLWAY.—Traffic return for smallest scruple, transmitted to India, via Marseilles, is the week ending June 19, 1853 (283 miles) £15,904 2 6 7s. 9d. This is probably the most expensive route in the Corresponding week last year (2234 miles) 11,628 3 0 world. Still it is not the weight or bulk of the mails LANCASHIRE AND YORKSHIRE RAlLWAY.—Traffic re. conveyed in this direction that makes this exorbitant turn for the week ending June 26, 1853 charge for letter postage necessary, for a copy Corresponding week last year 18,042 11 9 of the London Times, weighing three ounces, is CHESTER AND HOLYHEAD RAlLWAY.—Traffic return for transmitted to India via Marseilles, for 3d., or for only the week ending June 26, 1853 £6,005 18 9 id. per ounce. Thus manuscript mail matter is charged Corresponding week last year 3,606 2 8 at the rate of more than 12,0001. per ton in this direction, whilst printed matter pays only at the rate of 1501. per Increase in 1853 £2,399 16 1 ton. The postal anomalies in other directions are more CORK AND BANDON RAlLWAY.—Traffic return for the striking still. From the Channel Islands to the remotest of week ending June 25, 1853 £207 0 .4 the Shetland group, changing from steamer to railway and Corresponding week last year lBO o 4 from railway to steamer for nearly 1.000 miles, the WATERFORD AND KILKENNY R Al LWAY.—Traffic return charge on a letter weighing half an ounce is id. From for the week ending June 18 ( 2 9£150 13 11 Dover to Calais, two ports almost within sight of each Corresponding week last year (13 miles) miles) 54 5 9 other, the charge on a letter of the same weight is is. 3d ! From the western boundary of Texas to the north - • eastern boundary of the American Union, a distance of SEABORNE MALLS. 3,000 miles, lAd. From Dover to San Francisco, in Cali- fornia,, vitt the United States, involving three ocean transits (N signifies that the mails are sent from the by the night—and Mb y the Gener al Post-ofllet each averaging 2,000 miles, besides three inland services, m orning — dispatch.] ls.2d. From Dover to Caais, a distance of les3 than 30 •—..—. miles, one shilling and three pence for a letter weighing i oz.! COUNTRIES. D a ay wGeneral nen made uPost- p rt From what When Po The charge on a single letter from London to New York due la Office, London.* Dispatched. England. 'is is.; but from London to San Franciseo via New York - is. 2d., leaving only 2d. for the cost of its transmission America(byßrit.pack)N Every Friday .... Liverpool ... Each mon. America (by ,United Sts. from New York to Chagres,-thence across the Isthmus to packet) ... . ....N July l3 .. . .... . Liverpool ... July 5 Panama, thence by ocean steamer to San Francisco, a America (by U. States voyage of about 15 days ! These are some of the postal Au packest ralia t) (via .... outh 5...... N July 6 .. • • ...... Southampton June 30 anomalies which would be removed by the establishment ampton) ..........M July 4 .......... Southampton of a universal ocean penny postage. Ditto (via Marseilles) N July 8 ... Dover ...... NATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF WOMEN.—The Eng- Ditto (via Cape of Hope) ......... W ed N Augu st 4 ........ lish woman is respectful and proud ; the French woman Africa (West Coast) s 23rd ••• June 28 is gay and agreeable ; the Italian is ardent and passion - Alexandria.. .... .. .. s 8, 9, . 1 1, s tfr 3Torth of m. Vy o zonth ate; the American is sincere and affectionate. With an Alexandria.......... ill 4th & 20th of mon. Southampton July 1 4 English woman love is principle ; with a French woman il e a l h g l u m ln as . : 7 • • .. ... 7. 3; 7 2 D n a ci ti of the month SoutlitunptonlJely 1 it is a caprice ; with an Italian it is passion ; with •an Brazil ......:::: ... .. Id 9th gf • t • h • e • m • 'Zit; •.: D So o n v t a h r ain •• • • IDaity American it is a sentiment. A man is married to an Eng- Ilitenos A yret ........M Kh of the month.. SouthanZ l to a n al ‘l ° P ) : 11g lish lady ; united to a French woman ; cohabits with an Cape o o f f good Hoped .. N 14th of the month Plymouth .. 'June 26 p .. N Plymouth .. Italian ; and is wedded to an American. An English Ca pe de Verde ....N 14th of th e mon th. Pl ymouth .. Jtme 26 woman is anxious to secure a lord ; a French Ceylon (see India) woman a companion • an Italian, a lover ; an Ameri - Ceylon._ ~ ~ ...... N 14th of the month Plymouth .. June 26 can, a husband. The ' Englishman respects his lady ; the Ci Cti i i i t i n i nel Isles ........N M on • ,W ed. ,& Fild. S outhampton iTu.Th. Sat 11.1 td & 17th of month Southampton July 1 Frenchman esteems his companion ; the Ital ian ado res China is • ee • I • ndi • a • ) • •• • his mistress ; the American loves his wife. At night Constantinople ......N 1,8,17,24,&27 of m. Dover ...• .. (June 30 the Enlishman returns to his house ; the French- Constantinople ........ 4th & 20 th of mon. Southampton J uly 4 g E co g n y t p . t of s E eo ur n p d e iar & N Twice daily ...... Dover ......'Twieedatly man to his establishment ; the Italian to h is retreat ; the American to his home. When an Englishman France .... ••.. M & N Twice daily .. •• • • Dover ...... Twic edsib , is sick, his lady visits him ; when a Fren chma n is sick, Gibraltar .... . ......Si 4,7, 17, 20 , 27 of m. Southampton July 5 ' - his companion pities him ; when an Italian is sick, his mis- Gr e ece (see India) 31 and & 17th of mon . • i r tress sighs over him • when an American is sick, his wife HamburghieYtewn ................. N Tuesday & Frida London tsoutbampton ‘ uly I ; ....ifues. get nurses him. When an Englishman dies his lady is bereaved; Havannah ...:::....si 2nd of the month So uthampton 'July 1 M Wednesday & Sat. London -• • •. IM on. Thur. Italian dies,. his mistress laments ; when an American India (vlt s tSOUit • uln;p • t.)l 7 l i t t ‘ h (" & " 2ot7 ?P M. Southam p t on ' uaan3Plaa•julY 16 July 4 dies, his wife mourns. An Eng lis h woman instructs her India (v:s. Marseilles)M Bth&24th of month . Dover . offspring ; a French woman teaches her progeny ; an i„°,,T a T i l d is . i . e 8 ( s . e . e . m in t a) N Twice daily .. Holyhead ~. Twl ce d a ily Italian rears her young; an American educates her child. Lisbon ... ... . ..• •• • • ••I‘l 7,9, 17, &28of m. Southamp ton July 5 —American Paper. Madeira .. ~ ........ Al 9th of the month Southampton July 26 WHY IS THERE SO MUCH DISEASE ? Most of us d 0 i N N: te: T s e . e . in . • ; ..... Is 23rd of the month Plymouth .• June 28 not get any walk, or a very short one, which is scarcely Malta ...... d. ) . _ . . Is 7171928 30 ofin. Dover ...... IJune 30 ofany use. Man is formed to take simple, plain, wholesome Mauritius (see India) • • • • • 1 food. He eats all sorts of things, which not only do him Mauritius .....„...N 14th of the month Plymouth ..'June 26 Ino good, but do him harm ; and he drinks large 4uanti- Naples..... •• ... .. 1 , , na ofaetiiii(i)crth. Southampton July 1 ties of beer, spirits, and wine, which hurt his stomach; and New P 7,;;;;; c1 ••• • • •• • • v N ' 2 .) t d h sr t 7 th . of inionl°thlDover ...... l July 2 i I Southampton July 1 take away the proper use of his brain. Man ought to wash New Zea1and . . .. ...... •••• • • ~, private ship .. Various port': Uncertaln • • • ' • • • • lsth2s • himself all over with water every day, so as to cleanse the Papal buttes ........N 4i_ _ t 2 . thottnon. Dover ...... .July 2 pores of the skin, else they get stopped up ; he cannot t) e e ni ninsula ....... :: . : z 1 Id l l 7 ., h 7t B h timo n Southampton so July 5 perspire rightly, and his skin cannot breathe. The majo- Pert Natal 7.7. •.*:....N 14th of the monthmaa ilyumthoamotton July‘..l 1 26 rity of people only wash their hands and faces every day. Sicily •........ ••• • •• .1". ?thl'th2sthotrnon, Dover ...... Vuly 2 I Man should wear clean clothes next to his skin, because the Tuscany .. —•• • • ::: :m -A 1 2 r15th25thofinon. Dover ...• .. 'July 2 body gives off bad fluids. At present many people wear the "V re a l tl e t• t ic el e a •cii'; . L . a . nd (see 8411th of month oouthamptonidtuy 1 same things, day after day, for weeks together. Man A ustralia) ........ .. West Indies ........ IN MSc 17th of month Southampton I Guly I was intended to live in the l i ght. Many, very • many, -- have scarcely any light in the room. Man in this cli mate must wear warm cloth i ng. Many have no flannel, ~ when any o f these d a t es fall on a Sunday, the malls will be dispatche I on th e following day , w i th t h e except i on of the India (vht and are clad w ith heavy and useless things.—Hogg Southampton), and the Malta, both of which will be dispatch e d the Instructor. day Preceding. SUMMER DRESSES.—Bankruptcy o f E Blake - ley, Silk Mercer and Shawl Manufacturer to her Majesty. —ln addition to the rich silks and shawls BIRTHS. in Mr. Blakeley's stock, recently purchased and now OF A SON. selling off by Messrs. Atkinson and Co., of 69 to 75, On the 28th 12, tilt.,at St. James's-road, Holloway, Westminster - bridge-road, there are about 2,000 pieces of Mrs. W. J. Bullock. beautiful French Muslins, Bareges. and Norwich Lus- On the 29th ult., at Bath, the • tres, all quite new, first-class g oods, worth from 21d. to Fagan, B.E. 4s. per yard. These are now being sold by Messrs. At- OF A DAUGHTER. kinson and Co• at less than a quarter of their value ; that On t h e 27th u lt., th e w if e o f t h e R ev. Ed war d Baines, is, from 61d. to is. o.ld. 'Ladies are respectfully recorn- rector of Bluntisham, Hunts mended to i ns p ec t these goods , in o r der that their extent, On the 29th ult., at Glas . gow, the wife of the Rev. R. quality, and cheapness may be duly appreciated. N.B.— S. Oldham, M.A. Messrs. Atkinson and Co., having recently enlarged . their premises, have now a very extensive assortment of ' MARRIED. superior Cabinet Furniture, Carpets and Upholstery.— On the 30th ult., at St. James's, Westminster, Sir H. M. Weekly Times. aldin Vuvasour, Bart., of Sp , oion , Yorkshire, to the [ADVERTISEMENT.] —HOLLOWAY'S OINTMENT AND Louisa Anne Neville, second b Hon. daughter of Lord Bray. PILLS ARE SURPRISING REMEDIES FOR THE CURE OF rooke. BAD LEGS.—Mrs. Sarah Ashby, of Knowsley, had been a sufferer for a considerable time from a bad leg of a very DIED. alarming description. Several medical gentlemen at tended her, and she had recouse also to other remedies On the 29th ult., at the house of her son-in law, William usually adopted in such cases, but all were of no avail' Clement, E q., of Alton, Hunts, Mrs. Dacker, formerly of Greenwich, Kent. and after being reduced to a very distressing O n condit'on the 26th ult., in Great George-street, Liv e rp oo l, ' from continual pain and suff er i n she was induced to Th omas P. Dillon, Esq., aged 57. try Holloway's Oinment an d Pills, and these astonish ing medicines effected a perfect cure in a comparatively ' ~....... short time by strictly following the directions given with ' Print edan d r. ...DNDON : Published by. HURD° YOUNG, them. She has continued in excellent health ever since. i of No. 112; Strand,yrinter, r,t The Sun Office. No. 112, Sitryntl, Precinct of tho Savoy., in the county of Establishment, 244, Strand, London. 1 Middlesex, Friday, July 1, 18 5 3. . - 1 T Ahe tralul 'oPera lud o , 10 the _ Pro Amer ........_ ' r th e e Iprav, -th, 13, .__.__ .hare, on an at the 4, Ad &is; a.m. be pr, Will r Wl.lll, Fai outsi4 Tic 27, I (corn Paf fares. lnin will 14 at 8. , tlcc. horse; earlic a spec Opens from fom First Sewn, Thu m Oninit days, 'Weste Can in par pa Tict ton s earria on the A. tion of ALES newal their 1 plying from / as., ht also it CAO . A. R tnent avid P( Pr'opri No We a l , the ul varied The L native, The' elegan void fir A la Most 11 Induce An Prletoz I - 01HW The Public for .. v OBs with a City heal ca 800 d, ( such el L. u 36, Or: The excite] their Was w Were 1 , and ev Ever y prinei t Parent half ee shi Gentl the ki CA public tfilseh the ea obvlo No Loi 84,85 Lot M( Mak.: TIC cache withc price, The Satur A. r of pit advic, any T. ;1, 011 ap I ti:'( Post, Co Pore, Tri m Ueti t. A vo the „ bitti t latloc Sul vent oflloe tire, i Pac Rion n choke p er, $Y] 24) Mattel To I Fleet., Te 10 . A: l tii