The Sun. — London, England, 1857-07-17 00:00:00

And this very night the Chancellor of the Exchequer gets up and asks you, sir, to leave the chair in order that be may present the bill to the House of Comment). ask the House of C ,mmons did anything of that sort ever take place before. (Hear.) I recollect being in this house upon a solemn occasion. The war declared against Russia was declared in this house, and I shall not forget my own emotions, nor the appearance of the house on that occasion. When the p erson who officially made that declaration made it at the bar every countenance wore a solemn expression. They felt that England was entsrien into a contest which involved great interest, which might lead to disastrous consequences, and they felt that it was a solemn, and, if I may use the phrase, an awful occasion. But the war with Russia was not a more awful or more solemn event than the war with Persia. Persia, indeed, was an inferior power to Russia, but the conse quences we now see. The mutiny at Delhi may be traced to denuding our Indian empire of forces on that occasion, and when they declared warand determined on that expe dition to Persia they ran tLe risk of losing our Indian em pire, and diminishing for ever the power of England. I say that these two occasions are equally important, and if the war with Russia were important and should be com municated to this house, so was the war with Persia, considering the war which followed it, and of which I say the Government had notice. I have no doubt the noble lord, if he deigns to answer me, will say that all this is past, that the war with Persia has come to an end, that peace bas been made, and that our relations with Persia are upon the best possible footing. I am not going to enter into the question of our relations with Persia. That is not my cause of complaint. My com plaint is that the House of Commons upon this occasion has been entirely passed over ; that the House of Com mons, exercising the privilege of providing for the ex pense,' of an expedition, has a right to inquire into the principles upon which the expedition is undertaken and the expenses are incurred. I say that a more contemp tuous course than this was never pursued toward- , the House of Commons: (Hear.) We are now called upon in the coolest manner' possible to supply nearly a million of money. The house is called upon, on the ipse dixi of the noble lord, to furnish sums, and no explanation is offered of the expenses incurred. I say, if the House of Commons is prepared to undergo this insult e --for insult it is—we had bester shut our doors and go back to our constituents. (Cheers.) I know the power of the noble lord. I know that he has—God knows how—obtairnol in the country a wonderful ooinion. Why the people concede to bun that opinion I cannot for the life of me imagine, but I fully acknowledge that he is allowed to do things which others dare not do. Fancying I have duty to perform, I will, however, raise my voice, feeble as tbat voice is, and call upon my countrymen to point their finger at the conduct of the noble lord. I point my finger at the conduct of the noble lord, and I say no conduct since the House of Commons has been a House of Commons was ever so insulting as that which the noble lord has pursuedson this occasion. When Chad-is I. came down to this house in order to seize five of its members he certainly did commit a breach of its privi -1 ges, but he had gone through various stages in his progress towards that point ; and the great result of all the revolutions connected with this house has been that no course of conduct can be pursued by the Gevernment over which we have not an immediate control through the finances of the country. lam not at all surprised at the conduct of the nobli lord. It is, the result of the great confidence which he has in himself, but I think late events one ht to have served as a warning to him. The state of India at the present moment is one of the most striking evidences of the mistakes of the noble lord. Events are occurring there which involve the interests of England. It we lose our empire in India—and we may lose it — (cries of "No, no !" from the Opposition)—l understand that exclamation, it is a thoroughly English "No." (Cheers.) No man can join in the feeling which dictates it more heartily than I do. You believe yourselves able to meet even this great emergency, but you will not deny that it is a great emergency. (Hear, hear) I have that Confidence in my countrymen—in their indomitable spirit—that I have-no doubt, in spite of the mistakes of the noble lord, they will overcome the present difficulty. Nevertheless, I say the noble lord has made a great take. I may even use a stronger word. India is now the opprobium of the noble lord's administration. He has reduced India to its present position, and if we lose India we lose the world. My charge against the noble lord, therefore, is not a small one. First, I say that he has in sulted the House of Commons—t' a - , he has pursued the course of utterly passing it by—that he has declared ear, undertaken err expedition, and made peace without ask ing your approval or consulting your wishes. He has acted as if you were not in ex'stence. The House of Commons is in the opinion of the noble lord an utter cipher. Such is the first charge I bring against the noble lord. The next is that he has chosen an occasion for thus treating the House of Commons the most dangerous to England that has occurred since the declaration of independence by America. By a want of care, by a want of foresight, by that sort of rashness which constant success en genders, he has denuded India of her defences and thus led to all the dangerous consequences that have occurred. Far be it from me to take up the time of the house by unnecessary observations. I move the resolution which I have placed upon the paper with a full knowledge of its importance, 'with a full knowledge, too, of the vita peraeon and sarcasm to which I may subject mysel ; but, having before my eyes my daty as a representative of the people, I say that upon this question of the Per sian war the noble lord has been an enemy of the House of Commons of England. The hon. and learned gentle man 'concluded by moving : "That the war with Persia was declared, prosecuted, and_ concluded without information of such transactions being communicated to Parliament ; while expensive ar maments were equipped without the sanction of a vote of this house. " That it is tho opinion of this house that such conduct tends to weaken itsjust authority, and to dispense with its constitutional control over the finances of the country, and renders it requisite for this house to express its strong re probation of such a course of proceeding." Mr. AYRTON seconded the resolution. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the speech of the hon. gentleman had been, with one exception, confined to the notice on the paper, namely, as to the manner in which the war had been conducted, and not to the merits of the war itself. He would begin by stating that, he had come to the house prepared to hear the policy and justice of the war ques tioned, and prepared to state the grounds on which hos tilities were commenced, but he did not feel justified in going tnto those matters now, as the hon. gentleman bad not questioned the policy of the war, but by his silence seemed to admit it. The papers had long been on the table of the house, and it was not, theref, re, necessary to wait for a committee of supply to bring it before the house. Those who had watched the affairs of Central Asia during the last few years, would know that it had been a cardinal piece of our policy that Herat should not tall into the hands of the Persians, and that was looked upon as a piece of national policy by ell nations. Perela was a weak power, while Russia over shadowed her, and placed her in a state of semi-depen dence on Russia, indeed it was no refd-ction upon Persia to say that it was a vassal of Russia, and guided by Rus sia in its foreign relations. The British Government had lately been engaged in a great conflict with the Russian empire, and it was not his wish to say a word that might revive asperities that had passed a ?gay, but looking to Central Asia, it was impossible not to see that Russia and England had rival interests which induced England to maintain the independence of the Indian boundary. Undoubtedly there had been during the war with Re sia disagreements between our minister an I the Persian Government, but they did not give rise to the war, al though they might have giv,o rise to a su , pension of diplomatic relations. The right honourable gen tleman, having explained the origin of the war, pro ceeded to say that the hon. and learned gentleman had stated that no previous Government had ever entered upon a war without giving notice to Parliament ; bat let them look how far precedent and practice justified that statement. If they looked to the occupation of Bushire and Karrack in 1838, he would find that no snob communication was made to Parliament. There was:eo doubt of the prerogative of the Crown to declare war, so that nothing could have been done beyond a mere communication to Parliament. No money was necessary to be arked for at the time, as the preliminary expenses of the war were discharged by the Indian Go vernment. No step whatever was, required to be taken with regard to that house. The bon. gentleman had compared the Persian with the Russian war, but morally and constitutionally there was a great difference be tween the two cases, one difference being that in the Russian war the funds had to be provided by tbat house, whereas in the Persian war, the preliminary expenses were defrayed by the Indian Government. • The war was announced by her Majesty on the opening of Parlament, and he did not see how Government could have taken an earlier notice of the subject. Looking at previous practice, and the constitutional character of the case, he could not understand what irregifarity or inconvenience there had been, or io w hat way there had been any di-respect shown to Parliament. (Hear, hear.) He would now pass to that part of the hon. gentleman's speech, in which he sought to connect the recent events in India with the late Persian expedition. - He stated that the Government had been -ivarned against denuding India of her troops, but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was not aware of Any stieh warning, and as far as his experience went • he did not believe there had been any remonstrance on the part of the Indian Government. But was it true that there was any connection between the mutiny In the Indian army and the withdrawal of the troops for the Persian 'expedi r t e ien ct : ed h tc m co e rd - t i h n e g s to iri t t he of b t: i l s e t accounts which had a mutineers WAS peculiar to Bengal North-Western provinoes, and e didn b o a e y t at all a p n r d evail th in e the provinces of Madr a s an d, Bombay r e e d s u been rilp tion from which the troupe were draw n . there I In those p.m b no mutinous spirit exhibited, raisi ng a strong P ti on against the theory which the honourable gentle • bad cunt,,nded for. By this time the European e i ro n meats had returned to . India, and there was n o for connecting the mutiny at Delhi with a dgesirTtle weaken the English Government during the absence at the army, arising as they did from circumstances as dif ferent as could be conceived. He could not believe that the house would countenance the suspicions the honour ' able gentleman had raised as to the connection of the mutiny at Delhi and the Persian Expedition. If the motion had been made when the papers were laid en the table, such a notion would never have entered any one's head, because no one could have antici pated the results that bail recently occurred. But then the honourable gentleman bad spoken of the loss of our Indian empire as not an improbable thing. (Cries of no, no, from Mr. Roebuck) He re joiced to hear that the hon. and learned gentleman repudiated the supposition. Jaugieg from the acceu which had been received, h e could not place oti the perma nence of our Indian empi re as an I; looked to it as based upon a most soujinfouinedealst'ioen,rande denying the probability of his anticip a ti ons — a d m i tt i ng at the same time the gravity of evils whi c h wou ld de- • mend most anxious attention—he could not admit that rHE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 17, 1857 the Government was at all responsible, or that the hon. gentleman's ingenuity would convince the Muse that there was any connection between the Persian expedi tion and recent events in India. (Hear, bear ) Mr. NISBET, having had some experience in India, denied that the present revolt was to be attributed to the Persian invasion. The real reasons he believed to be two—the first was, that the Bengal troops were re cruited exclusively from men of high. caste, who would fight, but would do nothing else ; and next, that the European officers were withdrawn from the native regi- ments into civil offices. Mr. BA ILLIE hoped this would not be turned into an Indian debate lie proposed to discuss the policy of the Persian war ; and with regard to the question of communication with Parliament, be reminded the house that the provisional order for the sailing of the expedi tion was made in July last, while Parliament was sitting, so that an intimation of the war might then have been made. He pointed out from the papers before the house that before the war began Ferukh Khan offered to give up all we asked, except to dismiss the Prime Minister. For the dismissal of that Prime Minister, then, the war was undertaken, and after gaining, as we are told, va rious successes, we agreed to a peace, giving up our demand for the dismissal of the Prime Minister, and even other points which Persia before the war was die posed to concede. He then argued that the Affghans would in any case of war be found to be the natural allies of Russia, while Persia had every interest in the world to ally herself with us. It was madness to fling array the friendship of such a people ; and, therefore, unwilling as he was to embarrass the Government at such a moment, still he felt constrained by a sense of duty to vote for the motion. _ . - Lord BURY fully agreed with the principles of Mr. Roebuck's motion, but he could not consent to vote for it, and so to embarrass the Government at this moment of difficulty. He entered into details to show that Rus sia, even with Herat in her possession, could not invade India, and therefore our alarm with respect to that country was groundless. But he was rather disposed at the present moment to support the Government, who deserved the greatest credit for their promptitude in the present emergency with India, and especially for having sent out a man as commander-in•chief who to the eye of a hawk united the arm of a sergeant-major. Mr. DANBY SEYMOUR defended the policy of the Government, and taunted Mr. Roebuck and his sup porters with having never objected to the war till they were called on to pay the bill. . Mr. WILLOUGHBY also miintained that the in terests of Eogland were strongly bound up in keeping Herat out of the hands of Persia, and though he might not agree to all the steps adopted for that purpose, yet this was ❑ot the time to censure them. Adverting to the state of India, he said there was no cause for un manly alarm, though he deprecated some of the discus sions that took place in this house with respect to it, and particulArly the discussion on the petition from the mis sionaries. S'r F. W. WILLIAMS said that the great experience which be had had with Eastern countries convinced him of the strong desire manifested by Russia to get to India, and in the course of his communication with all classes of the East, the advance of Russia on India was the theme of conversation and discussion. The policy. of the Persian war way, therefore, perfectly a sound one, awl the results of the late operations at M.ohaminerah, one of the most important and valuable to ens of Persia, would not fail to be productive of the most beneficial results. Mr. SEIERID AN supported the motion of the hon. _ _ _ member for Sheffield. - - Lord J. RUSSELL—There ara two questions before the house, both of which have been discussed with great calmness, and I, for one do not wish to alter the tone of the discussion. One of the questions raised by the hon. and learned member for Sheffield referred to the control of this house over the finances of the country, the other is the policy of the Persian war. With regard to the firet of these questions the gentleman who spoke last, aud se veral who preceded him, and even the hon. and learned member for Sheffield himself, who spoke with so much ability on the question, have a little overlooked the pre- cise facts of the case. With regard to the delay in the production of the papers, I must say, that from Feb. until that production, the house itself was a consenting party. As soon as Pailiament met communications took Place between Lord Cowley and Ferukh Khan, which be came the basis of negotiations, and it then became a ques tion with the ministry whether it would be conducive to the success of the negotiations to produce at that time pa pers explanatory of the causes of the Persian war. It was their opinion that the production of the papers would em barrass the negotiations, but any member might have made a motion for their production, and if successful, the papers would no doubt have been produced. It was wis dom, in my opinion, in the house to refrain, and that accounts for the whole period from the beginning Of the session down to the signature of the treaty of peace. It may be said that they pushed reserve too far in not pro ducing the papers until the treaty had been ratified, but every one knows that when that took place the house was menaced with dissolution, and every ono was think ing more of the elections than of the treaty with Persia ; and it must be admitted that the moment the treaty was ratified the papers were produced. This eeeplains the greater portion of the delay ; but with regard to the for mer portion, I do not think that Ministers were altoge they justified in not calling Parliament together at an earlier period. I do not think that, when orders were first despatched to Bombay it would have been wise to pnb blish our intentions by a discussion in Parliament ; but when Nov. 1 came round, and the Governor-General of India had by their desire declared war, I think it would have been right to come down to Parliament with exp.a nations. But when Ireflectthat this is the month ofJuly, and that the delay complained of took place some weeks be&re Feb. 3, I think the charge Bs grave as to justify the house in coming to a resolution. (Hear.) With respect to the second question raised, viz., the negotiations, I own I cannot see that it is at all proved that we might not have had as good a convention as we have obtained without any declaration of war. Lord Clarendon repeat edly declared that the sine qua non of negotiation was the dismissal of the Persian Prime Minister, a most extraor dinary demand, but one that was not persevered in. If that demand had not been pressed, Lord Stratford had in his hands a complete compliance with all the demands then made, a compliance fully at complete, as the hon. mem ber for Inverness had proved, as that which had been ob tained as the result of the war. I cannot but think, on this part of the subject, that her Majesty's Government were not justified in going to war without being fully eatisfied that the objects which they deemed essential to the honour and interests of the country could not be ob tained without it. It has been said that all means of re gotiation were in the first instance exhausted, but he did not prove his assertion, nor is it to be proved out of the pipere. A gallant friend of mine says he found on the froatiere of Persia and Prussia much speculation as to a Raecian invasion of India, and on that ground he juilti fled our policy towards Persia. I must say I never knew a shorter cut in logic than that taken by my hon. and gallant friend. lam quite ready to adinit all he says of his own authority, as it would be a very natural subject for political theorists to speculate on the future destinies of England and Russia, but that, therefore, we should conclude that our policy towards Persia had been sound, is, I must confess, rather too sudden a leap for me. (Hear.) Taking his pre nines, I should have thought our best policy would have been to conciliate Persia. It may be said that they had violated a treaty, but then the convention with regard to Herat was of a vague and ue defined character, and there were many loopholes of which advantage might be taken. One thing is tolerably clear, that if the Governor of Herat ma's incursiont into the Persian territory, the Shah could not have been pre vented taking steps in retaliation. The Persian Guvern meat was ready to acknowledge the independence of He rat ; and if it had not been for the trumpery quarrel got up at oar mission, the probability is that by the usual diplomatic means we should have come to an understand. ing, and that the subsequent war might have been pre vented. The war may cost a million, perhaps two, it may have been imprudent to take the troops away from India—l shall not pretend to say so, but at the same time these wars disturbed men's minds, and gave rise to those vast speculations which are natural to the Eastern ima gination: It seems to me that when you obtained peace with Russia that was the time to commence a general policy of peace. ,We should then have been as friendly with Russia as with any other power in Europe, and have endeavoured, as much as possible, to tranquil. line the world, which had been disturbed by our con test. Having so concluded that war, I cannot but think that it is our interest, and the interest of the world, that the peace which has been established should be main tamed. Our interests trend all over the civilised world —there is no part of any sea—in the ear, in the west, in the north, or in the south—in which we have not some interest more or lass considerable, and where we have not sometimes unfortunately chosen an agent, in whose hands large powers arc necessarily entrusted. It is impossible to avoid trifling quarrels arising' at times at some one or other of these places, and•the only way to keep peace is to endeavour to smooth down the-e differ ences as they arise, and to instruct the agents to bring them, if possible, to a rational and speedy conc!usion, I and that while they did not sacrifice any of our engage ments or our great interests, to recollect that it is nei ther our aim nor wish to inflame those differences and those quarrels, but rather to avoid and put an end to them. (Hear) These sentiments which I have ventured to express are, I trust, not adverse to those which both the house and the Government entertain. (Elear.) I , regret that tlfe war with Persia and these hostilities in China should have made it necessary now to vote this sum of money—which, however, I am persuaded every hon. member present w:11 be ready to vote—hut in the hope that it will be the desire and the object of the Go vernment to do all in their power, without sacrificing the honour and interests of the country, to preserve that peace which we have obtained at so much, cost. Mr. KER opposed the resolut ion. Mr. WALPOLE contended that Ministers bad com- mitted a grave infringement on the privileges of this house, and showed by a comparison of dates that the war was determined on before Parliament separated last year. He thought this was not a matter to he lightly passed over by Parliament, and he hoped Ministers would give them the assuranc that this case would not bs drawn into a preecdent. He was unwilling to do any thing that would weaken the hands of the Govern lira at the present crisis ; and be was inclined to evade giving any opinion on the motion by voting for Ong Into committee, but he would do this on the distinct protest that he altogether disapproved of their conduct. Col. SYKES opposed the motion. Mr. V. SMITH entered at great length_into the his tory of the transactions connected with the Persian war. an d n.)ntended tbat if Ministers bad announced their in tendons to Parliament in July last year, it would have been a warning to Persia, and enabled them to stand on the defensive. With respect to the war itself, he denied Mr. Millie's assertion that the war was caused by the refusal of the Shah of Persia to give up his Minister. The truth was' that at Constantinople Ferukh Khan had no power 100 treat, and was the first to break off negotiations when he found that the Persian expe(iition had sailed. The peace we bad concluded, he maintained, was an essentially good one ; Persia herself was satisfied with it ; our power was strikingly Exttnplified in the war, and he believed Persia would henceforth attach hk rseli to England rather than to Russia. Mr. GL ADSTONE said the question before the house was one of extraordinary gravity and difficulty. He was not disposed to omit from his consideration the verdict that had been given by the constituencies in favour of the present Government, because the noble lord at the head of the Government had a right to urge that those acts complained of must have been under the review of the people during the last election, and approved of by them. He (Hr. Gladstone) was deeply convinced of the value of the privileges of the house over the Govern ment through the estimate., and that without them there was no guarantee for the honour and glory of this coun try. He took an unfavourable view of the question, and was sceptical of the dogmas that had been advanced in the course of the debate, and of the importance attri buted to the position of Herat. (Hear.) It was net by such conduct as bad been pursued in this war that the honour of England was to be consolidated. A connec tion in some degree might be presumed to exist between what had occurred in Persia and India, but he did not think it was a question for consideration in that debate. He dissented from the sours- that had been adopted - by the Government with re •pect to Herat, but he admitted they had only given effect to what might be considered traeitional ideas. He eootended that the Government had not given a satisfactory answer to the question—for what we went to war ? We went to war for oljects that were found unattainable, and as soon as that was discovered we mike fresh demands. The right hon. gentleman the President of the Board of Control had stated that we did nut make the dismissal of the Persian ambassador an ultimatum, but the contrary was the fact, arid the right hon. gentleman (11r. Gladstone) read extracts from the blue nook to show that such was the case. Who was it that urged the breaking out of hos tilities for not going on with the negotiations t Why, not Feruk Kban, but Lordh Stratford himself ; and yet at that time Ferukh Khan had conceded more than we had since obtained by treaty. So . much for the Persian war. There then remained the constitutional question, and upon that question the allegations of the hon. and learned member for Sheffield had not been met. The right hon. gentleman who had just sat down had referred to Indian precedents ; but these precedents ought to arouse the jealousy of the house, because the principle laid down was, that while the Government could not with the Queen's army cimmence war without the sanc tion of Parliament, yet they could do so with an Indiau army. (Elver.) That was a most dangerous principle, and in that case ;t was the more dangerous because the Persian was not an Indian war. That war was a matter of British and not of Indian principle, and therefore no claim could be made for it of being exempt from the control of Parliament. The question, then was, what course were they to take I Could they afford altoge ther to pass it by as regards the derogations which had taken place of the privileges of Parliament. He thought words of the deepest censure were justi fiable ; but as the derogation took place in the last Par liament, he would be content to waive that censure, pro vided he could obtain security for the privileges of Par liament for the future. Upon that subject he felt much alarm, beeauset the Government had defended themselves upon the merits of the case, and without reference to the dignity of Parliament. He confessed, therefore, that while he was not convinced of the necessity of recording censure, yet it would be inconsistent with the character of the house, and inconsistent with the jealousy with which the house always watched its privileges, if they allowed the matter to pass unnoticed. It the Government had said that this was not to be a precedent, he would have urged the hon. and learned gentleman not to per severe in his course ; but as they had been told that everything was right, he fur one could not, by putting a negative on the hon. and learned gentleman, support a principle which asserted that a war might be commenced and concluded without the consent of the British Par liament. (Cheers ) Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, I cannot concur either with the constitutional doctrine or with the constitu tional conduct of the hon. and learned gentleman who has moved these resolutions, If I understand the con stitutional doctrine which the hon. and learned gentle man endeavoured to lay down, it is this that the crown has no right either to make war or to make peace with out previous communication with and the concurrence of Parliament. Now, I deny that doctrine to be any part of the constitution of this country. I contend, on the contrary, that the constitution of the country vests in the crown the prerogative and the discretion of war and of peace ; but with this reserve, that when the ad visers of the crown have deemed it their duty to counsel their sovereign either to engage in war or to put an end to war by a treaty of peace, that it is the duty of those advisers to lay before Parliament, if sitting, the grounds upon which either the one course or the other has been adopted ; and if Parliament be not sitting when the interests of the country are deemed to be such as to require a recourse to war, I frankly admit that it is their duty to take the earliest opportunity of calling Parliament together for the purpose of laying before them the grounds on which that course has been taken. I should be the last man is the world to deny that general proposition. I rosootsio however, !05.% io 400 orrrirmo, which the motion abides, there were circumstances, which ren lered it a temporary exception to that rule. I must observe, however, that there is a wide distinction between the conduct of the hon. and learned gentleman and the doctrine of the right hon. gentleman the member for Oxford. The hon. and learned gentleman declares that in any case in which a war bad been undertaken, when co part of the expense was to be paid out of the re venues of the country, that then it was a case in which Parliament had no ground to interfere, whereas the right hon. gentleman contends that even in the case of Indian war, carried on within the limits of India, and with re gard to which no charge whatever would be thrown on this country—that even in that case the principle would apply. I leave the hen. and learned gentleman, and the right hon. gentleman to settle which of the two princi pies they should adopt. Now, with regard to the case itself ; I am quite rea ly to admit that it does involve a question which Parliament is entitled to have well ex plained to them, and which it not less capable of expla nation and if it were drawn into a precedent, might be attended with injurious and improper consequences. But the right liar. gentleman is quit, mistaken (and I think he could not have been present oaring the earlier course i.of the evening) in saying that no explanation has been given by any member of the government of any peculiar circuinsta'ices which took this case out of the general rule. The Chanc,llor of the Exchequer and the Presi dent of the Board of Control stated at length and in great detail why it was not a case in whicn it was necessary that Parliament should be consulted. It has been con tended by some that Parliament should have been caled together when the force was rent off to Bombay. 1 think my right hon. friend's answer is perfectly conclu sive. It would have been the height of absurdity to have proclaimed to the world that we were making pre f parations for waging war in a certain event which might or might not happen. Then it was said that Parliament ought to have been called together in September when the Governor-General gave orders for the expedition. I say it was premature even then to call Parliament toge ther, because it was impossible to say that circum stances might not have occurred in India which might have prevented the Governor-General from prosecuting the war. The earliest moment when Parliament could have been consulted with propriety on the subject was when we had knowledge of the declaration of war. Well, at that time Parliament was called together for the 31 of February. The Christmas holidays were near, and the eariiest period at which Parliament could have been called together was the first or second week in January; and therefore the only lathes, if there were any Itches at all, was in not calling Parliament together between the middle of Jan. and the 31 of Feb. If the war ha. - 1 been one with an European power involving great and serious Consequences, aed likely to require the immediate co operation of Parliament, he admitted that even that short period ought to bates been avoided—(hear) —hut consi• dering the remoteness of the scene of action, considering that no immediate requisition was called for from Par liament, he thought it would have been attaching more importance to the matter than it deserved if they had issued a. proclamation to call Parliament together a fort night sooner on the announcement that war had been commenced in Persia. We did, in the beginning of the session, in the speech from the throne, communicate the fact of this dispute with Pet sia, and the military opera tions which had taken place. Where was the hon. and learned gen lama° then ? Where was his constitutional jealousy ? Where was my right hon. friend the member for Oxford ? Where was my right hon. friend the member for Cambridge'? Where were all these constitutional cham pions ? Silent as the grave. Where was the vote of cen surs ? Where was the reprobation which the hon. and learned gentleman now wishes to draw down upon us ? Why, there are things which are said, like the oak to be long in attaining maturity ; but when they do attain it their irrength and power are great in pro portion to the time they have been acquiring them. And so with the indignation of my hon. and learned friend. He did not get up on the first or second day of the session and say, "You have just got Ui into a war with Persia and have not called Parliament together. I will propose a vote of censure upon you." He has brooded over his indignation from February till July, and now comes forward with a vote, not of censure, but of reprobation, with a strength of language proportioned to' the time it bas been suspended and the heat of the weather. (Cheers and laughter.) As to his constitu tional principles, I do not think the country will applaud them, and the time that has intervened and the moment he has chosen prove he is not a very ardent or a very ready champion of our constitutional privileges. What is the moment he has chosen ? He has waited until the feelings and at xieties of the country are roused and ago nised by the accounts we have received from India; he has waited'until the moment when the Government are engaged with all their mind and all their thoughts in providing for the difficulties of the hour. But, sir, has he even given the house the notice which is usual and customary when a member is about to propose anything which he thinks of great importance ? No, sir. The honourable and learned gentleman suddenly bethouglb himself yesterday evening, about six o'clock, that he world call attention to the evil doings of the Govern ment last year, and at six o'clock he gave notice of what he would do this evening. That, sir, is a departure from the ordinary practice of Parliament, He proposed to call the attention of the house to a subject of great importance, with regard to which papers of :ome magnitude had been laid on the table ; and I think it was only due to members—l do not talk of the govern ment, for we are always ready—(laughter)—l say he has laileo,lll the respect due to members in not giving them time to reperuse these papers, and he should especially have given time to the new meinbtrs—(laughter)—to acqaire intermati in. I now, sir, come to those who co tend that the only question before is i as to ~ he sour- e the government has pursued, and that is the main point of the resolwia although the hon. tnd learned gentle man has mix° I op a great variety of topics. He says he does not anticipate much success, as government halygelne the acquired, gne ui e i r d a u l iyashethinks, a n d w hy h e c a n not imagine, confidence of the country. (Hear, and laughter.) I cad tell him how we have gaited that confidence. His resolutions and his votes of censure will ten i as much to increase the confidence of the people as that celebrated resolution of his, which led to the great outburst of national feeling. The bon. and learned gentleman in the course of his speech, said he looked upon the overthrow of our power in India and the des trucdon of our Indian empire as a possible if not pro bable event. He was interrupted by a cry of " No" from gentlemen on the other side of the house ; he said, "Those are British noes." I wish, sir, that the speech and resolution of the hon. gentleman were British. I say thatit is beeaasethe country feels that the spirit which auiinates the hon. and learned gentleman is not an Eng. lish spirit, and that his feelings are not the feelings of Eng lishmen, and that his votes of censure have recoiled upon himself and on those who were found ready to support him. (Hear, hear.) Some hon. gentlemen have made little of the cause of the war ; but' sir, are we the only Government who have attached iinpertance to the inde pendence of Herat I Every successive Government for a length of time has held the same opioien. Toe Go vernments of Lord Derby, Lord Aberdeen, and Lord Melbourne have all felt that Herat in the possession of Persia would he a great danger to our Indian pooies eione. The right hon. gentleman the member for Oxford deprecated any allusi .n to Russia as ins igating Persian aggression in the direction of our Indian possessions ; but does not tne right hon. gentleman recollect that igwo heHra, andn,eontaf wasormeronly occ aslen,pre a Persian ar m y was besiea rented from taking it by the gallantry of Eldred and Pottinger, it was a Russian general sent on purpose to conduct the operations who directed the siege, a d at the same time another Russian officer was sent to Cabal and Candahar to organise a combination ? I should always wish to be on the beet terms with Russia. Tile war is over, and I trust the animosities arising from it are efficed from the minds of English and Russians—(hear, hear) —but it is one thing to renew friendly relations with a foreign power, it is another to forget the precautions necessary to guard im portant interests of the country. If, sir, Persia was not between Russia on the one side and British' India on the other, it would be a, matter of perfect indif ference to us whether or 'not she occupied Herat ; but knowing as we do that Herat. is the great fortress which leads to Cabul and Candahar, and knowing that Persia is a week power, under the instigation of Russia, and knowing that the posses sion of Herat by Persia would facilitate its occupation by Russia whenever the political relations between her and England might hal Russia to contemplate the inva sion of India, and knowing that its invasion by a Rue , wan force would tend to shake the confidence in our power, and the fidelity of our allies, any government which would shut its eyes to the danger of permitting Persia to occupy Herat would be wanting in its duty. But it is said, admitting this, we might have obtained the evacuation of Herat by negociation ; there is clear proof to the contrary. The Khan bad boasted that he had got Herat, and could keep it in his hands. Negotia tion had failed, and we were compelled to have recourse to ores to procure its restoration. It is said the negotia tions atCotnstantinople would have been successful if we had been cont en t w i t h t h e terms F eru kh Kh an propose d . In place, he never offered any terms, showing he had full power to bind his master; and in the next place, he made it a condition that we should suspend the expedition which was thee fitting out. My noble friend said we made war because Sadr Azim could not be turned out. He has made a mistake. It was to obtain very dif ferent terms that we declared war. The ciee-tion of peace or war depended on the acceptance or refusal of certain conditions, and orders were sent to the troops before Ferukh Khan had displayed his power, and when be learned that th e t roops h a d b een sen t h e declined to ne gotiate any longer, saying that by despatching an expe dition we had aliered the state of affairs, and it was for his sovereign to decide what should be done. It was a misapprehension to say peace or war depended on the ac ceptance or refusal of certain conditions by Ferukh Khan, because orders bad been sent to the troops to embark be fore the negotiation with him commenced. It is said we made worse terms at Paris than we could have got at Constantinople. It is quite true we relaxed certain Condi tions which we found to be particularly painful to the Shah. At one time we are accused of having exacted teo hard terms, and at another we are rebuked for makint con ceasions to Boothe the feelings of a weak power. (Hear.) I say that those who contend we ought to be friendly with Persia ought to approve of our conduct in having waived certain terms not essential to security, and which eoessn wa r o a f t caltbd meaorauvapt over we were perfectly justified in demanding in the outset, but which' we found to be grating to the feelings of the power with which we were anxious to be on good terms. (Hear, hear) The hon. and learned gentleman has found out th at the Persian war is the cause of the calamities that has occurred in India.. Why, sir, the very contrary is the truth. In the first place, no man in his senses can imagine that the withdrawal of 5,000 men from Bombay could a ff ect the presidency of Bengal and the north-west provieces. The power of England in Asia depended on opinion, and what would have been the effect on opinion it they had eeen England, after having made a great effort id 1838' to prevent Perna from acquiring Herat, and it, having nov p a r t ota u t g e t t a u r a e e h a a a d i e m e g a oz i e r r e n a m s a w n o t s r againstswords w ith Russia, she had rfirunk from the position slits bad so long maintained, and acquiesced in the retention of Herat in spite of all her remonstrances ? Such conduct would have had the most fatal 'effect on the reputation of Eng land in the East, for which the retention of 5,000 men powerful :w e d reeef a dru d shi i v aia a tvn, neataganggadg expedition gained ewe u sde s . in Bombay would have been no comfensation. On the to British influence in the East. (Hear.) They will see other hand, the tth,enablediresultegneav al evacuation the success have t to hat Persia, w e n e fu ' r e c t r e b e d a s a i tiv a m nd ph ß o u f ss a ia r n ms in a s ti t d ig d a i t p i, l , o n rcy which must be of great value to our reputation through the whole of Asia. So far from admitting the justice of the assertion that the Persian expedition was connected in the remotest degree with the unfortunate events which have happened in India, I c ntend it had rather a tendency to prevent them. The hon. and learned gentleman's own arguments upset his position in this respect, for he afterwards attempted to represent these events as the result of a long prepared combination ; and if so, they could not be the result of the sadden despatch of 5,000 men from Bom hay. These men have now returned t ) the shores of India, and with greater power and greeter influence, on account of the glory they have acquired, and the honour and character they have gained. Then, sir, I say there is no ground for the resolution of the hon. and learned gentleman on the point of the constitutional principle. But, even if I did not dispute his constitutional doctrine I contend that, under the circumstances, it is rather a piece of pedantry than the effect of any substantial re gardecp aao cul h caus e that ach t tei h esp e sh,i) r vil i g eeed h yg t ot s ov a e o rt n d h me en expedition .privileges l t of was a t tg h ha i e s i house. pstol ic policy Persia, o Lord there is no groundhafsorhhaids retshoeluutinoannimonouasccaopupiartoovfaltiolef f as much as of Lord Cl are nd on ; an d t h ere f N o l r a e lmb fo e r s tl u ie rY house to agree to a resolution which would directly or indirectly censure the plc) , of the Govern- ment in maintaining Herat free flow Persia would, I contend, be a fat a mistake, and one productive of the most fatal cense quences to our interests in India. Sir, en those grounds I trust the house will pass into com mittee of supply ; for, even if the hen. and learned gen tleman should consider it necessary to divide the house, I trust the rnajerity will tell him that the motion is not such as he had a right to expect that the feelings of the house would agree to- (Cheers ) Mr. DISRAELL—I hope the house will permit mefor a very few moments to trespass on its time while I ex plain the course which on this occasion I think it my duty to adopt. I will at once dismiss all that vexed question of Persian politics, with respect to which I rather still believe that I have more accurate impres sions than appear to prevail on the Treasury bench. Ac cording to the Chancellor of the Exchequer Persia is the vassal of Russia ; and according to the President of the Board of Control it is with great difficulty that he can prevent Persia from falling into the bands of England, her natural ally. With dogmas so discordant, and opinions so contrary, maintained by two of the most eminent members of the Cabinet on the vital question as to what led to the war and caused the expenditure, her Majesty's Ministers must excuse me if I do not place ' implicit confidence in their views of Persian politics. (Hear, and a laugh.) But the opinion of the house on Persian politics is not, I believe, the question which to tnoigehntteenrgaingteos our the aotttheenr q uestion, which, bor r o w i ng thetioo, nor do I think it necess ar y epithet used to-night, I may call that awful question of the present state of India, though it has been adverted opinion of the Government on at to hd ev b aF y ni gte LordO ir h o a m n c o el tfh lo tihs r of s the Treasury. c t u h s eE i o x n hequ that w. e e r atwa we have dwelt e ehaasvte have on raevceei this co ndition of our Indian empire. The Chancellor of the Exchequ e r h as informed us that u m ature t h a e n and present solem° the te cause at India at the present moment is suffering only from a m imentsry add unexpcct tci impulse arising from supersti ti us ctusee. This insurrection, which extends from the Purdah to Calcutta, is, Ac cording to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the creation of merely a sudden impulse. I can hardly believe that such a grave consequence has arisen from to accithntal acause. I should hardly be lieve that that is the cauoci especially in respect to our Indian army, which by its education a n d interests, and by every motive w hi c h can influence the loyalty of m en, ought to be most devoted to our Government, that should be suddenly found in a state of insurrection on account of the cause alleged by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I must be permitted to sa y that I believe state of the cause of the present India is much graver and deeper than appears to be conceived by her Ma jesty's Ministers. (Hear, sear.) I believe the present state of India has been occasioned by long years of in s g vernment ; and if it he the opinion of her Majesty's Ministers that the conditim of India is attributable to such temporary and unexpected causes as were alleged by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, I should have much lees confidence than I would willingly ent rtain with regard to the remedial measures they have proposed, and the further measures which I trust they are pre pared to submit to Parliament. But, dismissing the grave question of Persian politics which must soon en gage our consideration, let as consider the real question we have to decide to-night—namely, the, course which' independently of passion or of party, we ought to pur sue. The hon. and learned member for Sheffield has proposed some resolutions by way of amendment to the motion of going' into Gilnrui , tee of Supply, in order t provide for the expenes of the Persian war. Th so resolutions may be c•.uctiod in ,tronv. That is of c arse a qu-"tion of d-grtee of Hui , : moment, but no hon. gentleman will pretend that they do not embody a constitutional principle (hear, hear), or that that principle is not expressed in nervous, proper, and parliamentary language. Whether the resolutions apply to the circumstances of the case whether the inference which the hon, and learned gentle men bas drawn is sufficiently sustained by the premises, are questions meet and fit for parliamentary discussion ; but fer proposing these resolutions, which assert the privileges of Parliament and express a constitutional principle acknow . edged even by her Majesty's Ministers t e night, the hon. and learned gentleman is assailed in tones of vituperation, and is toll he is taking an un- English course. (Cheers.) The First Lori of the Treasury, speaking of the Shah of Persia, said he had a habit of boasting in his Durbar. Well there are other great men who boat (loud laughter and cheers)—in places which we were once fain to hope were almost as august as the Durbar of a Persian king of kings (laughter) ; but if the policy the noble lord recommends were pursued I think the influence of Parliament would be so much diminished that we might perhaps have to veil our glories before the superior authority of a Persian sovereign. The noble lord, having been accused of being a most popular Mierster (a laugh), yields to the soft im peachment, and in the Persian style says, "True it is, I am most popular (laughter, followed by cheers from the Ministerial side) ; true it is that I possess the confidence of the country, but what is the cause ? (Cheers from the Ministerial side.) I know wby I possess the confidence of the country. (Laughter and cheers). It is," said the noble lord to the hon. and learned member for Sheffield, "in consequence of your resolutions." (Laughter.) Now, what were the reso lutions of the hon. and learned member for Sheffield ? I remember several memorable occasions on which the hon. and learned gentleman, unsupported by any per sonal following in this house, has proposed re.olutione. I need scarcely remind the house of what e as, perhap-, the most memorable occasion on which the hon. and learned gentleman brought forward a resolution. It was a resolution for an inquiry into the state of the English army before the walls of Sebastopol. (Cheers.) Was that an un-English resolution ? (Renewed cheers.) Was it an unconstitutional resolution ? (Hear.) Why, the noble lord, who was one of the guilty ministers, yielded to the vote when that resolution was carried. (Cheers.) Another resolution, almost equally memorable, and which I am sure the noble lord cannot .have forgotten, was also proposed by the hon. and learned gentleman. The occasion was when the "turbulent and aggressive p Jim" of the noble lord was properly brought under our consideration by an eminent member of this house, and when a large and powerful party, asserting, as I believe, sound principles of policy---(cheers)— called upon the House of Commons to seal with its strong reprobation the iejurions policy of the noble lord. The hon. and learned member for Sheffield then came forward with one of his un-English resolutions, and by the aid of the hon. and learned gentleman, and by a scant majority, the mischievous career of the noble lord has continued. (Cheers.) Now, as the noble lord has alluded to the younger members of this house, I think they may learn from this instance what gratitude they wit t xeerience if, in future moments of delusion—(:s laugh). -desirous to save a Minister from a difficulty or to extricate him from a scrape—(laughter),—they come forward and propose resolutions to assist the policy or to vindicate the conduct of the noble lord. (Laughter) A few years will pass, and hey will then be held up to the scorn and ridicule of the house as the movers of un- English resolutions. (Some cries of " Oh," cheers and laughter.) Those who vindicate the privileges of Par liament—(cries of "Oh, oh")—aye, many of the hon. gentlemen who in their present zeal utter those murmurs . —(cheers and langhter)—and who I dare say are now only too eager to come forward to vindicate the noble lord—(cheers)---will learn from the lesson of to-night the future that awaits them. (Laughter.) Now, let us see whether the premises of the hon. and learned gentleman justify the conclusion at which he asks the house to ar rive Seriously speaking, that conclusion is a very grave one. ("Oh," and a laugh.) Why, surely, you would not have me speak seriously of light matters ? I have le. en answering the light part of the noble lord's speech —(laughter)—and I am now about to address myself to what ought to have been the grave portion of it. (Hear, hear.) The conclusion suggested by the hon. and learned gentleman is one of great gravity, and I am not prepared to say that if tbat conclusion were established —grave as it is —I, for one, should shrink from the re sponsibility of voting for it. 1 think we should place ourselves in a very false position if we asserted our be lief that the privileges of this house had been violated by the Ministry, and yet shrunk from the responsibility of ceadenining their conduct ; but at the same time it is necessary that we should scrupulously look to facts, and see whether the conclusion we are called upon to adopt is justified by the circumstances or premises alleged. What is the language of the resolution? It calls upon us to say— " That the war with Persia was declared, prosecuted, and concluded without information of such transactions being communicated to Parliament." Now is that the fact ? (Hear.) I perfectly agree that the house has not been treated in this matter with that can dour which I think it would have been wise if the Minis ter, however popular and powerful, had exhibited. I cannot, however, get over the fact that on the meeting of Parliament, which might have been too long deferred, and after an ambiguous silerce had, perhaps, been too long maintained on the part of Government, there was an announcement in the Speech from the Throne of a war with Persia. (Ll , ar.) I feel that that was the occasion —at the time the address was moved—when this question ought to have been mooted. (Hear, bear.) I do not at all agree with the Chancellor of the Exche quer or other hon. gentlemen, who maintain that this or any other Indian wars do not require notice from Par liament ; but the fact that at the commencement of this war an appeal was immediately made to the Exchequer of this country marks it out from usual Indian wars. (Hear, hear.) I cannot, however, agree that, as a general principle, all Indian wars are to be taken from the c mtrol of this house, even if an immediate appeal is not made to the British exchequer. (Hear, hear.) The basis of Indian finance is the credit of England ; and at this moment, when we hear of the treasuries of India being plundered, when no • no can tell by what machi nery the revenue of India can for some time be collect ed, we should have acted in a most indiscreet manner— even if this bad been purely and strictly an Indian war di a t t e he appealwwar to ttoo passtbewithout English exchequ er _ and discussion. There then, before us the imp or t an t without f we badan y allowedim'nefact that at the beginning of the last session of the last Parliament we were apprised t h at this war had been undertaken. I cannot under these circumstances agree to a resolution which alleges, "that the war with Persia was declared, prosecuted, and concluded without infor-• !nation of such transactions being communicated t Par liament." I think the Government acted unwisely and erroneously in not communicating their policy to Parlia ment at an earlier period ; but I cannot agree that the late Parliament was itself free from blame in allowing the conduct of the Government to pass so long unnotic ed. (Hear.) Does it then become an assembly that has been back ward in the fulfilment of its duty to agree to a resolution of so uncompromising a character as that proposed by the honourable and learned gentle man t I confess I cannot but feel that the honourable gentleman is ri e det in calling the attention of the house to this subject. I wish he had done so in a manner which would have allowed the expression of our opinion to be of an unanimous character. I cannot suppose that, wontever may happen, this debate will be without profit to our privileges, but I wish the hon. and learned gentleman would not call upon us to divide upon this issue. (" Oh I oh l") It is not fur me to counsel the hon. and learned gentleman, but I shall follow the course which I think it is my duty to follow. I do not think the premises in this case justify the severe_ and sweeping conclusions at which he has arrived, and therefore my course will be to vote that the house do go into committee of supply. (Hear, hear.) The house divided, when the numbers were— For Mr. Roebuck's resolution s 3B Against it Majority Some laughter followed the announcement of the num bers. Mr. DISRAELI asked if the papers relating to the mutiny in India would be laid on the table to-morrow (this day.) Mr. V. SMITH was understood to say" they would be laid on the table on an early day. The house then went into a committee of supply, pro forma, when The CHANCELLOR of the,EXCHEQUER acid he should not at that late hour (a quarter to one o'clock) ask the house to agree to the two resolutions which stood on the paper in his name. He should move them to-morrow OW evening in a committee of supply. The house then resumed. On the bringing up of the report of the committee of supply, Sir H. WILLOUGHBY asked how the balance re maining unexpended of the sum voted for civil contin gencies, and which bad been accumulating fir several years past, was to be appropriated ? He wished also to know whether the Treasury claimed a power to autho rise expenditure without any examination of accounts, and whether these accounts were audited ? Mr. WILSON sail the balances of civil contingencies, which had accumulated for some years,. had been paid as savings into the Treasury, and an account would be given year!) , of thove balances. The Treasury claimed no right to appropriate a single penny voted for civil con tingencies to any other purpose. At present the Civil S-rvice Estimates were not audited, but he hoped an airangernent would shortly be made to refer them to the Board of Audit. The report was then received. FRAUDULENT TRUSTEES, Sze., BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. DULWICH COLLEGE BILL. This bill was read a second time and ordered to be re ferred to a select committee. _ _ COMMONS ENCLOSURE BILL. This bill was read a second time. JUSTICE AND POLICE FORCE:(DUBLIN) BILL. 14Ir. J. D. FITZGERALD moved that the Speaker leave the chair in order to go into committee upon this bill. Lord PAL HE RS: e) Mr. VANCE objected, as lie had only just received uoth 9 amef dments from Dublin. M.- . FITZGERALD offered to postpone proceed ings on tti :9 bill to another day, if all the orders of mem bers whi c h 10 : 10 7ed were also postrned. Mr. GRo GALB : moved the adjournment of the house. N agreedithat it was unreason ) to expect , the house to go able at that hour (1 0 1 ;1002 ey were to sit, and there on with opposed bills, but ff tt: . •• were to be debates, it was only fair the debates should be on the suhje •ts as they stood in or , 'er o the paper. SUPE ti , ANNUA.TION ACT A MEN DM ENT BILL. L .r•I NAAS obj-c.,ted to postpone the 4,rder for the second read' , g of this bill• on the ,!round iliac Govern ment were in a very dill-rent position fr,m private memb-r:. Tne Government could fix the busi►.ess as they pleased, but a private member had no such ad va,tnge. Sir G. GREY said, the house would meet again to day at 12, and it was rather hard, after sitting at 12 yesterday, to keep members there until 2 r 3 in the morning. It was only reasonable that after 12 o'clock they should not proceed with bills which were likely to be eppo,:ed. Mr. H. BERKELEY said that the Civil Service Su perannuation Bill was viewed by the country with deep interest. He hoped that au opportunity would be given for its discussion. (Hear, hear.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER re marked that the Government were uisposed to give a day, but they were unalms at the present moment to fix at 7 time. Air. S. FITZGERA.LD hoped that the noble lord would not be content unless the Government named a particular day for the discussion of his Bill. (Hear, hear.) Viscount GALWAY suggested to the Government that they might ea-ily get over the difficulty by agreeing to the second reading. (A iaug-.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER sad that as Thursday morning next seemed to be unoc , uoe , the discussion might then be taken on the Civil Service Su perannuation Bill. (Hear ) The motion for the adjournment of the house was then withdrawn BOUNDARIES OF LAND (IRELAND). BILL. • Tips Bali na,,sed through committee. CRUELTY TO ANIMALS AMENDMENT BILL. Lord RAYNEIAYI moved that the order for tte second reading of this Bill be withdrawn. Agreed to. The other orders were disposed of, and the house adjourned at half-past 1 until 12 o'clock this day. THE PABLIAMg.NTABY OATHS BILL. MEETING OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT. [A portion of the following appeared in our impression of yesterday :---] Yesterday afternoon a meeting:of the Members of the House of Commons, favourable to the principles of the Parliamentary Oaths Bill, was held at the King's Arms Hotel, Palsce-yard, for the purpose of taking into con sideration "the re;ection of the measure by the House of Lords. Amongst the Members present were the following : E. W. Watkin John Locke W. S. Lindsay S. Gregson W. Coningharn G Talley T. M. Weguelin T. Mills T. P. Thompson R. Davey M. 'I. Bass J. Townsend W. Williams D. Nic J. A. Wise W. G. Langton W. Cox G. Hadfield B. M. Wilcox J. Platt J. A. Turner G. B. Pechell J. T Norris G. G. Glyn C. Paget J. Brady 111. Williams C. Forster A. W, Kinglake H. A. Bruce J. A Kinglake C. Napie: J. M`Cann H. W. Schneider J. White C, Trueman Goderich,Viscount J. Wyld C. Buxton J. Cheetham J. B. Smith C. Akroyd J. Blake A. F. Kinnaird J. Bagwell W. Kirk H. Peaso S Gurney J. A. Roebuck T Hankey W. Ewart A. Macarthy L L. Dillwyn J. Paxton C Gilpin K. D. Hodgson R. N. Philips W. T. M'Cullagh J. S. Trelawney R. W. Crawford A. S. Ayrton E Ei. J. Craufurd W. Hackblock C. E. Mangles. G. C. Glyn H. Fenwick C. S. Butler Raynham Robert Grosvenor De Lacy Evans S. WC. Greer Chas. Cavendish J. A. Smith S. Beale James Clay R. B. Sheridan W. Brown W. Jackson John F. NTaguire Wm. Pinney William Scholefield C. P. Grenfell C. R M. Talbot C. W. Grenfell R. W. Grey W. P. Price E. Horsman J. G. Rebow George Byng W. P. Thornhill Hastin.:s Russell Herbert Ingram Erskine Perry George Bowyer R. D. Mangles Harry Verney W. Hutt Francis Pigott T. E. Headlam P. MacMahon Augustus Smith E. Mac Evyo Henry Rich Johu Hamner J Jervoiso W. Cubitt J. C. Vivian John Biggs W. Fagan .E..Ellice E. Colebrooke R. P. Clinton H. R. F. Davie R. J. R. Campbell J. Kershaw H. Hussey Vivian J. D. Harris Wm. Henry Sykes J. Potter R. M. Ines F. H. Berkeley George Moffatt John Steel W Roupell E. H Holland J. C. Stuart James Pilkington C. Cowan H. W. Wickham L. Waldron H. M. Clifford F. French Thos. Barnard John• Ennis R. Halglish F. W Russell Melgund Sutton Western. Wentworth Beaumont At two o'clock precisely the.chair was taken by the Right Hon. Edward Horsman, M.P. The CHAIRMAN, in opening the proceedings, said they were met together that day, as a party, for the purpose of concerting measures for carrying out a principle of civil and religious liberty, to which they were all attached. They were not .there as the partisans of Baron Roths child, but, as he had said, they were there to show their adherence to a great principle—(hear, hear) —civil nun religious freedom. Mr. all wyn had given notice of a mo tion, which, if carried, would be of great importance, and the noble lord the representative of tbegreatest commercial city in the universe, the colleague of Baron Rothschil 1, had al'o given notice of a motion to amend the let and 2d of Victoria, to regulate the oath for the admission of its members, The cubject was an important yet simple one, and, if they were only firmly united amongst theonselve., the object they all had in view would be accomplished, and the gentleman who had been seven times returned as one of the members of the City of London, would be eligible to take hs seat in the House of Commons—(Hear, heat) — and the princip'e which they all had at heart would be finally accomplished. The last divi3ion on the re jecion of the atths had occasioned much disap• pointment, because it did not contain the natne3 of all the members of the Government, and it bad been said that Lord Palmerston was not sincere in his endavours to remove, the Jewish disabilities, but he Celt certain such was not the case ; he felt confident that the noble lord was one of its most earnest supporters. (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman concluded his address by forcibly urging upon them, as a party having one ob ject in view, to press forward vigorously, and if they did so, nothing cull prevent them obtaining a final triumph. Mr. CRAWFORD moved the first resolution, which was as follows Teat the time has arrived when the long vexed question of the removal of the Jewish disabilities should be filially settled, and considering the repeated opinion of the House of Commons and of the country in favour of this act of policy and justice, all the energies of the Liberal p irty should now be united towards its accomplishment." Mr. DILLWYN rose to second the resolution, although he did not entirely approve of it. The boo. gentleman ' was about to explain his objections when it was inti mated that the motion had better be a-opted as a step, and then be could make any observations he. pleased. This course was adopted and the resolution was passed. unanimously. Mr. M. MILNES rose to propose that Mr. Diliwyn be requested to postp , ne the motion he has upon the paper of the house until Lord J. Russell's motion had been disposed of. He thought it of great importance that the utmost unanimity ought to prevail on the subject. Mr. W. EVANS seconded the resolution. He thought it would be advisable to see the effect of Lord John Russell's before they brought forward Mr. Dillwyn's motion. Sir J. Getartem said he came to that meeting with great Pleasure. He thought it would be useless to detain the meeting with his views on the subject 'of Jewish disabilities, as they all well knew how he had voted on the question of civil and religious liberty during the great number of years he had bad a seat in the House of Commons. He thought that at present they occupied the vantage ground, and he did not believe that any bill for the removal ofJe wish disabilities was ever sent up to the House of Lords in a form so advantageous as the last bill. When the Premier, who said he never took the present oath without a blush, was in favour of the proposed alteration, he thought it was a subject of great gratification. He (Sir J. Graham) had ieva riably voted in four Parliaments in favour of b its for the removal of the Jewish disabilities. In order to please the House of Lords, the bills bad been framed in every variety of shape ; but the measures bad alt met with most unbending opposition. In the late division in the House of Lords he thought it was much io their favour that the bill bad been supported by seven bishops and the metropolitan one (the Bishop of Li,ndot,) In the House of Commons there was also matters for congratulation. Sir J. Pakingion had voted for the bill—(hear, hear)—and he did not far a moment believe a single member present would undervalue all the cir cumstances, which were of great importance, and sure signs of ultimate success. (Cheer-.) He (lid nut think ' it would be judicious to postpone the consideration of the subject till next session. (Hear, hear ) Something ought and must be done during the - present. If they carried the resolution of Mr. D llwyn, and the Jew took his seat without further lsgeletion, he would iminedi ately become subject to penalties. This was not a new view of the case. Mr. Salmons tried the point in the Court of Exchequer, and it was decided against him. Now, suppose the resolution to be carried, and the Baron took his seat, he immeciaeely became subject to all the penalties, which he had no doubt would be enforced. What would he the come pence of a collisioriwith.the House of Lords ? There would be a conflict _ on privi'e c les which ought to be avoided altogether. There had been such conflicts be fore, and the "House of Commons, when they had right and justice on their side, had triumphed. Such was the case at present; yet he thought, if the obj.ct c•,uld be at• taioed without such a proceeding it woJI , I be the wisest course. He did not know then anything of the intention of Lord John Russell, but he thought it would be a good opportunity to make another attempt to induce the House of Lords to pass this measure. He did hot • think their lordships would disregard the opinion of this meeting. Mr. DILLWYN said ho should bow to the decision of the meeting with respect to the resolution he bad in the books of the House of Commons. If it was de eded to postpone it, he felt bound to inform the meeting that he shoull most strenuously oppose the bill of Lord John Russell. He was not disposed to go to the House of Lords—to eat humble pie—to ask them to grant that as a boon which they had a right to demand. (Cheers.) Mr. INGRA3I begged to ask Baron Rothschild a ques tion. It wa. , , whether he would take his seat in the House of Com , nons if they passed a resolution (Rear.) The question was not answered. Mr. ROEBUCK said the sum and 5uh.t,,,0 0 of Lord J. Rus , ell's bill was that each house should regulate its own oaths. If they pa , sed that hid it. would be abso lutely saying that the House. of Commons could not sup 4 port its own oriviledes. (Hear, hear.) He maintained that it the House of Lords could e • elude Lord Wen-ley dale, the House of Commons could admit Ihron Roths child. The men who had laughed to scorn the efforts that had already been made on this subject would do so ' again. Ho for one would not submit to be trampled upon. (llPar, hear.) Sir J. GRAHAM said he thought that it was a duty the liberal party owed to Lord J. Russell in consideration of what he ha l done for civil and religious liberty to wait and see what. his bill was before they rejected it. Mr. ROEBUCK con•ended that they were only carrying out the law by proceeding to carry their object by a 1 re,olution. Vicourit EBRINGTON said the Lords, by excluding Lord Wensleydale by resolution, bal taught them, the House of Ginamons, how to admit Baron Rothschild. He wet= in favour of proceeding by way of resolution-- not by a bill. The resolution of Mr. M. Milnes was put to the meet ing and carried. Mr. ROEBUCK said a resolution had been put into hie hand to move somewhat against the spirit of his obser vations. It was to the effect that, on the late diiision in the House of Lords, alt the members of the Cabinet not having supported the Oaths 8.11, is calculated to . cause deep pain and disappointment to the Liberal party, and that Lord Palmerston be respectfully and earnestly solicitted to lend the whole weight of his Government in support of Lord 3. Russell's proposed ~ bell, and, in the event of its rejection, that the Govern ment should aid the attempt to seat Baron Rothschild by a ress.lution of the house. Mr. BYNG seconded the resolution. Mr. ROEBUCK said he bad just heard from a whip in • the House of Lords that he never could get the Liberal peers up. Thirty Conservatives were always in attend ance, and each had two proxies in his pocket. Any bill that was sent up to. them for the removal of Jewish Disabilities would be sure to be lost by a large majority. The CHAIRMAN then put the resolution. Sir J. GRAHAM said he approved of the two first sec- • tions of the resolution, but the last he objected to. He thought they ought n , ,t to call upon Lord Pal. merston to support a measure he had not yet heard. Mr. ROEBUCK said he objected to any alteration. They had pa-Bed one resolution for unanimity's sake, and he trusted they would pass that. What was sauce, for the goose was sauce for the gander. A suggestion was then made that the resolution should' end at the words " Liberal party." Tbis was agreed tot and the resolution was carried unanimously. Mr. GILPIN then moved that a committee be appointed: to wait upon Lord Palineston, and report to him til e . resolution of the meetin g ; a n d th a t an a dj ourn ment should take place until Tuesday n e xt, at. th ree o 'clock? . .. at which his lordship's reply could be announced. Mr. M'CANN moved that the whole of the meetiog, wait on Lord Palmerston—not a committee. This was agreed to ; and after a vote of thanks to the chairman the proceedings terminated. • Country Markets. BOSTON-JULY 15. A fair attendance at our market to-day, but there has been a very dull trade, prices for wheat receding foul 35 per qr. The weather continues very fine, and from OA, splendid appearance of the c ro p s th ere i s every pros pect of one of the most abundant harvests on record. Spring coi l unaltered. Prices :—Wheat, red, 52s Od to 62s Od; new, —s to —"; white, 603 0 , 1 to 64s Od; extra, 663. Barley, 403 Od to 4 2 01. Oats 25s to 31s. Peas, 403 to 443 Od. Beans, 4 v! Od to 49s Od per qr. NEWARK—JULY 15. A good attendance and a plentiful supply of grst of all kinds. Wheat experienced a heavy sale, at fully below last week's prices. Wheat, white 64s to 68s, red 62s to 61s; barley, raaltill —s to ---s, grinding 36s to 40s; oats, 24st. 34s to 360, 22 ,T, 28s to 30s ; beans, *Ns to 50 s ; malt, 13s to 80s ; peas, u!' to 50s ; tares, 44s to 48s per qr. LOUTH-JuLT 15. Our market this morning was thinly attended, and the 3 was little business transacted, a t pr i ces a trifle under the terms of last week. Wheat, 60s to 645; extra, 665; barley 41s to 445; 0110 As to 283; beans, 44s to 48s. MANCHESTER JULY 16. A small attendance to-day, and a very limited busineg li b doing iu wheat. American 2d per 'Nibs cheaper. Fr e : t o English flour offered at a decline of ls, but a mere rat business doing. Oats and English beans ruled very fil!ft Egyptian beans and Indian corn is to 2s dearer. Oatula'' rather easier to purchase. EDINBURGH GRAIN.—Tur.r 15. ld The supply of grain of all kinds to-day was good for 0 0 . season. Sales were heavy, except for barley. Wheat d° siderably back. Wheat, on the top, 2s 6d down, and on the aver ! 23 2d down. Barley, 2s Oct up on the top, and is up on the average. O a t s on th e t op O s 6d up, and -1.1 the average Os Id down. Bea ns on th e top 4s ud.up, sn ou the average —s Od up AVERAGES PER IMPERIAL QUARTER. Wheat £2 6 5 8-12ths. Do. new -12th. Barley Oats 1 10 8 10-12ths. Beans -12ths. Total Supply and Sales. Wheat 1408 qrs sold 758 qrs Barley l9B qrs sold in qrs Oats 542 qrs sold 468 go Beans l4 qrs sold 4 qrs DERBY SMITIIFIELD.—JULY 14. There was but a moderate supply of fat beasts te•t i ; which were well old, fully maintaining the prices of week. The supply of sheep and lambs was less—the I ga mer a heavy sale, the l a tt er rea dil y di spose d o f . A Itg.'s supply of caves, and f ew b uyers . Fat pigs not an ave"' supply, and a clearance effected. rho following were the quotations :—Beef, ai mutton, 7d to 7,id ; lamb, 8d to rid ; veal, 61 tc 61d ppa lb. ; Od to lOs 6d per score; rough fat, 5s 3,1 tu o per 1411. ; hides, 4ld to 6. 5 d per lb ; calf-skins, 40 to per lb. Gici to LOCAL SHARE MARKETS. . JULY 16. STOCK -EXCHANGE.--TheLIVERPOOL transactions in this Ina to-day have bteu steady, and prices at yesterday's ran, South Eastern, 24 6 Lon,i on an d N tr th-Wester 103,i g —Sbeffields, 43i — Lancashire and Yorksbiril io )4 c--Midlands , 83I—Great. Western of Canada , 2 0 —North .Eastern, Y or k, 36— Ditto, Leeds, 22$ —Gra., Trunk of Canada, 13 i — Caledonian, 38—Blackburn, " Eastern Counties, 1 4—DLit:Li Rhenish, 4 d. fdANCHESTEIt, JULY 16. STOCK EXCHANGE. —The market opened rather —as active to-day, with firmer prices. Ea,t Lancashire, 11 :16 DI , a d. —Leeds, 1001 a —Midland, B:3l—Dovers, '22s —Grand Trunk of Canada, 133 Sheffields, g n j East Lancashire Pref., Fifths, 7-16 prem.—London a" North Western, 103 a— Eastern Counties, 111 BIRMINGHAM. JULY 16. STOCK EXCEIANGE.—The market was dull to-dal, e j prices were firm. Birmingham and Stour Valleys Cl. Bi---London and North Westerns, 1021103—Great " tern Scour Valley Guaranteed Stock, 64 1 65.2 BIRTHS. Or A SON, On the 15th inst., at Dover, the wife of Colonel 14 000 C.B. On the 15th inst., at Bath, the wife of C. 31. T.West' efill Esq. OP' A DAUGUTER. th e On the 15th inst., at 2 , Hamilton place, Piccadilly , Countess Vane. On the 15th inst., at 29, Gracechurch-street, the vill e ° Mr. William Blanch. • MARRIED. On the 16th inst., at St. George's, Hanover-square , If o i Bowyer, Esq., second son of Si r G eorge B owyer, Bar IRO 11.a.dley House, Berke, and Denham Court, Oxford, to Sarah Woolaier. younger daughter of Shirley Wool Esq., of the Middle Temple, barrister-at-law. On the 16thinst., at St. Margaret's Church, West,,. -06 ster, the Hon. Edward Willi am D oug l as, fourth son of of Ea 1 of Morton, to August a A nne, youngest daug hter the late Right Hon. G. Bankes, M.P. for Dorset. DIED. $ On the 12th in s t., suddenly, at Dartmouth-houet , , t" a, James's-park, H anna h , t h e w i fe of Henry Woods, "' M.P. On the 14th inst., at Brook House, Ross, Her° 'S pi shire, Th omas Ed war d s, Esq., solicitor, of tha t to aged 63. oew On the 14th i ns t., a t W es t B romp t on, Eli za b e th, — 5 tet ~ f the late Mr. Edward Gilts, of Stoke Newington' On the 13th inst., at Romford, Essex, Mr. John Ta li age.i 69. On the 14th inst., Francis Sadler, the oldest son °- f 0 60 , William Williams, 4, Wellington-terrace, NeW-c' aged 24. iel On the 11th of M murd - Din t Delhi, M ..,11 le o. _ay, —ordered Conic) Sandys, S.P.G., Catechist, aged 23. 4 ‘ LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO Y OU 2 40 , of No,, 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Ottie o ' f 112, Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the c °ll of Middlesex, Friday, July 17, 1557. alloy Ward natio Pa Far e 'add and , Co Tllrn Fu 3orn, st e -__ ta ps g Ea s i 25t itoj at Ri rou gt about Ring: Aing, Wine Rei €.30 / On 'at tr, s ; st o k e Ing at The and tl and ti tio n , i and s at „ The Na, racter, Mom Stalls , Pol 3 7 rz n ad at it te, s 7 f of Pori 11 01 The L , k Faturd (le/I%e Air. 0 ' The Acity Past 7 may 1 Derf,, r , ih the co IA t 1 after f AL Ob. xel 2] With , 184 0.5 ' 44(1 1), Tn t Mit mo st c , The any their 1 . , Pidly The se ven tribut enlist Th e s Nor tisho Ful catio n Re v . t/441;' P At the hou,e 8115 w to 76 zh " at TII tary, 'titer of l c Wer( To, To , T o I , To,