The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1858-06-01 00:00:00

imptrial Vatliament.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—FRIDAY.
On the motion of Mr. G. CLITH, Mr. Washington
Wilke, the proprietor and publisher of the Carlisle
Examisser, who was ordered to attend the House, was
celled to the bar, and interrogated with reference to a
of
inotnit..
that paper upon Mr. Clive, as Chairman
f c
Upon the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the RI.
(Mantra', it was resolved, nem. con„ that the article
containing the charge was a false and scandalous libel
upon the chairman and other members of the cons-
mittee ; that Washington Wilke, the proprietor and
publisher of the paper, had been guilty of a breach of
the privileges of the House ; and that ho be committed
to the auto/1y of the Serjeant-at-Arins.
On the order for going into • Committee of Supply,
Lord .1. Roseau, drew the attention of the House to
certain statements in the speech of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer at Slough, espeoially those which referred
to our foreign relations and to India. Adverting to the
statement that when the present Government came into
alio, the question of peace or war was not • queetion of
weeks or clays, but of hours, he asked upon what ground
this alarming intimation was given, believing, he said,
that the people of this country and France were
cordially disposed to keep up and maintain the existing
relations between the two countries. He could not
learn from Lord Clarendon that our relations with
Frame were in so critical a state when the late Govern-
ment quitted office, and he wondered, if they were, why
no preparations had been made to meet such an emer-
gency. He referred next to the assertion that there had
been an endeavour to engage Sardinia and Neples in
hostilities, with • view of upsetting the present Govern-
ment—en assertion which he thought likewise required
explanation. Mr. Disraeli, he observed, had asked
whether we should pursue in India • policy of extertui-
, nation ; whether no mercy should be shown to the in-
habitants of India, and whether we should rule there by
force alone. He (Lord J. RUIIIiELL) wished to know by
whom such a policy had been indicated. He denied
that it had been the policy of the late Government. In
suggesting what would have been the consequence of a
vote adverse to the Government upon • late occasion,
that members would have to defend their vote on the
hustings, Mr. Disraeli had implied • threat of what Mr.
Burke called • " penal dissolution," and he (Lori JOHN)
thought it ought not to be the footing upon which the
relations between the Crown and the members of that
House should stand, that the Minister, when thwarted
should advise Ilier Majesty to dissolve Parliament, or
hold out the threat as • means of coercing that House.
Nothing, in his opinion, was more likely to derange the
constitution of the country.
The CHANCeLLOIt of the EXCHINUEIt observed that
Lord John, in alleging that he had made an attack, by
inuendo' upon the House of Commons, must have
assumed that no other person but himself had read his
speech, which contained statements and phrases express-
ing exactly the reverse. With regard to the state of
our relations with France at the moment when the
late Government left office, he wondered, he said, that
Lo John, instead of having recourseto Lord Clarendon,
had not consulted Lord Palmerston, who had deolined
to answer a question put to him in that house convey.
ing to the House the impression that our relations with
France were insult a delicate state that the answering
that question alone might decide the question of poses
or war. Those relations were now entirely changed, and
there was at this moment • greater approximation be-
Swoon the two Courts in tone and temper. He denied
that he had said that there had been an attempt in the
House of Commons to upset the present Government by
encouraging • war between Sardinia and Naples, What
he did my was, that there were persons who were en-
deavouring to do this. As to India, what he had said
was that the Government were not for a policy of con-
fiscation but of a discriminating amnesty, and a respect
for the religion, the property, and the rights and cite.
tome of the different people of India, This was what he
had said in Buckinghamshire, and this was what he had
always said. 11. denied that he had made any declara-
tion that could be interpreted as a threat that if the
majority on a late motion had gone against the Govern-
ment Parliament would have been dissolved. What he
had said was so guarded and constitutional Obit no one
could, he thought, pervert it into such a declaration.
He had said that if, as might be the case, there should
be a dissolution, he had no doubt the verdict of the
country would be in favour of the Government of Lord
Derby,
Mr. RICH considered that Mr. Disraeli had assigned
very flimsy reasons for an unjustifiable attack upon both
Frame and England.
Sir G. Lewis said, his recollections of the speech of
Mr. Disraeli agreed with the version even by Lord J.
Russell, not with Mr. Dlsraell's version. He insisted
that the policy of the late Government in India had
been one of clemency and many, so far as was consistent
with justioe toward. our own countrymen, from the
commencement of the outbreak, end the popular objec-
tion to the policy of Lord Canning, both in India and
at home, was that it was a weak policy, and erred on
the side of clemency. The statement that when the
late Government left office the country was within a
few hours of war he characterised as one of the grossest
misrepresentatione any responsible Minister of the
Crown had ever attempted to impose upon the House
and the country. He believed, he said, that the nio-
tion of Mr. Cardwell had been founded upon just
grounds, and he re-asserted the propriety of the course
adopted; but, if it were otherwise, he protested against
attributing the motion to faction, or intrigues, or to
some unknown cabal. . . . . . .

Mr. M. GIBBON said, he rejoioed to hear that all
parties were now favourable to a policy of humanity and
mercy in India. The Liberal party, be said, had been
badly led and badly managed, and there was no chant*
of the restoration of that party to power unless it was
prepared to bring forward It. own measures founded on
ita own principles, and to carry them, so se to show
they were not only Libb-raf in name, but earnest in the
cause of reform. . .

Mr. DoLusa read a passage in the speech of Mr.
Disraeli, to show that Lord J. Russell had not misrepre-
sented him. . . . . .

After a few observations by Mr. WHITESIDE, in reply
to Sir G. Lewis and Lord J. Russell, and by Mr. GRIF-
FITH, the subject was allowed to drop.
Sir DE LACY EVANS Cloyed an address praying that
Her Majesty will be pleased to take into consideration
the hardship experienced by captains of cavalry and in-
fantry who, having been reduced to the non-effective
list by order of Government at the termination of the
late war in 1856, and being replaced on the effective
strength of the army on the breaking out of the war in
the East in 1857, find themselves posted to regiments in
relatively inferior ranks to lieutenants who have ob-
tained the rank of captain, by purchase or otherwise,
during the intermediate year of peace.
General PEEL explained that it was impossible to
make an exception with reference to these officers,
and
Sir De
.LACY EVANS withdrew his motion.
. . . .

General PEEL having replied to certain questions put
by Mr. MONSELL, the House went into Committee of
Supply upon the Army Estimates, and upon those for
the several Civil Services, when various votes were
agreed to, after much discussion.
The remaining orders were disposed of, and the House
adjourned at five minutes to 1 o'clock until Monday.