The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1858-02-16 00:00:00

THURSDAY.

Mr. HICADLAN moved for leave to bring in a Bill to
abolish the distinction between joint-stock banks and
other joint-stock companies, with reference to the
liability of their partners, by enabling such banks to
limit the liability of the shareholders,

The motion we seconded by Mr. SLANEY.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was prepared to
assent to the motion for the introduction of the Bill.
He was disposed to think that depositors relied very
much upon the unlimited liability of the shareholders.
After a short discussion, the motion was agreed to,
and leave was given to bring in a Bill.
Sir J. PAILINGTON moved an Address to Her Majesty
to issue a Commission to inquire into the present state
of popular education in England, and whether the pre-
sent system is, or is not, sufficient for its object; and to
consider and report what changes, if any, are required
for the extension of sound and cheap elementary instruc-
tion to all classes of the people.
The motion was seconded by Lord STANLEY.
Mr. HARDY said, if there was to be an inquiry, which
he deprecated, he preferred a committee to a commis.
Rion, which would throw things into perplexity and
confusion.

Mr. HADFIELD opposed the motion, and protested
against State assistance in any shape for the purposes of
education. If, however, the commission should be ap-
pointed, he moved, as an amendment, an instruction ex-
tending the range of inquiry.
. .

Mr...AKßOYD'reviewed some of the salient points of
the education question.
Mr. HOPE said he could not make up his mind that
the proposed inquiry would make any practical addition
to the masses of evidence already accumulated upon
this subject. He objected to exposing the existing
system, wl.ich had worked satisfactorily, to an inquiry
which he likened to a " coroner's inquest." The cause
of education was in a course of steady improvement, and
sending a roving Commission to examine into the consti-
tution of all the schools everywhere growing up would
exasperate the national spirit.
After ROMS remarks from MY Fox, Mr. ADDERLEY,
MY. COWPER, and Mr. HENLEY,
Lord J. RUSSELL said he had hoped that the House
would have acceded to this motion; but, though disap-
pointed, he was not surprised at an opposition which
was but a renewal of that which had been offered to
every proposal for the futherance of education. After
replying to objections offered by Mr. Adderley and Mr.
Henley, he observed that, although the present system
had been successful as regarded the 170,000 children in
schools receiving grants from the State, it had not spread
so rapidly as could be wished, and, seeing that in certain
districts education was making no progress, was it not
desirable to inquire whether the system could not be
extended? He hoped that the inquiry of the Com-
missioners would not be too much restricted, and he did
not believe that there would be any unwillingnefe on
he part of landowneis or the clergy to give information
on the subject. The motion was a moderate and reason-
able one; it did not bind the House to any alteration of
the present system, but would only lay the groundwork
of future impr. vements.
After some observations by Mr. BRISCOE,
Sir J. PAKINGTON, in his reply, proposed to omit the
words in his resolution "whether the present system is
or is not, sufficient for its object."
Mr. COWPER assented to the motion in that form.
Mr. HADFIELD having withdrawn his amendment,
the House divided upon the original motion as
amended by Sir J. Pakington, which was carried by
110 to 49.

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
the Committee on Savinge.Banka was nominated.
Sir J. TRELAWNY obtained leave to bring in a Bill for
the abolition of ohnroh-ratee.

Lady Havelock and Sir Henry Havelock's Annuities
Bill was read a third time and passed.
The House adjourned at five minutes before 1 o'clock.

FRIDAY.

After various questions addressed to and answered by
different members of the government, on the question
that the House at its rising do adjourn until Monday,
Mr. STIRLING inquired whether the legacy of 10,000 f.
bequeathed to Cantillon, who attempted to assaasinate
the late Duke of Wellington, by the late Napoleon
Bonaparte, in a codicil to his will, approving and justi-
fying the attempt, had since the 2nd of December, 1851,
been paid by the Emperor of the French. Re remarked
that in that codicil the doctrine of assassination was
preached by a man whose memory was revered in
France; but what he wanted to know was, whether
this mischevious doctrine had been endorsed by the
present ruler of Franoe ; whether the wages of amain-
nation had beeu paid; if so, when and by whom?
Lord PALMMTON observed that it would have been

better had Mr. Stirling shown more good taste and
more of the apirit of candour, instead of appearing to
foundation for saying that the legacy had been paid by
taiaisounfoole
toan
tarooisiwlyerstototolr. staTtehrontw,
the Emperor of the French. Advances were made in
ow
1823 and 1826, but a refusal to issue the remainder of
by
siiimotpltyliaesksiligghht:swt
the legacy was given since the accession of Louis
Napoleon.
The motion for adjournment was agreed to.
The London Corporation Bill was read a second time
and referred to a select committee.
a Bifl lr Lord
for PtArLanm sEflielBTTinl
fromtothomotvoetftorlnleadivoectooobiprionogy
to
the Crown the government of Her Majesty's East India
doininions, He brought forward this measure, he said,
not out of any hostility to the company on the ground
of any delinquency on their part, or as implying any
blame or censure on that body, which had done many
good things for India, and whose administration had
been attended with great advantages to the population
under their rule. The company's political authority, he
observed, had not been conferred; it had grown up
gradually and accidentally from small beginnings,
factories extending to districts, and districts being en-
larged into provinces. When, however, their commer-
cial privileges were withdrawn, the company became but
a phantom of what it was, and subsided into an agency
of the Imperial Government, without, however, re-
sponsibility to Parliament, or any immediate connexion
with India. He pointed out the obvious inconveniences
incident to the double governuient by the Board of
Control and a Court of Directors elected by a body con-
sisting of holders of East India stock. No doubt, a
system of check was beneficial, but check and counter-
check might be so multiplied as to paralyze action, and
he thought it was desirable that the cumbrous machinery
should be reduced in form to what it was in fact, and
that complete authority should vest where the public
thought complete responsibility should rest, instead of
nominally in an irresponsible body, ostensibly a company
of merchants. The Bill would be confined to a change
of the administration at home, without any alteration
of the arrangements in India, the intention being to
alter as little as possible, consistently with the great
object in view, the establishment of a responsible go-
vernment for Endia, as for other territories of the
Crown. There would be no additional patronage
thrown into the hands of the government which could
provoke the slightest constitutional jealousy. In con-
clusion, Lord Palmerston replied to anticipated ob-
jections, expressing his conviction that the change lie
proposed, while it strengthened the power of England
' in India, would on the other hand, !setter enable the
government to discharge those duties towards the
people of India, which it was intended that this nation
should perform.
Mr. T. BARING, in moving, by way of amendment to
the motion, a resolution, " that it is not at present ex-
pedient to legislate for the government of India," dwelt
upon the extent and formidable character of the proposed
change, the alarm which it would excite in the minds
of the people of India, and the power which it threw
into the hands of the government, No charge he ob-
served, had been made against the East India Company,
and he entreated the House to pause before it adopted
the plan in the present state of affairs in India.
Sir E. PERRY thought on the contrary, that this was
the fittest and most opportune moment for introducing
a measure of this king. He thanked the government
therefore, for introducing a Bill which, while it did not
give them the least more power, imposed upon them a
complete responsibility.
Mr. MILNER said in his opinion, India would not be
better governed by the despotism of a Cabinet Minister.
He had expected that Lord Palinerston would have
offered some plea for the measure, but had been
disalPP° 3r. W. VANSTwrRT insisted that, before a change
was proposed, an inquiry into the causes and circum-
stances of the late outbreak in India was imperatively
demanded. He strongly condemned the policy of re-
ducing the number of European troops in India.
Mr. ATRTON said that, having gone to India with
every prejudice in favour of the Goverment of the
East India Company, he had come to the conclusion,
after a residence there, that the continuance of the I
rule of that remnant of a trading company was not
only inexpedient, but impossible. He disputed the alle-
gations in the Company's petition, which he said, put
forth misstatements and arrogant pretentious. Every-
thing done in India deserved the name of great and
good, he contended, had been done by Parliament
and the influence of Parliament. What was to be
thought of a Council for India, like the Court of
Directors, which had no communication with the res-
ponsible Minister, and managed its business an that
there should be no responsibility on any of its mem-
bers? He thought that the time was come for put-
ting an end to such an anomaly, which was a dis-
grace to the country. In giving his cordial support
to the measure, he suggested some alterations in its
details; he thought the best control over the Indian
expenditure would be the bringing it under the notice
of parliament in the Estimates.

Sir J. ELPHINSTONE WAS of opinion that this was
not the time for so serious a change in the exist-
ing Government of India, the merits of which he eu-
logized.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed that
there existed evidence damnatory of the Company as
a political body from 1758 to 1784, showing that no
civilized Government on the face of the earth was
more corrupt, perfidious, and rapacious. All that
could be said in favour of the East India Company
dated, he observed, from the year 1784, after they
had been subjected to Parliamentary control.
On the motion of Mr. ROEBUCK the debate was ad-
journed.
After some further business the House adjourned at
a quarter to 1 o'clock until Monday.