The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1858-03-23 00:00:00

THURSDAY.

In reply to Mr. KI-N-N-A-1-11-13-, --
-.
Mr. BArccrit stated that the six menthe batta awards
by the Governor-General of India to the army beford
Delhi was the utmoet sum fixed by law which he
was entitled to grant ; but that the case of both the
Delhi and Lucknow forces was under the consideration
of the Government.

Mr. Citsn FORD asked the Under Secretary for
Foreign Affair' whether the despatch of the 4th of
March, addreseed by the Earl of Malmesbury to Count
Walewaki, was submitted to the French authorities in
Paris, or to their representatives in England, for the

purpose of ascertaining the opinion of the French Go-
vernment Thereon, before the official presentation of
that document le the French Government on behalf of
the British nation.
The CHANCELLOR of The EICIILOVER observed that it.
was hardly fair to put such • question founded ape%
sumptions not within the knowledge of the Under &ere-
tary, and he protested generally against such • class of
questions.
Mr. A. SMITH moved for a Select Cennnittee to is.
quire into the circumstances connected with the ereo-
ton of the Godrevy Lighthouse, and to report their
opinion as to the proper position for the same, Prefac-
ing his motion with copious details upon the subject.
The motion was seconded by Mr. PAuti.
The motion was opposed by Mr. CARDWELL, Aft.
LINDSAY, and Mr. LowE, and ultimately negatived.
Mr. BLANEY moved a resolution "That it is expedient
to establish a standing committee, or unpaid board or
commission, to consider and report from time to time on
practical suggestions likely to be beneficial to the work-
ing classes. The graturci of his motion, be said, was
that preceding inquiries had not worked out an effectual
remedy for the evils to which these classes were exposed.
Mr. Eirrconwr hoped Mr. Slan.ey would be content
with having dirchsrged his conscience by making the
motion.
The motion was withdrawn.
Mr. RICH called attention to the treatment a
the of the mutinous Sepoys and other insurgents
In India. He adverted to reports of cruelties and
mutilations attributed to the insurgent*, which appeared
to be exaggerations or without foundation, observing
that we hid heard only one side. In touching upon,
the probable causes of the mutiny lie censured etrongly,
the conduct of the Indian Government in the matter of
the cartridges, asking why no inquiry had taken 403
in relation to the proceedings at Meerut, which had an.
much to do with the outbreak, insisting that it WAS not
• pretioncerted revolt, but arose from a combiaatlon of
eirownstanoes, and might, with due prudence, have been
Averted. He commended the instructions of Lord
Canning with reference to the treatment of the loser.
gents and deserters, and referred to published illite•
ments which showed, he thought, that some o.* cur
officers had not acted in accordance with the spirit of
those instructions. Hs concluded with moving tat
certain papers.
Mr. BAILIE expressed hie surprise that, upon such a
motion, Mr. Rich should have entered upon • general
discussion of the origin and causes of the Indian mutiny.
With one exception, he had no objection to the produc-
tion of the papers.
Mr. W. VArtscrrstr differed from Mr. Rich. Al/
India, he said, was looking with anxiety to isse whether
the outrages committed by the Sepoys would be avenged.
Lord Canning, he thought, had carried his conciliatory
policy too far.
Mr. BUXTON thought that Lord Canning ought to he
supported, not in sparing the guilty, but in keeping
down the exasperation naturally felt by those on the
spot. The dreadful stories of mutilation by the Sepoys
had turned out, upon investigation, aimed, if not en-
tirely, without foundation. He read reports of excesses
stated to have been ootnmitted by subordinate officers in.
India, showing, he said, • spirit not to be trusted; and
he asked whether the House was prepared to lay down,
the principle that it was right to hang in cold blood men..
who fought to free their fatherland from the stranger,.
or for disaffection to our rule.
Mr. MANGLES thought that Mr, Rich had made
more excuses for the Sepoys than They were fairly en...
titled to.
Captain Scorr mentioned acts of atrocity perpetrated,
upon an English offic*r and his sister in Oude.
Mr. ADAMS observed that a scant measure of justice
had been dealt out to British officers in India. He re-
minded the House of what the insurgents really were,
and thought that too much of a maudlin sensibility was
manifested on their behalf.
Sir H. ILAWLINSON remarked that the operations
against the mutineers had now lasted ten months, and
there was not a single prisoner in our hands; the in-
ference was that no quarter was given.
The motion was ageed to.
Mr. G. CLIVE moved for leave to bring in a Bill for
the disfranchisement of the freedom of the county of
the town of Galway, based upon the report of the com-
missioners, who found extensive and systematic bribery
prevailing among the freemen, the great majority of
whom were of a very humble class, and some exhibited
the appearance of poverty; and that for a long period.
corrupt practices had prevailed in Galway.
The motion was seconded by Sir T. BURKE.
In the discussion which followed it was urged the
equal justice should be dealt to all, and that the rich and
greater delinquents, who had seduced the poor electors
to the commission of the offence, should not be passed
over.
The motion was agreed to, and leave was given to in-
troduce the Bill.
Gthers Bills were advanced a stage, and the House ad.
journed at half-past 12 o'clock.