The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1858-04-20 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.--MONDAY.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER intimated his
intention to make his financial statement that day
week.

On the report of the Committee of Supply,
Lord J. RUSSELL, adverting to the Government of
India Bill, and to the objections which, he said, it had
generally provoked, observed that if the Bill was pressed
to a second reading, and all those objections were dis-
cussed, that discussion would, in his opinion, have in-
jurious effects. In 1813 preliminary resolutions had been
proposed by the Government and adopted in a committee
of the whole House, and this seemed to him the most
convenient course for the House to take on the present
occasion, and he though it would gain time in the end.
If the Government did not think fit to adopt this course,
he felt so strongly the great inconvenienoe and the great
difficulty of discussing at onoe any Bill upon this sub-
ject that he should be prepared to propose resolutions
embodying the chief points of a measure for the govern-
ment of India.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed that it
must be obvious that the proposition of Lord J. Russell
was a very convenient one, and he admitted that it was
conductive to the public interests; but the late Govern-
ment having proceeded by way of Bill, and as it seemed
to be the general feeling of the House that no unneces-
sary delay should take place, the present Administration
had brought forward the plan they recommended in the
shape of a Bill. By proceeding in the way of resolutions
• better opportunity would be offered for discussing the
essential principles of the measure; at the same time,
the House must feel that if that course should be adopted
there ought to be no unavoidable delay. On the part of
the Government, he would not shrink from proposing
resolutions, unless (which would be more agreable to
himself) Lord J. Russell would do so, for which purpose
a day should be at his service. The earliest day should
be fixed for discussing them, and he suggested that day
fortnight or the Friday following.
Lord J. RUSSELL said, although he had offered to pro-
pose resolutions, it was an office which belonged proper-
ly to the Government.
. . . . . . . . .

Sir J. WOOD insisted that the resolutions should be
proposed with the authority and on the responsibility of
the Government.
Mr. WALPOLK observed that both the preceding
speakers had mistaken the purport and intention of the
remarks of Mr. Disraeli, who said that he would not
shrink from the responsibility of proposing the resolu-
tions—a function which he (Mr. Walpole) admitted
properly belonged to the executive Government. The
House being in possession of the two Bills, it did not
become the Government to abandon their Bill unless
the House should be of opinion that the mode of pro-
seeding by way of resolutions was preferable.
Lord Psimssurros said, he was no deeply impressed
with the importance of the question as to the future
government of India that he should prefer leaving
things as they were to passing a Bill containing a bad
organisation. As to the question immediately before
the House, he though the method of proceeding by way
of resolutions not applicable to the present state of
things; that it was contrary to the ordinary practice
of the House, and would be an inconvenient prece-
dent.

Mr. Bouvearr complained of the oonrse proposed u
being totally unprecedented. Were the resolutions,
he asked, to be different from the Bill or not? If
different, was the Bill to be given up; or were
there to be three distinct propositions before the
Honey?

Sir B. HALL asked Mr. Disraeli whether he intended
to abandon his Bill?

kfr. HORSEMAN observed that the COUTES taken by the
House had been unprecedented ; it proposed to make a
great change, to frame a new government for our Indian
empire, which had to be re-established without any
preliminary inquiry whatever. He agreed with Lord
Palmerston that the inconvenience of prolonging the
present state of things for another year was preferable
to the evils of hasty legislation. Neither of the two
Bills was satisfactory.
Sir B. HALL having repeated his question,
The CHANC ELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, his inten-
tion at present was to propose his resolutions that day
fortnight; but he did not intend to give up his Bill,
believing that, after the discussion of the resolutions,
the House would adopt the Bill, with modifica-
tions.

The report was then agreed to.
On the order for going into Committee of Supply co
the Navy and Army Fetimates, Mr. W. WlLLreme,
after • wvere criticism of the estimates, which be
charged with extravagance, moved that they be referred
to a select committee.

Sir J. PACINGTON opposed the motion, observing that
Mr. Williams had not laid any sufficient grounds for
his propoul, and that he believed it the estimates were
referred to a committee they would some out rather
higher than lower.
Upon a division, the motion of Mr. Williams was
negatived by 161 to 24.
The House then went into a Committee of Supply
upon the Estimates. Sir J. Fenian:iron, in moving the
Navy Estimates, admitted that they were very high;
but, after full consideration, he said it was the opinion
of the present Government that it would be a wise
course not to propose a reduction of them, but to recom-
mend their adoption by Parliament. He concluded by
moving the first vote, for 59,380 men and boys, in-
cluding 7,380 in the Coastguard service, and 15,000
Marines,

Lord PALMERBTON agreed that the insular position of
this country rendered naval proteotMn essential to ite
security; but preference should be given to the prepara-
tion of materials, the building of ships, rather than
hiving c greater number of men actually employed.
The reductions and entrenchments proposed by the pre-
sent Government, in his opinion, were not wise or pru-
dent. _

--Sir J. PAYINGTON, in reply, observed that Lord
Palmerston had fallen into an error in suppoeing that
the present Government were about to stop ship build-
ing; they had no such intention.
Mr. HORBMAN observed that, although a war with
Prinee was highly im probable, we should be mecum against
accidents and possible contingencies. There was no
cause of alarm, but great reason for precaution.
The vote and certain money votes to complete the
estimates were agreed to, when the Chairman was
ordered to report progress.
The Trustees Relief Bill was read a second time.
The Oaths Bill was read • third time and passed.
The House adjourned at • quarter to 1 o'clock.

TUESDAY.
In reply to Mr. CRAWFORI),
The CHANCELLOR of the Excaspusa stated that no
errangemente had yet been ooncluded to effect the object
of extending the Mediterranean system of telegraphs to
Alexandria, and for bringing India into telegraphio
communication with this country, but he hoped that in
• very short time arrangements embracing that object

would take place. Arrangements were pending between
the Amerian Government and the Government of Her
Majesty upon the subject.
Lord BURT galled attention to the oondition of the
settlement,' In the strode of Mahican, and moved for
ooplos of and oorrespondence upon the subject, Aber •
little conversation the motion was agreed to.
Mr. J. L. RICARDO moved an address to Her Dfajwity,
representing the injury to British commerce inflicted by
the tax levied by Hanover on merchandise and shipping
ascending the River Elbe under the denomination of the
Stade Dues, and praying that Her Majesty will be pleamd
to give notice of the termination of tile treaty between
the United Kingdom and Hanover of the 22nd of July,
1844, according to the terms of the eighth Article. He
complained that the tax really increased the oost of pro-
duction of our commodities, that it eubjected our ships
to a differential duty, And that it tended to divert the
coarse of British trade from a natural to an unnatural
channel, The eighth clause of the treaty, he thought,
evidently contemplated that a time would arrive when
the people of England would no longer tolerate this
tyranny, arbitranly invoiced by the kingdom of
Hanover.

The motion was seoonded by Mr. BRAIILIT•MOORE.
Mr. HENLIT believed that Mr. Ricardo had truly
stated that the payment of this toll was accompanied by
circumstances that aggravated the tan, which he should
be glad to see properly got rid of. But both Mr. Ricardo
and Mr. Moore had directly raised the broad question of
the legality of the payment, and this question was not
so simple as Mr. Ricardo seemed to suppose. Before
the House compelled the Government to give notice of
the termination of the treaty, the more prudent course,
in his opinion, was to have the matter investigated, as
in the case of the Sound dues, by a committee of that
House, and if Mr. Ricardo would adopt that course, he
(Mr. Henley) was ready, on the part of the Government,
to consent to the appointment of a committee.
Lord PALIERHSTON said it seemed to him that this was
not a parellel case with the Sound dues, and that it
ought not to be referred in the first instance to a com-
mittee of that House.
Mr. GIBRON advised Mr. Ricardo to accept the offer
of the Government and have a committee of inquiry.
After some remarks by Mr. BRISCOE and Lord
ASHLEY,
Mr. S. FITEGIRRLD and Lord HOTHAIS recommended
the same course, which Mr. Ricardo consented to adopt,
and the motion was withdrawn.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER read the 00R•
tents of an important telegram from India, announcing
the fall of Lucknow. . . .

Sir J. TRELAWNT moved "That the receipt of any
species of reward by a member in consideration of the
exercise of his influence in that capacity is calculated to
lower the dignity and authority of this House, and is •
high breach of the privilege of Parliament." He adverted
to a recent inquiry before a committee of that House,
and urged the importance of protecting the Brittsh
Parliament from even a suspicion that justice was sold
there to the highest bidder.
Lord HOTHAM observed that this was a subject of
manifest importance; that there was •general belief on
the part of the public that practices did take place which
he thought it was the duty of the House to endeavour
to put • stop to. He specified the nature of the imputa-
tions which, he said, he had had heard made against
some members of the House of the legal profession.
Sir J. GRAHAM said he did not think any new resolu-
tion upon the subject was necessary. Distinguished
members of the House as agents for the colonies had
received • pecuniary reward for their influence in that
House without being held to have violated the rule.
Mr. J. I). FITZGERALD and Mr. MELLOR recommended
that the matter should be allowed to stand upon the old
existing law of Parliament.
Mr. MANaxxs pointed out the evil effect upon the
people of India of any act which might lead them to
believe that their own proneness to corruption was
shared by the ruling classes in this country.
Mr. Fox could not coincide with those who recom-
mended the withdrawal of the resolution.

-....-.---. --.---...
Mr. BRIGHT opposed the motion, contending that
there was no case for a new resolution, which might in-
volve honest members in difficulty.
Mr. WALPOLE was of opinion that no new rule was
necessary; that the old rale was better left as it was,
since new words, tying up that rule, might hamper the
Rouse. The duties of members who were of the legal
prnfesaion were well defined and well understood, and
be asserted with confidence that no new rule was re-
quired in their ease; if it was, the resolution should be
confined to them.

Lord PALMICRBTON entirely agreed with those who
considered that the present law of Parliament, which
was known and understood, wee sufficient for its pur-
pose, and thought the resolution objectionable on ac-
count of its vagueness.
Sir J. TRELAWNY withdrew his motion.
_

Mr. Lowe moved for copy of all instructions for the
engagement of natives of Africa in the Indian service,
and a return of the alterations in the annual Mutiny
Act which such engagement would render necessary.
Mr. Balm.= assented to the motion, and added other
papers.
PALMERSTON was of opinion that a black corps
would be extremely useful in India; but care should be
taken, he observed, to prevent any indirect encourage-
ment of the slave trade.

The amended motion was agreed to.
The House adjourned a few minutes before ten
o'clock.

WEDNESDAY.
Mr. MAGUIRE, in moving the second reading of the
Tenants' Compensation (Ireland) Bill, observed that it
should be regarded not as an Irish but an Imperial mea-
sure, inasmuch as the question involved not only the
happiness and well-being of the people of Ireland, but
the interests of England. He contended that the foun-
dation of the social fabric) in that country, owing to the
condition of its agricultural population, was still inse-
cure, the great social evil being a deficiency of motive in
that population for industry. The land was held, not
by lease, but by the will of another; and hence arose a
sense of insecurity. The objections hitherto alleged
against the remedy proposed by this Bill,—namely, a
surplus population and the smallness of farms, did not
now exist.

The motion was seconded by The O'DONOGRUE, who
urged the manifest justice of the principle of the Bill,—
that of giving to tenants a legal claim to compensation
for improvements, which had increased the vale of the
land, which had become for Ireland a social and political
necessity.
_ .

Sir J:WALSH moved to defer the second reading of
the Bill for six months. There was no demand, he ob-
served, for tenant-right in England or Scotland, and, al-
though it was alleged that tenancy at will in Ireland was
extremely insecure, he believed, from his knowledge of
both countries, that the hold which an Irish tenant at
will had upon his land was much stronger than that of
an English tenant.
Mr. J. D. FITZGRHALD said it WU because he approved
the principle of the Bill, which was the same already
sanctioned and endorsed by the House, believing that it
would benefit both landlord and tenant, securing the
rights of the one and giving protection to the other, that
he should vote for the second reading. He did not ap-
prove all he found in the Bill. The principle that the
tenant should have the benefit of improvements of •
permanent character made by him in the land was •
wise and sound one, of simple and abstract justice. He
enlarged upon the helpless condition, under the present
law, of the Irish tenant, which he considered to be in-
ferior to that of the Indian ryot.
Lord Pamszacron said it appeared to him that Mr.
Fitzgerald had misconceived and misunderstood the lead-
ing principle of this Bill, which was not the simple prin-
ciple he advocated, and which he (Lord Palnierstoo and
others had agreed to, but something to the effect de-
scribed by Sir J. Walsh—namely, the transfer of land
from one set of persons to another. A measure like
this, which transferred from the landlord to the tenant
that which both parties knew to be the property of the
former, would be an unjust law, and no improvement
of a country could be founded upon injustice. He should
therefore vote against the second reading.
Mr. FIASHARD spoke in disapprobation of the Bill,
which was supported by
Mr. CAIRO, who contended that the property of the
tenant was as much entitled to protection as that of the
landlord. He advocated the small farm system in Ire-
land, which he thought was beneficial to the country,
and which did not, in his opinion, interfere with its pro-
ductive powers.
Lord NAAS believed that, while the Bill would not
afford the desired security to tenants, it would infringe
most seriously on the rights of property. He oommented
upon the provisions of the Bill, some of which he cha-
racterizen as most dangerous, and declared that no
greater curse could be inflicted upon Ireland than the
passing of such a measure, which transgressed the first
rules and rights of priperty, and would reduce the
value of all estates purchased in the Encumbered Estates
Court.

On the motion of Mr. DEASY the debate waa ad-
journed to the 9th of June ; and
The House adjourned at twenty minutes past five
o'clock.

THITRSDAY.

Lord C. PAGE moved that the House resolve itself
Into • committee to consider an address praying Her
Majesty to direct that measures may be taken for giving
effect to the recommendations of the select committee
on lighthouses of 1845—namely, "that all expenses for
the erection and maintenance of lighthouses, floating
lights, buoys, and beacons on the coast of the United
Kingdom be henceforth defrayed out of the public re-
venue." He observed that it was of vital importance
that there should be • simple and uniform system of
lighting and buoying the coasts of this country, whereas
he showed that there was no system whatever. France,
as well as other maritime countries, had a simple sys-
tem whereby its coasts were approached without danger,
and even in Scotland the Commissioners of Northern
Lights had adopted a similar system.
Mr. HENLEY said he should have been glad if Lord
Clarence had limited his motion to the management of
lights, without touching the question as to who was to
pay for them. Upon the whole he believed that the
management of our system of lights was not in so dis-
advantageous position as Lord Clarence had represented.
The Government, he added, would be ready to issue •
Royal Commission to look into the whole matter, with
all its difficulties, which were not few, and by this means,
he thought, • more advantageous solution of the ques.
tion would be arrived at than by a resolution of
that House. . . _

Mr. LINDEIAT insisted upon the injustice of taxing the
shipping interest as • body for light which it waa the
duty of the nation to maintain. He objected to handing
the matter over to • Royal Commission.
Mr. Lows agreed with Lord Clarence Paget that the
cause of the great expenditure for lights was the double
government of the Trinity-House and the Board of Trade,
and so long as that double government existed he be.
lieved it would not be In the power of the Board ma-
terially to reduce the large expenditure.
Mr. CARDWELL contended that there was really no
double government and no divided responsibility, and
that before this charge should be fixed upon the Consoli-
dated Fund, and this increase of power and patronage
given to the Executive Government, the House ought to
be informed upon many most important points.
Lord PALM/MON said, although OD the main points he
agreed with Lord C. Paget, as important changes in the
constitution and management of the Trinity-Houee had
been made since the year 11,145, he strongly recommended
him to accept the proposal for a Royal Commission.
There was • great plausibility in the argument that
these dues ought to be borne by the public at large ; on
the other hand, the change should not be made until the
proper department had the power of controlling the en.
penditure and providing for the 'Ardent performance of
the service. Further inquiry on these points, he thought,
was requisite,

The discussion was voetineed, whoa Lori C. PAOVi•
withdrew his motion, upon Ma understanding thst the,
Government would issue • Royal Commission.
Mr. ATITOX moved for a Miami soforna, ticnouts uirem
respecting the expediency of estabßeiting tri oe•
commerce, or for otherwise improving the administra—
tion of justice in disputes of a commercial moan%
The IffoLlolToll-01LitatAL, Dot oproeing *emotion for•
• oommittee, examined the *only slots made br Mr.
Ayrton spinet oar courts of law with reference to the
manner in which mereanttle questions were disposed of,
reminding the House of the improvements ed:: 01 late
years in the establishment of County Courts, the en-
lerpoment of their jurisdiction, aid the modifications if
the proceedings in all our courts.
Lord .1. Russaz believed that some good might arise
from inveetMeting the subject.
After som;furilter discussion the motion was aiLnted to,
The Sociorron-GriszaaL moved for leave to ring in
• Bill to amend the course of procedure in the Court of
Chanoary. The objects of the Bill were two, both Mir-
ing one end, to enable • suitor to obtain in one court the
complete relief he required. One objeca wee to empower
the Court of Chanoery, in spplioations ter an injunction,
or for specific performanoe, to award damages ; the other
object was to obviate a difficulty in that Court in trying
questions of fact, by authorising It to call a jury to try-
such questions, instead of sending an issue to • court of
law, the witnesses being examined in open oourt. Ho
proposed that for the present this power should be soh
compulsory, but discretionary, in the judge.
After a short conversation, leave was given to intro.
dose the Bill.
The House adjourned at 11 o'clock.
---

FRIDAY.
Mr. HIADLAX inquired whether the opinion of the
law officers of the Crown on the subject of the Cagliari
had been received, and, if so, what course the Govern-
ment intended to pursue.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, In reply, Mitt
two questions, distinct from each other, were Involved
in this matter, one national, the other international.
With regard to the first, the treatment of Park sari
Watt, the opinion of the law officers had been received,
and it was unanimous ; they were of opinion that the
detention and imprisonment of Park, and Watt were
illegal. In consequence of this opinion the Government,.
after serious deliberation, had demanded from Naples
compensation for the grievances experienced by our two.
countrymen. With respect to the international ques-
tion, in which England was interested only in commoft
with every other maiitime nation, the opinion of the
law officers had not yet been received.
On the motion that the House at its rising do adjourn.
until Monday,
Mr. T. DUNOONBE inquired of Lord PALMERSTON'
whether he had any objection, in the present position or
the question of Parliamentary Reform, to lay upon Uns-
table a copy of the Bill for the amendment of the laws
relating to the representation referred to in the Speech.
from the Throne at the commencement of the presents

IMIEROD.
Lord PALIEERRTON stated reasons why the late Go-
vernment had not embodied their views upon the sub-
ject of Parliamentary Reform in the shape of a Bill, an
as to lay it on the table of the Rouse, but, eveti they
had, he doubted, he said, whether • measure of with
importance should be introduced except by the se,
sponsible Ministers of the Crown.
Mr. M. MiLszts put a question to the Government
respecting the effect of the new-pluisport regulations in.
Belgium on British subjects, and called attention to the
inconveniences of the present system of the delivery et
passports.
Mr. S. FITZGERALD, in reply, explained the recent
imnoccoTvoaentiienon.as inextphanwe sys.tedmat, uthendeFrorewighinch-offihecesadiidd
nthoet
now exist.
A conversation of some domestic interest resulted
from an inquiry by Lord ELCHO relative to the intended
alterations in the Green Park, accompanied by •
severe arraignment of the taste exhibited in the bridge
in St. James' Park.
Other questions having been put and answered, the
motion for adjournment was agreed to.
On the order for going into • Committee of Supply,
Mr. BEADY drew attention to the circumstances con-
nected with the failure of the Western Bank of Scot-
land.
The LORD-ADVOCATE said, there had been but one
proceeding in the Bankruptcy Court in the case of the
Western Bank, and nothing was disclosed in that pro.
oeednig which would justify a prosecution on his
Part.
After a vote to pay off Exchequer-bills, the considera-
tion of the remaining Navy Estimates was resumed
„
when certain votes were agreed to, after a long and,
rather sharp discussion.
General PEEL then, after a brief explanatory preface,
in which he acknowledged that the Army Estimates
framed by the late Government combined the two ob-
jects of economy and efficiency, moved that the sum
of £2,454,027 be grnted to oomylete the sum necessary
to defray the &aro for the pay and allowances
of the land forces.
This and other votes for the Army Estimates were
agree to, after discussion.
The resolutions were ordered to be reported.
The Loan Societies Bill passed through committee.
The House adjourned at • quarter past 12 o'cllsok
until Monday.