The Press.
London, England, 1857-12-05 00:00:00

same time they do not mean to preclude themselves
should they deem such a step advisable, from making any
alterations in the Bank Charter which upon further infer•
mation may appear to them either prudeut or necessary.
(Hear.)

He defended the course adopted by the Government
in regard to the mutiny in India, and denied that
our empire there was now in peril, though he most
heartily joined Lord Darby in the eloquent eulogium
which he had uttered on its military servants, a
share of which praise he also claimed for the ci-
vilians. As far as regarded the proposed Reform
Bill, he could only say that as soon as Parliament
met in February the Government would be ready to
give a most free and ample account of the details of
their intended measures.

The Earl of ELLENBOROUGS reproached the
Government with their want of energy and the loss
of time they had occasioned in sending out the
troops to India. In the month of May Government
promised that eight thousand men should proceed to
India :
Not a man went before the Ist of July, and in the first
three days of July between 600 and 700 sailed. But, I
repeat, there was a loss of five weeks. t Hear, hear.) I
was so constantly thinking on the subject, that, having
left London for the country immediately after the 19th
of May, I actually from the country wrote a private note
to the noble lord the Secretary for the War Department,
in which I suggested that the vessels carrying the last
troops to China should stop at Point de Galle, and be there
placed at the disposal of the Governor-General if he thought
them necessary. That 1 did on the 21st of May, and if
these troops had gone to Point de Galle how different
would have been our position in India! (Cheers.)
Again, when they were sent, five weeks too late, hJw
were they sent? Why, in the old ships which had been
trading to India fifteen years ego. (A laugh.) And
what assistance was given to them on passing the Line?
None at all. They were all sailing ships, and you have
ten or twelve steamers employed on the coast of Africa,
every one of which might have been made available in
towing them through the calms by which they would be
detained in crossing the Line. ( Hear, hear. ► The dif-
ference of five weeks is the difference of the safety or the
fall of Lucknow. (Cheers.) That is the difference, and
I say distinctly that due diligence was not used. (Hear,
hear.) The frith of the Government, pledged on the 19th
of May, was not kept; the troops were not sent as they
should have been; proper care was not taken, and if
Lucknow now falls, for all the loss of honour to this
country which that event will entail, and for all the horrors
that will be perpetrated, her Majesty's Government will be
responsible. (Cheers.)

The Duke of ARGYLL denied that the Govern-
ment had shown any want of energy, or that any
distinct pledge had been made by the Government
as to the time when the first troops were to quit
England.

Earl GREY spoke strongly against the recent sus-
pension of the Bank Act. That Government should
require twice within ten years a Bill of Indemnity,
for violating an Act of Parliament, without taking
any steps to alter that act, was manifestly wrong.
The act having been thus twice suspended its moral
power was at end, and in any other time of pres-
sure which might arise it suspension again would
naturally be looked forward to by the mercantile
classes.

Lord OVERSTONF was quite prepared to support
the principle which would separate the laws relating
to the dealing in money from the laws relating to
the issue of money. The principles of the Act of
1844 were founded entirely upon the principles of
free trade—a free trade in money, which provided
for the supply of the country with money as it did for
the supply of the country with food. The Go.
vernment must look to the causes which had led
to the recent suspension of the Bank Act, and not
go on merely applying palliatives to a practice which
was in some parts so wrong that, if not checked,
it would at last overpower our whole monetary
system :

Of all arrangements the prasent was the most unsatis-
factory. If so great a subject as the standard of value
were to be tampered with by discretionary acts on the part
of any one, let Parliament be told by whom and under
what circumstances so great an authority was to be exer-
cised. At present there was a divided authority between
the Bank and the Government. He thought that nothing
ought to be done to interfere with a matter of such vital
importance as the maintenance of the standard of value by
which all commercial transactions were regulated. His
complaint against the act was that it was likely to place WI
in a situation in which some departure from the standard
of value would be inevitable. What he feared was, not that
the standard of value would be departed from by what he
might call malice prepense on the part of the Bank or the
Government, but that a state of things would arise under
the operation of the act in which the existing standard of
value could be no longer maintained without incurring
difficulties which neither Government nor Parliament nor
the country would be prepared for.
The Address was then agreed to, and the house
adjourned at eleven p.m.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY.
The house met at 1.30 p,nl, A very full attendance
of members was present.