The Press.
London, England, 1858-05-22 00:00:00

MANNING THE NAVY.

Sir C. NAPIER moved an Address to her Majesty,
praying that she will be pleased t.) appoint a com-
mission to inquire into the best means of manning
the navy and improving its management, with a
view to reduce its expenditure without impairing its
efficiency. He insisted that, unless some regular
system of manning the navy were adopted, we
should, in case of emergency, be driven to recur to
impressment. More encouragement, he said, must
be held out to enter the service, by increasing wages,
by promoting petty officers, by making further pro-
vision for pensioning old sailors, and by other means
which he indicated.

Admiral DUNCOMBE moved, by way of amendment,
that the inquiry should be conducted by a select
committee, concurring in the object of the motion,
but believing that this mode of obtaining it which he
proposed was preferable to a commission.
Mr. LINDSAY was of opinion that this important in-
quiry ought not to be left in any hands but those of
a committee of that house. _ .

Admiral WALCOTT, on the contrary, preferred a
Royal Commission. He gave a more encouraging
picture of the resources of the navy than Sir C.
Napier.
Lord C. PAGET was also of opinion that there
were ample resources in the hands of the Admiralty
for maintaining an admirable fleet in regard both to
manning and shipbuilding. He, however, thought
there were matters connected with manning the
navy which deserved inquiry, especially as to keeping
up the coastguard, and that the inquiry should be
intrusted not to a commission but a committee.
Mr. BENTINCK said he could not understand how it
was possible to command at all times a sufficient
number of men to meet an emergency. He preferred
a committee to a commission.
Sir J. PAKINGTON admitted that this was a snbjsct of
immense importance, and he had pressed it upon the
attention of the house in moving the Navy Estimates,
when he adverted to the slow manning of our ships.
Bnt ho denied that the country was, as alleged by
Sir C. Napier, in a defenceless condition. We had
in our ports some of the noblest ships of war ever
built, and if a case of emergency should arise, with
the means at our disposal, a very powerful fleet could
be prepared for sea at a very short notice. He ad-
mitted that the question as to manning the navy was
a fair subject for inquiry, and as a previous com-
mission had not considered an important point—
namely, by what means the mercantile marine could
be made more useful in contributing to the royal
navy—he consented to so much of the motion (pre-
ferring a commission to a committee) ; but he could
not assent to the second part, extending the inquiry
into the dockyards, the Admiralty, and other branches
of the service.
LORD PALMERSTON observed that all agreed as to tbe
in.portance of the subject; the only difference of
opinion was as to the relative advantages of a com-
mission and a committee. He recommended Six C.
Napier to accept the limitation proposed by J.
Pakington.
Sir C. NAPIF.R consenting to the proposal,
the
motion as amended was agreed to.
The LORD ADVOCATE Obtained leave to bring in
bill to simplify the forms and diminish the expense
of completing titles to land in Scotland.
Mr. GROGAN moved that the house do on Thursday
resolve itself into a committee to consider of ail
Address to her Majesty, prayiug that she will be
pleszed to give directions that the ratePaYerb

~~

Ireland be relieved from one•balf of the expenses of
the annual revision of the valuation.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he could
not assent to a change that would affect the Consoli-
dated Fund without more considert.tion than he bad
been yet able to give to the subject, and
Mr. GROGAN withdrew the motion.
On the order for the second reading of the Weights
and ',Measures Bill, moved by Mr. JOHN LOCKE,
Mr. HORSFALL moved to defer it for six months,
observing that the change proposed by the bill would
produce a complete revolution.
This amendment was seconded by Mr. PAGET.
The bill was opposed by Mr. Adams, Mr. M'Cann,
and Mr. Kirk, and supported by Mr. Bass and Sir J.
Shelley.
Mr. HENLEY advised the house not to go on with
this bill, which, he said, would not secure uniformity,
and the attempt to settle the details would be most
embarrassing.
Mr. LOCKE defended the bill.
Upon a division, the amendment was carried by
U 2 to $4 ; so the bill is lost.
Pule house, after some further business, adjourned
at five minutes to one o'clock until Thursday.

HOUSE OF LORDS-THURSDAY.

SIR JAMES OL-TRAM AND LORD CANNING.
The Earl of DERBY announced that important de-
spatches had that morning been received from India,
including Sir J. Outram's recommendations in
reference to the proclamation in Oude which had
been the subject (if so much discussion ; and also
Lord Canning's reasons for issuing the proclamation
iu the form in which it appeared. Under ordinary
circumstances he should have thought it doubtful
whetheripapers containing a discussion between two
officers of the Crown in India on matters of
should at present be communicated to Parlia-
.

but as the despatches had already been laid
the Court of Directors, and as the course

by Lord Canning had excited great comment,
would be most unjust to him not to place before
Parliament, in his own language, the reasons that
4uced him to issue the proclamation. The papers
be laid on the table on Friday.

.arl GRANVILLE remarked that the house adjourned
tomorrow for the holidays, and if the papers were
• communicated before the time stated there could
no discussion upon them.
,fter a short conversation,
The Earl of DERBY, in order to insure the delivery
papers as early as possible, made the formal
motion for their production, which was agreed to.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-THURSDAY.
MR. V. SMITH.

. V. SMITH, in reply to Sir D. Norreys, said the
„e Government had not determined on the line of
policy to be pursued towards the landowners of Oude.
In answer to an inquiry by Mr. DILLWYN,
Mr. BAILLIE read a despatch relative to the sup•
pression of the mutiny and disarming of the 21st
Regiment of Bombay Native Infantry at Kurrachee
September, 1857.
Lord PALMERSTON, referring to the remarks made
the non production of the private letter from
Canning to Mr. V. Smith, dated the 6th of
earch, read an extract from that letter, and from a
Previous letter of the 20th of February, as well as a
letter of Lord Granville on the subject of his private
correspondence with Lord Canning, which contained,
said, nothing of real importance, and the prin-
. parts of which he (Lord Granville) read (as he
stated in the House of Lirds) to Lord Ellenborough.
Mr. BREAM asked whether the two letters were all
t had been received from Lord Cunning by either
.r. V. Smith or Lord Palmerston concerning public
affam relating to India?
Lord PALMERSTON replied that four letters had
received of the respective dates of the sth and
. of February, and the 6th and 17th of March.
COMMON LAW PROCEDURE ACT.
This bill was read a second time, and the Chan-
' Amendment Bill was read a third time and
passed.

ADJOURNED DEBATE ON TILE INDIAN nEspATett.
The debate was iesumed by Lord tionEawn, who
hupported the original !notion. Lord Canning, ho
contended, had only carried out the policy declared
Lord Dalhousie, when he announced the annexe-
-. of Dude; he was pursuing that policy when the
mutiny broke out. With regard to the proclamation,
reserved, he said, his right to pronounce an opi•
upon it until all the facts were before him. The
despatch, its tone and tenor, he strongly con•
ernned. But it had been published, and not only
iblished, but it was always intended for publics-
, for it had been avowed that it wus meant to he
satidote to the people of India against the procla•
'Bti"n of Lord Canning. lie dwelt upon the effects
lisas°wing publicly the policy of the, Governor.
general, and of proclaiming that the possession of
nude had been acquired by fraud and violence, and
called upon the Government to state what was

reierence
been the
Lord Cana
iu the fora
circumstat
whetherlpi
high office
policy 81101
ment; but
before tin
taken by
it would 1
ParHeinen
induced hi
would be 1
Earl Gn
tomorrow
not commi
be no disc
After a
The Eal
of the pap
motion for
Their la
13
Mr. V.
late Govei
policy tot
In Ansa
Mr. By
pressiou a
Regiment
in Septem
Lord P,
upon the
Lord Can
March, 1-*
previous 1
letter of I
correspon
be said,
cipal part
stated in
Mr. 13n
that had I
Mt V. Si
effeim rel
Lord I
been rece
20th of F
This bi
eery Anil
passed.
ADJOUI
The dr
supporter
colitentlei
11' Lord
Lion of 0
mutiny b,
he resery
mon upoi
despatch,
denmed.
aublishk
tion, for i
an smith,
mation 01
of disava
'eneral,
(Jude hal
he called