The Press.
London, England, 1858-02-06 00:00:00

%MIMI

THE PRESS, FEBRUARY 6, 1858.

126

Lord PANMITRE replied that it was intended that
such regiments should, to a great extent, be officered
by colonists.
Lord GREY protested against the embodiment of
the militia and the continuance of the China war.

Lord CAMPBELL said that there was no question
that a conspiracy by aliens in this country to assassi-
nate a foreign sovereign was a grave misdemeanour,
liable to severe punishment. On the other hand,
aliens, so long as they remained in this country and
obeyed the law, were to be regarded as standing on
the same footing as natural-Loru subjects of her
Majesty, and could never be given up without a vio-
lation of the sacred right of asylum.
Lord BROUGHAM thought the law ought to be
amended if it were not efficient.

Lord Hatowtocz deplored the lamentably ineffi-
cient state of the national defences, and the subject
dropped.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.--.THUMAY.

The house reassembled this day, after the Christ•
mss recess.

The SPEAKER took the chair shortly before four
o'clock, at which hour there was a numerous attend-
ance of members.

1 EW MEMBERS.
The following new members took the oaths and
their seats :—The Right Hon. T. M. Gibson, Ashton-
under-Lyne; lion. W. G. .Cavendish, Bucks ; Mr.
Dent, Scarborough; Mr. Lyall, Whitehaven ; Sir A.
Agnew, Wigtonshire; and Mr. Duff, Elgin district.
[The right hon. member for Ashton-under-Lyne was
received with partial cheering as he came to the
table.)

TRANSMISSION OF REINFORCEMENTS TO INDIA.
Sir Dr. LACY EVANS, who had the following notice
on the paper—

To move fora select committee to inquire concerning
the measures resorted to or which were available, snd as to

the lines of

adopted for reinforcing our
in

army during the pending revolt „ India, and to report
thereon to this house, with a view to ascertain the anange-
ments which should be made towards meeting any future
important emergencies involving the security of our
Eastern dominions,

said, that as the GoveromFnt had acceded to his
motion he should not trespass at any length on the
attention of the house. At the close of the last sit-
ting an hon. member opposite bad assserted that the
right hon, member for Wells (Mr. Hayter) had mis-
led him into postponing this motion ; but he could
assure the house that the right hon. getleman had
bad no share in that postponement. It was entirely
his own doing. The right hon. baronet the member
for Droitwich had expressed an opinion that this
motion was, in fact, a vote of censure on the Govern.
ment, but with that he hod nothing whatever to do.
The result of the committee might be a censure on
the Government, or it might be a matter of praise
and congratulation for them. That he did not
regard. All he wished was an inquiry conducted in
a judicial spirit, and not in any spirit of party. With
regard to the suggestion of the noble lord the mem-
ber for London, that this was a question for a com-
mittee of the whole house, and not for a select com-
mittee, he had looked into the precedents, and he did
not think that they were in favour of that course.
The gallant general concluded by moving :

That a select committee be appainted to Inquire into
the measures recently adopted by her 3lsjesty's Govern-
ment for the transmission of troops and stores to India,
and to report on the same to the house.

Sir C. NAPIER seconded the motion.

Sir J. PAKINOTON said that the motion put from
the chair was very different from that which stood
on the paper. Did the gallant general mean the
committee to inquire into all the matters mentioned
in the notice on the paper ?

Sir DE LACY Eustis said be should be the last man
to wish to restrict the inquiry. It was his full
intention to inquire into all the matters contained in
the scope of his original notice—into the proposition
for sending reinforcements from Canada for instance ;
the measure taken by the local auth Jrities at the
Cape ; and, in fact, into all the points connected
with the subject which were discussed before the

adjournment.
Mr. DIBII.kELI thought that as there seemed to be
grave doubts as to what the gallant general did
mean, and as the motion which be had made differed
greatly from that which stood on the paper, it would
be agreeable to the house if he would state explicitly
the motion which he intended to make.

Sir DE LACY EVANS said that he bad altered the
terms of the motion because he understood that
some hon. gentlemen objected to it in its original
form ; hut if the right hon. gentleman saw anything
very attractive in the motion as it stood upon the
paper he would willingly reintroduce it.
Mr. DISRAELI appealed to the Speaker on the
point of order, whether the hon. and gallant gentle-
man was not bound either to give a new and formal
notice of the motion which he intended to bring

forward, or to submit to the house at that time the
motion which was on the paper?
A long discussion on the point of order then
ensued, and many appeals were made to the
Speaker, who at length respon&d, and the
original forma of the motion was reverted to, namely.
for " a select committee to inquire concerning the
measures resorted to or which were available, and as
to the lines of communication adopted for reinforcing
our army daring the pending revolt in India, and to
report thereon to this house, with a view to ascer-
taining the arrangements which should be made
towards meeting any future important emergencies
involving the security of our Eastern dominions."
Mr. DISRAELI protested against the adoption of
the motion, in what lie termed a " stealthy " manner,
without a full discussion of the subject in the house.
There had been no preliminary debate, and, so far
as he was able to form an opinion, it was a subject
which might be discussed completely and profitably
in that house :

It was quite open to the gallant general to have brought
forward the reasons why in his opinion the forces in India
might have been more quickly and efficiently reinforced
by means of the overland route than by the mode to which
the Government had recourse, and the house might have
listened to the statements of the Government in their vin-
dication and have come to a decision upon the subject. As
the case stood, however, they had had no opportunity of
arriving at any decision, and he would ask the house whe-
ther it was wise or expedient in them to relinquish and
abdicate those functions which belonged to it as a delibe-
rative assembly bound to watch over the interests of the
public? Would they consent without any discussion to
appoint a select committee to inquire into a subject which
ought to be inquired into in that house, and which, in his
opinion, could only be satisfactorily investigated by means
of public discussion? The course proposed was perhaps a
very convenient course, when the conduct of Government
was called in question by a gentleman who was one of their
habitual supporters, but it was not an honourable posi-
tion for the house to be placed in. On the first night of
the session the hon. and gallant gentleman had given
notice of his motion ; and, of course, by the courtesy of the
house, any other gentleman was prevented giving notice of
a similar motion; and, in point of fact, one gentleman
had by that notice been deterred from announcing his
intention of bringing the subject before the house. Let
the house consider the position in which they were placed.
The session commenced unexpectedly in December, s hen
there existed through the country a feeling that the position
of the army and the military prospects in India might be im-
proved by the adoption of the overland route, and great dis-
content prevailed in the public mind as to the mode in
which that army was reinforced and the military power of
England in the East sustained. There was a general feel-
ing that reinforcements might have been sent much more
expeditiously by the overland route ; and it was expected
by the public that when Parliament assembled the subject
would meet with full and ample discussion. Well, then,
when Parliament did meet what occurred? Why, a gentle-
man who was one of the habitual supporters of the Govern-
ment got up imindliately and gave notice of his intention
to ask for an inquiry, and thus made himself master of the
position, and prevented any other gentleman from bring-
ing the subject before the house.

Lord PALMERSTON consiiered that in a question
like this, involving so many details, a committee was
th e best instrument of inquiry.
Ultimately, after a debate of a somewhat desul-
tory character, the house divided upon an amend•
ment moved by Lord J. RUSSELL to omit all the
words after the word " house," which was negatived
by 147 to 78.
The motion was then agreed to.
CITY CORPORATION.

Sir G. GREY moved for leave to bring in a bill to
reform the City of London Corporation. The principal
changes which the measure was destined to effect
were, that the City should be divided into sixteen,
instead of twenty-six wards ; that each ward should
return an alderman and six common councilmen, the
voting qualification being tenancy of a 101. house ;
and that the common councilmen should be elected
annually ; and that for cause shown aldermen should
be removable by a vote of the common council.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL expressed his approval of the
measure as outlined by the Home Secretary.
The motion was agreed to, and leave given to bring
in the bill.

Mr. DUNLOP obtained leave to bring in a bill to
abol►sh the privileges of heirs in Scotland in regard
to the Annus Deliberandi ; and a bill to do away the
exemption from valuation, under the Valuation of
Lands (Scotland) Act (1854), of certain descrip-
tions of lands and heritages.
The house adjourned at twenty minutes after
seven o'clock.