The Press.
London, England, 1856-03-08 00:00:00

ANNEXATION IN INDIA.

Sir E. PERRY, on Tuesday, moved for returns
showing the extent of the territories in India annexed
to the British dominions since the close of the Pun-
jab war, together with the pretext for such annexa-
tion, and the revenues accruing from each province
so appropriated. He believed that the acts of annexa-
tion in question, and especially the one last accom-
plished in the absorption of the kingdom of Oude,
would prove as unprofitable as they were unjust.
Mr. V. SMITH declared that the allegations put
forward by Sir E. Perry on the subject of annexa-
tion were altogether unsubstantiated. He could not
consent to discuss the question, until the receipt of
despatches from Lord Dalhousie, which would en
able him to publish the whole series of documents
relating to the recent disposition of the Oude tern-
tory. There was, however, no objection to the pro-
duction of the papers now asked for.
After a few words from Mr. OrwxY and Mr. KIN'
NAIRD, the motion was agreed to and the returns
ordered.

THE ANNEXATION OF OUDE.
Mr. V. SMITH, on Tuesday, in reply to Mr. Cobden
for any explanation of, or the papers relating to, the
annexation of Oude, said that, as the business was not
yet completed, it would be better not to lay the papers
relating to it on the table. A despatch had been
sent out to India stating the various modes in which
the maladministration of the kingdom of Oude
might be corrected, and leaving it to the discretion
of the Marquis of Dalhousie which of these modes
be would employ. No official reply had yet been re-
ceived to this despatch, and he should, therefore, not
feel justified in producing any papers relating to the
subject at present.

JUDICIAL STATISTICS.
Lord BROUGHAM, on Monday, moved a series of
resolutions on the subject of judicial statistics. He
described the deficiencies of the present returns
from the civil and criminal courts, and the want of
plan or system in the manner in which they Well
made, comparing with it the superior practice of the
French Government in this respect.
The LORD CHANCELLOR promised to give the sub-
ject his best attention. There would be no difficulty
in having the returns from the civil courts made
periodically, instead of being called for by motion
in
the Houses of Parliament.

The resolutions were laid on the table.

MARcH 8, 1856.

EXCHEQUER BILLS FUNDING BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
on Thursday,
Earl GREY drew attention to the "injudicious
policy" of raising loans to pay the current expenses
of the war. In one financial year by these means
we had added little less than 30,000,0001. to the
National Debt. The facility of raising money by
these means induced neglect in its proper application
on the one hand, and extravagance on the cther. In
this war all consideration for economy seemed to
have been disregarded. The expense of the militia
(4,000,0001.) was enormous in proportion to the small
number of men (24,000) supplied by that force to the
line ; and the vast sums expended upon a system of
fortification that modern science proved to be defec-
tive, were literally thrown away. Before any more
money was spent on our fortifications, the noble earl,
alluding to Mr. Fergusson's theory and the siege of
Sebastopol, urgedlLord Panmure to take the opinion
of a commission of naval and military men engaged
in the present war, including also some civil engi-
neers, who might impartially decide on the efficiency
of the two theories of defensive works.
Lord PANMURE justified the war expenditure.
The militia had not only given 27,000 men to the
army, but had done garrison duty likewise. The
firtifications now erecting were considered necessary
for the protection of the coast.
Lord MONTEAGLE thought that most unnecessary
erpenses had been incurred in the management of
this war. He trusted the Appropriation Act would
prevent any abuses.
The bill was ultimately read a second and third
time and passed.