The Press.
London, England, 1857-08-22 00:00:00

THE PRESS, AUGUST 22, 1857.

Mr. N

then moved to add, by way of

amendment, the following proviso, "The court
which pronounces a sentence of divorce shall grant
to either of the parties divorced a licence entitling
such persons to performance of the marriage cere-
mony by the incumbent of any parish, not being the
parish in which such person has been residing, and
such incumbent shall be empowered to marry such
person," which was added to the bill.
The preamble was then agreed to, and the Chair-
man was ordered to report progress.
The Lords' amendments to various bills were
considered, and the house adjourned at five o'clock.

HOUSE OF LORDS-THURSDAY.

The LORD CIUNCELLOR, in reply to Lord Shaftes-
bury, said that the opinion of the law officers of the
Crown was to the effect that there was nothing illegal
in the cultivation and exportation to China of opium
by the East India Company; and, secondly, that
such exportation was not in contravention of the
treaty between this country and China.
Several bills were advanced a stage, and their
lordships adjourned at twenty-live minutes to six p.m.

HOUSE OF COMMONS-THURSDAY.

The Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Bill was again

considered. A fresh clause was substituted for clause
18. Clauses 15 and 19 were struck out, and for 19
a fresh clause introduced. Several verbal amend-
ments were made, and the bill was ordered for the
third reading on the following day.

part of the community, who have been described by the
noble lord as so shortsighted, but the conviction that
advantage will not be taken of their generosity, and that
when the desired result has been accomplished their
interests will be consulted, and that they will be allowed to
husband those resources which, if an emergency should
again arise, can alone enable them to afford similar assist•

ance to the Government? It is the economy, the retrench-
ment, and the reductions of taxation effected after a war
which enable the community, when an emergency again
arises, to come promptly and powerfully to the aid of
the Government (Cheers). I conceive, therefore, that
when, as members of the House of Commons, we impress
upon the Government the necessity of reductions, we
merely do our duty ; and not only do we do our duty to
our constituents, who have the first claim upon our con
sideration, but generally and abstractedly we adopt a
politic course, because we enrich the community, and
enable them, when a necessity again arises, to supply the
resources which may be required.
There is some distinction between the position of a
mere member of Parliament and that of a Minister of the
Crown. A member of Parliament deems it his duty on
the termination of a great struggle, and after the com.
mencement of peace, to enforce reduction and retrench-
ment. Something more was to be expected from the
Minister of the Crown. He has sources of information not
open to us, and he has a policy in his mind of which we
are not the sharers. He has a responsibility on him ten
thousand times greater than all the members of Perlis.

went put together; and if the Minister believes it to be
not wise or expedient to effect reduction or retrenchment,
the Minister under those circumstances is bound to come
forward, and if he has that conviction it is not only his
duty, but, in my opinion, it would be on his part a duty
which be could successsfully fulfil, to impress that convic-
tion on Parliament. If Parliament pressed the Govern-
ment for reductions which they believe would be injurious
to the country, it would be in the power of a Minister—and
I am sure it would be in the power of the noble lord,
addressing the house in a warning and monitory tone,
without making revelations inconvenient to the public
service—to make such an impression on Parliament as to
induce members to relax in the efforts they were making
and in the opinion they were urging. Ido not say that her
Majesty's Ministers had a consciousness of the danger of
the course they were taking. I commenced by expressing
my perfect belief that they had not, though as to some
points of degree or of time I might have some difference of
opinion ; but in the main the Ministers thought that the
time had come when economy ought to be enforced and
reduction practised.

But did. the circumstances of the empire justify the
Ministers in having that opinion? I express my convic-
tion that they did not. I think the Ministers ought to
have been more aware of the condition of the Indian
empire than they were ; or, if they were really aware of the
condition of that empire, I do not think the Mintsters
were justified in the course they pursued and recommended
to Parliament. It is easy to say that it is of no use now to
inquire what is the cause of what has occurred, but in the
long run we must inquire what has been the cause of the
convulsion which has taken place. Then we are told that
the events were such as no one could guard against; but if
we maintain that argument we put ourselves in a false
position, for if these things could happen without any
human being anticipating them, what use is there for any
Government ? If without the slightest expectation
twenty four hours beforehand an insurrection can take
place extending over a country nearly as large as Europe,
and with a population of 180,000,000 of souls—if such a
thing could happen without those who are responsible for
the administration of that country having the slightest
previous knowledge or suspicion of it—l want to know of
what use or value is the Administration under circum-
stances of that kind.
Every day something oozes out which shows that the
Administration of India ought to have been, if not abso-
lutely prepared for all that has occurred, most suspicious
and prescient of what has happened. You cannot justify
now, when you are more acquainted with the circum-
stances—you cannot, with your knowledge of the insubor-
dination of the Bengal army, justify that Administration in
permitting a post like Delhi, the arsenal of the empire, to
be garrisoned solely by native troops, when they must have
had information of the mystical symbols of combination
and conspiracy circulating in that very city at the com-
mencement of this year. These are questions noz very
convenient now to urge, but when attacks are made on
members of Parliament because they performed their duty,
after the conclusion of the war, in enforcing economy and
retrenchment on Ministers, and when it is said that the
fault of our present position is due to members of Perlis.
liament doing their duty, it is right for us in our defence
to make these remarks, and to impress on the country
other considerations besides those which were submitted
by the hon. and gallant general. I repeat, we did our duty
in enforcing economy on the Government, though it is
very much to be regretted, considering what has happened,
that we were successful in our policy. I doubt not that
the Government of this country acted fairly and candidly
by the house in consenting to that great reduction of taxa-
tion and to those general measures of economy which were
adopted. They did believe, no doubt, that they had pro-
vided sufficiently for all the exigencies of the country, but
the Ministers cannot relieve themselves from this grave
responsibility which devolves on them, for having, in con-
sequence of their fatal ignorance of the condition of a great,
portion of her Majesty's empire, and of their total negli-
gence and inadvertence, sanctioned the policy, which Par-
liament commenced, of reduction, at a time when it is quite
clear that if they had been in possession of that informa-
tion which I maintain they ought to have been in posses.
sion of must have appeared a most unwise policy, and which
has ptoved most injurious to this country. (Cheers.)
Mr. V. SMITH denied that the Government were
• in any way responsible for the events in India. and

defended the measures taken by them for expediting
reinforcements thither. They had, he said, sent
positive instructions to Sir George Grey to forward
two regiments from the Cape to India, and as many
more troops as he could spare, and he (Mr. V. Smith)
bad not the slightest fear that Sir George would carry
out the instructions with spirit and promptitude.
There bad bean no lack of consideration as to the
force necessary to put down the mutiny. After that
was done measures would be taken to reorganise the
army in India, making a large addition of European
force.
Mr. HENLEY protested against any reproach being
cast upon the house for having obliged the
Government to reduce unduly the establ'shmeats of
the country.
The bill was read a third time and passed.
. The house then proceeded to consider the reasons
of the Lords for disagreeing to several of the Com-
mons' amendments in the Dulwich College Bill. In
the course of the discussion Mr. KNIGHT delivered a
rpeech vehemently inculpating the college anthoil-
ties. The house resolved to insist upon its
amendments.
The Crowded Dwellings Prevention Bill was
withdrawn.
Mr. H. HERBERT obtained leave to bring in a bill
to regulate markets and fairs in Ireland.
After some further business, the house adjourned
at half-past one o'clock.