The Express.
London, England, 1851-05-30 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY EVENING, MAY 30, 1851.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.—TnrasDaY, MAT 29.
The Sruszan took the chair at the u
SS. sual hour.
PRI BUSINE
Reports on the following bills were brought op and
OT :and to 14 on the table :—Cork and Waterford Rail-
way Bill, K 'Harney Junction Railway Bill, Waterford and
Kilkenny Railway Bill.
The following bills were read • third time sad pawed
Prtee'S Patent Candle Company Bill, Thames Avon Dock
and Railway Bill (with promoters' amendments).
(TREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY (No. 2) BILL.
On the bringing up of the report on this bill,
Mr. OLYN called attention to the fact that the promoters
wore empowered to no their carriages over the lines of
other companies. He trusted that before such permission
•:(` granted by the how propa care would be taken to
is,• qr.• safety for life and property.
Mr. TU F NELL said that the privilege war taken under
az' cement between two camomile* and the committee had
tt,.en every possible seeurity. Further, they bad referred
the- matter to the railway commissioners to be finally
ee,tled by them.
It:port ordered to lie on the table.
PUBLIC BUSINESS.

PETITIONS rl

titian, wereprcsentedby Sir J i;i iIiGTON, from
rat-payers in Worcestershire, complaining of the increase
In the county rate in convoqucuce of the establishment of this
rural police, and stating that from the fact of the force having
11)..r.0 adopted in *MO counties and not in others the greatest
quAlity in rating prevailed; also from ratepayers iu Stour-
oriking a similar complaint. By Mr. CROWDER,
Laos Liskeard, against the establishment of a diocesan
e).iod, and censuring the conduct of the Bishop of Exeter
13 resisting the decision of the Privy Council in the Gorham
c •c. liy klr. WIiII'ESIDE, from Enniskillen, in favour
of th" Irish Church Education Society. By Mr. M. GI
tetN, from Manchester, in favour of secular education. liy
Mr. EWART, from Dumfries, in favour of Ecclesiastical
st:es Bill.

NEW MEMBER.
Mr. Crawford took the oath% and his seat for the borough
o: Harwich.

NOTICES OF MOTION.

Kr. RWART, on going into committee on the miseel-
lw..uous estimate% to ask the 144 Lord of the Treasury,
wh^t progress had been made in carrying out the govern-
m-et plan of education.
Mr. MOWATT, for Tserday m it, to move fur leave to
Ming in a bill to provide • better supply of water fur the
metropolis, under the ountrol of the ratepayers.
O'CONNOR LAND SCHEME.

fin tlw pmentation of tbir report of the .elect committee
thy above isdieme,
Mr F. acos,wit complained of the deeiaion of the
c .ionsittee in his ease, and stated he did not expect to re-
..e justice in that house.
for 11. VERNEY, the chairman of the committee, mkt
tli it the committee had treated the hon. gentleman with
ev-ry consideration and kindro d ; hut that it we. imp...si-
b' to pi into the investigation without feeling conapas.ion
lor the poor no who had, from all parts of the country,
lo.on iadatad to engage in what was a mod delusive specu-
la

S. lIERBY.HT, as a member of the committee, mid
th it hr had visited ten of the estates, and declared that
Ilse complaints of the unfortunate people were perfectly
w.ll-fousideil. As to a school-rimm which was pointed out
it was filled with straw, and dirt, and banner., that
appeared to twee horn tows' in some triumphal procession.
Mr. F. O'CONNOR r aplained that the school-room had
to 4 I. danseas, and it hail been visited by fire manlier,
ef tb houw, and one of them remarked that it way very
▪ . but the ruffian, who bad limn ejected fur non-pay-
se at of rent had done their utmost to destroy it. (Loud
'es " order,- amidst which the how. member resumed
b. • ..est )
'I kr report was ordered to lie on the tattle.
RAILWAY ACCIDENT IN CHESHIRE.

. ......
I.AltoUCil ELIE Isid on the tatik the report of the
invernment inspector who had Men sent down to inquire
late the circumstances connected with .the late fatal acci-
dent is the I.anembire and Cheshire Itailway, and moved
Ittt it JO printed.—Agreed to.
ItAMSCIATY. lIARBOUR.

.....
Mr. WAWN asked whether there would be any olsj. e.
to tw lay on the table Mr. 'Volker'. report on the present
3tP a it.nvra.. Harbour.
Sir F. T. Ilk HI NO said he had no objection to lay the
r port ow the table, but would prefer waiting until he had
Lel as opportunity of cominuiliexting with the petits
t1...117 interested.
DOKIIAItA EXPEDITION.
Mr. lIISItAEI,I maid that on Monday last he bad moved
t's 4 the petition of two lalic., rdsters of an emcee who had
3 rislissl in the Ilnkhara expedition, be printed with the
Odes. Hy some informality it had not been plated in the
hood' of members until that slay, and therefore he must
d fer until to.mormw (thin slay) the question. he had in-
t •:.dad to ask her Majesty. government respecting it.
CEYLON.

The order of the day for the resumption of the adjourned
&bate on the affairs of Ceylon was then read.
Sir J W. 111)(10 entered into a long defence of the
C...irw• followed by the Ceylon committee in the conduct of
the Inquiry with which they they Were CllcriC*-11, and a
I • monist explanati .... of the part he had himself been
Is,.rod to take. Ile went on 14,881Kerife that this was the
lk et rote of enoure he had ever It. and mused in that 11,011.,
without being previously submitted to • committee, in
C. 4% where • committee had sat to examine the subject. It
a • perfetly novel practicer, when a charge of a serious
e!..ual or was made, not to state it to the committee, and
pi t theiroj tttt ion tliereupoo. The tint question to be asked
•• to this discussion was what would be the prun
e .1 nee of sus h a motion ? Lord Torrington was no longer
p •vernor of Colon. (Hear, hear.) During the inquiry
t'.. hon meinb.r fur Montro.ur ores d over and over again,
1- Why du you not terminate this insestiftation by recalling
11.-ril Torrington ?" but as Lord Tomngton had been
w(liilraimi, that, therefore, could not be the object sought
t be attainisl. (Hear.) Hut he presumed the object of
C resolution wa. to assail the Colonial Secretary. (hear.)
vloubtrelly, that Was a fair, legitimate, and parliamentary
*elect, but then the means selected to attain it were
sc ;thee fair, just, nor parliamentary. (Hear, hear.) If his
friend (Mr. Manic) desired to assail the Colonial Se-
to-tory, why did he not select some act of the noble lord's
colonial poliry, and move upon that • von: of want of con-
fidence, if not in the government generally, at least in the
....Innis' department, instead of putting a motion on the
j. per whereby, before they arrived at the Colonialsotfice at
en, they were called upon to east a censures, not only on
Lord Torrington, but upon almost every civil and military
a. tying employed in the colony ? Now, what said
alto resolution 1 It declared. " That this home is of
• that the execution eel 18 prestos, and the imprisons
wont, transportation, and corporal punishment of 140
ether persons on this occasion, is at rumen• with the Iner-
t ;ful administration of the British penal laws, and is nut
it demisted to secure the future Weedier and fidelity of her
hlajesty's colonial suljects." (" Hear, bear," front Mr.
Hume.) His bon. friend said " hear, hear," bat pre se this
• as a mere meaningless abstraction. (Cheers.) if the re-
Follies was wide spread and formidable this would be
a very mall number brought to punishment, but
q it Were trilling in extent, it might have been
a very large number. (Hear, hear.) Where, he
se,lied, was the practical knowledge necessary to justify the
it name—where the information neer-mazy tu snake the pros
jporation intelligible ? Vh did not the resolution set out
Ly declaring that there had been no rebellion ? or, that fact
1. sing conceded, why was it not stated that the sentences
passed by the towns-martial were unjust and unsupported
the evidence ? (Hear.) Ile would tell the house the
e: noon why. An attempt was made before the ecinunittee
5., prove thus preliminary matters, and that attempt ►ig-
s. failed. (lieu, hear.) First, it was 'ought to show
that Lard Torrington had imposed illegal
taxes ; that
ehe , however was comply negatived the testimony
of hosti completely
to Lord Torringtori. en it was at-
looped to be shown that there was nu rebellion, but only
a man riot: this was also disproved. (Ileac, bear.)
Again It w mid there we no occasion for proclaiming
niartial law, for the civil power aided by the military were
Quite sulleient to put down the ilistuiboace that existed,
1',.. also was disproved by witnesses who were unfavourable
Lord Torrington. And it having been proved that the,,
war • rebellion, and that martial law was mammary, it only
✓emained to show that martial law wee improperly con-
tinued nape than there was any warier' for. And at
this point it was the resolution wisely and guardesUy
commenced with the only matter left in doubt. (Ilear.
hear.) Now hr contended it was most unfair thus to word
Cie' resolution, shutting oat the whole of the prefatory mat-
ter upon which alone a just decision could be come
tu /With regard to the general notation of Lord
'I a commercial and financial policy (a question
which hen. Mead, Mr. Raillie,pmeml ever sitarrther)—
of this there could he no doubt, that found island
in a stab of embarrassment and debt, aid left it aourishiag
sad with a 'Purples revenue. (Hear bear.) It might her •
queries whether hie policy was right oe wrung in refer-
ence to sateen upon which discordant views were enter-
tained at home, bat so one could deny that his policy had
lei• strictly is accordance with that of this country foe the
last tea years. (Hear, bear.) The must
question was, whether or set, on the • importa
nt
Juiy, there was • serious disturbance, which jasti-
-6,1 the course adopted by the local government ?
Seernues, after all. the house had to look to the
eireussitemes as they existed when martial law was
proclaimed, not what they were after the danger had
passed. (Hear, hear.) Now it appeared that on the Mk
of July amounts wen received by Lord Torrington at Co-
lombo. (Mr. theme " No. not one account.") Certain
W pers had been reashed by Lord Torrington—(heer, bear)
. osneeyed to his mind the apprehension that a re-
Sllio•—(" No," from Mr. Ilume)—well, that a serious '
disturbing* had brakes oat. wunid his hon. friend pila-
w' that i (Chem.)
Mr. HMI3-1 delay that after the Nth any each account
was resolved.
Sir J. 11000 coati/sed—Lord Terr Meas having re-
eeived each Mfurmation, sent in thelnt Oam for C4eael
Fraser, the mos t experiewml militery authority ha the
Island—aa eater who hod beta tosservad is theta
of the rebellion of 1813. And what was ColoselP=
opinion ? Colonel Vern said that the men received led
him to boilers that the vests melba& &ogee was to he
apprehended, and he advised Lord Tonneau at mom to pre-
claim medal law, and to mend a steamer ea to Mans to
obtain stiltary sag boa the limbos government loch
was tbe view ashes at the am by Col. 'team ea the
vet, who semeitheiegi hie peat lead overbore vas at hest
se empeteat to form a orerect opinion SI lis lea. Mead
the wassiber he puree's. (Ear owl kagbase.) The
mat they lakes by Leal Teertharea taste othethiethaexe-
moth. at whisk Xr. awl Ges. Bark
gladepre-
sent; radon= ithisueuti hs the ef

Col. Fraser that martial law ought to be at
once. A few days after this the w=lirit_
_the
council agreed that not only was the edgers,'
measure of proclaiming martial law ; bet
they further considered that Lord ='
anwas
right in extending that proclamation MoWy district
than that in which the disturbances hail holm
out. What more could the governor d II totitiy do
in such an emergency than act upon tba -IMO of lin own
judgment, aided by the advice ef ea donna appointed
to assist hint ? ( II ear, hear.) This Lord Torringtbn did, and
there was no witness called before the committee who did not
admit that the necessity for proclaiming martial law existed.
Mr. Selby, Mr. Wodelaeuse, Sir A. Oliphant—(Mr. Hume:
" Mr. Anstruther did not admit it")—with the exception
of Mr. Anstruther, admitted the necessity, and the whole
weight of evidence was opposed to that gentleman's view.
(Hear, hear.) He new OM* to the more important gees.
tion, as far as the resolution was concerned—the continu-
ance of martial law. Olt that quettion, as he had said,
there was soma difference of opinion and fur that reason he
presumed his hon. friend (Mr. Blithe) commenced his
resolution at that point. The resolution said, "That
this house is of opinion that the conduct of the
late Governor of Ceylon, in keeping in force martial law
for two months after his chief legal adviser had recom-
mended its discontinuance, and during which period the
civil courts were sitting without danger or interruption,"
&c. Now, the whole drift and bearing of this part of the re-
solution, as it stood, was not that Lord Torrington conti-
nued =girlie' law in force longer than was necessary, but
that he acted contrary to the opinion of Mr. Selby, who
considered that the proclamation might have been with-
drawn earlier. (Hear.) Was there ever ouch an extra-
' ordinary proposition submitted as a resolution for the
' adoption of the House of Commons? In the case of a
disturbance occurring in a distant part of this country,
who would be the persons to be consulted as to the time
when the extraordinary measures adopted to meet the
emergency should be withdrawn? Would it be the So-
licitor or Attorney-General in London, or the commander-
in-chief acting in the disturbed district and the local
authorities there ? (Hear.) It was true that Mr. Selby
did, on the 7th of August, suggest to Lord Torring-
ton that he should put an end to martial law,
and that he drew up and placed in the hands
of the governor, or his secretary, a proclamation
to that effect, but which he said he did not intend should
be issued immediately, but to be ready when the governor
might think proper to line, be (Mr. Selby) being about to
go to Kandy. On the 10th of August he wrote from
Kandy
, suggesting that the proclamation he had prepared
should issue, but, as he admitted before the committee,
without having consulted either the commanding officer or
the judge of the district. ((tear, hear.) Now he (Sir J.
Hogg) thought, with all due deference to Mr. Selby, that
before he wrote a public document to the governor, so im-
portant in its bearings and in its probable results, he ought
to have consulted those whose position and experience
enabled them to give the soundest advice. (hear,
hear.) Immediately after this Lord Torringtou pro-
ceeded to Kandy, when Mr. Selby again mooted
the question as to the discontinuance pf martial
law. Lord Torrington replied, " Your letter has caused
me much anxious consideration, and I should be glad to
have a quiet consultation with you and Mr. Stuart, the
deputy-judge advocate, and Sir Herbert laddeick, an
oltleerof the Best India Company, of great experience.
A consultation accordingly took place, and after a long
consideration it was determined that fur the present it was
fit and proper martial law should be continued. On the
21st of September the pretender was apprehended, and it
appeared that he made statements implicating many of the
leading headsmen of the district, and in con.eelucnce of
the important information he gave, General Smelt
gave it as his opinion that it was not expe-
dient to discontinue martial law, until the in-
quiries instituted in consequence of the state-
ments of the pretender should have concluded. On the
tied Mr. Selby recorded his opinion that no necessity fur
continuing martial law existed, but that Lord Torrington
couridered that it should be continued until a bill of indem-
nity should have passed. On that occasion Mr. Selby stated
there was a lull meeting of the council present, and all
agreed that martial law ought to be continued but himself.
(Hear, hear.) Now, he (Sir J. Hogg) held, that in the
position in which Lord Torrington was placed, it was set&
ceat justification of his conduct to show that he was
anxious to do his duty fairly and honestly—not
that he had in no care erred in judgment—(hear, heer)—
and that Lord Torriugton acted under a conscientioue eon-
*ietion of duty throughout, and upon the best advice he
could obtain, there was ample evidence to prove. (Hear,
hear.) His hon. friend (Mr. Baillie), with all his sasiduity,
had only been able to direct attention to one court-martial
in particular. sir It. Craddock was present at three o
these courts-martial ; and Ito observed that he witnessed the
proceedings of the court martial held at Ceylon ; that the
prisoner was on that occasion allowed to cross-examine the
witnesses; and that order and regularity were observed.
Again, Captain Bird attended before the committee;
he was at several of the courts martial, and hie
answer, in like manner, was that the proceedings
were regular ; that the depositions were taken down in
writing, end that all the usual forms were observed. The
proceedings, moreover, were submitted to the considera-
tion of the commanding officer. Mr. Stuart, Mr. Selby's
deputy, officiated ar judge-advocate at four of the courts-
martial. Mr. Selby had prevented Mr. Stuart from officiating
any longer after he had attended the four courts already
alluded to; and that prevention was a very remarkeb:e and
extraordinary circumstance in the case. (Hear.) The
house ought to be informed that these courts martial at
Ceylon sat with open doors, that they were generally
crowded, and that proctors, of whom there were swarms
throughout the whole of Ceylon, attended them. Now,
had a single irregularity occurred, the house might rely
upon it that it would hare been speedily exposed, fur the
proctors were indignant at the existence of mar-
tial law, and were loud in clamouring against
it, but, with all the means there were of de-
tection, the committee had had no evidence before them of
any misconduct or irregularity characterising the proceed-
ing... With regard to the case of the priest, what was the
course pursued by Mr. Selby on that occasion ? He
said that when he arrived at Kandy, Mr. Smith, one
of the live proctor', called on him and told him that the
priest had been unjustly condemned, and that the wit-
nesses were not the witnesses of the truth ; and he begged
of him to go to the governor and endeavour to get the exe-
cution respited. Ile (Sir J. Hogg) asked Mr. Selby
whether he took any means to ascertain the truth of Mr.
Smith's representations—whether he had consulted his own
brother, who was present at the trial, or Mr. Stuart ? It
appeared, howeser, that Mr. Selby went to nobody, that he
consulted nu one, but that Mr. Stuart admitted tho sentence
to be just. It was surely the duty of a law officer,
before he dared to arrest the progress of justice, and go
to the fountain of mercy, toinform himself of the real
state of the case, particularly when every man in the
court, except that single proctor, felt convinced of
the guilt of the prisoner and the justice of the
sentence. In order to show the extent of consideration
Mr. Selby had given to the subject, he was asked what Mr.
Smith hail said to him. The answer was that he (Smith)
had said something about the character of the witnesses,
and the bearing of the evidence; and that was the state-
ment of a law officer of the crown, and the statement on
which he proceeded to Lord Torrington, who, at the time,
was in communication with Colonel Drought, going over
the depositions, and satisfying themselves of the guilt of the
priest. Mr. Selby related what he had heard from Mr.
Smith. Lord Torrington said in reply that he had full con-
fidence in Major Les inept', that he had read the pro-
ceedings on the trial, that Colpsel Drought had also
read them, and that it appeared to both that the man was
guilty. Mr. Selby said that at that interview Lord Tor-
rington made use of an expression, which, if he did, there
were no terms of disapproliation—he (Sir J. Ilogg) had al-
most said of execration—in which it ought not to be charm,
tensed. It was this, " By o—, if all the proctors in the
land were on his side, he shall die to-morrow morning."
Lord Torrington denied that he had ever uttered such an
expression Colonel Drought denied that he had ever
heard it uttered, sad he moreover added that Lord Tor-
rington was perfectly calm on the occasion, and
that Mr. Selby was much flurried. (Hear, hear.) Mr.
Selby went on to say that after his interview with Lord
Torrington he met Sir Anthony Odvant, who told him that
he was going to Lord Torrington on the subject of the exe-
cution of the priest, and that he (Mr. Selby) said to him,
" You bad better not ; don't go, or you will he insulted, as
I have been." But, if Mr. Selby believed in his conscience
that the priest had been unjustly sentenced, and if he knew
that the man was going to be executed the follow
ing morning, how did he reconcile it to himself
that he had attempted to dissuade Sir Anthony (Meant
against going to Lord Torrington and speaking to him on
the subject of the execution. (" Hear, bear," and
cheers) lie now came to the concluding proposition
is the resolutions 'before the house. The conduct of
Lord Grey in approving of the course taken by Lord
Terriagton was represented as "precipitate and injudicious."
He did not stand there to justify the irregularities which
had occurred is this ease, and which mast inevitably occur
in all wars, sad especially in all rebellions. But he did
maintain that there was nothing before the house to show
that Lord Torrington was directly connected with such
irregularities. These was nothing whatever to connect
Lord Grey with three irregularities. The concluding pro-
', position of the hos. member for Invernemshire was one
" upon which he (Sir J. Hogg) entertained the strongest
opinion. It conveyed a political immorality to which lie,
fee one, would be no party. What did the hon. member
I mean ? Did he mean by suggesting precipitancy
; that Lord Grey ought to have waited, with dastardly
craft, until the events were over, sad the exact results
had been ascertained? (Cheers.) in no case could Lord
Grey have written a despatch more void of any occasion of
cavil than that of Oet. 24, in which he urged Lord Toning-
, ton to limit the punishment as far as p wsible, and only to
' punish those who were proved to have been the promoters
and leaders in the rebellion. We. there any trace of harsh-
ness in this despatch ? (Hear.) But the question was not a
pevassal question. He (Sir 2. Hogg) opposed the censure
nieved on this occasion because to condemn Lord Grey for
the.swane he had taken in regard to the affairs of Ceylon
"mold be to endanger the peace of the whole of our colonial
empire. (Hear, hear.) He knew that it was necessary
to watch well and justly and carefully those who were
entrusted with the execution of military power in a co-
lasy ; but he also knew that it we. not less indispen-
sable to extend to the representatives of the sovereign so
pined a generous confidence so long as they were found
to deserve it. (Cheers). In conclasion, he most give his
nmesnapromising opposition to these resolutions ; and he
did so not only in justice to the civil and military servants
of Ceylon and to Lord Torrington and Lord Grey, but
because he believed that this question was inseparably con-
nected with the interests of our whole colonial empire.
(Cheers.)
Sir F. THESIGER had no personal intimacy" with any
ths poems implicated in them transactions ; but, on the

other boaddie bagged to disclaim all personal hostility.
le
szlet in as Velizamet • gamonal question. Ile
istr gm • of Nene of the witimmes had
ele boss astemialli Oaths Est night of
3he to bear his bet. mad limenel khedi(Serment
Id at the prohibited gileitleft of Mi. Selby,
fay MA meet poileallad hi the regular pro-
= ummeem His ben. end bum' Mad might have
he the
eyloaftikainlavidisal"malle theelogulatitredmwmto:l%
station who had never enjoyed that advan-
tagintrollsmiseal training which had been possessed by hi
hon. ma Isormed friend. In fact it was to the honour
of Mr. Selby, that notwithetionling his disadvantages in
this respect, he bed cored to the position which he now
occupied. The proposition of the honourable mem-
ber for Invemeseshire wee, that the house should
pCa censure upon the government. The hon. member
ring made his charge, it might have been naturally ex-
I.stg that either the noble lord at the head of the govern-
ment, or the hon. gentleman the Under Secretary for the
Colotdes, would have risen to reply. But, instead of this,
the hon. and learned member for Cork got up, and, in
terms with which they were familiar in courts of justice,
stated that he had been " instructed" by Lord Torrington
to defend that noble lord spinet the accusations brought
so long against him. how, his (Sir F. Thesiger's)
view was that these resolutions could only be considered
as resolutions condemnatory of a certain colonial policy
of the Colonial-office. Had Lord Torrington continued up
to this time to be governor of Ceylon, no doubt the bon.
member for Inverneesshire would have so framed the mo-
tion as to include an address to the crown, praying for Lord
Torrineon's removal. If Lord Torrington had been re-
moved by Lord Grey because of the conduct which the hon.
member for Invernesehire complained of, there would pro-
bably never have been any such motion as this on the
affairs of Ceylon before the house. But Lord Torrington
was removed in July, 1830, and not on account of his con-
duct in the rebellion, but because he had not been found
able to preserve the necessary harmony and mutual co-ope-
ration among the subordinate officers in his government.
These resolutions were, therefore, directed against the
Colonial-office, and only indirectly against Lord Torrington.
Him boa. friend (Sir J. Hogg) said that these resolutions
were an unmeaning abstraction, and would have no practi-
cal result on the particular case. But the use to be ad-
judged was a general one ; what they were to consider was
a policy which ought to be approved or disapproved of.
His hon. friend also said that these resolutions were incom-
plete without • prefatory averment. Why the prefatory
averment was in the Blue 89010. (Hear, hear.l Another
objection, urged by his hon. and learned friend the member
for Cork, was that it was unfair to take parts of this case,
and not to consider the whole scope and the entire period of
Lord Torrington'' administration. Such an objection was
obviously unsound. If a servant was charged in a
court of justice with having in a particular in-
stance robbed his master, it would be but a bad
defence to adduce evidence of his general previous honesty
and fidelity. The questions raised in the resolutions were
distinctly. these : the mode in which martial law was car-
ried out in Ceylon ; the period during which that martial
law continued; the severities practised during its con-
tinuance ; and the approbation expressed by Lord Grey
of the conduct of Lord Torrington from the beginning to
the end of these proceeding'. . The house had, therefore, to
ascertain the propriety of the severities which had been
detailed, and the causes in which the rebellion originated.
There was the most complete evidence to show that
this was not a deep-laid conspiracy of an old date
among the masses of the people. It arose, in the first place,
from the resentment M the priests at the cessation of
the interference of the government in religious mat-
ters, and from the revengeful feelings of the headmen
in consequence of a compelled diminution of their influence
with the natives. The mass of the people had only been
excited on a sudden because of the imposition of certain
tame and the apprehension that certain further taxes
would be levied. And unless it could be proved that there
had been a strong bond of union uniting different classes
together for a common purpose, it would be difficult to sug-
gest any justification fur the proclamatiou and the pro-
tracted continuance of martial law. No one could doubt
that if Lord Torrington had yielded, as he ought
to have done, when the crowd presented them-
selves to Mr. Buller, the government agent, and
granted the repeal of the obnoxious taxes, the
priests and the headmen would never have succeeded
in inducing the people to join them in any disturbances.
Afterwards, too late, and as rashly as he hail proposed them,
Lord Torrington did repeal the unjust ordinances. There
could be no mistake about the character of the rebellion.
Contrast the statements of Mr. Staples in 1848, immediately
after the events, with a letter which he wrote in 18s9, and
it would be found that in the former instance he had made
light of the matter as • riot, and said that the "low country
people were all thieves and robbers," while in the subse-
quent letter he said that the disturbances were to all intents
and purposes • rebellion, and expressed his opinion that
" those who had made the bold assertion before
the select committee that the late disturbances
were mere rioting' must have been under the influence
of the Kandians." The complaint he made was not that
martial law had been proclaimed—although there might be
strong opinions expressed in the evidence before the select
committee as to the silence of such necessity—but what he
complained of was that martial law had been proclaimed
without directions having been given how that martial law
was to be carried out. (Hear, hear.) But if his hon.
and learned friend was right in his position, and the general
had absolute power over the lives and property of the people
—if, as his hon. and learned friend had argued, he hula right
to confiscate their property—if he had a right to torture
them—as it had been 'toed that the pretended king had
been tortured—it was perfectly clear, that even under a
proclamation of martial law there must be some limit.
What was that limit ? The limit which custom and usage,
on these terrible occasions, prescribed to those who had the
power of command, and the execution of these acts com-
mitted to them. (Hear, hear.) Now, in consequence
of the proclamation of Colonel Drought, and his accom-
panying instructions, parties of armed men went about
from village to village, entered all the houses, and ran-
sacked them,. carrying away the property they contained, of
every description, whether perishable or imperishable.
The Colonial Secretary, in a circular issued from his office,
on the 16th of February, 1848, summed up the matter in
those words :—" Our troops are engaged with the
civil officers in scouring the province, and taking
possession of the confiscated property." And yet
ir merson Tennent, in his evidence, had stated
most distinctly that there had been no confiscation what-
ever,ibut that all that had been done was to sequestrate
the property and preserve it fur the owners. lie would
give the house a sample of the notions entertained by Sir
Herbert Maddock. (Hear, hear.) Sir Herbert said that
as there were still a great many persons absent
from home who were suspected of encouraging the
pretender, it would be well to issue another proclamation,
calling upon them to return to their homes and deliver
themselves up within 16 or 20 days, and if they failed in so
doing their lands and all other property was liable to confis-
cation ; and he further advised that, whenever the com-
mandants directed confiscation, they should agree upon the
form in which it was to be drawn up. Acting upon this
suggestion, Lord Torrington, on the 16th of August, issued
a proclamation of confiscation ; and in that proclamation, as
his hon. and learned friend had observed, most important
expressions were used to show the real state of the country
at that time, there being these words—" late insurrection'
and " recent disturbances." That paper was laid before
Mr. Selby, the Queen's advocate, four days afterwards ;
and Mr. Selby lost no time in expressing his decided opi-
nion that it was entirely illegal to confiscate the property of
persons who had not been convicted by the courts of jus-
tice. Upon receiving this communication from the
Queen's Advocate Lord Torrington wrote to him to
say that that paper had occasioned him much
anxious consideration, and to request an immediate male-
masee. That conference took place, and then both Mr.
Selby, the Queen's Advocate, and the Deputy Queen's Ad-.
vacate, repeated the same opinion of the illegality of the
confiscation of property by Colonel Drought. At that time
there was an endeavour made to convert confiscation into
sequestration, but with what success would be seen by the
evidence of Captain Watson. It was remarkable that in
writing to Lord Grey Lord Torrington sent his own procla-
mation of the 18th Aug., but omitted to send Col. Drought's
proclamation of the Bth August. Nor did Lord Torrington
transmit with that despatch the paper of suggestions by
Sir Herbert Maddock. The proclamation of Col. Drought
was not sent until after the inquiry had commenced before
the committee of 1849, when it was forwarded with an apo-
logy that it had been overlooked until that moment.
Far from reprehending the conduct of Capt. Wataon in hav-
ing practised illegal confiscations in the district of the island
with the administration of which he was charged, Lord
Grey wrote to Lord Torrington to say that he had no doubt
the conduct of that officer had been perfectly justifiable.
He would take the evidence of the governor of the colony,
the secretary of the commanding officer of the troops, with
respect to the state of the country, and he would ask any
dispassionate man whether martial law ought not to
have ceased before. On the 18th of August General
Smelt had written a letter, in which he had stated
that there was at that time • general lull and an
apparent peaceable conduct on the part of the Kandians,
which created • strong impression on his mind that
all was not right. It appeared that the general would
not have been in the slightest degree intimidated by the
din of arms, but that a state of profound peace alarmed
him. (Hear.) On the 15th of October he (General Smelt)
had again stated " No fresh outbreak has taken place
in this colony since the date of my last despatch."
Now, let them compare these sentiments with those
of Sir Emerson Tennent. He, writing on the 12th of
August, said that to the south and west of Kandy, he
had found the country perfectly peaceful, the roads were
restored to its usual state of quiet. Sir E. Tenneat had
added in this letter that Col. Drought had informed him
that the accounts which he (Col. Drought) was receiving
from all quarters, represented matters most favourably, that
armed crowds were no longer ho be seen, and that the
people seemed anxious to resume their peaceful occupations.
What, however, had Lord Torrington said of the state of
matters at this time ? Writing to Col. Drought on the 25th •
September, Lord Torrington had said—" the military 1
measures which were adopted, crushed the rebellion
in the bud." (Hear, hear.) It had been suggested 1
by Lord Torrington that in u much as the pretender
had fled to some place of concealment, it was necessary to I
continue the state of martial law until he was secured, and .
be (Sir F. Theaiger) was astonished that his hon. friend the 1
member for Honiton justified the continuance of martial
law, and considered that the giving of Lcilities for securing i
a noterious offender was ground sufficient to warrant mar- •
teal law being continued in two districts of this colony. I
Lord Torrington had said on the 16th of August, 1848, that •
the pretender and his brother could not long remain in
their concealment, as the people were generally dissatisfied ,
as to all their pretensions, and numbers of the natives were i
in active pursuit, allured by the reward which was in 1

to a

mgpill4.igw, could it be asserted after this letter, that
ine limy neceesity to continue martial law so
Mag. to this period down to the 10th of
WOW, however, supposing it Amid be allowed
that the et the pretender was a , object
iq the of martial law, how me mar-
del law het elatiseed tee lbw weds
These snub medal had bees eempurd it tam slink
and Illone huger 481111. it WIIIII WO OM
the ofcrefoffiset 101 very suds le de with the lid% MS
that the *ty had bees devolved ea three yews
officers. T was no imputation to be test on dune
officers, but it would surely be confessed that they MI
been placed in a position of very great difficulty and anxiety,
not only by being called to the performance of very painful
duties, but also by the nature of the instructions they had
received from their =peeler officers. (Hear.) The letters
of Colonel Drought had been already referred to, but he
would take the liberty of again bringing them under the
notice of the house, in order to justify the observations
which he felt it his duty to make. The first letter was
dated the " 16th of August, Matelle," and they would re-
collect that this was eotemporaneous with the letter of Sir
Emerson Tennant. Colonel Drought, under this date,
said "My dear Watson-1 wish you to explain to your
officers at Matelle, that I sin surprised they did not sen-
tence the four prisoners to be executed. A plunderer in
these times is a miscreant in the double capacity of a rebel
and a felon, who would if he could first take your life and
then your property. Remind them that all engaged as these
were are rebel., and that all rebels should suffer death. Tho
court have, under the present law, merely to satisfy themselves
as to the parties being guilty or otherwise, and to find and
decide accordingly." Andthenin another letter Col. Drought
said, " My dear Watson,—You are getting on swim-
mingly. (Laughter.) Your Deputy Judge-Advocate will
of course receive the usual allowance for every day the
court sits. Impress upon the court that there is no ne-
cessity for taking down the evidence in detail, so that
they are satisfied with the guilt or innocence of the in-
dividual ; that is sufficient for them to find and sentence."
Theder such instructions as these haw could it be pos-
sible for these junior officers nut to feel that there was a
Most serious responsibility resting on them if they ven-
tured to go contrary to the wishes of the superior officers,
who hail directed the Judge-Advocate to be got rid of as
unnecessary. He begged to ask whether an account
done of these courts, published in the Morning Chronicle
on the 31st of March last, was correct ? That account said
there had been four prisoners tried before that court; that
the wart had consisted of three young officers ; that with
regard to the first and third prisoners, as they were de-
signated, there had nut been produced one tittle of evidence
to implicate them in any part of the illegal transisetions ;
sad that with respect to the second and fourth, questions of
this kind had been put, " Question. Did you see this per-
am let off a gun? Answer. No, I did not; but Mr. Mat-
tarty says he did.—Ques. Did you see this person running
out of the jungle ? Aas. No, but several people said they
had seen him.' (Hear, hear.) Upon such evidence as this
the men had been found guilty of high treason, and sen-
tenced to be shot. The sentence had been carried out on the
following morning. Hear, hear) He was uuwilling
to notice the conduct of these young officers much
further, seeing that they were encouraged by their
superiors, but he could not avoid mentioning the
conduct of Lieutenant Henderson, who had burned three
homes merely because the men were supposed to be of had
character. At the time these summary and awful pro-
ceedings were going on, the civil court weighting in Kandy,
presided over by Sir Anthony Oliphant, the Chief Justice,
who had been requested by the governor to go on that cir-
cuit to hold courts. At these civil courts 34 prisoners had
been tried, of whom one-half were acquitted. Contrast
this with the number tried by court martial-126, of whom
Bor 10 only had been acquitted. (Hear, hear.) And then
let them, after this, consider if there had not been some
ground for believing that if legal objections, and what a
military man was pleased to call legal difficulties, had
been interpoood at the trials by court martial, that
the result would not have been very different, and that
many lives would have been spared which had been so
recklessly sacrificed. Oa these 17 men being convicted, Sir
Anthony Oliphant, before whom they had Iseen tried, had
written to Lord Torrington, stating that the several convic-
tions hail been obtained in due course of law, recommend-
ing the prisoners to his excellency's clemency, stating that
a sufficient example of severity had been made in former
executions, and concluding by mentioning that the sentences
ought to be commuted, some to transportion for life,
others toll years' transportation, and others again to periods
of imprisonment. In regard to the celebrated conversation
between Mr. Selby and Lord Torrington on the case of the
priest, Lord Grey iutimated strong disapprobation of the
conduct of Mr. Selby, yet ho sent that functionary track to
the colony There was plenty of opportunity and ground
for censure with respect to maay of the facts brought home
both to Lord Torrington and his subordinates ; yet Lord
Grey never once expressed the slightest disapprobation.
This was a question involving the future policy of the
orantry and the interests of our colonies. It could not he
@snared to the narrow walla of that house, nor to the limits
of this country. He felt that great allowance was to be
made for Lord Torrington, considering the difficult cir-
eunistances in which he was placed, and the haste with
which he had to form his decisions ; but he thought the
house would not take the same view of the conduct of the
noble lord the Secretary of State for the Colonies. Ile was
not called upon to act on the sudden, but had time and op-
portunity for judgment and deliberation. If the acts of the
Colonial Secretary should be adopted by the representa-
tives of the nation, he feared that the result of this discus-
sion would give a fatal blow to the character of this coun-
try for justice and humanity. (Cheers.)
Col. DUNNE defended Colonel Drought, and referred
---.....eication he had received from that officer

giving details of the proceedings of the courts-use.—_
With regard to the case of the priest, of which so much
had been said, and of his being hanged in his sacredotal
robes, it was a curious fact, as he was informed by Colonel
Drought, that the individual in question was not a priest
at all, but had assumed the character in order to obtain
greater influence over the natives. He saw many military
men around him, and ho appealed to them whether an
officer would obey a junior officer. Thr way of forming
the courts-martia/s was perfectly clear; three subalterns
were put on them. The hon. and learned gentleman
asked why the senior officer was not put on. Of course he
could not be on because he had to confirm the decision of
the court. As to the general question, he did not feel
bound to give an opinion, though there was much in the
conduct of the colonial government of which he disap-
proved, but he deprecated attacks on absent men, engaged
in the public service.
Mr. HAWES, having at some length defended the course
taken by the Colonial-office, in connection with the inquiry
by the Ceylon committee, passed to the question involved
in the resolution. He thought the chief points to be looked
to, with a view to form a correct judgment of Lord Tor-
eington's measures, were, what was the state of the island
la the latter part of 1818, and had there been undue
severity in carrying martial law into effect? (Hear.)
Now his hon. and learned friend (Sir F. Thesiger) said
Mare was no rebellion or disturbance of any
magnitude, and no organised resistance to the government;
law the government stated one thing at one time and
=other at another ; and therefore it VIM attempted to im-
pugn the honour of all the public officers. It was said that
when they received lettersseeking for information as to the
tradition of the colony all their answers were favourable to
the governor; and that as they stated opinions opposite to
these they had previously expressed, and as those answers
writ given some time after the events had taken place,
therefore they were disentitled to credit. That was the
argument of the hon. member for Montrose (Mr.
Nate), but those letters could not possibly have been re.
*red earlier; inasmuch as they were called forth by the
ammittee of inquiry. Their epinions were given, it was
In% ease a lapse of time, but they were given by honour-
able am who had been on the spot and were acquainted
with the facts ; and therefore he (Mr. Hawes) held them
Jost as worthy of credit as if they hail been given at the very
mat cent of the outbreak. But before alluding to the more
Immediate subject of discussion, let him remind the house
est these events occurred in the year 1848—• year most
Imoseorable, and that never would be forgotten—a year
Viarke.d by events in Europe which, he must be allowed to
ay; bad bad a sensible influence throughout our colonial
alphas (Moen.) He considered that the excitement in
Neeepe had produced a corresponding effect in Ceylon and
NM Crape and had been taken advantage of by parties who
watt lailaus to unsettle the government of some of our
ffikethea (Cheers.) With respect to the causes of the
inspetheae.es, the hon. member then quoted a passage
Mom the evidence of a gentleman whose evidence had been
mask relied upon by hon. gentlemen who had spoken on
the other side of the house, to the effect that the rebellion
bad been produced by cause similar to those which had
hessight in that of 1812. Mr. Selby added, however, that
many more persons had joined the rebels in 1818 than in
WM owing to the dissatisfaction which had been created
by a statement that the government intended to impose a
' peat number of new taxes. It was, continued Mr. Ilawes,
I well known that interested parties had spread a re-
ject to the effect that upwards of thirty new taxes,
mese of which were of a most oppressive character,
were about to be created; the excitement thus caused
had materially swelled the ranks of the insurgents. Here,
then, they had the local officer of the government de-
/daring that the causes of the rebellions were the same, but
he (Mr. Hawes) would go further and say that they were
not only identical in 1848 and 1812, but in 1817 and 1818
also. Mr. Hawes next quoted a passage from Col. Bray-
Invoke, who said that they were under apprehensions that
the whole country was in a state of rebellion; and that in
1818, when Sir Robert Brownriggc had delayed proclaim-
leg martial law for three or four months, the consequence
was that the rebellion had grown to a much more formi-
dable height than could have been the case had the military
been allowed to act with more effectiveness. Col. Forbes,
in a work written ten years ago, had made a similar state-
ment with respect to the rising of 1817-18. In fact Col.
Braybrooke stated that near 10,000 natives had perished by'
the sword or by disease ; and he (Mr. Hawes) believed that
nearly 1,000 British soldiers were struck down by the same
fatal causes. Thus the house would see that the neglect of
energetic measures had caused a protracted struggle,
injurious alike to the country and to the people; and de-
structive alike of life and property. (Hear, hear.) Hon.
and learned gentlemen had strongly insists I that there
was no organised rebellion, but they had not referred to the
charge of the chief justice, who had tried a great number
of persons in Kandy for treason, before martial law was
proclaimed. In that charge he distinctly stated that there
was rebellion, which had been fomented by the head-
men, the Korales, and the priests; and that it had
nothing to do with the imposition of taxes. He thought
that when hon. gentlemen had referred to the petty evi-
dence against the government contained in letters written
by officers at a time of great excitement and alarm, and
could know little more than that which occurred in
right to have also referred to the charge of the
their own immediate neighbourhood, he thought it would
have been