The Express.
London, England, 1847-03-19 00:00:00

"'.~~.~

2

where the lesiburds their well, and tame
the law wee =al die Pa'
matey were and resgeeden Ibis. ear-
ners, sod yielding a reedy eheilmse to the law. (Hear.) It
was ,no desirablethata searshimginquii7ehoiddles lastituted
into the result. of absenteeism and fa this there would be
abundant opportunity during the ensuing summer.
Mr. Alderman HUMPHERY said that the Landoll am-
pumice generally, which had large properties in the north of
Ireland, spent, not 10 per cent., which would probably be the
amount of MI absentee tax, but, about faun-tifths of their
rental in the country from which it was derived. The Irish
Society, to which he belonged, bad a rental of 9,0001. or
10,0001. a year, and they invariably spent In Londonderry
and other parts of Ireland, 7,0001, a year for edacation and
religious instruction. They never refused money to the
Catholic priests for improving their chapel, or for the purposes
of education ; and there were 60 schools which were annually
hi the receipt of sums of money from this society. Another
society had a rental of 7,0001. from estates in Coleraine; and
during ten years 3,0001. only out of that rental had been ex-
pended in London. The Globe Insurance Company had
keen alluded to as receiving 3,0001. a-year from coat*. in
Ireland. The probability was that that company were net
the owners of the property, but held a mortgage on it. Now
the result of an absentee.= would be, that the e companies
would pay ;the 10 or 20 per cent., whatever might be the
amount of the tax, and that uo other part of their income
would be expended in Ireland. (Hear.) Ile should be glad
to see a return showing how much was spent in Ireland by
hon. members residing there. (Hear.) Of the four millions
aster received by the aleontees, he doubted not that two
millions were returned to Ireland, ("No, no.") He was
eonfident that the absentee proprietors who had been named
is this discussion, sp_ent more on their property then the resi-
dent proprietors. The London companies had no mortgages
on their Irish estates, and hail therefore the greater oppor•
musky of spending money on them ; and he should be glad
to see a return of those rcgdent proprietors who had mort-
gagee on their estates. It those gentlemen spent u much
money so the London companies in promoting instruction
and Minding religious houses, Ireland would be in a much
letter condition. (Hear.)
Mr. LABOUCHERE said he was fully convinced that
whatever tended to the impoverishment of Ireland was in-
jurious to the empire at large; and if he thought that any
real benefit would result from the proposal of the hon.
member for Limerick, he would at once accede to it. He
was opposed to questions of this kind being dealt with by
resolution, rather than by bill ; but the hon. gentleman had
removed by his speech any ambiguity that might hang over
the resolution. He had said that hi would prevent gentle-
men from holding property both in England and Ireland,
and even in different perts of the latter country. Surely
• government at all advanced in civilisation could be
brought to adopt such a principle as that. (Hear, hear.)
A.lnutting the great evils of absenteeism, he mast express a
beief that these .vile might be expected gradually to de.
sae, under the operation of two of the new measures. One
of these was the new poor-law for Ireland, which might
kit ly he expected to induce a greater number of gentlemen
to rends on and promote the improvement of their estates;
as it would then be no longer possible for absentee proprie-
tors to refuse to bear their shore of the existing burdens. By
another measure, shortly to be offered to the lepclature, the
facilities for transferring landed property would be increased;
and believing that the existing evils resulted less from ab-
Seatahinn than from property being largely held by incom-
petent persons, he anticipated very important improvesamb
rem this measure. It should be remembered that a great
number of those who were called absentee proprietors such
as Lord Abusers, the Marquis of Lansdowne, and Others,
who had been named, resided on their estates during several
mouths in the year, and did all in their power to
promote the improvement of the people around them.
He would not allow the hon. member for Northamptonshire
(Mr. Stafford O'Brien) to be placed in an invidious light oa
the list of absentees. The right hon. gentleman then quoted
the authority of Mr. Prior, on the propriety of taking steps
to compel absentee landlords to share in the burns of
their country ; and showing that it was advisable that there
should be a more equal distribution of property, as it was
well known that incomes derived from large estates w eyespot
abroad, whilst those which were got from small estates were
spent at home. He thought it an unjust and impolitic prin-
eMle, which woad Mader persons from haviag emotes both
in England and Ireland, by taxing them according to the
pootasioss in the latter eountrv. He took the imposition
ea absentee property more in the light of a penalty than a
tax which would encourage the sole of estates.
He would not detain the house further, than by expertise
his concurrence with the hon. gentleman, in the opinion,
that thine who bad property in Ireland should be at their
poets, and that the legislature should take care to encourage
landlords to aunt tneir poorer neighbours. It was that
motive that influenced the government is bringing forward
We acts which had already pared, namely, the poor-law,
and the bill for facilitating the sale of encumbered estates.
The boo, gentleman concluded by saying, that if the hen.
member for Limerick pressed the motion to a division, he
would give it his opposition.
Sir A. BROOKE said that he would give his support to
the hon. gentleman the member for Limerick, though of some
of his propositions he did not approve. The only principle
on which he would have property taxed, was that which laid
down t.h.t the amount levied should be expended cis the
property from which it was derived. They ought to tax
property generally for the support of the people, and
not lay a tax on absentee property in particular. He
wished to ammo his disapproval of the principle of out-
door relief which had been adopted by the government.
There was one propoeition in the resolution brought forward
by the hon. gentleman which he could not at all agree with
as it would be a practical carrying out of the repeal of the
union. It was that which sought to prevent a man from
holding propert7 in both England and Ireland. Notwith-
standing these differences between him and the lion. gentle-
man he would support his motion in the hope that it would
be of some advantage ultimately.
Mr. BELLEW rose to oppose the motion on the ground
that absenteeism was not the cause of the evil which was
complained of. It was the incident not the cause. The evil
arose out of the want of confidence, which persons holding
capital entertained, about investing it in that country. There
were many instances in which the tenants on the propertissof
nos-resident landlords were much better off than those
ca the properties of their resident neighbours. The measure
of poor-law which had been brought forward would go
further than anything else to remedy the evils attributed to
absenteeism. He would suggest to the government that in
addition to that poor-law and the mu/ere for facilitating the
sale of estates in Ireland, they ought to pant measures en-
couraging emigration, and giving teens for private and pub-
lic works. TIM proposition of the hon. member would not
regoaerate Ireland. He expressed kis opinion that the ob-
;set which the hon member had in view would be obtained if
they made every man in Ireland feel that if he wished to
labour he would not starve; and concluded by quoting from
Dr. Kane on the subject, showing that inaustry made
capital, and not capital industry , and stating that he would
oppose the hon. gentleman's motion.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL said that he agreed with the hon.
member for Louth in the opinion that the measure of the
right hon. pot. the number for Limerick was not one
which would regenerate Ireland ; but that hon. gent. did
not pretend that it would. Uwe' only a measure of cape-
dimes which lie wanted to alleviate the existing distress.
The lion. gent. had quoted Dr. Kane, but he would beg to
remind him that Dr. Kane altogether overlooked the
amount of capital that was annually drained out of Ireland.
While there was such a drainage of repital it was impassible
that what remained in Ireland osuld be healthily or whole-
somely cimalated.
They would find that there was no
attempt to invest capital in manufactures in Ireland, because
they could not compete with their wealthy neighbours, if they
bad not rich customenin the country to circulate their money.
Absenteeism existed during the Irish parliament, because
that parliament was held in most unconstitutional bondage,
and there was no inducement to the rich proprietor to reside
in Ireland, when he found his country impoverished by laws
that crippled commercial enterprise, and prevented the in-
dustry of the people from being developed. In 1782 the
absentee drain amounted to upwards of two millions annu-
ally, but in that year freedom of trade and legislation were
accomplished, and from that period up to 1800 they
had the testimony of Lord Clare that no country
in the world ever made so rapid a spring in
manufactures, commerce, agriculture, and general pro►
perky as Ireland did in those eighteen years. The
absentee drain had fallen during that time to 623,3221.,
but soon after the union it began to increase, and had steadily
grog vaned until now, when, according to the statement
Of Lord Cloneurry, it amounted to six millions and a half
per annum. Ireland had constantly progressed from 1782 to
1800, when she VIES again smitten dews by the union, which,
by taking away her parliament, removed every inducement
for the rich proprietors to remain at home. Since then, the
country had become miserably impoverished; the land-
lords had got into debt, which
_produced an additional
drain, and the manufactures of Ireland being destroyed,
they had to send money out of the country to purchase what
they required; therefore, the capital of the country was
drained is every way, and it should be the policy of England
to stop these drains' and give Ireland the use of her own
capital. He would give the fullest coedit to some of the
landlords for the efforts they bad made, and were still
making, to relieve the necessities of the people, and amongst
them were to be found the Duke of Devonshire, the Marquis
of Londonderry, the Marquis of Abercorn, and other noble
lords, who did au immense deal of good ; but all that we,
beside the question, unless it could be proved that if they
came back to Ireland they would become bad landlords.
Calton, son annsum, natant, qui trans mare current,
was the moxim of the poet; aud could the sky, or the soil of
Ireland change the dispositions of such men to do good
amongst their. tenantry 1 (Hear, hear.) From the union p
to the present time there had been an ezeme of 20,000,0'0/.
of Irish revenue remitted to England over the amount of
English Manua remitted to Ireland; and the present an-
nual outgoings from Ireland was 22,2500001., whilst the
total amount of the annual receipt* by Ireland, was only
14,390,0001., showing anexcessof upwardsof B,ooo,oool.,whith
were annually taken from this impoverished country.
Was it not, therefore, natural that the Irish should grasp at
everythiug that would keep this money in Ireland ? They
wanted to supply the natural inducement to the owners of
property to hen at home ; and if Ireland had her own par-
liament they would have a string interest in doing so. If
be did not feel that a repeal of the union was certain, he
would advocate a permanent absentee tax ; but in the pre-
sent wretched and impoverished state of Ireland, it was im-
mediately and imperatively necessary to compel, if they
could not induce, the owners of property to go back to Ire-
land, and spend a portion of their money is that °poetry.
Hear, hear.)
Lard CASTLEREAGH wished to express his assent in
Oliat had Men from the hon. member for Louth (Mr.
Bellew) that absenteeism wee net the sole cease of the misery
at Intend. He did not repectiaie the motion of the boa.
member for Limerbik, bat he thought that es the govern.
mem were about to Merano* a fill for facilitatingthe
traushr of property in behead, it was not desirable that it
should be inaandsend wit/ sash a tan as that proreed ; sad,

moreover, be thought that the new poor-law would too great
extent meet the evil so justly complained of. There wee no
doubt that there were many Irish landlords who neglected
thsir duties, and the right boo. baronet the member for
Marylebone (Sir B. Hall) had done his tamest to show up
the landlords of Ireland. Ile had, however, obtained the
reward of his exertions in being thanked the other day by
the Maryls bone vestry u a gadboy—(laughter)—end he
had no doubt the hon. baronet's prapects foe the next
election had been greatly improved—(s laugh) ; nevertheless,
he hoped the hon. baronet would believe that there were
many Irish proprietors who were most anxious tu do every
thing in their power to improve the condition of the

country.
Col. RAWDON speed with the noble lord who had just
sat down, that the resolution of the hon. member for
Limerick did not go far enough ; for he was of opinion that
those who had jointures and annuities should be wed for
the benefit of the country. He did not so much value the
money which might be raised froin an absentee-tax as the
moral pod which would be effected if landlords were
obliged to become residents. In going through
Ireland a person would be able to say at once,
from the appearance of tho country, where there
were resident landlords and where there were not.
An absentee-tax would not affect such persons as the noble
lord the member for Tint ton, who spent the whole of his
estate in Ireland in improving the land. (Hear.) He
I would support the resolution by his vote the more readily,
because it marked with some degree of censure those who
ab.ented themselves from the country at a time of great na-
tional:calamity (Hear.) The bon. and gallant member, in
eandrios, reed &letter which he had
tivivedplferomm&laadt
part
e( =smaling the sufferings of
I Mr. FITZGERALD said that one of the greaten evils
of Ireland was that of absenteeism. He believed that
dr small resident proprietors were capable of doing
1 taw good by the example, encouragement, and
aides which they gave the people, than any money which
sent into the country by the absentee proprietors.
Ms thoesktrat anything which would abate the evils elate
mated= ought to meet with the ready approbation of the
home. The hon. member for Southwark said the the
aleentoe proprietors spent mere money in Ireland thins the
resident proprietors. That struck him with great surrion
more especially as he heard, by way of complaint, that the
proprietors of that country spent more than they re-
ceived—that they spent a guinea for every Is. 6d.
(Laughter.) He admitted that no property was better
=nerd than that of the Irish society, but the improve-
ments ware of late date. Ile agreed in the resolution, and
tiorght the hon. member for Limerick deserved thanks
he barging forward the subject. He knew an instance of a
large prop, ray, where the tenants had not seen the proprie-
tors for forty years. That was the case of Mrs. Oliver Gas.
coigne ; but her representatives now resided 011 the property,
to the great benefit of the tenantry. The Marquis of Or-
monde also sold his property in England, and resided on his
estate in Ireland, the team's., on which were now most
comfortable. Lords Mountesahel and Glengall were also
resident landlords, to the greet advantage of their tenants.
He hoped their example would be followed by others and
that the list mentioned by the hon. member for Limerick
would be diminished.
Mr. R. YORKE said ke wished to propound two ques-
tions ; first, how absenteeism was to be defined ; secondly,
how a tax on absenteeism was to be reconciled with the non.
iiitrsion of the great constitutional principle of primal
liberty. If any hon. gentleman would answer these ques-
tions es shortly as he had put them he would vote Is, the
motion. (Laughter.)
After a few words from Mr. V. Stuart,
Mr. S. CRAWFORD said be thought that if Inland was
to continue apart of the United Kingdom, whatever legisla-
tion might be adopted, it should be comma' to both coun-
tries. (Hear, hear.) If for example, an Irish proprietor
were to be taxed for regain/ *.mui England, an Basilan pro-
prietor residing In Tressed d also be taxed. He knew
manyabsenteepropiellenwhose estates were better managed
than those of reddest ones. A resident proprietor in Ireland
who rads& in a port of the wintry which-was distant from
his peppery wee cats se negligent of his duty as if he re-
sided in England. The proposed poor-law would, he
thought, establish a peeper system of responsibility. Fearing
thst the evils attendant on the proposed tax would counter-
brutes the good, he would not vote for the proposition in
Nos present shape.
Alter • few words from Mr. W. S. O'Bant in reply, the
hour divided—
Fee the motion l9
Against it 7O-61
REMOVAL OF SMITHFIELD MARKET.

Mr. 0. GORE moved for a "select committee to inquire
int* the necessity for the removal of Smithfield market as a
nuisance in the centre of the British metropolis, to some ap-
propriate site comprising an area of not less than twelve
acres, and the establishment of abattoirs in the vicinity of
London." The hon. member said he would nominate the

committee on Monday week.
Lord MORPRTH said a committee on that subject was
appointed in the year 1828, and from the report which was
presented, it certainly appeared that there was great room
for improvement, Ile believed, that in consequence of that
report the Corporation of the City of London had since
made some improvemonta, and had enlarged the area of the
market. But it was undeniable that there still remained
ground of complaint, both on account of danger to life, and
on account of the neighbouring districts. There was, in
feet, an ample cane for further inquiry, and to that inquiry
no obstacle would be interposed by the government. He
would suggest to the hon. member, that in constituting his
committee, he should give due weight to all the great
interests concerned.
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN said, this question was one
which deeply affected the interests both of the country
which he represented and of the farmers of England
generally. None of the parties concerned with whom he
war acquainted objected to an inquiry; and he had no
hesitation in saying that he thought the appointment of an
impartial committee would be attended with good results.
Mr. WAILLEY had been requested by persons residing
in the neighbourhood of Smithfield to oppose the motion ;
but so great did he consider the evils requiring to be reme-
died, that he could not consent to take that course. He
thought the present system was attended with very great
cruelty to animals, as well **inconvenience to the public.
Mr. PROTHEROR said that one serious grievance war
the fact of the market being. held on the day immediately
following Sunday. That -eircuraitanee caused a great dese-
cration of the Sabbath. The drovers were employed nearly
the whole of Sunday in preparing to drive the cattle into
Smithfield. It would be much better if Tuesday were the
day fixed for holding the principal market.
Mr. Ald. HUMPHREY *burred that the cattle were not
permitted to be driven into Smithfield until after six o'clock
on Sunday evening, and consequently the drovers, if they
wished to go to church, could find time to go either on Sun-
day morning or afternoon. If they removed Smithfield
market they must take cue that they did not create a still
greater nuisance by permitting cattle to be driven from one
part of London to the other, instead of merely into the
market and out of it.
• ' -

Mr. it. YORKE said that was just his idea ; but the hon.
gentleman having anticipated him in expressing it, he could
only observe that it was his idea. (Loud laughter.) It was
an idea of which he was very proud. (Renewed laughter.)
Mr. HENLEY expressed an opinion that it would be
better that this question should be desk with by the govern.
meat at once • and
Sir B. HALL concurred in this opinion, and also urged
that unless they constructed slaughter-hours they would do
no good by abolishing the market at Smithfield.
Mr. D. GARDNER made an observation, and Mr. 0. GORE
having replied,
The motion was agreed to. with some verbal amendments.
MR. MARA'S CASE.
The Earl of LINCOLN then rose to call the attention of
the hone to the petition of Mr. Richard Weston Mar
formerly Registrar of Friendly Societies in Ireland, who had
been recently deprived of his appointment. In the course
of the last session of parliament a bill was brought in and
passed upon the subject of friendly societies. The functions
to be discharged by the registrars were under that bill some-
what altered, but no one ever supposed that the position of
the registrars themselves was affected in any way whatever.
Those registrars in England, Ireland, sad Scotland, all con-
tinued to carry on their duties. Mr. Mara as one of them,
engaged an office and a clerk in Dublin, to Perform the extra
work devolved upon him. Mr. Trevelyan, of the Treasury,
corresponded with him for two months as registrar in Ire-
land, and everything want on as if no alteration was ever
thought of. It appeared, however, that all this time a de-
sign had existed in the Home Secretary'si office to supersede,
if possible, Mr. Mara. That gentleman haying occasion to
correspond with Sir George Grey, most unexpectedly re-
ceived a reply written by Sir William Somerville,
informing him that his office was vacant and in the
gift of the commissioners of the national debt. That
this design Wei limited to the office of the Home
Secretary was proved by the fact that subsequent to this
letter the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was one of the
commissioners of the national debt, continued to correspond
with Mr. Mars as registrar. In the course of a short time,
however, Mr. Man was superseded, and a Mr. Connell re-
ceived the appointment. It was said, when this subject was
before the House of Lords, that Mr. Contell was appointed
because it was very desirable that the registrar should be a
barrister in the confidence of the Attorney-Oeneral and the
government of the day. It was curious enough, however,
that by Mr. Connell's appointment those results were not
attained ; for Mr. Connell was simply a private friend of the
Attorney-General for Ireland, and not a barrister holding
any public position. Now he (the Earl of Lincoln) should
argue upon this case, first, that the removal of Mr. Mara
was illegal under the act ; second, that if legisl, it was in
direct contravention of the intention of the legislature ; end
third, that if neither of these arguments were sound, It was at
least impolitic as to the public end unjust as to the individual.

The CHANCELLOR of the EX6IIEQUEft referred to
the various appointments to the office in Scotland and Ire-
land for several years past, to show that previous to the
frof the present act the invariable practice bad been
tihnel Lord Advocate in Scotland and the AttortiepO•ne-
ral in Ireland to appoint a new person upon each change of
government. It was quite clear, therefore, that bad the pre-
sent act not been pawed, the Attorney-General for Ireland
would, upon the change of government, last July, have ap-
pointed some friend of his own in the place of Mr. Mara.
Now, although it was not until the eth of July that his noble
friend was sworn into *dice, the right hon. Miscast bad an-
nounced his resignation on the 29th of June, and it was sub-
sequently to that that the bill became law. The right hoe.
gentleman had still the power to)nake appointments,but they
all knew it wee not usual to do ao, when a minister merely
held office until his succor should be appointed.
(Meer, haw.) He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) wee
unaware of the prang of the act until the Lord Advocate
or Attorney-Nnenl called his attention to the fact towards
the end of July, observing, at the same time, that ft was
, by that act, for the commissioners for the nuke-
ties of the notional debt, of whoa he wee ex-olleio chair-

man to appoint persons in Scotland and Ireland to perform
the duties of the office in question. He looked at the act,
and then, as now, mulct only pat the me interpretation upon
it, am explained by the lawyers of both countries, that it was
hie duty to make a new appointment ; and that whether Mr.
Mara; or Mr. Connell were to be the person, it was equally
and indispensably necessary that a new sued distinct appoint-
ment should be made. If the late government bad remained
in office long enough they would probably have appointed
Mr. Mara, but their successors were not bound to carry out
their intention in such a matter, and, seeing that he had
only been six months in the office, he certainly could nut
be supposed to have any vested right entitling him to be con-
tinued permanently under the ant. He had not the least
objection to give the papers, if the noble lord thought lit
to press his motion.
Mr. OOULBUEN had listened with great attention to
the right hon. Bart, but thought that • greet deal of
what he had said was completely beside the question. It
was true that, as a general rule, the officer appointed by the
Attorney-Oeneral should go out with his superior, but here
was a ease, where inconsequence of the inconvenience arising
from such a practice, special legislation bad been called in
to alter it. He thought that tne appointment had been
made in a manner which sou much to be regretted, and that
Mr. Mara bad a very fair ground of mievanee.
Tba CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained
that he had never heard or said anything to the detriment
of Mr. Mara's character.
The motion was then agreed to.
ORE ECE.
. -

Lord J. MANNERS poetponed until after Easter his
motion respecting the again of Greece.
RAJAH OF SATTARA.
Mr. HUME rose, pursuant to notice, to move for copies of
* despatch from the secret committee of the Court of Direc-
tors of the East India Company to the right hon. the Go-
venier•General of India respeetine the ex .Rajah of Sat era,
dated the 24th day of March, 1846; and a copy of the reply
of the right hnn. the Governor-General of India to that de-
'patch : together with copies of the several documents re-
ferred tofu that reply, or connected with it: of any other
letters which have been addressed by the present Governor-
General of India to the Court of Directors of the East Indis
Company, or to the secret committee of the East India Com-
pany. relating to the ease of the ex•Rejah of Setters, from
the period of his lordship's arrival in India to the present
time of the minutes of dissent of members of the Court of
Directors which hare been recorded by any member of that
court, and not hitherto published, relating to the ease
of the ex-Rajah of Sattara, from the 30th day of
April, 1840, to the present time. The boa member
mid that what he asked for was but a simple art ofjus-
tice, a means of vindicating the character of a much-injured
man. if the papers in question were likely to injure the
Rajah, they would be produced at once: and believing, she
did, that their production would redound to his credit, he
(Mr. Hume) trusted that the government would not refuse
their production.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said that the question for the
house to consider was, whether it would be expedient to pro-
duce copies of a confidential cerreepondence between the
Court of Directors and the Governor-General of India. He
believed that the papers asked for did not contain the matter
anticipated by his hon. friend; but whether or not, there
was one reason which was, in his (Sir J. C. Hobhouse's)
opinion, quite conclusive as to the expediency of pro-
ducing them. Ti the disgrace of the parties con-
cerned be it said, copies of these despatches bad
surreptitiously found their way to Ragland. (Hear.)
His hon. friend had seen them indeed, he had put the
despatches into his (Sir J. Hobhouse's) hands. He asked, if
by giving the sanction of parliament to the production of
these papers, they would not be encousiging fraud, perjury,
sad breath of trust ?—and if euch transactions were caws-
tenanced by the governmeet here, it would make it impossible
to carry on government in India. I t was clear from the terms of
the motion that some such breach of confidence had been
committed, for the very dates were given. He would not go
into the question of the guilt or innocence of this prince, but
he would urge the house not to do anything to encourage an
act like this. Did his bcrn, friend really want the papers ?
He knew Major Carpenter's sentiments—he had got the
papers. Why were they not brought before the
Court of Directors ? Because they were ashamed of
being asked how they got them—whether they had bought
them or stolen them. He had asked his hon. friend if he
had stolen them—(laughter)—and 'he in the most honour
able manner expressed his disapproval of the transaction ;
but would it not be potting the seal on it if the house con-
sented to this motion, and which it would not he easy to re-
move? (Hear, hear.) If it had not been for this roguery and
thievery , having no wish to prejudge the cause of this prince,
he would have produced the papers; but now he would not •
and he threw himself on the house for support, (Hearj
This was not the first refusal ; for the Court of Directors h
refused them by a majority of 14 to 8 ; but even bad they not
refused them he would. (Hear.)
Mr. WILLIAMS said that the papers were refused only
en the ground that they were surreptitiously obtained; and
the right hon. gentleman did net deny that they would vin-
dicate the character of the rajah.
Sir J. HOBHOUSE—I say they do not,
Mr. WILLIAMS : That was the question in difference,
and was a ground for the production of the papers. He
thought it was the duty of the Board of Control to enable
the house to establish the innocence of this prince, and he
hopedhis hen. friend would take the sense of the house upon
his motion.
Mr. BRIGHT said the right hon. gentleman had made
charges against those who had obtained these papers. He
(Mr. Bright) knew some of the parties whe were interested
in this question in this country, and they were totally igno-
rant of the source from whence they came. It was not diffi-
cult in France to get copies of official documents. The right
hon. gentleman did not wish to withhold these papers except
on the ground of the dishonest mode of obtaining them. He
was surprised that the right hon. gentleman should take so
low a ground for his refusal. He thought there ought to be
an investigation to show whether the rajah had suffered in-
justice or not, and it should be known in India that there
was a high court of appeal in this country in cases like this.
After a few weeds from Sir E. COLEBROOKI and Mr.
AOLION NY, urging the production of the papers,
Mr. ESCOTT concurred in the reprehension which had
been expressed with regard to the fraud by which these
documents had been obtained, but thought, as this infor-
mation was necessary to enable the house to form a correct
judgment on the case of the Ex-Rajah of Satter*, when it
was brought forward by the hon. member for Montrose, the
motion ought now be granted,
Sr It PEEL thought the right bon. baronet at the head
of the Board of Control was quite right in the course he
had taken in refusing the production of these documents on
the ground he had stated, and he hoped he would not qaalify
that refusal by a promise to produce them at some future
time.
Dr. BOWRING supported the motion of the hon. mem-
ber for Montrose, on the ground that the information sought
was only an act of justice to the injured and deposed
prince.
Lord PALMERSTON joined in resisting the motion.
Mr. HUME said, that at that late hour he would not
press the first part of his motion, but would take so much of
it as the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Hobhuuse) consented to.
The motion was, by leave, withdrawn, and, on the motion
of Mr. Hume a return was ordered of copies of the minutes
of diligent of members of the Court of directors which have
been recorded by any member of that court, and not hitherto
published, relating to the case of the Ex-Rajah of Sattara,
from the 30th day of April, 1840, to the present time.