The Express.
London, England, 1851-06-25 00:00:00

mettle people and produce a spirit of insane-e—
-thos en amid Indus to the other. (H hear.) It wu
as IMO otbialt would never he forgiven ear,
by his class, or by
✓tillikelrlit whom had been inflicted so deep a wrong.
e 1,8 bid ma Indian territory by the respect which we
bod Aiwa tot temples and mosques and zealous. (Rear,
ben.) If we were to despise the means by which we had
111111 Ma it, and could diuegard' the feeling% of the people
al Sea subjects, they might depend on it that our tenure
at tuna would not be worth • fortnight's purchase.
=.) The noble lord concluded by moving for the pro-
of the charges against Jotee Pershaud our army
isestrector in India, and of the verdict given on the trial.
Lord BROUGHTON rose to reply lie should take
the liberty, in the first plate, of saying that he was
most happy to find that the charge which in the first
instance hid been brought against the government of India
had not been repeated that evening by the noble earl, but,
on the contrary, that he had had tise candour and straight-
forwardness to own that the charge of the govern-
ment of India having instituted a criminal proceeding
in order to stop a civil suit had no foundation. But
that was the first charge which had been made—
a charge which if well founded, would have made the
government of India liable to all the imputations, and to
mere than all, the imputations cast on it by the noble earl.
The case, however, was exactly the contrary. The civil
suit was not instituted until after the early and the really
important part of the criminal investigation had been en-
tered on. But it would be easy to show that there were
good grounds for supposing that the civil suit was insti-
tuted in consequence of the criminal prosecution. The
facts of the cast could bo briefly stated as far as they
affected a justification of the government of India in hav-
ing taken these proceedings. On the 30th of March,
a native of Agra, mixed up in the affairs of Jotee
Pershaud: sent in a representation to the authorities stating
that Jotce Penhaud had been guilty of corruption, em-
bezzlement, and forgery in connection with his dealings i
with the government of India. The case was submitted to
Major Ramsey, who reported, in the exercise of his discre- 1
tion, that he did not think the matter worthy of considers-
lion. This report was then submitted to the military board.
Two of the three constituting the military board
with Major Ramsey, that the charge made againstaT ;fee
Penhaud was unworthy of attention, but Colonel Mackie,
the third, a gentleman of great weight in the service, did
think that the accusation ought to be inquired into fully.
Such, indeed, was considered the value of the opinion of
Colonel Mackie, that the military board, in submitting their
report to the council, submitted at the same time a state-
ment of the opinion of the single dissentient. Upon all
these facie being placed before the council they were consi-
dered, and the result was that the president in council or-
dered that an investigation should take place. Mr. Cum-
mins, the chief magistrate of Agra, being at the time
absent from his post, the examination was entrusted to
ordinate magistrate, Mr. Denison • and the report which
Mr. Denison made, after carefully looking over all the
charges, was to the effect that he W ascertained one false
charge for 4,400 bullocks to have been made, and that be
had discovered an intention to make another false
for 25,000 bullocks, a charge which had not been
only in consequence of the announcement of the inquiry.
Mr. Denison did not continue the examination. On the
return of Mr. Cummins the investigation was referred te
him, as the superior officer ; and this circumstance attested
to the fairness, and not to the unfairness, with which the
inquiry had been conducted. Mr. Cummins reported '
to the effect that he had examined the whole
of the evidence, had heard several witnesses, and
that he had become satisfied of the existence of
the most extensive frauds. The noble earl had spoken
of a serious discovery which had been made with ;reference
to Mr. Denison, which had necessitated his being withdrawn
as the examiner in this case. It was quite true that Mr.
Denison bad on a previous occasion borrowed money from
Jotee Penhaud, and that this debt bad not been altogether
discharged at the time of the investigation. But in order
to show the spirit by which the government of India, or, at
least, Lord Dalhousie, desired that this inquiry should be
characterised, it was sufficient to mention that the way
first moment the Governor-General was made aware of the
position in which Mr. Denison stood to the party accused,
he gave orders that the culmination should be placed in
other hands, and be expressed himself deeply concerned
that Mr. Dcuisou should have been placed in such a posi-
tion. These were, however, not the only two magis-
trates who fame to a conclusion adverse to Jotee
Penhaud. Two other magistrates besides Mr. Cum-
mins and Mr. Denison were appointed, and concur-
rently inquired into other charges; and these two
gentlemen also reported that they had detected frauds
to a very considerable extent. Now this was all in July,
18.50, and up to that time there had been no hint on the '
part of Iota! Pershaud, or on the part of any of his friends,
of an intention to proceed with a civil suit against the
government of India for the recovery of an alleged balance
due to him. It was nut until some months after all these
reports had been delivered in, and after all this mischief
had been done to the reputation of Jotee Penhaud, that he,
or his friends, resolved to bring a civil suit in the Calcutta
court against the government.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH—After he was
arrested ?
Lord BROUGIITON—Tee, after be was arrested; but
the ono transaction followed upon the other; and the con-
nexiou could be easily traced. On the 4th of October,
11150, the attorney a Jotee Pershaud made a formal
demand and iestituted a suit for the payment of the sum
of 570,0001. The Assistant Commissary-General (Captain
Newbolt) in the commissariat department was applied
to for an explanation, and he expressed his surprise that
these demands of Jotee Pershaud should now have
been made so suddenly, no such demands ever hang
been heard of before in the department. The gamer
meat acted in the plainest and most proper manner.
And to show the spirit of fairness in which the whole affair
was conducted, he might mention that Major Bygrave,
who had been appointed to examine those accounts,
had reported that there was • balance in favour of Jot*
Penhaud.
Lord LIROUCHIAM.—How much?
Lord BROUGHTON did not know the exact amount.
Major Lawrence, who signed the minutes of conned of the
government, in a minute, an extract from which be bed lOW
before hina„ made mention of an offer which had loom nets
on the part of June Penhaud of a common% la mblob be
agreed to put an end to the civil snit if the
would abandon the criminal proesedisr AD
offer was refused. Subsequently*, et do poissi•
ings were reviewed by the mis=l anis In tab
in mute of the 4th Nowsialter, ausemmilla
approval of the detsnsiaelles aim am' to poem= le
the prosecution, in order lbol.ll It wan loam el
the character of high negoilnembil Moen nes
their misdeeds might all nem =llO 11• liti
Of, on the other hand, if lien Ins at As
imputations that their ebenelie oolglM be al 1110.1111 flea
rated. With respect to se* Sr **Odom.% be bad
only seen them in nt wampum I*owed that the
greatest indulgence had bias userPeeshaud ; there
had been no extortion pretaili NI bit. Is had forfeited
his recognieances, and he had been 101 l unmolested. lie
knew, therefore, of no charge welch mold be brought
against: the government in the matter, =tenth, noble earl
said be was not fairly tried, That, however, could not be
justly asaintaiiied ; for the jury eunisied of four half-omits
and a native, a very able adman, hell defended bias ens
be web sequined. What, the., AN dm amble earl air
plain of t Was it of an error a =id a libe
part of the governoranneral in Mons Ito lobl.
Had he not ordered the trial, would it net boa been aid'
that it wee in consequence of ear complicity between
Jotee and some high departmental eta,,, whoa ciendwit 1
the govern/tent did net wad to any, enema? What. lip, I
was to be dons widabe spaded Or aeg leambe. law of
whom had given fear ebelie isidentlutilieeimpe wig
Jotee Penhaud were weih4ll6Bl4 ens amPut hubs pew
ented ? The government Mk le Ink me eats illneonvo
than to order the trial, and be mil net see Oak iallid be
made a ground of complaint easiest the ineenneat loot
they had failed to obtain • verist Their lerdaiipe beam
that it was not always possible to .obtain a vemlbe In this
country. All that he contended for was, that lIMMIS bad
been • sufficient case to go before a jury in the natter.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH replied. He contended
that there had been a great error in judgment committed in
proceeding criminally until Jots. Pershaud had proceeded
with kis civil suit, and hail been found to rely upon docu-
mute liable to impeachment. He brought no charge against
the Governor-General, who he believed could not have acted
in any other manner than he had done ; but still he doubted
if the prosecution would have been sanctioned by him had
he been in Calcutta in February.
The motion was then, without further discussion, agreed
to.
REGISTRATION OF ASSURANCES BILL.
On the motion of Lord Cestraina. this bill was read •
third time.
On the motion that the bill do pare,
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that as their lordship*
had now arrived at the last stage of the measure, he begged
, to cell attention to one or two circumstances of an interest-
', ing character. lie believed they had succeeded in solving
, satisfactorily a most important question, involving no lees
; than the settlement of • point which had been more or lees
in agitation fur years. Although Use measure was •
government measure, and was now pseud with their full
sanction and concurrence, still the chief merit of solving
the difficulties connected with it was attributable to the
efforts of able and learned men to the members,
fur instance, of thine commissions which hail sat
upon the subject, but, most or all, to the labours of the
noble and learned Intel near him (Lord Campbell) who had
devoted his attention indefatigably to the bill. In fact, it
was the result of a complete inquiry. It would secure to
the country the most effectual of title*, place those titles
beyond all estv:l, and make them easily accessible and use-
ful on all occasions. (Hear, hear.)
The bill was then paned.
SALMON FISHERY (SCOTLAND) BILL.
This bill Rued through committee.
AGRI CULT Ult.iL DISTRESS.
Lard BERsileita preseuted petitions from boards of
WlZwed others in the counties of Leicester, Nor-
&mile, a implaicing of the continuance of
eiphripda distress, and praying that the law of
Mania mid remora I might he repealed. Some
attune he mid were n.e.-ously signed • the parties stated
Meet they were suffering ww,,,er great distress, and hoped
Mae measure might be adopt. d to relieve them from the I
rut burdens of taxation now p:eveing upon them. Ile'
asbalenstcedlordtos
had
dm
IfeOrtr
thepresc house,
b;eb.uot;i:e.teillilmeiethalyt
observes I
Mated that ether petitions to a eimfte r effect had been en- 1
that they contained three allegations—Res', existing and '
increasing distress ,• secondly, Inc ill erreet,sf the law of
settlement ; and third, the injustice and ineque'litY of the
s Ile promised on a future ociaaial to Pee-
se ystem of rating.
nt them.
COMMON LODGING-HOUSES BILL.
The Hall of BILAITEiSS 1.41 Y, whoa apeleined to their

lordships for Ere • on them so coon after his elevation,
moved the sae of this bill.
After a few wards from Earl Morro'
The Disk* of ARGYLL a:premeds hope that the bill
would be Wended to Scotland, where in the principal
towns the lodging-houses were, he said, as bad, if not
worse, than they were in England.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE Paid, this bill, like every
measure emanating from the noble earl (Shaftesbury), was
entitled to the respectful attention of their lordships.
The bill was then read a second time.
MARRIAGES (INDIA) BILL.
Upon the motion of Lord Hisovourox, certain amend-
ments to this bill were agreed to.
BRITISH WHITE HERRING FISHERY BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
Their lordships adjourned at a quarter after 7 o'clock.

ROUSE OF COMMONS.—TVESDAT, JVN 24.
The SPLAIIII took the chair at 12 o'clock.
The St. Helens Improvement Bill was read a third time
and passed.
METROPOLITAN WATER SUPPLY.
Mr. MOWATT rose to sore that the standing or-
ders be dispensed with in the awe of the Metropolitan
Water Supply (control of representative body) Bill. Ile
hoped to be able to show that the promoters of the bill
could not possibly have complied with the standing orders.
The hon. member then went into a history of the exertions
of the promoters to comply with the standing orders ; but
owing to unforeseen obstacles, and to matters of form, they
were not able to effect their purpose, although they did
their best to comply with all technical and formal regula-
tions. He considered that he had made out a case which
entitled him to ask the house to extend to this bill the
same indulgence which had been extended to the other bill
on the same question.
Mr. W. I'ATTEN said the standing orders committee
wished to have the bill before the select committee, but they
found so many insuperable obstacles that they reluctantly
abandoned their intention. The boa. member proceeded to
show that the promoters of the bill had not entitled them-
selves to the relief prayed; that the bill was too sweeping in
its objects, and that the notices which they had published
for the information of the public did not accurately define
the extent and nature of the objects sought to be attained
by the promoters. It would be a perfect absurdity to have
a committee of standing orders if a bill, like the present,
violating every standing order, could be got into that horse.
Mr. HUME said the real question was not about the
compliance with numerous standing orders or otherwise,
but whether the bill would give the means of a better sup-
ply of purer water to the metropolis than any other measure.
Ile admitted the value of an adherence to rules and regu-
lations, but was it worth while to prevent a great public
question from being fully considered and decided in order
to adhere to a technical rule. Ile hoped the house would
comply with the request to suspend the standing orders, as
the public interest really appeared to require it.
Mr. WILLIAMS thought for a slight inconsiderable
omission of a technical form a:measure of public importance
ought not to be defeated.
Sir G. GREY would not say a word about the merits of
the bills relating to this subject. He thought an appeal
ought not to be made to government to pronounce an opinion
on this question ; on the contrary, he considered it was tke
duty of government to see that the decisions of the standing
orders were adhered to, and more especially after the able
and clear statement of the hon. member opposite (Mr. \V.
Fatten.) lie denied having given any promise on the
r aubject of the bill, because lie could give no promise on the
subject, and certainly he could not, therefore, be charged
, with having caused any disappointment in consequence of
not having adhered to that promise. He gave no promise
on the merits of this or any other bill. Had the bill come
, on for second reading he should not have offered any oppo-
sition to that course.
. . . .

Sir B. HALL hoped the motion for suspending the stand-
ing orders would be withdrawn, es the feeling of the house
was obviously against it. He would, however, remind the
hon. member that every member of that house was aware
of the merits, principles, and details of the bill in question.
Mr. MOWATT, alter denying that the promoters by this
bill sought to obtain extraordinary and compubory powers,
as asserted by the hon. member (Mr. W. Puttee), to extin-
guish other companies, to supply water or to rate the inha-
bitants, withdrew his motion.
After an explanation from Mr. W. Partz.N. the motion
was, by leave, withdrawn.
RULES OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. FREWEi asked--if there wereani precedents for
government business having priority on Tuesdays ? He
had a bill which stood second on the orders for that day,
and he had been surprised to observe that in the printed
votes of that morning it was put down at the bottom. He
wished to know if the right hun. gentleman (Sir G. Grey)
had ordered the clerks at the table to put down to the bot-
tom a bill which had yesterday stood second? lle had ex-
amined the sessional orders, and could find no rule to
justify such proceedings.
Sir O. GREY said that when the house sat on the motion

of government the government business was entitled to
precedence. At these morning sittings, when met for the
transaction of specific business, such specific business took
precedence of any order placed on the paper. He believed
the Speaker would concur with him in that opinion.
The SPEAKER said that on Tuesdays, strictly speak-
ing, notices of motions had precedence °fortiori; but when
the house was invited to sit specially, the special business
had the precedence.
Mr. HUME was of opinion that it was not competent
for government to appoint 12 o'clock sittings, in order to
obtain the advantage. It was never intended that govern-
meat should have the benefit of their own days and Tues-
I days also. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. W. PATTEN said that generally towards the end
of the session, government asked the house to meet at 12
o'clock to discuss particular measures, and, of course, at
such sittings these measures were entitled to priority.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS remarked that it unfortunately

happened that when they had a morning uttiug, a house
could not be got in the evening. (A laugh.)
The subject then dropped.
PREVENTION OF OFFENCES BILL.
This bill was read a third time and palmed.
SMITHFIELD MARKET REMOVAL BILL.

Sir U. GREY having moved the third reading of this
bill
lir. A. STAFFORD begged to protest against the mea-
sure, and expressed the hope that it would be treated with
more care in another house. lie deprecated the hasty
manner in which legislation on this subject had been con-
ducted, argued that no market could compete with the
present Smithfield market, and contended that before any
alteration of the site of the market had been determined on,
there ought at least to have been provision made for pre-
serving the present market as an open space in the centre of
the metropolis. This bill, he had no hesitation in saying,
would perpetrate great injustice on the counties on the
southern side of the river, and would have the effect of
raising the price of meat. (Hear.)
Mr. lIUME urged that they possessed no information to
justify them in acceding to this measure. Government had
determined to take into their own hands the supply of an
article when it had been clearly experienced that they failed
in everything of the kind they tried. When government
took such a matter in hand, it became a job. Places were
created, salaries were given, and the public interest was
neglected. (lieu, hear.) This was the ease, with seareely
an exception, as regarded every administration for the last
fifty years. It had been the uniform advice of committees
or this house, that government should not be permitted to
erect works. The procedure of government on this subject
was both rash and inconsiderate, and violated that great
constitutional principle that municipal corporations should
be allowed to manage their own affairs. The present inter•
ferenee with the corporation of London could not be justi-
f ed. lie concluded by moving that the bill be read a third
time that day six months.
Mr.W.WILLIAMS seconded the motion, and complained
of the irresponsible powers conferred by the bill on the
Secretary of State. The Secretary of State had the appoint-
ment of the five commissioners, and had, besides, the con-
trol of these commissioners.

Sir 0. GREY had hoped that, after the repeated deci-
sions of the house on the merits of the bill, its opponents
would not have deemed it prudent to divide the house on
the present stage. He denied that government wished to
supersede the functions of the authorities of the city of
London. Government had not interfered until the city au-
thorities had, after repeated offers, refused to take the
question into consideration, and to do that which public re-
quirements had demanded. He hoped the house would ad-
here to the decision to which it arrived.

Sir J. DUI said the right hon. bironet bad not put the
question fairly before the house. So far from the city of
London being indisposed to stir in this question, the city
authorities were willing to lay out a large sum of money,
and to make such alterations and enlargements as might be
expedient.
Mr. CARDWELL defended the bill, and showed that
the committee, in 1809, complained that the area of the
market was too small for the population of that period.
That argument had since acquired greater force, in conse-
quence of the great increase of population. He contended
that the committee had done its duty, and if they were to
be blamed it was because they had imperilled a great public
reform in their desire to consider and protect vested interests.
Sir H. VERNEY said the hon. member for Northamp-
ton opposed the bill in the interest of the graziers, where's
he (Sir H. Verner) opposed it because at present, when the
graziers sent their cattle to Smithfield, they were at the
merry of the butchers, and were frequently obliged to sell
at a loss. What the graziers wanted was to have conve-
nient fields and sheds where the cattle which were not sold
might be placed.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE opposed the bill because it was to the
advantage of the southern counties that they should have
the cattle market in the centre of the metropolis, rather
than it should be five miles to the north.
The house then divided—
For the third reading Bl
Against it
CHURCH BUILDINGS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
On the order of the day for the second reading of this
bill,
Sir G. GREY said the bill was founded on the report of a
commission laid before parliament last year on the sub-
, divi•ion of parishes. The bill made provision for the endow-
ment of these sub-divisions of pari,hes in certain cases.
One proeis:on was that the Church Building Com-
mimi,mers woe authorised is certain cases to flx a scale
of pew-rents. ,that provision was objected to last night b
the hon. member . roe e Montrose, and when that objection
was pointed out to lz.na he certainly thought it was a matter
of great difficulty to effix pew-rents except by universal
conscut upon pews wives had been already appropriated
as free sittings for the poir. That referred to one clause of
the bill. There were °the:provisions which could only be
considered in committee. lie should state before they
went into committee the enures he proposed to take with
repeal to the claim* to wltie4 041100011 bad boa as ,