The Express.
London, England, 1856-06-25 00:00:00

(Stamped ld. Additional.) [TWOPENCE.

IMPERIAL P.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—TUUDAY, Ants 24.
noir Lordships roe t .t live o'clock.
LAW OP DIVORCE.
Lord LYNDHURST brought op the report of the select
etaaatittee as the law of &votes and pve notion that on
Thanday seat Ito could move that It be referred to a con-
shoe el the whole how.

to give his bill any charm of paring, be must entirely alter
the form of it, for as it cow shred, it was the greatest botch
ever sent out of that house. On ell former occasions when
any chugs was made In the oath, the old oath was repealed
and a new form gutted; but the noble earl proposed to
enact that a clause should be left in one place, a few words
is another, and a couple of words added io a third. If the
bill pared, it would be impossible for any officer to tell what
form of oath he wee to administer. He he pod the noble
earl would propose loch a form of oath as to thought ought
to be preserved, and send It down in such a shape as the
House of Commons would agree to.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE could not allow the
bill to pass without impressing his dissent. He objected
entirely to the bill, for whatever might be its merits, the
marten in which it was introduced pieced their lordships in
• most offensive attitude to the Howe of Common+. At a
future stage he would move the rejection et the bill.
The Earl of WICKLOW approved of the principle of
the bill.
The Earl of DERBY said he had proposed the bill in its
present form to avoid say chance of a conflict with the
House of Consorts. If be had adopted the course suggested
by the Lord Chief Justice, aud, repealing the existing oath,
had proposed • use one, retaining the words " ea the true
faith of a Christian," he would hove thrown a direct &al-
rep to the Hoar of Commons; but the course be had
adopted would enable them to get rid of ea objeetioseble and
' anneeerrery oath without allies the attentioa of the other
home to the 'arrester worde on which the &Moreau arose.
He was sure he only did justice to the House of Commons
in thinking that they would not volunteer a second cutest
in the course of this serion, and would not reject a bill which
all desired.

11;•hilltras thee read a *wood tine.
Their lordships adjoessed at twenty minutes to eight.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-TIIESDAY, Ana 24.
(Continued from the Express of yesterday.)
NAWAB OF BURAT TREATY
HOOO, who opposed the third reading of the bill,
recapitulated the history of the treaty, the objects for which it
was entered into, end the grounds upon which the But
India Company resisted the claim of Meer Jeffir Ali Eh'..
Hr. Y. SMITH denied that the government were ob-
sessions to anything like shame in respect to the cqnspromise
which bad been some to in this matter. The whole goer
Yost bad been one of compromise, and they were j notified in
oontinaing so to treat it. Tbey hed dealt with the question
with fairness and moderation, and with a desire to do justice
to all patties. His bon. friend had greatly iszsggeraied the
feats, and had spoken es though he were the Band of Di-
rectors of the But India Company ; but the government
had acted throughout is consonance with the views of the
Rut India Board. His knowledge of than views was ne-
cessarily derived from the celetal correspondence with the
chairman and deputy-chairmen, end that correspondence
had led him toe very different eonclesion as to their feeling
in this case from that stated by his bon. friend.

Bir J. HOGO—Fourteen tritwo.
Mr. V. SMITH—WeII, but that gave him (Mr. V.
Smith) the two. He denied that he was bound by the
opinions of the previous Presidents of the Board
of Control, if, upon a fuller essmination of the facts,
he felt that that opinion mould not be maintained. He had
always been of opinion that the deposed sovereigns of India
should be treated with great liberality. He d:d not think that
liberality had been shown in this case. He admitted that
a private bill was not the best mode of dealing with this
question, and therefore be advised that it Avoid be ar-
ranged by the Court cf Directors out of doom. The hon.
gentleman had referred to a paper in which the Eet India
Company declared that they were ready to deal with the
question with the utmost liberality. Want was that but
the suggestion of • compromise ? lint, if the East India
Company was right ie their statement, that the &Howson'
they made to the late Ameer's family was inertly an act of
liberality, he could not undorstend what the question of
oollaterel heirs had to do with it, inasmuch as the money
was the property of the company, and nobody else had say-
thing to do with it. The question was one which should be
tr. ated by the house judicially ; and though to ollectil to
its being brought forward as a private bill, he thought it
would be most unjust to the claimants, seeing tint theta was
a deficiency of appeal, to refuse the claim on that ground.
but that it would be more satisfactory to pars the bill sad
then refer the whole OW to the House of Lords. In future, be
thought it would be well to consider whether there should
not be the some protection given io the Indian revenue as
ems mow Einem Ica* eseenne of this OVUM by the Mao&
lag Orden* of the house.
Mr. 0. BUTT as a member of the committee on the bill
expressed his full concurrence in the views enuncia'ed by
the right hon. gentleman. The true construction of the
treaty left so doubt of the genuineness of this claim.
Mr. LO WE, without offering any opinion on the question
as between Meer Jar and the East ladle Company, said
there was another point which also involved the important
question of British justice, sod which came before him
when he was Secretary to the Baud of Control. That was
the righta of those poor, absent, and misrepresented panties
who, ender the set of distribution passed by the govern-
ment of Bombay, bad now an interest in the property of the
lets Nawab, and which interest would be prejudiced by this
bill. Those persons were sot heard before the committee,
bet Meer JaMr All was permitted to npresent his case as
against theirs in their adman, and upon that representation
the eommittrais decided upon re-opening a cue which had
been decided by the government of Boastny--• iribunal of
Reel appeal—and by an on poet facto law, and upon am
en parts statement, to reverse that decision, and deprive the
pettiest* whom be referred of property to which they ware
legally entitled.
The BOLICITOB-CIENEEAL thought that the East
India Company, when they took the dominions of the
Newels, undertook to make • certain provision for the
Nawab and his family, but afterward. they passed an ut—
ile set to which the right hon. gi ninnies (Mr. Li we) bad
referred—which pronounced that the East India Company
should be the sole interpreters and the sole judges of the
intent of their obligation. Could there be • great' r mockery
of justice ? The House of Commons was called upon to re-
view the decision of that tribunal, and to afford the means
of finally determining what were the rights of the parties.
If this bill had co °tilt r good tffsot, it would at least prove
to the people of ladle that they might depend upon British
justice—the best foundation upon which our Indian empire
weld rest. _ _

-81; ii.-WILLOUGHBY suggested that 'be Solicitor-
-1 General's argument would deny to India all legislative
poem or legislative rights. The question was not one be-
Mum the But India Company and the claimant but be-
' tween the trustees sad the Crown, ate the dispoial of this
Isom of 16,0051. a year. He recommended that an oppor-
tunity should be afforded to the Leadenball street board ea&
the Board of Control, who appeared to be nearly agreed, to
re-seasideet the question, and arrange it, and that the bill
should he put off for a few dope for that purpose.
Mr. MANGLES denied that the set cf the Indian lees.
tabus pet into the hands of the Indian Compuy the power
of deciding their own caw, as the Sol eitur-General had
stated, or the power to interpret the treaty nude with the
late Newab. The set in question wee oonfload entirely to
the diatosal of the property of the lute Nswab.
After a few words from Mr. DANS! SITMOUIP,

Ti:hoase dieided— .
Apes 213
Noas 2B-186
The bill was socordisely read a third time sad passed.