The Express.
London, England, 1858-05-14 00:00:00

gee expreoo.

Attartlismoste tsiZarst "Tbasplam•jsedes Insitag Ism
mat le at the fibs 10.1assiabralayst. brtv•VOlssit as ths
W it pabikalisa

UMPOUZIL/Re.
TM WWl*. TWEL/TH NIOUT. Ilaskatasclin. O.Y.emig
—PLUTO 4/ID litOmpasa MM. L. Lamaarag,
Welabil—JAo‘ll &RUM MOM CANTON.—AaI YOUI
11r1LL2.—Orr all.

PHINOMMIS.
Tan Rramtk, Ntlalo RATH ORAHNIL—KINO LEAH. Ile
o.lhas.—Aad WIIIIL 1111 SPASM OP HIMURILP.—.Opma at
lelfolet

Two ammo, WIVIII Tatitaro IMFD.
frahrd, a~•
sad 101 l Pilaw; Nim Mbelp624:=
To:AIR BOOTS. Ni. Widdlortb.—Aad OILLKOND NUN.
are lance.—Ouisisassel baaPprillt

NIGH WAND. AT LONDON BILIDGI.
Tins DAT—rimes. 111. 1fia..........After0me. Ili. 4ea.
T 1 masse—rims. a Om— .. —....Allemsa IL 11.

LONDON, 121IDAY, MAY 14.

Wawant Mr. Canowzu.'s Resolution—regarded
merely as a party move—be affirmed or negatived.
is to as a matter of the most perfect indifference.
Net so when it is considered with reference to the
effect the vote of the House will have in India. We
therefore embrace what may be our last opportunity
to adjure the House of Commons to pause before it

panes a Resolution—merely to subset re the interests
of party—which may convulse our Indian dominions
from Arrakan to Peshawur, and from Cape Comorin
to the Himalaya--which may, in effect, " cry havoc,
" and let slip the dogs of war" among hundreds of
millions of human beings.
Mr. CARDWELL'S Resolution affirms two propo-
sitiou : the first, that it is matter for regret
and apprehension that Lord ELLENDOROUOTA
Despatch wu written ; the second, that it is matter
for regret and apprehension that the Despatch has
been published. The latter affirmation is perfectly
harmless. The propriety or impropriety of the pub-
lication of the Despatch is an open question, upon
which men may warrantably hold different opinions,
sad may express them without danger. The first of
the two affirmations is of a very different character.

It must be borne in mind that Mr. CARDWELL'S
Resolution sets out with declaring that the House
" la its present state of information abstains from
"impressing an opinion of the policy of any Prosla-
-4 11101111 which may hare been loaned by the Go-
es

in relation to Onde." It then I
goes on to say that the Hose " has seen with
" regret and apprehension that her MAJESTY'S
" Government hare addressed to the Goeratsoa-
u GENERAL, through the Secret Committee of the.
" Court of Directors • • • a Despatch condemn-
" ing in strong terms the conduct of the Govan/fox-
" Gerentsz." Common sense and common justice
regain that before °ensuring the Government for
"condemning the conduct of the GOVERNOR.
" Gmsalat.," the House should inquire whether the
esudact of the Ootaahok-GairLL was or was not
deserving of blame. To censure the expression of oon-
osennationbyGovernment,whiledecliningtovindicste
the conduct of the Govtaisoa-Garixast, is virtually
to declare that no Home Government has a right to
oondenin anything that a Governor-General sees
fit to say or do. It is to declare that the GOVERNOR-
ORNIULAL is not a Viceroy exercising delegated
authority, but an absolute Sovereign invested with
irreeponsible power during his period of office,
whom no one can call to amount. It is to
strip the Crown and the Company alike of all
power, and to place the whole of India at the mercy
of a despot in Calcutta. The words of the
Resolution mean this if they mean anything ; and
far the Members of the House of Commons to attempt
to get out of the difficulty by saying that they do
not expect them to be so literally construed, will be
to trifle scandalously with the discharge of an in-
portent duty. This tint affirmation in the Resole-
non is unfair, inasmuch as it condemns Government
upon exactly the same amount of evidence which it
declares insufficient to enable it to pronounce • Ind
judgment on the Govannia.GENERAL ; it is fasiddy
suicidal, inasmuch as it disclaims on the part et the
Imperial Government (of which in the wider our
el the word the House of Commons is a part) all
right to control or censure their head-servant in India.
This is matter that concerns the home public mainly.
The sense in which the Resolution of Mr. CARDWELL
may be understood in Hindostan concerns both Eng-
lend and India. It is maintained by some that
Lord CANNING'S Proclamation is calculated
to inspire with a sense of insecurity every proprietor
and possessor of land in Oude. This is denied by
others. Our own opinion has been too often and too
frankly declared to render it necessary to re-state it
here. We do not take up that pound at primpat
It is sufficient for our purpose that the meaning of
the Proclamation as regards "confiscation," and its

probable effect on the minds of the people of India,
is disputed. The controversy can only be decided
by farther information from India. Even Mr.
CARDWELL admits that the House of Commons
cask; "in its present state of information," to ab-
stain " from expressing an opinion " on the subject.
If, then, the House of Commons, "in the pre-
" sat state of its information," censures the
condemnation of Lord CANNING'S Proclamation
by the Government, it will declare that, in
its opinion, Lord CanNtrio's policy ought to
be upheld even in the event of its proving
to be a policy of ruthless and indiscriminate con.
tMafia. We know that some who are prepared to
rapport Mr. CARDwELL's Resolution will protest in.
dignantly against even the suspicion of their being
capable of harbouring each an intention. We be-
lieve them; but we tell them that among those who
are hounding them on to pane that Resolution, there
are some who will not shrink from such a conclu-
sion. There are some who unblushingly avow their
advocacy of a sis viva, policy in Oxide. The adop-
tion of the CAtiziwzu. Resolution by the House of
Careneons will be interpreted throughout India, if
set as a decree for universal confiscation in Chide,
yet as a declaration that if such confiscation is de-
ereedby the GOVERNOR-GENERAL it will receive the
sanction of the Imperial Government ; and every
native of India will ask his neighbour, Is our tarn
to mew next ? The adoption of Mr. Canowttt's
motion, as it now stands, by the House of Commons,
will be enough to convert every native of India into
a dusky Ribbonman or agrarian insurgent.

So far we have canvassed the demerits of this
Bssehttion, without reference to its paternity. We
hsee analysed it as it lies before as, without asking
who are Its asthma. The question of authorship is,
kvinver, a material one. We are given to under-