The Sun.
London, England, 1864-02-12 00:00:00

THE CASE OF LIEU'!'. TINLING.

- _
Lord CHELMSFORD called the attention of the First
Lord of the Admiralty to the particulars as the death of
Lieut. Tinling, of H.M.S. Encounter, at Soushing, on the
sth of March, 1863, and asked for an explanation of state-
ments made by the Secretary of the Admiralty respecting
the same. The noble lord the secretary had said he could
not state that the gallant officer had died in the performance
of his duty. It was urged that, although at the time he fell
he was under the command of his captsin, yet, as that cap-
tain was acting beyond the limits of his duty at the time,
the lieutenant could not be said to have died in the service
of his country. He contended, however, that an inferior
officer. who was obeying the instructions of his command-
ing officer, must be considered as acting in the performance
of his duty.

The Duke of SOMERSET, in reply, read a letter from
Captain Dew, stating that at the time of his death Lieut.
Tinling had not proceeded to Soushing by his orders or on
duty ; all officers who accompanied him on his visits to that
place were considered as being on leave. Captain Dew
said he had cautioned Lieut. Tinling and all other officers
against going under fire on their visits to Soushing, which
was then being besieged by the Imperialist forces. No doubt
Lieut, Tinling had on the occasion he met his death behaved
with the same distinguished gallantry which he had shown
on previous occasions, but he could not say that he had died
in the performance of his duty.

Earl GREY contended that although Lieut. Tinling was
acting in an irregular kind of service, he was still virtually
under the command of his captain. He protested on public
grounds against the mode in which her Majesty's officers,
both in the army and navy, were permitted to take part in
the civil war in China on the side of the Imperialists. Our
present course is neither consistent with neutrality nor with
such an intervention as might be worthy of England. No
good could come out of our present half measures and of the
irritating interference which we were now carrying on. He
asked the Government to lay before the house papers which
would show both why they had sanctioned Captain Sherard
Osborn's expedition to China, and why that expedition had
proved abortive.
The Earl of HARDWICKE also insisted that Lieut.
Tinling, although a volunteer, yet being under the orders
of Capt. Dew, had died in the execution of his duty. If the
First Lord of the Admiralty maintained the contrary, he
did not know the business that he was sent to perform, or
the character of the force over which he presided.
The Duke of SOMERSET said that Lieut. Tinling had
not volunteered for service, but was, when he met his death.
on leave. The experiment of allowing the Taepings to take
one of the treaty ports—that of Ningpo—had been tried.
The result was that the place was a scene of massacre,
plunder, and destruction. He did not wish to see the Eng-
lish Government commit itself to a policy which would ad-
vance pillage on shore or piracy at sea. While we traded
with China, we must protect our countrymen against both
plunder on shore or piracy at sea.
Earl GREY said that the difficulties with which we were
contending in China were due to our having pursued no de-
finitive policy in regard to that country.

Earl RUSSELL said that, in the first instance, the
English Government had pursued a strict policy of non-
intervention in the civil war in China. But it turned out
the Taepings were people having no notion of establishing
any government whatever, and having no object in view but
plunder and massacre, It had been found necessary to de-
fend our treaty ports, and we had accordingly done so. It
would have been both objectionable and expensive to have
intervened, by sending a force to the support of the Emperor
of China against the rebels ; but the policy which we had
pursued had not been attended with any great cost to this
country. That policy was, as he had said, to protect the
treaty ports, where our trade was going 011, and to prevent
the Taepings from there pursuing their usual course of
plundering and murdering wherever they went. From time
to time, also, English, French; or American officers had
been permitted to assist the Imperialist cause. That course
had been eminently successful, as was evidenced by the
flourishing and progressive state of our trade with China.
He should maintain that was a policy which it was to the
interests of this country to pursue.
Earl GRANVILLE could not help believing that Mr.
Tinling and his family must feel, from what had fallen from
every person—and from no one more so than the noble duke
himself—that the country fully recognised the services of
.this young man. There was the fullest possible admission
of his possession of all the most eminent virtues which dis-
tinguished the sailors of this country, and that ho tell from
having too much of that quality which was the greatest and
proudest distinction of the British sailor.
After a few words from Lord CHELMSFORD on the
subject of Capt. Dew's letter,
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH expressed his opinion
that the letter was written by Capt. Dew for the purpose of
throwing the whole responsibility upon himself, and re-
lieving others from it. (Hear, hear.) It was an act of
generosity from a gallant officer, and no more.
The Earl of HA RDWICHE said the duty of an inferior
officer was simply to obey, unless ordered on acts of piracy
against the law of nations.
The subject then dropped.
THE METROPOLITAN RAILWAY SCHEMES.
Earl GRANVILLE brought before the house the pro-
posal of the House of Commons for the appointment of a
joint committee of both houses to consider the schemes of
railways projected in the metropolis. He could not antici-
pate any opposition to the appointment of that committee,
although the precedents for such a course were of somewhat
ancient date, the last being in 1695. The House of Lords
had power to enforce evidence on oath, which the other
house did not possess; and a proposal having been made in
the House of Commons to act in concurrence with this, he
could not help thinking this was an occasion on which the
experiment might be fairly tried. The alarm caused by these
railway schemes had almost turned to a panic, and he
thought the committee ought to be al pointed. If their lord-
ships agreed to the proposition he should venture to propose
the names of the noble lords to servo upon it; and he had
a strong wish that the powers of the a ernment should
give what assistance they could. He should submit the
motion of which he had given notice, and should suggest
that the committee of that house should consist of five lords,
three to be a quorum ; that a message should be sent to the
Commons in answer to theirs of yesterday, and on the ap-
pointment of the committee he would propose that they
should meet at half-past three o'clock en Monday next.
The Earl of DERBY said he was told that not only
would the expenditure on these railways of the metropolis
exceed somcwhero abouc 35,000,000, but he understood that
, a deposit of b per cent, of that amount was made, and he

heard that there were no less than 160 streets of the metro-
polis which would be seriously interfered with for a time.
This being the case, he quite felt that the question should
be taken up in some such way as the noble earl proposed;
and he did not feel disposed in the slightest degree to object
to the appointment of a joint committee. Still less ehOuld he
be disposed to object to the members of the Government form-
ing part of that committee, for he had regretted that the Go-
vernment had not taken a more active part than they had
done, and that they had not laid out for themselves before
Parliament what appeared to them to be a general scheme
for taking the railways of the metropolis in different direc-
tions. With regard to other parts of the country, he would
not think of making that suggestion ; but with regard to
the metropolis, the interests were so large that he thought
it would be better if one mind had been applied to one
general prcject. The noble earl then laid on the table two
petitiori.s, one from the Institute of British Architects, and
the other front the Architectural Association, in which they
represented the great inconvenience which would be felt
from these conlicting railways. They also represented
that the thoroughfares were not adequate to the traffic, and
suggested this subject to the consideration of their lordships.
He should rather like to know on what principles the com-
mittee were going to proceed, or whether the Government
could of themselves figure out in their own minds a general
scheme of communication throughout the metropolis. Un-
less something of the kind were done, the proceedings of
the committee were not likely to lead to a clear elucidation
of the subject.

Lord REDESDALE considered this was an exceptional
case, in which Parliament would be justified in the appoint-
ment of a joint committee. The precedents they had were,
as the noble earl had said, of an ancient character, and ap-
plied to joint action in case of impeachment. This appoint.
ment of a joint committee was an exceptional course, but
they were driven to it by the exceptional character of the
matters they had to consider. The question was a difficult
one, but he did not despair of a satisfactory result being
attained.
The Earl of DERBY wished to know whether they were
to proceed to the consideration of these bills with or without
hearing counsel.
Earl GRANVILLE was understood to say that the same
course would be pursued as the committee had taken last
year, and counsel would not be heard.
The motion for the appointment of the committee was
then agreed to, and their lordships adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—Last Evening,
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.