The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-22 00:00:00

quences. It appeared that by a Hindoo law any native ' statement of the right hon. gentleman, inasmuch as it was
who might become a convert to Christianity forfeited his thought by the officers of the company that this clause cast
property. But that law had been very properly abolished a stigma upon them. He need not remind the committee
y the Le- gislative Council ; and he believed that if that that in the war of Affghanistan the company's officers did
amendment were adopted, the result would be that the themselves immense credit. (Hear, hear.) If the Govern-
. natives of India would be led to suppose that the House of ment made more use of those officers they would find
Commons disapproved of the course which had been pur- greater advantages derivable from their services. He
. sued by the Legislative Council in that matter. He did thought that the company's officers had a right to complain
not think that we were bound to respect every feeling or of not being placed in more situations of importance, in
custom of the people of India without any reference to the which they could exhibit their talents.
conformity of such feeling or opinion to good sense and Mr. J. D. PHILLIMORE wished to know whether any
morality. We had already abolished infanticide and arrangement had been made in respect to the Commanders
suttee in that country, and be believed that there were in-Chief being an ex officio member of the Government ?
other customs still in force there, which might, with great Mr. V. SMITH suggested that the clause should be made
*,,s` .. advantage, be similarly done away with, whenever the more intelligible, so as to remove all those doubts which
opportunity might offer.
had arisen respecting its meaning. ,
.
Sir H. MAI)DOCK replied, amidst cries fora " divi- The clause was then agreed to, as was also clause 29.
sion." The very words ho had introduced into that amend- On clause 30,
ment were employed in the 26th clause of the bill, and had Mr. HUME said that there was a question of great im-
been copied from a provision in the act of 1833. He be- portanco to the whole of India, which he would wish to
lieved that even if these words could be considered as mere have answered. He wished to know whether the Govern-
surplusage their insertion in the bill would give consider- ment intended to make any alteration in the regulations
able satisfaction to the people of India. which regarded furlough ? Many able officers had fallen
The amendment was negatived without a division, and victims in consequence of not being allowed to come direct
the clause
25 was was ordeagreedred t
to.o stand part of the bill. to England when in bad health. They wore compelled to
Clause
go to other parts of India which were often less healthy
On clause 26, referring to the enactment of a law com- than the places they had left.
mission to inquire into and report upon the administration Sir C. WOOD said that that was the very object of the
of justice in India,
clause. It proposed to remove those restrictions which at
Mr. BLACKETT objected to the clause, as it was eaten- present prevented officers on leave of absence from ill-
lated to give an inaccurate view of the result of the late health returning to England.
law commission of India. The matter could not be allowed Sir J. W. HOGG said that those restrictions did not
to drop without explanation as to why the late commission arise from any regulations of the directors, but from the
hod been allowed to fall into abeyance. (Hear, hear.) If state of the existing law.
no defence could be made, it was only right that so flagrant Mr. T. BARING said all the witnesses asked was that
a violation of an act of Parliament should be exposed to the officers of the East India Company should be put on
the people of this country. In December, 1842, on the the same footing in this respect as the officers of her Ma-
resignation of Mr. Amos from the commission, the Court jesty's troops.
of Directors declined to fill up the vacancy, and gradually Sir H. WILLOUGHBY thought it was advisable to the commission fell into abeyance, alter the system of paying in sicca rupees instead of com-
Sir C. WOOD said he had no cognisance of what took pany's rupees.
place in 1842 or 1843. He thought they should not now Sir C. WOOD said the salaries were all paid in corns discuss what took place then, but confine themselves to the pany's rupees.
future of India. Mr. V. SMITH wished to know what salary was to be
Mr. HUME thought the directors were called upon to given to directors ; whether it was to be limited to the
explain the matter. inadequate sum, 5001. a-year, now proposed to be given?
Mr. J. PHILLIMORE said they could not attend to the Sir C. WOOD said unless some hon. member proposed
argument of the President of the Board of Control. But an increase of salary he could not do so of himself. But if
an increase were propesed he would take it into considera-
what was the use of enacting a clause now which would
tion. He was willing to make the salary 1,0001. a-year if
have no better result than the former clause to the same
thenitoeursao should be of opinion it was advisable.
purport. (Hear.) The law commission had cost a great
sum of money, but had effected very little for the people few words from Mr. ELLIS,
Lord. STANLEY.
.would suggest, as this was the only
a
of this country. They surely had a right to inquire why
the commission had fallen inoperative. (Hear.) clause in the bill which dealt with salaries, and as reduc-
Sir C. WOOD complained that these matters should be tions were to be made, he was surprised that no proposal
introduced at the present period of the session. If hon. to reduce the Governor-General's had been made.
r
gentlemen were not satisfied with the Government mea-
M . OTWAY was no friend to large reductions. He
sure why not suggest a better one? thought, however, it would be advisable to fix a sum for
Mr. BLACKETT did not wish to throw unnecessary the Commander-in-Chief, which should include his trips to
obstacles in the way of the bill • but he should say his the hills and his salary.
object was attained in making these charges, seeing the Sir C. WOOD thought it would not be advisable to
hon. members for Guildford and Honiton in their places, adopt the suggestion.
Mr. HUME said the Governor-General had all his
but making no reply. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. W.IIOGG said the charge of the hon. gentleman expenses paid by the company if he moved about the
was that the Court of Directors had violated an act of country.
Parliament by discontinuing appointments to the commis- Sir C. WOOD said this was not the case: The Governor-
sion on the occurrence of vacancies. He assured the hon. General gained nothing by his movements.
gentleman he was in error. The Court of Directors re- Mr. HUME replied that the complaints from India on
ceived a letter from the Governor-General of India, stating that head were unfounded if the right hon. gentleman was
that, whilst the expenses of the commission were enor- correct in his statement. The returns of expenses would
mons, very little good was effected in return. The matter show the fact, and those returns he should take an oppor-
was then considered by the Court of Directors, and the tunity of moving for.
general feeling appeared to be that it was advisable to dis- Mr. OT WAY could assure the right hon. gentleman that
continue the law commission altogether. (Hear, hear.) the country did pay the expenses of the Governor-General's
Mr. BRIGHT observed that the commission had cost moving about. He knew that Governors-General profited
over 100,000/yet no result whatever had been attained. considerably by these trips. The Commander-in-Chief was
.
He had heard it stated that the code of laws prepared for in the same condition.
India by the hon. member for Edinburgh (Mr. Macaulay) Sir C. WOOD did not state that no expense was incur-
was positively untranslateable into any language known in red by the Governor-General and Commander-in-Chief
India. If such were the fact, of course it was right not to moving about. What he meant to say was that, personally
have proceeded with it. However, it seemed to him that and individually, those functionaries gained nothing.
the question should have been brought before Parliament Mr. RICH hoped an opportunity would be afforded of
and discussed, with a view to some remedy being applied, having a discussion on the salaries to be paid to the di-
He thought the observations of the hon. member rectors.
for Newcastle most reasonable ; yet the President of Sir C. WOOD said an opportunity would be afforded
the Board of Control lectured him for inquiring into when the salary clause was brought up.
affairs that occurred ten years since. (Hear, hear.) The Mr. BRIGHT should not like to let the directors have
period of the session had been urged. Why, they had been the fixing of their own salaries. He might give the house
sitting there since last November. (Hear, hear.) The an instance, which he had from a friend of his, of the
convenenice of the Cabinet was doubtless very important; value of patronage to the directors. A gentleman had
but was there to be no consideration for the 100,000,000 of applied, through another, to a director for an appoint-
human beings groaning under a chaos of laws and amnia. ment, which the director seemed willing to give, but his
lies ? (Hear.) He (Mr. Bright) had received a letter from friend, in announcing it to him, said, ' He is not a rich
Bombay, where it was reported that her Majesty's Minis- man ; you are a man of business." " But," said the one
tern intended to appoint a commission for each of the pre- to be appohited, " what do you mean by telling me lam
shimmies, and which commission should report on the a man of business?" "Oh ! you are a man of business,"
several important matters in the presidencies, such as the was the reply. The gentleman to be appointed then urged
tenure of land, the administration of justice, and so forth. that he should have to go to the India-house, and make
He hoped the President of the Board of Control would in- oath that he had not given, and should not give, anything
form the house if such were the fact. (Hear, hear.) He in consideration for his appointment. He was met by
(Mr. Bright) hoped it was, as nothing could be more ad- the other saying, "These things are mere matter of form ;
vantageous to India, as forming the basis for future legis- and you are a man of business." Ho, however, assured
• lation for that country. He thought one such report from him that, though he might be a man of business, he was
men of ability on the spot would be worth a dozen blue not a man of that sort of business ; and so he did not get
books compiled at home, though the commissioners need the appointment. Somebody else did, who was more a
not be paid 19,0001. a year, as the former law commission- man of business, and less scrupulous upon these points.
cr ; had been. (Hear.) (Hear, hear.) Ho also recollected a case of an artist
Sir J. W. HOGG should say that Mr. Macaulay had of some celebrity, who, wishing to get a relative
been appointed a legislative member at 10,000/. a year, but of his out to India, made a suggestson that some di-
it was no part of his duty to be of the law commission. rector might probably want a portrait of himself, of his
However, he volunteered his services and acted gratuitously wife, and of his children, however many there might be ;
as president of the commission during the entire period. and he evidently thought portraits of this kind might
(Hear, hear.) The other commissioners had not 10,000 e, be compensation sufficient, and would be outside the law,
but 5,0001. a year ; and as to Mr. Macaulay's code being to enable him to obtain an appointment to India. There
untranslateable, he should say that, considering the diver- was, in fact, no doubt that
when we talked of patronage
city of languages and prejudices, it was no wonder it should worth 10,000/. or 12,0001. a-year, though we do not mean
have been found inapplicable to all India. (Hear, hear.) that the directors actually pocketed so much, we did mean
After a few words in explanation from Mr. BLACKErT, that by interchanging, and arrangements, and so on, there
Mr. MANGLES said the failure of the law commission was a very large personal and family advantage to these
had been entirely owing to the want of landmarks to guide directors from this patronage. Indeed, it could only be
it. The failure was not at all owing to the members who on that ground that they had a salary so small as 300/.
composed that commission. a-ar. He did
en who
believe so h the pof
Mr. J. PHILLIMORE asserted that the commission the gentlem sat there as muc
toin supposeatrioti that they
broke down by reason of the increasing opposition of the gave the amount of time they said, and suffered the
Court of Directors. (Hear, hear.) amount of anxiety under which they complained they
Sir C. WOOD begged to state, in reply to the hon. laboured, for 3001, a year. Were they to continue this pa-
member for Manchester, that no such commission as that tronage, and was this patronage to be understood as a per-
• to which he had alluded was known to him ; indeed, that tion of the directors' claim? If so, he did not think the
was the first he had heard of the matter. s dary should be higher than proposed. And if the no-
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY thought the main difficulty lay mines director's salary was 1,0001. a year, an advance must,
in the cominissnea endeavouring to accomplish too much, he supposed, be made on all. That would be 18,0001. a
As for ose universal code of laws for India, he believed year, or, as the chairman and deputy-chairman had twice
the thing to be quite impossible. as much as their colleagues, 29,000/. ; and, considering
Mr. J. MACGREGOR cautioned hon. gentlemen how that this bill increased the expenseS altogether, and that
they dealt with the clause now under consideration, as it the country was taxed most enormously, he thought that
was one which straightway touched the prejudices of the we ought not to add anything to the home expenses, unless
native inhabitants of India. (Hear, hear.) we saw that we were giving India a solid advantage in re-
The clause was then ordered to stand part of the bill. turn. He recommended the right hon. gentleman to de-
On clause 27, "Advocate-General's appointment to be crease the number of directors, and then to consider the
subject to the Board of Control," question of increasing the salaries of the remainder.
Mr. HUME said he thought it would be much better to Mr. BARING said that the honourable gentleman who
give the power of appointment to the Court of Director. had just sat down was a man of business, and, as a
The proposition, as it stood was indicative of a want of man of business, should not make statements which he
confidence in that body, and he begged to move that the could not substantiate. He himself was a man of busi-
clause be struck out. DM, and he had not found, in his experience, that those
Mr. V. SMITH said the clause was a gratuitous insult wo were most suspicious of others were most trustworthy
to the Court of Directors, and he should support the amends themselves. (Hear.) The hon. gentleman did not there-
fore do himself justice in indulging in these suspicions.
ment of Mr. Hume.
Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE supported the clause. The hon. member should not have treated this as a personal
Sir C. WOOD said the clause was proposed in its pre- question, but should have confined himself to charges upon
sent shape, because it was thought more likely to secure a the mode of government, instead of making accusations
proper appointment against individuals. As to the question of sala was
Sir J. W. HOGG said that there had been a series of a question for the Government, and as every divisionthat had
appointments by the Court of Directors to the office of shown that they were all-powerful, they ought not to be
Advocate-General, of the most eminent and distinguished chary in accepting or suggesting amendments which they
men. And, with one exception only, he challenged any thought really needed.
one to state a single name in the whole of that series who Mr. Bright and Sir J. W. Hogg then rose together, and
was not eminently qualified for the office. He hoped, for some time neither would give way ; until at length the
therefore, that her Majesty's Government would not throw manifestation of feeling on th part of the house becoming
a slur upon the Court of Directors by persevering with the decidedly in favour of the latter gentleman, Mr. Bright
clause.
gave way.
Mr. T. BARING thought if the appointment were Sir J. HOGG said it was very true that the honourable
vested in the hands of the Board of Control it would be member had throughout the whole of this discussion in-
found that the Government were very much open to Bulged in personal observations, for which, however, he
pressure from without, and that in order to satisfy some did not wish now to blame him. But when an honourable
portion or other of its supporters it might make legal ap- member made a statement casting imputations on any man,
pointments which would not be preferable to those which and made it of his own knowledge, that statement must,
were now made by the East India Company. At first he prima facie, be taken
to be true and' to be provable. He
had no great objection to the clause as it stood, because he hoped the day never would come when any mi
ght
believed
mi ht
believed the appointment would be made in concert be- rise in his place and make a charge against
any gentleman,
tween the two bodies—the East India direction and the or any body of men, entrusted with power, and yet shrink
government ; but if the committee were to decide upon the from substantiating that charge. The hon. member had
principle on which it was now put, that it was to be in the spoken, not generally, but in detail. He had spoken of
hands of the government, then he must say that he had great some personal friend of his own—a friend who seemed
distrust of government appointments ; and he thought it to deal in the basest of all traffics. He had spoken of ad
was not unlikely the appointment would be given to some proposal base to the man who made it, base to the man to
supporter of the ministry of the day. With these opinions whom it was made. He had told them that somebody else
he should wish the clause withdrawn, that the appoint- had got that appointment—somebody who was a better man
went might remain altogether with the Court of Directors. of business. He (Sir J. Hogg) caed uon now, as he
Sir J. FITZGERALD supported the clause. hoped that in future his statements in thathim house would
Sir C. WOOD said the hon. member for Huntingdon command belief, and credit, to state the name, the appoint-
(Mr. Baring) was mistaken in supposing that the clause ment, and the director, whom, if these imputations against
placed the nomination in the hands of the government. him were true, he ought to hold up to public scorn and
He (Sir C. Wood) had no wish of the sort. On the con- disgrace. If the hon. member shrank from this, all that he
trary, he desired to leave it with the Court of Directors, had said of the directors would fall back upon himself.
subject, however, to the approbation or veto of the govein- (Hear, hear.) lie would state to the house some of the
went.
foundations on which these kinds of stories rested. When he
Mr. E. B. ROCHE supported the clause. If this veto was chairman, some few years since, there were rumours
were not given to the Crown the Irish bar, which was respecting the distribution of patronage so generally cireu-
9'lnal to any other bar in the world in point of talent and lated, the; he thought there must be some foundation for
information, would be shut out altogether from these ap- them. A secret committee sat, and over it he presided.
I- *laments. Ile supported the clause giving this veto to Before that
.committee came everybody who had the slight-
the Crown, because it would have the effect of making the est imputation to cast on any director. The result was
Board of Control responsible to Parliament for these ap- that they found gangs of swindlers had personated direc-
pointruents.
tors, and promised patronage. The different gangs were
Sir J. W. HOGG instanced the appointments of Sir John indicted, and, he thought, convicted, without exception.
French, as Judge of Cal
of Mr. St rotten and other gentlemen, of
Sir
William M‘Naughten, In one case there was a son seemingly appointed by the
ing that the East India agoentlemen, with a view of show- agency of his father who paid 1,2001. for the appointment.
merits of Irishmen. Company had not overlooked the Owing to some unexpected circumstance he went on one
those appointments were onl .at the company in making occasion straight to the real director, and in a roundabout
select men of eminence and aybilllit
fluenced by the wish to way introduced his subject. The director denied any know-
ment of the East India Company From the establish- ledge of the transaction, and the gentleman pulled out a
ment they had always the eIII.P to the present mo- note purporting to be from the director. The note was
those appointments. If that hewer power of making of course a forgery. In one of these gangs they found a
from them, it would imply a kind Nso as now to be taken tariff of appointments under Government, as well as under
ed
thefireensure upon the the company— a tariff which went even to titles, and fixed
company for not having dischare
Sir R. H. INGLIS would not be apa duties honestly. the price of a peerage. On that occasion everybody able
that would imply a censure upon the Eaertyr.rii7• any course to cast any imputation against the directors did so, and
for their appointments, nine out of ten of which Company there was certainly one of their own body who appeared to
be implicated. He was indicted and convicted. Having
raitted by the Minister of the Crown to be al• were aid be
stated these particulars, he again appealed to the hon. mem-
able.
Mr. NEWDEGATE had no wish to SU her. He asked the house to co-operate with him in his appeal
Insert course to that hon. member to state the details, to state the per-
which would meet the views just advocated by
member for Cork, who distinctly stated that he value'. sons, to state the names, and to expose all engaged in that in-
the famous transaction to the public scorn which they deserved.
the clause because it would cause a scramble amone
Irish bar for appointments. If the Scotch and English pus that although there was no money given, yet that the Court
e of Directors, by the exchange of appointments, or by some
scramble for patronage would be on a most extensive Neer arrangement, received something for their patronage.
scale. He never heard a clause so weakly supported as
taentames Hogg) told the hon. gentleman that that
the present was. If the appointment be vested in the date
, acre, totally void of truth and foundation, and
to his standard of morality, any director
Board of Control, the right hon. gentleman would be sub- that
proxappointment with any expectation, direct or
ject to continual pressure on account of them. He trusted who gave an
inintaeartn or remote, of any reward, emolument,
that the right hon. gentleman, in whatever view he might indirect,
orappointment, or •mything else—after the declare-
regard those appointments, as they concerned himself, favour,
would endeavour to relieve his successors from the odium money, chaege, or anything in return—either
...cherjured himself, and basely be-
Honitonl n was committed to him for the
that must attach to them in respect to those appointment& tion he had made, bulvoly,
Mr. RICH said the statement of the lion. member for trayed the patronage
public advantar,e.,
to Let the lion gentleman give
. did great credit to the Court of Directors, in the (Ch way of appointments. But the East India Company were up the names of tuose to whom I *
subject to influences as well as other bodies, and he W. Hogg) pledged himself that ua alluded, and he (Sir J.
the Court of Directors
thought that it would be well to counteract them as far would co-operate with him in exposi -
as it was possible. engaged in these infamous transactio
Illie those who had been
Mr. BRIGHT said it was quite .s. (Cheers.)
The committee then divided, when there appeared— Mr. plain that his
For the clause ... 115 had eiven rise to a display of muc vi
P statement
rtuous
Against it 59 For instance, the hon. member fora mint.indignation.
II in2don (Mr. T.
Majority —s6 Baring) had read him a lecture, though he hr„r .
°Ali:flitted the
The clause
was thenagreed
to. whole of his case, in saving that he considereil that all
On ter
use 28,
their patronage was a reason why the salaries should. be
Sir He use
low as 500/, a year. Why, that was the vet •
ject of the clause in asked a question as to the ob- as
the 9 pith
Bright) had been saying
respect to the appointment of the com- of what ho (Mr. to house.
pany's officers ?
(Oh, oh, and hear, hear.) Now, the hon. me
Sir C. WOOD said he wa
I nnlied to him for all the details of them
misapprehension abroad as to 4 aware that there was some Honitoll bac a.. tld th
the meaning of this clause. to which he had referred. lie had,however, o at hon.
The question was, in effect, whether •
narrative which he laid before the
exclude the officers of the comps it was intended to baronet already that the.
him _
meats to be made. He was happyurein the chief appoint- house had been communicated to by a member of the
and Oh, oh.) He
ject was ever intended. Althonghsai,hthat no such ob- House of Commons. (Name, name,
the
appoint the commander-in-chief of thew heoleQueen would would tell the house that such, nevertheless, was
(Oh fact,
.„ ja as, that officer might be a general in the corn of the forces, and he believed the circumstances to be true. , oh,
c.% IA The clause in this
t respect made no differe Pa''' would
a Y 8 service. and Hear, hear.) The hon. member for Honiton la; 21 • ein'; ties? • herto followed, -ce In the Prim- have the house believe that it was ho (Mr. Bright) who was
6:01"1 7 --,:„ , 'IN' r . Illna expressed his gratification at beetle the best " man of business." No ; his friend was not the
---; --!: as 4.,.. 1. 'I g this rem sufficiently a man of business to enter into such a
9,....-, ....>;:k_44-4. „. r--• f
f
.. '
1 .". '9"4" I: •
4 An' • •-.% 'e- . se4. .1.,
,a . ----
116
4, • ~..
1 1.
13" '

transaction. He would not say that the person who had
named the transaction was a friend of the hon. baronet,
or any of the directors ' • but he, at all events, knew the
gentleman who refused to have anything to do with the
transaction. (Oh, oh.) And still, notwithstanding all
that had been said by the hon. baronet and others, he be-
lieved that such trafficking did take place, and he held the
fact to be indisputable. (Oh, oh.) Indeed, he knew of no
office open to such temptation as that of an East India
director. He was not one of those who approved of all the
patronage which devolved upon the Court of Directors;
on the contrary, he would deprive them of it, and give
them salaries befitting their position. That was all he had
to say on the matter. (Oh, oh.) It was all very well to
cry " oh ;" but hon. gentlemen ought to remember that
he was concerned with a district of this country which had
suffered enormously from the misgovernment of India,
and nothing, therefore, would ever deter him from de-
nouncing what he believed to be a corrupt and vicious
system. (Hear.)
The CHAIRMAN here reminded the committee that
the discussion going on had nothing whatever to do with
the clause before it, which had reference entirely to the
payment of general officers.
On the question that clause 31, as amended, stand part
of the bill,
Mr. ELLIOT wished to know from the hon. member
for Manchester whether he would have hon. gentlemen
consider him as a party to the fraud referred to by refusing
to give up the names of the parties implicated?
Mr. BRIGHT—What I stated I stated upon the autho-
rity of a member of this house—(name, name)—and I will
not name him. (Oh, oh.)
Mr. MANGLES would put it to the house whether it
was fair for any hon. gentleman to bring forward charges
which he was unwilling to substantiate? (Hear, hear.)
Cries of " Name, name," were then reiterated, but Mr.
Bright sat unmoved.
The clause, as amended, was then agreed to.
On dance 32 being proposed,
Mr. M. MILNES moved to leave out the words, " the
provisions hereinafter-mentioned respecting the admission
of students into the college of the said company at Hailey-
bury (that is to say), sections 103, 101, 105, 106, and 107 of
the said Act of the 3d and 4th years of King William the
Fourth, shall be repealed."
The questipn having been put,
Sir C WOOD said that the amendment applied only to
Haileyburn, although the observations of the hon. member
had had more reference to Addiscombe. If, however, the
hon. member chose to raise the question as regarded Hai-
leybury, he should not object to his doing so. It was not
necessary for him to detain the committee on this point, as
the speech of the right hon. gentleman the member for
Edinburgh left nothing to be said with regard to it. All
experience went to show that the persons who had distin-
guished themselves in early life were the persons who were
afterwards found filling high and important situations in
after years. He could not understand why they should
not take all the means in their power for securing the best
men for the service of India, and the hon. member had not
shown that the throwing open of Haileybury was not the
best mode.
Mr. HUME said that the question was an important one.
All were agreed that the present system had produced the
best civil servants for India, and yet it was proposed all at
once to destroy it. He suggested that one-half of the can-
didates should be admitted on nomination and one-half on
competition. The most ample testimony had been borne to
the efficiency of the East India Company's officers, and he
saw no reason why the educational establishments should
be broken up.
Mr. M. MILNES said that what the committee required
to know was, whether the natives of India were to be in-
cluded in the competition.
Lord STANLEY observed that this question would
come under consideration in the next and following clauses.
This clause simply affirmed the principle of competition
vote
sagai
it.ns Theretnomina wtione,rae objectionsnd, su
to h
such being thet case,
eclause
on
should
for
score of detail, to which he should hereafter draw
attention.
Sir C. WOOD would be willing to take the division on
the amendment of the hon. member for Pontefract, and
then report progress.
Mr. V. SMITH, whilst indisposed to affirm the whole-
sale system of competition supported by the right hon.
member for Edinburgh, nevertheless recommended the hon.
member for Pontefract to withdraw his motion. He
wished to know whether, if the committee passed this
clause, they could re-open the question with regard to
Addiscombe, a question which he considered to be the
most important part of the bill?
Sir C. WOOD said he wished to keep Haileybury dis-
tinct from the other appointments. As the question was
an important one he should be happy now to report
progress.
Lord J. RUSSELL then moved that the chairman re-
port progress. He thought the hon, member for Ponte-
fract had quite misunderstood the intentions of the Govern-
ment with regard to the military appointments, and it
would be better to restate them at another sitting of the
committee.
Mr. OTWAY asked what restrictions it was intended to
impose on admissions to Addiscombe ? In case of the Ben.
galees it would be necessary to impose efficient restrictions;
for although they were an emasculate and effeminate race,
they could, by a process of cramming in India, come over
and render themselves eligible to pass the examination.
Lord J. RUSSELL said it would be better that the
Government should state their intentions on this and other
points on the following day..
The committee was then adjourned until six o'clock to-
morrow (this day), and the house resumed.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
On the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL this bill was read
a second time, on the understanding any debate on it was
to take place in committee, which he fixed for Friday in
next week.

CUSTOMS AND STAMP ACTS RESOLUTIONS--
ADVERTISEMENT DUTY.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that
the report of the resolutions agreed to by the house on the
Ist July be now received. He took the opportunity of
saying that ho should act upon the intention which Go-
vernment had formed, of deferring to what they believed
to be the wish of the real majority of the house in refer-
ence to the advertisement duty. (Cheers.) It was not
necessary for him to enter into the reasons which had led
them to that conclusion, believing that the man who made
an unnecessary speech at that period of the evening was an
enemy to his country. (Cheers and laughter.)
Mr. BRIGHT wished to ask when the advcrtisemen
duty would cease ? It was important this should be known
and he had been applied to by several newspaper proprie-
tors on the subject.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
certainly of great importance that proprietors of newspapers
should be relieved from uncertainty on this point as soon as
possible, and he was afraid that some had unfortunately been
misled by arguing hastily that the practice which the house
pursued with respect to customs duties would apply to the
duty in question, which was, in fact, entirely of a different
character. He believed there was no precedent for making
the remission of this duty follow immediately on the vote
of that house. They should not lightly alter the established
practice, but he saw no reason why the bill in which those
resolutions were to be inserted should not become law by
the end of next week, or, at least, by the beginning of the
following week.
Mr. NEWDEGATE asked if the resolutions now before
the house included the tax upon supplements.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said no.
The extension of the area of newspapers was provided for
by a clause in the Stamp Duty (No. 2) Bill, which was
postponed till after the other orders of the day. What he
proposed in reference to that bill was to commit it, to in.
sert in it the resolutions now brought up, and to re-com.
mit the bill to-morrow (this day).
The report was then agreed to.
CUSTOMS, &c., ACTS.
In committee on these acts,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the
resolutions of which he had given notice, respecting the
post-horse and hackney-carriage duties. With regard to the
first, his proposal was to consolidate all the various duties
now charged upon the keepers of post-horses and post-car-
riages, so as in future to render them liable to pay only
one duty. The effect of this arrangement would be to
make a reduction upon the aggregate amount of the duties
to the extent of about 60,0001. a-year. He believed that
this proposal would give satisfaction to the parties inte-
rested. With respect to the hackney-carriage duties, he
proposed that there should be an annual license for keeping,
using, or hiring hackney carriages in the metropolis of 1/.
The present system was not to levy an annual license, but
to levy one license, for which 51. was paid. He might
state, in addition, that the bill which he would require to
bring forward would contain a provision to the effect that
those who had already paid Si. for their license should not
be liable to begin to pay for an annual license until three
years after the Ist of January next. When he first laid his
financial measures before the house, he proposed that the
weekly duty upon hackney carriages should be reduced
from 10s. to 7s. He had since ascertained, however, that
a considerable number of proprietors did not wish to use
their carriages upon Sunday, and what he now proposed,
therefore, was to charge 78. upon those who tan their car-
riages seven days in the week, and 6s. upon those who ran
theirs only six. (Hear, hear.)
In reply to a question from Colonel BLAIR,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he did
not intend to propose any change with regard to stage-
coaches.
The resolutions were then agreed to.
BETTING-HOUSES BILL.
On the order of the day- for the second reading of this
bill_

cussion of the bill, and with that view would postpone it
till Monday.
PATRONAGE EXCHANGE BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
The Colonial Bishops Act Extension Bill went through
committee.

LAND TAX REDEMPTION BILL.
The louse went into committee on this bill, and the
various eauses were agreed to.
NEWSPAPER STAMP DUTIES BILL.
This bill passed through committee pro forma.
HIGHWAY RATES BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
TURNPIKE TRUSTS ARRANGEMENTS BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
TURNPIKE ACTS CONTINUANCE, &c., BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill, hen
Mr. FREWEN said he wished to move an additional
clause for the purpose of relieving districts where the com-
missioners of turnpike roads had placed an excessive num-
ber of toll-gates, in order to exempt the parts of the
country where they themselves resided. Thecommissioners
often took care to keep all the turnpike gates away from
their own neighbourhood—(a laugh)—and inflicted great
injustice upon other parts of the district ; and the object
of his clause, therefore, was to restrict the number of toll-
gates within certain specified distances.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL hoped the hon. gentle-
man would postpone his clause till the bringing up of the
report.
Mr. FB.EWEN assented, and the bill passed through
committee.
SHEEP, &c.; CONTAGIOUS DISEASES PREVEN-
TION BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
PUBLIC WORKS ACTS AMENDMENT (IRELAND)
BILL.
Sir J. YOUNG moved the second reading of this bill,
the objects of which were—first, to enable grand juries to
borrow money from private parties for constructing roads
and other public works ; secondly, to transfer certain
piers to the grand juries, with power to levy tolls for
keeping them in repair; and, thirdly, to transfer one
thousand miles of road from the central authority (the
Board of Works) to the local authority, namely, to the
counties to which the roads in question belonged. This
would place no additional burden upon the counties ; and
he, therefore, calculated upon receiving the support of
hon. gentlemen who opposed centralisation.
Lord NAAS said that the grand juries were about to
have an entirely new power given to them and he thought
it would be advisable to put in the bill, some additional
safeguard, so that all their proceedings might be well
known in every county.
Mr. F. SCULLY thought this important power should
not be given to grand juries unless those bodies were re-
modelled and made to represent the ratepayers.
Mr. WHITESIDE inquired whether, if the county
should be willing to do a certain work, and the surveyor
should have the misfortune to be of a different opinion,
that work could be carried out?
Sir J. YOUNG said he fancied it could not.
Sir R. FERGUSON would feel it to be his duty to op-
me those claufies of the bill giving power to the Board of
Works in reference to piers and harbours.
Mr. V. SCULLY said that this bill would b® the means
of showing the present defective constitution of grand
juries; for it would lead to such abuses that the fiscal
powers of those bodies would have to be transferred before
long to bodies of ratepayers.
Mr. FRE WEN said that there was no county in Ireland
with which he was not intimately acquainted, and had no
hesitation in saying the act of 1836, relating to grand juries,
had worked well in that country; and if it worked well in
Ireland, surely it must be an exceedingly good act. (A
laugh.) If county boards were established, as had been
suggested, the result would be that presentments would
be passed for building Roman Catholic chapels or some-
thing of that description. (Oh, oh.)
The bill was then read a second time.
CONSOLIDATED ANNUITIES (IRELAND) BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill.
The Consolidated Annuities (Ireland) Bill went through
committee.
The Dublin Parliamentary Registration Bill was read a
third time and passed.
The Public Libraries (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The Burials (beyond the Metropolis) Bill was read a
second time.
Mr. PETO in reference to this bill, called the attention
of the house to the way in which the rector of St. Giles's
was affected by the closing of the burial-ground of his
parish. The reverend gentleman had left a parish worth
6001. a year to come to St. Giles's, but the closing of the
burial-ground had reduced the value of his present living
from 9601. to 2601. a year. ' When he told the house that
the reverend gentleman employed three curates, and that
he was liked both by Churchmen and Dissenters—(cheers)
--they would see that every consideration which could be
shown to the reverend gentleman would be afforded to
him. (Hear, hear.)
The Consolidated Annuities (Ireland) Bill was read the
second time.
The Employment of Children in Factories Bill was read
the second time.
STRANGERS AND DIVISIONS.
Mr. MUNTZ moved the consideration of the report of
the committee upon strangers and divisions, and proposed
that Mr. Speaker take measures to have the resolutions
agreed to by the committee carried into effect.
Mr. S. HERBERT suggested the postponement of the
subject at so late an hour (ton minutes past two).
Mr. MUNTZ said the notice had been for some time on
the paper, and the object was perfeetly well understood ;
but he would consent to postpone it, if the Government
would give him a day for its consideration.
After some discussion, the debate was adjourned till
Thursday.
CRIME AND OUTRAGE PREVENTION ACT
(IRELAND).
Sir J. YOUNG moved for leave to bring in a bill to
continue the act 15th and 16th Viet., c. 66 (the Crime and
Outrage Prevention Act) until the 31st day of August,
1854-
Mr.
The

MAGUIRE opposed the motion.
house divided, and tho numbers were—
For the motion 3B
Against it.
6
Majority
Leave was therefore given to bring in the bill

Mr. MIIRROUGH presented a petition against the bill
from the keeper of a betting-office, who entreated that it
should not be passed into law before the Newmarket Octo-
ber meeting, upon which a large sum of money had already
been staked. He further craved that his petition should
be referred to a select committee, and that he might be al-
lowed to appear by counsel in support of its prayer.
The reading of this petition caused considerable merri-
ment in the house, which was increased when the hon. and
learned member stated, with great earnestness, that he had
no sympathy with its object.

CROWN SUITS.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved for and obtainec
leave to bring in a bill fon the amendment of the proce
duro and practice in Crown suits in the Court of Each°
quer, and for the payment of costs in proceedings insti•
tuted on behalf of the Crown.

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES.
Mr. WILSON moved for and obtained leave to bring
in a bill to amend the laws relating to friendly societies.
CUSTOMS DUTIES.
Mr. WILSON also moved for and obtained leave to
bring in a bill to repeal certain laws relating to friendly
societies. ,
The remaining orders were disposed of, and the house
adjourned at half-past two. o'clock.

The ball Was postponed till to-morrow (this day).
LAW OF EVIDENCE AMENDMENT BILL.

On the motion for going into committee on this bill,
Mr. WHITESIDE said he did not object to the amend-
ment of the law of evidence, but it was with inexpressible
astonishment he found several most important clauses in-
troduced into this bill without a word of explanation from
the Attorney-General, though they had no connection what-
ever with the avowed object of the measure. The object of
the bill was to enable husbands and wives to be examined in
cases in which they might happen to be parties ; but the
hhbeiiirelnlhsheotr.uht
could
very first clause provided that persons who entertained con-
scientious objections to the taking of an oath should be per-
mitted to give an affirmation instead, thus overturning a
recent decision of the house. He trusted the bill would be
postponed till some future day, when there would be an
opportunity of fully discussing its details.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, at that late► hour
(one o'clock) he had no objection to accede to the request
of the honourable and learned member, though, when he
considered that the main features of this bill had been
folly and elaborately discussed in the report recently made
by the Common Law Commissioners, and had met with
session,
it
ohanopr:periaslopevbe ailchltlit
if:::
erhhoemed
introduced
highestcceielivdt
ciadnlatluvoeisietashlbt
oel authorities
other
in the other
!aouse, he was surprised that they should have been opposed
tydat n ylearnedbody
gaecnqtni
carpi natnedh
awdi trhefetrhree(i, t presentlawheyon.
gi
noafileyviiodremn ewe
A impossible that that bill house; but
embu ti honourable.nastiet
was consider,
this
present bill, they having received the sanction of the dis-
tinguished legal authorities in the House of Lords. He
would endeayelq • to procure a morning sitting for the dis-

THE SITN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 22, 18 53.