The Sun.
London, England, 1853-08-04 00:00:00

HE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, AUGUST 4, 1853.

LINES LEASED AT FIXED RENTALS.

Leasing Closing Prices Business
Shr. \Paid. Renwste. Compans. Yesterday. this day.
50 all Bedford and London &
Bletchley. .. N. West •••
301 all Birm. &
guarantee.... Gt.Westn.
301 all Do. withoutgr Do ...
301 all Birm.Wolv. &
Dudley guar. Do —
30/ all Do.wthtguar. Do —
St. 100 Buckghamsh. L.IzN.W lO7 109
50 all Clydesd.aleJc. Caledon 542 55/
St. 100 E. Lincoln gr.
6 per cent. Gt.Nrthn. 150 152
25 all Glstr.& Dn. Fri Gt. Westn 33 31
100 all Hrtlpl. Dk. SeYk. New.
Railway & Berw. •••
50 all Hull & Selby Y. &NMd 113 1144
25 all Do. 4 Shares. Do 56 57
122 all Do. / Shares. IDo 27. 28?
13i all Lon.&Greenw S. Eastern 141 —l4-Ix4
20 all Do. Preference Do 26 27
20 100 Lowestoft gr.
4 per cent. Norfolk 9B 100
20 LllO Do. 6 per ct.
52 all Manch. Bxtn. I,&N. W
and Matlock & Midld 3 31
50 all Middlesbro' & Stckton &
Redcar Darlingt.
00 all Midld.Bradfd Midland.. 108 110
50 all Northern and
Easternsp.c. E. Count. 65 67 65
50 all Do. 6 per ct. Do - •••
50 all Do. Fixeds pe Do .. _ . •..
25 all Prest. & Wyre L. &N.W.
&Ln&Yk
122 12 Do. Shares. Do —
St. 100 Roystn.&Hit. GtNorthn 150 152
St. 100 Do.Shepth.St Do 150 152
25 18a Shef•Rothand Lancash&
Goole g. 5 p.c. Yorksh. • •
12 92 S. Staffordsh. M.MClean 1 d
50 all WearValleygr Stockt. &
6 per cent... Darlingt. •••
25 all Do. Do 32 33
St. 100 Wilts&SomrstlGtWestn lo3k --1042

1 1 all

)s. all
LO 2
!O 5
1 all
1 all
1 all
1 all
1 all
20 13.5
35 24

-
1
LO all

it. all
' all
5 all

!O all
2 all
3 all
1 all
1 all
1 all

1 all
LO 9
1 all
1 all
5 1
1 all

10i
1 all
.0 7
!8i all
1 all
1 all
1 all
1 all

JOINT-STOI

Australasia
British Colonial Bank

and Loan Company
British N. American
Chrtd. Bnk.of India,
Austral., and China
Chrtd. Bnk. of Asia.
Colonial _ _

5 5
)0 25
)0 20

Commercial of Lond.
English Scottish and
Australian Chrtd
London Chrtd. Bnk
of Australia
London and County
London Joint Stock
Lond.and.Westminst
National Provincial
of England

D 1122

0) 221
;5 all

]
ld

•
g d
5 a
d 8 d
P
._
47 _

-- 41
2 -- 3
32 -- 34
d p
47A -- 484
10-- 1
} -11 A
60 -- 70
7i -- Sip

21 11 d
14 —l6
i— 4 P
11 d
t d
id p

Do. New
National of Ireland
'Oriental Bank Cor
poration
Provincial of Ireland
'Do. New

LO I all
5 1 1

5 25
:5 all

38i
10 32
5 5
4 4
!O 1
1 1
L 5 14
?O 14
!O 5
1 all
LO 3
?0

Royal Australis. Bkg,
and Gold Imp. Co
South Australia
Union of Australia
IDo. New
Union of London
Union of Madrid

#
Id par
6' 74
ad

d Ap
22 24
73
4 5
pax
6 8
d
d
d
d

BANKS.

81 - 82

-
d- pal
ad

par— A p
2 - - 211)

, . - ...

- 49

if i

11

i d— par I
44 46
72i —73lpcdl
8 8i

oUs

- 34

1i ). - - lip'
i

)0 60
5 25
1 all
5 2

26A 5i 6

32 i

..• -

ia --: TP

38 I 40

16 - 17

MARKET NEWS-(THIS DAY.)

GENERAL AVERAGE PRICES OF BRITISH CORN

For the Week ended Aug. 4, 1853, made up from the Returns of the
In,pectors in the different Cities and Towns in England and Wales
per Imperial Quarter.
witEAT. !BARLEY] I
OATS. RYE. BEANS. PEAS.
52s 7u I 29s 7.1 22s 21 36s 3d 40s 5.1 37s 10d
THE SIX WEEK'S AVERAGE.
BARLEY. I OATS. I RYE. BEANS. PEAS.
29s 4d 20s lld 34s 7d I 40s 3d 36s Od
DUTIES ON FOREIGN CORN.
WHEAT. BARLEY. 1 OATS. RYE. BEANS. I PEAS.
I
Is Od Is Oil is Od is Od ls Od lis Od
QUANTITIES OF GRAIN SOLD LAST WEEK.
Wheat, 87,469 ; Barley, 1,862 ; Oath, 9,435; Rye, 36 ; Beans
2,356 ; Peas, 287 quarters.

WHEAT.
49s 4d

EAST INDIA HOUSE.

A special general Court of the East India Company
was held, by adjournment, at their house in Leadenhall-
street, yesterday, for the purpose of considering a mo-
tion submitted to the Court on Friday last—viz, "That
this Court concur in the views and opinions expressed
the Court of Directors in their minute of the 29th of
July, regarding the Bill for the Future Government of
India ;" Mr. R. Ellice in the chair.
The CHAIRMAN said, before he requested the minute
to be read, or called upon Mr. Mackenzie, who was in
possession of the Court, to proceed, he wished to state
that, in answer to a question put to him by Mr. Sulli-
van at the last Court, whether the minute referred to in
the motion was carried unanimously. instead of saying
that it was so, he ought to have stated that it was
carried nentine contradicente.
Mr. HOLT MACKENZIE said, when he last addressed
the Court he expressed almost sufficiently the general
opinions he held with respect to the bill that had just
passed the House of Commons, and certainly his objec-
tions to the bill remained as strong as ever. He
could, however, scarcely expect, in the face of the
decision which had already been come to by the Court,
that any attention would be given to his opinion, op-
posed as it was to that which the Court entertained.
He could not adopt the language used by an hon.
baronet at the last general meeting, and say that
the bill continued the government of India in
the hands of the East India Company. It, hi the
first place took away from the Government of the
East India Company that position which it had held as
an independent body, unconnected either by personal
obligation or by party ties with the Administration of
the day ; and it further took from the Court of Proprie-
tors the power of election of all the directors. It reduced
the number of directors from 24 tc 18, and then proposed
that one-third of that reduced number should be ap-
pointed by the Crown. That being the case, he could
not accept the language of the resolution proposed by
the chairman. Besides, he had tie strongest objections
to the mode in which the Legislature proposed to con-
stitute their body—namely, that a body consisting of 30
gentlemen should exclude 15 of tleir number. He con-
tended that it belonged to the proprietors, and not to
the Court of Directors, to choose who should remain in
direction. No doubt many of the present directors
would voluntarily retire. It was true it was not easy
for a man to persuade himself that he was past work.
He remembered only one example—Sir William Grant,
when Master of the Rolls, who, at the ago of 70, retired,
amid the general lamentation of the bar and the public.
He believed many of the present directors would follow
that honourable example. Another question was the
intrusion of nominees into the Court. To that he
very strongly objected, because he thought it would
be fatal to the independence of the whole body, and
would give rise to a great deal of unpleasant feeling in
the discussion of matters whenever the Court was called
upon to resist the course of the Minister of the Crown,
because those gentlemen nominated by the Crown could
not act with the same independence as those who were
elected by the proprietors. They were to be nominated
for short periods, but to be eligible for re-election. How
could they expect gentlemen so appointed to act as a
barrier to the encroachments of the Crown ? If there
were to be nominees, it was quite :ndispensable that they
should be appointed for a fixed ?eriod, and should not
be open to re-election. Upon these two points, there-
fore, be was quite at issue with the Court of Directors.
He felt strongly the importance of a numerous Court of
Directors, and he was astonished to see the reasons
assigned by Sir C. Wood for limiting the number to 18.
This was done by the mere motion of the Government,
without any inquiry or any reference to the test of ex-
perience. • There was no recommendation of any com-
mittee of either house to sanction it. It was a notion
adopted by the Minister of the day without that delibe-
rate consideration and discussion which so important
a measure ought to have received. Sir C. Wood
in his last letter expressed Es surprise that any
person should recommend so large a number as 24,
considering the Court of Directors in the only light in
which it could now be viewed, that of an executive
council of government. Now hr (Mr. Mackenzie) did
not know what was the meaning of "executive council."
If it meant the Board of Control ae would admit that 24
was an extravagant number, but if Sir C. Wood meant
a council, or a senate appointed so advise on the affairs
of a vast empire, the question took quite another shape.
He should say 24 in the latter case was not only not too
large, but was in fact too small. Since he left India they
had acquired two great kingdoms, and were likely soon
to acquire another. When he looked at the duties of
their different departments, which had been well summed
up by Colonel Sykes in his late speech, he could see
work for six separate committees, and for more than 24
directors, and he should rejoice to see their number ex-
tended, that both in and out of Parliament they might
form a barrier to protect the President of the Board
against popular folly, or the power of self-will,
or the subserviency of political friends, and, to be
able to do it, it was important the Court should
possess the weight which lumbers gave. When
speaking of the magnitude of the business to be trans-
acted by the Court of Directors, they should consider
how vastly India had been increased since the last char-
ter, both in extent of territory and in number of popu-
lation, as well as in the amount of business arising from
new elements having been introduced. They were just
commencing a system of railways, projecting large
public works, beginning the great task of educating the
people, and of establishing a new judicial system. In
Lahore, in Berar, at Benares, and even in Bombay Pro-
per, there were different races, different languages, and
different religions which required attention and manage-
ment to save those countries from being thrown into
a state of disturbance. Sir Charles Wood referred to
what he called experience derived from similar cases,
but he (Mr. Mackenzie) knew of no such similar
case in existence. There was no instance of any
other empire consisting of a series of great kingdoms.
Our British colonies were in an entirely different posi-
tion. Referring again to the constitution of the Court
of Directors, the hon. gentleman contended that it ought
to consist of a considerable number of men entirely inde-
pendent ; but he did not think it necessary or desirable
that they should be all working men. There ought to
be some men of leisure, but of sufficient knowledge, so as
to be able to give advice as to what ought to be done by
the working men. The chief defect of the Indian Go-
vernment arose from its members being perpetually at
work, so, that, in fact, there was no time for deliberation
as to any particular acts, still lass for those large and
general views by which alone a system could be safely
and advantageously worked. The great increase in the
public press of India demanded the strict attention of
the Court of Directors. They saw already what had
been the effect of the press. (A Proprietor—" The salt
duty.") It would require to be watched ; but not merely
with a view to its suppression ; it must be looked to for
instruction as well as warning. In what be bad said he
had confined himself to the question of the home Go-
vernment, which ought to be settled before they entered
upon the discussion of the Indian Government. With re-
gard to the appointment of an Executive Council, that
ought to be introduced with great care. He could wish
that the wisdom of the House of Lords would refrain
from legislating on that point at present, and confine
themselves to that which was most urgent—the
Government—leaving all that related to luh
future measure, when the Government and
Parlia-
ment could have advice from the Court of Diredctsourschoar
from some other court, if it were possible to
fin
body equally worthy of confider.ce. Withregcarodurtto, the
resolutions he had formerly submitted to the
begged to say it was not his intention to propose them
for adoption. But he thought it would be premature for
the Court to declare any opinion upon the bill in its
present stage, especially an opinion in favour of it, when
their wish and hope was that the bill would obtain very
considerable modification in the House of
Lords. He
should not be able to take any further part in these dis-
cussions ; he therefore had thrown together some reso-
lutions, which he proposed to substitute for those which
he read on a former occasion. The hon. gentleman then
read the following resolutions :
" That the consideration of the question now submitted
to this Court by the Court of Directors be postponed until
the bill shall have finally passed through both Houses of
Parliament. That the Court of Directors be requested im-
mediately to prepare and present to the House of Lords a
petition submitting. to their Lordships the views of this
Court on the following points
" 1. The arbitrary reduction of the number of directors.
" 2. The objectionable mode of effecting that reduction.
" 3. The intrusion into the direction of persons not chosen
by this Court, to the extent of ono-third of the whole
body.
" 4. The denial to the Secret Committee of any right
to advise the Ministers of the Crown on matters belonging
to the secret department, and the omission of any efficient
check to the power of the President of the Board of Con-
trol in that department.
" That this Court is clearly of opinion that the number
of directors elected by the proprietors or other popular
constituency should not be less than the present number
of 24.
" That, if it be thought advisable to discontinue the
present system, under which six directors retire annually
and to appoint the directors for a term of years, with the
privilege of immediate re-election, the choice of their 24
directors ought to remain with the proprietors.
" That this Court cannot admit that it is open to the
charge of being wanting in a due appreciation of public
servants connected with the East, but, aware of the diffi-
culties of a canvass of so large and scattered a consti-
tuency, and, in deference to the opinion of the House of
Commons, they have no desire to object to the addition of
new{ means to facilitate the admission of retired public
servants into the direction of Indian affairs, by the addi-
tion of six persons not chosen by the general body of pro-
prietors, provided that suhpers
ofon thebe chosen by some
agency independent of the Minister
" That the selection of directors by the om
Minister of the
Crown is rendered peculiarly open to objection by the
shortness of the term for which some are to be appointed,
and by their being rendered re-eligible after the expiration
of that term.
" That all Parliamentary provision relative to the Go-
vernment abroad be postponed until the whole subject of
legislation for India shall have been maturely considered
with the aid of the home Government, fully organised in
such manner as Parliament shall see fit to determine."
Those were the resolutions he would now submit to the
Court. He had left them very general, because he be-
lieved the details had better to be left to the Court of
Directors.
Sir T. COLEBROOKE seconded the resolutions, and lie
did so in order to
texpress hs strong opinion as to the
objectionable character of the bill. He should prefer,
rather than attempt les4islate in the spirit of that mea-
sure, that the Courtsohould altogether decline the task
by undertalting the government of
imposed upon them
India. They might retaini the government of India in
form, but most certain y
.they would not do so in sub-
stance. The moment it was passed the government
of India would gradually escape from their hands, and
fall into those of the Crown. Although entertaining
this strong opinion of the measure, he thought it would
be premature to come to any definitive decision
upon it while the measure was pending before Fara-

ment. But he hoped the Court of Directors were not
so enamoured with the bill as to adhere to their an-
nouncement in the original motion of it being their inten-
tion to accept the bill such as it was. He hoped the
alternative proposed by Mr. Mackenzie would meet with
a favourable consideration. He thought the difficulties
attending this question would have been considerably
diminished if the inquiries in Parliament had been con-
cluded before legislation was attempted. Much of the
difficulty out of doors was owing to the ignorance of
the public on the question. This would account for
many of the attacks to which they had been exposed
from various quarters. Sir C. Wood in his last letter in-
timated a doubt as to whether that Court could claim the
actual administration of India, and if the Government
really entertained those doubts, then they had utterly
failed in their duty to Parliament upon the great ques-
tion they had undertaken in proposing to continue the
government in a body in regard to whom they enter-
tained those doubts. But while the Government ex-
pressed those doubts, he on the other hand would say
that much of the wonderful success which had attended
the government in India, had been owing to the form of
the home Government, and to the fortunate accident of
its having been placed in a double mould, and one part
being a check upon the other. It not only brought
various minds to work upon the measures of Govern-
ment, but it made an important impression on the ser-
vice of India itself, when it was known by those en-
gaded in that service that a fortunate rise in their career
was independent of political parties. Those were the
reasons why he had always been attached to the exist-
ence of the double government, and why he deprecated
centring the government in the Crown. It would make
the Governor-General far too powerful for any subject
to be made, and, relying for support on party connection
in this countrp, he would establish a despotism in India
of the most serious character. (Hear.)
Mr. LEWIN would not discuss the merits of the bill,
but he wished to express his objection to placing the
framing of the petition in the hands of the directors ;
by doing so it was placing themselves in the hands of
the Philistines, for the Court of Directors had brought
forward a proposition entirely assenting to the bill. To
place a petition against it in their hands was therefore
absurd. To show how far the directors deserved to be
trusted, what had they done in Parliament ? Why, they
had supported the Government. Sir J. Hogg voted
against the proprietors, and in favour of Ministers. He
attributed this to a sort of bargain between them.
(" Oh, oh !") The directors would get quite as much as
before in point of patronage ; the proposition, there-
fore, on their part, that the Court of Proprietors should
accept the bill was a most extraordinary instance of
modest assurance. (Hear, and laughter.) The clause
relating to the quorum would have the effect of destroy-
ing the Court of Proprietors ; and the natives of India
would be much more grievously affected by it, for they
would thereby be deprived of any exponents of their
grievances in that court.
Mr. HumE wished to call the attention of the Court to
their actual position. The House of Commons had passed
the bill, and if the Government adhered to what they
had intimated, it would have been much better if they
had come forward in a manly way, and had stated that
the time was come when, finding that the Government
of India had been mismanaged, they were determined to
take it out of our hands. With all- they
deference to the
Court of Directors, he considered the proposition to ap-
prove the bill was altogether premature. Although he
highly respected the House of Commons, yet there were
two branches of the Legislature, and it would be better
to pause and see what the opinion of the House of Lords
would be on the second reading of the bill. He had had
great experience as a Reformer, and one rule which he
always adopted was, that before proposing reform he re-
quired that the evils of the existing system should be
pointed out. He never advocated change for change
sake. There ought always to be good reasons assigned
for any proposed change. Had this been done in the
present instance ? Had the East India Company been
shown to have misgoverned India ? The opinion of both
Houses of Parliament was in their favour, and through-
out the whole speech of Sir C. Wood, when he introduced
the bill, his effort was to impress the house with the fact
that the Government of India had been well conducted.
Having, then, the favourable opinion of the two houses '
of Parliament, and of the Cabinet, what could any man
suppose when he, nevertheless, found that the whole
efforts of the Government were now tending to destroy
that very body by taking away their independence and
making changes in a system which they had hitherto so
ably carried out ? What could any man suspect but that
there must be some covert object in proposing a measure
of that nature ? The bill took away the popular ele-
ment from the Government of India by substituting
nomination for election. The system of nominees was
against the whole spirit of the company's charter, which
was intended to operate as a check upon the Board of
Control. That system was introducing Parliamentary
interests into the Court, and giving the Minister of the
day greater power, and thereby destroying the popular
interests. It was by election alone that the indepen-
dence of the court could be maintained. Therefore he
trusted the House of Lords would protect them. The
bill was not yet an act of Parliament, and he would sub-
mit to the court that they ought not to come to any re-
solution in the way of expressing an opinion on the bill
until it had been passed by the House of Lords, when
they would be able to judge of its whole scope and ten.
dency. He would, therefore, recommend that a peti
tion should be drawn up and presented to the House o'
Lords. Whatever the result might be it would show
that the proprietors had done their utmost for preserv-
ing their constitutional rights. The petition ought to be
presented without delay. The complaints of the pro-
prietors, as well as of their directors, were expressed in
a very fair way in the resolutions submitted by Mr. Holt
Mackenzie last court-day. He (Mr. Hume) had changed
these resolutions into the form of a petition, and con-
cluded by praying their lordships to preserve the effi-
ciency and independence of the Court of Directors, and
especially to amend the clause as to the appointment of
nominees to the Court of Directors. That was the sub-
stance of the prayer, and, if complied with, the principal
evils of the bill would be removed.
The petition, which embodied Mr. Mackenzie's reso-
lutions of Friday last, was then read.
Mr. AYRTON commented upon the letter addressed by
the Chairman and Deputy-Chairman of the Court of
Directors to the President of the Board of Control on
the Ist of July, and said that, instead of maintaining the
constitution of the Court of Proprietors, no sooner had
the Minister of the Crown laid down an ascending scale
which would put power into their own hands than they
made a suggestion which would totally nullify the
Court of Proprietors. If there was one point
to which the Court of Directors ought to have called
the attention of the Government it was the insuffi-
cient strength of the Court of Proprietors, but instead
of that they took it upon them to state that that Court
was unfit to have the Government of India put into
their hands, and they then made a suggestion, if it
should be considered desirable that the constitution of
the Court of Directors should be altered—and what was
that suggestion ? Not that the Government should
nominate the directors, but that the directors should
nominate their own members, subject to the approbation
of the Board of Control, thus transferring to them that
power which they held to be so objectionable when
given to the Government ; so that, in point of fact, the
only alternative, with a view to remedy existing abuses,
was to take all the power out of the hands of the pro-
prietors and put it into their own. (No, no !) Why, if
they considered that Court wanting in weight and in-
fluence, why did they not suggest that there were ele-
ments in its constitution which ought to be removed—
elements entirely inconsistent with its political character,
however they might have accorded with its commercial
character—and that old women and girls, provided they
possessed the pecuniary qualification, constituted part of
that Court? He was not astonished that the Court of
Directors had not taken more trouble in regard to the
bill, for it would render that Court still more close and
secret than at present : and he considered that the prac-
tical result of the reduction of the number of directors
would be to enable those gentlemen to re-elect one ano-
ther, so that it would be impossible for the proprietors
to introduce any new director except at great intervals
of time. He saw some remedy for this evil in the sys-
tem of nomination by the Crown. But what would be
the aspect of the Court then ? Why, men who had not
been in India for 20, 30, or 40 years, would be the
elected members of the Court, while men who had just
returned from India, and who were intimately ac-
quainted with the present condition, feelings, and opi-
nions of the people, would be from time to time nomi-
nated by the Crown, and thus a division would exist in
the Court, which was to he greatly deprecated.
The CHAIRMAN said, the object of the Court of Di-
rectors in submitting the minute to the Court of Pro-
prietors was to place fairly before them the question as
it affected the Indian Government and people. They
had been accused of being promoters of the bill, but
the correspondence would sufficiently refute that charge.
As to the petition to the House of Lords, of course, if
there was any wish on the part of the Court of Proprie-
tors that a petition should be presented, the directors
could have no objection. At the same time he hoped
the terms of the petition would be left to the Court of
Directors, as there were certain expressions in it which
required modification. No doubt the Court of Propi pe-
tors had suffered in this cxperimentum, crucis, as wro7thaes
the Court of Directors - but to say that the powe
proprietors would be altogether nullified
respecting the quo-
rum not to be justified. The clause p
was. anexpres-
m
bfaulto
rwei tnhu ,m• be
ruetuhs
ley t ha
totuegnhdte
di t
.
rNwould
proprietor
cause the no rh swfound
oucourtl dg r
tteheaitnk of noticing that there was
not a quorum, present, unless the ghost of the Rajah of
Sattara's case should rise up among them ; and then, if
any gentleman did take notice of there not being a quo-
rum, it would serve to put an end to repeated mo-
tions before the Court which tended to diminish its cha-
racter more than anything else. The Court of Directors
had said in their correspondence all they could say. No
ired the
eo of
Crgood.s
o tuh ret opinionof
It
Direc-
tors, was,e e
r pos-
sess o
he Cue
obstruction would be thrown in the way of the course
which the proprietors desired to take though he feare d
tt ha w t t
ae is irrwlt, eaealipl t
ph
p ware
seto i
ut
tei
hond n
ed
e dwcz oo
uu a th
fte lrdam vbcot ef a
pte
hr
y rr
aoprite
t
cl
l ot
htoersrah ,
e a s tuhre
e
that popularity which they once did. As to popu-
larising the Court of Proprietors, that, of
course,
did n
of doing. He
Court of Directors never had any idea
should be very sorry if they had. Should any measure
for effecting such a result be carried, he hoped the pro-
prietors would carry it themselves, and not press it
upon of of Directors.
trongly
advocated the policy of maintaining
the power of the Court of Proprietors. It was the only
opinion
channel through which public piriion. could be brought
to bear on the Government of India for the benefit of the
native population. With respect to the bill, he saw great
embarrassments likely to aris from it to the government
of India, and he thought Sir C. Wood had not acted
honourably in giving such insufficient reasons for such
mighty changes.
Mr, SuurvAli said that when the chairman moved the