The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-24 00:00:00

of that year was evidently an experimental one ; and was
to remain in force for 20 years only. The time for that re-
consideration had now arrived ; and it was due to the vast
population of India that all doubt and uncertainty as to
their future destiny should cease, and that Parliament
should at once proceed to legislate. It was most desirable
that they should do so this session, but no less so that their
legislation should have something of a permanent charac-
ter. (Hear, hear.) The bill before the house had not that
character ; Mr. Lowe had admitted that it. might be
amended from time to time, and said that India would be
placed on the same footing as the colonies. (Hear.)
Mr. LOWE explained.
Mr. BAILLIE said he fully admitted the evils of delay,
but it would be a much greater evil for the people of India
to suppose that the government was forcing a crude legisla-
tion upon them, without waiting for the report of their
own committee. Had the government come to the conclu-
sion that no great change in the government of India was
necessary, the case would have been different ; but as ex-
tensive changes were proposed, he thought a short 'delay
would neither be unreasonable nor unjust. (Hear, hear.)
The committee had only reported on the first branch of
their inquiry—the authorities and agencies for administer-
ing the government of India at home and in India. The
committee had expressed themselves favourably as to the
government by a board of directors, but they had given no
opinion as to the future government of India, probably
because they had not proceeded sufficiently far in their
inquiries. They were well aware of the inconveniences
and anomalies of the double form of government ; but they
were compelled to admit that the system had prac-
tically worked well. Had they supposed that their report
would have been accepted as a final one, or one in which
the house was to legislate, no doubt they would have en-
tered more fully into the evils of the existing system.
They were.now invited by the Government to legislate for
the reconstruction of the home Government of India, and,
to leave it to the Government in connection with the ad-
ministration- in India to carry out the reforms that were
necessary. That being so, the most important considera-
tion for the house was the selection of the instruments—
the East India directors. Though it might be said they
were powerless, and that wars had been undertaken with-
out their sanction, there was no doubt that as regarded ad-
ministration they originated and regulated everything. By
the present mode of election, every proprietor of 1,0001. of
India stock was entitled to one vote in the choice of direc-
tors. Those possessing larger amounts had a plurality of
votes. As the proprietors were scattered over the country
votes by proxy were allowed, and as many were indifferent
about the choice of directors, they left their proxies in the
hands of their London bankers, and thus arose what had
been called the great bank influence. So far was this car-
ried that six of the great London banks were represented
at the India-house as well as the monied interest generally.
Other proprietors took great interest in the choice of direc-
tors, and collected proxies in favour of particular candidates.
He had been told by one gentleman who was a candidate
that he was beaten, although he had a majority of promises
in his favour, by a gentleman who went into the India-
house with all his patronage pledged for 20 years to come.
This was nothing less than corruption, and it was not less
degrading, though it might be veiled from the public eye.
Probably the noble lord (Russell did not know of it, any
more than he did of the gross bribery and corruption that
prevailed at his first election for the city of London.
(Hear, and a laugh.) He contended that the present sys-
tem of electing India directors did:not secure the best men.
The question of patronage was undoubtedly more difficult
to deal with than that of nomination. Under the present
system the directors received only a nominal salary, but
enjoyed a large amount of patronage ; under such circum-
stances, it could not be wondered that the directors should
look upon that patronage as a sort of substitute for salary.
He believed that on the whole that patronage was very well
exercised. (Hear, hear.) Indeed, he knew of instances of
severe self-denial on the part of directors. In regard to
the army, he thought too much patronage was left to the
directors. The plan he proposed was this, one-half of the
appointments in this branch should be laced under the
control of the Commander-in-Chief, to be exercised by him
as a solemn trust, with a due regard to the welfare of the
people of India ; such a plan would lead to a more satis-
factory system of patronage than existed at present, or
would exist under the plan proposed by Government. His
next proposition was, that it was due to the people of India
that they should understand the form of government under
which they were to be placed. But this was precisely
what they did not understand. The whole body of the
native population believed that the government was vested
in the company. The idea of her Majesty was entirely
kept out of sight. This was a state of things highly im-
proper. He did not ask that the present system should be
violently uprooted, but that it should be so amended that
the government of an immense country should not present
a melancholy example of inefficiency. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HE/CRIES, who spoke in so low a tone as to
be almost inaudible during the whole of his remarks,
said that the noble lord who proposed the amendment
(Lord Stanley) had not sufficiently set forth his ulterior
views upon this subject, and he (Mr. Herries) was there-
folly unable to give him his support. The amendment
seemed only calculated to embarrass Government without
promoting any practical result. The passing of the second
reading of this bill was also a matter involving great
difficulty, and, as it stood, he could not say that he de-
sired to see it become law. Nevertheless, he was of
opinion the most judicious course would be to assent to
the second reading, and then endeavour to amend the bill
as it passed through committee. The right hon. gentle-
man was understood to urge that there had been a pro-
gressive increase in the exports of India ; and that progress
had been made in providing the means of education of the
natives ; that the Government had done all they could to
encourage the construction of railways and public works ;
and that a proposal to establish the electric telegraph had
been entertained. He concluded: by expressing his incli-
nation to agree with her Majesty's Government as to the
expediency of immediate legislation, but he had strong
objections to parts of the bill proposed. le should, how-
ever, postpone such amendments as %he thought would
render the bill effectual for the government of India
(among which wouldl be one for expunging all the parts of
the bill relating to the new constitution of the Board of
Directors) until the committee ; and he should not oppose
the second reading.
On the motion of Mr. HuitE the debate was adjourned
till this day.

ley and of Mr. Stoner, had naturally looked into the evi-
dence upon which MI. Towneley had been unseated. He
found that the main ground for this course was a bribe
said to have been given by Mr. Stonor to a man named
Donovan ; but, as that letter did not appear upon the evi-
dence, he wished to inquire what had become of it?
Mr. MA.CARTNEY moved the adjournment of the de-
bate till Tuesday.

Mr. HINDLt Y supported this view, particularly as the
chairman of the committee was not present.
Mr. BOUVERIE was of opinion that the writ should
issue, and denied that the question of Mr. Stone)." s charac-
ter had anything whatever to do with the matter.
Mr. NAPIER observed that it was 2 o'clock in the
morning, and that the house had to meet at 12 on that
day.
Mr. FITZGERALD had carefully perused the evidence
which had been given before the committee, and he defied
any one to show him any legal grounds upon the face of
that evidence why the writ should not issue.
Sir J. V. SHELLEY said, that after the decision in the
Harwich case, it appeared to be very necessary that this
question should be inquired into. As far as he could see
the decision seemed to have been arrived at upon a letter
which was not in the evidence at all. (Hear.) He certainly
thought it behoved the house to know whether this com-
mittee had acted, contrary to all the rules of evidence, or
without any evidence at all. (Hear, hear.)
Sir E. FILMER, as one of the committee, said that,
although reference had been made to a particular letter,
as though the case against the member unseated rested
solely upon that, he must state plainly that his vote was
not given merely upon any particular letter, but upon the
whole evidence as it struck his mind, and from the testi-
mony of Donovan himself. As to the letter in question,
he could not see what that had to do with the issue of the
writ. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON said, that as he had expressed
an opinion the other day that it would be better to post-
pone the writ, he was bound to say now that it seemed to
him there was no longer any reason why the writ should
not be issued. (Hear, hoar.) He had thought it better,
at first, considering what had passed, that the writ should
not issue until the evidence had been placed in the hands
of members. Hon. members now had that evidence. No
special proposition affecting the borough had been founded
upon it, and therefore it would not be fair to the electors
of Sligo to keep them unrepresented merely in consequence
of some question about a letter to Donovan. If there
should be anything in the evidence upon which any mem-
ber wished to found an inquiry upon other grounds than
bribery, such as the intimidation alleged to have been
practised at the election, he would not be precluded from
making a proposal upon that point after the •issue of the
writ. It would not be necessary to suspend the issue of
the writ for any purposes of that kind, and he therefor()
thought that, following the invariable practice of Parlia-
ment in not keeping a constituency unrepresented any
longer than was necessary for the purpose of inquiry, it
would not be right to postpone any longer the issue of the
writ.

Mr. VANCE said, this evidence had only been before
the house 48 hours, and it was impossible, therefore, for
them to determine whether it would be right to issue a
commission. There was one remarkable omission in this
evidence, in addition to the non-insertion of the letter
complained of. He had been present at the sitting of the
committee, who had ocular demonstration of the intimi-
dation of the Roman Catholic priesthood, which was car-
ried into the very committee-room. He observed a Roman
Catholic priest place himself opposite to the witnesses
while they were giving their evidence, and the counsel for
the petitioners at last requested that this gentleman should
be removed. The committee, however, could not believe
that anybody in the garb of a gentleman, much less in that
of a clergyman, could act in such a manner as that de-
scribed. But the chairman at length perceived that, by
threatening motions and other gesticulations, the witnesses
were prevented by this person from giving their evidence,
and then the chairman ordered him to be removed from
the position he occupied. (Hear, hear.) The reputation
of the borough of Sligo, as regarded bribery and priestly
intimidation, was notorious. He thought they ought to
pause before they issued this writ, with the view of giving
the house time to deliberate upon the matter, he moved
that the house do now adjourn.
Mr. EVELYN, as a member of the committee, did not
think any case had been made out for suspending the writ
any longer.
Mr. WORTLEY supported the issue of the writ.
Mr. BOWYER thought it very important that, though
this house was not to impugn the decision of its committees,
still some opinion should be expressed in case of a mis-
carriage by them, and a more extraordinary miscarriage
had never occurred in any court or tribunal than had oc-
curred in this instance.

Lord C. HAMILTON thought that these personal mat-
ters showed the wisdom of the motion for adjourning the
debate.

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, when
The ATTORNEY -GENERAL rose, and hoped the
house would not divide. No reason had been shown why
the writ should not issue. What, then, could be the ob.
ject of an adjournment? Was it to renew a discussion of
the topics they had heard that night? The only question
was, whether the writ should issue. Nothing had been
urged why it should be suspended. The house, on reflec-
tion, must see that they were committing a violation of a
constitutional principle in suspending a writ merely upon
a personal and collateral question.
The house then divided. The numbers were— •

CUSTOMS, &c., ACTS.

The report on these acts was brought up and received.

EXCISE DUTIES ON SPIRITS BILL.

The order of the clay was then read for further proceed-

:ngs on the third reading of this bill.

Mr. BOWYER rose-to move a clause of which he had
given notice relative to the wastage of spirits in bond.
What he asked was, that the same principle that was
applied to the 17th clause should be made applicable to the
28th. The 17th clause related to the wastage of spirits
during the process of distillation, and the 28th clause re-
lated to the wastage of spirits in bond; and he wished the
same principle to be adopted in the latter as in the former
case. He proposed that an allowance should be made for
wastage in bond, the Chancellor of th. Exchequer fixing a
maximum, if he chose, beyond which no allowance should
be made. The hon. gentleman then moved a clause em-
bodying his views upon the subject.
• The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed,
that the details of this measure had been carefully consi-
dered in conjunction with the distillers of spirits; and he
was warranted in saying that the allowances in the bill
were satisfactory to them.
Mr. BOWYER said that, though the distillers might be
satisfied, the dealers who were obliged to keep the spirits
some time before they sold them, were not.
After a few words in support of the clause from Mr. P.
O'BRIEN and Mr. GROGAN,
The clause was negatived.
Some new clauses were added to the bill.
On the question that the bill do pass,

.
Mr. COOLLY said, that when aon former evening he
had opposed the further progress of this bill, he had been
charged with factious motives, but he had been actuated
solely by a feeling of what was due to the constituents
whom he represented, and to the country to which he
belonged. It was impossible for him to allow the bill to
pass without entering his protest emphatically against
the whole measure, and upon the entire spirit in which
it was founded and framed. He did not oppose the
details ; he objected distinctly and entirely to the prin-
ciple of the bill, and he had stated his objections pri-
vately to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Ile
thought the right hon. gentleman had done him a gross
injustice in taunting him with not having been here
to oppose the details of the bill, when he knew that it was
not to the details, but to the principle that he objected. It
was quite preposterous that Irish members should be met
on Irish questions with taunts such as those, put forth,
too, in a tone of offensive familiarity. (Laughter.) The
hon. member enlarged upon the impulse which would be
given to illicit distillation by the increase of the tax, and
on the consequent extension of demoralisation. If the
consumption of spirits could be decreased by increased
duties, then, indeed, increased duties would be a great
boon ; but, so far from that being the case, the extension
of illicit distillation increased to an enormous extent the
consumption of spirits. He moved a direct negative to
the motion.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that,
with reference to the employment of the constabulary in
the collection of the spirit revenue, the Government had
not altered the intention he had formerly announced, but
that intention, he begged to remind the house—the
Government being fully alive to the immense importance
of the other duties of the constabulary—was, that the em-
ployment of the constabulary on this service should inter-
fere as little as possible with their other duties ; that they
should be made available only so far as they could be made
available without injury to their thorough efficiency in the
main purpose fot which they were constituted. There *as
no idea, for example, of employing them on " still hunts,"
but it was felt that they could be properly employed in
escorting prisoners to gaol, and tkat they might also take
cognisance of spirits in transitu when they met persons
conveying such spirits.
After a few words from Mr. M'CANN, Mr. R. MooRE,
and Lord C. HAMILTON against the policy of employing
the constabulary police in carrying out the provisions of
this bill,
The house divided on the question that the bill do pass,

Ayes
Noes

121
41

21/g9rit7 .

The bill accordingly passed.
The Customs' Acts Bill passed through committee and
was reported.
The Assessed Taxes Bill was read a second time.
The Malicious Injuries (Ireland) Bill passed through
committee and was reported.
THE RECOVERY OF PERSONAL LIBERTY BILL.

• 10.•••• -
On the order of the day for the resumption of the ad-
journed debate on the second reading of this bill,
Mr. PHINN moved that the debate be further adjourned
till Wednesday, the 13th of July.
Mr. C. BERKELEY deprecated proceeding with a re-
ligious discussion of this nature, and suggested to the hon.
and learned gentleman to move for the appointment of a
commission, similar to that which had been appointed to
inquire into Maynooth, instead of a select committee.
Mr. PHINN ready to accede to any reasonable pre-
position, and, if so desirable a contingency were possible,
would accept it with pleasure.
Mr. NEWDEGATE considered that theimajority who
had carried the motion for the reference of the bill to a
select committee ought to be considered, before the hon.
and learned gentleman could accede to any proposition of
this character. He begged the hon. gentleman to consent
to the adjournment till the 20th of the month.
Mr. PHINN was quite ready to adopt any plan that
might suit the convenience of the house.
Mr. MOORE moved that the debate bo adjourned to
that day six months.
The house then divided,—
For the adjournment till the 20th of July 83
For Mr. Moore's amendment

Majority
SLIGO. _ _

On the motion for resuming the adjourned debate upon
the issue of the Sligo writ,
Mr. GIBSON said that he, being a friend of Mr. Towne•

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENIN.G, JUNE 24, 18 53.