The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-27 00:00:00

TI! E SUN, LONDON, SAT URDA Y, FEBRUARY 21, 1811

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, FE& 26.

Their Lorthhips met at the usual hour, the Ea•l
SHAFTESBURY presidlLg.

The Bishop of LONDON presented two petitions
from places in Essex against any future grant to
the College of Maynooth ; also a petition from a
place in Lincolnshire against the sanction giros
to superstitious practices in India, and praying that
the enactment on the subject might be carried into
effect ; and a petition from Thomas Henry Smith, in the
parish of St. Pancras, complaining of the state of the
streets of that parish with respect to drainage, and pray-
ing that in the Bill before their Lordships the necessary
powers be giwn for the cleansing of streets.
Lord MONTEAGLE presented a petition from a so-
ciety of universal rational rel'gionists, praying for an in-
quiry into their doctrines.

THE BURNING ACT.
Lord BROUGHAM moved the smild reading of til'e
Bill for extending the Burning Act b the County and
City of Dublin. The Noble and Learned Lord said,
that in consequence of a te2lmical a r)r Dublin did not
come within the pravi:iusuf the existing law.
The Bill was then read a second time and committed,
and ordered to be read a third time on Nlonday. next.
COI YHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
On the motion cf Lcrd BROUGHAM the second
reading of the Copyhold Enfrancbi-esnent Bill was ap-
pointed for Thursday next.

PACKET STATIONS.
The Earl of MOUNT EDOECUNIBE presented a
petition f•om Falmouth, complaining of the removal of the
West India packet sta.ion from Falmouth to Dartmouth,
and prayinr, that toe change might not be sanctione.l until
their Lordships bad irquired into the matter. The Noble
Earl, who supported the prayer of the petition, concluded
by moving that the Report of the Commissioners on the
subject should be laid bcf ire the House.
Viscount MELBOURNE said, that the Government
had nothing whatever to du with the pla;:e from which the
vessels were to start—that deFended upon t;:e Company
to which they belonged. Alt that the Government l•ai
dune was to reserve to itself the right R 3 to the
port from which the mail should start, and they had
,verrnined that they should prodeed from the port of
Dartmouth. Ile had never heard any (Onion in favour
of the putt of Falmouth, except from those parties who
were connected with the county of Cornwall.
Lord ASHBURTON thought the arrangement made
by the Government was a mot absurd our, because the
vessel would leave two harbours to melte iustea I of one
upon every vo)agi%
After a few observations from the Earl of MINTO and
Lord MELBOURNE, the petition was ordered to be laid
on the table; and a copy of the.! Repcit of the Committee
on the subject of the departure of toe West Intiia
was ordered to be presented to the Ilause.
Their Lordships adjourned at a Qua7ter beftr: Six
u'Clock to ',Monday.

ROUSE OF COMMONS, FEB. 26.
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly bef re Four
o'Clock.
On the motion of Mr. PEASE, the Great North of
England Railway Bill was read a second time, and or-
dered U be committer!.
SEVERN NAVIGATION.
Captain WINNINGTON moved the second reading of
the Severn Navigation Bill.
The Eatl of DARLINGTON said it was not his in-
tention to persevr re in the motion of which he bad given
notice of adding to the Speaker's list the nareca of the
Members fir West Gloucestershire, Gloucester city,
Tewkesbuty, Bridgenortb, and Wenlock, after the him-
mation be bad received. All he wanted war list tre
subject should be properly considered, which be now be-
lieved would be the case.
Sir G. GREY was quite sure the Noble Earl might
leave the matter most safely in the hands of the Committee
of Selection.
After a few observations fhorn Mr. T. Hope, Captain
Berkeley, and Mr. Bailey,
Mr. SLANEY said that if the promoters of the Bill
could show in Committee that it would not impede the
navigation of the upper part of the river, be was sure it
would meet with no vexatious opposition.
Mr. GODSON gave bis support to the measure, which
he considered to be one of the most useful character.
The tolls which it was proposed should be herearter
raised would be applied to keep the works in repair.
Mr. PA KINGTON said whatever Committee the Bill
should he referred to, would be sal factory to the pro-.
moters of the measure.
The Bill was then read a second time.
Captain WINNINGTON presented petitions from
Kidderminster, and from the iron masters of Worcester
arid Stafford, in f.vour of the Severn Navigation Bill.
Oil the motion of Mr. TURNER the Blackburn Small
Debts Bill was r•ad a second time.
Lord MARCUS HILL presented a petition in favour
of the Severn Nsv:gation Bill.
Mr. H. BERKLLE Y presented a petition from the
Chamber of Commerce, Bristol, in favour of the same
me asure.
On the motion of Sir G. GREY, the following Mem-
bers were appointed a Select Committee on Divorce
Bills :—Mr. Freshfield, Mr. Haytrr, Dr. Nichol], Sir
Charles Grey, Mr. Darby, Mr. James Steviafit, Sir John
Yarde Buller, Mr. William John Blake, Mr. Wilson
Rates, Dr. Stock, Mr. Laseelles, Dr. Lushington, Sir
'William Hoofbeat°, Mr. William Evans, and Mr. Baines.
Mr. T. EGERTON moved the record reading of the
Peak Forest Canal Bill.
The Bill was read a second time.
Petitions in favour of the Severn Navigation Bill were
presented by General Lygon, Colonel Salvrey, and Mr.
Clive.

Lord A. LENNOX presented a petition from Chi-
chester against the Poor-law Commission continuance Bill.
Captain PECHELL supported the prayer of the pe-
tition.

Lord G, LENNOX presented a peition in favour of
toe Bill, and praying that it might pass into a law,
Mr. PHILLPOTTS pie,sentod a petition against the
Ses ern Navigation Bill.
Colonel R A WDOiti presented a petition from Carlow
in favour cf the Government Irish Registration Bill.
Mr. HAMILTON presented a petition from Bucking.
ham, praying for Church Extension.
COMMERCIAL TARIFF,
Mr. HINDLE Y presented a petition from the
merchants, manufacturers, and trader: 'in the borough
of Ashton-under-Lyne, in favour of an entire revision
of the Commercial Miff of this country. The petitioners
stated that they had read with great interese the vie.
'treble and disinterested cvid'enee given before the
Committee on this subjeet during the tut mission. They
complained that the present system not only prevented
them tromperthaeing in the cheapest markets, but
also drove capital into improper channels, and called
into - existence manufactures far which the country
had no natural advantages, thereby placing both cayie
taint and operative in a false position, and exposing
the trade in which they were engaged, to frequent changes
and sudden reverses, besides exceedingly restricting
commerce by limiting the articles of exchange with
other counties. They deplored the effect of the
present tieebibition system not merely on the physical
comfort, but also on the intellectual and moral character
of the labouring populteion. They implored the House,
therefore, to give free scope to the industry and energy of
the country, by an entire revision of the Commercial
Tariff. The petition was signed by 'fo persons, employ-
ing 18,000 hands, and having upwards of tW millions en- ,
gaged in trade, It was entitles', therefore, to the serious
attention of the House, not only from the important subject
to which it referred, the arguments by which the prayer
was enforced, but from the wealth and standing of the 1. eti-
tioners. He need not add how entirely he concurred with
the prayer of the petition.
Mr. T. DUNCOM BE presented petitions from South-
wark, and from Hodnet, in Yorkshire, against the Poor-
laws. Also a similar petition from Boston, in Lancashire,
in which the petitioners expressed their opinion that the
Poorelawe were a violation of the law of God, and
destructive of the best principles of the British
Constitution, and that they would vote for no Mem-
ber of that House who supported it,—( Hear, hear.)
Also a petition from Worthing, one of the unions under
the Gilbert's Act, prayings that their privileges ought not
to be interfered nub. Also petitions from the Rev.
Price Jones, curate of a parish in Northampton, and from
Kinross, signed by 5,000 persons, against the Bill.
Mr. F. FRENCH presented a petition from Roscom-
mon in favour of the Government Irish Registration 13111,
Lord DA LMEN Y presented a petition from Stirling
in favour of the Medical Reform Bill.
Mr. S, O'BRIEN presented a peition from the county
of Limericks in favour of Lord Morpeth's Iriab Registra-
tion Bill,
The O'CONNOR DON presented petitions to the
same effect from Roscommon,
Mr. HUME presented petitions from bonegal to the
same effect, Also tt petition from the workmen in a fac-
tory at Kiliterebtit, praying for a general extension of
the Suffrage.
Cieltinel SIBTHORP gave notice of certain amend-
ments in the County Coroners' Bill,
LORD CARDIGAN'S TRIAL.
Mr. HUME wished to know whether there would
be any objection to lay upon the table of the House an
account of the expenses incurred for counsel and other
matters relating to the trial of Lord Cardigan ? If there
was, he would give notice that on Monday next he would
move for the Return.--(Heer,)
Mr. FOX MA UL R said there could be no objection to
lay before the Rause that return, as it had been already
ordered by the House of Lords.
On tte motion of Mr., MARK Pil" ' IPS the R
EXPORTATION OF MACHINERY,
`o be loatidthbeeteorttnlikeTel3e:ft
the late telbeing to ',he exportation of
s`ii and '‘ijr- -
rill_c82;:awcrey7 ordered
ere3i3L7L. is nquiring loco
te answer 0 a question eet;riri:t
Mr. Is A BOUCH ER R mid he ho d the House would
allow the Railway Bill to go into Copt;
mitre,otristle.tee Fur the
purpose of Ciicussing it, but in order to ins
to as whether the Govern-
scent intended ifzorNtihis,eßly)uriyepogee4.eodf ireeint
intended to intreduZo any measure fouudodupon the
Report rrade by the Commission of I- • ' L
equiry into the state
of Tnrrikaike Trusts ?
Me. 1. 0 X Ptheiaette,iih.
re
mse.
MA ULF: said the Report *7.ls tiVinkii• ‘ie
tensideration of the Secretary tor ti filete bep 't
tl
to be superseded
(The Earl of LINCOLN iuggetshteethe
vernment ought en propose a resolation suspend
further proceecAnge in the numerous Small Debt Bills that
were before the House, as they were likely
by tine County Courts Bill. It would save much trouble
and expense to the parties concerned.--(Hear, hear.)
In answer to a question from Mr. LAW,
Mr. F. MA ULE said he had been exceedingly anxious
his
oproee
Friend wishededwitht to proceedheCountyCour w
Courts' Bill thatot4.
night, but
Noble Bills;
but
1.0 4
be hoped to be able to pe...reel with it on that daY fortnight.
Sir R. Pr; E'.. -,:iris , 0 ,11i)rul:T ocf;a ll tba N.obio
had emit titesi ,t; en, a Tlik& Cenneutatier, Bill pre eared by
him (Sir R. Peep., In the year 1837 ho; brought in a
Bill for the introduction of County Courts, Lie did not,
.. . • .

mean to introduce that Bill in opposition to the Noble
Lord's; but if there was no objection in point of form,
he would move that the Bill be printed, in order to sec
if any thing could be got from it.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said he bad no objection.
REGISTRATION OF' VOTERS, (IRELAND)
BILL.—No. 2.
On tho motion of Lord STANLEY, the Order of the
Day for the Second Reading of the Bill introduced by
the Noble Lord, for Registration of Voters (Ireland), was
postponed to Monday next. The Noble Lcrd went on to
say that as the Noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies
had promised to give the Hot& on that day some infor-
mation ro3peciing the course intended to be our;usA
by hcr Majesty's Government, on the Noble Lord's Bill,
he (Lord Stanley) would be enabled to fix a day for ra-
ceeding wio his own Bill.

LORD KEANE'S ANNUITY.
On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL. the Or.
der of the Day for going into Committee on Lord Keane's
Annuity was read.
The House then went into Committee, Mr. BERNAL in
the Chair.
On the first cause being read,
Mr. F WA wr moved that all the words after " Lies_
tenant-General Lord John Keane," ke left out. The
ceject of Lis motion was, that the pension of 2,000/.
should be granted enly for the life of Lord Keane, and not
be extende Ito his t.vo next surviving heirs. He l'egqed the
House to understend that he quite neers el e ith the Notee Lerd
on tee hence btlosv, as to the greet aid teilli irt services
which had !seen performed by Lo:d Keane. The motion
which he made neither reflewed upon his gallantry as a
soldier nor his character as a man. The Peerege of this
country was generally bestowed upon men r f large pra-
perty ; but it was also conferred as the reward ofgr at and
and e relent sr neces, especially in the army and navy ;
and in such cases it was sometimes accompanied by a e er-
petual pension. That was the case with the Duke of
Marlborough and the Duke of Wellington. It might
be questioned whether even ir, the case of
those eistinguised individuals, the peneion should descend
without limit to Usti - posterity. A poor Peea-age was ant to
eeg eserate into a dependeet. Peerage, and then it assumed
the shsracter of the French Peerage before the Revolution.
It appetred to hint that the Bill ciente c 1 many disadvan-
tsges under the shape in wbieh it was then presented to
the House. It gave to the descendants of Lord Keane
just enough to make the nselees idle ; the, would le c-
peneeet for tso genentions, and pauFe.-s ever . ere% It
bestowed on then a dig. ity without giving them the means
of maintainieg it. Ile confessed that It • thought the b--
stowal of Peerages ferlife would be eruad a he sefiela' mea-
sure in modern times. But, be tint as it might, the grant
was one which the House should not be c:iit,d up,m to
sanction. It would be much better to give Lord Keane
a large sum of money as comperaiatien for his servicss,
tient entail a tex upon the public for so long a period.
He thought the subject ought t ) be looked et in two points
of view. First, what was their duty to ih,er country ? It ap.
pe Sct Ito liet that as they were callsd upon to reward simply
the personal exertions rf Lord Kesee, the reerard shook
be purely personal. Another griestion was, whether his
proposition wouuld not be more consonant v ith the character
of Lord Beare, and that his cbildrsn, instead of bsitig
brought up In a state of splendid depcndeace, should be
taught t ) depend upon their own exertions. For these
reasons he felt it his duty to submit this motion to the
House.—( Hear, hear.)
Capt. HAMILTON said that although he could not
agree with all that the Hen. Member ( Mr. Ewan) had
said, he arrived at the same conclubien.—( Hear.) If
the question were whether any' peasion at all
should be greeted to the Noble Lord who was the
subject of debate, he sh euld feel considerable
difficulty to say no to it, because it might
rap; eut ungracious in tee house to refuse
pecuniary recompense to the gallant officer who
had received so disinguished a mark of her Ma-
jesty's approbatien. Yet when the question was
the amount of that reeompensd, he thought every Mem-
ber should give his vote according to his own opinion.
Ile regretted that he was called upon as an individual
Member to give any vote at ail upon this motion; and
he considered it a question that did not raise the
character of that most important branch of th 1 ser-
vice :o which Lord Keane belonged, because
although he slid not for a moment question the
right of the Severeign to create any number of .Peers,
yet he did question the policy a pursue g that course which
alloy el the people out of doors, and the public generally,
to suppose that the creation of a Peerage, and the granting
of a pension, must go hand in hand.--(Hear, bear.)
feeling as he did upon the subject, he should give his vote
in favour of the shorter period.—( Hear, hear.)
Sir JOHN HOB HOUSE could not say that either the
Hon. Gentleman who had just eat down, or the Hen,
Member for Wigan, had doge anything more than exercise
their undoubted light in questioning the propriety of
the vote, and taking the sense of the House upon it.
With respect to the argument urge I by his Hon Pi lend the
Member for Wigan (Mr. Ewen), be must take
the liberey of saying that a good deal of what he
had addressed to the House was rather a complaint
that more was not given, because the Hon. Member seemed
to say that if the pension were gratited In perpetuity
there would be something like common sense in it,
seeing that the Peerage was graree 1 ie perpetuity._
(No, no, from Mr. Ewart.) He had also understood
his Hon. Friend to say the amount wits not sufficient.
Mr. E WART—No, n 0...,. (Cries of " Order, ordee")
Sir JOHN HOBHOUSg—What his Hen. Friend said
was teat it was either too much or not enough. —( Hee%)
Her Majesty's Government in proposing a grant of this
nature eould only be regulated b,y precedent, as to the
atbouut. If his Honourable Friend contended that
nothing at all ought to be granted beyond the life
of Lord Keane, he could then understand him ; but if he
said that the pension ought to be granted in perpetuity,
because the Peerage was in perpetuity, big (Sir John
flobliouses's) answer to that seas, that her Majesty a Go-
vernment bad not thought it necessary to follow that course
in the eresent case. These was nothing in the case of
Lord Keane, that could take from hint the benefit of pre-
cedents that had been established, A good deal that had
been addressed to the House by his Hon. Friend had
reference to peerages themselves, dad he had stated that
peerages ought only to be granted for life; but as the
presente siwasl granted to Lead Keane and his stli,
e e laid down by his Hon, Friend could
ssorpeerageth e p ritieip
not apply.—(Hear, hear.) . He would as Ph the permis-
sionof the House, menton three or four instances in
erhiteh a eittilAr ctinfie to that adopted in the present case
had been pursued. In the case of Lord tieresford, 2,0001
a_ye-at was granted to him, and to his heirs male for ever.
Lord Cembeemere had 1,000/. &year granted to him and
the two next successors to the family, 2,000/, a-year was
granted to Lord Hill and his heirs forever, In the edge
of Lord Lynedoch ,t'.)ooi. a year WM granted to him
and the holder of the title for ever ; and in the C 690 of
Lord Seaton last year a similar course was pursued. After
mentidnitig those instants he thought his lion. Friend
would say that, instead of malting as extravagant demand,
they were only asking the House to tortiply with an ordi-
nery cuttom, and were, la fact, asking less for Lord Keane
than had been granted in several former instances. Last
year, when the services of Lord Keaton were to be re-
warded, it eras said they wete noteleg at compared with
the services of Lord Keane and many others; but row
when Lord Keene was to be botiottriehly rewarded, it eras
said his scrieces were not of so important a netere as to
entitle him to the reward and honour which he (Sir John)
thought ought to he conferred upon him.—(Hear, hear. )
It *tie' not or hide to tae thlyibleg Mout the services of
either of those Noble Lord?, but if hi, Hon. Priend eon-
ceeted thiit ei,en preiloils ti the late e:...eats Lard Krause's
services had not men or tne retest Pettneiee find lerillisnt
description be had been greatly misinfornsei.—(ll,ari
I ~ Hear,
bear, hear.) That Noble Lord had served his country
In the tout quart' es of the eithed,--eHear, hear, hear.)
Since he entered the army in UM theft,. tees net a part
of
lßritish arms had distinguished
ti
that Lord theeant had nett served,—( Hear. )
6 ro the s
,gi glob: e in which
As the course now proposed had always been the usual
mode of rewarding !services, he considered it would be all
injustice to Lord Keane not to adept it, and unless he
head more than hit Hen, Priced the Member for Wigan
had stated, he thought the House of Commons would not
hesitate to grant to a gallant officer that which had been
conceded to others under similar circumstances.
Lord WORSLE Y thought it would be a great hard-
ship to Lord Keane not to agres to the vote, unless notice
had been given to him for some time previously. He,
however, thought that some change in the mode of reward-
ing the services of public men ought to be effected.
Mr. WALLA CE said that the people out of doors did
not care bow often the Crown exercised its undoubted
privilege of making Peers, but they objected strongly to
the practice of conferring it upon those who could not sup-
port the Peerage without putting their hands into the
pockets of the people: —( Hctir, hear.) On these grounds
he should support the emendaseat He wag not led away
by what "had been stud by,. the Right Hon. Baronet the
Preeiethst Of the. Maid of Control. He had alluded to the
services of Lord Keene. He (Mr.
Wallace) did net ob-
ject to Lord Keane, but he did object to his progeny ; he
did object to conferring. this pension upon his eons
(Hear, beer.) They had fought no battles for the people
of England. If any gentleman would get up
battles
show
him
forosv
him that these young gentlemen hied foteeht anY
at •
the country, then he would recona e !Ile Ins• ter bt,tt be
'
would not consent to give the people's motley to those who
had done nothing for it.--( Ikea beef.) Hi' should the -ce
fore vote for the amendment, and he *eiltd gee 4 lie titMld
not frame a resolution, upon the third reading of the Bel,
et r i'rem him on a fearer occasion
to recommend the present advisers of tee Crown, in all
time to come, to beware of giving the Peorage to those who
could not do without pensions also; —( Cheers. )
Mr. HUME said the Right lion, BetedWei hehailPtit a
congructiee upon wee
!elites tell
—.a could not be maintake l, when he alluded to his
comparison between Sit' Juhn Colborne and Lord Kealc.
The House was awe re that at that time it was decided
that Lae Keane should have no reward—that was per-
fectly well known.—(He ir, and laughter.) He spoke
then from what was the current report. He had asked
the Right Hon. Baronet the other evening why this re-
%sod was conferred so long after tl e conferring the
honour. No answer was given ; but thereby hung a tale.
—(Hear, hear. ) It had teen usual t t reward officers
connected with the East India service—as in the case ef
the Marquis of Wellesley and the Marquis of Ileetugs--.
tent of the revenues of India, and not out of ''4,,, pockets of 1 that itunouge ~ ..,...
ecoeitse Whoa Min"'proposed to grant a pension I the sneer- cane in the East Indies,
e should have ...„ers . .
er
Cs! I"eitit • Seaton'- he (Mr. Humes s,- te-ereerea altogether to as that produced in the West Indies, it was not lea._
the -proposed rewarJ. Hd considered that his serv.ce slid apply the prim iple to spirits getterally. Upon clause 3, he
not entitle him to any till' of the kied ; that they were the proposed to add
eorebeevnalburaobule holt taon
gs
that had ever been performed. General the power of =lnv
words, giving to the Guvernor-
atthtetyr
most objectionable service' es
p . mg reuds. He had considered t .
ing a reward.
Keane Were
because he He allowedg that the services of lerre very attentively, and found it impessible to undertake to
regulations for the per.
were ado ted by the Governor
regulations p .
athtro'sael
oifnstLeoedrdof
Seaton,
cpoonssetiotfutereavemaatc'hinefry
Government, however, should have laid before the House Gent ral, and h
ow far they were successful.
for that-purpose, at least until
respondence which had taken place between them Mr. HUME •agreedH Gentleman on
and th ' quite with the on.
made e East India House, so that Parliament might Le that subject. H thought that every colony should be
acquainted with the negotiationsthe b. ' left -make. its e I •subjects, Sat
An
An Hon. Oetetle
Di:„.et __ i . man opposite had said that the East India ,he could not help regretting !het the Government were
or h:+(t A.. .. ,i
• ,an
'.N 01Ni:.11 timt, it le .in;ld it 'nut*
hi, '' -, r,t ,•- the -• • - ..1-1-i. fist. pi.i.,,),?5,,ti l!kiLI:11' '..1,..
to the ii.,,,mit,
et tun _ , _, ~ .
i_ ,
~,,_ • - , ,gli.u., ~ );,.t..;, , spirits to , , ~.
~. , i
~. , . ,
~, tuat,t,) rria, Lord reeene eeould be ; titre ce r, e eere- ',,,,i - 1-I-Hr neat ) eves, ri,,t ~Otut,
Pak', out of tit... pu'.i, ~ , ' ' _
~
~, _ - •.- Gould ,( -..-... • • —t. •- ~ • ,
L ,C, .c , . ve,.uu Ise e el,. Lun.e) !lid cur, ell 6pirits? Ile :ea. hoped shirt a in,:rc Idle-rol policy
however, think -so ; because it was the East India Corn- i would be pursued, and that they would be prepared to
Parry. that had principally benefited by Lord Keane's ( take from India overt article Which they required for home
, .

proposed annuity.
as one of those
t,-) be too
'ent

Sir CHARLES BURRELL supported the vote, con-
sidering that those who objected to it did not consider the
importance of the Edo. India possessions to this country.
He thought this reward was well merited, and he should
therefore vote in favour of it.

Mr. MUNTZ objected to the grant. He thought if they
had done wrong on one occaiion it was no reason why
they should continue to do so. He would never vote to
tax future generations, He should vole for the atwne-
ment, because he thought he could not do better.
ere ordered to withdraw and the HOUEC
Strargersw.
divided--

—v,
;100 thitre rippeated-
For the motion •• • •• 117
Fof the amendment
Majority in favour of the original thotiod —43
Mr, HUME Fakid that he should take another Oppor
t Otoilesing that the words relating to the Contioli.
dated Fend sho4id be omitted.

Sir JOHN HO B HOUSE said that it was impossible
to effect such an object.
The other dames were then agreed to.
EAST INDIA RUM DUTIES BILL.
On the motion of Mr, LA 1101:CHERE, the House
wont into Committee on the Ea't India Run) Duties' Bill.
Sir S. LUSHINGTON said that it was not his inter-
tion to offer any remarks upon 110 1341 in its present stsge.
He would reserve what he had to say until he had seen all
the papers upon the subject.
Mr. LABOUC;HEfiE wished the House to underitaad
• • Intended to put runt, the produce of
-••••^n the same footing
'-+Anded to

services. And, after all, had not those sersi'ea been
Greatly exaggerated? It was well known that Lord
Keane had attempted to take Ghuznee without battering
Uit% had if it lied not begn thiken by turprne,
the expedition would have been a faildre. Besides;
Colonel Denny was the person who had led the
storming party, and to him the greatest merit was
due; and yet his claims passed unnoticed.—( Hear, hear,
hear.) He (Mrs Hume) could produce a number of
Indiaa newspapers containing complaints on that subject.
Such publications might be treated as the Right Hon.
Baronet had treated them, but public opinion in India was
not to be so treated. All the army knew that when a retreat
was sounded by mistake, Colonel Denny had rallied :hero
and carried the fortress And what reward was offered
to Colonel Denny? The person who stood aloof had no
more to do with the capture of Ghuznce, than any person
in a distant country. But suppose he had, let them look
to the capture of Seringapatam, to the battle cf Asseye,
and the achicvments in Be igsl. The deeds of Lord Wel-
lesley had been ten times more Irdiiant than thme of
Lord Keane, amd was there any Peerage offered or pension
proposed far him? He thought, therefore, they were maki
a disproportionate reward slings ther for such an ordinary
transaction as the capture of Ghoznee. He thought i the
duty of the Goeernmeet to amiorti in rewards for military
services according to their merit, and not to select the
individual of all others the least desirous of them. In the
sec Had place, he objected to the system altogetl es of
making Peers elm had not the means of maintaining their
dignity ; biro above all, he objected to doiag so when so
much distress pre vaded in the country. How many per-
sons, almost in a state of destitution, would be called upon
to contribute to this pension ? He believed the Govern-
ment had not thought Lord Keane's service worthy of this
reward, or they would not have suffered so much delay to
hays taken place. With respect to India, he knew of no
person who was raised to the Peerage for his services in
that part of the world but Lord Lake ; hut there was no
comparison between the brilliant exploits of that com-
mander, and those of Lord Keane. Lord Lake's pen-
sion via., he believe-1, Irons the Crown. He (Mr. 'lyre)
thought that the House, in the course it was pursuing in
the subject at present under discussion, would outrage,
and had outraged, the feelings of the whole Bengal
army. He care I not who might state to the contrary. he
knew it that feelings of dissatisfaction were manifested,
both privately and publicly, in India, with respect to the
proposal by Government of rewards so diipr .porfonately
great to the services of Lord Keane. That ge ieral
officer would ha c remained Sir J. Keane but for the
capture of the tort of Glatiznee ; and he (Mr. flume) had
shown how little he was entitled to the glory of that cap
teri. There were not many rewards given fir such ser-
vices, and Hen. Members should therefore use some dis.
crimination in them. The prosent was a most inopportune
period for making pecuniary grants, alien their finances
ere in so distressed a state. They were also inverting
the ra'ure of ihiegs in this country. They ought to have
rich, independent aristocracy, and not a poor, pauper, and
dependent one. Ii was on thst principle that he effete('
any opposition to the present measure, and he trusted
that on the third reading the House would reject the 1311
altogether.
Sir ROBERT PEEL hail already stated that he
would give his support and assent to the passing of the
presents Bill. It would be invidious in the present in-
stance to make any exception to the usual course of pro-
ceeding. But he was not so clear as to the propriety of
the East India Company's not granting a pension to Lord
Kearie for his services. He would wish that her Majesty's
Government would suggest to the East India Company the
propriety of their granting the pension. It was that body that
was most benefited by the services of Lord Keane, and
' they ought, the, efore, to beer the expense. They
ought not to reward the mere taking of one particular
fortress, said the Hon. Gentleman, but they ought to
take into account the consequences that had been
averted by an individual success. It was impossible to
calculate what might have been the consequences of
failure upon the occasion, and he (Sir R. Peel) gave
Lord Keane as much credit for the determined resolution
displayed by him, as fur the taking of the fortress.
But what could have caused such an aLeratien in the views
of the Hen. Gentleman ? When it was proposed to re-
ward Lord Seaton, then the Hon. Member decried his
services, and then lauded the brilliant services of Sir J.
Keane.—(A laugh.) But then, said the Hon. Member,
a secret came out te. all India.—( Loud laughter.) N„vr
he denies that any merit was due to Lord Keane; he as-
cribes it all to Major Denny. Now would the Hon. Gen-
tleman grant the pension to Major Denny ?--( A laugh.)
When Lord Seaton's case was on, the services of SirJnhn
Keane were pre eminent ; lie spoke then eloquently of
the gallant exploits of the Noble Lord ; but now, when it
was proposed to reward those services *with a pension of
2,0001. a year, the Hon. Member found out that no ser-
vices had been performed. Did it become the Hon.
Member to say so ? He had moved far a return of the
former serv:ces of Sir J Keane. If there were none, why
move for a return of " Nil?" but if it was found that I.e
had for forty years been performing eminent services in
every quarter of the world, surely the country would not
think him too highly rewarded. His opinion was that
Lord Keane ought to be rewarded ; he agreed that these
rewards ought to be granted very sparingly__( Cheers)__
but be would be very sorry to see such eminent services
go unrewarded. However, he still retained his opinion
that as the service was performed for the East India
Company, the East India Company ought to bear the ex-
pense.—( Hear. )
Sir J. HOBHOUSE explained with regard to the
statement of the Han. Member for Kilkenny with respect
to Colonel Denny and Major Thompson not having had
any honours awarded to them, that it did so happen that in
Lord Keane's despatch, the services of Colonel Denny
had been made distinct and honourable mention of, and
that he himself (Sir J. Hobhouse) had had the honour
of recommending Major Thompson for the Companionship
of the Bath.
Mr. HUME explained that at the time when he stated
that Lord Keane's services were pre-eminent, he was not
aware of the credit due to Colonel De my and Major
Thompson, as the despatches had not then been published
which detailed the services of those gallant officers.
Mr. HOGG was not astonished at the pertinacity of the
Right Hon. Baronet who was anxious that a reward should
be given to Lord Keane, but at the same time he was
anxious to save the pocket of the country and to throw the
burden upon the East India Company, and, therefore, he
said that the House of Commons ought to make
up for the neglect of the East India Company. The
Directors of the East India Company were as aware of the
merits of Lord Keane as the Right Hon. Baronet or her
Majesty's Government. It was easy to he generous with
other people's money—( Ironical cheers) —but it was a
species of generosity to which the East India Company
made no pretensions. —(Cheers, and laughter.) When-
ever East India matters were discussed in that House the
Hon. Member for Kilkenny insisted on the necessity of
not extracting one farthing unnecessarily from the pockets
of the people of India.—(Cheers.) Now, it would have
been extracting money from their pockets unnecessarily if
the East India Company had granted the pension to Lord
Keane.—(Cheers.) They were not liable for it either on
precedent or principle. Lord Keane had been rewarded
with the Peerage, and would be, he trusted, with the pen-
snarl, not for his services in India alone, but for his services
in Egypt and America, and in every portion of the globe for
half a century, from which the English nation
had derived the greatest benefits. The locality
In which public services were performed did
not affect the question whether the State should reward
them. That was the case with regard to Lord Lake, the
theatre of whose exploits was peculiarly India. Would
any one say that was the case with the taking of Ghuzace,
and the campaign of AtTghanistan ? Did not those events
affect the state of our relations with Persia and Russia,
and the whole of our European policy? He (Mr. Hogg)
maintained that they did. The East Indies had always
maintained their expeases, civil and military, while the
West Indies and other Colonies had been draining the na-
tional revenue. He maintained that it was the duty of
the country to reward services which, though performed
in India, affected our ietorests as much as if performeii in
EL:rope, He did not think that an imputation should be
cast On the East India Company which they never had de-
a want of liberality. They had often
served-namely,
been reproached with a lavish expenditure, but he was glad
to find that the complaint now made against them was
that of a cautious economy.
Sir R. H. INGLIS defended tu,.
Mr. AGLIONBY felt himself bound, .
who had the protection of the public money, nos
generous in giving it away. He hoped the Governm
would withdraw this clause for the present, for the pur-
pose of seeing whether the East India Company would
adopt the suggestion of the Right Hon. Baronet the
Member for Tamworth. The course the Government had
taken was neither justified by liberality nor economy. He
should vote against the grant to the next two in succession
to Lord Keane.