The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-17 00:00:00

THE HAGUE, JULY 12.—The King again left the
Hague this morning, for Soetsdyk, whence his Majesty
will go to Arnhem, to be at the races at that place to-
morrow. Towards the end of the month his Majesty
will go to Luxemburg.
THE HAGUE, JULY 13.—The Government has received
a dispatch from the Envoy of the Netherlands at St.
Petersburgh, dated the Ist of this month, accompanied
by a note of the Chancellor of the Empire, Nesselrode,
of the same date, announcing that the tara of the 15th
(27th) July, at which, according to a preceding conven-
tion, the ukase of the 19th of June, 1845, should be ap-
plicable to the flag of the Netherlands, being on the
eve of expiring before the negotiation between the two
Governments could be terminated, it has pleased his
Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, agreeably
to the desire expressed by the Envoy of the
Netherlands, in the name of his Government, to
order that the faculty provisionally granted
till the 15th (27th) of July, 1846 (the ships of the Nether-
lands to import indirectly goods into Russia without
being subject to the increase of duties of Customs or-
dered by the ukase of the 19th of June, 1845), shall be
prolonged for this year till the expiration of the navi-
gation season.

BRUSSELS, JULY 11.—The Senate, in its sitting to-day,
adopted several projects of law.
JULY 12.—Their Majesties received Sir Hamilton
Seymour, the English Minister.
The King presided in a Council of Ministers, July 13.
The Senate, in its sitting to-day, heard the report of
the Chevalier de Bethune, on the project of law relative
to the Convention with France. It then formed itself
into a Secret Committee, to hear the communication of
the Minister of Foreign Affairs respecting the negotia-
tions which preceded the convention.
The Independence announces the departure of Mr.
Mercier, which, it says, is to take place to-day or to-
morrow. This statement is at least premature. Nothing
was decided yesterday or has been decided to-day re-
specting the departure of Mr. Mercier.
The train from Paris to Brussels direct, which left
Paris yesterday morning at seven o'clock, arrived in our
city at ten o'clock. If we mention the hour of its arri-
val, it is not to complain of it—we halo a more impor-
tant observation to make. We learn from a traveller
who may be relied on, that the train consisted of 28,
perhaps 30 carriages ; it was, therefore, as considerable,
perhaps more so, than on the day when the late catas-
trophe took place. It is to this point that,
for the sake of the pablic, we think it our duty
to call the attention of the directors of the Company.
A large train has always more chances of danger than a
small one. It may be remembered that when communi-
cation by railway was first introduced into Belgium, the
trains were always divided, so that no more than ten or
twelve carriages attached to one locomotive. After the
accident of the Bth of May, 1842, it was judged that it
was desirable to avoid, as far as possible, the union of
two locomotives. In the present instance two loco-
motives were attached to the train which leaves Paris at
seven o'clock in the morning, because the train is divided
at Douai ; one half proceeds to Lille, and the other to
Valenciennes and Brussels; but might not two trains be
sent from Paris, instead of one very long train, leaving
it necessary that an interval of half or three-quarters of
an hour should elapse between their departure from
Paris ? By this regulation it would prevent those
lamentable accidents which we have had to notice of late.
DUTCH FUNDS.—AMSTERDAM, JULY 13.
Money. Bills
Actual Debt, 2% per Cent •• •••• • . • • 61 GI
Ditto, 3 per Cent •
Ditto, 4 per Cent. 95%
Amort Syndic, 3% per Cent..........
Ditto, 3% per Cent.. •.••••• • . • • • • •
Commercial Company, 4% per Cent . • 176% 177%
East India Loan, 4 per Cent.... •• •• • • 94% 95
Exchange on London, at sight • • • • • 12 25
Two months... •.••..•••••• 12 15
On Hamburgh, at sight .... 35 75
Two months. •••• • . • • ...... 35 31
On Paris •••• • • • • 37
Two months. ••••••• • • • • • • • 56 75
-Dutch Papa's, July 14.
PRUSSIAN FUNDS.—BERLIN, JULY 10.
.
St. Schuld Sch., 3% Bills. Money
per Cent
rxuss.English Bonds, 1830.4 per Cent
Foreign Exchanges „ „ ........
Exchange on London, £1 Sterling, 3 Months. 6 24' 6-231,4
Tlamburgh, 300 Marks, 2 Months. 14814 148%
Paris, 300 fr., 2 Months •• •.•• • • • 79'2-3 79%
—Universal Prussian Gazette. July 11.
HAMBURGH BORSENHALLE, JULY 9.
Bills. limey,

Bankitt Si lsitais• ee
rsi
e.
6.
1.
..
Austrian 5 per Cents .
.sc.r—ip—tion ..... ....... 101%
--
.•• •• •• •• 1590
Anglo-Russian Loan . ..... ....... 106%
Russian 5 per Cent., 'lamb. Certificate. 10114 101
epnetr Cent
..
..
..
.. ....
............ : :
21973, LI :/..,,
Ditto, hope and Co., 3d and 4th series..
Ditto, in Certificate ..... ..... "--
• • • • • • • .
New 4 per Cent., Hope and Co. ... ••• 90
Ditto Stieglitz .. • . „ „
........_ '—
Spanish3N perew C 5
Anglo-Portuguese Loan, 2% per Cent..
Ditto
Dutch Actual Debt, 2% per Cent...... 593
Ditto 3 per Cent •.•• • . • ....„. _
Polish New 4 per Cent Loan, 1844.... 7935
.....
Anglo-Danish Loan, 3 per Cent •• •• • • 86% 86 3(
National Bank Shares• •• • • .... ...... .
—.
BELGIAN FUNDS.—BRUSSELs, July 14.
Actual Debt, 2', per Cent .•••••• • • • • • . • _
Rothschild's Loan, Five per Cent ........
Loan of Thirty Millions, Four per Cent •.
Ditto Three per Cent..................
Ditto. Thirty-seven Millions, ditto .. •• • .
Ditt0iditt0,1840........ ..... .... .• . 101
Ditt0,ditt0,1842....................
Ditto, 1844 .. . . ... 100
Ditto, 1836... • • ........... ..... ......
Ditto, 1838 •• .. •..................... 74
Ditto of the City, 1832 ................ 101
Ditto, 1843 . 100%
Bank ofßelgium • •
—Brussels Papers. July 15.
AUSTRIAN FUNDS.—VIENNA, JULY 8.
b per Cent. Metalliques • .
4 per Cent. ditto • • ••••• • • • • • • • • • ........ 1001/g
B per Cent. ditto. .
Loan, 1834 .••••• •• • • . • •• • • ••••• • • • • • 154%
Ditto, 1839 12214
Bank Shares
Esterhazy's Loan ........ . • ...........

RAILWAYS.
The Northern, or Ferdinand • • ••• • • • • • • 184
Gloggnitz .. • • • ••••••• • • • • • • 134
Vienna—Milan .. ............. .
Leghorn• • • • •• • • • • • • ••• • • • • .
Oldenburg • • • • • • • ...... •• •
Pestoja . • . ...... .......................
Apenninen • • • • • • •••• • • • • ...........
.Allgeraelne Zeltung, July 11,

PMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, July 16.
Their Lordships met to-day at Four o'clock.
ROYAL ASSENT.
The royal assent was given by Commission to the
following public and private Bills.
The Lords Commissioners, who arrived shortly after
four o'clock, were the Earl of Minto, and Lords Cotten-
ham and Campbell.
The following is the list of the Bills :
Election Notices (Ireland).
Dublin, Dundrum, and Enniskerry Railway.
Leeds and Thirsk Railway (North-Eastern Extension,
Wath to Hartlepool).
Scottish Central Railway (Alloa Branch).
London and Birmingham Railway (Camden and Euston
Stations Enlargement).
Slamannan Railway (Bathgate and Jawcraig Branch).
Leeds and Thirsk Railway (St. Helen's Branch Devia-
tion).
Leeds and Thirsk Railway (Knaresborough Branch
Extension).
Ambergate, Nottingham, and Boston Railway.
Midland Railway (Eyewash Valley Branches).
Midland Railway (Claycross to Newark).
Deeside Railway.
Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ardrossan Railway.
Wilsontown, Morningside, and Coltness Railway (Cale-
dilian Junction).
Wilsontown, Morningside, and Coltness Railway (Im-
provement and Branches).
Wilsontown, Morningside, and Coltness Railway (Bath-
gate Branch).
Midland Railway (Nottingham and Mansfield).
East and West Yorkshire Junction Railway.
Stirlingshire Midland Junction Railway.
Great Western and Uxbridge Riklway.
Wexford, Carlow, and Dublin Junction Railway.
Great r einster and Munster Railway (No. I—Carlow
to Kilkenny).
Norfolk Railway Extension (Dereham, Wells, and
Blakeney Branch).
Cambridge and Oxford Railway.
Reading, Guildford, and Reigate Railway.
Newmarket and Chesterford Railway.
London and South-Western Railway (Farnham and
Alton Branch).
London and South-Western Railway (Chertsey and
Egham Branch).
London and South-Western Railway (Hampton-court
Branch).
Dunblane, Dowse, and Callender Railway.
Lancashire arta Yorkshire North-Eseteru Bann ay.
Morayshire Railway.
Monkland and Kirkintilloch Railway (Chapel Hal]
Branch).
Scottish Central Railway (Denny Branch).
Bristol and Exeter Railway (Crewkerne Branch).
London and Birmingham Railway (Aylesbury Railway
Purchase).
St. Helen's Canal and Railway.
Morecambe Harbour and Railway.
Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole Railway (Methley,
Askern, and Oakenshaw Branches).
Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland (Mullingar
to Galway).
Sheffield, Ashton-under-Lyne, and Manchester Railway
(Dukinfield, Worsborough, and Glossop Branches, and
Sheffield Station).
Glasgow, Paisley, and Greenock Railway (Polloc and
Govan Branch).
Scottish Central Railway (Perth Termini and Stations).
East of Fife Railway.
Scottish Central Railway (Crieff Branch).
Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland Junction
Railway.
Grand Junction Railway (Huyton and Warrington
Branch).
Mallow and Fermoy Railway.
Limerick, Ennis, and Killaloe Junction Railway.
Great Southern and Western Railway of Ireland (Cork
Extension).
Mountmellick Junction Railway.
Clonmel and Thurles Railway.
Cork, Blackrock and Passage Railway.
Killarney Junction Railway.
Glasgow Southern Terminal Railway.
Stirling and Dunfermline Railway.
Midland Railway (Burton-upon-Trent to Nuneaton
Branch and Ashby Canal Purchase).
London and Birmingham, Grand Junction, Manches-
ter and Birmingham Railway Amalgamation.
Eastern Counties Railway (Epping Extension).
Wishaw and Coltness Railway (Greenhill Branch).
Newcastle and Berwick Railway.
Waterford, Wexford, Wicklow, and Dublin Railway.
Templemore and Nenagh Junction Railway.
Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland (Liffy
Branch and Longford Deviation).
Kilmarnock and Troon Railway.
Wakefield, Pontefract, and Goole, and Port of Goole.
Dublin and Kingstown Extension Railway.
South Leith Church Bill.
Chard Canal Railway Bill.
Stockton Gas Bill.
Worcester Gas Bill.
Yeovil Markets and Fairs Bill.
Manchester Markets Bill.
Bath Waterworks Bill.
Newport and Pillgwenlly Waterworks Bill.
Bristol Waterworks Bill.
Witham Navigation Bill.
Ardrossan Municipal, Police, and Improvement Bill.
Aston Rates Bill.
Schoolmasters' Widows' Fund (Scotland) Bill.
Banffshire Roads Bill.
Vidgen's (or Dudderidge's) Estate.
Videan's Estate.
Abbess of York's Estate.
Waucbope's Estate.
Dundas's Estate.
Cullen's Estate.
De Winton's Estate.
Thompson's Charity Estate.
Creagh's Divorce Bill.
Curtis's Divorce Bill.
Messengers from the Commons brought up several
Bills, which were ordered to lie on the table.
CORRECTION OF CLERKS BILL.
The Bishop of LONDON said that, with their Lord-
ships' permission, he would move that the order of the
day for going into Committee on this Bill be dis-
charged. He did so principally in consequence of the
advice of his Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack,
to whom some of the provisions of the Bill were objec-
tionable, and who had promised that if the Bill were
postponed, he would devote his first leisure time before
the next session for the purpose of drawing up a Bill to
remedy the present state of things, which every one
must admit required great alteration. Unless the Church
were armed with greater power for the punishment of
such as were her ministers, and who had disgraced them-
selves, the Church, and the morality of the people, must
suffer great injury.
The order of the day for going into Committee on the
Bill was accordingly discharged.
The Bishop of NORWICH presented a petition in
favour of this Bill. He was decidedly of the same opinion
as his Right Rev. Friend as to the necessity of some such
measure as this. He knew many instances in which
clergymen of the Church, notwithstanding their awful
profligacy, retained their livings, and it was almost im-
possible, under the present law, to dispossess them.—
(Hear, hear.) lie himself had convicted one of
this sort of disreputable clergymen, but it bad
cost him 3501. To the honour of the clergy of his
diocese he has received addressed from them, thanking
him for his conduct in that case, and 150/. was raised
and paid by them into the Norwich bank to defray as
far as they could the expenses to which he had been
put. This showed their anxiety to maintain the disci-
pline of the church as well as the great diffi-
culty and expense of punishing the guilty.
Livings might be gambled for, and yet the
bishops were disabled from putting a stop to such
nefarious proceedings. He did not grudge the money
that was expended in the prosecution of clerical offenders,
for, in his opinion, money could not be better expended,
but surely it was high time that something should be
done by the Legislature to make it an easier matter than
it now was to visit such offenders with just punishment.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that some Bill of
the kind was necessary, but he thought it inexpedient
to discuss its provisions at present. As the Bill had
been withdrawn by the proposer of it, he would not take
up their time in alluding to it further; before the next
session of parliament he would consider the propriety
of bringing forward a Bill to carry out the intentions of
the Right Rev. Prelate.
The subject then dropped.
PROTEST AGAINST THE CORN IMPORTATION
BILL.
Lord RADNOR complained of the course adopted by
certain Noble Lords who bad signed a protest against the
Corn Bill, but who had never been in the House during
the discussion of that measure. He thought the practice
quite unusual and objectionable.
Lord BROLTGHAM thanked the Noble Lord for re-
ferring to the subje ct. The practicesatiooifi votinged
the by prosy,hyeiri
and protesting by proxy, was sand
Parliament, but it had never been usual in British
Parliament. He thought, however, that the Noble Lord
referred to had acted through inadvertence, and from
The LORSDTC.
not being aware of the regulations which obtained in their
Lordships House regarding protests.
aßietition from
the clergy of the diocese of Leicester against the Bill for
h Bangor, and pray-
the union of the sees of St. AsaP-- and
the Archdeacon and clergy for Manchester.
ing their Lordships to provide a bishop
The Bishop of OXFORD presented afrom
the petition
HAASNAcPEHLAL
°Nit: p
rßeAseNtiTteGdO
oses to unite
Oxford, against the Bill which PrQP
the sees of St. Asaph and Bangc'n
of the archdeaconry of
Lord STRADBROKE presented a number of peti-
tions relating to railway Bills before the House.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE laid on the table the
annual returns furnished by the Registrar-General of
Births, Marriages and Deaths.
LORD GOLIGH,AND LORD FIARDINGE'S AN-
NUITY BILL.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the bring-
so prayed that the Bill be restored to its
ing up the report of this Bill, and in doing
original form. He re retted that the first duty imposed
on him in his presentgsituation should be the taking of
the preset course, which might be construed into some-
thing not like due acknowledgment of the great services
rendered by the illustrious individuals in question. He felt
however, the highest sense of the great services rendered,
still his duty to the public and to the other House of
Parliament compelled him to ask them to
reconsider the decision they bad given, and to
place the Bill in its original form. Before
asking them to take that step, it would be neces-
sary for him to go into the circumstances that had
led to the proposal of the grant in question,
He was bound to say, looking at precedents under si-
milar cireumstances, and looking at the substance
of the Bill, it seemed to him that it did
confer on these distinguished individuals ado-
quate compensation. This was his decided view after

taking a glance at similar circumstances in the history of
the country. Ile would only call the attention of the
House to the fact that a Noble Duke in that House,
after the battle of Talavera and a brilliant cam-
paign in Spair., was made a Viscount, and received
a pension of 2,0001. a year. This was considered ade-
quate cor.npensation for the great services rendered then,
and therefore he thought the provisions of the pre-
wat Bill, as it originally stoood, was ample enough to
meet the case et the distinguished individuals in question.
If they were to make any alteration in the present Bill,
they would be doing more for Lord Hardinge than had
been done for those who had rendered the most re-
markable services, and obtained the most splendid ad-
vantages which had accrued to this country during the
last war. According to the tenor of this Bill, it was
arranged that the sum of 3,0001. a-year should be given
to Lord Hardinge, and the sum of 2,000/. a-year to Lord
Gough, over and above the sums which had already been
voted by the East India Company, with a view to enable
them to support the dignity of their peerage in that
House. If this Bill were to be passed in its present
shape, it would be giving more than had ever been
give nin any previous instance. In order to bring this
matter properly before the House, he should remind
their Lordships that the annuities, to which reference had
been made, had been granted by the East India Company,
and were in fact a part of the government of the Com-
pany. Thus then, in fact, there was the guarantee
of the State. Now it was well known that as the East
India Company could not guarantee anything without the
authority of the Sovereign, the Noble Lords who were
about to enter upon the enjoyment of those annuities
would have the benefit of the Sovereign's authority;
and the reply, therefore, to those who took a stand
upon this Bill was, that there was only a temporary
interest in the • possession of those by whom the annui-
ties were granted, but he thought that what he had just
stated was an assurance that that ground was invalid. In
the case of Lord Colborne, for whose eminent services
in Canada a pension had been granted by the North
%Vest Company, the same course had been observed.
The object of granting that annuity was to enable him
to maintain the dignity of his 'Peerage in that House,
and no doubt had ever been started of the validity or
the permanence of the grant. He (the Marquis of
Lansdowne) had a long list before him of distinguished
individuals upon whom similar grants for similar ser-
vices had been conferred. The first he had upon that
list was the Marquis of Cornwallis, whom he had known
in early life, and of whom he never could speak but
with the utmost respect. Then there was the late Lord
Wellesley, than whom no man had rendered more
eminent services to his country in India. These, and all
the rest, were rewarded just in the same manner ;
so that there was little doubt of the continuance of the
annuity, especially when it was recollected that if the
interest of the East India Company was a contingent
interest, the Crown held the reversion. Again, he must
remind their Lordships that if this Bill were to be car-
ried in its present state, the amount conferred would
surpass all the lavish expenditure of the last war, when
the currency was depreciated, and, consequently, the
total sums were of less value. And, further than this,
he must also beg to remind them that if they refused to
accede to this proposition, they would be entering into a
contest with the other House of Parliament, which has,
at all times, assumed the right of managing the public
money. It would be expressing an opinion contrary to
that House ; and, in fact, would be sending down an
amended money Bill to that House, and thereby be likely
to create an increased jealousy in that House, which was
an evil at all times to be deprecated. There was no
no doubt but that the representatives of the people were
the proper persons to impose the taxes which.
the people had to pay, and to direct the way
in which they ought to be levied. On this very
day he had received a letter from a distinguised lady
regarding a p-rson who was the subject of this conver-
sation, and who was alike distinguished by her own
merits and for her ancient descent. This was Lady
Emily Hardinge, now Viscountess Hardinge. This
lady stated that she and her family—and she was quite
sure that their feelings were quite in consonance with
those of Lord Hardinge himself—she stated that they
were perfectly satisfied wi:h the amount of the allow-
ance and the way in which it was conferred. She was
the grand-daughter of the first Lord Camden, than
whom a more excellent lawyer and upright individual
never existed. She was the niece also of the second
Lord Camden, who renounced the per centage on the
Exchequer, which he was granted in consideration of
his public services. He (the Marquis of Lansdowne)
hoped, therefore, their Lorciships would rescind the
vote which had been come to on this question on a
former occasion, and vote for the measure brought in
by the late Government,
The Duke of RICHMOND opposed the motion. His
opinion on the subject was unchanged. The Noble
Marquis stated that he had received a letter from Lady
Hardinge, in which she expressed a desire that the sub-
ject would not cause any division in their Lordships'
House. He (the Duke of Richmond) could not, how-
ever, look upon it as a private question. It was on public
grounds he opposed it. There were few prizes in the
-lot of a soldier's life, and the ability, energy, and
courage displayed by their armies entitled then to the
highest rewards the country could bestow. He would
ask, did the grant of foreign lands to the Noble Duke, in
consideration of his great services, weigh for a mo-
ment when the Parliament of this country rewarded his
glorious achievements ? No, the country considered
that it was dee,.ily his debtor, notwithstanding all the
rewards he received from foreign powers. He (the
Duke of Richmond) was surprised at the conduct of his
Noble Friend (the Marquis of Lansdowne) in,taking the
course he at present adopted, for three weeks ago when
the Bill was read a second time he did not vote at all, but
went below the woolsack. The Noble Marquis—also
the Postmaster- General—would, he hoped, adopt the
same course he did then, and vote against the measure
—(Laughter)—and he trusted the Noble Lord (the
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster) would not go
below the woolsack, but express his opinion unre-
servedly on the Bill. lie saw no reason to alter the
opinion he formerly expressed, and he would firmly
resist the motion of the Noble Marquis.
The Earl of RIPON defended the course adopted by
the late Government in regard to the present measure.
In questions of this kind it was difficult to fix the precise
amount to be affixed for such services as those which had
been rendered; still he thought enough had been named
in the Bill. In the case of Lord Nelson, for the brilliant
services he had rendered, the utmost sum granted was
HU a-year. In other cases the same principles of
economy had been observed. It was a painful circum-
stance to interfere with a feeling of generosity, but
he thought it was the duty of the Government
to see that no undue application of the public
money was made. With regard to the case of Lord
Hardinge, ho was in India the representative of
the East India Company, and had advantages and emo-
luments such as did not fall within the reach of those
who held office under the Crown. The company had,
on many occasions, conferred great advantages on those
who held office under them. Lord Clancarty, Lord
Cornwallis, and other Governors-General of India had
received pensions and large grants of money. Lord
Hastings received no less a sum than 60,000/., and his
son had also been treated with great liberality. Lord
Wellesley had also been treated in a similar spirit. The
grant proposed by the company in the present instance
was said to he offered independent of the execu-
tive and the Legislature, and that that grant
should not be allowed to regulate the one
proposed by Parliament. But this was not the fact.
The Government was virtually a party to the act of the
company, as the latter held its charter under the Parlia-
ment of the country, and conducted its operations in
harmony with it. If they gave reins to their generosity
they would involve themselves in continual difficulties.
They ought to deal as liberally as the circumstances
would warrant, but nothing more; and he was per-
suaded, that if a grant of 8,0001. a year was allowed to
Lord Gough, it would be the means of serious incon-
venience in future, when similar cases were to be con-
sidered. From all precedents, and judging from the
circumstances of the case, the late Government con-
sidered they could not go further than the provisions
contained in the Bill as it originally stood. He did not
wish to cast the least reflection on the distinguished in-
dividuals in question, as he felt it a high honour to have
been connected in office with the Government under
which such great men had achieved their brilliant vic-
tories; still he was bound to act in the way he now
proposed.

iLord BROUGHAM said he had not spoken on the
previous occasion, when the Bill was discussed, but since
then he had carefully considered the question, and he
must on the present occasion vote against the amend-
ment which had been proposed. As he understood the
question, the real matter was the propriety of granting
sufficient sums to the distinguished individuals in ques-
tion, in order to enable them to maintain with dignity
the rank of peerage which had been conferred on them.
Much as had been said on the other side, this was the
real point they should keep in view, and the wording of
the preamble of the Bill showed that such
was the original intention of its introduction.
He argued, that the consequence of this doctrine would
be, that where a peerage was conferred on a distin-
guished military officer, that House would make inquiry
into his private fortune. He did not see what the Go-
vernment had to do with the East India Company and
their grants ; for although he admitted that their
grants could not pass without the sanction of Parlia-
ment, still that did not make their money the money of
the Government, or of the public ; the money if not
bestowed in that way would remain in the treasury of
the Corporation, and never would pass into the coffers
of the Exchequer. Ile said it was difficult to limit the
reward for military services. Ye tit might be asked, whe-
ther 5,0001. was not enough for Lord Hardinge ? but he
answered, that he had before this, seen 2,0001. and red
ribbons given to men for services which, in after years,
if their fame ever should pass into after years,
would make men raise their hands in wonder, that
so illiberal a reward bad been bestowed on the brilliant
actions of Sir Henry Hardin,;e. As for the constitu-
tional question, he agreed with the Noble Lord (Lans-
downe) that it would be better far that the privileges of
the people's representatives should be left unquestioned
by them, and uninterfered with. But he contended, for
the privileges of their Lt rdships' House, that their
Lordships had a right to exercise their judgment on the
Bills sent up from the House of Commons, and were not
to swallow either the whole Bill untouched, or to reject
it altogether. The letter from the Noble Lady, which
had been introduced by the Noble Earl, affecting and
powerful as it was, had just an opposite effect on his
mir.d, from that which it seemed to have produced on the
Noble Earl's. Perhaps the letter might have been ex-
pected from the grand-daughter of Lord Camden, and
the daughter of the late Marquis, but he contended that
from a sense of justice to Lord Hardinge, §tinaulated by
the generous and disinterested conduct of the Noble
Lady whose letter had been alluded to, their Lordships
ought to deal liberally in this case,
The Duke of WELLINGTON said he had been in
the Government when this Bill was introduced into the
House, and, therefore, he begged to submit a few ob-
servations to their Lordships. He be Red Vl* Lord-

•
ships to recollect that it was a money Bill sent up from
the Commons, proposing a grant made under a standing
order of that House, and founded upon a message from
the Crown. He begged his Noble and Learned Friend
(Lord Brougham) to remark the exactness of the words
of the message, which very words had been engrossed in
the preamble of the Bill. Her Majesty stated that she
desired to make provision for Lord Hardinge, in support
of the dignity which had been conferred on him, and in
consideration of his great services. He said the House
of Commons had passed this Bill at the suggestion of the
Crown. Now this House had the same Bill be-
fore it. It was an understanding between the two
Houses that their Lordships' House should not
alter a money Bill, yet this House proceeded to do so ;
but he defied the Noble and Learned Lord to produce
one instance of thus increasing a grant after it had come
from the other House. The consequence would be that
the Bill would be lost. He acknowledged the high
merit of the Noble Lord's services in the field, and her
Majesty had conferred the dignity of the peerage upon
him, a reward which had been received with approba-
tion by the country. He said the Noble and Learned
Lord asked for instances, and he could give him one in
which the poverty of a Noble Lord was made the sole
basis of provision. He would not give the name.
Another case he recollected, in which it was supposed
that the Peer had sufficient to support his dignity, but
it was found afterwards that he had not, and provision
was made for him on that accoant. He would not men-
tion the name. He begged their Lordships to consider
what would be the effect of leaving this particular point
to: caprice or to chance what effect it would
have on the mind of military men who might
have conferred on them this expensive honour.
It appeared that the sum of 5,0001. a-year, and 2,0001.
a-year were to be granted to Lord Hardinge and Lord
Gough, respectively, by the East India Company for
the purpose of maintaining the dignity of their positions
in that House. He quite agreed with his Noble Friend
the late President of the Board of Control, that these
grants were to be made out of the funds of the East
India Company, with the consent of her Majesty, and it
was necessary for her Majesty to give her consent be-
fore any such grant could become valid. It was, there-
fore, evident that it was only as servants of the Crown
that Ministers could take any notice of. the making of
the grant, but it was equally evident that as such tier-
vents they could not do otherwise than take notice of it.
He had advised her Majesty to give her consent, and
such being the case, they had agreed to bring in an Act
of Parliament for that purpose, and he would remind
their Lordships that in the event of the Bill being
altered in that House, there was a possibility that the
annuities might be lost altogether ; and he intreated,
therefore, their. Lordships, for the sake of the army, for
the sake of the officers, and for the sake of their families
--for it shciuld be remembered that the position of those
families depended upon their vote that night— to confirm
the decision at which the other House had arrived.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE felt that he had to
justify himself for the vote which he was about to give,
for he bad, he must confess, changed his principles. He
had certainly voted in opposition to the annuity the
other night, but he had done so without sufficient consi-
derotion, and without once reading the Bill which con-
tained the clause, which it was now desirable to erase,
and which his Noble Friend (Lord Monteagle) had so
strongly inveighed against. It now appeared evident
that this grant must have the consent of the Crown; and
there was the further consideration that arose with re
Bard to the position of the Government, and the circum-
stance still more important as regarded this debate ; that
these grants were not made so much as rewards for the
services which had been rendered as to enable the
Noble persons on whom they were conferred to support
the dignity of the Peerages which had been bestowed
upon them. It should be observed that the grant ta
Lord Hardinge was limited to his own life and that of
his two succeeding heirs male, while that of Lord Gough
was limited to his own life alone. The Noble and Gallant
Duke on the cross-benches had rightly reminded them
that as it was the duty and the privilege of the House of
Commons to make grants of public money, if this Bill
were altered at all the annuities might be altogether
lost to the noble persons for whom they were intended,
and should, therefore, vote with his Noble Friend.
The Earl of GALLOWAY was surprised at the vi-
tuperation of a Noble Lord connected with Ireland,
not now in his place, the other night, although he had
abstained from moving the amendment. Like the Noble
Marquis, he had come down the other day ignorant of
the clause which regulated these annuities, and was
anxious to justify himself from the charge of inconsis-
tency. But seeing that not only the Noble Duke (the
Duke of Wellington), who had spoken from the cross
benches, but that other members of the Government, of
which he was a member, and also several members of
the present Government were induced to alter their
mode of proceeding, he felt that, though just contrary
to the vote which he had previously given, he should
vote with the Noble Marquis (the Marquis of Lans-
downe) on the present occasion.
The Earl of WICKLOW quite agreed with the Noble
Marquis, the Postmaster-General, (the Marquis of
Clanricarde), that this vote ought to be sustained. He
could not forget that the Noble Lord, from whom the
proposition had originally emanated, had refrained from
putting the amendment himself, but had expressed a de-
sire that some other Noble Lord of greater weight in the
House would put it to the House. Then up jumps the
Noble Duke on the cross-benches (the Duke of Rich-
mond), and put the vote to the House, and thus secures
the Noble Baron's vote. Truly he believed that no one
was more surprised at the effect of his own eloquence,
than was the Noble Baron himself ; nor any one, he
believed now, that more regretted it. Seeing, then, the
change of parties in the country, and the change in the
Ministry, and the possibility which existed, that in the
event of their not acceding to the proposition of the
Noble Marquis (Lansdowne), that the annuities to the
two noble persons for whom they were intended might
be endangered, he should certainly go in opposition to
the vote which he had given the other evening. He
thought it would be imprudent and impolitic to adhere
to the decision which bad been taken on the former oc-
casion, and he called on them to support the Bill in its
original form.

After a few words of explanation from the Marquis o
LANSDOWNE,

The Duke of RICHMOND said he must deny the
imputation that he had ever said anything reflecting on
the character of Lord Hardinge. What he stated was,
that Government should take care to prevent a divided
command in India in future, and to take care that the
Governor-General should not be second in command.
He must say in taking the course he did on the present
Bill, be was not in the least degree actuated by party or
political considerations.—(Hear, hear.)
The Earl of GALLOWAY explained, that he had no
intention of attributing any such motives to the Noble
Duke (the Duke of Richmond).
The gallery was then cleared for a division, when there
appeared— .

For the amendment (restoring the Bill) .... 47
Against it —, lB

Majority for the Government 29
The report was the❑ brought up and received.
Several Bills were advanced a stage, and the House
adjourned.

HOUSE OF COII,IMONS, July 16.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
NEW MEMBERS.
Mr. SHELL (Master of the Mint) took the oaths and
his seat as Member for the borough of Dungarvan.
Lord A. PAGET also took the oaths and his seat as
Member for the city of Lichfield.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.—ROYAL
ASSENT.
Sir Augustus Clifford, the Usher of the Black Rod,
appeared at the bar, to summon the Speaker and the
House to hear the royal assent given to several public
and private Bills, (for which see Lords' report).
The SPEAKER returned after the absence of half an
hour, and informed the House of the Bills to which the
royal assent had been given.
A messenger from the Court of Chancery brought up
several returns.

MANCHESTER AND SOUTHAMPTON
RAILWAY.
On the motion of Lord E. BRUCE the Manchester
and Southampton Railway Bill was read a third time
and passed ; as were also the following Bills :—Billings-
gate Market, Cambridge Improvement, and Hill's
Estate Bill.

DERBYSHIRE, STAFFORDSHIRE, AND WOR

CESTERSHIRE JUNCTION RAILWAY.:
The report upon the Derbyshire, Staffordshire, and
Worcestershire Junction Railway Bill was considered
and agreed to.
EDINBURGH AND GLASGOW UNION CANAL.

This Bill was read a third time and passed.
SLIGO SHIP CANAL BILL,
This Bill was read a third time and passed.
DUBLIN WIDE STREETS BILL.
Sir J. Y. BULLER brought up the report on the
Dublin Wide Streets Bill.
AYRSHIRE AND BRIDGE OF WEIR RAILWAY.
On the motion of Mr. DUNCAN, the Lords' Amend-
ments to this Bill were considered and agreed to.
LORDS' AMENDMENT.
The Lords' Amendments to the following Bills were
considered and agreed to :
Ashburton, Newton, and South Devon Railway Bill.
Birmingham, Lichfield, and Manchester Railway Bill.
Buckinghamshire Railway Bill.
Gloucester and Dean Forest Railway Bill.
Great Western and Wycombe Railway Bill.
London and Croydon Railway (Thames Junction
Branch) Bill.
Newcastle and Darlington Junction Railway (Durham
and Sunderland Railway and Wearmouth Dock Pur-
chase and Branches) Bill.
South Wales Railway Bill (No. 2).
THE ANNEXATION OF
F SIN
DE, HUME, seeing the Right SI
Baronetp E
Ron, t h e
sident of the Board of Control in his place,
ask him a question with respect to Sinde.
'reed to
-11,
to know if Sinde had been annexed to th-
e wished
as was declared by Lord Ellenb'jr 0 Bri'fish empire,
ougn to b'e the intention
of Goverment, in the mina
or whether
annexed ; manner in w'nich i;eylon was
tion of the t ;as to be considered as a por-
no, he wishepd osses`
''sons of the East India Company?lf
toascertain what course was to be taken
by the Government, as the government of that province
was altogether different from any other place in the East
si India Company's possessions, as it was in neither pre-
dency, nor had it a civil government, but it was
governed by a single officer.
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said, that in answer to the
question of the Hon. Member for Montrose, •he begged.
leave to tell him that the province of Sinde was a pro-
vince kept by the East India Company in trnst for the
Crown. The Hos. Gentleman would recollect on perusal
of the panrsrs which had been viblished by Lord Ellen-
-1 Trough with respect to Sinde, that Sinde was annexed
in the usual manner by notification, and th,e
Management of it had been entrusted by Governrne nt
to Sir C. Napier, who reported his proceedings to the
Rome Department.
.When his report was received% it