The Sun.
London, England, 1851-07-08 00:00:00

oats, 00s Od ; rye, 004 Od ; beans, 00i Peas, ('O4 Od
average per imperial quarter.
STIRLING, Jut? .4.—Whezt, foreign, 00s to o^s; ditto,
home, 2ls 9d; ditto ditto new, 2ls Odlo Od; barley, per
boll of 6 husbels, 010 d to Os Od ; ditto new, 191 Od to 20s od.
Oats, Cupar, UOs Od to 00s ; ditto new, 151 Cd to 16s Od;
ditto, Flemi.h, Os Od to Os Od; ditto ditto new, 00s Od; malt,
distillers, .13s Od to 35. ' • ditto brewers, 35s Od to 37s ; beans
per boll, 00, Od to t,04 Od; ditto new. 15s 8d to 1889 d; pease 15s
id to oos 0d; ft.,ur, new per sack, 33s to 34s Od; ditto common
ditto, 19. Od to 21s Od; oatmeal, per load, 00s Od to 0 )s Od;
ditto new 33. Od to 36s Od ; ditto per peck of 71bs, lid to Is;
fresh butter, per lb, 7d to 9d ; eggs, per dozen, 7d to 8d ;
hay, Keno, per ton, 75, to 77. 6d; ditto, Dryfield, 001 to 746.

COAL MABEE'
&addle's W. Hartley.. 133 Od
Burnhope Gas
Cares Hartley ..... 13s Oil
Chester Main l2s 6d
Redhugh Main lls Od
Longridge'sW.Hartley 13s Od
North Percy Hartley l2a 6d
Howard's W. H. Neth. 13s Od
Tanfield Moor
West Wylam
Wall's End, &e. _ _ _

‘a.-YESITXRDAIr.

i:am 1;ton = I' ' rose lBa Od
fletton
Haswell... l4B 6d
Lambton
Lumley l2: 91
aussell's Hatton
Scarborough l2s 9d
West Hartlepool
'South 'Cellos l3s 3d
Thornley
IWhitworth • 12s Od
Adelaide Tees
Seymour Tees ......
!Tees ....
IHartley —....... .....

Acorn Close
Elm Park l2s 3d
Hebburn . l2B 3di
Walker l2i 3d)
Eden Main
Ships at marke,,

119 Sold, 65.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS. Julyj 7.
JOTEE PER,SRAUD.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH, in moving for a re-
turn of the names of all persons committed to and dis-
charged from the gaol of Agra b tween the 11th March
and the 7th November, 1850, specifying in each case the
magistrate by whose authority each such committal
or oischarge took place, together with the grounds, if
any, assigned for the same in the warrant. He said he
had eiveu this notice with the view of obtaining an op-
portunity of making a statement with respect to some
facts which appeared to him to hare an important bear-
ing On the question he had recently submitted to their
Lordshipe' attention. If the Noble Lord had given any
notice that he intended to institute an inquiry into these
matters he would have refrained from saying anytbiug
on the subject; but as he was not authorised to entertain
an expectation that the Noble Lord intended to originate
an inquiry, he felt it therefore to be his duty to make
the statement of which he had already given notice.
But even without that statement there was ample room
for inquiry, as would be seen from the statement of facts
which had appeared in the hallos newspapers. It was
openly sated that a large number of witnesses who had
given evidelice on the trial of Jotee Pershaud were un-
worthy of credit. One witness had sworn to certain
circumstances before a magistrate who had atterwards
contradicted that statement on oath. Another witness
had made one statement on oath, a second statement on
oath contradicting that statement, and a third statement,
also en oath, declaring that his first statement was true.
Io additiou to these tan aordiuery matters he
found that the defendant had never been con-
fronted by the magistretes with any of the witnessed
against him, and the judge on the trial brought
out the tact that witnesses for the defendant had never
been examined at ad. He found, also, that counsel ob-
jected to the reception as evidence of decuments, the
signatures to which were unproved. He considered that
the 'Omitted facts were of themselves amply sufficient
not only to justify, but to require the Government, hare
and in India, to Institute a searching inquiry into the
conduct of parties implicated. The suit, it must be re-
membered, was not got up by a solicitor, but by the
magistrates, who used all the strength and power they
could command to bring witnesses before them. Whe-
ther Jotee Pershaud were guilty or not was of no im-
portance. The question involved in his statement was
of more importance. There could be no protection for
innocence, unless a man reputed guilty had a fair trial.
A fair trial was not given to Joie, Pershaud, because
means were used to obtain evidence which ought by
no means to have been used. The case especially
concerned the Government of India, whose duty it
was to take care that its power was sufficiently exer-
cised to punish wrong-doing on the part of subordi-
nate officers. In this and all well-constituted countries
the people looked to the laws for protection ; in the
East they looked not to the laws, but to the Govern-
ment for protection. Ho understood it was not cor-
rect to say that the first person who gave information to
Government in this case, was a person employed in the
commissariat. He understood that person was a convicted
felon just released from gaol. He believed that while
evidence in favour of the accused was not attended to by
the magistrates, that evidence against the accused was
received by them with thanks. These were the general
points which could be supported by the testimony of
witnesses, that Jotee Pershaud only by accident became
acquainted with the proceedings and the indictment
against him, and that be was not made properly ao-
quainted with the allegations of the indictment. He
would proceed to make a short statement of facts, and
before be left that House he would place in the hand* of
the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Broughton) the name of
his informant. Oue of the witnesses in favour of Jotee
Pershaud had been arrested, and bad been threatened
day by day with being committed to gaol if he did not
vary the depositions he had previously made. His in-
formant had seen this person in the custody of two of the
native police at the door of a house of a magistrate
named Denison. Tnia person declared ho had been con-
fined for nearly twelve days because he refused to vary
tee deposition he had given in favour of Jotee Pershaud.
Tnia man, he contended, was illegally taken into cus
tody and illegally confined. The Noble Lord might
satisfy himself to-morrow of the truth of these allege
tions. The person was ultimately committed to gaol.
Tnis was the first case which affected Mr. Denison.
The second case affected Mr. Cummins, another magis-
trate. A banker of Agra who had no connexion with
the commissariat, was called before a magistrate, and he
made a deposition which the magistrate considered un-
satisfactory, whereupon the magistrate abused him in
terms toe gross to repeat. The Agra banker sent to
Mr. Laing. an eminent counsel at Calcutta, to know
whether he could no! prosecute the magistrate for defa-
mation on account of the abusive terms applied to him in
court, and the reply of the barrister. he understood, was
that a bill of indictment would lie against the magistrate.
Tnis banker was called before a magistrate, and was
committed to a common gaol, because he refused to alter
rue depeeition This banker we. catifieed in a small
cell, and was obliged to perform uffiees which were con-
sidered an abomination to persona of his creed. This
banker was only released at last upon petition. & re-
epectetile gentleman—au Lichen planter—was cognisant
of all the citcutusteeces, and could confirm this state-
ment. (I'bc Noble Earl here banded over to Lord
Breughtun a slip of paper, on which he said was written
ins name of his informant.) He e-ntentled that these
acre subjects which called ter inqulrt. He asked nothing
more man whir was essential tor the honour, he had
elmeet said for the security, of government in Itelia.
El- wanted to 'thew to the world that these things could
Lot, be done with impunity, and that if done no diepos.
non existed tai buck inquiry.
Lord BROUG I'ON must submit that these motions
and these waternents placed the Government in India
and the Government at home in a position that could
hardly be called tale, because Government were not in
possession of any information un the subject to enable
him to reply to the statements of the Noble Earl. He
submitted that these statements contained grave accu-
sations, and coming with the weight of the Noble
Earl's authority, who had filled the highest place in
the Government of India, they ought not to be lightly
made, certainly not on the authority of newspapers or
of a private person, unless that person was willing to
submit himself, to whatever punishment he would not
say, but to whatever consecpeences, in case it should
be proved he had given wrong information on so seri-
ous a matter. The Noble Earl must be aware he was
in a situation not to be able to answer the statements
just made, but as farmer statements on the same sub-
ject had been proved not to be correct he was em-
boldened to say that he believed he should ultimately be
able to prove that the present statements were not of
that authority which the Noble Earl asserted they
possessed. Now, what was thy charge in these state-
ments ? Why, that the Government of India had
endeavoured to Moe the efforts of an Indian gentleman
to get money due to him, by instituting criminal pro.
(seeding, against him. He was satisfied a true statement
of facts would show that this was not correct. The
Noble Earl would recollect the wrong statement he made
the other evening, relative to an alleged irruption into
the ladies' apartments of Jotee Pershaud, and that one
of the officers had been guilty of the monstrous outrage
of tearing the rings from the nose of one of the ladies. All
the foundation for this was, that the inventory of goods
taken by this officer was an item relating to a nose ring.
As this allegation was shown not to be true, he was not
without hope that some of the recent statements of the
Noble Earl would be ascertained to be equally unfounded.
He did not say the statements now made by the Noble
Earl were untounded: he had no means of knowing whe-
ther they were true or not until he obtained evidence
from India, which he had wo iiten for, and until he re-
ceived which he did not think to hear any details from
the Noble Earl.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said he did not enter
into details, excspt such as he conceived the Noble Lord
was prepared to answer. The Noble Lord could have
stopped him if he objected to them.
Lord BROUGHTON was new to the practice of their
Lordships' House. He had written to India, and had as
yet received no answer. He did not like to interrupt the
Noble Earl, but had the Noble Earl and himself been in
the House of Commons he should have stopped him in
five minutes. With respect to many of what the Noble
Earl called facts, the Noble Earl would find them contra-
dicted in the speech of Mr. Willie, who appeared for the
prow cute n. The charges of violence agatust Mr. Deni-
son and Mr. Cummins were contradicted. He had re-
ceived a name from the Noble Eat I as the Noble Earl's
informant, eat he thought it hardly gracious for a ser-
vant, who (light to be a tail hful servant, to furnish
,natter for attack on the Indian Goverment as soon as
he arrived in this country. He dal nee mean to say that
air s iif vies utalversation in the I .;dititi empire should
h, pas.ed ever, that everybody's rueutti should be sealed,
and the Noble Earl not ieforaied ot %ha: occurred, let
order that the Noble Earl might be precluded f. om
bringing the matter before Perliatuteit. But this he said,
when no official means o contradicting grave charges
were in existence, that such charges ought not to be
brought forward unil the means of giving con!radiction
or explanation were supplied. The Noble Earl stated
there was only one newspaper in India that took the
part of Government in this affair. He would refer the
Earl to a very respectable paper, the Bengal Hur-
karu. in which 'air view of the case was found. Toe
Noble Earl would, perhaps, be surprised at the cberacier
which even the counsel for Jotee Pershaud gave of Jot, e
Pershaud's countrymen, and of course including Jotee
Pershaud himself. Mr. Laing, in defending Jotee Per•
ohaud, said they must tske the natives as they found