The Sun.
London, England, 1856-07-08 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

ROUSE OF LORDS--4YESTERDA )
The Loan CHANCELLOR took his beat on the woolsack
at 5 o'clock.

ROYAL COMMISSION.
The Royal assent was given .by Commission to the
following bills : Industrial and Provident Societies ;
Seamen's Savings Bank Annuities Redemption ; Stock
in Trade Exemption ; Luton, Dunstable, and Welwyn
Junction Railway ; London, Tilbury, and Southend
Railway (Extension and Branches) ; Middlesborough
Improvement ; Tormohatit Water ; Yarmouth and
Haddiscoe Railway ; Scottish Drainage and Improve-
ment Co. ; Lymington Railway ; Borough and Eamont
Bridge Road, Donington Turnpike Trust, Claycross
Water, Sittingbourne and Sheerness Railway, Leeds
Water, Eastern Union Railway, Bawtry and Tinsley
Road, Godley Lane Road, and Shipton's Disabilities

Removal.
The Royal Commissioners were the Lord Chancellor,
the Marquis of Breadalbane, and the Duke of Argyll.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

On the motion of Lord REDESDALE, the following
bills were read a second time :—lsle of Wight Steam
Bridge and Approaches ; Metropolitan Railway ; Wave-
ney Valley Railway; East Indian Railway Company ;
Severn Navigation Improvement Commission ; Cleobury
North, , District Roads • Dorset Central Railway ;
Wimbledon and Croydon Railway ; Stirling and Dun-
fermline Railway ; Dunblane, Donne, and Co.llandar
Railway ; Rhoaydd Railway ; Conway and Llandudno
Road.
On the motion of the same noble lord the following
bills were severally read a third time and paseed : West
London and Crystal Palace Rail way, Bagenal9tnign :And
Wexford Railway, London Printing and Publishing
Company (Amendment..) •
NAWAB OF SURAT BILL.

-•- - -
Lord LYNDHURST asked whether the law officers
of the Crown bad been consulted as to their opinion of
the construction of the treaty entered into with the East
India Company and the late Nawab of Surto, and if so,
whether the Government would have any objection to lay
a copy of the opinion on the table ?
The Duke of ARGYLL said he was not aware of
any formal question laaviog been put to the law officers
of the Crown by her Majesty's Government as to the
construction of that treaty. He was therefore unable
to say what their opinion was on the subject.
On the order of the day for the second reading of this
bill, •

The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH asked whether the
Government were prepared- to give the assent of the
Cr iwn to the second reading of this hill, which would
affect the revenues of the Crown, inasmuch as the coin•
pang were only the trustees fur the Crown in She man-
agement of the affairs of India.
The Duke of ARGYLL said he was not prepared
to give the assent of the Crown to this bill.
The Marquis of CLA.NRICARDE then. nese, and
moved the second reading of the bd. He contended
that it was founded on justice, and that the heirs of the
Nawab were clearly entitled to a continuance of the
payment of the money which the treaty secured to them.
'nesse could be no question tat in this case wrong bad
been done. The President of the Board of Trade had
admitted it, and the Solicitor-General bad spoken and
voted in favcur of the claim. Every legal authority in
the House of Gammons, with the exception of one (a
gentleman who was one of the leading counsel to the
East. India Company), had. taken the• same view, and
that view he trusted their lordships would confirm by
passing the second reading of the bill. (Hear.)
The Duke of ARGYLL believed that his noble
friend the chairman of committees bad moved that the
bill .be visa a, 'third time that day three months.
Undoubtedly that'amendment was proposed upon a point
of form ; but ha believed be could •convince the house
that in rejecting the measure upon the point of form
they would do no
:injustice upon the merits. Tne fact
of hit nobleiriend (Lsrd Redesdale) refusing to under-
take the conduct of the bill, as he would do, as a matter
of course, in- the case of an ordinary private bill,
was a strong presumptive proof that there was some-
thing objectionable in it. The standing orders com-
mittee bad examined the bill and reported that none of
the standing orders which the house had raised for the
protection of public and private interests in private bill
legislation were applicable t 3 it, the natural inference
being that it ought to be treated as a public bill, if en-
tertained at all. That it affected the public interests
wan beyond question, for it dealt with the revenues of
the Crown to the extent in capital of half a million of
money. And with regard to private interests it affected
injuriously the private rights of a number of poor indi-
viduals in India, who, as far as be knew, had no know-
ledge that any such measure was in contemplation. He
denied that the claimant bad suffered any substantial in-
jesiiee to warrant his appealing to Parliament. There
were two questions involved—first, the di-posal of the
public annuity granted by the E tat India Company
under the treaty to the Nawab of Surat and his sue
censor ; and, secondly, the distribution of the
private estate. W7itli regard to the first he con-
tended, by a reference to,the trees), itself, the diary
of Geverner Duncan, the report of Sir G. Arthur,
and the decisi in of the governor-general in council upon
that report, that the iiitenton was that the annuity
should attach to the Naseabsirip, and that such was the
interpretation put upon it by the Nawab himself whet!
the treaty was first concluded. The next point to which
he alluded was the at empt of his noble friend to cast
odium ors the C oirt of Directors. To show how unjust
was this, he would refer the house to the general iustruc•
tions of the Court of Directers, which wets, that the
Nawab's family should be liberally dealt with ; in fee-,
in the end they granted pensions to every one of them
They chid the Bombay Government for their niggardli-
ness in the first instance, and at the present moment nn
less than 11,0001 out of the 15.0001. claimed was by
their order distributed amongst the family. Ha mann
tained, then, that on the whole the Ceropany bad be-
lieved fairly and liberally to the Na Nab of Surat and his
faintly.. He did not mean to say that, questions iniet,ht
net arise out of this ancient for the judicial
committee of the Privy Council ; but was it
Lac under the fects wh ch he had related, to take ad-
vantage of the passing unpopularity of the cempeny to
for.* a private bill through Parliament. Supposing the
judicial committee to decide in favour of the claim, what
were they to do wittr,the annuities which had been
granted ? They must still be paid, and this necessity
would place the Government in a difficult position. He
should mention also, that when the priva•e property of
the late Nawab was to be divided, Sir R. Arbuthnot
decided that the present claimant was not entitled to
any part of it. Nay, more, this very man was a consent-
ing party, to that arrangement. A special act was passed,
authorising a.n agent to act in the distribution of the pro-
perty, and in it eas a clause suggested by the present
claimant, going directly against the present application
Only two years since he appealed to the Privy Council,
and the decision was given by Sir Knight Bruce, to the
effect the, no appeal lay in the case. Having cautioned
the house against the impolicy of reopening the case, and
thus disturbing the annuities which had been so long en-
joyed by a number of poor people, the noble duke con-
cluded by declaring his intention to oppose the bill.
The Earl of ALBEIVIARLE'dteied the right of the
Indian Company to be heard as against the Govern-
ment, of which they were merely a subordinate depart-
ment.

The E srl of ELLEN BOROUG a said the noble duke
ha l so clearly explained the case that it would bo unne-
cessary for him to trouble the house at any length He
was not generally so fortunate as to be able to praise
the conduct of the India Cimpany, but in this case he
thought they had acted as became commissioners between
the people of England and the people of India. They
had no personal interest in it, and bat merely acted ac.
cording to law and custom. It was perfectly ridiculoum
to talk of the female heirs of a Nawab, and therefore
the case set up in this claim was perfectly untenable.
Having given the case his carefal cnn‘ileration, he was
determined to oppose the bill. Let him imagine a
parallel case. Suppose Moldavia and Wallachia to be
released from the suzerainty of tie Porte, and to grant
in return an annuity to the Sultan and bis heirs. Did
any one imagine that it the Sultan's an hority were de-
stroyed, the Principalities would continue t,.) pay the an-
nuity amongst the Sultan's daughters, the wives of all
the Pachas ? And yet this was precisely the case against
which he Nished to guard their lordships, and he warned
them that there were more to come, which were only
waitiiig the decision ti which their lordshiPs might come
that e yelling. He tru-ted that the question, whether by
the treaty of 1800 the ant.uity was settled 'to the heirs
male of the Nawab, would be submitted to the Judicial
Committee. (Rear.)
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE replied. He also
hopea that this matter would be judicially inquired into.
But when that was done he truged that steps would be
taken to carry the decision of the Judicial Committee
into effect, even although a special act should he required
to enforce the decision to which the Judicial Committee
might c >me.
After a few words from Lord DEMEAN,
The second reading was negatived without a division.
COM3IIS3IONERS OF SUPPLY (SCOTLAND)
BILL.

The report of amendments 'sag reoeived.
DRAINAGE (IRELAND) BILL.
This bill aai rea 1 a seco.ud time.
DISTILLATION FRO..NI RICE BILL.
This bill wag read a second
• EVIDENCE IN FOREIGN SUITS BILL.
This bill -pasoed through
DWELLINGS FOR LABOURING CLASES
(IRELAND) BILL.
Thislaili passed. through commit - ''• •
BILLS (1,000,000 i.) BILL.
Thii bill passed throughirnittto.
C44OIITDGE UNIVERSITY BILL
The rep.vrt of amenilin,rits wa.'recAved.
S7.!IALL• DEBTS IMPROVENiENT- ACT AMEND-
MENT "(SCOTLAND) BILL.
Tts4'bill wag read a•tt•irc• tirne'iv,d passed.
CPLIZT-07EOEFECMEII, (SCQTLSND)'BiLL.
Ve LORD C-020 NCELLOR, in
ninvi" g the ground
reading of this bill, briefly explained objectthatthe
of
the measure was the abolition of the Court of Exchequer
of Scotland, and the merger of the jurisdiction of that
couft4 the Court of Seesion.
thtielOrdshipe adjourned at 8 o'clock. •

, HOUSE -OP COMMONS. -..(17;......,ERDAY.)
ene,tgia,ticeit_took the chair at the usual hour. •
PRIVATE BUSINESS. - -

The Lord-! f...,,n,a!tnent3 to the f,):lo.ving were
3,-,reei; to : lin%.ll.qh ‘V,lter
rits - T 1
,t) AD. jr ;, to,r.(-t ..wanca
Mouse ; Stockton 'and Darling,tou