The Sun.
London, England, 1858-05-18 00:00:00

PUBLIC INCOME.

Mr. W. WILLIAMS moved for an account of the
public income and expenditure of the United Kingdom,
in the years ending the 31st of March, 1857-58,—
Ordered.
Mr. BRIGHT presented a petition from Birming-
ham in favour of the Property Qualification Abolition
Bill; also a petition from numerous freehold land
societies in same place, praying that the 40.!. county
franchise might be extended to Scotland.

THE OATHS BILL.
At balf-past four o'clock the SPEAKER announced that
the hour appointed for the conference with the HOll5O
of Peers had arrived.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved that the members who
drew up the reasons of the Commons for disagreeing
with the amendments made in their lordships' house be
appointed to manage the conference.
The motion was agreed to, and the members left the
house.
After an absence of 10 minutes the members returned,
and Lord JOHN RIISBELL announced that they had been
to the conference, and bad left the bill and the reasons
with their lordships for their consideration.
Lord NORREYS gave notice that on Thursday
next he should ask a question cf the Secretary of the
Board of Control, with respect to his silence regarding
the proclamation of the Governor-General of India.
HARBOURS IN IRELAND.

Mr. HASSARD asked the Secretary of State for
War, if any rrpert bad, within the last year, been re-
ceived at the War-office or Horse-Guards relative to the
great facilities afforded by the harbour of Waterford for
landing and embarking troops to and from the south of
Ireland ; and, if so, whether he had any objection to lay
the same on the table of the house I

General PEEL said the most favourable reports had
been received, and as those reports were asked for, there
would be no objection to their production.
THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S PROCLA-
MATION.
Sir D. NORREYS asked the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, whether the Governor-General of India bad
rent home a copy of the proclamation addresqed to the
chiefs and inhabitants of Oude, whin!' was aefual 1y
is,ued after the taking of Lucknow, and whether
it differed in any respect from the proposed proclama-
tion, a copy of which had been laid before the house ;
Anl whether the Governor-Cieneral of India had given to

the Government of England, or to the India Board, any
other explanation of such proclamation, or the reasons
which have led to or justify its issue than such as are
contained in the letter addressed by Mr. E.lmonstonelto
the Secretary to the Chief Commissioner of Oude, dated
3d March, and which has been laid bef ‘re the house.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said no
copy of the proclamation aotually issued had been re-
ceived, and therefore could not be produced. With
respect to the second question, I have to inform the
hon. member that on Saturday last we received three
private letters from Lord Canning, and in one of them
reference was made to other documents and also to the
explanations with respect to the Governor-General's
Pr.:elm:nation, but the documents referred to in those
letters have not been received. (Cheers from the
Ministerial side of the House).
Lord NORREYS asked whether any positive infor-
mation of the issuing of the proclamation had yet been
received ?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. —We
have nut received any positive information from the
Governor-General, but we are in receipt of information
from another source, that the proclamation has been
pos tiv el v issued. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON said the hon. gentleman oppo-
site (Mr. Disraeli), in answering the question of the
noble lord, had alluded to the receipt of three letters from
the Governor-General which referred to certain documents
which had not come to bawl. He could state most
positively that his hon. friend, the late President of the
Board of Control, had not had any further communica-
tions of any kind from Lord Canning. So, if the infor-
mation referred to had not come to band, it must have
been lost, for it most certainly had not been received by
the hoe. member for Northampton.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
the noble lord was_perfeotly_justified in rising, _but in
the obseriations he (kr. Disraeli) hi--aliddressed tcithe
houie, he never intended to make any insinuations. Some
gentlemen were too ready to apply insinuations ; but if
such had been his (the Chancellor of the Exckequez's)
otject, he should not hesitate to have done so in plain
language.
Sir J.Y. SHELLEY asked whether the Government
had received direct information that the proclamation
had been issued—yes or no ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—We
have no official information, bat we know positively
that it has been issued. (Cheers.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON said he had within the lilt two
hours seen an officer who had held high command at
Lucknow. Previous to his quitting India he had seen
Sir C. Campbell who expressed his opinion that the pro-
clamation had arrived.

Lord V. TEMPEST asked the right hon. gentle-
man the member for Northampton (Mr. V. Smitb)
whether he would have any objection to produce
the letter or extracts he had received from Lord Canning
referring to tke explanations that were to accompany
bis proclamation. _ .

Mr. V. SMITH said he had already stated the pur-
-1 port of the Ittter.
Lord V. TEMPEST said the right hon. gentleman
had not answered his question.
Mr. V. SMITH said he had already stated the pur-
port cf the communication, and he should decline to
produce any private communications.
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE raid the information given
by an officer who had lately held an office, being in
command in Oude, ought to be put into some
shape by which it could be communicated to the house.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. DILLWYN asked whether, in the event of his
amendment being agreed to, the Government would
give it his support (Hear, hear.)
An 110 N. MEMBER. said he believed information
had been received from India stating that the proclama-
tion of the Governor-General had been issued in accord-
ance with directions is:med by the late ministry. (Hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON said, in his interview with
CA Pranks, that gallant offictr, whom he had never
seen befire, exhibited the greatest delicacy with re-
spect to his communications with Lord Canning.
He expressed his sincere regard for the Governor-Gene-
ral, from whom he had received many k ndnesee•, and
was exceedingly desirous that Ilia came should not be
associated with the angry discussions that were now
going on with respect to this sutject. (Limn) The hoc.
niernberfor London seemed to have been misinformed with
with respect to Lord Canning's informing that gallant
officer that the proclamation had been issued in accord-
ance with directions from home. Lord Canning did not
tell him he had reoeived any such instructions. (Hear,
bear.)