The Sun.
London, England, 1867-05-25 00:00:00

THE RAJAH OF MYSORE.

Lord WILLIAM UAY called the attention of the House
to tho despatch of the Secretary of State for ladia relative
to the claims of the Maharajah of Mysore.

➢lr. SMOLLETT characterised Sir S. Northcote's
despatch as the most honest and straightforward which
had issued from the India-office on this f object, though it
was not in entire accordance with Lord Cranborne's

language, and did not condemn in sufficiently strong
language the unscrupulous views of the Indian officials
who had contemplated the annexation of Mysore. The
original treaty, he maintained, was intended to be permanent,
and after the Queen's Proclamation, abandoning for ever
the policy of annexation, the absorption of Mysore would
be regarded in India as a gross breach of faith. He pro-
tested against the interpretation of the treaty being de-
cided by an arbitrary Governor-General, backed by a
crotchety Secretary of State; it was a legal question which
ought to be decided by an impartial legal tribunal, and ho
agreed with Lord W. Hay that the system of native
agency, which was more popular in native States and in-
finitely more economical, ought to be restored.
Sir 11. RAWLINSON expressed unreserved approbation
of Sir S. Northcote's despatch, and argued that the treaty
was permanent and dynastic, the more fact of sovereignty
involving the right of heritable succession. Advortirg to
a 7mour that ail, Secretary of State had acted against the
opinion of the mjority of his Council, he asserted that
with one exception all the councillors who had experience
of native States were in favour of this policy, and he de-
fended the part he had taken in calling the attention of
Parliament to the matter.

Colonel SYKES and Sir E. COLEBROOKE also spoke
in warm approval of the.deeision cf the Government and
the dynastic character of the treaty.
Mr. LAING, without intimating, a decided personal

opinion as to the treaty, pointed out that hitherto all the
weight of authority was against its dynastic character,
and dilated on what he described as a misfortune— that
the decision of successive Governors-General and Indian
Secretaries should be overruled by a Secretary just now
to office, who could not be considered an Indian authority
—on the tendency to concentrate the Government of India
is En3iand, and on the hnportauce of consistency in our

Indian policy. Though not an advocate of annexation, he
gave some reasons for concluding that Lord Dalhousie's
policy had been beneficial to India.
Mr. IL D. SEYMOUR criticised the vagueness of the
despatch, and insisted that Sir S. Northcote ought to give
some opinion on the character of the treaty ; and, after
some observations from Mr. STANSFELD,

Sir S. NORTHCOTE defended the decision of the Go-
vernment and explained the steps be had taken, intimating
that his object had been to avoid as much as possible
entering into minute inquiry into the character of the
treaty (which was open, no doubt, to argument on both
sides). In coming to a decision he had been guided not
so much by the language of the treaty as by a reference to
the spirit of the arrangement Lord Wellesley into uded to
make and on the grounds of general policy, and he can-
vassed minutely the transactions of 1799 with the view of
showing that, though Lord Wellesley's idea was to hold
Mysore in a dependent and subordinate position, he did not
necessarily contemplate a future annexation. He defended
next the policy of making arrangements for the future
government of the country at once, in preference to leav-
ing them open, enlarged on the importance of endeavouring
to develope the native talents for self-government, and dis-
claimed all idea of overriding the policy of his pre-
decessors.

Lord CRANBORNE cordially approved the action of
his successor in overruling the majority of his Council, not
only because he agreed in the policy he had adopted, but
kieause he noticed in the dissents of some councillors
a tendency to trench on the functions of the House of
Commons. The despatch substantially :carried out his
own views and embodied the general opinion of the House
of Commons; and he commended the wisdom of its silence
on the law of the case, though his own opinion still in-
clined to the personal character of the treaty. With great
power of language and felicity of illustration, he explained
his reasons for advocating the maintenance of a few well-
governed native States, which afforded opportunities for
the development of the moral qualities of the natives, and
in their simpler form of government might often produce
more salutary effects than our complicated system.
After some observations from Mr. KINNAIRD the sub-
ject dropped.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in reply to Mr. Milner
Gibson, gave some explanations as to the state of the law
respecting the securities which are required from the pro-
prietors of small newspapers and other publications, assur-
ing him that no new directions had been given as to pro-
secutions by the present Government, and declining to
bring in a Bill this Session for the repeal of these securi-
ties.

Mr. AY RTON mentioned that he had passed two Bills

for the purpose through that house, and the rejection of
the last in the Lords had been brought about entirely by
the management of the so-called Liberal Government then
in office.

Some conversation took place, started by Mr. C. FOR-
TESCUE and followed up by Mr. O'BEIRNE and Dr.
BRADY, on the inconvenience of delaying the introduc-
tion of the Irish Reform Bill until after Whitsuntide.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER acknow-
ledged that there had been delay, for which he took the
responsibility, but urged the pressure of public affairs,
and promised that the Bill should bo brought in directly
%Rat Whitsuntide, and that ample time should bo given
before the second reading.
Mr. ESMONDE complained with some bitterness of the
contempt with which Ireland had been treated; and The
O'DONOGHUE asked whether the Bill would be based
on the same principles as the English Bill, but received no
reply.

In committee of supply, the remaining votes in clause
3 and a vote of £1,700,000 to pay off Exchequer Bonds

were agreed to.

The Habeas Corpus (Ireland) Suspension Act passed
through committee, and, the standing orders having been
suspended, was read a third time and passed.
Some other orders were disposed of, and the house was
" counted out" at a quarter to two o'clock.