The Sun.
London, England, 1858-05-01 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 1, 1858.

The resolutions respecting the future govern-
ment of India were last night brought under the
consideration of the Howe of Commons, but
owing to the obstructive policy of Lord HABAY
VANE, but little progress was made ! That noble
Lord had supported the introduction of the bill
brought forward by the late Government, and as
be himself declared that "he had done so under
the conviction that if they were to pass a new
measure upon that subject, it was desirable that
they should pass it without delay." But " a
change came o'er the spirit of his dream."
His vote was given for Lord PALMERSTON,
not for the welfare either of England or of India ;
and although be was individually responsible for
the necessity for immediate legislation thereby
occasioned, he could not refrain from the daring
act of tergiversation. The hope of embarrassing
the present Government, and wasting the public
time, was a more than adequate recompense for
any censure to which he might be subjected by
the factious and unwarrantable course. He took
the trouble of assuring the House, that " he did
not wish to invest his motion in any
way with a party character ; that he de-
sired to submit it solely and simply on
public grounds." But he could not " rail the
seal from the bond." He could
,not by any
sophistry or special pleading explain away his
former vote. He must have known the utter
inutility of the attempt. He was well aware that
he would not obtain the support either of the late
or of the present Government, or of the hybrid
flitting between, and opposed by the Derbyite,,,
Palmorstonians, Russellites, and the independent
party represented by Mr. MILNZB. GIBSON. What
reasonable hope could he have of success? It was,
however, in his power to waste much valuable
time. That he accomplished. And the sense
of the House was manifested by a majority of
390 (t) against his motion. It would have been
394, but for the accident of four Members being
shutout..

After-the obstructive proposition was thus deei-
' sively-disp„ed
of, L
JOHN RIIsSELL altered the
terms of his amendment to the 6th resolution, which
raised twoquestions, viz , as to the mode of appoint
went of the members of the intended Counciland
their tenure of office, by limitinglimitingthe issuet'ot
first point. The matter wilt therefore
on
whether any of the members are to depend
be elected, or
whether all are to be Crown nominees, and the
whole patronage of India virtually vested
in the Government by whom these influential"
personages are to be appointed in the first in.
stance.
After this notice the real business of the even-
ing—the resolutions—was proceeded with. It'
ever a question had been finally decided) it was

that of the transfer to the Crown of the jurisdic-

tion hitherto exercised by the Moribund " JOHN
COMPANY." But even " NERO had mourners,"
and it could not be anticipated that the Magnates
of Leadenhall-street could be suffered to go the
way of all flesh without a funeral oration or a few
garlands being hung on the gaping sepulchre !
The task was entrusted to Mr. R. D. MANGLES,
who certainly performed the duty with impres-
sive solemnity. He knew that it was "an uphill,
and almost hopeless battle to fight." His attempt,
therefore, was merely " to vindicate the character
and rule of the Company." He felt that it was
doomed, and all he could do was to let it fall with
decency. We do not complain of the course
adopted by the Honourable Gentleman, consider-
ing the position he has occupied, and although it
led to some delay, he was fully justified therein,
although he admitted that he had not the slightest
anticipation of success, and was merely hanging
a garland over the yawning tomb. He did
not even divide the House, and the first and most
important resolution was carried with virtual
unanimity.

The discussion was not, however, by any means
thrown away. Many important points that must
hereafter be considered were ventilated. The most
interesting related to the conne3tion between the
finances of India and of the United Kingdom,
and the necessity of providing for any possible
deficiency in the former from the National Ex-
chequer. This is a matter to which we have
frequently referred, suggesting the propriety
of rendering the burdens as light as possible
by the use of the superior credit of the
Home Government. These suggestions were,
however, ignored ; and we must, consequently,
make up our minds to bear the increased burden,
if it should ever be cast upon our shoulders.
This is, however, happily, a very improbable con-
tingency ; ffor, looking to the existing circum-
stances—the virtual suppression of the Indian
insurrection, and the improved returns that may
fairly be looked for from the establishment of a
better administration of affairs in that im-
portant dependency—the liability, or respon-
sibility, is hardly worth taking into
ascount. The real point is by how much the re-
turns to England will be diminished in conse-
quence of the grave mistake. This, however, is
not in any degree to be ascribed to the present
Government. Their predecessors are entitled
either to receive the praise, or submit to the cen-
sure that may be attached thereto.

As to the notion that a creditor of the Com-
pany could possibly object to the substitu-
tion of the British Government, it is one
that could only have occurred to the astute
mind of the Right Honourable Member for Oxford.
A creditor is seldom disposed to cavil at anything
that materially improves his position, and gives
him practically a far better, or rather an unex-
ceptionable security in addition to that which he
formerly held. If . any parties should rejoice at
the contemplated alteration, and give a ready and
cheerful assent thereto, it is most assuredly the
creditors of the Company, whose securities will
increase materially in value in consequence
thereof.

Mr. SPOONER has given the Roman Catholics a
high religious character, one too high, perhaps,
for his purpose. Allegiance to the Crown is with
them, be says, a secondary consideration—allegi-
ance to their Church stands first. That is, their
toast is like Mr. SPOONER'S, Church and King, or
Church and State ; not King and Church, or State
and Church. What, however, is this but the old
principle with which Christianity began, the prin-
ciple, indeed, of all religious martyrdom, that
GOD must be obeyed rather than man. It is not
for one mortal to decide for his fellow-mortals
t what is obedience to GOD. A man's Church ex-
presses his notion, right or wrong, superstitious
or enlightened, still his notion, of what his
service to GOD should be ; and, though you
may induce him, by bribes, or threats,
to prove faithless to his Church, you
do not eradicate his conviction of its prior
claims. Those who really believe that there is
no difference in the claims of different churches
on individuals, are but few indeed. Certainly
Mr. SPOONER. is not amongst them. The origin
of that preference may be very unsatisfactory to
the philosopher ; in nine cases of ten, at least, it
is birth or education. Mr. SPOONER, for in-
stance, is a Church of England man, we have
little doubt, solely because he was born an I
brought up one. Born at Rome, or at Vienna,
he might have been a first-class Jesuit, and born
north of the Tweed a most ardent denouncer of
" Black Episcopacy." This is, to be sure, a
miserable reason to give for the faith
which is in us ; but we fear the majority
of us can give no better one. We wen t
, to the parish church, or to the kirk, or to the
Catholic chapel, or to the chapel of some dissent-
ing community when we were lads, we learned the
catechism of our sect, we went to school where we
duly marched to the proper place of worship on a
Sunday,—and so we are Churchmen, Presby-
terians, Catholics, Dissenters. We talk proudly,
perhaps, of our convictions, but forget to inquire,
honestly, how we came by them. If we did, we
believe that bigotry would have a limited range
indeed. Few, very few, are the enthusiasts who
owe their zeal to any process of intelligent inquiry.
Indeed we may safely affirm, that really intelli-
gent inquiry must disclose such a world of difficul-
ties and doubts to the inquirer that a bigot or a
persecutor he could never be.
With Mr. SPOONER'S good leave then, in ford
conscientias, Church first and Crown second is the
order of every man's creed, and must be so.
Catholics are not worse than others ; only being,
in a measure, under oppression, they exhibit to
the world more plainly what, at the bottom, is
the conviction of all men. Strange creatures we
are to be sure. Why, the very criminal like LANI
about to expire on the scaffold, or the licentious
monarch like CRARLES the Second, about to die
in a palace, alike sends fora minister of the Church
in which he has still a mysterious faith, as the
mediator between him and Heaven, however the
whole life may have been a denial of its precepts.
Our inference from the fact mentioned by Mr.
SPOONER is then just the reverse of that
which he would deduce from it. We should
say that as it is a fact with religionists of all
classes, and as we are all in some measure reli-
gionists, it is far better that the Crown stolid
never contest the prior claims of the Church. That
the former should regard the latter as one of those
inalienable rights of the individual--to select his
own Church, we mean, and to hearken to its
voice which must be protected but never inter-
fered with. The Crown must, in a word, deal
even-handedly by all Churches, and then all
Churches will show equal honour and bear eq ial
allegiance to the Crown.

As to the Maynooth grant itself, it will cer-
tainly never be withdrawn till all State en-
dowments in Ireland, Protestant as well as 0 1,-
tholie, are withdrawn with it. L)rd DERBY
warned the Anti-Maynooth deputation that they
were furnishing a handle to the voluntaries
of which the latter would not be slow to avail
themselves. ' Mr. TiraLroix, on Thursday night,