The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-02 00:00:00

THE INDIA LOAN.

Mr. CRAWFORD asked the late Secretary of State for
India whether he was aware, when he proceeded on Thurs-
day, the 21st day of April last, to receive and adju-
dicate upon the tenders invited to be sent in for the
Indian loan, of the fact that the Austrian ulti-
matum to Sardinia had been wade known to her
Majesty's Government on the previous evening by a tele-
gram from Vienna, and also by a written communication
from his Excellency the French Ambassador to the Secre-
tary of State for Foreign Affairs.
Lord STANLEY said nothing could be fairer than the
manner in which the question had been put by the hon.
member for London. It was a question which he could have
answered on the previous evening, when notice of it was
given, but he thought that probably the hon. member would
wish to accompany it by some remarks. It was not the
fact that either he or any other person connected with the
negotiations for the loan or with the Indian Department was
cognisant of the news to which the hon. member referred at
the time when the tenders for the loan were received. He
did not know at what hour of the night or of the morning
the intelligence in question was received by his noble friend
Lord Malmesbury but the intelligence in question was not
received by him (Lord Stanley) up to 4 o'clock iu the after-
noon-of the 21st April, and the tenders for the loan were
finally adjudicated upon between 12 and 1 o'clock. (Hear,
hear.) A considerable time elapsed between the period when
the then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs received this
intelligence and the time when it became known to the In-
dian Department, but the fact was that immediately on re-
ceiving it his noble friend proceeded, as was natural, to,
summon a Cabinet Council, in order that deliberations
might take place upon it ; and it so happened that Lord
Derby was in attendance on the Queen at Windsor, so that
the Cabinet Council could not be held up to 4 o'clock inthe
afternoon. The first intimation he (Lord Stanley) received
of the intelligence was at 4 o'clock in the afternoon, which
was between three and four hours after the time when the
transaction connected with the loan took place. (Hear.)
Mr. CRAWFORD said that the noble lord's explanation
would be considered satisfactory.
ROMAN CATHOLIC SEAMEN. _ _ _

-- -
Mr. HENNESSEY asked the late First Lord of the Ad-
miralty what steps the late Board of Admiralty had taken
with reference to the complaints whichhad been submitted
to the. Board respecting the treatment of Roman Catholic
sailors in the Royal Navy ?
Sir J. PAKINGTON had no objection to answer the
question, and he hoped what he was about to state would
not bring him under the animadversion of the hon. member
for Beaumaris. The facts were briefly these.--A memorial
was sent to Lord Derby complaining on the part of the Ro-
man Catholic body that Roman Catholic sailors were sub-
jected to certain disadirantages in respect to their religious
worship. Lord Derby sent the memorial to him, requesting
his opinion on it, whereupon he wrote a letter to Lord
Derby stating the views he entertained with respect to the
different matters contained in the memorial, which were
drawn up under a series of headings, to the number, he be-
lieved, of about 11. He was entirely of opinion that every
fair and reasonable claim on the part of the Roman Catholic
sailors with respect to the exercise of their religion ought
to :be conceded ; and more especially that that should
be removed which formed one of the main points of
their complaint—namely, that Ronan Catholic sailors
were not allowed the same advantage with respect to their
worship as were conceded to Roman Catholic soldiers ; and
he stated distinctly in his letter to Lord Derby that, so far
as the different nature of the two services permitted, Roman
Catholic soldiers and sailors should be placed on precisely
the same footing. He also proceeded to state thathe thought
that some of the requests contained in the memorial, which
related to matters in respect to which there was a great dif-
ference between the two services, it would be impossible to
concede. Having sent this answer to Lord Derby, he caused
a copy of the memorial and his letter to be circulated among
his colleagues at the Admiralty Board, who considered
them. As a change of Government was impending, it was
impossible for him to take any further steps in the matter ;
but it was his intention, if he had continued in office, to
direct instructions to be issued to concede such portions of
the memorial as he thought, in fairness and justice, ought
to be conceded. That was the position in which the ques-
tion now stood, and he had left the papers he had referred
to for the consideration of his successor at the Admiralty.