The Sun.
London, England, 1859-02-09 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 9, 1859.

READING STEEPLECHASES—Wednesday,
9th, and Thursday, 10th February. TRAINS leave
Waterloo-bridge Station for READING at 8.5 and 10.50 a.m.,
returning at 4.10 and 7.45 p.m.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY).
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.

NEW PEER.
The Earl of MORNINGTON took the oaths and his seat
on acceeding to the title.
Lord CRAN WORTH asked the Lord Chancellor
whether he would lay on the table a return of the statistics
of debtor and creditor quoted in his speech last night ?
The LORD CHANCELLOR said there would be no
objection to furnishing the returns referred to by the noble
and learned lord.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY presented a petition
in favour of an alterationof the Law of Debtor and Creditor.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Bolton
and other places, praying for an alteration in the law with
respect to the Transfer of Real Property.
GLEBE HOUSES,
Viscount DUNGANNON put a question as to whether
any measure sanctioned by the right reverend bench was
likely to be introduced during the present session to alter
and amend the law relative to dilapidations in glebe houses ?
The noble viscount said he had received a great deal of im-
portant information from different parts of the country with
respect to the dilapidated state of glebe houses, and he had
intended to propose a bill to their lordships, but he would
much rather such a measure should emanate from the epis-
copal bench.
The Bishop of LONDON, in the absence of the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, said that the Episcopal Bench had
seriously considered the matter, and directions had been
given to frame a bill on the subject. It was a very difficult
subject, and therefore he would not give a distinct promise
that the bill would be introduced during the present sessi'

IMMIGRATION OF FREE NEGROES.
Lord BROUGHAM, in pursuance of notice, asked whe-
ther the royal assent had been given to the Jamaica Immi,
gration Act ?
The Earl of CARNARVON said the best attention had
been given by the Secretary of the Colonies to the act re-
ferred to by the noble and learned lord, and he had deter-
mined to submit the act onthe very first opportunity to her
Majesty for confirmation, as he was satisfied the bill
worked very satisfactorily, which was, in fact, nothing but
a confirmation of the principles which had been repeatedly
sanctioned. The bill had not been hastily adopted by the
Jamaica legislature.
Lord BROUGHAM said the bill was introduced into the
Jamaica Assembly one Wednesday, andhad passed through
all its stages the Wednesday following. In that time two
days intervened, Saturday and Sunday, during which no
business was transacted, and consequently no petitions
could be presented.
Earl GREY believed that the system which the bill
legalised would ultimately, instead of leading to an en-
couragement of the slave trade, prove a most formidable
rival to that trade, and restore prosperity to our colonies.
He thought the colonial legislatures ought to be closely
watched, as after a bill passed by one of them had once
been confirmed by her Majesty, her Ministers could only
overrule it by a 'special act of the British Parliament.
After a few words from the Earl of AIRLIE,
The Bishop of OXFORD thought as there were certain
alterations which the Government intended to suggest to
the Colonial Legislature to amend, it would be better if the
bill, with the alterations, was presented and laid on the
table of the house.
Their lordships then adjourned.

when the report of the commission for maiming the navy,
with the evidence taken before the commissioners, would be
laid on the table of the house ; _and also when the return of
the deserters moved for last session would be laid on the
table P

Sir J. PAKINGTON said that a report had been pre-
pared, which would be shortly laid on the table, in refer-
ence to the first question ;, with regard to the second ques-
tion, the report was not yet ready.

TROOPS IN THE CRIMEA AND INDIA.
Mr. LAURIE asked the Secretary for War when it was
probable that the Turkish medals so long promised by the
Sultan would be issued to the British troops who served
in the Crimea ? whether it was intended to give any reward
for service in India F. and whether it was true that several
of the Queen's regiments now in India had been ordered
home ?
General PEEL said that 47,000 medals had arrived in
this country, 10,000 of which would be given to the navy,
and the rest distributed amongst the soldiers who had served
in the Crimea. Her Majesty proposed to give medals to
the troops engaged during the mutiny in India.
CORRUPT PRACTICES PREVENTION ACT.
Mr. H. BERKELEY asked the Attorney-General whe-
ther, seeing the probability of an early dissolution of Par-
liament, it was his intention to deal with the Corrupt
Practices Prevention Act, so as to endeavour to correct its
tendencies, or to permit the electors of Great Britain and
Ireland to elect members under its present enactments ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the subject was
under consideration.
EXCHEQUER BILLS.
In reply to Sir G. LEWIS,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
the Exchequer bills had accumulated very rapidly.
WEEDON.
Mr. NICOL asked the Secretary of State for War
whether any report had yet been made by the Royal Com-
mission, appointed in pursuance of avote in this house in
the last session, with the view to inquire into the system
upon which the books and stock had been kept at Weedon,
as well as the general mode in which the business of that
establishment, and other similar departments of the public
service, had been conducted ; and, if such report had been
made, when will the same be laid upon the table ?
Mr. WALPOLE said that the report had not been pre -
pared, but it would shortly be prey • ited to the house.
MARRIAGE LAW AMENDMENT.

- --
Viscount EBURY moved for leave to bring in a bill to
legalise marriage with a deceased wife's sister.
Mr. B. HOPE strongly deprecated the introduction of
this measure, which he contended was agitated only by per-
sons actuated by factitious zeal or interested motives. (No.)
He contended that public-opinion was against the measure,
in support of which he cited the feelings which, he alleged,
were entertained by the Roman Catholics of Ireland and
dissenters, who viewed the question from totally different
points. If any hon. member would vote against this motion
he would be most happy to second his amendment. If,
however, the bill passed the present stage he could assure
the noble viscount that he would encounter tho same oppo-
sition with which the measure was received last session by
those with whom he (Mr. B. Hope) agreed.
The house then divided, and the numbers were—
For the motion
Against it B5
Majority
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
SITTINGS OF THE HOUSE.
Mr. W. EWART moved that on every Tuesday and
Thursday (beingni hts on which Government business does
I
not take precedence the house do not sit later than 12 o'clock
at night. He sai that the motion which he had the
honour to introduce had the candid approval of the late
Speaker, who was then one of the most experienced
members of the house. He (the late Speaker) con-
sidered that the debate which took place on Wednesdays
which were not to exceed a certain hour were generally the
best, and his (Mr. Ewart's) object was to carry out that
principle as far as he could. He believed if the motion
was agreed to it would not interfere with the full freedom
of debate, but that it would have the benefit of
curtailing the speeches of hon. members. He denied that
private members would be placed in a worse position than
they were at present by the adoption of the proposition, for
they all knew that independent members had little
chance of proceeding with their bills after midnight.
He felt satisfied that diurnal instead of nocturnal legisla-
tion would be of advantage to the public' and would afford
relief to the Government, the officers of the house, and to
the Speaker.
Mr. LAURIE seconded the motion, and considered that
it was preposterous, even in cases of Government measures,
for the house to sit after 12 o'clock.
Mr. LOCKE KING was opposed to the motion.
Mr. WALPOLE considered that however desirable it
would be to terminate their proceedings at 12 o'clock. still
he could not consent to an hour being fixed to adjourn the
house at a fixed hour, because it would be unfair to private
members who had only two days for their motions.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS supported the motion.
Lord PALMERSTON did not consider that the motion
could be carried out with benefit to the public
service. It would be very desirable if hon. members could
contract their speeches, but measures of the greatest im-
portance might be before the house which it would be in-
convenient to postpone at a fixed hour.
Mr. EWART replied, and the house divided. The num-
bers were—
For the motion
Against it 237
Majority 209
THE MUTINIES AT MEERUT AND UMBALLA.
Colonel SYKES rose to move for an address for copies of
all correspondence between the Commander-in-Chief s and
judge-Advocate-General's Departments and the military
authorities at Meerut, whether divisional, brigade, or regi-
mental, respecting the court-martial at Meerut in April,
1857, upon the 8,5 troopers of the 3d Light Cavalry ;
together with copy, in extols°, of the proceedings of the
court-martial and correspondence consequent thereon ; and
of all correspondence, reports, or,proceedfags relating to the
36th Regiment Bengal Native Infantry having, at Umballa,
in March or April, 1857, expelled from their caste (excom-
municated) those of their comrades, constituting a detach-
ment of the 36th Regiment, engaged in learning the Enfield
rifle practice at the depot of instruction at Umballa. He
said that he held in his hand a paper which had been laid
on the table of the House of Commons during the recess,
which was designated " Further Papers, 8 A, insurrection,
East Indies." This indicated that it was a duplicate of the
original number 8. That paper he saw in manuscript at
the India House in the spring of last year, it having been
intimated to him that it would be laid on the table of the
house. He replied that if that was done he should be con-
strained to move for certain papers and documents which
contained information which had been left out of thatpaper.
On this it was withdrawn, and the matter passed by.
Nevertheless in the recess the paper appeared, and it com-
prised a selection of the correspondence relating to the pro-
ceedings of a court-martial at Meerut on 85 troopers of the
3d Light Cavalry, and of the proceedings relating to the
36th Regiment Bengal Native Infantry. at Umballa, who
were excommunicated by their comrades as having lost
caste by using the Enfield rifles. He would read a pas-
sage from a letter of the Judge-Advocate-General of the
Army, ckigned " H. Young, Lieut.-C01.," to the Chief Com-
missioner of the Punjaub, which was to the effect " that
the Chief Commissioner must have observed in the public
journals an erroneous account of the mutiny in Meerut,
which Colonel Sykes had given in his speech in a debate
in the previous August. This account coming from such
high authority, would be received as the correct ver-
sion of what had occurred at Meerut, and as it would be
some time before Colonel Sykes received an account of the
true state of the case, it was necessary to - explain that he
had been led into error by some ignorant and designing in-
dividual, the effect of which would be most injurious, for
that it appeared, as if an officer of the cavalry had endea-
voured to force the greased cartridges on the men, and that
the commanding officer had prevented it." He (Colonel
Sykes) was not bound to answer such an accusation, but
when the terms ignorant and designing were applied to his
informant—a person of character and honour, and an eye-
witness to what occurred—he was bound to defend him.
The papers before the house contained, among other docu-
ments, a letter written by an officer of a troop of the 3rd
Cavalry the night before the mutiny to the commanding
officer, explaining the circumstances in which the men
were placed, and urging him not to force them to obey the
order. It was the universal practice that all proceedings of
court-martials in extenBe should be sent to the India House,
but it was not done in this case, and in selected statements
great injustice had been done. He would read a memoran-
dum of what occurred at the neighbouring station at Um-
belle, near Meerut, and which was a station for the practice
of the Enfield rifle, and where, consequently, the greased
cartridges were used. The memorandum stated that each
regiment of native infantry had instructions to detach an
officer and a certain number of sepoys for rifle practice at
Umballa. The 36th Regiment at that time composed part
of the escort of the Commander-in-Chief—General Anson.
A detachment of this regiment left far Umballa. The'
Commander-in-Chief continued his tour of inspection, and
arrived at Umballa in March or April, 1857. The detach-
ment of the 36th Regiment there, as was usual, came out
to meet their comrades, but those who had been practising
with the Enfield rifle were repulsed by their comrades,
and declared to be excommunicated, as having lost caste
by the use of polluted cartridges. The men in question ex-
plained to the others of the regiment that there was nothing
polluting in the cartridges ; but they were deaf to the expla-
nation, and treated the men as outcasts. They informed
their officers of the fact, and wringing their hands, and with
tears in their eyes, described the miserable state in which
they were placed, that is, neither mothers, fathers, brothers,
nor sisters, could touch or come near them, and they were
severed for ever. The circumstances were made known to
the officer commanding the depot, .who censured the native
officers of the 36th Regiment for allowing such treatment
of the 1:20n. The native officers, taking alarm, said that
there was ne substance in their complaint, and that the re-
proaches of thejr associates were only a jest. The facts
were known at the neighbouring station of Meerut, and the
mon of the 3d Cavalry, when they were asked to adopt the
new method of using cartridges, distrusted it, and com-
bining the circumstance with what had taken. place at Umballa
they told their officers the night before the parade at which
they were to use the cartridges that they would not obey
the order to do so. This became known to the authorities,
and a letter was written by the Adjutant-General to the
secretary to the Governor-General, to the effect that "at
all the depots for rifle practice the men had used the now
cartridges, and precautions had been taken to prevent the
men from the depots on rejoining their corps from being
taunted with having used the Enfield rifle. ' He (Colonel
Sykes) had carefully read his speech of August 11, 1857,
and he had not a word to alter or unsay in it, and the
documents he asked for would testify t 9 its accuracy. If
the documents lie now moved for appeared to gainsay any-
thing he had said, he would acknowledge his error, bat
till they did so, he would repeat his opinion that nothing
but the most lamentable ignorance of native feelings and
Meerut;prudces, and want of tact, had caused tho outbreak at
e but it having broken out, nothinK but the most
fatuous inaction, when two European regiments were in
the garrison, prevented its being crushed ; and if that had
been done the men would have been prevented getting to
Delhi, and we should have been spared thousands of lives
and millions of money.
Lord STANLEY said it was quite natural the hon. and
gallant gentleman, whose statement had been contradicted,d
should be desirous to vindicate his assertion. He (Lor
stani,!,v) hod made inquiries about the papers refprre to,

and had ascertained that they were not yet sent to England.
He would write to India for them, but as some of them
might be of a confidential nature, the hon. and gallant
member would allow him to see them before he promised to
lay them on the table of the house. He hoped the hon. and
gallant gentleman would therefore withdraw the address he
had moved. It was quite possible that the papers would be
of a character to be laid on the table, but if they consisted
of correspondence between the Commander in-Chief and
the Judge Advocate General, it might be inconvenient to
produce them.
Col. SYKES said he had the utmost, confidence in the
noble lord's assurances, and would leave the matter entirely
in his hands.
The motion was therefore withdrawn.
ABOLITION OF CHURCH RATES.
Sir J. TRELAWNEY moved for have to bring in a bill
to abolish church rates.

Mr. GRIFFITH protested against the title of the bill,
which, if it were introduced in so rapid and unobserved a
manner, might prejudice the entire question, and render any
amendment of the measure afterwards inadmissible. The
bill ought to be introduced under a neutral title, such as "to
amend the law relating to church rates;" this would allow
the discussion to proceed fairly ; but under this title, as " a
bill to abolish church rates," it would admit but one way of
settling the question. It was not likely that either house
of Parliament would allow church rates to be thus sum-
marily swept away, without any consideration of the inte-
rests involved in them. He could understand that such a
proposal suited the political purposes of gentlemen anxious
to win the applause of popular constituencies, but he did not
believe the country would approve of it, or that the honest
religious Dissenters wished to carry into effect so intolerant a
design. He would not offer any impediment now to the in-
troduction of this bill, but only protest against the free
judgment of the house being fettered by the title of the bill.
Mr. PIKE asked the hon. member for Tavistock to ex-
plain the provisions of his bill.
Sir J. TRELAWNEY said the bill was precisely of the
same chafacter as that which he introduced last session, and
he trusted no opposition would be offered to it in this stage,
as he had understood from the right hon. the Home Secretary
that the Government would consent to its introduction. He
desired that the question should be settled ; but in order that
everybody might have an ample opportunity of making his
views heard upon this bill, he would not ask for the second
reading until to-morrow (Wednesday) fortnight.
Mr. DRUMMOND remarked that the hon. baronet was
desirous the question should be settled, the meaning of
which was that he desired the Church should allow herself
to be robbed quietly. It had been openly admitted by the
school from which this and similar measures proceeded,
that they did not care about church rates, but they urged
this question as a way of getting at the abolition of tithes.
That was what they wanted, and if they did not intend to
put the tithes in the landlords' pockets, they intended to put
the church rates in their own. This bill being the same
that to a certain extent passed the house last year, some re-
spect was due to it, and it was difficult to refuse leave to
bring it in, but the members who were hosiile to the object
of it had a right to stipulate that no advantage should be
taken hereafter of the title.
Mr. WALPOLE said the hon. baronet had asked him
whether the Government would oppose the bringing in of
the bill, and heanswered that the bill being the same as that
of last session, no opposition would be offered at this stage.
The discussion uponthe bill would take place hereafter, and
he (Mr. Walpole) would be ready to state the objections he
had to it on the second reading.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
PAUPER SETTLEMENT.
Mr. S. ESTCOURT moved the appointment of a select
committee to examine into the operation of the Act 9th and
10th Victoria, cap. 66, which enacted that no poor person
should be removable who had resided five years in any one
parish ; and also the Acts 10th and 11th Victoria, cap. 110,
and 11th and 12th Victoria, cap.' 110, which provided that
the relief given to such irremovable poor person should be
charged on the common fund of the union. It was neces-
sary to deal with the subject now, because the last cited act
would expire next year ; but it did seem to the Government
that the time had now come when the whole question must
be decided upon. In 1834, when the new Poor-law Act
passed, all means of any poor person acquiring a settle-
ment, elsewhere than in the parish of his birth, were taken
away. This went on for 10 or 12 years, and was found to
work very hardly, since formerly, under the old law, a poor
man could move from one place to another, and acquire a
fresh settlement wherever his occupation or industry called
him. In 1846, therefore, an act was passed, providing that
no poor person, having resided five years in any parish,
should be removable from it. But no sooner had that act
been passed than it was found to entail a great additional
expense on particular parishes, and in the next year an act
was passed which charged the cost of the relief upon the
whole of the union in which that parish happened to be
situated. A select committee, of which Mr. Evelyn Denison
was chairman, sat in 1847, to determine this great question
of settlement and removal. That committee examined many
witnesses, and investigated the matter. Several resolutions
were passed by the committee, but when the report drawn
up was put to the vote in that committee for adoption, it
was negatived, and as the labour of the committee was
altogether thrown away. Time passed on, and nothing was
done, but from year to year these temporary acts were con-
tinued. In 1855 a committee was appointed to consider one
branch of the subject, the removal of Irish and Scotch poor
persons ; but that committee found itself compelled to con-
sider the main question, and passed a resolution recom-
mending that the term of five years should be reduced to
three, and that the area of irremovability should be ex-
tended from the parish to the union. In the following year
the President of the Poor-law Board introduced a bill to
carry those recommendations into effect, but that bill was
withdrawn, and now the question was as far from being
settled as it was in 1840 ; indeed, it was in a worse position
now, in some respects, than it was in 1834. It was proposed
therefore to decide now whether the provisions of the two
acts he cited in the title of this bill should be maintained,
and under what conditions, or whether they should be
superseded by some other provisions.
Mr. H. A. HERBERT observed that the interests of the
Irish poor were deeply involved in this question, and he
hoped there would be some Irish member appointed on the
committee.

Mr. S. ESTCOURT said he proposed to put the same
names upon the list as those of the gentlemen who composed
the committee last year, and in that list Ireland would be
fully represented.
Mr. AYRTON thought it would be useless to examine
into the operation of two isolated statutes without going into
the whole system. The entire administration of the poor
laws in every department should be embraced in the inqmry.
The area of relief, and the area of management, should be
the main questions for consideration, in determining the
principle of settlement. He meant to take an early oppor-
tunity of bringing this subject before the house.
The resolution for the appointment of the committee was
then agreed to.