The Sun.
London, England, 1857-06-24 00:00:00

J UNE 2. 4s 1857

The house had been told that the real drawback to an
increased cultivation of cotton in India was the absence ,
of a sufficiently continuous demand. India was available
as a cotteeemarket in times of extreme scarcity, because
in those times, and then alone, the high price enabled the
Indian cultivator to overcome the artificial obstacles in
his way. (Hear.) But the Indian Government had no
right to take advantage of its own wrong. There would
be a 'continuous demand for Indian cotton if it were
grown in districts so open to the seaboard that there was
a possibility of carrying the cotton at a sufficiently low
rate to enable it to compete with American cotton in the
ordinary state of the market. (Hear.) It had been said
that there was a great deal more cotton grown in India
than was sent to this country, and that the natives pre-
ferred to manufacture it for their own use. A great deal
of cotton might be worked up for consumption on the
spot, but it did not follow that it .was more economical
to do so. No doubt, the oost of freight was an important
element, but the cost of sending the cotton half over the
globe might be more than balanced by the greater eco-
nomy of English manufacture. It used to be matter of
ridicule against California as now against the S. Anierican
States that they sent their raw hides to the United States,
there to be manufactured and re-imported into these
countries as shwa. That may have shown a want of en-
terprise on the part of South America ; but it did not
follow that that double voyage was not more economical
for all parties. The hon. member (Mr. Mangles) asked
the House to look at the developement of the indigo
plantations as a proof that the East India Company had
not hindered commercial enterprise in India. If that
applied to the case of indigo, would it also apply to the
case of cotton ? The differsnce between the two was this
—that the cotton -growing districts, though perhaps not
situated further in the interior than the indigo planta-
tions, were yet far less accessible from the want of inter-
nal communication. With regards to works of irrigation
the hon. gentleman appeared to think that great injustice
bad been done to the Indian Government by the assertion
that it had not equalled the enterprise of various native
rulers. Without depreciating the value of the Ganges
canal, and other works of a similar character though of
less extent, which had been undertaken by the Govern-
ment of India, looking at the condition of the native
States when they-passed into our hands, examining the
works that existed there, estimating also the proportion
those works bore to the resources and population of those
states, and contrasting all this with the power which our
, Government now had, with the present population, and
with the superior industrial appliances at their command,
he was much mistaken if, on such a comparison, made in a
dispassionate spirit, it were not foundthat many dynasties
which are justly termed barbaious had, in ages long gone
by, provided far better than we now did for the material
wants of their subjects. He would mention a single ex-
ample of this which came under his own observation. My-
sore passed under British dominion within the memory
of the present generation. It comprised an area of 36,000
square miles, and he was informed that it had no fewer
than 26,000 tanks, many of which were of large extent ;
the general result being that not much less than one-
twentieth of the entire surface of the province was under
water for the purposes of irrigation. In no part of India
had a provision to anything like that extent been made
by our Government. The instance he had quoted came
actually under their own eyes ; but he might mention
another, drawn not from an historical but a pre-historical
period. Tne greater part of the northern districts of
Ceylon were at present inhabited by a scanty population,
and many portions lay entirely waste. Sir E. Tennent,
who formerly held an official position in that island, and
had travelled through the country, stated, in a book
which he had published, that he saw the remains of vari-
ous tanks or artificial lakes, about 30 of vihich were of
large size ; and that one which he examined must,
though net very extensive, have measured, when in a
perfict state, something like 10 miles in one direction,
and 12 in another. Of course individual instances proved
noth ng ; but without a proper comparison,_ which it was
certainly difficult now to institute with accuracy, it was
impossible to say how the case stood between the native
tovernments and our own. With respect to railroads,
the hon. gentleman admitted the truth of a great deal
that had been eharged against the Government of India.
He did not pretend that this species of communication
had been opened to anything like the extent that was
desired, but he assured them that it would be so some
day or other. He told them to look at the map and
they would see the railways that had not been made but
only planned. The question was, would these lines be
executed, and, if so, when ? Time was an element in
matters of this kind which they, were too apt to neglect'.
In making railroads in India they followed too much
the English practice. Not that the works were not ad-
mirable in construction and perfect in execution, if high
speed were the chief object, but their scale and expense
wore such that the resources of the Indian Govern-
ment would not suffice to complete them with-
in any moderate period. It was the opinion
of many eminent practical men that the prece-
dent of the English railways did not apply to a country
situated like India. In England, before a single mile of
railway was laid down, we had a most complete system of
canal communication, which practically sufficed for the
carriage of heavy goods. The railroads came in to sup-
plement the canals, not to supersede them. In India,
on the other baud, the case was rather that which ex-
isted a few years ago in the United States, where the
railway did not supersede the canal, but was the first
and only communication introduced. It was, therefore,
clearly the policy of those who planned the lines in the
United States to execute them at the lowest possible
cost, and to treat with comparative indifference the
question of speed, but to press forward the completion
of the works with the utmost despatch, even though
they should be finished in a somewhat rough and clumsy
manner. Thus they would he opened for slow and heavy
traffic at the earliest practicable period. The principle
which was found adapted to the case of the United
States was far more suitable to India, because the in-
terest of money. was greater in the one instance than in
the other, and the outlay upon unfinished works there-
fore constituted a heavier burden upon the enterprise.
The hoc, gentleman bad placed the house in a dilemma
by requiring them to affirm that the Government of
India was either very dishonest or very foolish. Now,
be (Lord Stanley) was not prepared to endorse either of
these charges: He did not accuse the Indian Govern-
ment of being interested in opposing the opening of rail-
way communication in:thatcountry ; but, owing to their
peculiar position, they required a good deal of propulsion
from without to make them carry out their works with
due zeal and energy. The question was not so much
one of what order should be sent out by the President
of the Board of Control, or by that body which the hon.
gentleman represented, as practically of what was the
feeling of the local authorities on this subject. The In-
dian official—than whom there could scarcely be a more
hard-working person—was entrusted with a sufficient
amount of duty to fill up any one man's whole time. A
vast, area was confided to his sole care, and the climate
afterjlong residence was, unfavourable,to continued energy
on the part of Europeans. The civil servant also had con-
stantly to report (perhaps unnecessarily sometimes) to
the authorities at Calcutta upon the state of the district,
and, above all, his connexion with the country which he
governed was official and official only. An officer
so situated might not fail in discharging his functions,
but it was clear he had no strong motive urging him to
go beyond the strict, line of his duty. Moreover, the
Indian public consisted chiefly of military men, whose
feelings, perhaps, lay in a different direction to the pro-
motion of industrial improvements, and of civilians who
had no strong personal incentive to take up subjects of
this nature. He omitted the native population when
speaking of the Indian public, because their voice scarcely
ever reached this country or influenced the policy of the
Government. It was impossible not to observe that
there was a constant tendency in the Indian Govern-
ment to quarrel with its neighbours, which quarrels in-
variably exhausted funds that might otherwise have been
devoted to the improvement of the country. (Hear.)
Nothing could keep an Indian governor-general quiet
except a deficit, and even then he could scarcely !avoid
quarrelling with neighbouring States. (Hear.) The
public in India consisted of civilians and the military.
The civilians foresaw an extension of patronage in every
new annexation, and both they and the military were
flattered by prospects of the extension of the power of
this country. Even the missionary interest, he believed,
was not hostile to what might enable it to propagate,
under British protection, its opinions in a new district.
And so it happened that whenever there was any pros-
pect of a dispute it was almost certain that all parties
would be in, favour of a warlike policy. He did not say
that from theory only. Ho was in India at the time
that the second Burmese war broke out. He was not
about to say anything about the policy of that war, but
this he would say, that before it was competent for any
man to have formed an unbiassed opinion upon the dis-
pute between the Indian and Burmese Governments,
there was throughout the country a cry taken up
by the civilians and the military in favour of going
to 'war. He mentioned that fact because the same
causes still existed, and were likely to exist for
a long period, why we need not hope that
the surplus revenue of India would be applied to
the development of its resources. If wa were
to wait until India applied her surplus revenue to works
of internal improvement we might have to wait for a
long time. He rose simply to meet the defence of the
hon. member for Guildford by a reference to the real
facts of the case. At this moment we bad a demand for
cotton which exceeded the supply. During the last 40
years our productive power's with respect to the cotton
manufacture had increased 40 per cent., and there was
no reason to suppose that either those powers or the
demands of foreign countries for our produce would
diminish ; on the contrary, they were likely to increase.
Although the price of cotton was now double what it
was a few years ago, the cotton, manufacture in this
country had increased to an unprecedented extent. No
fact could be stated more significaut than that, and it
could therefore hardly bedisputed that the Indian Go-
vernment, which was, in fact, the landlord of the soil of
India, ought to.exert itself to the utmost to promote the
growth of cottton in India, in order that the constantly
increasing demands for our cotton manufactures might
be amply supplied. •

Mr. DANBY • SEYMOUR contended that all the
charges brought against the company by Mr. Smith
referred to a previous period, and did not apply to the
energetic efforts that had been made within the last
three years. He moved the previous question.
On the motion of Sir E. PERRY, the debate was
adjourned to Thursday night.
Mr. GRIFFITH bad leave to bring in a bill to alter
and amend the Railway Traffic Act.
Mr. WARREN obtained leave to bring in a bill to
enable the House of Commons and its committees to re-
ceive evidence upon oath.

Mr. WILSON obtained leave to bring in a bill to
regulate life insurance offices, and a bill for the incor-
poration of insurance companies and mutual companies.
The bills were read a first time.

Mr. MASSEY withdrew his bill on the highways, on
the ground of the late period of the session and the
opposition that was threatened.

Sir Fitzroy's Kelly's hill on the w;113 of British sub-
jects abroad was read a record time.
Mr. Atherton's Alehouse Licensing Bill was road a
tuird
.time and passed ; and his Charitable Uses Bill
• passed through committe.
SUPPLY.

Tho report of the Committee of Supply was brought
up and agreed to.
The Insurance of Lives (Abatement of Income-tax)
Continuance Bill wag read a third time and passed._

TRANSPORTATION AND PENAL SERVI-
• TUDE BILL.

The house considered the Lords' amendments to this
bill, one of which was agreed to and the other negatived.
A committee was appointed to communicate with
their lordships upon thee subject.
The house adjourned about haltpast 1 o'clock.

Lord Rayleigh's name should have been recorded as
voting against the second readinz of the Ministers
Money Bill, instead of that of the Earl of Darnley.
Mr. Coningham was accidentally shut out from the
diviion on the second reading of th© Finsbury Park
Bill, for which he had intended to vote.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—June 23.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Sittings at Nisi Prins, before Mr. Baron Martin, and a
Special Jury.)
BARBER V. POTTER.-THE SAMARITAN INSTITUTION-

Mr. Sergeant Ballantine, Mr. Joyce, and Mr. Doyle
were counsel for the plaintiff ; Mr. James, Mr. Lush,
and Mr. Sleigh were counsel for the defendant.
This was an action brought to recover damaged for
slander, and for a malicious prosecution. The de-
fendant, by his own pleadings, put in issue the
truth of the words spoken. The damages were
laid at 1,0001. It arose out of the proceedings in-
stituted before Mr. Alderman Carden, at Guildhall,
with reference to the conduct of the plaintiff and the
management of the Samaritan Institution, in West-
street, Smithfield, of which he was secretary. The
declaratioU contained seven counts. The first charged
that, the plaintiff being the secretary of the Samaritan
Institution, the defendant had stated before Mr.
Alderman Carden on the 6th of December, 1856,
that, understanding the institution was about to apply
to the Lord Mayor for assistance, he thought it his duty
to state publicly that he frequently passed the institu-
tion, which was established to supply food andahelter td
the houseless poor, and that on no occasion had he ever
during the last eight months seen the building used ex-
cept as a residence for Mr. Barber, the secretary, and
the reception of his horses and phaeton. The second
count charged that the defendant, on the Bth, made
another statement before the alderman, to the effect
that some books had been sent to the institution, and
that he did not know what had become of them.
The third count charged that the defendant had ac-
cused the plaintiff of obtaining goods by false pre-
tences. The fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh counts
stated in substance that after the writ in the
action had been issued the defendant maliciously,
and without reasonable and probable cause, and in
order to oppress the plaintiff and induce him to for-
bear from the prosecution of his action, caused four
summonses to be issued by Alderman Carden charging
him (the plaintiff) with having by false and fraudulent
pretences obtained certain flour, beer, Mid biscuits, for
the purpose of distribution to -the poor, and bad misap-
plied the same. These last named counts then set forth
that the plaintiff was put to great expense and loss of
time and health in defending himself from these charges,
which were adjourned from time to time till they were
finally dismissed. The defendant pleaded not guilty
generally, and as to the first and second counts that the
words complained of were true in substance and in fact.
Ho also denied that the plaintiff was the secretary of
the institution.

Mr. Sergeant Ballantine having replied,
Mr. Baron Martin summed up.
The jury, atter a long absence, found that the written
statement was libellous, but true, and that the defendant
had not acted maliciously. The foreman also stated
that it was the unanimous opinion of the jury that Mr.,
Mre., and Miss Barber had all given their evidence with-
out any design to misrepresent the facts.
The decision of the jury amounts to a verdict for the
defendant.

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL.
THE QUEEN V. GEORGE MYER- JUDGMENT.

This case was argued some time since, but Judgment
was deferred. _

The prisoner had been indicted for receiving the half
of a 5/. note, knowing it to have been stolen. The note
had been issued by the county Bank at Swindon. One-
half had been sent by post from Swindon to Bristol, and
had been duly received ; the other half was put into a
letter and posted at Swindon, but was stolen in its
transit. Tne prisoner had received the last-mentioned
half of the note, and had sent it from Bath in a letter to
the bank at Swindon, and had requested payment. No
evidence was adduced to show thatthe prisoner received
the note in the county of Wilts. The prisoner was tried
before Mr. Justice Williams, at Salisbury, and was con-
victed ; but the learned judge reserved the point as to
whether there was jurisdiction to try in Wilts.
The Court affirmed the conviction.

COURT OF ERROR.
(Bofors Lord Chief Justice Cockburn, Mr. Justices
Williams and Willcs, and Barons sramwell, Wat-
son, and Channel]. )
DIANSELL V. THE QUEEN.

Mr. Russell and the lion. Mr. Denman appeared for
the prisoner, and Mr. Welsby on the part of the Crown.
The plaintiff in error was convicted of wilful murder
at the winter assizes at 'Maidstone, but 'judgment was
respited for the purpose of taking the opinion of a supe-
rior court upon several points raised by the convict's
counsel, Mr. F, Russell, with respect to the constitution
of the jury. These points were fully argued before the
Court of Queen's Bench and Were overruled.
Mr. F. Russell went through an elaborate and care-
fully arranged argument, and at the conclusion of the
learned gentleman's speech the Court adjourned.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
IN THE BANKRUPTCY OF L. BERNSTUGL.

The bankrupt, L. Bernstugl, carried.on business as a
merchant in Broad-street.buildings; he was also in part.
ner.hip with S. Maurice, of Sydney, and carried on busi-
ness there under the etyl., of S. Maurice and Co. This
was the certificate meeting. The claims of unsecured
Creditors are 16,026/. ; ditto holding secarity, 4021. ;
liabilities, 20,4221. ; profits, 37,1251. ; surplus, March
1850, 6,6171. ; marriage portion with his wife, in 1851,
2,000/. ; doubtful debts, 17,9691. ; property, 3441. ;
ditto, held by creditors, 3572. ; balance of shipments,
14,2111. ; consignments to J. Hill, 1,7801. ; bills re-
ceivable, 765/. ; trade expenditure, 6,069/. ; domestic
and personal expenditure, 1,800/. ; amount standing to
the debit of J. Schalusker, 6731. ; lessee, 1,005. On this
occasion Messrs. Lowrance and Bagley appeared for the
several parties. The bankrupt was thus interrogated:—
Has any property fallen to your wife since your bank-
ruptcy ?—Yes.
How much?-1001. a-year.
How did it accrue ?-1 don't know.
You don't know !—No ; I never made any inquiries.
Commissioner—That seems most extraordinary negli-
gence..
Commissioner—Who paid or pays the money to your
wife !—Her uncle's trustees.

And you don't know anything more about it ?
Commissioners—lt is a most extraordinary instance of
carelessness. Did you never inquire ?—I never had an
opportunity of inquiring.
Commissioner—That is all nonsense. Who are the
trustees I—Nathaniel Levy, of 6, Upper Montagu-street,
is one.

Commissioner—ls tbat the person to whom you exe-
cuted a bill of sale shortly before the bankruptcy ?
Yes ;heis my father-in-law. The other trustee is Jonas
Levy, of Tavistock-squsre, and adopted eon of Lewis
Levy, who died in December last.
The attention of the Commissioner was then called by
the assignees to the figures of the balance sheet. The
bankrupt had really nothing for a dividend, it was al-
leged, and it was also said that the trading was reckless,
Upon the other hand it was put forward, on the bank-
rupt's behalf, that his books had been well kept ; that
he had done all he could to assist his creditor, having
gone out to Australia since the bankruptcy, in order to
forward their interests, but he had in fact lost a capital
of 8,0001., and his losses were the result wholly of un-
avoidable loss and misfortune—viz , by consignments to
Australia.

The Commissioner said there were many meritorious
circumstances in this case. Tae bankrupt had not com-
menced without capital, the trade expenses were mode-
rate, the domestic expenses were extremely moderate,
the books had been well kept, and he had exerted him-
self ter the benefit of his estate. On all these points the
Court gave him credit. There was not the slightest
suspicion of fraud or dishonesty. But, on the other
hand, they had to deal with figures which showed a
most disastrous trade ; 16,0001. creditors ; 20,0001.
liabilities; and on the other hand there was a
miserable residue of 3541. property. The bankrupt
had engaged in a falling, a losing trade—a trade, he
might almost say, attended with inevitable loss. He
(the Commissioner) had never seen any balance-sheet i❑
which the entry "consignments to Australia" appeared,
in which he did net set it down in his own mind that
this was a dead loss. He could not, therefore, declare
that this was a case wholly of inevitable loss and mis-
fortune, nor grant a first-class certificate. • -But the case
came very near it. Perhaps he might say with a little
regret that his duty bound him not to grant it. With
such figures on the balance-sheet he could not certify
this was a case which deserved what he must term the
high honour of a first-class certificate- But he would
grant an immediate certificate of the second class, and
with the approbation of the Court upon the bankrupt's
general conduct.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT.
(Before Mr. CoEumissioner Murphy.)

IN RH WILLIAM SALMON-BECOMING A "SURETY."

This insolvea(a baker) was opposed by Mr Reed for
the Parish of St. Leonard's, Shoreditch ; Mr. Sargood
supported.
In this case the appearance was owing to the insol-
vent becoming surety for Joseph Smith,
rate collector of the garish of St. Leonard's, Sboreditcb.
The insolvent had paid 3001. and obtained security from
Smith on some property. whe was a poor
Several points were raised—first, as to whether the
insolvent was in a condition to become answerable for
Smith. He was now in custody for upwards of 3001,
which Smith owed the parish as a defaulter.
It appeared that the insolvent had a good business
when he signed the bond to the parish, He was pos-
sessed of some shares in the Submarine Telegraph
Company, He pleaded to the action that he did not

make the bond, and the costs were 271. 98. 2d. Had
tlere been no plea the costs would have been between
3/. and 41.

The inplvent was examined as to the disposition of
his property, and to the sut he had paid to help Smith.
out of hi 4 defalcations, and the security he held. .He
was in custedy for upwards of 3001. owing to the parish
by Smith's defalcations.

• Mr. Commissioner Murphy required further evidence
as to the disposition of the insolvent's property. He
considered that the insolvent was in a condition to be-
come surety for Smith.
On a question as to whether the insolvent should be
admitted to bail to the 14th July, to which day the
case was adjourned,
The learned Commissioner said that, as he was always
in favour of the liberty of the subject, he should allow
bail to be granted.
The case was accordingly adjourned.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS.—June 23.

(Before Mr. Pashley, Q.C., Assistant Judge.)

A REFORMED TICKET•OF•LEAVE MAN.

Thomas Madden, 22, Richard Anderson, 32, Michael
Cog!an, 25, and Bridget Tally, 24, were indicted for
having stolen a watch, value 61 , the property of Henry
Bailey.
On the night of the illuminations in honour of the
Queen's ,birthday, the prosecutor was at th 6 opera-house,
and as be was leaving he was jostled by a mob in the
colonnade, and some one stole Ms watch from his right
hand waistcoat pocket. A person tapped him on the
shoulder, and asked him if he had lost anything, and he
at once missed his watch. A policeman saw the four
prisoners in company with another person, and suspect-
ing them he watched their proceedings. He stated that
he saw Tully standing near the prosecutor, and place his
hand in front of him, hastily withdraw it, and pass some-
thing to Madder, who handed it to Coglan. The latter
got away, and was not taken until the next day.
A young man named Harrington was calkd. Ho
deposed—l live at No. 6, Poole's-buildings, Mount-
pleasant, Gray's-inn-lane, and am employed now as a
supernumerary at the Princess's Theatre. lam occa-
sionally a house painter. I was convicted at the Old
Bailey six years ago' last month, and was sentenced
to seven years' transportation, and I have had a
Picket-of-leave three years next October. Qu the •
evening in question I was in the Haymarket,
when I saw the prisoners, and knowing Coglan to lie
a ticket-of-leaver, like myself, I watched them. I saw
them attempt to get a watch from a gentleman's pocket,
but they did not succeed. Two of them got in front of
the prosecutor, and two behind, well covering him, and
wedging him in. Madden tried to get his watch. I
was close to them at that moment, and heard the wo-
man say, "Let me get at it.". That was said in a whis-
per, but I heard It. Madden got aside, and the woman
got her hand round to the gentleman's pockets, and got
the watch off the swivel of the chain. She got some-
thing in 'her hand when she withdrew it, which she
handed to Madden, and from him it went to Coglan.
A policeman was close by. I asked the gentleman if he
had lost anything. He said his watch. rthen laid hold
of Tully and another woman, who was one of the lot as
well, but who got away.
Cross-examined—l don't consider myself much of a
fool. Once I was much the other way, perhaps, but I
am now reformed. I am a repentant ticket-of-leave
man now. I know a policeman by his look, although
he wears plain clothes. The policeman in this case wee
in plain clothes, bat I knew he was a policeman. I
have given evidenca in two other case. I was tried on
the 12th of May, 1851.
Coglan—This is all malice; him and me were work-
ing together, in 1853, in Portsmouth Dockyard. We
had some words and a fight, for which we were punished.
This is through that.

Witness—rhat's wrong ; we were at Wakefield before
we went to Portsmouth, bat we did not work in the
same yard. I had no words with him and never fought,
and was only punished once, and' that was for tobacco.
I know Madden as well• as the others.

The jary found all four guilty.
A former conviction was then proved against Coglan.
The Assistant-Judge deferred the sentence for the
present; there being another case against Coglan.

Country Markets.