The Sun.
London, England, 1861-04-20 00:00:00

CONVICT REFORM IN IRELAND.

On the motion for the adjournment of the house at its
rising until Monday,

Mr. W. EWART inquired of the Secretary of State for
the Home Department whether the system introduced by
Captain Crofton into Ireland for the discipline and reform
of convicts would be taken into the consideration of the
Government.

Mr. CLIVE said that any advantage resulting from the
reform in question by Capt. Crofton would be considered by
the Government.

INDIA.
Mr. LAYARD asked the Secretary of State for India
whether a bill had been introduced into the Legislative
Council of India to enforce contracts for the delivery of
agricultural produce ? He expressed pleasure at seeing the
right hon. gentleman (Sir C. Wood) in his place. He be-
lieved the question to which he drew the attention of the
house was one of extreme importance, and if he was
correctly informed, our countrymen in India were
guilty of the most reprehensible conduct. Last
year there was an outbreak in Bengal in consequence of
the proceedings relative to the question of indigo cultiva-
tion in that presidency. A bill was then introduced
into the Indian legislature, which rendered the breach
of contract in the cultivation of indigo punishable
by fine or three months' imprisonment. The cultivation of
indigo was promoted by the system of advances, and the
effect of this system enabled the planters to act in
the most oppressive manner towards the ryots, who
were the owners of the soil. An inquiry had been
made into the subject, and 4,000 answers were obtained
from different witnesses who were qualified to give correct
information, who had made a report, from the perusal of
which he had risen with mingled feelings of horror,
indignation, and dismay which he could not ex-
press. (Hear, hear.) The law in question was en-
trusted to young magistrates in many cases, and it armed
the planters with a power which they exercised most ex-
tensively, and the consequence was that numbers of the
unfortunate ryots were imprisoned or fined for a failure in
the fulfilment of their contracts. The hon. member then
read extracts from the statements of Mr. John Peter
Grant, Lieutenant-General of India, and other resident
authorities in India to show that the result of the system
was to inflict the grossest injustice, and he contended that
unless some alteration took place there were grounds for
apprehending an outbreak in Southern Bengal. In re-
gard to this act there was great want of faith towards
the natives„ for when it was first passed it was with the
distinct understanding that it was to continue only for six
months. However, it was reintroduced last March, and he
strongly condemned this policy, which had only for its
object the benefit of a few planters in Southern Bengal,
and was calculated to render this country hateful to the in-
habitants.
Mr. VANSITTART asked the Secretary of State for
India whether his attention had been drawn to the report
of the Indigo Commission, with the minutes of evidence
taken before them, and appendix, dated Calcutta, April
27th, 1860; and, if so, whether he has taken any
steps to carry out the recommendations contained
therein. He said he had gone carefully through this
report, and contended that the planters were exonerated
from the charges brought against them. In his opinion
the conduct of Mr. Grant was most objectionable, for he
threw the whole weight of his authority into the scale
against the planters. He said that in many cases the ryots
were a money getting body, and were in many cases ab-
sentees, and they induced their fellow-ryots to
act in such a manner that the planters were
unable to meet their liabilities, and their pro-
perties were sold. He could not see the policy of acting
in a hostile manner towards the planters in India, to whom
the zemindars and ryots were indebted for much improve-
ment, and this country in a considerable degree for the
maintenance of its power in that country. He referred to
the testimony of several competent authorities in India to
show that the planters were the friends of improvement
and progress, and that instead of being open to censure
they were entitled to the greatest praise.
Mr. KINNAIRD asked the Secretary of State for India
whether he had received a copy of the correspon-
dence regarding the cultivation of indigo, between the
Government of India and the Government of Bengal,
which took place between July and November,
1860; also of the correspondence connected with the
issue of the Indigo Proclamation, dated September, 1860;
and, whether he had any objection to lay the same on the
table of the house. He defended the statements of the hon.
member (Mr. Layard), and he expressed a hope that
the house and the Government would not blind themselves
to the emergency that bad arisen in India in reference
to the question. The facts stated by his hon. friend (Mr.
Layard) could be proved, and it could be shown that the
cultivation of indigo was impolitic and oppressive. He
trusted the papers for which ho asked would be produced,
and that justice would be done to the unfortunate ryots.
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE referred to the debates on the
subject in the Indian Legislative Council, to show that the
statements of the hon. member fin:Southwark (Mr. Layard)
were not justified by facts. He also passed a eulogium on
the planters, who, he argued, were not inferior to any other j
body of her Majesty's subjects.
Mr. H. SEYMOUR said that the greatest injury would
be inflicted on India and this country by the expulsion of
the planters ; and for that reason he felt bound to differ
with his hon. friend (Mr. Layard).
Sir C. WOOD said that the majority of the papers ap-
plied for were already on the table of the house: He
agreed in what had been said in praise of the
planters, but at the same time he agreed that there
was truth in the statement of the hon. member for
Southwark. He did not approve of the renewal
of the act in question, and he did not think
there should be special legislation in regard to
indigo, the forced cultivation of which was impolitic.
He condemned the Principle of contracts in regard
to the cultivation of indigo, and believed that in enforcing
that system great injustice was inflicted ; bed-ridden, blind,
and deaf ryots having been imprisoned for breach
of contract, which, from their condition, they could
not fulfil. He believed a very serious crisis had
arisen in Lower Bengal, and he regretted extremely
the introduction of the bill alluded to into the Legislative
Council of India, as he considered it a great mistake, no
case having been made out to justify the Legislature in in.
terfering in regard to the cultivation of indigo in India.
ATTENDANCE OF VOLUNTEERS -AT
ELECTIONS.
Gen. PEEL said—The question lam about to put to the
noble lord the member for Tiverton arises out of a report
which I have seen in the newspapers respecting the election
for the borough of Tiverton. The report stated that the elec-
tion was fixed for 2 o'clock at the Town-hall, but that long
before that hour the streets were crowded, and they were
enlivened by the Tiverton Rifle Corps, and Lord Palmerston
was escorted by them from his hotel, the Three Tuns, to the
hustings at the Town-hall. My object in asking this question
is to prevent a precedent being established upon what, in
my opinion, was a very novel and most improper proceed-
ing; and I hope to hear from the noble lord an assurance
that orders will be issued from the War-office to prevent, in
future, the appearance of volunteers at elections. (Hear.)
I, myself, should be prepared to go much further, and to
say that with the exception of drill and exercise, and every-
thing connected with them, I should like to see the volun-
teers prevented from appearing in arms without the consent
of the lords-lieutenant of their different counties. (Hear.)
I think it ought to be left to the volunteers themselves to
decide to whom military honours were to be paid, but I
think the house will agree with me that their appearance at
elections is undesirable and improper. (Hear.) We know
the objections which exist to the appearance of regular
troops at elections; those objections are much stronger with
regard to volunteers, who might be actuated by local and
party feelings, and who moreover were not subject to the
discipline of regular troops, which can alone render it safe
to allow the presence of armed men in crowded assemblies.
(Hear.) I may be told that this was not a contested elec-
tion, and that the only object of the volunteers was to pay
a mark of respect to a very distinguished individual, and
whose connection with Tiverton was a great honour to it ;
and if this had not been an election;so far from complaining
I should be one of the very first to approve of what they had
done; and I can assure the noble lord that it is out of no

disrespect to him I make these remarks. (Hear.) But to
say that an election is not to be a contested election before
the question has been put by the returning officer was
hardly possible. -How do we know that Mr. Rowcliffe may
not have been intimidated? (Hear.) I own that a man
of his nerve is not very likely to be intimidated, but still a
man of less strong nerves might have been intimidated, and
felt unable to act up to what be considered to be his duty
at that oppoi tunity. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord had
put it to the volunteers whether the army was to be
reduced, and was met with loud cries of " No, no."
(Laughter.) Ido not say that much harm was occa-
sioned by the presence of the volunteers on that occasion,
but I wish to prevent a recurrence of such an event. I
trust the house will agree with me that this is a question
which ought not to be passed over in silence--(hear) —and
I hope some steps will be taken to prevent its recurrence.
(Hear.) If the volunteers have the right to support one
man they have the right to support another; and what
would be the case supposing a popular colonel of a volunteer
force were to become a candidate in a locality with which
he and his corps were connected ? (Laughter.) I mean no
disrespect by these remarks to the noble lord—(hear)—l
mean no disrespect to the volunteers. (Hear, hear.) No
man can feel more interest than I do in the volunteer move-

ment, because I am responsible for having reeommended
the acceptance of their services, which had been refused by

the previous Government, but I certainly wish to see lima

course on account of the sensitiveness of the Spanish Go-
vernment. The noble lord said that the Spanish Govern.
ment were most anxious—he (Sir R. Peel) believed the
noble lord said that Marshal O'Donnell and also the Mini-
ster of Justice were most anxious—to give every liberty to
the exercise of political rights in that country; but the fact
was that these persons who call themselves Spanish Pro-
testants ware men who held socialist principles, and were
about to attempt to establish a republic in Spain. But the
indictment against these men stated that they were being
punished solely on account of their religious convictions.
It was no doubt extremely easy for the noble lord to have
this clever answer put into his mouth. But why did not
the Spanish Government try these poor people? (Hear.)
They were now treated worse than if they had been mur-
derers and thieves. They were called heretics solely on
account of their religious opinions, and on this ground
were excluded from all intercourse with their families. He
(Sir R. Peel) had letters from many of these people, which
if read would draw tears from the eyes of hon. members,
stating that they were positively dying, and praying that
the Government would bring them to trial. And these
persecutions ware extending. (Hear.) At Seville some
20 or 30 men were taken up who had merely assembled to-
gether for the discussion of newspapers and pamphlet's of
that kind. The rest were discharged, but two of them were
thrown into prison. These acts were an insult to the 19th
century. It was high time that the noble lords the mem-
bers for Tiverton and for London should, from their ante-
cedents on this question, show some spirit, and tell the
Spanish Government how they looked upon this subject.
They should have the moral courage to tell the Spanish ,

Government that this conduct was quite incompatible with

the liberal feelings of modern Europe. Until the other
day the Austrian Government was the most arbitrary Go-
vernment in Europe on religious questions. The concor-
dat made with Rome was supposed to be one of the most
extreme documents ever published in Europe ; but on the
Bth of April last the most complete liberty had been
given to the Protestant religion throughout the
Austrian dominions. N4w here were the Spaniards con-
tinuing in this dreadful course of persecution, and the noble
lord got up in the House of Commons and pretended to say
that these men were suffering not from any question of faith,
but solely because they were connected with secret societies
whose principles were subversive of the authority of the
Government in Spain.
Jord J. RUSSELL (interposing) said he had never
stated that these men were suffering in consequence of their
belonging to secret societies ; nor did he say that the alle-
gation of belonging to secret societies was justly applicable
to these persons. What ho had said was that the Spanish
Government declared they would have been glad to release
these men, who were imprisoned, as his hon. friend justly
remarked, in consequence of their not agreeing in the doc-
trines of the Roman Catholic faith, but that they could not
do so, because, since they were in prison, certain secret
societies had been discovered, who were endeavouring to
bring about the establishment of a republic in Spain. There
was no allegation that the persons imprisoned had them •
selves been members of secret societies.
Sir R. PEEL continued. Then why were these men not
brought to trial ? (Hear, hear.) The noble lord knew that
this was an allegation which was always brought against
men who did not conform to the established religion. He
could assure the noble lord, on the faith of these men, that
they were in no way connected with any political movement
in their country. He charged the Spanish Government with
the most direct perversion of the truth in saying that these
men were in any way connected with secret societies in
Spain. These poor men were suffering the most bitter
punishment ever inflicted on criminals of the worst descrip-
tion, and he hoped her Majesty's Government would act in
the matter as they did in 1853 and 1852, and endeavour to
represent to the Spanish Government that these persecu-
tions solely on account of religious principles, were wholly
incompatible with the feelings not only of this country, but
of the whole of Europe.
BRITISH CONSULS AT SHANGHAI AND JAPAN.
Col. SYKES rose to call attention to a consular notifi-
cation, dated Shanghai, Feb. 8, 1861, and to ask the Secre-
tary of State for Foreign Affairs what circumstances had
occasioned this notification; and to ask on what grounds
the consul-general in Japan had abandoned his position at
the capital ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said that, before he adverted to the
questions put to him by his hon. friends who had last
spoken, he would advert to the answer which he had given
to a question put to him last evening (Thursday), respect-
ing the sums payable for the Chinese indemnity. He wished
to state, with regard to the sum which had been actually
received, and the sum which we were entitled to receive—.
first, that he had ascertained the sum which had been ac-
tually received to be not £650,000, as he had stated, but
£212,000; and secondly, that the sum which we were en-
titled to receive was 2,000,000 taels, or £650,000. With re-
gard to the question of his hon. and gallant friend near
him (Colonel Sykes), it was quite sufficient to state that
Mr. Meadows, the consul at Shanghai, last year asked for
further assistance, and that the Government gave it. In
February last his health failed him, and he then said he
was not equal to the performance of the duties of the office,
and that he should confine himself to the mere routine
duties for the present, leaving to the second consul the
more active duties. He regretted that Mr. Meadows was
not in good health, because he was a most deserving officer,
and he, in common with his hon and gallant friend appre-
ciated his services. With regard to the statements which
his hon. and gallant friend had made, he would merely ob-
serve that they had belonged to the arrangements made
some time ago by which the Custom house duties were col-
lected by Europeans. It was supposed that such a system
would prevent a great many abuses which prevailed amongst
those in the service of the Chinese Government at the vari-
ous ports. Whether the arrangements had been completely
fulfilled he could not state at present ; but he should not
propose to put an end to them. As to the anarchy which
was said to prevail in some places in China, it did not sur-
prise him, because for many years past the Chinese empire
had been in a very weak state, and those in the administra •
tion of affairs had shown how feebly they managed them.
The British Government had not attempted to prevent it,
but they had endeavoured to prevent wrongs being com-
mitted against British subjects in the Chinese empire. He
could not discover what course his hon. and gallant friend
wished the Government to pursue. What they had done
was to acknowledge the existing Government of China, and
between that Government and the Taepings her Ma-
jesty's Government had remained neutral, but they had de-
fended Shanghai against an attack of the Taepings simply
because it contained the property of British subjects. They
had not defended, nor had any intention of defending, the
Chinese authority against the Taepings. (Hear.) His hon.
and gallant friend had also asked on what grounds the con-
sul-general in Japan had abandoned his position at the
capital. The reason for his doing so was contained in the
despatch which the consul had written and sent to the
British Minister of Japan, and which he (Lord J. Russell)
would have no objection to lay upon the table of the house.
The circumstances were shortly these :—For a considerable
time there had prevailed at Jeddo a system of intimidation
towards the foreign Ministers, and though not counte-
nanced by the Japan Government, yet they allowed it to
proceed, and in the end a servant of the French Minister
was murdered, and no redress could be obtained. Some time
afterwards the secretary of the American consul was mur.•
dered, and when that took place, the foreign Ministers met,
and asked the Japan Government for redress, but none was
afforded to them. Nothing, in fact, was done, but when the
foreign Ministers proposed to attend the funeral procession
of the murdered secretary to the grave, the Japan Govern-
ment said it would very likely lead to a general massacre of
the foreign Ministers, and that they could not protect them:
Although that threat was held out, the foreign Ministers
did attend the funeral, and they subsequently held a meet-
ing for the purpose of considering the course which they
ought to pursue, and they asked that full protection should
be given to them and all persons trading at Jeddo.
The resolution was acted upon by the British, French, and
Russian ministers, and the Turkish consul, and they left
Jeddo, but the American consul did not agree in the resolu-
tion, and he remained at Jeddo. The Foreign Ministers
had not broken off relations with the Government of Japan.
There had been no rupture of friendly relations, the Minis-
ters had simply removed themselves to a place where the
men-of-war would protect them from danger, and there
they would remain until relations should have been placed
on a more satisfactory footing. He had no objection to pro-
duce the papers, but he should prefer to wait for a time
longer for further accounts before doing so. (Hear.) He
observed that there was a question at the end of the paper as
to " whether he had received any information respecting:the
case of a British subject, the owner of the cargo of the Mio
Teo, and the alleged injustice and injury to which ho had
been subjected, with the sanction of the Spanish authorities
of Poi t Mahon, in the Island of Minorca." Now that was
a question entirely for the Spanish tribunals, and the law
officers of the Crown could not properly interfere in the pre-
sent stage of the business. He (Lord J. Russell) must take
notice of what had been said by the hen. baronet the mem.•
ber for Tamworth with regard to the religious persecutions
of certain persons in Spain. He had merely stated what
were the allegations of the Spanish minister, and he begged
leave to remark that he did not attempt to justify all those
allegations. (Hear, hear.) The Spanish Minister never
said that those persons were not in prison, or that they were
connected with certain republican societies. Far from it.
But what he said was that they were persons who had been
condemned to a period of imprisonment for allowing a form
of religious worship, not authorised, in their houses. They
were not charged with being members of a secret society. It
was said by the Spanish minister that he should be glad to
give British subjects every kind of indulgence compatible
with the law, and that he should also be glad to appeal to
the Crown for a pardon for those persons who were suffer

ing from expressing their religious opinions; but at that
moment there were a number of religious societies scattered
over Spain which were connected with republican socie-
ties, and therefore the law must take its course.
That statement might be good or bad; he (Lord J. Rus•
sell) was merely responsible for stating that such were the
allegations of the Spanish Government. With regard to
the subject no one could for a moment doubt that, holding
the opinions he did, he must be in favour of religious
liberty, and opposed to religious intolerance. But at the
same time he could not instruct the agents of this country
to inculcate his views in every part of the world. (Hear,
hear.) He would refer to an incident which happened last
year, and from which he trusted the cause of religious
liberty was in some degree promoted. There were two
Governments in Mexico•—the Church Government and the
constitutional Government, and the Governments of
France, Spain, and Britain wished to mediate between
them. The Government of France did not agree with him
because he would not recommend anything unless the
principle of religious liberty was acceded to. The consti-
tutional Government had established itself, and the prin-
ciple of religious liberty had been proclaimed. He should
have opposed everything tending to intolerance, and pro•
meted the view of religious liberty for every man in Mexico.
But with regard to the Spanish Government, they knew
well all the hon. baronet' had recommended—viz., that he
should let them know the principles which the Government
of her Majesty professed, and that those which the Govern •
ment of Spain sanctioned were wholly opposed to the feel•
ings of right thinking people in these enlightened times.
(Hear.) He stated this to a deputation which waited upon
him, and the Spanish Government knew what he then stated,
but if he were to make an official representation, on the
subject the Spanish Government might say, " Our prin-
ciples may be right or wrong, but that is nothing to you,
we have a right to maintain our own laws and our own con-
stitution." There was an article contained in the„Spanish
constitution which was quite repugnant to his feelinsaAtld
opinions, but, at the samo time he must use a certain de-
gree of discretion in treating with an independent Govern-
ment. Ile begged the house to believe that if he did not
interfere Actively on this subject it was not because he was
not in favour of religious liberty being fully practised
throughout the world. (Hear, hear.) In answer to the
question of the hon. member for Glasgow (Mr. Buchanan)
he wished to observe that he had not been able to find any