The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-27 00:00:00

GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF INDIA.

The Marquis of NORMANDY said he had a motion
on the paper fix Monday next, with respect to certain
recent transactions at Owalior. It was his intention in
in making that motion to make some remarks respecting
the treaty of Bhurtpore, but he had just heard that the
Governor-General of India had been recalled, and if this
was so, of courseat present he should refrain from
making such remarks. He wished to know whether the
report of the recal of Lord Ellenborough from India was
true ?

The Earl of RIPON said it was true that the East
India Company had recalled Lord Ellenborough.
- The Earl of COLCHESTER wished to know if this
step had received the sanction of her Majesty's Govern-
tment ? •
The Earl of RIPON said it had not.

Lord BROUGHAM said it was a most extraordinary
thing that the Board of Control should have the power
of controlling every act of the Court of Directors of the
East India Company except that most important one the
recall of the Governor-General of India. This was
matter which might affect the safety of our Indian em-
pire, wid yet the East India Company were subject to no
control with respect to it. Ile thought this was a groat
oversight.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE' said that so far from
lis having been an oversight, it had been the subject of
the gravest discussion.
After a short conversation the subject dropped.
WRITS OP ERROR. _ _

Lord CAMPBELL postponed the second reading of
this Bill fror Monday to Thursday next.
LANDLORD AND TENANTS. COMPENSATION

• - BILL.
Lord PORTMAN moved the second reading of this
BilL The object of the Bill was to give to the tenant
security for capital which he expended on his landlord's
-property.
Lord BEAUMONT opposed the Bill. He believed
that if this Bill were allowed to pass, it would lead to
endless litigation between landlords and tenants, and he
therefore, snored that the Bill be road a second time that
day six months.
The Duke of RICHMOND was prepared to vote for
the second reading of this Bill, provided his Noble Friend
would consent to send it to a Select Committee up
stairs.

The Marquis of SALISBURY would be glad if means
could he devised for giving compensation to tenants for
their improvements, and he therefore thought this Bill
ought to be referred to a Select Committee.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said this was a
subject of very great danger and difficulty, and ought to
be approached with great caution. He did not think
that this Bill would be so beneficial to the tenants of the
country as had been anticipated by the Noble Lord op-
posite (Lord Portman.)
The Eurl of HARI)WICKE opposed the Moon the
ground that it would, if passed, open the door to litiga-
ion. He thought the Bill was unnecessary, and -he
trusted their Lordships would refuse a second reading
to it.

The Duke of CLEVELAND said he should support
the Bill, for he did not believe it would have the effect
which had been stated by the Noble Earl who had just
sat down. He believed the Bill to be admirable in prin•
ciple, and one which would be very beneficial to the
tenantry of the country, and he should therefore give it
his entire support.
Lord REDESDALE believed the Bill to be useless,
and therefore he should support the amendment.
After a few words from Lord PORTMAN,

Their Lordships divided. The numbers were—
For the second reading 27
For the amendment l9
Majority
The Bill was then read a second time.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented several petitions
for and against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
'Their Lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 26.
The SPEA ILEA took the Chair at the usual hour.
NEW W

An Hog. MENIBEA (Mr. Estcourt we believe) moved
that a now writ be issued for the election of a burgess to
serve in Parliament for the borough of Horsham, in the
room of the Hon. Mr. Scarlett, now Lord Abinger.
Mr. TUFNELL, who was very indistinctly heard in
the gallery, rose to call the attention of the Speaker to
the delay which had occurred with respect to the issaing
of this writ. He wished to know whether it would not
be consistent with the forms of Parliament to issue at
once a writ for the election of a Member of that House,
'in the room of a Member who had been called by the
death of his father to the House of Peers—to issue that
writ immediately that this fact became known. The
eldost son of a peer was admitted into that House with-
out any property qualification, without any inquiry
being made as to his claim to such a privilege ; and he
(Mr. Tufnell) could not see why a now writ could not
be issued without such delay taking place as that which
bad occurred in this case.

The SPEAKER was understood to say that this
point had been settled by Lord Dunfermline when
Speaker of that House. It was perfectly true that on
the death of a peers the eldest son of that peer holding
a seat in that House immediately vacated his seat, but
the House had no means of ascertaining whether such
Member's claim to the peerage was bona fide or not ;
and therefore the only safe course for the House to
adopt was to wait for the issuing of a writ of summons.
It was perfectly (rue that the eldest son of a peer was
admitted into that House without a property qualification;
but it was equally true that a claim to that privilege
might be founded on error. This had been shown in a
case which had recently occurred, in which an Hon.
Member qualified as the eldest son of a Peer, and it
afterwards turned out that he was not so.
Mr. ESTCOURT perfectly concurred in the view
whieh was taken by the Speaker.
After a few words from Mr. TTJFNELL the new
writ was ordered.

---
- T ----LEEDS GAS BILL.
Mr. BECKETT moved that the evidence taken be-
fore the Committee on the Leeds Gas Bill, in the year
1835, and also the evidence taken before the Committee
in the year 1843, be referred to the Select Committee
en the Leeds New Gas Bill.—Ordered.
LEEDS AND BRADFORD RAILWAY BILL.
9,1 the Order of the Day that the report of the Com-
mittee upon the Leeds and Bradford Railway Bill bo
further considered,
Mr. HARDY said that ho thought it was neccessary
that the Bill should be re-committed. He thought that
the Standing Order which precluded Committees on
Railways from receiving ma or plans relating to com-
peting lines shouldbe suspended. When this question was
raised in the Committee, he voted against the evidence
offered by the opposing parties being received; but ho now
thought that he had construed the order too stringently,
and es the parties themselves to the Bill had
given evidence that there was a shorter line than that
proposed by them, it was, in justice to the public, and
to the advocates of the other line, only right that the
claims of both should be fully examined. He would
move, accprding to that view, that the Bill be Tottered
back to the Committee.
An Hoyt Martustin seconded the motion.
Sir. R COLEBROOK defended the decision to which
the Committee had come, and to which he said they were
by the Standing Order bound to come. It had,
n
bleisiedes,as ,betinn
proved to the Committee that the shorter
. many respects objectionable, if not impracticable. [At
ennt o
et
rhge,
this moment Mr. C. W. W. Wynn was carried
House upon a litter, borne by two e gseat.
clithrrimedessi
Who placed him upon the Ministerial bench, onthe
nett to that nazi y occupied by Lord Stanley. Dur_r.
ii2g
the silence occasioned by this unusual occurrence, M
Ferrand came into the Honse, and took his usual seat,
without attracting observable notice.]
Mr. J. S. WORTLEY wished the House to recollect
that the lion. Member for Bradford, only asked the
house to re-commit this Bill. Had be asked anything
beyond this most assuredly he (Mr. Wortley) would
. have opposed him to the utmost. The question was
whether the Committee were justified by any rule or
. 1:1 the prutice of that House in refusing the evidence
tail-Vi*Mieli- hail been
.tendered. Had the matter been fully
4-4;r97m6_,* and, fairly so--if they had refused to enter-
•c, -.:...t A,- vence which they ought to have received, then
~,,Z:: (r. Wortley) thought it would be difficult for them 1
PA,l7.i;!llFeignfil s .to re-commit the Bill. For this reason he
t1,,,-..., . -,.t 4p err the. motion of the Hon. Member for'
0:-:12.akk!r4-:.
(
\.,/- i •
.:
*:,, - NE6 said the question of the reception

I

of the evidence had been decided in the negative after
fair and due consideration; and were the House to order
the Bill to be re-committed, be very much doubted if the
Committee would not again come to the same decision
as that at which they had already, arrived.
After a few words from Mr. REDHEAD YORKE,
Mr. C. WOOD said the position of the question was
simply this—that evidence had been rejected which,
according to the ordinary practice of the House, ought
to have been received. The parties ought to have the
opportunity of putting in that evidence.
Mr. ADDAX and Mr. HODSON having briefly ad-
dressed the House,
Mr. GLADSTONE was of opinion that the Com-
mittee which sat on the Bill were in error, and that the
Bill ought to be recommitted.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it
Majority for the re-committal of the Bill —lO2
The Bill was then ordered to be re-committed.
NEWQUAY HARBOUR AND RAILWAY BILL.
On the motion of Mr. P. HOWARD, the Newquay
Harbour and Railway Bill was read a third time and
passed.
LIVERPOOL GAS BILL. - _

On the motion of Sir H. DOUGLAS, the Lords'
amendments to the Liverpool Gas Bill were agreed to.
On the motion of Mr. MILNER GIBSON, the Man-
chester Royal Infirmary Bill was read a second time.
Dr. BOWRING gave notice that, on Thursday week,
he would call the attention of the House to the subject
of quarantine.
RECAL OF LORD ELLENBOROUGIL
Mr. MACAULAY said he wished to put a question
to the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's.
Government. He wished to ask him whether it was
t ne, as had been reported, that her Majesty's Govern-
ment had recalled Lord Ellenborough from the govern-
ment of India?
Sir R. PEEL said—ln answer to the question which
has been put to me by the Right Hon. Gentleman, I beg
to state that on Wednesday last her Majesty's Govern-
ment received a communication from the Court of Di-
rectors, that they had exercised the power which the law
gives them, to recall, at their will and pleasure, the Go-
vernor-General of India.—(Loud cheers from the Oppo-
sition benches.)
Mr. MACAULAY said, that, under those circum-
stances, he need scarcely say, that it was not his intention
to bring forward on Tuesday week the motion of which
he had given notice respecting the late events in Gwalior.
He would roserve the right of bringing that subject
under the notice of the House hereafter, but as the
administration of Lord Ellenborough had terminated,
he could not suppose that the public interests would be
exposed to the smallest risk from the postponement of
the discussion ; and it would be more satisfactory to his
own feelings, and it would clearly be more agreeable to
justice, that no charge should be made against that
Noble Lord, until he was able to attead in the other
House to vindicate his character.—(Hear, hear.)