Star.
London, England, 1830-02-06 00:00:00

Uike.

1M PERIA 1, PA RLIAAI ENT,
HOUSE OF COMMONS--FRIDAY.
The .SOLICITOR•GENERAI. mowed for a return of the
number of persons committed for contempt by the Court of
'` Chancery.
hit. D. HARVEY save notice that he would move, on the 115th
laqtant, for a Select Committee to investigate the landed Revenue of
she Crown. -
Mr. TENNYSON moved for the Report of the Select Coin-
PM Wee of the Howie of Lords last Sewlen.
lifr. Alderman WAITH 1111 AN moved for Returns of &MA
P educe eAported from 1790 to 11130. with its declared and effi-
cient value.

-11 r. O'CONNELL presented petitions from the Roman Ca-
thodes of Killarney against the Vestry and Subletting Acts; and
from the parishes of St. Michael's and St. Johr.'s, in the city of
Publia, to the same effect.
UM, 111.1.11.110ROCON's LITTIS
Mr. SPRINn RICE rose to present a.petition from the mer-
-emit: and traders of Limerick. in favour of the opening the trade
to India ; and. at the same time. he begged leave to ask a ques-
tion of:the how. gentleman, whom he sae, in his place, connected
with the affairs of India. A letter had lately appeared in the
public r tints, which, as it remained uncontradicted up to the pre-
sent time, he was obliged to consider a genuine document. It par-
Totted to be a letter from the noble lord who was at the head of
the Board of Control, add d to Sir John Malcolm, the Go-
Verner of Bombay, and it contained several rem. rkshle expressions
relative to the renewal of the Charter,- and to the admihistratioa
of public justice in that country. He could not say more to par.
the letter, satisfied that it could have escaped the observe-
riesn of very few members of the house, or. Indeed, of few WOW- '
deal. in the community. The question he had to ask way whe-
ther the letter to which he had alluded was a genuine letter or not j
• and. if k wets genuine, was there any obiestion to have it laid be-
lose Parliament ?
Mr. GEORGE BANKES said, he bad no objeetien to give an
Vehe information in his power with respect, to that letter. From the
eireumstances of a family misfortune; he had not for some days the
usual facility of communication with the noble lord alluded to, but
be had sufficiently distinctly to understand from him that the let-
ter ha.l never been intended by him to meet the public eye. Oa
she contrary, it was one of the most private and confidential na-
ture ; and, even though he was acting as secretary to the board of
which the noble lord was president, he bad never heard of it until
Ms attention was directed towards it In the public prints. With
regard to the letter in circulation being strictly genuine, or an exact
espy of that which the noble lord admitted he bad written, he was
not prepared to say, as the noble lord bad not kept a copy, so
atictly private and confidential did he consider It, and so uncoil-
vetoes was he of any necessity which could arise of its being thus
made use of. The noble lord bad written to Sir John Malcolm
wish perfect freedom, and in the confidence that his sentiments
were conveyed to toe honourable person alone. who would not
divulge them ; and the publication could only bare taken place by
one of the most shameful and base breaches of trust which had
ever been committed. He had. in conclusion, to assure the hon. ,
gentleman thatb if any fufther information were demanded, he was
'sot desirous to shrink from the inquiry, but rather to afford the
rsitisfactlon in his power.
. BROUGHAM said he was unwilling to enter on a Ma-
uston on the document until the exact KIM of the genuine letter
were before the House; but. if they were any thing like those con-
tained in the letter now in circulation, Ise must declare that, in his
opinion. tb. writer was totally incapacitated for the office which
be held. Fie must enter his protest against the doctrine laid down
by die hon. gentleman who spoke last, that the sentiments urged by
the writer of that letter against the character and independence of
she Judges in India should be treated without severity, because
they were conveyed under the seal of privacy and confidence. Now
be could only say that he felt the deepest regret that a person high
in the confidence of his Majesty could be totted se weak as to per-
mit himself to indulge in observations of such a nature on these
particular subjects which be bad selected.
Mr, GEORGE BANKES rose to explain that be had
',ready expressed his belief that the noble lord could not state
whether the letter in circulation in Ragland was genuine or not,
because hr had not kept a copy of that which be had written;
Oltd he would repeat that the document could never have bees
Procured unless the basest violation of private confidence had taken
place.
Mr. TR ANT said he should be sorry to see the hen. member
* Limerick found any motion on a document, however cursor-
'silvery Its nature was, which had been put in circulation by suck
''dishonourable means. If confidential communications betweee
public men were to be thus violated, there was a total end to that
aoreservedness and harmony which were so essential to the coo-
duct of public affairs. Knowing, indeed, as well as he did, be felt
sailed ups. to protest against any question being raised on such s
feeedation.
M. S. RICE said he wished, for the satisfaction of the hem.
member who spoke last. to explain in what manner the document
bad found its way into the world, but he had not the power to do
so. The house bad nothing to do with that considervion. The
piper was there, and that was enough for the BOOM of Commons.
The noble lord who bad written the letter had committed a de-
cided breach of hi. duty—the person *tee broke the trust which
bed been reposed in hitr, and gave the letter to the world. was
ally culpable ; but the house would be KM more guilty it it
to notice the fact when clearly made out before it. It wee
a for the house to inquire how the document was obtained :
lkere It was, and it must stand or Tabby its own merits.
-• Mr. HUME said he waste possession of a copy of rho letter in
guidon, whet had been transmitted to him from India. It we*
sho published in every newspaper in Calcutta and Bombay. and it
eras *eidetic that the object of those publications was to give Mr
Jaen Malcolm a triumph over the king's courts. It had been
spread abcoal. in every part of Bombay, that two individuate were
. manage the Judge, and be . was likened to a wild elephant
.brought to submission by two tame ones.
Mr. GEORGE BANKES did not understand what doctrine
tee hem member (Kr. Brougham) accused him of inculcating. He
bad broached an doctrines, but had merely stated facts, in answer
it* the question st the hon. member for Limerick ; bur. if be were
Iced with promulgating any. they would not amount to more than
an uphtion be had offered—namely, that an individual should not
be judged by his private letters, when the whole tenor of his public
eepduct was Wore the country. ,It wag true that the letter in
circulation in ealcutta differed with that published in London, but
dime were no means of ascertaining which, or if any, were strictly
correct, becange the noble lord had kept no copy of that which he
bell written.
Lt.ed ASHLEY said, as an hon. gentleman had been understood
to say that private letters had been sent out to India to I:antrum,
public documents proceeding from the Board; he must say, that so
bog as he had the bottom to be connected with it, no such thing
dad occurred.
Mr. BROUGHAM said the whole face of the argument in fa-
vour of the noble lord was, that the letter was private. and strictly
gnfidential. In his opinion It was oMcial in its tam, though
illeaven knew .its contents were &ore inollicial than any. which hi
had ever seen cotrieg from so high a quarter. But he ceofessed
be beard it contended, with some degree of alarm, that the docu-
ment was jinni:bk. when he considered that the minister for India
had thought piopee In such a shape to Inform the governor that the
joliges should be made dependent on him.-s-(Hear.) It did norther
the suture of such a communication that it was made in eonfidenU
and priesey ; nor, could be comprehend 111 e necessity which
Misted to 7 this sort of intercourse, between the Minister foe Eng-
land and the Isditial governor. If the lanceted bites obtained by
t Itteseh Ist confidence three was no 'apeman+ of .kontempt too
across for the individual who had procured it ; bat that was no
Num why the uoble writer or the governor Auld be esocerated
from their remandbiiity, or that the latter, in particular, should be
roused for•the publication, u it must be from his neglect or eta-
degree (though he did not mean to make that charge) that time
teeter was shown, atid thereby got Into Circulation. (Hear.) Who
Ord_ Sir John Malcolm show it to, or why did fie show it at all ? He
pa a suspicion h ld e, mind that the letter being in favour or Sir J. and
spinet the ludges:•.sthat in it he was held up sod they were pat
4.yrt—that the letter came, in point of fact, from Sir J. filakelm.
gin whatever blame attached tatty individual who committed the.
lareseb of conlidence, that did not at all alter the ease, or excuse
the noble lord for having written such a letter.
. Mr. PEEL said that different versions had hum circu-
lated in India of this letter, which he understood were very
ildhrent from the one published in this country. He had asked 11
his noble friend respecting it when the letter was published there.
The noble lord • acknowledged that be bad wrken •
hiler of that description, but be could not say that that was a
comet copy of it, and it was moreover a letter wiltteu. hastily,
said inadvertently. He (Mr. Peel) did not mean to say, that
a public officer bad a right to write letter e to public functionaries
upon piddle subjects, and afterwards*. screen himself from anint-
mw,„;,,,, in the plea ika: his brawn were private. The expression
so In the wild and tame elephants. was but a hasty and inadvertent '
jots h seeded ins private bitter, and it shouldMA be Set Ilan
the public MIMI' Ur bee noble frismi's Mfe
Lard JOHN RUSSELL said that so satisfactory expleesdato
of ibis matter bad been given, and that the house Auld consider
*better the Individual who could write such a letter was fitted to
ill the take whigess *misled.
sir J. MAVjEiniTOSH condemned fw the strangest trans the
notimeaticrjesdWd4 she letter to Which the meatus of the
bete. bed .akeli directed. He weld sot huh spas a latter
!raps eta. *sakket' of the .11,1disliksard to a Governor le le.
dbr (MOW O. Nob" Irobjectig. es p private Mum. Is wiiitoe

this letter, the noble lord seemed to forget what was due to his
situa ion. He would say, that If the noble lord should now
come forward, and, in a 'steamer which could not be mistaken,
and which could not be concealed, disavow the 'sentiments of that
letter, supposing it to be genuine, such i disivowal, so made sod so
published, would he, in his eyes, a great reparation of thi original'
huts which he bad committed. If be could understand that any
thing of that kind was In contemplation, be should be Ad to re-
ceive it ; but it was treating a matter of Brn rate importance with
far too much levity, to say merely 'that the noble lord bad for-
gotten what be might have said 'respecting it. Those Rude jests
which the letter contained, about employing a tame elephant as a
decoy for the two wild ones, were not likely to be forgotten soon
by she reader, and were in all probability entraven deeply in the
memory of the writer. It was extraordinary that any public
functionary should have written such a letter; but it was still more
extraordinary that any public functionary should say that be could.
not recollect whether he had written that letter ur not. In point
of fact, it did appear to him that the noble lord, In saying that he
hid forgotten what be bad written, had been guilty of an aurava-
tion of his original offence.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said, that as It appeared front the public
newspapers that a terrible domestic calamity ►ad been indicted
upon the noble lord within the last few days, some ludelgence ought
to be attended to bins, if In the confusion of the moment, he had
stated that he did not recollect what be had written in a letter
which be had sent to India nine months before, and of which be
bad kept no copy.
Mr. G. liA NK ES said, that as so much allusion hid been made
to the forgetfulness of the noble lord, he would on)y say that the
friends of that noble lord would have ill serval him if they had
rested his defence entirely upon that ground. His forgetfulness
was intended to apply to particular expressions in the letter; and
really those 4xpressiuos appeared to him to have been very much
misinterpreted by the newspapers.
Mr. RICE said, that his reason for bringing this mat fett (a-
ward at this early period was, that the letter stated the intentions
of Government with regard to the East India Company's chute/.
The petition was then brought up, and ordered to be printed.
. Mr. W. PEEL presented certain papers relative to gaols, which
were ordered to be printed.

MALT mama.
Lord F. OSBORNE gave notke, that on thalkst Thursday
after Easter, he would bring forwdrd a motion for referring to a
committee of the whole house, the duties on malt and beer.