The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-04-14 00:00:00

parliamtnt.

HOUSE OF LORDS—THURSDAY.
Among the petitions was one presented by Lord ABINGER,
from the printers and publishers of the Times and Morning
Post newspapers, against certain parts of the printed papers
bill.
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY presented petitions from
American loyalists in Canada against the clergy reserves bill,
and from the Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign
Parts, representing such bill as a breach of faith.
Lord ELLENBOROUGR wished to obtain a pledge from the
government not to advise the adoption of the bill until their
lordships had received the judges' answers to the questions
thereupon propounded to them, and which could not be until
after the Easter recess.
Lord MELBOURNE said that, without giving any pledge,
there would be ample time, no doubt, afforded.
Lord DLNCANNON presented the despatch from the go-
vernment of Upper Canada relative to the monks of St. Sul-
pine.
Lord KENYON presented a petition from the Corporation
of Dublin, praying to be heard by counsel against the muni-
cipal corporations (Ireland) bill.
The Marquis of VV'ESTMEATTI presented a similar petition
from Belfast.
Lord DENMAN presented a petition from the Cashier of a
Provincial Bank, representing that he had received notice to
quit such situation, because his conscientious scruples would
not allow him to take the oath required in some legal pro-
ceedings, and praying for a remedy. His lordship observed
that he had heretofore ineffectually endeavoured to provide
relief for such cases ; and he added that if he could only ob-
tain some assurance from their lordships that they might
now extend more favourable attention to him, he would
again introduce the bill on the subject.
In answer to Lord Westmeath,
Lord MELBOURNE said the second reading of the Irish
municipal bill would certainly not come on before Easter.
The house went into committee on the printed papers bill.
Mr. Platt, counsel for Messrs. Stockdale and Howard, ad-
dressed the house with much point.
The report of the bill was ordered to be brought up on,
Tuesday.
Lord FITZGF.RALD gave notice that he should move, on
an early day, for copies of the instructions that had been
given to the valuators under the poor law in Ireland.
Lord REDESDAI presented a petition from Sudbury,
praying that union workhouses might not he exempted from
rating.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—TIIURSDAY.
Many petitions were presented ; among them several against
the clergy reserves (Canada) bill, one of them being from the
Bishop of Toronto, presented by Mr. Pakington.
Sir H. PARNELL gave notice, that after Easter he should
move for leave to bring in a bill for again ascertaining the
population of Great Britain, distinguishing the increase or
diminution, &c.
Mr. HOME gave notice that he should hereafter move the
appointment of a select committee, for the purpose of exa-
mining the duties on imports, to ascertain where the duties
were for the protection of similar articles the product of this
country, or where they were imposed for the purpose of re-
venue.
Lord J. RUSSELL obtained leave to bring in bills-1.
" To continue the poor law commission fora limited period;"
and 2. " For the better administration of relief to the poor in
England and Wales."
Mr. W. MILES, connected with the same subject. ob-
tained leave to bring in a bill " to provide a summary remedy
to the lower classes of society in cases of seduction and
breaches of promise of marriage."
Mr. GOULBURN moved for, and which were ordered, co-
pies of any correspondence between her Majesty's govern-
ment and the East India Company, showing the arrangement
entered into with the East India Company for paying the
expense of the armament now preparing in India for service
in China.
Mr, SLANEY obtained leave to bring in a bill " to repeal
so much of an act made and passed in the sth and 6th years
of the reign of his late Majesty King William the Fourth,
intituled ' an act for the establishment of loan societies in
England and Wales, and to extend the provisions of the
friendly societies' acts to the islands of Guernsey, Jersey,
and Man,' as relates to the establishment of loan societies
in England and Wales ; and to make other provisions in lieu
thereof."
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE called attention to the petition of Mr.
James Howell, lecturer on astronomy, praying the house to
address the crown to afford him a continuation of the privi-
lege of lecturing at theatres during Lent. He moved an ad-
dress accordingly.
Mr. Fox MAULE opposed the motion, on the ground of
the new regulations laid down by the Lord Chanberlain.
After a short debate the house divided, and the motion
was carried :—Ayes, 73 ; noes, 49 ; majority, 21.
The adjourned debate on China was then resumed.
Mr. HOGG began by adverting to the evidence which was
taken by government before the opening of the trade, and
which proved that the Chinese were opposed to the settlement
of foreigners, to the admission of political residents, and to
the transaction of business through any other channel than
that of the Hong merchants. The policy of the government
had been shaped in contravention of all those objections, and
the national feelings of the Chinese had been crossed. When
difficulties began to arise, repeated entreaties for instructions
were addressed to government, but no instructions were
-vouchsafed. It was said the country was too remote to make
instruction practicable. If ministers had professed to invest
the superintendent with uncontrolled discretion, that policy
might have been defensible. But here they professed to in-
struct him, yet left him uninstructed.
Dr. LUSRINGTON gave credit to Sir James Graham for
having constructed his motion on the principle of a drag-net—
to catch the large fish, the little fish, and the loose fish. He
admitted that China was no party to the law of nations,
commonly so called, but she could not be exempt from the
great obligations of ordinary justice. Considering the pecu-
liarly mischievous properties of opium, and the extensive
growth of it in our Indian dominions, he might have acknow-
ledged that China would have been entitled to call on us for
the suppression of its sale within her limits, if she herself
had been making genuine efibrts for that suppression ; but
while she was urging this demand on us, she herself was con-
niving at the trade. Suppose, however, that instructions
had been sent to Captain Elliot to put down the traffic, and
that the merchantmen, which was not very likely, had sub-
mitted to leave Canton, the only result would have been that
they would have diffused it over other parts of the coast.
Sir Jorns HonitousE contended that if there was ground
for this motion there was ground for a much stronger vote.
But the present proceeding was not a practical one ; it pro-
posed no suspension of the hostilities which it condemned ;
it was a mere party matter, brought forward without the
slightest care for China ; and he regretted such trifling upon
a great question of peace and war. He wished Sir James
Graham had here, as in the case of his last year's wisely
abandoned notice about the war in India, abstained from
bringing forward a discussion likely to damp the energies of
those who were to fight their country's battles. The various
speakers on the other side had agreed in no definite opinion
about the justice of the war with China ; yet surely, before
they sought the removal of the present ministry, they should
have made up their minds whether they would support that
war, if conducted by another cabinet. With respect to the
opium trade, its enormities had long since been exposed to
parliament ; and none of those whose consciences were now
so tender on this topic had then stepped forward to express
their disapprobation. But it now seemed to be made matter
of blame that the British ministry did not introduce a bill for
making it penal to smuggle opium into China. He then
entered into various details to show the impossibility of pre-
venting this description of contraband. He defended the
conduct of Captain Elliot, and concluded by expressing a hope
that the circumstances of the case would be foie d to justify
ministers in the responsibility they bad undertaken.
Sir R. PEEL said, that though the crown had sent no mes-
sage to the house on the affairs of China, and invited from
it no opinion, the country was, by the confession of minis-
ters, on the verge of war with a region inhabited by almost
one-third of the whole human race. And the objection of
those ministers to this motion on so momentous a question
was, that it proceeded upon party principles. Such proceed-
ings had ever been usual under a free constitution, and were
inseparable from it. But the present case, it had been said,
was of too great magnitude to be canvassed by a party mo-
tion. That is, your impunity is to be in proportion to the
greatness of the interests you endanger. Your war, how-
ever, may be an unjust one with reference to its causes ; and
yet it may have been rendered a necessary one by the gross
neglect and misconduct of the ministers who have brought it
on. The charge against them was, not that they did not
foresee what the Emperor of China would do. but that, in
the new state of things arising out of the opening of the
trade, they sent out a superintendent furnished with no
instructions, and strengthened with no moral force from
the presence of naval support. The distance was set up
as a reason for their meagre and contradictory instruc-
tions ; but they might, without fettering him by specific
crders, have possessed hint of their general views, as to
the place of residence, the mode of communication, and
tha traffic in opium. The moral effect of a naval force
might have been secured, without stationing it so near
as to give umbrage to the Chinese authorities. Sir Robert
Peel went on to observe, that the main question now was
whether ministers had been guilty of reprehensible neglect,
and to that he would confine himself. He then selected
from the published papers a variety of passages establishing
particular instances of the neglect which he imputed. For
example, an act of parliament had authorised ministers to
give certain power to their superintendents by order in coun-
cil. They passed an order, but it was so imperfectly framed
as to confer no power at all. The imperfection was pointed
out to them, and instead of amending it they simply pro-
posed to extend these non-existing powers to a wider local
limit. They had authority, too, by order in council, to es-
tablish a criminal jurisdiction among the British subjects in
China. They did not exercise that authority, but they in-
troduced a bill into parliament in 1837, so late in the session,
that it was necessarily withdrawn ; and they introduced
in 1838 another bill, which they protracted to a still later
period of the session, and which comprised a civil as well
as a criminal jurisdiction. It failed ; but the authority
to establish a criminal jurisdiction by order in council still
remained with them ; and that authority they . still ne-
glected to exercise. Having gone through the details of
representations, entreaties, and remonstrances made by the
superintendents, and disregarded by ministers, Sir R. Peel
observed, that if his only object had been to obtain a majo-
rity, that object would probably have been accomplished
by a motion simply condemning the war and the traffic
in opium. But he could not conscientiously say that some
further continuation of hostilities, however culpably they were
originated, might not, in the actual state of things, be now
unhappily necessary. Still he was anxious to prevent the un-
fair excitement of the public mind against the Chinese.
Some of their acts were indefensible ; hut our provocations,
and the general humanity of the people ought not to be for-
gotten. If war was necessary, let it not be conducted in a
revengeful spirit, but rather with a disposition for re-opening
the way to a permanent friendship. Let it be remembered
that success itself might lead to fearful e,010107000 oenessi.
men.per-
haps to revolution and anarchy among w 0:
Let it be considered that the interests of other states might
be so affected by our hostilities, as to involve us in difficulties
with their governments also. The late blockade had lasted
only-five days, but it had produced a remonstrance from the
American merchants. He concluded by an earnest prayer
that Heaven might avert those evils to which the misconduct
of the rulers had justly exposed hes%
Lord PALsrEasTos: described the conception of the motion,
and the execution of it in the debate, to have been equally
feeble. And if his own nespatches were considered deficient
in precision, what must be thought of the language of -the
proposed resolution ? Omission was charged ; but no one
had clearly explained what it was which had been omitted.
Meanwhile he rejoiced that the motion threw no imputation
upon the officers employed ; and he wished to state the utter
groundlessness of the supposition that Captain Elliott had
in the least degree countenanced the smuggling of opium.
- After some not uncourteous animadversions on the speeches
of Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Thessiger Lord Palmerston again
complained that the nature of the alleged omissions had. not
been stated by his opponents. If you accuse a roan of what
he has committed, you need not suggest that he should have
done something else; but while you accuse him of omitting
something, you are bound to state the thing so omitted.
Gentlemen had not ventured to speak out,but he believed their
real meaning was, that the superintendent should have been
armed with powers effectually to suppress the trade in opium.
The noble lord then answered various points of detail arising
out of the published papers : afterwhicl which he
that
heradve objectrtedto was
untruth of the pretence set up by China,
the morality of her people. That was not the real motive :
if it had been so, there , would have been a prohibition of
the poppy culture in the Chinese dominions. The real
object was to favour the poppy interest, and to keep the
, bullion in the celestial *awe. If. in ccanpliance with