, in the absence of Mr. Secretary Canning, presented, by command of his Majesty, the following

rose to present a Petition on a matter affecting; the vital interests of parliament, and the privileges of the House. He moved, however, first, that the usual sessional order against tampering with or influencing witnesses to be examined on matters before the House, which was in that order declared to be a high misdemeanour, should be read. The order having been read, the hon. member stated, that his petition was from a Mr. Thomas Lambert, of Gal way, brother to the gentleman who had presented a petition against the return of Richard Martin, esq. The petitioner stated himself to have been since the late election, in a very delicate state of health, but upon receiving the Speaker's summons, he proceeded to London, and when in the lobby of the House, was insulted and assaulted by Martin French, esq., whom the petitioner believed to be the active supporter and warm partisan of Mr. Richard Martin. The petitioner declared he had given no provocation for such an attack, and prayed the protection of the House. The hon. member said, he did not intend to move for the attendance of the person mentioned, because he hoped that this notice of it would be enough to show that the House had the power of protecting its witnesses, and would enforce that power so as to put a stop to occurrences like that now complained of, and without which witnesses might often be exposed to difficulty and danger.

thought the matter ought not to stop here; because it became the House to maintain its dignity and show its power. When its witnesses were molested some time ago, the House had sent a man to prison for attacking a gentleman in the lobby; and he therefore moved that the petitioner, and Mr. Martin French should be ordered to attend to-morrow.

asked,' if it was the pleasure of the House that the Serjeant-at-Arms should inquire if Mr. Lambert was in attendance, and the House having sig- nified their assent, the Speaker directed the Serjeant-at-Arms to proceed to the lobby, and make the necessary inquiry. A pause of about five minutes occurred, at the expiration of which, the Serjeant-at-Arms returned to the table, and informed the Speaker, that Mr. Lambert was in attendance, and waited the pleasure of the House.

.—Is it the pleasure of the House that Mr. Lambert should be called in? The House having signified their assent, the Serjeant was directed to return to the lobby, and bring Mr. Lambert to the bar of the House. In a few minutes Mr. Lambert appeared at the bar, and the following examination took place:

.—What is your name?—Thomas Lambert.

.—Is this your name attached to this petition?—This is my name. You will now state slowly and distinctly, for the better information of the House, and in order that your answers may be taken down in writing, the nature of the occurrence complained of in your petition?

then proceeded to state, that on Tuesday last he came down to the House, in consequence of a summons which he received to attend the committee appointed to try the Galway election. "I had not been five minutes in the lobby," the gentleman continued, "when Mr. French came up, and said, 'How do you do, Lambert, I am glad to see you,' and asked me to shake hands with him. In consequence of the conduct pursued by Mr. French, when a trial was pending on which my life was at stake, I declined to shake hands with him, but merely made him a low bow. I forgot to state that Mr. Baggot was along with me, and also a Mr. Phipps. Mr. Butler, who is a relation of mine, and a friend of Mr. French, was also with me. As soon as I made the bow, and declined to accept Mr. French's hand, he got into a violent fit of passion; so much so, that his countenance became suddenly distorted with rage. He said, 'I deserve this treatment, for contaminating this hand by offering to shake hands with such a contemptible rascal.' I bowed and thanked him. Two or three gentlemen, who happened to be in the lobby at the time, came over to my friend, Mr. Butler, and asked him if that gentleman was mad? I forgot to say, that Mr. French held out his hand in a threatening manner; but whether he intended to strike or not I cannot tell. If he had struck me, however, I should not have returned the blow. The next morning I received a note from sir Richard Birnie, to attend before him. I waited on him accordingly; and after hearing the circumstances of the quarrel, he said, that if I pledged my word of honour not to proceed any further in the business, he should not require me to give bail to keep the peace. I replied, that I was perfectly willing to comply with these terms, and pledged my word of honour accordingly."

.—Have you any thing further to add?

said, "I forgot to mention that one or two gentlemen wished me to call for a constable, to give Mr. French into custody, but I declined to do so, as I did not think it necessary."

.—Has any hon: member any question to propose to the witness?

.—Are you not in attendance in consequence of a summons issued by the Speaker, requiring your attendance as a witness before the committee appointed to investigate the merits of the Galway election?—Yes I am. Is not Mr. French summoned as a witness also?—I believe he is. As soon as the witness had retired from the bar,

said, that the usual course pursued by the House in cases of this description was to call both the petitioner and the person petitioned against to the bar of the House,—a course which he suggested should be pursued to-morrow, when Mr. French would have an opportunity of replying to the charge contained in the petition.

, with all due deference to the right hon. gentleman, conceived that this was not a case in which the House was called upon to interfere. No impediment had been offered—no blow had been struck; and he must observe, that if any offence was given, it was the refusal, in the first instance, of the petitioner himself to return the common courtesy which Mr. French had offered him. He was therefore of opinion, that no case had been made out to warrant the interference of the House. If, indeed, the witness had been assaulted, and rendered incapable of giving his evidence, the House in that case would be fully justified in calling the offending party to the bar.

concurred in the opinion of the hon. gentleman who had just sat down. If any insult had passed between the parties, it appeared to have originated with the petitioner himself.

observed, that the question did not appear to be whether Mr. French was a hundred miles off from the petitioner, or only a yard; but whether an assault was committed, or attempted to be committed, within the precincts of that House.

agreed in the general principle, that the House had a right, in vindication of its honour and dignity, to call persons before them who were guilty of a breach of privilege; but at the same time he could not agree that the present case was one in which that power should be exerted. Another argument against the House interfering in this quarrel, was, that the civil power had already interposed between the parties. He therefore conceived, that the House would be wasting its time, and compromising its dignity, by interfering in the case.

perfectly concurred in the view which the hon. and learned gentleman had taken of the subject. Nothing had occurred tending to a breach of the peace; and even if there had, the police had interfered to prevent any unpleasant consequences.

said, that his duty, in the first instance, was confined to presenting the petition of Mr. Lambert; but now that the case was before the House, he must be permitted to say, that it was one in which they were called upon to exercise that sound and wholesome authority, which they possessed. He contended, that the consequences would be most dangerous, if insulting words, tending to a breach of the peace, were passed over without any expression of displeasure, because no blows had been struck. There was no principle more dangerous than this; and he conceived the House was imperatively called upon to discourage such a doctrine. His chief object in presenting this petition was, that persons summoned as witnesses before committees of that House, should know that the House was ready to take up any question, involving their safety or protection. He did not wish to have the person petitioned against in this case called to the bar of the House; but he hoped that the notice of this discussion would have its proper effect.

said, that a petition having been presented, and evidence having been heard at the bar in support of its allegations, he thought it would be wrong for the House to come to the decision, that the prayer of the petition should not be entertained. Witnesses who attended that House should be protected. If a gentleman refused to shake hands with another, that was no reason why he should be threatened. After hearing the petition read and its principal allegations supported by the evidence of the petitioner, he conceived that the party complained against should be called to the bar and admonished. It was said, that the civil power had taken up the case; but in what way did it do so? Merely by calling upon the parties to pledge their honour that nothing hostile should pass between them. This might be sufficient for the purpose of keeping the peace; but the House had another duty to perform; and it was a question to be considered, whether, if this case was passed over, the House would not be surrendering that protection which they should extend to their witnesses. The better way, he conceived, would be for both the gentlemen to attend at the bar of the House to-morrow.

said, that the right hon. gentleman opposite seemed to think that one of the parties in this case had been guilty of a breach of privilege. Now, in that opinion, he could by no means agree; for not one word had been uttered in the lobby connected with the business, on which the parties had been summoned as witnesses. He, therefore, called upon the right hon. gentleman, whose authority in such cases was certainly high, and whose memory no doubt was furnished with ample precedents, to point out any one case similar to that which was now before the Mouse. He thought it would be a hard case if the House decided that Mr. French should be called to the bar and admonished.

said, he had not enjoyed the advantage of hearing the examination of the witness at the bar; but, from what he had heard, it rather appeared to him that the evidence did not entirely support the allegations of the petition. It was certainly questionable whether the party who had petitioned the House had exercised a sound discretion in doing so; but he had done so, and had stated that he was insulted. After the evidence which had been given, he thought that a very slight notice on the part of the House would be sufficient; but he was of opinion that both parties should be called to the bar, and should be told that the House was a privileged place, and that those who were called there came to discharge a public duty—that they must do so quietly, and that while so engaged there must be an oblivion of personal quarrels. Had he been consulted he would not have advised the presentation of this petition; but as it had been presented, and as evidence had been examined, the House could not pass it by without notice. It should be recollected, that, on these election petitions, adverse parties were brought into immediate personal collision; and it was therefore necessary to impress upon them, that those who were not inclined to quarrel should have perfect personal protection, and that those who were should restrain themselves in that place, and decide their quarrels elsewhere. He was of opinion, that both parties should be called up. So far was he from thinking, that the proceedings at Bow-street made the interference of the House less necessary, that it rendered it more so; as the friends of the parties saw there was so much personal conflict, as to warrant their application to a magistrate for his interference.

said, that the case appeared to be this,—two witnesses, both of whom had been summoned on an election committee, had had a quarrel, and one charged the other with a breach of privilege. Under all the circumstances, he conceived that the House would not be doing equal justice, if both parties were not ordered to attend.

considered the point upon which the attention of the House was employed as one of the most frivolous he had ever heard discussed. He would venture to say that there was hardly ever a committee, in reference to which some trifling squabble did not occur, which might not with as much reason be made the subject of an application for the interference of the House. The hon. member to whom the petition had been intrusted had done quite right in presenting it; but he was of opinion that there was nothing in it which called for any further step on the part of the House.

differed entirely from the worthy alderman, and conceived that his own arguments were sufficient to prove that it was incumbent on the House to take the matter into consideration, It did not signify what were the characters or the station of the parties; nor was it material whether the act complained of received any palliation, as to its impropriety, from any antecedent aggression. It was the duty of the House to show to the public that every witness who came within the precincts of that House, in obedience to the orders of parliament, should be protected there as if he were in a sanctuary, without reference to any previous quarrels. He therefore considered the course recommended by the Secretary of State for the Home Department as in every respect the most advisable.

, and Mr. Thomas Lambert were ordered to attend the House to-morrow.

begged leave to recall the attention of the House to an order made a few days back for the taking into custody John Stanbury, who was reported by the Penryn Election committee to have absented himself. It was directed, by order of the House, that he should be taken into custody, in consequence of his not having attended before the committee. The Speaker's warrant was accordingly issued for the purpose, and a messenger was deputed to carry it into execution; but the party having- absconded, all his endeavours to discover and apprehend him were unsuccessful; and although he was a second time despatched from town on a similar mission, his efforts were attended with as little beneficial results as before. The usual course on such occasions was to have the messenger to the bar, that the House might hear from himself what steps he had taken for fulfilling the order of the House; and if it should then appear expedient to the House, to present an address to the Crown, praying his majesty to issue a proclamation, with a reward for the apprehension of the party. The Serjeant-at-Arms was then called and received directions to order the messenger, John Wright, to appear at the bar of the House. The messenger having made his appearance, he was desired by the Speaker to state the course he had pursued for the apprehension of John Stanbury. He accordingly entered into a detail of his route from town to Exeter, to the house of Mr. Stanbury, where he was informed, that that individual had not been at home for some time before. Having received intimation that the fugitive was concealed in a farm-house about five miles from Plymouth, he proceeded thither, and aided by four constables, searched the premises, but without obtaining any trace of the object of his search. He then proceeded to Tregony, and from thence to Truro, in both of which places he made diligent inquiries after Mr. Stanbury, but was unable to gain any intelligence of his retreat. He returned again to Exeter, and from thence came back to town; and having received directions to go a second time to Plymouth, he repaired thither, but with no better success than before; and he was obliged finally to return to town without having accomplished the object of his mission.

asked if any member wished to put any question to the messenger; and no advantage being taken of the invitation, the messenger was permitted to withdraw.

then moved, "That it appears to this House, that John Stanbury has absconded, to avoid being taken into custody, pursuant to an order of the House." Also, "That a humble address be presented to his majesty, praying that he will be graciously pleased immediately to issue his royal proclamation, with such reward as his majesty shall think proper, for discovering, apprehending, and detaining the said John Stanbury."—Agreed to.

said, that there was already before the House a petition from gentlemen connected with the Shipping Interests of the city of London. He held in his hand a petition of a similar nature, from a body of ship-owners in London, of equal respectability. The two bodies to whom he alluded were associated, and had appointed a committee; and although the petition he was about to present was not united with the preceding, it was of a precisely similar nature. The present petition was signed by more than two hundred and fifty persons. They represented the hardship of their case arising out of the laws recently passed by the House, and by which the House had removed certain restrictions upon foreign shipping which had proved an essential security to the British shipping interest. The petitioners stated, that it was now impossible for them to enter into competition with foreigners, as they had to bear the disadvantage of from thirty to forty per cent in the prices of implements, wages, and almost all materials. The petitioners also state, that every other class of the community that had been willing to try the experiment of free trade upon the petitioners, had equally shrunk from allowing that experiment to be tried upon themselves. He did not pledge himself as to what he should do when the subject came before the House; but all the petitioners wished was, that their case should undergo an inquiry. For his part, he felt it impossible to put the petitioners upon a fair and proper footing, under the existing law, unless, by a reduction of taxes, and especially of those which operated to raise the price of provisions, they were placed in parallel circumstances with foreign competitors, and with other branches of English industry.

said, that in rising to submit to the House the question of which he had so long given notice, he felt it necessary to state, that whatever he should now do upon this subject would be done by him with the greatest reluctance. He would not have submitted this matter to their consideration, if he had not been fully convinced of its great importance as relating to our government in India, and to all our connections with the affairs of that country. The occurrence to which he was about to call the attention of the House took place in the early part of the month of November, 1824. When he mentioned that date, a question might naturally arise, why so great a delay had occurred in laying a subject of so much importance before parliament. Upon that point he should only state, that in the middle of the month of July, 1825, in the course of the session of that year, he had requested to know from the President of the Board of Control, whether the government of this country had received any information of the transactions which had taken place in India in the November preceding? The right hon. gentleman answered then in the negative; and gave the same answer up to the last week in the session, when it was too late to take any step on the subject. In the last session he had given two notices upon this subject; but by some of those chances which frequently occurred, he was twice prevent- ed from making those notices the subjects of discussion; nor had he any opportunity whatever for so doing, until towards the close of the session, when the lateness of the period, together with the expected arrival of that officer, whose conduct was chiefly the subject of discussion, and whose presence in this country was desirable, that he might immediately meet the charge, had induced him to postpone his motion. When the present session arrived, he felt the most anxious wish to introduce the matter to the notice of the House; and he should certainly have done so before this time, but for the important subjects which had occupied so much of their attention. He felt that it was at any time a delicate matter to interfere on subjects relating to the army, perhaps more so on this than on many other occasions; but he felt it to be a positive duty for him now to take upon himself this task, and to bring under the notice of the House the proceedings of the executive in India, with regard to the management of the army. He acknowledged that he should not have been warranted in calling the attention of the House to the subject, but on account of its very great importance. He knew that, in all armies, as well at home as abroad, some instance of insubordination among some of the troops, might, at one time or other, be discovered. The degree of importance of any such instance of insubordination would vary according to time, place and circumstance; and some might be of a very trifling nature; but, in the East Indian army, where there were at least one hundred and twenty thousand native troops to twenty-five thousand British soldiers, any thing which affected it in such a manner, as to tend, in the slightest degree, to create a feeling of insubordination, must always be a matter of the highest importance. It should always be remembered that we held possession of India but by a very small numerical force, at least compared to the number of the natives employed in our service; and it should always be a matter to which our general officers and governors should devote their utmost care and attention, to uphold, as much as possible, the character of our officers and soldiers, not merely for their superiority of military skill, discipline, and courage, but for their moral conduct, in carrying on the government of that immense country. Having made these general observations, he should now state the circumstances of that transaction on which he wished to take the opinion of the House. The governor-general of India had, in consequence of some manifestation of enmity on the part of a native prince, deemed it necessary to embark in hostilities against him. That resolution was taken in October, 1824, and in furtherance of it, some troops were sent towards the frontiers. Among these troops were the men composing a battalion of the 47th native regiment, who were marched from Futtaghur, which was about a thousand miles up the country, towards the eastern frontier. What he was now about to move, related to the order given them to march from Barrackpore, where they had assembled, towards the Burmese territory, and to their refusal to obey it; a refusal which, on account of the line of conduct that, he contended, had been improperly pursued by the commander-in-chief, led to the destruction of three or four hundred of their number in a very short space of time. There were two questions upon which he thought the House would require to be informed. In the first place, they would desire to obtain some knowledge as to what had been the causes, the existence of which had led to this insubordination and mutiny; and secondly, they would wish to know whether proper measures, such as were consistent with the maintenance of strict discipline, and at the same time with a spirit of humanity, had been employed to bring these mutineers back to their duty. When they were satisfied upon these two points they would be able to decide, whether the loss of life that had occurred had not been owing to the mischief of not properly carrying into effect those means that might have been resorted to for the purpose of restoring order without having recourse to bloodshed. There was no man who had been in India, that would not readily bear testimony to the general good conduct of the native troops—none that would not agree with him in saying, that whenever these native troops had been led into action by the side of our countrymen, they had manifested as much zeal and courage in the service as the British soldiers. He was positive that all who knew them would concur in the statement, that on all these occasions they had shewn the same zeal, alacrity, and bravery, and. had displayed the same gallantry, that had so honourably distinguished our countrymen in the service there. At the same time, he was bound to acknowledge, that they had occasionally displayed acts of insubordination. That, however, ought not to be resorted to as an argument against them, any more than against the European troops, for the same thing had occurred in the European corps. He should now proceed to consider the circumstances to which the mutiny of the native troops was to be attributed, repeating what he had before said, that their insubordination was no more a reproach to them than to our own troops, and that the corps of British and of native troops ought both to be placed on the same footing in that respect. If, as he had already asserted, the native troops were distinguished by general good conduct, and those who had served with them were prepared to bear testimony to their merit, he thought they would concur with him in saying, that the circumstances which had led to the mutiny of these troops must have been of a most extraordinary nature. The battalion of the 47th native regiment had but a short time before been brought down from the upper provinces, from Futtaghur, which was about a thousand miles up the country, and up to the time of their being assembled with the other troops at Barrackpore, he believed that no troops had shewn greater readiness or good will in the service. The service to which they were destined was certainly not one that was likely to create much enthusiasm. Some alarm had arisen throughout the country, not only from the proceedings that had taken place on the eastern frontier, but also from the fear that the native troops of Bengal had acquired religious prejudices that would prevent them from acting with their usual zeal and alacrity; and, indeed, that they would manifest a greater degree of unwillingness than on any other occasion to quit their own territory. That unwillingness might not only have been expected, but could have been easily accounted for, by a variety of circumstances. First of all, it was known that the troops which had preceded them had suffered great privations, that many had been disabled by sickness, and they naturally feared that they should suffer in the same manner; the more especially as they were in a state of destitution, as to many things that were absolutely necessary. In speaking thus of these troops, he could not avoid drawing a contrast between the troops sent from the Bengal, and those sent from the Madras, establishment. The Madras troops were in a much better condition as to all necessary equipments. He, therefore, distinguished between these troops, as the two governments under which they acted had so differently provided for their wants. The Madras regiment came down to the military station fully equipped, and in a short time received directions to proceed, together with the Bengal troops, towards the eastern frontier, in order to enter upon the Burmese war. A short time previously to their being assembled for that purpose, about three hundred men had deserted from one corps, on account of their unwillingness to go upon such an expedition. Towards the latter part of the month of October, these troops received orders to march from Barrackpore. On the 22nd of that month a report was presented to colonel Cartwright, stating the impossibility of their moving forward, unless cattle, carriages, and other conveniences were afforded them for the conveyance of their baggage. He believed it would be found that this report had ultimately been forwarded by colonel Cartwright to the Presidency. The conveniences they required were such as the experience of former services had proved to be necessary; and the demand of the troops was not, therefore, to be wondered at. Whether that document had found its way to the commander-in-chief, and from him to the government, he was not able to say; and it was his wish, and indeed his object in the present motion, to ascertain that fact. All he knew was, that every day the anxiety of those native troops to obtain the necessary carriages became more earnest, and they urged that their demands should be granted without further delay. Their request was, in some measure no doubt, strengthened by the superior attention which they saw had been paid to the comfort of the Madras troops. These troops having been landed on the Bengal territory, had daily rations distributed to them, while the Bengal troops had none. The former, too, had great coats given them to protect them from the excessive rains, while none were allowed to the latter, who had to bear the same inclemencies of the weather; and this difference existed between the troops of the two Presidencies, although both were acting in the same service. Sir Thomas Monro, the president of the Madras establishment, had so well provided for the troops sent from his Presidency, that they formed a most striking contrast to the miserable condition of the Bengal troops. On no former occasion had men turned out in such numbers or in better condition. The Madras troops amounted to ten thousand, all of whom were volunteers; and the zeal, alacrity, and readiness they had manifested, were admirably supported by the very excellent arrangements of sir Thomas Monro. The battalion of native Bengal troops required additional batta, which, undoubtedly, would have created an additional expense to the government; but if that expense was necessary, the troops were justified in demanding it. They were told, however, that they could not have the cattle, nor the carriages they required. When that answer was given to the Hindoo troops, the reply they made was that which might naturally have been expected. They said, "if we are made coolies (that is beasts of burden), how can we fight? How can we be both coolies and soldiers. It has always been our pride to be soldiers, and we are willing to do our duty as soldiers, but we cannot use our arms, and carry burthens at the same time." Now, he could hardly think that the commander-in-chief was ignorant of these circumstances, as colonel Cartwright and general Dalzel had made the requisite statements to the Presidency. On the 30th of October, these native troops were told, that they could not have the cattle, and that march they must. Now he must observe, that this refusal did not at all accord with what had generally been the practice in that country, where it had always been the custom to obtain in such circumstances the assistance of the civil magistrate. These orders and that answer drove the men to insubordination, and the blame of creating that insubordination seemed to him not to rest with the men who committed it, so much as with the officers, who were, or ought to be, answerable for the complaints. The want of cattle at that time was so great, that from within fifty miles round, all the cattle had been pressed into the service of the government; and, at the very time that cattle were refused to the troops, there were no less than ten or fifteen thousand head of cattle at a place a short distance from Fort Wil- liam, which was only twelve miles from the spot where they were required, and where they might have been applied to the necessary purposes of the government. Indeed, the government ultimately appeared to be satisfied that the demand which the men had made was reasonable, since they actually issued money to enable them to purchase or to hire cattle for their service. The manner in which that issue was made, or rather a statement which accompanied it, seemed to him to prove, in the clearest manure, that the Commander-in-chief, sir Edward Paget, could not have informed the general government of the necessity of furnishing the troops with cattle, since their own order for the issue of money, which was dated on the 4th of November, distinctly stated, that as soon as they were informed of the necessity of furnishing cattle to the troops, they had issued money to the men for the purpose of procuring them. The issue of money, however, under the circumstances to which he had already alluded, was not the best course that could have been pursued; since, even if the sum issued had been four times as great as it was, the troops could not, without the assistance of the government, have procured the cattle they required. The issue of money, therefore, was but adding insult to the previous denial. On the Monday morning the troops declared, that unless the grievances of which they complained were redressed, they must decline to march, and they expected that justice would be done them. They demanded either to have the cattle furnished to them, or to have inquiry to ascertain how far their complaints were well grounded. He contended that troops had never before been ordered to march under such circumstances. On the 1st of November, sir Edward Paget, the Commander-in-chief, thinking it necessary to put down at once any symptoms of insubordination, went down to Barrackpore, having previously ordered thither a large body of English and native troops, and several pieces of artillery. Now, he admitted, that whenever a corps was in a state of insubordination, their mutiny ought to be put down; and he did not quarrel with the measures that had been adopted for that purpose, but with the mode which had been pursued. The hon. member here produced a plan of the place, where the forty-seventh Native regiment had been assembled at Barrack- pore, and by its aid described the manner in which they had been surrounded by the Body Guards, the Royals, and by his majesty's forty-seventh regiment, and entered into a detail of the circumstances under which the massacre took place. He then contended that, if sir Edward Paget had informed the mutinous troops of his determination to enforce obedience, and of the means he possessed to do so, they would instantly have obeyed him, and this dreadful destruction of life might have been avoided. These troops had only ten minutes given them to decide whether they would march or not; and then, without being informed of the force that could instantly be employed against them—without having shown the slightest disposition to resist—without having loaded one musket, they were treated in the severest manner, and were, at the end of the assigned time, shot down by a fire opened by the artillery, and supported by the Royals; and, when their battalion broke, they were charged by the cavalry. None of those means which common humanity would have dictated were employed. The men were kept in ignorance of the force under the command of sir Edward Paget. The troops under his orders and the artillery were kept in ambuscade, until the work of destruction began, when these unhappy persons were hunted down in such a manner, that not one of them was afterwards to be found. The loss on this occasion had been computed at four or five hundred men—some said six hundred; but he should be content to put it at the moderate estimate of three hundred men. There was a great deal of uncertainty regarding the details of this unhappy affair, because the press of India was shackled, and the only information that could be obtained was through the statements of private persons. The press of India, besides its general restraint, was in this instance put under a special interdiction. A circular was sent from the government to the papers, forbidding the mention of this circumstance until the official statement of it should have appeared. All the details, therefore, were suppressed; for no persons would dare to publish them, since they knew that such a publication would have been attended with the same punishment and the same ruin that had before been inflicted on others who had ventured to disobey such commands. From private information, however, there was sufficient evidence to shew the real nature of the transaction.—The hon. member here referred to a letter which he stated to have been written by one field-officer to another. It was dated from Fort William, and spoke in strong terms of the melancholy occurrence which had then taken place. The writer, however, stated, that he was not present on the occasion of the firing on the native troops.—The men who fled to the river were sniped and shot in the water; and so indiscriminate was the slaughter, that he believed he was correct instating, that a number of country people, in no way connected with the disturbance, were destroyed in the fury of the pursuit. Such had been the progress and result of this unfortunate mutiny. Courts martial were held first upon forty, who were found guilty, and six of whom were executed. On the 8th of November, twenty more were tried and convicted, four of whom were hanged; and on a subsequent day, forty-two men of the forty-seventh Native regiment were brought to trial; the charge was proved against them, and they were sentenced; but he did not believe that, in the whole, more than twelve of the mutineers had been hanged. They were hanged on the parade; and, what he believed had never occurred before, one of the offenders long remained exposed in chains, to keep up the memory of this melancholy affair, which the House was now told ought to be allowed to sleep without further disturbance. He thought he was warranted in asserting—whether by order of the government, or by the instrumentality of sir Edward Paget, he knew not—that to this moment the country was in ignorance of the real causes which had occasioned such disastrous consequences, excepting by means of private information. On the 4th November, a general order had been issued from Fort William, which stated that the mutiny could not have occurred without the previous knowledge of the native officers; it therefore directed that the forty-seventh regiment, including commissioned and non-commissioned officers, should be disgraced, and the officers discharged, and declared unworthy of the confidence of government. In the issuing of such a hasty order, culpability rested somewhere, and it was for the House to ascertain whether any and what portion of it was attributable to sir Edward Paget. The fact was, that the officers having failed in persuading the mutineers to aban- don their design, had left them to their misguided judgments, and had notwithstanding been dismissed the service, and involved in indiscriminate disgrace. Such had been the effect of this violent course upon the native army in India, that had not affairs taken a favourable turn both in the east and west of our possessions, the consequences might have been most fatal. If one point more than another demanded investigation, it was the reasons that could be assigned for this sweeping act of power, which confounded the innocent with the guilty. The loss of life, the squandering of human blood, was another question which he was satisfied the House would not be disposed to treat with indifference. He well knew that military law, to be efficient, must be arbitrary; but every man who wielded a power so enormous ought to be held responsible, and to be prepared with good reasons for its application on every occacasion. He thought he was in a situation to establish, that the proceedings of sir Edward Paget had not met with the approbation of individuals in authority. Many of the officers and Brahmins would infinitely rather have been shot than condemned to labour in chains like ordinary felons. He was not aware whether any orders had been sent out to India to liberate them, and discharge them from a punishment so onerous and degrading.—He now begged to state why he thought that the Commander-in-chief was principally answerable for what had occurred. At first it had been his opinion that lord Amherst had given the orders; but a letter from captain Amherst, of which he had received a copy from India, went far to satisfy him that the Governor-general was not implicated. It stated, that the Report of the Commissioners of Inquiry had not been sent to England sooner, out of delicacy to sir Edward Paget. He (Mr. Hume) therefore concluded, that lord Amherst considered himself free from responsibility, and was unwilling to furnish evidence against the party who was really culpable. The Commission of Inquiry commenced its labours in November, and continued them until January; but the Report did not reach this country until the July following, seven or eight months after the period when information ought to have been obtained. In order to obtain the fullest and most accurate information regarding a transaction which had spread terror and dismay through all India, that commission had been very properly appointed, consisting of a colonel and two lieutenant-colonels. One of his objects was, that their Report should be laid upon the table, in order that the House might be able to judge how far the corps had been driven to these acts of desperation by inattention or mismanagement. He wished to discover whether the mutiny was a wanton violation of the respect the soldier ought to pay to his allegiance; whether it was a voluntary act on the part of the troops; or whether they were, in fact, driven to it by the conduct of their superiors. The Report would also shew whether those conciliatory measures had been adopted in the first instance, in this case, which in many others had succeeded in allaying a spirit of disobedience, and in saving an effusion of blood. Had the same course been taken which was pursued in 1807, when a native regiment had been disarmed and sent down into the country, which was afterwards restored by general St. Leger to the service, and an opportunity thus afforded of distinguishing itself, perhaps the evils now so deeply to be deplored might have been avoided. If the men loudly complained, in God's name let some symptom be shewn of a disposition to inquire and redress. At Bhurtpore, not long since, the officer in command having heard of some discontents, plainly asked the men what they wanted; and he satisfied them immediately, by telling them, that the matter should be investigated, and a remedy, if required, applied. But, supposing the conduct of the corps had been as flagrant as that of a regiment at Ava, which fired upon its officers—justice was more easily satisfied; and, although the regiment was disgraced, it was afterwards, to a certain degree, brought back into the service. Some years ago, in this very metropolis, harmony had been restored by similar means of remonstrance and conciliation; and, if a similar course had been adopted at Barrackpore, the result might have been far different, and less distressing. He had stated fairly and candidly what impression had been produced on his own mind by these events; and if the fault lay not with the Governor-general in council, but with the commander-in-chief, sir E. Paget, who, with the host disposition and intentions, might have been misled, it was fit that he should sustain the responsibility. The evidence with which he had been furnished, had produced a strong impression upon Ins mind, that the official information he required was necessary for the purpose of placing the Bengal government and sir Edward Paget in that situation of commanding respect, which both ought to occupy, for the general advantage and security of our Indian empire. True it was that not one of the innocent men, if they were innocent, could be recovered: life had been destroyed and could not be restored; but to shew the natives of India that there was a disposition on the part of the government at home to inquire, and redress, as far as redress was possible, would have the effect not only of conciliating, but of securing even confidence and affection.—One word as to the objection which would probably be urged to his motion, and he had done. He begged to recall the recollection of the House to what had passed in it on the discussion of the freedom of the press in India. The advocates of its liberty were then told, that a free press in India might do harm to an extent that was beyond calculation; bat that, while the press was unshackled in England, the whole object would be I answered, and inquiries could not be I stopped into the conduct of any government in India which had afforded just ground of complaint. This reasoning-would strongly apply to the case now before the House. In this country discussion was unfettered, and he hoped that parliament would not refuse to interfere, whether the parties requiring its interposition were Christians, Mussulmen or Hindoos, and whether they were the subjects of the Crown on our own shores, or separated by half the globe. He would move "That there be laid before the House, a Copy of the Report from sir Edward Paget, the Commander-in-chief, to the Governor General in Council at Calcutta, respecting the Mutiny at Barrackpore, and the measures adopted to suppress it."

said, he felt bound to do justice to the moderation of the statement of the hon. member, although he held it inconsistent with the good of the service, and with the prosperity of our government in India, to grant the documents required. The hon. gentleman had introduced no inflammatory matter, and no needless exaggerations; and if he was inaccurate in some of the details he had presented to the House, no blame for mis-information could fairly be imputed to him. All that had been advanced might be separated into three questions. First, whether every thing reasonable had been done by the Indian government and by the commander-in-chief, to supply the men with necessary comforts? Secondly, whether proper steps had been taken for the supression of the mutiny, and whether there had not been a needless effusion of blood? And Thirdly, whether it had been fit to commute the sentences of many, and to employ them in irons upon the public roads? As to the origin of the mutiny among the native troops, he believed that it originated very much in a persuasion, that the Burmese possessed more than mortal power, and that they dealt in magic and enchantment, and that the industrious circulation of this notion promoted the calamity. The right hon. gentleman then adverted to the circumstances attending the order for embarkation, and stated that 4,000l. had been advanced to each regiment, for the purchase of animals to carry the baggage. It was a fact which he had mentioned to the hon. member for Aberdeen, but of which he had taken no notice, that a hundred bullocks, or ten bullocks to each company, were actually in the line of the refractory regiment for this purpose. If he were asked, at what time these animals were furnished, he should reply, that it was certainly before the order for embarkation. But the main ground on which the hon. gentleman seemed to rely was, that proper measures had not been taken to suppress the turbulent spirit of the native troops—that the officers ought to have gone among the men, in order to inquire into their grievances; and his position was, that if an investigation had been promised, no mutiny would have occurred. Was the hon. gentleman ignorant that that very course had been pursued? Did he not know, that the very day before the mutiny the men were called upon to send two soldiers from each company to state their grounds of complaint, and that a court of inquiry was ordered? It was asked, how could the rest of the men be assured that their two comrades would be sent back? The answer was, that colonel Cartwright himself had offered to remain a hostage for their safe return. All these means had been taken; but the men refused to state their reasons. The complaint was not, in truth, the want of cattle, but that the men knew that it was intended to embark them, whether they were or were not willing to go; that promotions in the regiment had not been regularly conducted, and that old officers had been superseded. The demands were, that they should either receive double pay or be allowed to depart to their homes, and that the Zemindar and Hamildar should be given up to them to be put to death. The hon. gentleman had said, that the mutiny was one of the mildest character; that the men refused to march, and that was all: but was he not aware that the men had carried off their colours by violence: that the twenty-sixth regiment presented their bayonets at the breast of major-general Dalzel; that they had forced their officers off the parade; and that they were afterwards joined by detachments from other regiments? Could such a state of things be allowed to continue with any thing like security? The hon. gentleman was ready to allow, that the commander-in-chief had acted with that promptitude, zeal, and activity, which had always distinguished him, and had collected a very superior force in an incredibly short time; but he contended, that this force had riot been displayed to the disaffected in due time. Now, he was prepared to show, that every means had been used to convince the men that they had no chance of success. Colonel Stuart, commanding one of the regiments, had gone among the men the night before, and represented to them how vain would be their efforts against a force so superior. Some of the delegates were also purposely carried through the lines, in order to convince them that they would not be able to accomplish any thing by resistance. It ought to be recollected, that there existed a general disinclination to the war; and if such a mutiny was allowed to continue, he would not say for days, but for hours, the consequences might have been dangerous to our empire in India. As to the conduct of sir Edward Paget on this anxious and perilous occasion, he would only refer the House to a case which came before lord Mansfield, where the question was, whether a captain in the navy, during a storm, was justified in abandoning his ship. Sir Charles Douglas, an officer of the most distinguished bravery, was asked by the judge, if he would have acted like the captain and the reply was, that if called upon to decide on a calm day in the sun-shine, he should say no; but if placed in the same circumstances, in the midst of the war of the elements, his determination might have been to have forsaken the vessel. So in the case of sir Edward Paget: it was easy at a distance to assert that he had been hasty and cruel, but the true mode of judging was, to suppose oneself on the spot in the midst of the tenors of a mutiny. The great responsibility which attached to the commander-in-chief at the moment of the mutiny, ought never to be lost sight of; for if this mutiny had not been suppressed with promptitude and decision, it might have extended to other regiments, and then he would have been responsible to the country for the consequences. With regard to the circumstances, it was, among other facts which he had mentioned, clearly established, that the adjutant-general had gone among the men, and endeavoured, by every means in his power, to persuade them to return to their duty; and having failed, he certainly did inform them, that they were to be allowed only ten minutes' time for deliberation. It was after that time had elapsed that the necessity of employing actual force to quell the mutiny became apparent. The artillery opened upon them; and this was the instrument which of all others was the most proper for the occasion, and that which would produce the least portion of slaughter and bloodshed. With regard to the statement, that the mutineers had made no efforts to resist, the hon. member had been very much misinformed. The hon. member had said, that they had not fired a shot; but the truth was, that they had fired several shots at the royals, who were in the rear. The mutineers had, indeed, evinced, from the beginning, an unequivocal determination to resist, when they drove their principal officers from their quarters, and committed other acts of insubordination. The hon. member had also been misinformed as to the time employed in following the fugitives. To be sure, it was not possible to stop all at once the career of a regiment actually engaged in hostility, in the same manner as if it were at a review; but, from the most authentic accounts that could be collected, it appeared that, after the lapse of half an hour from the commencement of the attack, not a shot had been fired. The hon. member had also been misinformed as to the numbers which had been killed during the attack. Some exaggerated accounts had stated it at three hundred; but upon the most correct inquiries, it could not be found to amount to more than one hundred and sixty to a hundred and eighty. With regard to the report of the committee of inquiry, he could not, for various reasons, not altogether connected with the mutiny, agree that it should at present be laid on the table of the House. That inquiry related to a great number of general matters connected with the state of the Indian native army, the constitution of that army, and a variety of other matters which it would at present be inexpedient to make public. Besides, it was material to state, that various measures had been already adopted, founded on that report—such as regulations with respect to carriages, and other articles to be supplied to the regiments. Several other measures, founded on that report, were still under consideration; and it was obviously inexpedient, in the meantime, to publish the report, lest it should excite expectations that might not be realized. Then, with respect to those who had been tried after the mutiny had been quelled, the number did not exceed a hundred and forty: and by whom had they been tried? By a court-martial of native officers: a hundred and forty were tried in this manner, and a hundred and forty had been convicted; and of these only twelve had been executed. When the magnitude of this mutiny was considered—when it was considered, that it took place at head-quarters, and in the immediate vicinity of the governor-general's residence; that three regiments were concerned in it; that the principal mutineers had driven away their officers, and showed every determination to resist, which resistance had only been prevented by the judicious choice of the artillery as the chief engine for quelling the mutiny—it could not surely be thought a very severe proceeding, when only twelve were afterwards executed. The rest had been sent to work in irons on the roads. This was not at all an unusual punishment in India; and even under the mild administration of the marquis of Hastings, it had been inflicted, in the ordinary course of justice, upon persons of high caste. But, on account of the good conduct of the sepoys at Arracan, it was resolved by the Indian government, that a general amnesty should be granted. Orders to that effect had, indeed, been sent out from the authorities at home; but the Indian government had anticipated them, and had granted the indemnity before the orders arrived in India. With respect to the native officers of the 47th Native Infantry, it was quite impossible that they could be ignorant of the proceedings of the men; more especially as they must have held meetings, not only among themselves, but in conjunction with the men of two other regiments; and there must have been, therefore, on their part, a great degree of criminal connivance. The officers must have known of these meetings; and if they did, it was their duty to have prevented them: if they did not know of them, that fact was a proof of a considerable degree of culpable negligence; and, therefore, whether they did know or did not know of these meetings, it was quite certain that they were not fit for their situations. Then the hon. member had adverted to the order sent to the newspapers, prohibiting the publication of the transactions at Barrackpore, and blamed that order. Now, he confidently asserted, that the order in question was highly proper; for every one knew what a tendency to misrepresentation and exaggeration existed in these cases, more especially in India, and what calamitous results might have been the consequence. It was, therefore, a most proper precaution to prevent such accounts from extending to other regiments, until it should be known, at the same time, that the mutineers had been punished. He trusted he had now explained these transactions to the satisfaction of the House; and as to whatever stain might have attached to the native troops on account of this unfortunate occurrence, it had been completely removed by the excellent conduct of the sepoys, both in the west and the east; and the native troops themselves were completely satisfied on the subject. This was evident, from the cheerfulness with which they had entered into new terms of engagement with the government, and had volunteered to serve beyond seas as in Bengal. Every complaint that could be reasonably made by the native troops had been attended to; and, upon the ' whole, as the present case was intimately connected with the discipline of the army, it was but reasonable to expect that a considerable degree of confidence should be reposed in the Indian government. The Report of the Committee of Inquiry could not at present, with advantage, be produced and made public. The examination of the officers had taken place with closed doors; and it would be unfair to them at once to publish their evidence. As to the other papers to be called for by the hon. member, such as the general orders, the numbers tried and convicted, and such matters, it was quite unnecessary to produce them, as they had been all published in the newspapers, and were already known.

maintained, that the Report of the Committee of Inquiry ought to be produced, if it were only for the purpose of supporting the case which the right hon. gentleman seemed to suppose he had so triumphantly made out. Its publication was due also to sir Edward Paget, and to the European officers. It was due besides to the native officers who had been dismissed the service without a Court-martial, or any inquiry—a proceeding which would not have been adopted with respect to European officers. It was most unjust to have one law for the natives, and another for the Europeans. The same rule ought to be adopted for all. It was necessary to have the Report on the table, that every one might be able to satisfy himself where the blame rested; especially after a transaction of such a horrible nature, that nothing like it had before occurred in the British dominions, either at home or abroad. There was nothing in this case but what usually occurred among the native troops; who never scrupled to complain when they thought themselves ill-used, and even to mutiny until their grievances were redressed. Certain regiments had before so far mutinied, even in the face of an army; and sometimes whole armies had mutinied on the same grounds. The mutiny of the army of Scindea was an example. He did not mean to justify such things; they would be done among the native troops; but they did not require this mode of punishment; and, in point of fact, neither this nor any other example of the kind would prevent such things occurring among those troops. There was only one way to prevent mutiny among the native troops—and that way was, to do them justice, and to use them well. Treat them in this manner, and they would submit to the greatest privations and hardships, and might form an example to other troops. They had been sometimes in arrears of pay for eight, twelve, even eighteen months; having nothing but a bare subsistence. But they did not complain, and rested satisfied with the assurance of their officers, that their arrears would be paid up as soon as possible. These troops—he spoke chiefly of the Bombay and Madras troops—might form an example to other troops. He observed some members, who he supposed were young military officers, smiling at this. But he repeated, that these gentlemen might acquire some instruction by going to India, and observing the conduct of the native troops; and he would recommend to them to consult the present illustrious commander-in-chief, and learn from him what he thought of the Indian native troops. Among the many unfortunate persons who fell victims, one was massacred under peculiarly affecting circumstances. Two Europeans were seen by an officer taking aim at an unfortunate creature who had taken shelter in a tree. The man called out to the Europeans not to fire; one of them, nevertheless, did fire, and the poor wretch fell from the tree, calling out for mercy in the Hindostanee language, and stating that he was not a sepoy, but the governor-general's gardener. He put it to the House, whether, if a Coroner's inquest had inquired into such a transaction, they could have returned any other verdict than one of wilful murder? In fact, men, women, and children, were indiscriminately sacrificed. Under such circumstances, it was not surprising that the feeling between the Europeans and the natives was now very different from what it had formerly been. The kind feeling entertained by the natives towards Europeans was strikingly exemplified, during the siege of Arcot; when there was a scarcity of provisions, and the native troops willingly conceded their portion of rice to the Europeans, who were accustomed, as they declared, to more solid diet than themselves. There were many instances of mutiny in India which had been quelled without bloodshed. In the former siege of Bhurtpore, two of the king's regiments refused to march to a breach. They declared that the breach was not practicable; "make a hole for us," was the language held by these regiments, "and we will march." On that occasion two Bengal regiments, and one Bombay native regiment, volunteered to undertake the service refused by the European regiments. "Come, my lads," said the colonel of the Bombay regiment, "if the Europeans will not go, let us try." These gallant sepoys marched three times to the breach, and were three times re- pulsed from it. The offending European troops were subsequently ordered by colonel Dickinson to be surrounded by native troops, and to ground their arms. The mutinous troops were embarked for Europe, without a single man being tried, or a single drop of European blood being spilt. European blood was too valuable in India to be wantonly spilt: they could not afford to massacre Europeans as they massacred the native Indians. If we wished to preserve our empire in India, we must establish it in the affections of the people; for it would be impossible to maintain it through their fears. In the mutiny of the officers at Madras, one of the most alarming mutinies that had ever occurred in India, no blood was shed, and not a single officer was dismissed without a Court-martial. He trusted the House would see the propriety, the necessity, and the humanity of having the documents laid before them, which could alone elucidate the facts connected with the unfortunate affair at Barrackpore. If there were but one other member in that House ready to vote with him, he should not be ashamed to vote in such a minority. Notwithstanding all that had been said of the danger likely to result from agitating this question, he should never cease, as long as he had a seat in that House, to bring under its notice, session after session, the massacre at Barrackpore. In his opinion, his majesty's ministers were bound to agree to the motion, both in justice to the natives of India, and in justice to the noble lord at the head of the government in India.

in explanation, said, that the letter alluded to by the hon. member was a private letter to lord Amherst from captain Amherst, an amiable young man, acting at the time under the influence of warm and excited feelings; but in no part of the correspondence of lord Amherst with this country, was there any expression of censure upon the conduct of the commander-in-chief.

said, he must, upon the authority of a letter received from a relative in India, deny the assertion made by an hon. member, that the artillery was brought unawares upon the mutineers. The fact was, that the tents of the mutineers were close to the cannon; that they were aware of the intention of the officer in command to make use of the artillery; and that, notwithstanding their being aware of such intention, they actually drove back at the point of the bayonet the officers, who had made an attempt to remonstrate with them upon their conduct. He wished to know, now that the transaction was almost forgotten in India, what good could be produced by having all the circumstances ripped up by a parliamentary inquiry? He must also say, that the number killed upon that occasion was very much exaggerated. Those persons whose duty it was to make returns of the numbers killed, and whose interest it was to make out as large a return as possible, because they were paid for burying the mutineers at so much per head, had never stated the number killed at more than one hundred and eighty. With respect to the alleged misunderstanding between the governor-general and the commander-in-chief of the army in India, he would say, that it was utterly unfounded. He was warranted in making this statement, by the letter to which he had alluded—a letter which was one strictly of a private nature, and never intended by the writer to be made public, but which he had felt it his duty to transmit to lord Liverpool, who had by his permission, shewn it to his grace, the commander-in-chief. [The hon. member here read extracts from the letter, giving a detail of the operations of the army employed in the Burmese war, and stating that lord Amherst and the commander-in-chief were on the best terms, and that the harmony which subsisted between them had never been interrupted, even for a single hour]. He trusted that the hon. member for Montrose would state whether he had seen the letter to which he had alluded, and whether it bore the signature of captain Amherst.

answered in the affirmative.

.—Even taking the sentiments in that letter to be as stated by the hon. member, was it fair towards the commander-in-chief, or towards the writer of the letter, who, under the excitement of heated feelings, had, in a letter strictly private, expressed his opinions, to bring them forward in a public discussion? Would it be fair towards any man, to bring-forward upon a motion attaching censure to him, the opinions expressed by other persons, in a confidential communication? He should be glad to know, what would be the feelings of the hon. member for Montrose, if such a course were pursued upon a motion made with respect to the Greek war [cheers]. Would that hon. member think it fair, that, upon such a motion, the opinions of other persons as to his financial care of the interests of the people whom he had taken under his protection, should be pressed into the discussion? He mentioned this to shew that persons who lived in glass houses should not be the first to throw stones [cheers]. He was induced to make those observations, from his anxiety to rescue the character of a gallant officer from the imputations which had been most unjustly cast upon him.

said, the hon. member who spoke last, had alluded to the proverb, "that those who lived in glass houses ought not to throw stones." He would leave the House to appreciate the good feeling and good taste of such an allusion. He would not himself give any opinion on the subject, much less would he, in imitation of the hon. member, bring before the House the misfortunes—for he could call them nothing but misfortunes—which befel the hon. member himself some years ago. If he followed that hon. member's example, he could mention transactions, connected with the hon. member's name, which would bring a blush of shame on that hon. member's cheeks [cheers and murmurs].

rose instantly. "I call; upon the gallant colonel," said he, "to explain what he means. He may say what he pleases. I defy him."

said, that he never interfered with the proceedings of the House without great pain, and often not without some doubt as to whether, in what he was doing, he might be doing good. Certain he was that his interference could never do good, except in cases where it was absolutely necessary—a consideration which often kept him silent. But perhaps the best proof which could be had of the utility of observing even rigorously the forms of the House, was to be found in the inconvenience which commonly arose from any deviation from them. In the beginning, the mischief seemed trifling; but it almost constantly very soon increased to an extent which the House itself could not bear. The hon. member for Bristol could hardly fail to be aware, that he had begun, in the present case, by deviating from the immediate subject before the House, and alluding to topics connected entirely with other matter. How far the observations made upon that matter might be intended to be personal to the feelings of another hon. member, was not exactly the question; because the hon. member could not be surprised if they were, at all events, taken to be so; and, being- so taken, they could hardly fail to produce retorts. He hoped that what he had felt it his duty to say, would convince hon. members of the inconvenience attending any deviation, however slight, from the rules of the House; and that the hon. gentleman who was about to resume the debate, would confine himself exclusively to the question.

resumed. Certainly, he said, when he rose to speak, he was labouring under feelings which were painful to utter; but he believed the great body of the House would concur with him, that his feelings were such as ought to animate every man who had a heart. The gallant member then referred to the details of the melancholy transaction which they were discussing. He was the last person who would impute cruelty to the gallant general who commanded. He believed him to be a brave, honourable, and humane man: but he contended, nevertheless, that the production of the papers was necessary to the vindication of sir E. Paget's character; and to shew where the guilt really lay.

expressed not only his regret at the occurrence of so many mutinies in India, within the last twenty years, but his conviction of the necessity of putting an end to them by such a measure as that adopted by sir Edward Paget. He had known and served with his gallant friend many years: he had been in the same regiment and the same company with him; and he had had many opportunities of witnessing the humanity of his disposition. It was well said, in a general order issued by an illustrious individual, whose loss they had lately to deplore, that "the brightest gem in the character of the British soldier was humanity." Now, in no bosom did that gem shine more brightly than in that of his gallant friend. He could assure the House, that there was no officer in the British army more adverse to unnecessary severity of discipline, than that gallant officer. Menacing and mutiny on the part of soldiers, with arms in their hands, ought to be instantly suppressed on all occasions; but particularly in a country so circumstanced as India. Were not all proper means used to prevent the unhappy occurrence. An offer was made to the mutineers before the officers left the regiment, to lay their complaints before a tribunal, which was about to be convened, and even the commander-in-chief's plate was offered to them as a hostage, to assure them of the sincerity of the intended offer; and the officers who went to propose a submission the following day were turned back at the point, of the bayonet. How, then, could his gallant friend yield to them under such circumstances? A concession to their insolent claims would have subverted all discipline in India, and shaken the very foundation of the British power. Nor was this the only mutiny in India in which lives had been lost. In the mutiny at Vellore, in which the sepoys fired on the European troops in a barrack yard, and which was ultimately suppressed by the gallantry of general Gillespie, who broke open the gates, and rescued the King's troops from destruction, there were no less than six hundred lives lost. The sacrifice of lives in the late affair at Barrackpore was imperatively called for; and it was but just that they with whom the insurrection had originated should be made to pay the penalties. The mutineers were, he would admit, soon broken and dispersed; but even after that some of them meditated resistance, and actually fired on the Royals. Was it not impossible to restrain the fury of soldiers, against even a national enemy, when broken? As to the Report of the Committee of Inquiry, nothing could give the family of his gallant friend more pleasure than the production of it. He was convinced that his gallant friend had done no more than was necessary to uphold the discipline of the army, and the authority of the British government in India.

admitted that more lives were lost than was necessary, but it was natural that soldiers, irritated and let loose on their opponents, should commit excesses that humanity must deplore. As to the effects of the example made on that occasion they were most beneficial; as appeared from the present superior discipline of the Bengal army. The hon. member said, he should oppose the production of the report.

spoke with great warmth against the motion. The hon. gentleman who had brought it forward, had, he said, undertaken to treat of a subject which he did not understand. He might be very good authority on a question of physic; and he wished that the hon. gentleman would for the future confine himself to such subjects as he really did know [a laugh]. His speech on this occasion was, to use a parliamentary expression, frivolous and vexatious; for his part, if he had been in sir Edward Paget's place, he would have done the same; and he would do so a hundred times, if it was necessary.

was not of opinion that the conduct of sir E. Paget was blamcable; but it was equally clear that there was something connected with this mutiny which the public were not to see. The Sepoys complained of grievances, which had since been admitted and redressed. It was evidently necessary that some substantial remedy should be applied, to prevent the recurrence of an event which might lead to the loss of our vast empire in the east.

said, he had heard several, but not all of the speeches which had been delivered, on this occasion, and among others, that of the hon. baronet (sir C. Forbes) whose speech seemed to comprise all the observations that had fallen from all the East India proprietors during the last twenty years. He had also heard the very temperate and conciliatory remarks of the Chair, in its endeavour to produce a better understanding between two hon. members; but he certainly had not heard any attack attempted on the character of sir E. Paget, although he had heard it vindicated, as if some hostile animadversions had been made upon it. The fact was, that sir E. Paget, in the extraordinary situation in which he found himself, had but done that, which every brave and humane man, in the capacity of commander-in-chief, would have done under similar circumstances. He had, undoubtedly, acquitted himself in an honourable, a just and a gallant manner. But the question before the House was, whether these papers should or should not be granted? All agreed that sir Edward had not proceeded to extremities, until that course could be no longer avoided. But, in answer to this demand for the papers necessary to put parliament in possession of the history of this unfortunate transaction, he had heard one of his majesty's ministers affirm, that their production would be exceedingly inconvenient; and if it rested on that right hon. gentleman's own responsibility, he would give this assertion so much credit, as to take the matter for granted. But when it was added, that the granting of these papers would implicate too many persons in India, he could not help asking, what sort of hold must our's upon India be, if gentlemen were to be met, on calling for inquiry into the causes of any great disaster, with exclamations of alarm, and his majesty's government were the first persons to cry, "Hush, for God's sake, not a word on that subject!" It had been admitted, that one cause of the disaffection exhibited by the sepoys was, their destination at the time; for it was conceded on all hands, that the Burmese war was exceedingly disrelished in that part of the country and by the native troops. If the fact was so, it exceedingly behoved those gentlemen, who were most connected with the government of India, to keep those boundaries, for the future, which good policy and equity alike prescribed to them, as the proper limits of their eastern possessions. If they should exceed those limits, he for one hoped to see the day when the government of such noble territories would be taken out of the hands of those who, at present, wielded it in Leadenhall-street; and placed in hands to which it should long since have been made over—the hands of his majesty's government.

considered that the papers called for were absolutely requisite, to shew whether a case of sufficient necessity really did arise, for the dreadful massacre in which, not only one hundred and sixty of the native soldiers had lost their lives, but many women and children, residing in their huts, were sacrificed also.

, when he heard some hon. gentlemen really doubting whether the transactions which had been so much referred to that evening, did or did not amount to a mutiny, begged to observe, that he had received a letter from a brother officer of rank, who was present at the scene, and who not only described it as a mutiny, but declared that sir E. Paget had—by his forbearance in the beginning, and his determination at the conclusion, of those transactions—as much entitled himself to the praise of having saved his country, so far as her eastern dominion was concerned, as lord St. Vincent had done, by his admirable conduct in the mutiny off Cadiz, in preserving to Great Britain the allegiance of her navy. This officer had written, home, that sir Edward merited the thanks, not only of India, but of the whole British empire; and he particularly extolled the good feeling manifested by this distinguished commander, in going before the troops, in front of their line, under arms, and asking them with the utmost earnestness and anxiety, to return to their obedience. When, he at length found that his remonstrances were vain, he performed the sad duty which remained to him, like a man, whose determination was equal to his humanity.

, in reply, contended, that the right hon. gentleman himself, with a degree of candour for which he was bound to thank him, had, in fact, admitted the whole of the case, with one or two exceptions that were of little moment; for he admitted, that the evils complained of by the native troops, as to the deficiency of beasts, and other means of transport and accommodation, had existed, and that they had since been remedied. He was very glad to hear this assurance; but the admission with which it was coupled sanctioned the principle of the motion now before the House. In stating the loss of human life, however, on this melancholy occasion, at only one hundred and sixty, the right hon. gentleman greatly underrated the extent of the calamity, for he did not include the one hundred and fifty natives who perished in their attempt to escape over the river, and were shot at like so many wild fowl. As to those who had been described as the great fomenters of the discontents, and the necessity of whose removal had been, in some sort, made the excuse for the attack upon the sepoys, it was notorious that they lived in line with the rest of the native troops; and might, at any moment, have been all of them seized and executed, if their destruction was thought essential to the preservation of our influence and power in India. But our own troops and officers had, by their acts, increased the discontent and resentment of the sepoys; who did, however, manifest, in return for what they felt as insults and injuries, the most extraordinary forbearance. Among other instances of this forbearance on their part, was the case of colonel Dalzel. That officer, who did not understand a word of Hindostanee, in the irritation of the moment, reviled and abused them, and addressed to them epithets, which among our own soldiers and sailors would be re- ceived as the most degrading terms of reproach. For instance, he "God damned their eyes," and every thing else. He pulled off his coat, tore open his waistcoat, and, baring his bosom, bad them shoot him, and otherwise deported himself in such a manner, as to make the sepoys think him of unsound mind. The hon. gentleman concluded by disclaiming the notion of intending any personal disrespect to sir Edward Paget by this motion; and animadverted on the utter irrelevancy of all the eulogies which had been passed on that eminent officer, to the objects of the present motion.

said, he could not allow this bill to pass without again raising his voice against it, and declaring the grant to be a profligate waste of the public money, and that it placed his royal highness in a most degrading situation. However, he would not press the question to a division, as he had on a former occasion experienced its inutility.

said, that he had divided against this grant on every occasion, but not on either of the grounds which had been advanced by his honourable friends. Those who might be termed the party tacticians on his side, opposed the grant, not because it was too large, but because the duke of Clarence was not the heir apparent to the throne. Now, when he looked at the proximity of that illustrious individual to the throne, and that it was scarcely possible that any child of the present king would interpose, he thought the objection on that ground untenable and ungracious. If the duke of Clarence would really be intitled to it, were he actually the heir apparent, for one he should say, let him have it, although in law he was only heir presumptive. Nor could he oppose it on account of the peculiar distress of the country, for he did not believe that the people of England would derive any comfort for their own wretchedness, by stripping the Crown of its due splendor. But he opposed it on the broad principle, that the general financial affairs of this country required a speedy, sincere, and effectual supervision, with a view to a real and unsparing system of retrenchment and economy. And where, he would ask, could the House begin this good work so effectually, not only as being- an expensive part of our establishment, but still more from the value of the example, as with the Civil List? For one, he liked to begin in high places, and he despised the contemptible policy of lopping off a few pence from unpatronised clerks, leaving the over-grown, over-fed, and over-paid consumers of the public money to remain unmolested. The same motives which had influenced him in opposing any additional grant to the duke of Clarence, would cheerfully induce him to cut down very considerably the incomes now allotted to the other branches of the royal family.

supported the bill. He thought it must be satisfactory to those who supported the grant to know that the illustrious personages who were the objects of it, exhibited a pattern of domestic virtue and hospitality.

said, he was so averse to the grant, that he would take the sense of the House upon this the last stage of the measure.

said, he had opposed the vote in the first instance, but had abstained from taking a part in the discussion since that period. He put it to his noble friend whether, as it was evident, the majority of the House was favourable to the bill, it did not take from the grace of the measure thus to persist in opposition to a measure which, however objectionable, was not so important as to require an hostility so persevering. If his noble friend determined to divide the House, he should decline voting with him.

expressed his disinclination to trouble the House unnecessarily, or to do any thing that might be considered ungracious. He would therefore not press his opposition to the measure to a division.

moved for leave to bring in a bill to regulate the Salmon Fisheries of the United Kingdom. He proposed to allow ample time for filling up the blanks; so that all parties likely to be interested in, or affected by, the bill, might be in possession of its details.

said, that a former report on this subject had assigned, as one of the causes of the diminution in the breed of fish, that the rivers of England were fished too hard; and it was suggested, that water-bailiffs should be appointed for their better superintendence and protection. Now, to him it appeared, that a much more eligible mode might be hit upon for increasing the supply of this fish, than the adoption of any new system of Game-laws, as he was tempted to call this proposal. Fresh salmon, under the existing law, was a prohibited article. Perhaps the gentlemen of Scotland who possessed salmon wears and fisheries could explain how this had happened. Turbot and lobsters might be freely imported; but not so salmon. Now, when his hon. friend's bill should be brought in, he meant to contend for a free trade in salmon.

was convinced that his hon. friend could not have read the bill; the object of which was, to open the salmon fishery of this country, which, by the present law, was closed. The aim of his hon. friend's bill was to increase the breed by diminishing the period within which salmon might be taken.

hoped that sufficient time would be allowed to transmit copies of the bill to all the proprietors of these fisheries throughout the United Kingdom. The original report he had read; and he ap- prehended that some knowledge of natural history would be indispensable to the due discussion of the present bill. How far the hon. gentlemen who might form the committee upon it would be prepared with this species of information, he could not anticipate; but he well remembered, that his impression was, upon perusing the report in question, which entered very largely into all the details of the breeding, habits, and peculiarities of the salmon, that the gentlemen by whom it was prepared must have passed a considerable time themselves in the society of that fish.

had no objection to the bill being introduced, but he begged to forewarn the hon. member for Ayr, that, if his information as to the nature of some of its clauses was correct, the measure would be considered, by the owners of salmon wears in Scotland, as a mere attempt to take money out of the pockets of one set of proprietors, in order to deposit it in the pockets of another set.