spoke as follows: I am enabled, I will not say through the courtesy, but the public spirit and generous feeling of many Members who had Motions entitled to precedence over mine, to bring forward that of which I gave notice immediately on the receipt of the intelligence of our recent successes in India. That Motion, interposed as it is between discussions of great political importance, leading to much eager and even angry controversy, and to serious differences of opinion, will, I know from past experience, obtain the hearty and unanimous concurrence of this House. That Motion will unite the representatives of a great Empire, proud of its military glory, in acknowledging in the first place the protecting hand of Almighty God the giver of all victory, and in then expressing their exultation that new examples of heroism have maintained and exalted the military character of their country. That Motion will enable us to pay a tribute of cordial and grateful acknowledgment to the generals, to the officers, and to the men, who have achieved signal victories in a far distant land. It will enable us also to mingle with the admiration of valour the expression of a manly but heartfelt sorrow for the loss of the "unreturning brave," who have sacrificed, willingly sacrificed, their lives in the defence of their country's interests, and in the maintenance of their country's honour. The Resolutions I shall propose will convey the thanks of this House, for splendid victories achieved within a very limited period, and within a very limited space; but I have felt it my duty not to incorporate our acknowledgments for these triumphs in a single resolution, but to reserve to each triumph the separate recognition so justly due to it. It will have been my good fortune since the month of February, 1843, on five distinct occasions, to propose that the Thanks of the Commons of England should be conveyed to the armies, European and native, engaged in the service of the Crown in India. Including, indeed, the Vote on the glorious termination of the Chinese war, on six different occasions, will the Thanks of this House have been awarded. The repetition of these Votes tends in no degree to dim or disparage their value. National gratitude must keep pace with national glory; and every fresh achievement adds new value to the reward we confer on skill and valour by the public acknowledgment of our gratitude. I intend, therefore, to submit two separate Motions: one, acknowledging the distinguished services of Sir Henry Smith, and of the division of the army under his command, for the battle of Aliwal; and the other, conveying an equal acknowledgment for the glorious services of the army under the immediate command of Sir Hugh Gough. Since the termination of those battles, which have already entitled the Indian army to the thanks of Parliament, (the battles of Moodkee and Ferozeshah,) the enemy with whom we had to contend, has displayed, through a series of operations, great military skill, and that character for undaunted bravery for which they are justly distinguished. Notwithstanding the reverses they met with on the 18th and 21st of December they appeared without delay on the banks of the Sutlej in considerable force, protected by a powerful artillery, near the ford of Hurekee. They established on the right bank of the river a large army, retaining possession of a bridge, over which they passed from the north bank of the Sutlej to the south; they established also a tête de pont on the left bank, and entrenched on that bank a force which by constant accessions at last included not less than 35,000 men, supported by about seventy pieces of cannon. The artillery was of beautiful workmanship, and of heavy calibre. Not only did the enemy establish that large army and plant that artillery in the face of the British troops under Sir Hugh Gough, but they despatched a force of not fewer than 20,000 men, conducted with the utmost skill and courage, towards the city of Loodiana, from which our forces had been at first withdrawn in order to assist in the battles of Moodkee and Ferozeshah. They adopted this operation, not merely for the purpose of occupying the city of Loodiana, but for the purpose of threatening to interrupt our communication with Delhi, and to intercept the arrival of our artillery by the road of Bussean. It was in order to prevent the success of this skilful and dangerous enterprise, that Sir Henry Smith was detached by Sir Hugh Gough and Sir Henry Hardinge—greatly weakening the force retained in front of the main body of the Sikh army. It was necessary, however, to do this in order to defeat the formidable body which crossed the river from Philloor in order to intercept our communication, and if possible to transfer the seat of war from the neighbourhood of Ferozepore to Loodiana. It was intended, before Sir Henry Smith attacked the army under the Sikh chief, composed of not less than 24,000 men, supported by about sixty pieces of artillery, that he should effect a junction with the British troops at Loodiana under Major Goldby, and with another body of men sent to reinforce him under Colonel Wheeler. The House is aware that the junction was ultimately effected; and that Sir Henry Smith was strengthened by the addition of the force from Loodiana, and of that under Colonel Wheeler. A desperate action was afterwards fought by the division under Sir Henry Smith, the result of which was the utter discomfiture of the enemy, the capture of all his guns, the disorganization of his whole army, and the flight of that army across the Sutlej after the severest loss. These operations are described with such precision—are detailed with such fulness and beautiful clearness—and must be so familiar to all whom I address, that I will not weaken the effect of their perusal by attempting to go over the same ground. The hand that held the pen, used it with the same success with which it had wielded the sword. I have yet adverted only to the successes of Sir Henry Smith; now I will speak, and speak with confidence, and speak to his honour, of interruptions and checks to that success. There cannot but be vicissitudes in the operations of war; and that man is to be honoured, who recovers from temporary difficulties and disappointments, and thus adds brightness to the glory of his achievements. I wish, therefore, for the purpose of exalting the merits and services of Sir Henry Smith, to present to the House some occurrences that preceded the battle in which he was so eminently successful—I wish to present, from Reports only recently received, an account of the difficulties and disappointments he encountered with the same spirit and constancy which he displayed in victory; and which, in my opinion, entitle him to equal applause. The great battle of Aliwal was fought on the 28th of January; but earlier in that month Sir Henry Smith had sustained what some might have considered a reverse. I allude to a period before his junction with Colonel Wheeler, and with the five regiments from Loodiana. In the absence of all intelligence he encountered the enemy; and but for his eminent skill and resolute valour, might have been exposed to serious hazard. Let me state in what manner he extricated himself. Writing to Sir Hugh Gough on the 21st, just after he had succeeded in relieving Loodiana, he said that he had accomplished that object, but under circumstances not quite so fortunate as he desired; and he used these expressions:—

"When within a mile and a half to my left of Buddowal, moving parallel with my column (which was right in front ready to wheel into line), and evidently for the purpose of interrupting my advance, I saw the enemy. Nothing could be stronger for the enemy than the continued line of villages which were in his front.

"He was moving by roads, while I was moving over very heavy sandbeds. He was in advance far bevond, on my right flank; so far did he extend, and so numerous did he show his infantry and guns, and so well chosen for him was the line of villages, that with my force he was not to be assailed; and he opened a furious cannonade of from thirty-five to forty guns of very large calibre, and, as usual, right well served. My object being to unite myself with the force from Loodiana, which every moment I expected to appear in sight—for it was nine o'clock—I moved parallel with the enemy, resolving to attack the moment the Loodiana troops reached me. He, however, so pressed upon me, that I opened in one body my eleven guns upon him with considerable effect, and moved up the 31st, and was preparing to form line upon this regiment, when the enemy most rapidly formed a line of seven regiments, with their guns, between, at right angles with the line I was about to attack, while a considerable force was moving round my right and front. Thus enveloped, and overwhelmed by numbers, and such a superiority of guns, I had nothing for it but to throw back my line on its right, which represented a small line on the hypothenuse of a triangle."

That is to say, the two divisions of the enemy formed two sides of a triangle, Sir Henry Smith and his force being placed between them on a shorter line, and nearer the centre than the remaining side of the triangle. He goes on as follows:—

"The enemy thus outflanked me and my whole force. I therefore gradually withdrew my infantry in echellon of battalions, the cavalry in echellon of squadrons, in the direction of Loodiana, momentarily expecting to see the approach of that force—viz., one regiment of cavalry, five guns, and four regiments of infantry, when I would have made a vigorous attack. The ground was very deep and sandy, and therefore very difficult to move on. The enemy continued to move on as described for upwards of an hour, and until I knew the Loodiana force was moving not a musket was fired. Nothing could exceed the steadiness of the troops. The line was thrown back, under this cannonade, as if on parade, Native as well as British, and the movements of the cavalry, under Brigadier Cureton, were, without any exception, the most perfect thing I ever saw, and which I cannot describe."

So far from withholding this narrative of his extrication from his difficulties, I think it only adds to the proofs of his skill and valour, and illustrates his high character as a commander. Having been disappointed in effecting his junction with the troops from Loodiana, and those expected to arrive under Colonel Wheeler, he extricated himself from his formidable embarrassment with consummate coolness and judgment. Instead of desponding under his temporary disappointment, he was able to direct all his energies to the entire discomfiture of the enemy only a few days afterwards. Of the battle itself I will not speak; the victory was complete, and it has been so admirably described by the illustrious commander, that I will not weaken the effect of his narrative. And is this victory his only title to our acknowledgment? What have been the services of this gallant Officer? These recent events have given new lustre to his preceding career. It is one of unusual distinction. Sir Henry Smith was at the capture of Monte Video—at the attack upon Buenos Ayres; he served during the first campaigns of the Peninsular war, from the battle of Vimeira to that of Corunna. He was at the battles of Sabagal and Fuente d'Onor, at the sieges of Ciudad Rodrigo and Badajos, at the battles of Salamanca, Vittoria, Orthes, the Pyrenees, and Toulouse. He was at Washington and at New Orleans, and finally he was at Waterloo. What a series of noble services—and how rejoiced I am that there should be an opportunity, through this new and signal victory, of bringing before the gladdened eyes of a grateful country a long life of military exertion, and an unbroken series of military honours! After he had achieved that success for which we are about to give him our special thanks—after he had driven back the enemy across the Sutlej, he instantly returned to rejoin his commanding officer, Sir Hugh Gough. He arrived at head-quarters on the 8th February, two days before the decisive victory gained by the forces under Sir Hugh Gough and Sir Henry Hardinge. He took, therefore, a distinguished part in the battle of Sobraon. But for his services in the victory of the 28th of January, I propose that there should be a distinct and separate vote—distinct and separate from that which I shall recommend for that not more glorious, though perhaps yet more important and decisive achievement accomplished at a later date by the whole British army. I say I will not weaken the effect of the recital of the particulars of that second battle and victory, as detailed in the despatches of the gallant officers in command, by attempting what must be in comparison a poor and inefficient narrative. I will do the Members of this House, the fellow countrymen of these distinguished officers, the justice to believe that they are familiar with all the details of these signal exploits. Let us not forget, in commemorating the valour of our own countrymen, to give due praise to the skill and bravery of our defeated enemy. After our successes over them on the 18th and 21st December, they so far recovered from their disasters, that, undaunted, they met on the field, after the lapse of a few weeks, the whole force of the British army. Sir Henry Hardinge, speaking of their conduct in the battle of Sobraon, says, "Such was the bravery of the enemy, that being defeated they walked away, and, in the middle of the river, disdained to ask for quarter." But I will not enter into particulars—for every man who hears me is master of the details of the battle fought on the 10th February; he is aware that the well-appointed army of the Sikhs suffered a complete and a signal discomfiture; that their loss was enormous; that, after the exhibition of great valour, they were driven across the Sutlej; and that the British army, crossing at the Sutlej near Ferozepore, as well as at the point where the battle was fought, united its forces and marched together towards the capital of the Sikh territory. All this was accomplished in a period not exceeding eight weeks from the day on which the first incursion of the enemy took place; and during that period of eight weeks the enemy was triumphantly defeated wherever he was encountered. Every gun which the Sikhs had brought to bear on our troops was captured; and after a series of decisive victories, we now probably occupy the capital city of the Punjaub. I believe that not more than one-third of the whole force engaged consisted of Europeans; and the example which those Europeans set was worthy of being followed by the native soldiers. They did follow it—and on every occasion during the four successive and desperate conflicts in which they were engaged, was the honour of the British name worthily sustained by the commanders, the officers, and the men. The victory, this succession of victories, has been interrupted by no single failure; it was unsullied by any imputation on our arms and character. We have not been influenced by a grasping spirit of aggrandizement—we have simply repelled an attack made upon us in a time of profound peace—all national engagements on our part having been faithfully kept, there not having been a pretext, even in the shape of justifiable preparation and defence, for the aggression that was made upon us. Those Sikh chiefs with whom we have had communication since the defeat of the enemy, who disavow any participation in his perfidy, and profess to disapprove of it, have frankly acknowledged the object they had in view. By their powerful artillery, and by their formidable infantry and cavalry, they thought to overpower the two detachments of the British forces stationed at the extremities of the frontier line—Ferozepore and Loodiana; having overpowered them, they intended to march at once to Delhi, and hoped by their success to shake the allegiance of our Indian soldiery. That was the avowed object they had in view. It was admitted that there was no excuse for this aggression from any proceedings on our part; we had been guilty of no breach of treaty, and had done nothing that could justify hostility. The same persons admitted also that they should derive consolation even from the failure of a rebellious and mutinous army—that the next best thing to victory would be a defeat, since it would lead to the dispersion and annihilation of a force which it was impossible to control. For success so gained, and for triumph in a conflict so unprovoked, I think there will be but one universal and unanimous expression of gratitude within these walls. There is much to adorn and nothing to sully our victory; and I do hope that now it has been achieved it will give lasting peace to India; that a general conviction will be felt of our power—a conviction of the superiority of British arms, that will ensure a long enjoyment of tranquillity to that country. I trust that this may be our last battle, and that hereafter we may be enabled to direct our undivided attention to the amelioration of the condition of our Indian fellow-subjects, and the improvement of the natural resources of our Indian Empire. In that anticipation the House will, I am sure, permit me to refer to some circumstances which may well fill our hearts with joy and exultation. The two leaders of our victorious army, the Governor General and the Commander-in-Chief, have throughout these operations set an example of cordial concert and union—an utter forgetfulness of themselves, to which the happy result is greatly to be attributed. All matters of punctilio were sacrificed, and Sir Henry Hardinge consented to serve as second in command. On the other hand, there was not a suggestion offered by Sir Henry Hardinge which was not thankfully accepted by Sir Hugh Gough. Hoping, as I have said, that this may be the last occasion on which I shall have to perform the gratifying duty of proposing a public acknowledgment for victory, and a public expression of admiration for the high qualities of our illustrious countrymen, I will, with the permission of the House, refer to a document, not of a public character, that has been put into my hand since I entered the House this evening—it is a letter from Sir Hugh Gough, which was never intended to meet the public eye; but it does him so much honour, that I cannot refuse myself the pleasure of reading it. He says:—

"It is now with pride and with pleasure I enclose you a copy of my despatch, detailing one of the most splendid and decisive victories upon record—the Waterloo of India. I have entered so fully both into detail and commendation in my despatch to the Governor General, that it would be impossible for me to enlarge upon a subject embracing the warmest feelings of my heart. Policy, however, precluded me publicly recording my sentiments on the splendid gallantry of our fallen foe, or to record the acts of heroism displayed, not only individually, but almost collectively, by the Sikh Sirdars and army; and I declare, were it not from a deep conviction that my country's good required the sacrifice, I could have wept to have witnessed the fearful slaughter of so devoted a body of men. Never, in the page of military history, has the hand of an All-wise Being been so signally manifested: to Him, therefore, be the glory; we, as his instruments, feel the pride. But I cannot pass over—I cannot too strongly record—facts which, whilst they add lustre to the native army, afford to me, as its head, inexpressible pride and pleasure. For upwards of a month, when the two armies were close in front of one another, notwithstanding the numerous temptations held out to our sepoys by men of their own colour and religion; namely, greatly increased pay, from seven to twelve rupees a month, and immediate promotion, I had but three desertions from this large force. Nor should I omit to mention, as a proof of the high state of discipline of this splendid army, that trade has been carried on unreservedly since we crossed the Sutlej in the several Sikh towns around which our divisions have been necessarily placed for the procurance of water, and the same confidence has been shown as though we were in one of our long-established provinces."

The example set by two gallant commanders of disregarding military punctilio, and looking exclusively to their country's honour and to the safety of the army, told, as might naturally be expected, on those placed under their orders. Sir Hugh Gough speaks of an officer who joined only the night before the battle, and pays him a tribute which I am proud to mention. This officer (Brigadier Irvine) had made every exertion to join the army, in the hope of being placed in the prominent station to which by his rank he was entitled; and, as I have said, he arrived only the night before the battle. The command would naturally have devolved upon him, but he declined to assume it, in order that all the credit might attach to the officer who in point of rank was inferior, but who had superintended the preparations for the coming action. While we are bestowing due praise on such devotion to public duty, let us not forget the example that had been set by the Governor General and Commander-in-Chief. That example had, no doubt, influenced the conduct of other brave and honourable men, who were willing to make a sacrifice, not of mere personal interest, for that they disregarded, but of that which was really dear to them, the opportunity of personal distinction. I am sure the House will permit me, among expressions of gratitude to the surviving conquerors, to mingle some of deep regret at the loss we have sustained. On the former occasion I had to lament the sacrifice of life, and I met with universal and generous sympathy; I had to condole with the country on the death of that gallant officer Sir Robert Sale, who was known to most of us, and endeared to all who had intercourse with him, by the kindly frankness of his deportment. On this occasion I have to deplore the loss of several officers of the highest reputation, and the first I shall name is Sir Robert Dick. I am confident that the House will permit me shortly to recite what is the extent of national gratitude due for the former services of this gallant officer. He entered the service in 1800. He embarked with the 78th Regiment for Sicily in 1806, and was wounded in battle. He accompanied the expedition to Egypt, and was present at the taking of Alexandria. He embarked with the 42nd Regiment in 1809, and was again wounded at Fuente d'Onor. He commanded the second battalion of the 42nd Regiment at Ciudad Rodrigo. He was at the battle of Salamanca, at the storming of St. Michel, and was present during the siege of Burgos. In 1815 he was severely wounded, and, after a life of honour, he at last fell in the battle, for the happy result of which we are about to make our grateful acknowledgments. I deeply regret that in the face of the House of Commons I cannot do justice to every officer and to every man who fell in this encounter, and sacrificed his life in his country's service. Some limit, however, must be imposed on the mention of individual officers, and the least invidious limit is that of rank and standing in the army. Not outsepping that limit, I must deplore the loss of another gallant soldier. On the day which deprived us for ever of the services of Sir Robert Dick, there also fell Lieutenant Colonel Taylor of the 29th Regiment. The father of this gallant officer, leading into action the 20th Light Dragoons, of which he was Lieutenant Colonel, lost his life in the Peninsula. The father fell at Vimiera — the son met an equally glorious death at the battle of Sobraon. I will, with the permission of the House, briefly recapitulate the services of Lieutenant Colonel Taylor. He commanded the light company of the 20th Foot, in the expedition against Kalapore, in 1827–28; served on the frontier during the Canadian rebellion, where, in the succeesful attack of a village occupied by the rebels, he rendered an important service; commanded a brigade of infantry in the actions of the 18th, 21st, and 22nd of December, 1845, wherein he was wounded; commanded also the troops sent to keep up the communication between Sir Henry Smith and the main army, whilst the former was engaged in the operations which led to the battle of Aliwal; and a brigade of infantry at the battle of Sobraon, where he fell. His death is thus announced by Sir Hugh Gough:—

"The army has sustained a heavy loss by the death of Brigadier Taylor, an able officer, and worthy to have been at the head of Her Majesty's 20th Regiment, by which he was beloved and respected."

How many there are who have lost their sons and relatives in these conflicts I need not say; but I have been thrown of late into frequent and necessary intercourse with one, whose gallant son died on the field of battle in this encounter. It has been my duty, my painful duty in some respects, to hold constant communication with Lord Fitzroy Somerset, whose brave offspring, had he survived, would have supported the honour of his family, and transmitted to another generation the high character of his father. Lord Fitzroy Somerset himself has run an illustrious career. He accompanied the Duke of Wellington throughout all the battles of the Peninsula, and was severely wounded at Waterloo. Had his son survived, the satisfaction of Lord Fitzroy Somerset, in contemplating the recent services of his former comrades, would have been unalloyed. He has now to mingle with admiration of their valour the sorrows of a father for a painful and irreparable loss. If in mentioning the name of the gallant and lamented Somerset, I am transgressing the limit I proposed to observe, the services and character, and station of the father, his relation to the British army and to its illustrious Chief, will fully justify me in offering this, the best consolation to the wounded feelings of a father and a soldier. I wish I could do justice to my own feelings by naming many others scarcely less distinguished or less lamented; but the list is so numerous of those entitled to grateful remembrance, that I trust a reluctant silence will not be imputed to any want of a due sense of their claims and merits. When I review the names of those who have taken a distinguished part in these and other recent victories in India—the names of Sir Henry Hardinge, Sir Hugh Gough, Sir Henry Smith, Sir Charles Napier, Sir Robert Dick, and General Thackwell—(several Members here added the name of Gilbert)—I reflect with satisfaction and pride that these distinguished men received their military education under the auspices of the Duke of Wellington. It adds new lustre even to his immortal name, that his school has produced pupils who have so profited by his example. There are officers not less eminent, who have not had the honour and advantage of serving under the Duke of Wellington; but on them his precepts and example have not been lost. Such men as Nott, and Pollock, and Gilbert, and other bright ornaments of the Indian army, have treasured up the memory of "Assaye," and the brilliant career of the Duke of Wellington throughout his Indian campaigns. His Indian Correspondence, his Comments on the Retreat of Colonel Monson, his Lessons on the Art of Indian Warfare, have exercised their just influence on those to whom, perhaps, his person is unknown. It may be that at this very moment the Duke of Wellington is bestowing, in the House of Peers, the unstinted meed of his praise on these signal achievements, and is stamping an additional value even on the Thanks of Parliament, by bearing his high testimony to the skill and valour of those to whom they will be justly given. With what conscious pride must he reflect on the number of gallant men distinguished in these Indian campaigns who have heretofore fought and bled under his command, and, after the lapse of many years, have now worthily followed his example! And long after he shall have been gathered to his fathers, will that example instruct and animate the British army. It will teach them that success is ensured by the calm and dispassionate calculation of remote contingencies—by the preparation for all vicissitudes of fortune—by valour tempered according to the exigencies that require its display—now patient and enduring—now reckless and desperate. It will teach them fortitude under disappointment, and moderation in the hour of victory. The memory of the high qualities and the great deeds of the Duke of Wellington will be for ages a tower of defence to his country, inspiring her military councils with wisdom and justice, and guiding heroes that are yet unborn in the paths of glory. I conclude by moving—

"That the Thanks of this House be given to Major General Sir Henry George Smith, Knight Commander of the Most honourable Military Order of the Bath, for his skilful and meritorious conduct, when in command of the British Troops employed against a large portion of the Sikh Army, of greatly superior numbers; and for the signal valour and judgment displayed by him in the Battle of Aliwal on the 28th of January, 1846, when the Enemy's Force was totally defeated, and new lustre added to the reputation of the British Arms.

"That the Thanks of this House be given to the several Officers, European and Native, under the command of Sir Henry Smith, for the distinguished services rendered by them at the Battle of Aliwal.

"That this House doth highly approve of, and commend, the intrepidity and exemplary discipline displayed by the Non-commissioned Officers and Private Soldiers, European and Native, in the Battle of Aliwal, on the 28th of January, 1846, in their attack on the Enemy's position, by which the Sikhs were completely routed, and driven in confusion across the Sutlej, with the loss of all their Artillery and Military Equipment; and that the same be signified to them by the Commanders of the several Corps, who are desired to thank them for their gallant behaviour.

"That, in requesting the Governor General of India to communicate these Resolutions to the several Officers referred to therein, this House desires to acknowledge the zeal and judgment evinced by the Right honourable Lieutenant General Sir Henry Hardinge, Knight Grand Cross of the Most honourable Military Order of the Bath, Governor General of India; and also by General Sir Hugh Gough, Bart., Knight Grand Cross of the Most honourable Military Order of the Bath, Commander in Chief of the Forces in India, in supplying Major General Sir Henry Smith with such reinforcements and military means as enabled him, under Divine Providence, to overcome all the obstacles thrown in his way by a brave and determined Enemy."

said: Sir, I consider it a very proud distinction to be permitted to second the Motion of the right hon. Baronet; but I can assure the House that I shall do so in a very few sentences. After the eloquent and effective appeal which has been made by the right hon. Gentleman, it would be superfluous in me to do more than, in a very few words, explain why I consider we are called on to pay this tribute of thanks to the gallant general and the troops under his command. General Smith has, as the right hon. Baronet says, by these actions maintained the glory of his former character, and contributed to the subsequent success—to that success which is to form the subject of the second vote of thanks which the right hon. Gentleman is this night to move. And here I may take the liberty of observing, that never, I believe, in the annals of Parliament—never, I believe, upon any former occasion—was it the good fortune of a Minister of the Crown to propose two votes of thanks upon the same night for two such brilliant victories as those which it has been the right hon. Gentleman's duty to bring before the notice of the House on this occasion. It is, as the right hon. Gentleman said, a peculiar felicity that we should have this opportunity of recording the sentiments of a British House of Commons upon his proposal, and bearing our testimony to those great exploits—exploits which the right hon. Gentleman is perfectly justified in saying have never been exceeded, if they have ever been equalled, in the history of this country. It is superfluous for me to say much more upon this subject, because, as the right hon. Gentleman has told you, we have in the despatches of those gallant officers their own account of these great deeds, and such an account as shows not less their modesty than their valour; for we find the record in those despatches of the great deeds of almost every officer and of the men under their command, but a silence, a modest and perfect silence is observed with respect to their own individual deeds. It is, indeed, as the right hon. Gentleman said—it is true that the right hand which held the sword also held the pen; or, as it was said of a great commander of antiquity, Eodem animo scripsit quo bellavit; and the detail in these admirable despatches makes it unnecessary to allude more particularly to the brilliant actions they describe. But an allusion which has been made to the Governor General of India, although, perhaps, it more particularly belongs to the second Motion of thanks which the right hon. Gentleman is about to propose to the House, will, I hope, be a sufficient excuse for my saying one or two words with reference to that distinguished man. It is a great comfort to me, as it must be to every Member of this House—it is a great consolation to me, who have mixed familiarly, I may say, upon the floor of Parliament with this distinguished man, to see him now in a distant country meeting those hitherto invincible battalions with the same courage, the same success, and the same devotion to his country, that characterized him when we saw him mingling in the discussions of the Senate, and winning the esteem, however he might differ from his opponents, of all those with whom, happily for them, he ever came in contact. There is something, I may say, almost of Roman grandeur in this, that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman gets, as it were, from the floor of this House, where he had so long distinguished himself, to the command of a great province and of mighty armies, where, though suddenly and treacherously attacked, he combines with the greatest skill and prudence all the available forces of the province committed to his care, and with wonderful success in less than two months performed deeds which would be sufficient for the life of any other man. Why, between the 17th of December last and the present time, Sir Henry Hardinge has performed exploits and achieved conquests such as would illustrate the life of any other commander. Whether this is the last triumph that we will have to record—though I hope peace may be assured—or not, I cannot but conclude with saying that we shall ever remember with grateful pride that distinguished man, who, so well known in this House, has shown himself equally distinguished in the field, and has more than upheld that renown which he had previously enjoyed. Most willingly do I second the Motion.

said, the House would remember that when a vote of thanks to the army in India was before recorded by the House, that a petition was presented by the hon. Member for Durham from the town which he (Mr. Russell) had the honour to represent, the town of Reading, and that a very just rebuke was thrown upon that petition by the right hon. Baronet at the head of Her Majesty's Government. He had since received a request from the inhabitants of the town of Reading, conveyed to him through the mayor and magistrates of that town, that he should disclaim on their part that petition; and that he would would express their deep regret—he might add their shame—that such a petition should have been supposed to have proceeded from that town. They had carefully examined that petition, and found attached to it the names of many women and school children, and many persons who were hardly able to write; and, besides that, there were several signatures which were actual forgeries, for some gentlemen whose names were attached to it had given an indignant denial to the statement that they sanctioned that petition. He had been requested to avail himself of that debate to say that there was no town in Her Majesty's dominions which more heartily and more loyally rejoiced in the triumphs of Her Majesty's armies, or was more cordially desirous to concur in the tribute of praise and admiration of the gallantry by which those triumphs had been obtained. It would be presumptuous on his part to attempt to swell the high and just panegyric that had been pronounced upon those deeds by the right hon. Baronet at the head of Her Majesty's Government; but having had the honour to wear the uniform of the Bengal army during many of the best years of his existence, it would not seem unreasonable that he should have been specifically requested by a large number of persons to offer their homage and admiration to the troops of Her Majesty's army, and to the troops of that service in which at one period he might say he had the honour to serve.

would not follow the hon. Gentleman who had spoken last in the former part of his observations; and it was sufficient for him to say that he entirely agreed with the latter part of them, and in every word that had fallen from the right hon. Baronet at the head of Her Majesty's Government, beginning, as he did, with ascribing the glory and the success of the war to Him to whom alone they were due, and following up that with a detailed statement of the merits and services for which he had claimed the gratitude of that House, and with respect to which he had, he (Sir R. Inglis) believed, spoken the sentiments not only of that House, but also of every Englishman who was worthy of the name. He thought it would be presumptuous in him, a layman, to offer any testimony to the military merits and services which the right hon. Gentleman had enumerated—a testimony which better became the military companions of those distinguished men; but he could not forbear referring to the testimony which had been borne by the right hon. Member for Nottingham (Sir J. C. Hobhouse) to those services—a testimony which was the more honourable as being given to a political opponent, and doubly valuable as coming from one who, if he might be allowed to say so, had the misfortune to differ from the right hon. Baronet the Governor General of India. He wished also, following up the observations with which the right hon. Baronet had commenced, specially to call the attention of the House to the despatch of Sir Hugh Gough himself—a despatch which would bear comparison with any despatch in any age of the military history of this country, and which revived, in some of its expressions, the remembrance of some of the greatest heroes who had ever fought and conquered, and who had always attributed success to Him to whom alone it was owing. What were the words in which the Duke of Marlborough announced the battle of Blenheim?—

"God has blessed Her Majesty's arms with as great a victory as has ever been known."

What was the language used by Lord Nelson after the battle of the Nile?—

"Almighty God has blessed His Majesty's arms in the late battle by a great victory over the fleet of the enemy, whom I attacked at sunset, on the 1st of August, off the mouth of the Nile."

What were the expressions used by Lord Collingwood after the still greater battle of Trafalgar?—

"The Almighty God, whose arm is strength, having of his great mercy been pleased to crown the exertions of His Majesty's fleet with success, in giving them a complete victory over their enemies, on the 21st of this month; and that all praise and thanksgiving may be offered up to the Throne of Grace for the great benefit to our country and to mankind, I have thought proper that a day should be appointed of general humiliation before God, and of thanksgiving for this his merciful goodness, imploring forgiveness of sins, a continuation of His Divine mercy, and His constant aid to us in the defence of our country's liberties and laws, without which the utmost efforts of man are nought."

In the same spirit as the Duke of Marlborough, Lord Nelson, and Lord Collingwood, did Sir Hugh Gough, in words which ought to be engraven on all their hearts, open his despatch:—

"Thanks to Almighty God, whose hand I desire to acknowledge in all our successes, the occasion of my writing now is to announce a fourth and most glorious and decisive victory."

He (Sir R. Inglis) said that those men were worthy of being the countrymen of Marlborough, of Nelson, and of Collingwood, who, in the moment of victory, could make that acknowledgment; and he trusted, from the passage he had already adverted to in the opening speech of his right hon. Friend at the head of the Government, that he would not only accord to those distinguished individuals on the present occasion the same acknowledgments which others had expressed, but that he would not be unprepared publicly to give effect to such expression of acknowledgment. It would be invidious to particularise individuals; but he could not but feel that more mention should have been made of Major General Gilbert and Brigadier Cureton, whose merits must have well entitled them to more especial reference. The latter distinguished individual, though descended from what the world generally called a good family, had the credit of raising himself from the ranks. If he thought that in making that allusion he detracted in the slightest degree from the great merit and character of that individual, he hoped he should shrink from doing anything of the kind, or of seeking to undervalue him; but he mentioned it as redounding to his own honour that he had risen by his talents from the ranks. He believed there would not be in that House one dissentient voice, or dissentient feeling in the country, with respect to the merits and services of those who were now to receive the most grateful of tributes which man could confer upon man—the honour of a unanimous vote of thanks from that House. Thanking the House for having permitted him to bear his share in according this public expression of thanks, he would conclude by stating that he gave his cordial support to the votes both to Sir H. Smith and to Sir H. Hardinge for their achievement on the banks of the Sutlej.

As the right hon. Baronet has brought this question so fully before you, it is not necessary for me to trouble the House with many observations; but I wish to take this opportunity of expressing my cordial participation in the vote of thanks which the right hon. Baronet has moved. The terms in which he moved that vote of thanks, the speech he made in moving it, every topic to which he alluded, seem to me to leave nothing to be supplied. I never heard a question of a vote of thanks sustained with more feeling or more ability. Perhaps it may be permitted to me, who am not the political or private friend of Sir Henry Hardinge, to say there is no person who is united to him either by political connection or private friendship who can feel more warmly the honour he has acquired in the recent transactions than I feel, who have been opposed to him in politics, but who have always felt for his character the highest respect. Let me say further, with respect to Sir Hugh Gough, that I am glad to see that a native of Ireland has added another to those many glories which Irishmen have contributed to the reputation and fame of England. I have great satisfaction in thinking that the glory which the British army has acquired under the Governor General and Commander-in-Chief has been altogether untarnished. If the state of the Punjaub had rendered the invasion necessary, we might be liable to the charge of ambition—if we had even assembled a large army, apparently menacing that territory, then it might be said that it was imperative on them to seek protection for their country by crossing the Sutlej; but from the manner in which Sir Henry Hardinge has concluded the great affairs committed to him, we can say that no preparation was made that could justify the smallest aggression—and we can say, likewise, that if the utmost preparation had been made—if the army had been collected with a view to dispose of the Punjaub according to the dictates of our ambition, even in that case there could not have been more happy and brilliant success than that which has followed this wanton and unprovoked invasion upon the part of the Sikhs. With these few words I beg to express my cordial concurrence in the Resolution.

I hope this House will allow me to give my cordial concurrence and support to the vote moved by the right hon. Baronet. There is a peculiar reason why I do not wish to give a silent vote of thanks to Sir H. Smith, for happily it has been my fate to be peculiarly associated with him on many occasions. The right hon. Baronet has so ably detailed the services of Sir H. Smith, and has so well eulogized his conduct upon the present occasion, that I will not attempt ts follow him; but there was an expression, in which I cannot quite concur, as to what the newspapers have called a "reverse," in the admirable conduct which has been so well described. I do not think the expression of a reverse—although even in that case there would be nothing injurious to the glory of the actions of Sir H. Smith—is in any degree applicable. Sir H. Smith was placed in one of those unexpected difficulties which frequently occur. He had a very difficult military operation to execute, and he succeeded. His first and primary duty was to effect a junction with the small corps under Colonel Godby, and also with the still smaller force under Colonel Wheeler. Therefore he had one of the most extraordinarily delicate manœuvres which it could fall to the lot of a chief to execute; and though surprised, he made only a partial failure by sacrificing a small portion of his baggage, which I do not believe was of the slightest consequence. When it is recollected that this was a parallel movement, that the enemy was double our force, and though it is not well known to hon. Members in that House, the baggage is four or five times as large as in an European army, and that the followers are three times the amount of the army, I do not think the loss great, even if 700 camels had been lost. It must be recollected that in Affghanistan the loss was 30,000 or 32,000 camels. I therefore conceive that the expression of the right hon. Gentleman was not applicable. The victory which followed was a great proof of skill and ability. There are hardly any recorded details of any army which can surpass this in my admiration. With regard to the merits of the Governor General and the Commander-in-Chief, former circumstances may lead the House to suppose that, in supporting the vote for their distinguished and glorious services, I may be less cordial and less sincere than in the vote to Sir H. Smith. But, Sir, I know too well the ill consequences in the feelings of officers and of men of any unjust criticisms in this House or in any other place, or of any inadequate acknowledgment of services, to follow what may have been the course pursued towards myself in this House at a former period. With regard to the Governor General, as a Lieutenant General, placing himself second in command to Sir H. Gough, and as Governor General in the exercise of his arduous duties, collecting supplies, and obtaining men, I must say, that though many glorious achievements stand on the records of this country, there are none recorded which are more honourable than this to the Governor General. Some criticism has also been passed on the battle of Ferozeshah; but, Sir, there never has been a battle fought, not even Waterloo, after which there was not a variety of gentlemen to be found who could have fought it infinitely better. It has also been said the Governor General ought not to have began the engagement on the evening of the 21st, but should have waited for the next morning. I will not put my opinion in competition with that of these infallible critics; but they should bear in mind that if our army did not engage on the 21st, the enemy had a large body of cavalry, which might have captured our sick and wounded, and seized the stores and supplies which were coming up. Moreover, if we had commenced the battle next morning, I am not aware that our own people would have been much better off than the night before; they had not any supplies, and the battle would probably have been much longer in the morning. Nay more, I may be permitted to remind hon. Gentlemen that a large body of men, and forty or fifty guns came up after the action; and if they had acted on our flank, or in the rear at an early period, they would have done injury to our attacking force, and I do not know what additional danger they might have produced. Permit me also to refer humbly but sincerely to the glorious career of Sir Hugh Gough. It is well known that he is an officer of advanced age, and of invariable gallantry. From the day when at Barossa his regiment captured an eagle of the enemy, down to the present hour, in his various posts, he has never failed to attract the notice of his superiors, and the approbation of the Government. As the battle of Sobraon may be regarded as the Waterloo of Indian battles, I only wish to call the attention of the right hon. Baronet to what I am sure the country will gratefully recollect, the services of this gallant old soldier, and, as I believe, he is termed in one of Sir H. Hardinge's letters, "the glorious veteran." He has had the good fortune to be Commander-in-Chief in two most glorious and successful wars; and I believe, with the exception of the illustrious Commander-in-Chief of our army, who was connected with a series of wars, and who was always triumphant, I believe this is the only instance of a Commander-in-Chief who has, in a few years, conducted two most glorious and successful wars.

said, that having paid his tribute of admiration on a former occcasion to the great achievements of the Indian army, he should not enter again into tactical details relating to that splendid plan of operations. He rejoiced that separate votes of thanks were proposed to be given to Sir Henry Smith, and to the Commander in Chief, Sir Hugh Gough, for the two distinct and brilliant victories which they had gained; for had not Sir Henry Smith succeeded in the very difficult and critical operations intrusted to him, and defeated the well-conceived and very formidable attempt made by the enemy to intercept the main communications of the army, the crowning victory of Sobraon, in which he too had a principal share, had never taken place. The operations of the division under Sir Henry Smith, were, tactically, of the most difficult description, and were conducted with admirable skill, and a perfect knowledge of the science of his profession. And he (Sir H. Douglas) agreed with his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Westminster, that nothing occurred in these movements which could be considered to have been disappointment, far less a "reverse." There was a trifling sacrifice of some of the baggage which followed in the rear, which Sir Henry Smith had too much skill and constancy of purpose to attempt to protect by any hesitation, or deviation from his plan, which must have brought on a general action ere he had formed his junction with the other corps. Had he done this, the great object for which he was detached would have failed; and the most serious consequences must have ensued, to the main operations, instead of being a prelude to that great victory for which the House was now about to return thanks to the Commander in Chief, the officers, and soldiers, who fought on that glorious day—one of the most splendid and eventful in military history. Having described, from a plan in his hand, the works thrown up by the enemy, forming a tête de pont, consisting of three separate enclosures of which the most advanced was a formidable entrenchment armed with seventy or eighty pieces of ordnance, defended, moreover, by powerful batteries placed on the right bank of the river which commanded, by about forty feet, the low ground on the left bank on which the operations took place, the gallant Member (Sir Howard Douglas) observed, that he was not aware of any instance in which so strong a post of that description was attacked, directly in front, without other combinations; and, for this reason, that têtes de pont may easily be turned, by crossing the river on either flank, unless the enemy prevent this by occupying the reverse bank of the river likewise with a large force. Thus, by waiting for the advance of Sir Charles Napier, combined with a movement across the river by a part of Sir Hugh Gough's army, the enemy would have been forced either to cross the Sutlej, or to permit their communications to be intercepted, and their retreat cut off. But this plan of operation required time; and the heats were at hand, when the operations of the British army could no longer with safety be continued; and this, had it succeeded in obliging the Sikhs to recross the river, would have led to the commencement of a fresh campaign—to the prosecution of a war of invasion in the Punjaub, instead of terminating a war of aggression in Hindostan, at one blow, by a victory which destroyed the remnant of the invader's force, and opened the way to put an end to the war, without further bloodshed. Sir Hugh Gough, therefore, and the Governor General decided wisely. Well were they entitled to rely on the valour, the determination, the invincibility of his forces, for so daring and decisive an operation. The arrangements were perfect—the different arms of the service were admirably combined — the operation was eminently successful, and highly deserving of the thanks of the House, and the gratitude of the country.

said, it was not his intention to have obtruded himself upon the attention of the House; but after the speech of the hon. Member for Reading it appeared to him that it would partake of pusillanimity on his part, with the sentiments he held in regard to war, if he did not stand up in that House and endeavour to vindicate principles which he was never, ashamed to acknowledge. He knew that in this country the abhorrence of war and the principles of peace were fast gaining ground in the public mind; and previous to the last occasion when the thanks of that House were voted to those gallant officers and men in India, a deputation waited upon him to request that he would support a resolution which would have appeared to be in opposition to the vote of thanks that was then proposed; but he thought that this war had been of such a character that an opposition then started in that House was not likely to propagate those principles of peace which he wished to advocate; and that, on the contrary, it was better to abstain at that time from an avowal of them, which might only injure their progress in future. On the present occasion he had no wish to destroy or to weaken the unanimity and cordiality of the vote that was proposed to be given to those men who had risked their lives, nay, many who had sacrificed them, for what they believed was calculated to promote the honour, glory, and welfare of this country; and he did not hesitate to say that his heart was as warm and his feelings as grateful to men who in any state had done what they could to promote the interests of this country as any man's; and although he might not exactly agree with the sentiments of many hon. Gentlemen, yet he had not the slightest wish to say one word that could give offence to any one. He assured the House that he spoke only from an imperious sense of the correctness of those principles which he had long entertained upon this subject. It was not exactly according to his sentiments that they should mix up religion with war; for he had always considered war as the greatest scourge that could be permitted by Providence to afflict the human race, and that it was the duty of all men to do what they could to prevent it. He should deeply regret to see the military spirit increased in this country, as he believed that the best interests of nations might be promoted without having recourse to arms. The right hon. Baronet had depicted with great feeling the horrors of those scenes which had taken place in India; and he did not like attributing to the Almighty what He could not look upon with complacency. There was a manifest distinction between what God appointed, and what He permitted. He appointed what was good; He permitted what was evil; otherwise it could not exist. Nothing could be more injurious to society, than confounding good with evil. It was a profanation of the sacred principles of Christianity. He was, therefore, decidedly against the consecration of regimental colours, and placing the trophies of war in the temples of peace. God must look with an equal eye upon all mankind; and although He might permit, for some wise purpose, a great evil to exist, and permit one class to punish another, yet, according to his ideas of religion, they ought to set up those principles which they thought right, and to manifest their confidence in them by adhering to them.

said, that as a very old friend of the gallant officer (Sir H. Smith), whose conduct they were now considering, he hoped he should be pardoned for availing himself of the opportunity of expressing his entire and cordial concurrence in the sentiments so ably, eloquently, and justly expressed by his right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Treasury. He thought it impossible for any one to read the despatch of Sir H. Smith without coming to the conclusion that these proceedings were conducted by him with the most consummate ability. It was also, as his right hon. Friend had said, well worthy of remark, that Sir H. Smith had detailed all the circumstances attending the battle of Aliwal, with a degree of perspicuity which rendered them so intelligible to every Member of the House, that even those the least acquainted with military operations were able to see at once not only the precise object which he was ordered to effect, and the difficulties he had to contend with, but also the manner in which, after a severe struggle, he was able to overcome those difficulties, and add fresh lustre to the British arms. His right hon. Friend had stated that perhaps the success of Sir H. Smith might, in no small degree, be attributed to the opportunity he had had of serving under the Duke of Wellington. He was sure that, if they had Sir H. Smith amongst them, he would be the first to admit that his success was mainly attributable to the advantage he had of learning the art of war, for five successive years, in the Peninsula, under that illustrious man whom they had the satisfaction still to see at the head of the British army. Sir H. Smith was attached to a portion of the Peninsular army not less remarkable for its discipline than for its intelligence, and general knowledge of its duty; a division always in the front when they were advancing towards the enemy, always in the rear when necessity compelled a retrograde movement, and always in the line when they were formed for action; and although constantly exposed to danger, he had had the good fortune, except on one occasion, to escape those casualties by which so many of his brother officers were disabled, and thus he had the opportunity of seeing an extent of service which it fell to the lot of few to witness. The House saw to what good account he had turned the advantages he had possessed in acquiring professional knowledge; but besides this, Sir H. Smith had the additional natural advantage of a remarkably quick perception, and was, moreover, characterized by unceasing activity in the performance of his duty, the most ardent zeal and devotion, and the most undaunted resolution. There could be little doubt that to the knowledge that he possessed all these qualities, it might be, in some measure, attributed that he was selected by Sir H. Gough for that service which he had so well and so effectually performed. Gratifying as it was to him (Lord Hotham) to see the House notice with honour any portion of the service to which he belonged, he thought they should do so only on great occasions; but he was also of opinion that no one could doubt that this was one of those occasions. He cordially concurred in the second vote of thanks which would be proposed to the Governor General and Sir H. Gough; and would only further say, that, as every officer and man who had been engaged in the late operations in India had richly deserved the thanks of the House, so he believed that all, and no one more than Sir H. Smith, would highly appreciate them.

, before this vote passed, which he hoped would be by the unanimous voice of the House, wished to make one or two observations. He was sorry that the question of the policy of war should have been introduced by his hon. Friend, as this was by no means the proper occasion for introducing it. The right hon. Baronet stated, and truly stated, that in achieving such glory he could not make an exception of the native troops, or distinguish them from any others engaged. It appeared that two-thirds of the troops engaged in these battles were natives; and he questioned whether the House knew the extent or the value of the services of the native troops. He had himself had opportunities of noticing the conduct of native troops, when pay was nine months in arrear, while engaged in war, and yet the whole of these troops continued to act throughout that war with the greatest fidelity. He did not believe that the page of history offered a more striking instance, as regarded the loyalty, the fidelity, and the bravery of troops, than was to be found in this campaign in the conduct of the native troops. He hoped that the East India Company, which was so much indebted to the native troops, would do its duty by promoting their interests in every possible way. He trusted that there would be a unanimous vote on this occasion. He had formerly heard of the grasping disposition of Governor Generals, and that they were constantly encroaching on surrounding States with the view of extending the Indian empire: if he might offer an opinion on the conduct of Sir Henry Hardinge, it would be that he had shown an excess of moderation, but which would redound to his and his country's great honour, and remove the stigma which very often was unjustly urged, that this country was grasping at all the territory of its neighbours. The conduct of the Sikhs had been such as would have justified Sir Henry Hardinge in taking any course; but he pursued a course most honourable to himself and his country, and which would prove as advantageous to the East India Company as it was to exalt his own character. He confessed that he had looked forward to the possession of the Punjaub as a probable event, as it appeared necessary for the securing peace on our frontier; but, as the Government had said that they for the present would make the trial of preserving its independence, he would not say one word in objection. If peace, however, should not be secured, they would have to take possession of it hereafter, and those who violated the pledge they had given, must fear the consequences.

thought that it would be unnecessary for him to trouble the House further than merely to propose the Resolutions, embodying a Vote of Thanks to Sir Hugh Gough and Sir Henry Hardinge, and the officers and soldiers serving under these distinguished generals. The gallant Officer (Sir De Lacy Evans) misunderstood him if he supposed that he (Sir R. Peel) intended to have made the slightest reflection on Sir Harry Smith, with respect to any loss in the baggage of his army; on the contrary, in what he had said he had been most desirous of paying an additional compliment to the gallant General for his most able and judicious conduct previously to the action of the 28th. Instead of implying any sort of blame, he intended to express his opinion that the movement of the troops previously to the battle of Aliwal had been conducted with the greatest skill and bravery. He was fully aware that it was a matter of delicacy to allude in that House to the probable exercise of the prerogative of Her Majesty. He would not, however, let the opportunity pass of observing that Her Majesty had signified, within one hour after the receipt of the despatches, Her gracious intention of conferring the honour of the British Peerage on Sir Henry Hardinge and on Sir Hugh Gough. He would take that opportunity of alluding to events which ought not to pass in silence. In a communication from Sir Henry Hardinge, which he received yesterday, that gallant Officer bore testimony to the valour of the distinguished Prussian Prince and the officers who accompanied him in the campaign in India. That distinguished personage had left the army after the battle of Ferozepore, but on hearing that there was a probability of another engagement, returned to take part in it. The Prince is thus alluded to in the despatch of Sir Hugh Gough:—"We were in this battle again honoured with the presence of Prince Waldemar of Prussia, and the two noblemen in his suite, Counts Oriola and Greuben." Here, as at Moodkee and Ferozeshah, these distinguished visitors did not content themselves with a distant view of the action, but throughout it were to be seen in front wherever danger most urgently pressed. He hoped also to be permitted to supply an omission which he had made in proposing the Motion, namely, in not doing sufficient honour to the distinguished services of Major General Gilbert. The highest testimony was borne to the distinguished services and merits of this gallant officer. With respect to his conduct during the recent operations, he would refer to the words of Sir Hugh Gough, which were much better than any to which he could give utterance:—

"I want words to express my gratitude to Major General Gilbert. Not only have I to record that in this great fight all was achieved by him which, as Commander-in-Chief, I could desire to have executed; not only on this day was his division enabled, by his skill and courageous example, to triumph over obstacles from which a less ardent spirit would have recoiled as insurmountable; but since the hour in which our leading columns moved out of Umballah, I have found in the Major General an officer who has not merely carried out all my orders to the letter, but whose zeal and tact have enabled him in a hundred instances to perform valuable services in exact anticipation of my wishes. I beg explicitly to recommend him to your Excellency's special notice as a divisional commander of the highest merit."

If he had inadvertently omitted to notice with the honour due to it the name of General Gilbert, he believed that he had now made ample compensation by reciting the highest testimony that could be borne to his conduct. He should conclude with proposing the following Resolutions:—

"That the Thanks of this House be given to the Right Hon. Lieutenant General Sir Henry Hardinge, Knight Grand Cross of the Most honourable Military Order of the Bath, Governor General of India, for the judgment, energy, and ability with which the resources of the British Empire in India have been applied, in repelling the unjust and unprovoked invasion of the British Territory by the Sikh nation; and for the valour and indefatigable exertions which he displayed on the 10th of February, 1846, at the Battle of Sobraon, when, by the blessing of Almighty God, which we desire most humbly to acknowledge, this hostile and treacherous invasion was successfully defeated.

"That the Thanks of this House be given to General Sir Hugh Gough, Bart., Knight Grand Cross of the Most honourable Military Order of the Bath, Commander in Chief of the Forces in India, for the signal ability and valour with which, in the Battle of Sobraon, upon the 10th of February, 1846, he directed and led the attack, when the enemy's entrenchments were stormed, their artillery captured, their army defeated and scattered, and the Punjaub laid open to the advance of our victorious Troops.

"That the Thanks of this House be given to Major General Sir Henry George Smith, Knight Commander of the Most honourable Military Order of the Bath; Major General Walter Raleigh Gilbert; and Major General Sir Joseph Thackwell, Knight Commander of the Most honourable Military Order of the Bath: and to the other Officers, European and Native, for the distinguished services rendered by them in the eminently successful operations at the battle of Sobraon.

"That this House doth highly approve of and commend the invincible intrepidity, perseverance, and steady discipline displayed by the Non-commissioned Officers and Private Soldiers, European and Native, in the Battle of Sobraon, on the 10th of February, 1846, by which the glory of the British Arms has been successfully maintained against a determined and greatly superior force; and that the same be signified to them by the commanders of the several corps, who are desired to thank them for their gallant behaviour."

The right hon. Baronet concluded by moving—

"That the Thanks of this House be given to The Right Honourable Lieutenant General Sir Henry Hardinge, Knight Grand Cross of the Most honourable Military Order of the Bath, Governor General of India, for the judgment, energy, and ability, with which the resources of the British Empire in India have been applied in repelling the unjust and unprovoked invasion of the British Territory by the Sikh Nation; and for the valour and indefatigable exertions which he displayed on the 10th of February, 1846, at the Battle of Sobraon, when, by the blessing of Almighty God, which we desire most humbly to acknowledge, this hostile and treacherous invasion was successfully defeated."

I regret that I so imperfectly expressed myself with reference to the manœuvres of General Sir H. Smith. I did not suppose the right hon. Baronet intended any other than to acknowledge in the best spirit the honour and glory due to the gallant Officer; but I thought it right, as a military man, to object to a word that he made use of. I am glad to hear that it is Her Majesty's gracious intention to bestow the honours of the Peerage upon Sir Hugh Gough. I, for one, received that announcement with delight; and I am sure that feeling will be shared in from one end of the country to the other. For my own part, I will venture to say, I should be gratified to find that, in addition, it was the gracious intention of Her Majesty to confer the honours of the British Peerage also upon Sir H. Hardinge. My hon. Friend the Member for Montrose, in alluding to the moderation of the Governor General, has expressed a doubt whether he has not shown almost too much moderation in the terms of the peace. But, in my view, in no part of his conduct has the Governor General shown more judgment, more wisdom, and more sound policy than in the course he took after the victory, more particularly as displayed in his despatch to the Secret Committee. I believe that this moderation will be found to be most conducive to the maintenance of the power of the British Government, and to the satisfaction of the vast population who are now connected with us in the north of India. Sir Hugh Gough has given us a beautiful description in his despatch of the brilliant conduct of no less than twelve brigadier officers, who commanded in the late action, and particularly of the conduct of Brigadier Stacey, who led the army into the enemy's intrenchments. He has also spoken in the highest terms of the gallantry and conduct of Brigadier Cureton. I suppose there are some precedents which have prevented the brigadiers from being included in the Vote of Thanks, upon the present occasion; but I think they might have been included. During forty years of the last war I find that no less than fifty brigadiers have received the thanks of Parliament; and if there were any precedents against it, I think that now, upon the conclusion of the war, they might have been departed from; and if the slightest colour could be found for including the brigadiers in the present vote, they ought to receive the thanks of the House.

A generous suggestion has been made by the hon. Member who has just sat down, which would have been a proper suggestion from any one; but is doubly friendly from him, with reference to the honours that may be conferred upon Sir Henry Hardinge. I know as well as any one that it is the duty of the House not to interfere with the prerogatives of the Crown. But I perfectly agree in the allusion made by the hon. and gallant Member, that if the right hon. Baronet should feel it his duty to make any recommendation to Her Majesty upon this point, it would be followed by the grateful thanks of this House, and of the country generally. There is another gallant Officer who has not been so prominently mentioned as he deserved—Major General Sir Joseph Thackwell. I do not remember anything in the annals of military history superior to the charge of the 3rd Dragoons, or to the cavalry of the left entering the entrenchments in single file, and then reforming and charging the enemy.

I feel that this is rather a delicate subject; but in order to prevent the possibility of any doubt, I may state to the House that the despatches had not been in the possession of the Queen an hour, when Her Majesty signified her intention of conferring the honours of the peerage upon Sir Henry Hardinge and Sir Hugh Gough. I may also state that the appointment of Aid-de-Camp to the Queen was made out for Lieutenant Colonel Taylor for his previous services, before the intelligence of his death arrived. I rise to make these explanations, in order to show that every wish expressed by the House has been anticipated by the Queen, in the desire to reward with distinctions those who had conducted themselves gallantly.

, in rising to move for leave to bring in a Bill, in accordance with the Resolution of the House last Session, wished to ask the right hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether it were the intention of Her Majesty's Government to take any steps in accordance with the recommendation of the Committee on this subject, and with the Resolution of the House of last Session? And, if the answer was in the negative, whether, in the event of the Motion being brought forward by him (Mr. Mackinnon), the right han. Baronet would give it his concurrence and support?

said, the House would remember that the Resolution referred to had been carried against his strong remonstrance; and that though he had voted against it, he was left in a minority. What he had stated then he was prepared to state now—that the subject, in his eyes, was only exceeded in its importance by its difficulty; but, having given it his best consideration, he had come to the resolution that he could not, on the part of the Government, frame any measure satisfactory to himself for the adoption of Parliament. Under these circumstances he should most gladly support the Motion of his hon. Friend; and when the measure which he proposed to introduce was before the House, he should give it all the attention in his power, and endeavour to make it as fit for the purpose in view as possible.

said, that after these observations of his right hon. Friend, he should proceed with the Motion of which he had given notice. He felt all the difficulty of bringing forward a question of such delicacy and such great magnitude; but he had letters from nearly every large town in the kingdom urging him to press it, and in some cases twitting him as for neglect of his duty in relation to it. He believed if it were adopted, that it would be most conducive to the health of these towns, and most beneficial to their inhabitants; while he was satisfied that it would not only not injure the clergy of the Church of England, but would do them a considerable service. He said this because he was a stanch supporter of that Church, and because he was satisfied that much of the opposition offered to the measure was founded on the erroneous impression that it would injure the clergy. He could state, for his own part, that the superior clergy were most anxious for it, and that the opposition which existed did not emanate from the leading members of the Church. The only way to meet the difficulty which attended the question was, to give towns the opportunity of petitioning the Privy Council, who should have the power of deciding upon the report of their inspector. He trusted that there would be no opposition to the introduction of the Bill, or to its principle, and the House would, of course, do as it thought fit with it in Committee. As there was no opposition to his Motion, he begged leave at once to move—

"That the practice of interments within the precincts of the metropolis and large towns is injurious to the health of the population, and demands the serious attention of Parliament."

said, the right hon. Baronet admitted the difficulty of the measure consisted principally of the impossibility to reconcile the interests of the Church with the details of this measure: this was a Bill that ought to have Government support, and be introduced by Government; for what was the use of having a Government if it refused to introduce measures that the public advantage imperatively required?

, in explanation, wished a right rev. Prelate in another House of Parliament had introduced a Bill on the subject, and then much of the difficulties of the question connected with the Established clergy would most likely have been avoided. The Dissenting bodies, it should be recollected, were also very deeply concerned in the measure.

then moved for leave to bring in—

"A Bill to amend an Act passed in the 39th year of the reign of George III., c. 79, relating to Corresponding Societies and the licensing of places for the purposes of Lecture and Reading."

He believed there would be no objection to this Motion. According to the 15th Clause of the Act 39 George III., c. 79, which was commonly called the Corresponding Societies' Act, any person delivering a lecture on any subject in a room not duly licensed annually by the magistrates, and receiving money at the door, and any person paying for admission, was liable to a penalty of 20l. He would venture to say there was not a room in the metropolis, or in any part of the country, which was duly licensed for such purposes; and persons who lectured or attended lectures in them were consequently liable to proceedings for these penalties. A case occurred at Hull last year, where an information was laid against a bookseller under this clause, by some parties who entertained a feeling against him. In that case a lecture was given; money was taken at the doors; an information was laid; and the person proceeded against was convicted. The decision of the justices was questioned in the Court of Queen's Bench, on the ground that the magistrates had no jurisdiction; but that Court confirmed the conviction. There was not at this moment a mechanics' institute the conductors of which were not liable to proceedings under this Act. He had moved for a return of all rooms licensed for lectures in Middlesex and Surrey; that return had not been made, but he believed it would be "nil." Hon. Gentlemen were aware that Shaksperian readings took place at the Argyle Rooms, where money was paid at the doors; and, undoubtedly, the persons connected with those proceedings were open to information. He believed that, in consequence of the conviction at Hull, it had been in the contemplation of some common informers to lay informations by wholesale against the lecturers in all unlicensed rooms. In that event there would be no end to the penalties which would then be recovered, and the House would then have to interpose, as they had done with reference to the qui tam actions; and in another case with regard to a clause in this Bill, which required the name of the printer to be placed on the first and last pages of all publications. The object of this Bill was to relieve parties from these penalties; and he hoped it would receive the sanction of the House. He also proposed to amend the Second Clause of this Act, which operated with peculiar hardship on friendly societies established for charitable purposes, with reference to the correspondence between the officers of such societies. He might mention that he had seen addresses issued lately by what are called protection societies, in direct violation of this clause of the Act; and there could be no doubt that the writers of such addresses were liable to indictment.

said, he was not disposed to offer any opposition to the introduction of the Bill; but there might be great danger in removing the safeguards established by the Act. In assenting to its introduction, it must be understood that he did not pledge himself to support it in a future stage.

then rose to call the attention of the House to two petitions he had presented some time ago from William Scott, chairman of a public meeting of the inhabitants of Dundee, and from six factory girls in that town, complaining of the illegal treatment and imprisonment of those girls. The persons on whose behalf he (Mr. T. Duncombe) addressed the House, were six unfortunate and unprotected factory girls of Dundee, between 14 and 20 years; one being 20, one 18, two 19, one 17, and the youngest between 14 and 15; and the parties of whom they complained were Messrs. Baxters, who were wealthy and influential bankers, merchants, flax-spinners and shipowners in that town. He might be told that those gentlemen were liberal men — that they were free traders, and that a short time ago they subscribed 600l. to the Anti-Corn-Law League; but he asked them and the House to do justice to these unfortunate girls. Those young persons stated in their petition that they had been for a considerable time—since they were nine years of age—in the employment of Messrs. Baxters; and it could not be alleged that they had ever committed any offence, or given any ground of complaint, during their period of service. These girls worked in Messrs. Baxters' flax-spinning mill, where they were engaged by the week. A short time since some of the operatives employed in the mill obtained an advance of wages; and the girls, forty in number, employed in the same "flat" with the petitioners, applied for a similar advance, but their request was refused. The advance for which they asked was only 3d. a week—from 5s. 6d. to 5s. 9d. They made the demand for an advance before breakfast on the 27th October last, and after the refusal of their request they left their work at dinner time, and did not return to their work that day, though they ought to have worked from two o'clock to seven o'clock. They were therefore absent five hours. They returned to work on the following morning at five o'clock, when they were apprehended by four men who conveyed them to a private office. The fact of their returning to work showed that they had no intention to desert the service of their employers; but they stated in their petition that they took the afternoon of the 27th for recreation, as other persons employed in the mill had been in the habit of doing. The penalty for so absenting themselves from work was, according to the rules of the mill, a deduction of wages for "a time and a half;" or, in their case, as they had been absent five hours, of the wages they would have received for seven hours and a half labour. The petitioners were kept at the private office to which they were taken, in the presence of four men, till twelve o'clock in the day, when they were marched through the town, not to the town-hall, but to another private office, where they found the magistrate, with one of the Messrs. Baxter, and the overseer and manager of the mill, in the same room. While in charge of the four men, the girls were induced to sign a paper, which they were told would be satisfactory to their employers, but which amounted, in fact, to a confession. Mr. Baxter whispered with the magistrate before the latter gave his decision; and what did the House suppose was the punishment to which the girls were condemned? Ten days' imprisonment with hard labour! Messrs. Baxters, in a petition they had presented, in answer to this charge, alleged that before this occurrence combinations and strikes to a considerable extent had taken place in several of the flax-spinning manufacteries in Dundee. But because such strikes or combinations had taken place elsewhere, were Messrs. Baxter justified in thus treating these girls? One of the rules of the mill provided that any person intending to leave work should give a week's previous notice to his overseers, but not one word was there said about imprisonment. Messrs. Baxter had, however, carefully omitted mentioning another of their regulations, which provided that any person absent after the hours appointed for commencing work should have a time and a half's pay deducted from his or her wages. The operatives, therefore, supposed that this was the only penalty they incurred by their absence. These petitioners also complained that no one was allowed to approach these girls during this trial. The brother of one of the girls did not know that his sister had been tried and imprisoned until she was actually in prison; and the sisters of another of the girls, hearing that she was in trouble, went to the door of the justice-room, and asked permission to see their sister, but were repulsed, and told that they had no business to come there, and that if they did not go away they would be tried and imprisoned too. Could that be called a fair trial where the doors were not open for the admission of all persons? No similar case had occurred in Dundee, he was informed, since Dundee was Dundee. He believed that no cotton-spinner in England could point to the occurrence of a similar case in this country. They durst not act in that way in Manchester, where the parties leaving their work would be merely fined. It was a monstrous, shameful, and cruel sentence on these helpless girls, whose families had been distressed by their incarceration, and the mother of one of whom, being dependent on her for subsistence, had suffered great misery in consequence. Complaints were made with respect to this false trial and imprisonment to the Lord Advocate, who instituted an inquiry; and he (Mr. Duncombe) should be glad to have the result of his precognition, as it was termed, but that was refused, on the ground that it was unprecedented to communicate the details of a precognition instituted by the Crown. If that was unprecedented, the case also was unprecedented; and, as the Messrs. Baxter asked for investigation, he did hope that the House of Commons would institute an inquiry into the case, when he would undertake to prove the allegations made in the petition of the inhabitants of Dundee. The hon. Member concluded by moving—

"That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the Allegation of the Petition of the Chairman of the Meeting of the Inhabitants of Dundee, complaining of the illegal Trial and Imprisonment of Jane Bennett and other Factory Girls in Octobor last."

seconded the Motion. He said that nothing would satisfy the working classes of Dundee but a thorough and complete investigation into the whole case. When that investigation was gone into, the House would find that the Messrs. Baxter, instead of being oppressive to their working people, were careful, none more so, of their health and comfort. He was a justice, and had acted in many instances with the gentleman who tried this case, and a more upright and able justice (not being a legal man) did not exist. He was also acquainted with the Messrs. Baxter, had gone through all their works, and could testify to the care they took of the comfort of their working people, and to the excellent motives which influenced all their acts. The hon. Member for Finsbury had alluded to the petition of the inhabitants of Dundee; and he had felt it to be his duty to call the attention of the provost of that town to the petition; and the answer he received from that gentleman was to the effect that that meeting was held without any notice from the authorities of the town; that he thought it best to let the labouring classes meet and discuss their grievances, or alleged grievances, for any attempt to prevent that would only increase their discontent; but that, in such a case as the present, where judicial matters were involved, the circumstances of which could be ascertained from the records of the court, he did not think much weight was due to the expression of opinion on the part of such a meeting, and that he had no hesitation in declaring, as his opinion, that in the case in question ample justice was done, and that the justices of the peace in the town and neighbourhood were all men of such respectability that he was convinced that they were incapable of using their power for the oppression of any one. Under these circumstances, he could not regard that petition as the petition of the inhabitants generally of Dundee. He had mentioned to the Lord Advocate that certain friends of these girls had gone to the court and had been refused admission; and the Lord Advocate explained to him, that though such was the case, the refusal did not emanate from the court, or from Messrs. Baxter, but was owing to the ignorance of the doorkeeper of the office, in which he had often sat as justice (the town-hall at the time being employed for a criminal trial before the sheriff); and the Lord Advocate added that he had taken care that no such obstacle should again take place. It had been said that these five girls, whose petition was before the House, were minors; but from an excerpt from the books of Messrs. Baxter, kept under the Factory Act, it appeared that none of them was under twenty years and a half old; that one of them had been nearly ten years in the employment of Messrs. Baxter, and none less than seven years. It could not be said, therefore, that the Messrs. Baxter had taken advantage of persons ignorant of the nature of their engagement. It appeared that the girls, on being refused an advance of wages, went away without stating that they were not coming back; and that he (Mr. Duncan) held to be a breach of engagement. One of the rules was, that any persons leaving their work must give a week's previous notice; and another was, that any person whose services were no longer required would receive a similar notice or a week's pay. This was an equitable arrangement—that if this agreement was binding on the master, it should be binding on both parties. Something had been said about the misery of the families of these five girls; but he could state that the whole of them had been retained in employment during the depressed years of 1841, 1842, and 1843, when many other establishments were closed; and that larger wages, he believed, were given to them than to almost any others of the same class. Messrs. Baxter themselves courted investigation, and the affair was important, because it concerned the maintenance of a good feeling between masters and workpeople. Mr. Stuart, Factory Inspector for Scotland, had stated, after perusing the petitions, that Messrs. Baxter's regulation that no one should leave without notice, was very general in Scotch factories; that Messrs. Baxter had a reputation for conducting their factory on the most enterprising and respectable footing; that though they were very averse to factory legislation, he had never found them violating or attempting to violate any of the provisions of the law; and that he had had many occasions to admire their attention to their workpeople, in protecting them from unnecessary exposure to cold, and contributing most liberally to provide education for them.

said, that Messrs. Baxter showed the anxiety natural to honourable and high minded men for an investigation into their conduct to their workpeople after such a complaint as this. He had known them long, and could bear testimony to their high character and position, and their great integrity. He joined in the wish for an investigation: whenever the working classes came to the House and said they had been wronged, the House was bound to lend a willing ear.

said, that on the 8th of last November he received a statement, which led him to infer that the persons in question had been seized possibly without a warrant, and brought before a person possibly not a magistrate; and he had considered it his duty to examine whether an offence had been committed which would call for a criminal prosecution at his instance. He waited upon the sheriff of the county, and requested him to investigate the matter. Investigations by the public prosecutor before trial were entirely ex parte; and for the purpose of informing his own mind, and detecting crime, each witness was separately examined; and if any of them were confronted, their evidence could be objected to at the trial; nor ought the public prosecutor to disclose the examinations so taken, and the tendency of the judgments of the courts was, that he would be guilty of a dereliction of duty if he did. It was said that these six persons now contemplated a demand for compensation: clearly he ought to make no statement which would prejudice their claim, or the defence to it. However, they were examined separately, and in the result it appeared to him that the petition presented by Messrs. Baxter against those women for a violation of the statute was a competent petition to be presented; that it had been followed out in a manner which did not warrant his interference as for the perpetration of any offence; that he considered to be the question for him, and not so much whether there had been any imperfection in the proceedings. It was observed, that the trial did not take place in the Court room, where criminal trials were usually held; but the fact was, that a trial was then proceeding in that room, which was likely to last all day, and the apartment, used on this occasion was one frequently employed for holding courts. It also appeared that the officer in attendance at the door refused admittance to a sister of one of the parties; it turned out that she did not inform him of her relationship; and the officer stated that he excluded her because she was making a noise, and he thought she would create a disturbance in the court; still, thinking that unless she was evidently unruly, it was not the doorkeeper's province to determine whether she should be admitted or not, he had called the justices' attention to this, that they might take steps to prevent its recurrence, or remove this person if they thought fit. As to the principal fact in the case, if the statute did not apply, or if there was any irregularity, it was perfectly competent to those parties to institute proceedings in a court of law; and indeed it appeared, from the petition of the girls, that they did contemplate a demand for reparation—compensation for loss of time and false imprisonment. Though he would not say whether, in his opinion, these parties had a civil action, or express one word for or against such a proceeding, yet there could be no doubt that such was the object they had in view; and as little doubt that such a course was perfectly open to them. They might raise an action either against the Messrs. Baxter, or against the magistrate before whom they had been taken; but he begged to direct the attention of the House to the question, whether this was a fitting matter for their interference, whether it would not be an interfering with and prejudging the claim, either of the one party or the other, if a Committee should be appointed to make an investigation—to have a sort of fishing examination of that which was to become the subject of legal inquiry? He had not the slightest interest in this matter. He had no acquaintance with the Messrs. Baxter, and he had never heard of the magistrate before this case came under his notice; but, from all he had heard, both parties were persons of the highest respectability. He hoped that in coming to a decision on this matter, the House would consider the injurious effect which such an application for Parliamentary inquiry was calculated to produce.

, happening to be a magistrate in the district, and acquainted with many of the parties, hoped he might be permitted to say a word or two on the subject. He regretted to hear what had fallen from the learned Lord, as he was most anxious that every circumstance connected with the matter should be most minutely investigated, being certain that it would have been found there was much less foundation for these petitions than the hon. Member for Finsbury seemed to imagine. He had received a letter from the Messrs. Baxter, stating how much they felt hurt at the charges which had been preferred against them, and narrating a variety of facts to show the great attention which they were accustomed to pay to the education and general comfort of their work people. The noble Lord read the letter. He was instructed to give the most complete contradiction to the allegation that the Messrs. Baxter, or any of their servants, attempted to interfere with the course of justice in this case, and that, instead of showing any harsh feeling towards the girls, they had done everything in their power to soften the rigours of their position, both before and after trial. He must say, judging from the terms in which the petitions were drawn up, that they appeared to him to have been written by some party who had a personal animosity to the Messrs. Baxter. He trusted his hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury would inquire into the character of those gentlemen, and if, after doing so, he found that they were capable of acting as he had represented, he should be both surprised and astonished.

said, if the Messrs. Baxter were respectable, that was no reason for refusing an inquiry. It was highly creditable to those gentlemen to come forward and pray for an investigation, and he did not know why it thould be opposed. There was one remark made by the learned Lord, which he could not concur with. The learned Lord said that the courts of law were open, and that the parties in this case intended to proceed for damages. Now, that he denied. The girls only asked for compensation for their loss of time and false imprisonment. In the way in which that allegation was put in the petition, an objection might have been raised to its reception by the House; but there was nothing in the petition to show that these girls were able or willing to go to law. They asked only for compensation, and the House ought to give them such compensation as an inquiry into their conduct, and the vindication of their character, would afford. The parts of the petition which, in his judgment, would justify inquiry, were not the parts which would justify compensation. There were facts alleged in this petition of which no court of law would take cognizance. The girls stated in their petition that they were taken into custody by four officers, and kept in confinement till twelve o'clock, and that they were then imprisoned for ten days. They might, perhaps, according to Scotch law, be entitled to some damages for not being immediately taken before a magistrate after their apprehension; but according to the English law, at any rate, it would be necessary to prove corrupt motives before any claim to damages could be established. Whether the magistrates acted rightly or wrongly in the matter, he would not pretend to say; but the allegations made were quite sufficient to justify the granting of the Committee. The girls alleged that they were asked by the officers to give such answers as would please their masters; and they stated that they consequently did so, and, as they feared, to their ruin. The learned Lord did not state in his address to the House how far that allegation was correct. In the English courts, when prisoners were brought up for examination before magistrates, they were cautioned that what they said might be used against them, and they were consequently warned not to say any thing without due deliberation. Again, the petitioners stated that their master stood by the side of the magistrates, and whispered to them before the passing of the sentence. Now, that allegation was not denied. Messrs. Baxter said that they did not unduly interfere or influence the course of justice; but there was no denial on their part that they were near to, and were talking with, the magistrates. The impression produced in the public mind, when a prosecutor was seen talking to the magistrates, was always one unfavourable to the administration of justice. He had come, therefore, to the conclusion that the House ought under all the circumstances to grant the Committee.

had felt considerable difficulty upon this question, and that difficulty had been much increased by the course which the hon. Member for Finsbury had taken. The hon. Member had substituted for the Motion of which he had given notice, the Motion that a Committee of Inquiry be appointed. He (Sir J. Graham) did not think that upon that Motion the House need discuss what was the character of the Messrs. Baxter, or the character of the girls. The question had been settled; but the question which they had now to discuss was, whether justice had been administered in this case. Now, while he distinctly admitted the right of any persons who felt themselves aggrieved to come before the House of Commons, he considered that petitioners ought not to come before a legislative body, except in the last resort. He laid this down as a general rule. Then the question came to the point as put by the hon. and learned Member for Cockermouth. Was there a short and satisfactory remedy elsewhere? The law in Scotland was upon this subject different from that which prevailed in other parts of the United Kingdom. Year by year the Faculty of Advocates appointed a standing committee of the most distinguished members of that body, to consider the cases of parties coming forward to sue in forma pauperis. Now, the girls in this case stated that their masters held secret communications with the magistrates before sentence was passed, and that injustice was consequently done. Let them go to the Court of Session. As a matter of course their statement would be referred to the standing committee which he had mentioned. If this committee reported that there was what was called, he believed, probabilis causa litigandi, a good ground of action, the court would instantly assign them counsel and agents; and these girls, humble though their means might be, would be enabled to proceed either criminally or civilly against the parties. If the fact which they alleged to be true could be proved, he had no doubt that the girls would obtain ample damages for any injustice which had been done. As his hon. and learned Friend had stated, a previous inquiry before this House, especially if publicity were given to the evidence, would greatly prejudice the case against the magistrates. These girls had ready means of redress; and, therefore, he thought that the appointment of a Committee would, with a reference to ends of justice, be a superfluous, and consequently not a desirable appointment. He had stated frankly his views upon this case, which he had been obliged to form upon very short deliberation, because he had come down prepared to discuss a very different question. Unless, therefore, he heard some argument to show that the views which he took were erroneous, he should not be disposed to agree to the appointment of a Committee.

said, that as far as regarded these girls, the case was very simple. They allowed themselves that they had violated their engagements; and the question, therefore, was, whether justice had been done to them in the trial which had taken place. He confessed that he had read their petition with very great pain. It appeared to him that there had been some hole and corner work in the matter, and that justice had not been done to them. The Lord Advocate had stated very fairly that, in the prosecution of his duty, he had made an inquiry into the matter. That inquiry, however, was secret; and it was important that Judges should be above suspicion. It was because these girls were poor, and without friends, that the House should be careful to institute an inquiry. The Lord Advocate was satisfied; but would the people, would justice be satisfied without a public investigation? He submitted, therefore, that there ought to be an inquiry before a Committee of the House. If the question came to a vote, he should divide with those who called for an inquiry in public.

replied. What had occurred in Dundee would never be allowed in an English manufacturing town. Were the Committee granted, he should be in a condition to prove the most, if not all, the allegations of the petitioners.

, pursuant to notice, rose to move for an Address to the Crown for—

"A Return of the total amount of public money (whether derived from local funds or from funds voted by Parliament) which has been paid for services as a Crown witness, or for other services, to a man named Robert Reily, alias George Reily, alias Robert Alexander, alias George Rowan, alias Hugh O'Neill, who was sentenced to transportation, as a vagrant, at the late Spring Assizes for the county of Tyrone; specifying the service for which such money has been paid; the department and the public officer by whom such payments have been made; and the period of time during which such payments took place."

His attention had lately been drawn to the case. He need not enter into the details of the evidence given by the man Reily. He presumed that Ministers would not state that they had given their sanction to the proceedings in question, and that they would admit that, if such a system prevailed in Ireland, it ought to be exhibited and condemned. He would, therefore, content himself with simply moving for the Return.

said, that since the hon. Gentleman had given notice of his Motion, he had not had any opportunity of receiving information from Ireland on the subject; and he was, therefore, quite uninformed as to the case. The hon. Gentleman, however, only did the Government justice in stating his belief that the employment of persons to entrap others into crime would be regarded by Government as the greatest possible outrage upon law and property, and that it would receive their most prompt and grave reprobation. He had no objection to the production of the Returns moved for.

remarked, that there were many instances of the police attempting to entrap persons into situations in which they might be charged with crime; and instanced the case of a policeman named Callan hiding arms, and accusing innocent parties of concealing them. There were other cases of a similar nature, in one of which a policeman was set down as being in England, when, in fact, he was secretly employed in the west of Ireland; and another in which a policeman was detected slipping Ribbon documents into the pocket of a countryman, with the view of accusing him of belonging to illegal associations. He knew persons who were cautioned that everything that occurred in their public houses was reported to Government.

The hon. Gentleman alludes in his Motion to persons transported for vagrancy. Is it a fact that vagrancy is ever so punished in Ireland?

It is. If a man taken up as a vagrant cannot give 10l. security for his good behaviour, the Judge is empowered to transport him.

expected a better explanation than the Government had given. Charges were made, names given, and parties pointed out; and not a Member of the Government was able to say whether they were true or not. If the imprisonment of two or three girls in Scotland occupied their attention three or four hours, surely such offences as that charged against the police in Ireland should be thoroughly sifted by that House. The Government should institute an inquiry immediately: their own character was at stake.

The House, I am sure, will pardon me one moment. I am inclined to think the hon. Member for Montrose has not heard what I said in answer to the hon. Gentleman. The hon. Member for Limerick places on the Notice Paper a substantive charge as to a particular person, and that so recently that I have not had an opportunity of receiving an answer from Ireland. I directed immediate inquiries as to the facts to be made, and I have not yet received an answer. In the absence of that reply, I have stated that I was most willing to give an assurance that the Government would never sanction the employment of spies, directly or indirectly. The hon. Member for Meath gives a number of cases. I hope I shall be excused when I say—considering the office I hold is not immediately connected with Ireland—that I never heard of them before. I will undertake, on the part of the Crown, to assure the hon. Gentleman, that there shall be a searching inquiry as to the conduct of the policeman mentioned; that, if found to have offended as described, he shall be dismissed; and that a general order shall be issued that no such means as those referred to shall be issued by any one in the pay of the Government.

I shall state only enough to make my Motion distinctly intelligible, and to show that the documents I ask for ought to be produced. A letter appeared lately in the newspapers exceedingly well written, signed "P. D. Ryan," and considered so important that it was referred to the other night in the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Home Department. This gentleman signs himself "your faithful friend." Now, I have made some inquiries as to this "friend" of mine, and I find there is nothing about him that would induce me to claim the honour of his acquaintance. He has stated that his house was attacked: and he took special care to announce that this outrage was committed during "family prayers." Now, I am informed, that seven months ago he alleged that a similar attack had been made on him. He then alleged that his house was fired into whilst he was in the midst of his family. The magistrates investigated the matter, and they found the charge a totally unfounded one. I wish to get the report of that transaction, which was furnished to the Government, and also the report of the recent transaction. I understand it will appear that both representations to the Government were fabrications. There is another document which I do not know if I have any right to call on the Government to produce. I understand this gentleman was an insolvent, and I ask for the production of his schedule, as it will prove, I am informed, how faithful and conscientious a tenant he was, and also how sensible of the obligations which a contract imposes. The hon. and learned Member moved for—

"A Copy of any Report sent to Government by a stipendary, or other magistrate, or by any police authority, of any attack made, or alleged, on the house of Mr. P. B. Ryan, or on himself, in the year 1845:—Also of any attack made, or alleged to have been made, on the house of the said Mr. P. Ryan in the Month of March 1846:—Return of the Discharge of the said Mr. P. B. Ryan by the Insolvent Court, in the county of Tipperary, and a copy of the schedule filed by him on that occasion."

I do not rise for the purpose of offering any opposition to the Motion of the hon. and learned Gentleman. With regard to the first part of his Motion, the explanation which the hon. and learned Gentleman requires is very natural. As to this gentleman's schedule, it may be true that he was unfortunate, and had taken the benefit of the Insolvent Act; but this misfortune did not at all invalidate the accuracy of any statement made by him. I must observe that I had no personal knowledge whatever of the gentleman. I was struck by his statement, and by the forcible language in which it was conveyed, and also by the circumstance that he was placed, in 1828, in the chair of the Catholic Association, on the Motion of the hon. and learned Member for Cork.

A man's insolvency may certainly be a misfortune; but there are cases in which it may not. It is not because this gentleman was a poor man that I ask for his schedule, but because I had the most distinct evidence from the person who suffered from his insolvency that he did not behave quite fairly on that occasion. The hon. Member for Tipperary had the misfortune to have this gentleman as a tenant. He has represented himself as a suffering landlord. I wish to see what was his schedule when he became an insolvent, and what were the debts returned by him. I think this important. It is painful to me to drag up this species of account; but after the publication of that letter I do not think this gentleman entitled to be treated with any great ceremony. I can assure the House I did not see this letter until three days before it was quoted; and when I heard it read, I acknowledged it was infinitely better written than I could have supposed. As to this gentleman filling the chair of the Association, I am utterly unable to say whether he did or not. It might have happened that as a country gentleman he was moved to the chair; but this was no great proof of his station. I do not say it did not happen; and if it did, it is very immaterial. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman it is for no miserable triumph over the man's poverty that I ask for his schedule; but I ask for it because I think I can show, on the evidence of a Member of this House, the character of this man to be such, that the right hon. Gentleman will feel some surprise at hearing what description of a man he is whose aid he summoned to his eloquence.

begged to say a few words on this matter. The gentleman in question was the only bad tenant he had in his life. He thought it important that the schedule should be produced to remove the impression which the letter of this gentleman had produced. It was well written, certainly. He begged, however, to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the facts which he knew. After becoming insolvent, this gentleman over-held his land, and his agent obtained an order for the payment of rent from the assignees for the surrender of the land. The assignee was a person rejoicing in the name of Rody Fogarty, and who, he supposed, was this gentleman's brother-in-law. His agent served notice on this Rody Fogarty; but when about to obtain an attachment against the brother-in-law of the gentleman, it turned out that the assignee, Rody Fogarty, was a labourer in this gentleman's employment. He thought that fact quite enough to show what credit should be attached to this person's statements as to crime in Ireland. An appeal having been made to him an account of this man's large family, he allowed him to remain on the land. The former outrage, which Mr. Ryan alleged to have been committed, was investigated by Mr. G. Jones and two local magistrates, and declared to be unfounded. His firm belief was, that no such attack as that alleged was recently made on this gentleman's house.

After witnessing the consumption of three hours devoted to an examination of the case of six factory girls in Scotland, I hope I shall not be considered as trespassing too far on the attention of the House when I ask about twenty minutes or half an hour of time, whilst I bring under your notice what I consider to be a case of great oppression. The complaint to which I refer regards the expulsion of sixty-one families, in all 270 persons, from the homes of themselves and their fathers. An ejectment under circumstances of a painful nature, a short time back, attracted general attention as described in a Roscommon paper. This statement caught the eye of a most respectable friend of mine, the proprietor of the Dublin Freeman's Journal—a gentleman to whom the right hon. Secretary for the Home Department has given an historical name, by classing him with those who, with all respect, I must ever consider were the victims of an infamous prosecution. He sent a special reporter to the spot where the alleged clearance was said to have taken place; and it is to the report of the gentleman so sent down that I am now about to call the attention of the House. It is certainly written in strong language, but not stronger than the occasion justifies.—The hon. Gentleman read a long statement from the Freeman's Journal, dated Mountbellow, county of Galway, Wednesday night, March 25, describing the village of Ballinglass, parish of Kilasobe, and barony of Killyon, county of Galway, and the eviction of a number of tenants from huts they had erected on land obtained from the bog on the estate of a Mrs. Gerrard. The principal features were these:—

"At an early hour on the morning of Friday, the 13th instant, the sheriff, accompanied by a large force of the 49th regiment, commanded by Captain Brown, and also by a heavy body of police under the command of Mr. Cummings, proceeded to the place marked out for desolation; the people were then according to the process of law (I could not procure a copy of the habere) called on to render possession, and then the bailiffs of Mrs. Gerrard commenced the work of demolition. In the first instance the roofs and portions of the walls were only thrown down; the former, in most instances, lie on the side of the road. Great pains must have been taken to demolish the houses, as the walls were very thick, and composed of an umber clay, and when the inside turned up good plaster and whitewash always appeared. Not content with throwing down the roofs and walls, the very foundations have been turned up. When this last act had been perpetrated, the 'wretches' took to the ditches on the high road, where they slept in parties of from ten to fifteen each, huddled together before a fire for the two succeeding nights. I saw the mark of the fires in the ditches; every body can see them, and the temporary shelter which the 'wretches' (I cannot help quoting the word so often) endeavoured to raise round them with the sticks, rescued from their recent dwelling.

"A boy there about nine or ten years of age, told us that one of the bailiffs told his mammy not to take in any of the people who were turned out, but his mammy let in an old woman after that. I would not have placed much relianee on this corroboration, except for what you will learn some further on. It is to be hoped, for the sake of humanity and of womanhood, that Mrs. Gerrard is ignorant of that order. I expressed a wish to be direeted where I could meet some of the poor people, when the man said, 'Oh, here is one of them coming down the hill.' This person who soon joined us was old, and as he raised his hat to salute me, his fine white hair floated on the breeze. He was a fine athletic handsome old man, with a mournful countenance, and as he addressed me in the beautiful and simple salutation of the country, with 'God save you, sir!' (he spoke English very well) I felt a reverence for the old, ill-treated, and unhappy man.

"Are you one of the people who were recently turned out? I inquired.—Indeed, I am, Sir, said he, with a heavy sigh.

"How old are you, Sir?—Nearly eighty.

"How long did you reside in the village of Ballinglass?—Over sixty-eight years, Sir; and he burst into tears.

"How many in family have you?—Three, together with myself; but I had a great deal more than that. Some of them are dead and gone, and well for them they didn't live to see this desolate day: others of them are married, and some more of them are gone to America.

"How much land had you?—Why, I can't rightly tell, as there are no regular farms, but there was over 400 acres belonging to the village.

"Did you owe any rent?—I did, Sir.

"Were you able to pay it?—I was, Sir, and willing, too, but she wouldn't take it for the last five half years.

"Why so?—Why, because, Sir, she wanted to throw down the houses to make bullock pastures.

"Did you ever offer the rent to the lady?—I did, Sir, more than twenty times, and I offered it to her agent also, but they would not take it. We went to the hall-door (meaning the hall-door of the lodge already mentioned) often with the rent, but they would not take it from us. Every man in the village but one offered the rent over and over, but they wouldn't take it; and we offered to pay that man's rent, but they wouldn't take that either.

"Is it true that the remainder of the walls were ordered to be thrown down to prevent the people from sheltering themselves at night?—In truth it is, Sir; they wouldn't let any one go near the place; we slept in the ditches for two nights, and I got pains in my poor old bones after it.

"Did the women sleep in the ditches?—They did, Sir, and I saw one of the women with a child at her breast hunted by the bailiffs from three places the night after; they threw down the houses when we were under the walls, and they came to put out the fires, and they put out the fires in the road ditches on us too."

The report then proceeds to give a list of the persons, from which it appeared that sixty-one families, numbering two hundred and seventy persons, had been evicted.

"It appears that the 'one man' so often before mentioned who refused to pay the rent, had some of his land let to under-tenants. He went away leaving some rent due; the people offered the rent which they used to pay this man to the agent of Mrs. Gerrard, and demanded receipts, but he would not give any receipt except one 'on account' of rent due. The people owed no rent, and therefore they refused to take receipts on account."

That was the statement. He was bound to say that of the transactions he knew nothing of his own knowledge, but taking the representation of them as correct, here was a picture of an Irish village! This was a picture of the civilization which had been introduced into Ireland. Why it would be better for Ireland to return into the state of barbarism which existed before the English connexion than to enjoy such a state of civilization as this. At least it was right, when the House was called upon to enact coercive measures, that they should know what were the circumstances which stimulated the people of that country to outrage. Give fair play to both parties, that it might be known against whom coercive measures should be passed; whether against the peasantry, by locking them up in their homes away from their lawful occupation, or against the landlords of Ireland, by passing some measures by which they should be compelled to perform their duties. He had done what he conceived to be his duty, and it would be for the House to determine what course they would take. The hon. Member concluded by moving—

"That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, to inform Her Majesty that the attention of this House has been directed to a case of ejectment of tenantry which has recently taken place at a village named Ballinglass, in the county of Galway, in which it is stated that not less than sixty-one families, comprising 270 individuals, have, in one day, been expelled from their habitations, under circumstances the most cruel and heartrending, and to pray Her Majesty, that She will be graciously pleased to give directions that the Stipendiary Magistrates, and other officers of the Irish Constabulary, who are in the habit of reporting to the Executive outrages committed by the peasantry of Ireland, or such Commissioners as Her Majesty may be pleased to appoint, be required to furnish to Her Majesty's Government such authentic information respecting the facts of this case as they may be able to collect upon the spot, and that such Reports may be laid before Parliament at as early a period as possible."

said, that the hon. Gentleman declared that he knew nothing whatever of the transaction except what he had collected from newspaper report, which he had read, and which, he said, had been positively contradicted in another newspaper which he had not seen. He took it, that the hon. Gentleman knew nothing of the transaction except from newspaper report. He wished he could state that he entirely discredited it. He had already stated that under the present circumstances of Ireland, he had expected that Irish landlords would exhibit more than ordinary forbearance—that they would do so in the present unhappy circumstances of Ireland; and generally there had been that forbearance exhibited. The hen. Gentleman talked of outrages that had been committed. He was confident that there was no person in that House, but had a sincere desire that outrages should not be committed, and when committed should be suppressed by all lawful means. But, to render Ireland habitable, tranquillity should be preserved. He must say that that terrible system which went under the name of "clearing estates," ought to be discountenanced; and if it proceeded it would be absolutely necessary to check it by legislative means. At present he knew nothing of the facts of the case. Having made this statement, he thought the hon. Gentleman would agree with him that it would be superfluous to move an Address to the Crown, as the matter was under inquiry by the competent authorities, and the Ministers had not yet received the information. When that information was received, he should be prepared to inform the hon. Gentlemen and the House what on inquiry were the real facts. In the meantime he thought it only justice to the parties concerned that the House should suspend their judgment, these allegations having been met by a positive denial.

observed, in reply, that it was not with any view to give sanction to outrages that he had made the present Motion. He had no desire to be popular with murderers; he had denounced such crimes in language stronger than any that had been used in that House; and he had more than once exposed his life to danger in an endeavour to suppress such crimes. His object was to impress on the House the necessity of taking some steps to remove the causes of these crimes. He would withdraw the Motion on the understanding that the right hon. Baronet would lay before the House the results of the inquiry.

rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Laws respecting Highways in England. In addressing the Speaker, he was addressing one who was peculiarly conversant with this subject; and the Bill which he sought to bring in was the result of the great attention and labour which the Speaker had bestowed upon it. The House was aware that the sum levied for the maintenance and repair of highways in England annually amounted to 1,600,000l. Not only parishes, but minute subdivisions of parishes, supported and maintained their various highways, and a number of officers were employed. In the Act brought in by the Speaker, a permissive power was given to parishes to unite for the purpose of conjointly maintaining highway and other paid officers. This power being permissive and not compulsory, had not been brought into general use; and the principal object of the measure which he sought to introduce was to substitute a compulsory for a permissive power. To make the new enactment perspicuous and perfect, he had thought it better to repeal all existing laws with respect to highways, and to introduce a Bill re-enacting and consolidating the whole. The first important provision was, that districts should be formed throughout England and Wales, generally speaking, coterminous with the registration districts. He proposed to give to the Enclosure Commissioners, a body constituted by recent Act of Parliament, the power of forming and regulating the districts. That would reduce the number from 1400 or 1500 to 550. The Bill would then provide that, for each district, a surveyor should be appointed, to be a paid officer, with assistant sub-surveyors. The power of appointing surveyors should rest with the local board in each district, the salary being fixed by them, and the choice of the officer subject to the veto of the Commissioners; the power of dismissing officers should be with the Enclosure Commissioners, and concurrently with this power of dismissal should be the power of dismissal on the part of the board. With respect to the election of the board, he proposed that it should be elected for two years by all rate payers in each parish and township maintaining its own roads. Each parish or township was to be represented at the district board by one or more way-wardens, as the Enclosure Commissioners should determine. No hamlet, containing less than four miles of road, had the right of choosing way-wardens. He proposed that there should be two paid officers in each district; one the surveyor, the other the clerk of the board. He proposed that there should be a general annual meeting, in which the accounts of the whole year should be made up, and the estimates of repairs for the ensuing year should be brought under their consideration by the paid surveyor of the district. He proposed that the accounts of the district should be annually audited; and he would suggest, inasmuch as it accorded with the plan of his right hon. Friend, that the Poor Law Auditors should audit annually the highway accounts. These accounts, so audited, should be transmitted annually to the Enclosure Commissioners, and they should report annually to the Secretary of State; and each report, together with the abstract of accounts, should be laid annually before the two Houses of Parliament. He gave also the power, by the unanimous consent of the way-wardens forming the district board, to convert the charge of the highway district into a union charge, instead of a parochial or township charge, with the consent of the parochial commissioners. He proposed that three rates should be made in the district, one district rate for the joint expenses, salary of the surveyor, salary of the clerk, and the general expenses of the board, the proportion for the district to be submitted to the Enclosure Commissioners in London, and receive their sanction. If the district should come to the resolution to make the charge a union charge, then only one rate would be necessary; but if they should not be so disposed, then there must be two rates levied: one district rate for the district charges, and, as at present, a parochial or township rate for the maintenance of the roads. He proposed to retain the present maximum rate of 10d. a rate; and that there should be no more than three rates in the course of a year, thus making the maximum highway rate per year 2s. 6d. in the pound. He proposed also that the rate should be collected by the collector of the poor rate; and with respect to the remedy in case of non-payment, and also in appeals, that it should be identical with that which at present regulated the collection of the poor rate. He proposed further that power should be given to borrow money for effecting improvements of the highways with the consent of the Enclosure Commissioners, providing that the principal and interest should be paid within twenty years. And with the view of enabling the Commissioners to form a judgment before any outlay of such borrowed money was made, he would give them the power to send down an inspector to make a survey, and report upon the condition of the highways, and the expediency of effecting the projected improvements. He preserved all the existing liabilities to repair, and also retained all the principal provisions which were so recently sanctioned by Parliament. With reference to South Wales, he should state that there were particular provisions in the Acts regulating the turnpikes in that part of the Principality, which would appear to interfere with the extension of this Bill to the highways there; therefore he should suggest that South Wales should be exempted from the operation of this amended Highway Act. The right hon. Baronet concluded by moving for leave to bring in his Bill.