Papurau Newydd Cymru

Chwiliwch 15 miliwn o erthyglau papurau newydd Cymru

Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

8 erthygl ar y dudalen hon

- -_ -__- -IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

Rhestrau Manwl, Canlyniadau a Chanllawiau
Dyfynnu
Rhannu

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, THURSDAY, APRIL 17. Lord Itedesdale again put his question to the Govern- ment on the substitution of the? police f n the firemen at- tached to the house. Lord Stanley of Alderley explained th.it it was intended to adopt the plan followed in the dockyards. In answer to a question from the Earl of Elgin, Lord Panmure stated that an impression which had gone abroad, that a large military force was about to be embarked for the British possessions in North America, was without foundat" It ivas intended to send there a certain num- uer of regiments returning from the Crimea to replace those which had been withdrawn but that a very large force was to be despatched to our North American colonies was an unfounded rumour. It had been also stated that great quantities of munitions of war were htso on the point of being sent to those colonies. The fact was that during the rcent war the colonial depots had been drawn upon largely for this description of stores, and all that was about to be done was to replace the quantity which had been so removed. The Earl of Albemarle gave notice he should on an early- day move the re-appointment of the Committee on Indian Territories. The Public Works (Ireland) and Public Works (England) Bills were read a second time. The Bishop of Oxford asked whether it was the intention of the Government to proceed with the Education Bill. Earl Granville stated that it was not the intention of the Government to press the bill, at least during the present session Lord Monteagle moved for some returns relating to the redemption of hereditary pensions in the year ending 31st March, 1856. The returns were ordered, and the House adjourned. The Commons were unable to make a House. FRIDAY, APItIL 18. The Earl of Ellenborough stated, he had received infor- mation of the occurrecc of a case of torture in the piesi- dency of Bengal; the perpetrator of it, however, had been severely punished by the authorities. He wished the Duk? of Argyll would make some inquiry into the facts. The Duke of Argyll undertook to do so. The Earl of Albemarle fixed the 5th of May for his motion for the reappointment of the Committee on Indian Territories. The Colonial Bank Bill was read a third time and passed. The Marquis of Salisbury moved for copies of documents relating to the discharge of certain convicts upon tickets of leave; he wished to know the grounds on which they had been granted in these eases ? If the men could not get employment, the plan must fail; even if they wished to reform they found it impossible. The Duke of Argyll explained the particulars of the cases referred to, which he contended proved nothing against the system; he hoped the Marquis of Salisbury would withdraw his motion. Earl Stanhope called the attention of the house to the whole subject of secondary punishments. The svstem of granting tickets of leave could not be argued by itself. There were great evils connected with it, not accidental, bat inherent and inevitable; they might vary the details of the system, but the grand difficulty would remain—the men discharged could never obtain employment in this country against the competition of men of good character. The Government would do well to consider the policy of establishing some penal colony where criminals could begin a new career. There, the offences committed in the Old World were not remembered against them, and if they wished for honest employment they could find it. He ad- mitted that no convicts could be sent to any of our colonies without their fullest consent; but he believed both Western Australia and Moreton Bay were ready to receive convict labour, though an objection had been made to any being sent to the latter settlement by the province of New South Wales, of which it formed part. Considering the advant- age the Australian colonies had so long produced to th;s country by relieving us of our criminal population, and, looking at the present wealthy, civilized, and flourishing condition of these colonies themselves, there was certainly strong encouragement to found another settlement of the same description. The system carried into effect by Mr. Pitt in 1788 could not be objected to as something new and untried. Earl Granville suggested that Earl Stanhope should move the appointment of a committee of inquiry into the question. Lord Lyttelton believed the evils complained of must be borne at home, and that they must trust for improvement to the gradual progress of education. The state of Western Australia could be no guide, and they should not deal with Moreton Bay unless it became a separate colony. Earl Grey wished for a deliberate inquiry into the whole system. Perhaps the penal portion of a man's sentence might be better carried out in this country; but afterwards the colonies were invaluable as a resource to those who were emerging from jiunishment: they would there be placed in the best position to reform. It was most unjust that the colonists of New South Wales should refuse to allow to the settlers of Moreton Bay that convict labour from which they had derived so much advantage themselves. He strongly condemned the principle of the act of 1853, by which a sentence to four )-ears' penal labour was substituted for seven years' transportation. The Earl of Derby believed that no old colony would now ever overcome the prejudice against transportation, and that we should be driven to devise ourselves the best means of dealing with our convicts. In the probation for tickets of leave there was not a sufficient variety of tests of refor- mation. Some island might -be found on the coast of England that would be a natural prison, and North Austa- lia was still open to them. Lord Campbell hoped the system of transportation would be revived at present he did not know what punishment be was inflicting when sentencing a prisoner. After a few words from the Earl of Harrowby, The Lord Chancellor explained that, but for the act of 1853, the same number of criminals would have been re leased without the check on their conduct furnished by the ticket of leave. The Marquis of Salisbury withdrew his motion and Earl Stanhope gave notice he should, on a future day, move for a committee of inquiry into the question. The House then adjourned. MONDAY, APRIL 21. The Earl of Albemarle presented a petition from the European and native merchants of Singapore, remonstrat- ing against the introduction by the Government of India of the rupee as the currency of that settlement, instead of the Spanish dollar, which had been long estab- lished, and was found convenient and satisfactory. He stated that the old currency of Singapore was a decimal one, but that of the rupee was difficult to reckon, and had produned the greatest intricacy and confusion The Government, by paying its officers in rupees, inflicted on them a serious loss, as that coin was always at a discount, he hoped the act would be repealed. Earl Granville admitted that the home Govern- ment had doubted the expediency of the measure, and instructions had been given that its effects should be closely watched. The Lord Chancellor, in moving the second reading of the Church Discipline Bill, described the mixed powers and functions of the Ecclesiastical Courts, and stated that the present bill referred exclusively to their ecclesiastical jurisdiction. An act relating to the Law of Divorce had already been introduced in that House another bill affecting the power of the Ecclesiastical Courts over wills had been brought into the House of Commons, because it involved many claims to compensation. The old form of process before the Ecclesiastical Courts was so cumbrous, dilatory, and expensive that some cnange was necessary. He detailed the reforms attempted by the act in 1S10, and the Bishop of London's bill of 1847, which still retained too much of an ecclesiastical character The present bill proposed that the assessors (barristers), should sit wit;¡ and act for the bishop, that four of these chancellors or assessors be appointed, superseding all vicars-general throughout the country the assessors to be appointed by two Irish bishops, two English bishops, and the Bishop of London before exercising any of their powers they are to subscribe the Thirty nine Articles. The jurisdiction < f the Bishops' Court extends to offences committed by clerks in holy orders and the proceedings necessary to enforce a due administration of the sacraments and the riles and ceremonies of the Church. All proceedings under the act are to be commenced within two years of the offence There is &n appeal from the Diocesan Court to the Pro- vincial Court, and from the Provincial Court to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The Archbishop of Canterbury opposed the bill, and moved that it be read a second time that day six months. The Bishop of Derry approved the measure, though some of the details might require modification to render it more acceptable to the English bishops. He read a document in support of the bill, signed by the Arch- bishops and Bishops of the provinces of Armagh and Dublin. The Bishop of Exeter strongly condemned the bill. The 15th clause destroyed the authority of the bishop of the diocess, and vested it at the pleasure of the Arbhbishop. J If the Irish bishops approved that clause—if they did not | feel the sanctity and divine right of the diocesan episco pacy-they thereby separated themselves from the Church of England He hoped the House would refuse to go into committee on the bill. He minutely criticized the details of the measure, and denounced them as ill-consi- i dered and miscalculated, involving a large expenditure for inadequate objects, derogatory to the bishops and degrad- ing to the Church, which it would deprive of every power of independent actiorl. The Bishop of Bangor spoke against the bill. The Earl of Harrowby denied that the bill gave any new authority to the Archbishop. The other objections to the measure of last year, he contended, had been re- moved. The Bishop of Oxford and the Earl of Derby addressed the House in opposition to the bill. The Bishop of Cashel supported it. Their Lordships then divided. There appeared for the second read ina- 33 Non-contents. 41 Majority against the second reading 8 The bill is consequently thrown out. The House then adjourned until Thursday. ) HOUSE OF COMMONS, FRIDAY, APRIL 10. I In reply to questions put by Mr. E Denison and Sir J. Pakington. Mr. Wilson stated the progress of the arrangements made for effecting a system of postal communication with the Australian colonies, which had been framed by the Govern- ment as to the colonies and to the country, and which did not stipulate for any particular line. None of the tenders, however, had appeared to be such as the Government, ought to accept; they had, accordingly, been reopened, and the Government, he said, were prepared to enter into a contract as soon as an acceptable tender should be made. On the motion that the House at its rising do adjourn until Monday. Sir B. Hall gave ample and detailed explanations re- specting the plans in contemplation for opening communi- cations through St. James's Park. Sir E. Perry called attention to the increasing deficit in the revenues of India. The deficit in the year ending April, 1855, he said, exceeded £2,500,000, and be had no hesitation in saying that of the present year would be not less than upwards of £ 2,000,000. He showed that over a large series of years the revenues of India had greatly in- creased, but that latterly there had been a deficit of revenue which had been increasing from year to year. The ques- tion was, to what this unsatisfactory state of the Indian finances was to be attributed ? The President of the Board of Control had said that the deficiency was chiefly owing to the expenditure upon public works but he (Sir Erskine) asserted that the cause was to be found in the series of wars in which the Indian Government had engaged -and which were not defensive wars-and the annexations of territory. lie read a statement of the profit and loss resulting from the annexation of Scinde, Sattara, the Punjab, Pegu, Martaban, and Nagpore, which showed a net deficiency, allowing for excess of revenue, of E288,000, But this, he said, gave a very inadequate idea of the real loss, because there had been a large addition to the military charges, which had increased to the amount of £2,94.5,000 Having stated these results, and the causes to which he ascribed them, he called attention to the policy of annexa- tion, and entered upon a review of the administration of Lord Dalhousie, dwelling particularly upon the recent annexation of the kingdom of Oude. He insisted that the maladministration of that country was overcoloured but if it were darker than represented, he contended that the charge of misgovernment should be laid at our own door, since it was the necessary effect of the fatal connexion between that State and the Government of British India which had been commenced by Warren Hastings. The doctrine of annexation was unsouud upon financial prin- ciples but, on the higher grounds of right and justice, and the obligations of every Christian Power, that House, he said, was called upon to interfere, and, by its authority, check the system of territorial aggrandizement in India, which must tarnish the British name and weaken the foundations of British rule. Mr. Murrough followed, denouncing in very strong terms the proceedings of the Indian Government, especially with reference to the family of the Rajah of Coorg. Mr. V. Smith declined to enter into any detailed state- ment upon these subjects at that time the proper occasion for discussing them was when the East Indian Budget was before the House, Sir E. Perry having made no motion He totally dissented from the doctrine that annexation of territory was to be considered with reference solely to pecuniary profit. If a particular annexation got rid of a state of perpetual inquietude, it was impossible to say what its value might not be. Annexation was not to be discussed in the abstract as a policy; every annexation of territory must be taken by itself, and it was unfair to judge of the result during the first four or five years. He questioned the accuracy of Sir E. Perry's figures, observ- ing that the outlay upon public works, including works of irrigation, which he had taken at EI,200,000, was there- fore, in a single item, nearly half the deficit of revenue. He admitted that the next great item arose from the an- nexation of territory, which would, however, ultimately realize a surplus revenue. There was another item, that of increase of charge, not only in the military expenditure, but in the allowances of civil servants, which it is very difficult to keep down in India. With regard to the annexation of Oude, he believed that, when the papers were before the House, the public, so far from being dissatisfied, would. wonder that such state of things should have been allowed to exist so long by a Power which was the paramount authority in India. In conclusion, he stated that he should have to announce, in his statement of the Indian finances, that the deficit of the last year was less thah £ 1,900,000. Sir J. Hogg, after correcting some misapprehensions of Sir. E Perry and Mr. Otway respecting the finances oflndia, and observing that a desultory debate upon the subject could only mislead the House, gave an analysis of the revenues and the charges during the last six years, which would explain he said, the reason why there was a surplus I in some years and a deficit in others. In the first four of those years there was a surplus revenue, and a deficit in only the two last; but the important question was how far the causes which had brought about this deficit were per- manent, and how far temporary ? He showed that the ¡land revenue was diminished by occasional dearths, and the i,opium revenue by the disturbances in China. On the side I of expenditure an enormous outlay had been caused by the erection of barracks for European troops, and within the last two years a considerable sum had been expended on account of education. Upon the whole, the deficit of revenue had arisen from causes mostly temporary, while the increased charges would be reduced when the country was restored to tranquility. On the subjects of annexation and adoption he challenged a discussion of any particular instance, denying that the abstract opinions of illustrious men, cited by Sir E. Perry—some of which he said, were mere truisms—had any application to the cases in question, many being cases of failure of heirs and lapses to the paramount Power. With regard to Oude, the only difficulty would be, he said, to defend the Government, which had the right and power to dictate, for not sooner interfering. The subject then dropped. Lord Chelsea inquired, whether any steps had been taken with a view to the erection of a public monument to the memory of the late Duke of Wellington in St. Paul's Cathedral ? Sir B. Hall said, the object had been delayed because no money had been voted for it by Parliament but he had been instructed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say that he would move the House that the sum remaining, after defraying the expenses of the funeral of the Duke of Wellington, amounting to nearly E25,000 should be ex- pended in the erection of a monument to the late Duke and, if the matter were placed under his control, he would call in aid several artists in this country, that we might have something worthy of the memory of that great man. The House then went into Committee of Supply upon the remaining Civil Service Estimates, the greater part of the discussion turning upon the vote of £39,0.54 for the nonconforming clergy, which was not carried without several divisions. The Chairman having reported progress, the other orders of the day were gone through, and some other bus- iness having been disposed of the House adjourned at a quarter past 1 o'clock until Monday. MONDAY. Arr.IL 21. Several questions were addressed to the Government which had reference to the preparations for celebrating the conclusion of peace, and those questions assumed the form of a debate when the Chancellor of the Exchequer moved that the House at its rising do adjourn until Thurs- day next. The leplyon the part of several members of the Government amounted to this-that they had been guided by precedent; that there was no innovation in making preparations before the terms of peace were known; that the cost of the fireworks, the exhibition of which would not be confined to the west end of the town, would not exceed LS,000, and that they did not think it necessary to submit to the House previously a formal es- timate for this outlay. Mr. Malins called attention to the charge made by the Clerk of the Ordnance against Messrs. Grissell, of having inserted pieces of iron in the mortars made by them, in order that the flaws in the material they had used might escape observation. This charge, which, he said, was without the slightest foundation, affected not only per- sonal character, but involved the principle upon which the parties contracting with the Government were to be treated. He gave an exposition of the facts and of the effect produced by the announcement of the charge in this and the other House of Parliament,-a charge implying fraud, which, after Messrs. Grissell had been held up to the contempt and opprobium of the country, was, he con- tended, ultimately abandoned. He charged both Lord Panmure and Mr. Monsell with a want of caution and fairness in making a charge which ought not to have been made. Mr. Monsell said he should be glad if he could con- scientiously arrive at the same conclusion as Mr. Malins but he felt he was perfectly justified in the statement he had made by the information he received from competent authorities. He referred briefly to some of the particu- lars of the case contained in the papers laid before the House in support of the statement. Mr. G. Dundas was convinced that the charges were altogether unfounded. Lord Lovaine, on the other hand, thought it impossible not to pass judgment on the contractors to this extent, -that, a damage having been shown to them, they had not acted with honesty and honour. Colonel Boidero acquitted Messrs. Grissell of fraud, I but considered that they had acted with gross negli- gence. Mr. Evelyn, Mr. Alderman Cubitt, and Sir J. Pakington bore testimony to the high character of the firm, and upon the documentary evidence acquitted them of any in- tentional fraud or dishonesty. Mr. Tite stated reasons which, in his opinion, would account for the accident to the mortars. The motion for the adjournment was then agreed to. On a question that the House do resolve itself into a Committee of Supply, Sir F. Baring pointed out what he considered to be imperfections in the revenue accounts, respecting which Mr. Wilson gave explanations. The House then went into a Committee of Supply on the remaining Civil Service Estimates, the first of which, Y,60,000, for the salaries and expenses of the British Mu. eam establ ishment, was moved by Lord J. Russell, who,von the part of the trustees, mad I the customary statement of the transactions connected with the Museum during the past year. tr. Milnes called attention to the system of manage- ment and patronage in that establishment, especially with reference to the report of 1850, which had recommended, among other things, that there should be a body, con- sisting of a few persons, responsible for the government of the Museum. This recommendation, a3 weil as the suggestion of the commissioners in respect to the pa- tronage, had not been adopted, and he urged the Govern- ment to give effect to them by a bill. He regarded the selection of a foreigner (Mr. Panizzi) to be head librarian of the Museum, instead of a distinguished literary man of our own country, as an evidence that the government of the establishment was not satisfactorily adminis- tered. The Speaker (not being then in the chair), said he would not discuss what should be the future government of the Museum but he felt it his duty to state by what considerations the principal trustees had been guided in selecting Mr. Panizzi to fill the office of chief librarian. He was ready to take his share of the responsibility of that selection, and he believed it was not possible to make a better. It was by no means so unusual a thing to appoint a foreigner of five Principal Librarians two had been foreigners. Mr. Panizzi, who was the next officer, possessed, besides his claim on that ground, great talents and essential qualifications for the headship, testimonies to which the right hon, gentleman read. As to the pa- tronage of the Museum, he and his colleagues would have no objection to be relieved from the burden of it. Mr. Layard defended the appointment of Mr. Panizzi, but insisted that some reform was required in the go- vernment of the Museum. Lord Elcho suggested whether it would not be desir- able to consider the propriety of separating the different collections and sending the artistic and archaeological por- tions to the new National Gallery. After a few remarks by Mr. Tite, The Chancellor of the Exchequer explained Low far certain recommendations of the commissioners had been adopted, and the reasons for the non-adoption of others and he answered inquiries made by preceding speakers. Mr. Disraeli said, no satisfactory solution of the diffi- culty met with in the Museum could be found except by the division of the great subjects, literature, science, and art. He defended Mr. Panizzi against what he designated as a personal attack upon him by Mr. Milnes, who had not, however, he observed, alleged a single objeotion-to his selection except that he was a foreigner. In his (Mr. Disraeli's) opinion if the trustees had not appointed Mr. Panizzi to the post, they would have acted with great injustice and offered discouragement to meritorious public servants. The discussion then fell into the laxity usual in com- mittees in the course of it, Lord J. Russell replied to observations and objections. With reference to the appointment of Mr. Panizzi, he expressed surprise that Mr. Milnes should have shown so little liberality as to consider a person, whose talents he had admitted, disqualified for this post because he was born out of England. Mr. Milnes reiterated his opinion that this particular office should have been conferred upon a distinguished literary Englishman. The vote was then agreed to, as well as a vote of X18,626 for the Board of Health. The Chairman was then ordered to report progress. The report of the Committee of Supply was brought up and agreed to. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in moving the se- cond reading of the Fire Insurance Bill, stated that its object was to remedy a defect in the existing law, by which the duty was charged only when the insurance was effected in this country. It provided that insurances on property here should pay the duty whether the policy were issued here or in another country. Mr. Wilkinson considered this to be an unwise mea- sure; that it would not effect the object in view, while it would drive business from this country. The better course would be to reduce the duty. He moved to defer the second reading for six months. Mr. E. Denison believed that the bill would be inopera- tive, except that it might produce the effect predicted by Mr. Wilkinson. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, the reduction of the duty to Is. would cause a sacrifice of revenue of between £600,000 and E700,000 a year, and he did not think the burden of the tax was severelv felt. Mr. Henley remarked that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not shown that the bill would save the revenue. He thought it would prove mere waste paper, and that the revenue would gradually slip away. Mr. Kinnaird moved the adjournment of the debate. A discussion of some length ensued, in the course of which Mr. Tite called attention to the effect of the average clause in foreign policies, and ultimately the debate was adjourned until Friday. The other orders were gone through, and, the remain- ing business having been disposed of, the House adjourned 4t a quarter before 2 o'clock until Thursday.

jTHE NEW AMERICAN MINISTER

[No title]

I BETRAYAL OF EUROPEAN LIBERALISM…

THE EMPEROR ALEXANDER AT MOSCOW.

IMOVEMENTS AT NAPLES.--

ITHE FLEET AT SPITHEAD. -…

[No title]