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

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

very slight notice on the part of the House would be sufficient; but he was of opinion that both parties should be called to the bar, and should be told that the House was a privileged place, and that those who were called there came to discharge a public duty-that they must do so quietly, and that while so engaged there must be an oblivion of personal quarrels. Had he been consulted he would not have advised the presentation of this petition; but as it had been presented, and as evidence had been examined, the House could not pass it by without notice. It should be recollected, that, on these election petitions, adverse parties were brought into immediate personal collision; and it was therefore necessary to impress upon them, that those who were not inclined to quarrel should have perfect personal protection, and that those who were should restrain themselves in that place, and decide their quarrels elsewhere. He was of opinion, that both parties should be called up. So far was he from thinking, that the proceedings at Bow-street made the interference of the House less necessary, that it rendered it more so; as the friends of the parties saw there was so much personal conflict, as to warrant their application to a magistrate for his interference.

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

Mr. Alderman Waithman considered the point upon which the attention of the House was employed as one of the most frivolous he had ever heard discussed. He would venture to say that there was hardly ever a committee, in reference to which some trifling squabble did not occur, which might not with as much reason be

interference of the House. The hon. member to whom the petition had been intrusted had done quite right in presenting it; but he was of opinion that there was nothing in it which called for any further step on the part of the House.

Sir Robert Wilson differed entirely from the worthy alderman, and conceived that his own arguments were sufficient to prove that it was incumbent on the House to

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

Mr. Martin French, and Mr. Thomas Lambert were ordered to attend the House

to-morrow.

PENRYN ELECTION-CASE OF JOHN STANBURY.] The Speaker begged leave to recall the attention of the House to an order made a few days back for the taking into custody John Stanbury, who was reported by the Penryn Election committee to have absented himself. It was directed, by order of the House, that he should be taken into custody, in consequence of his not having attended before the committee. The Speaker's warrant was accordingly issued for the purpose, and a messenger was deputed to carry it into execution; but the party having absconded, all his endeavours to discover and apprehend him were unsuccessful; and although he was a second time despatched from town on a similar mission, his efforts were attended with as little beneficial results as before. The usual course on such occasions was to have the messenger to the bar, that the House might hear from himself what steps he had taken for fulfilling the order of the House; and if it should then appear expedient to the House, to present an address to the Crown, praying his majesty to issue a proclamation, with a reward for the apprehension of the party.

The Serjeant-at-Arms was then called and received directions to order the messenger, John Wright, to appear at the bar of the House. The messenger having made his appearance, he was desired by the Speaker to state the course he had pursued for the apprehension of John Stanbury. He accordingly entered into a detail of his route from town to Exeter, to the house of Mr. Stanbury, where he was informed that that individual had not been

at home for some time before. Having received intimation that the fugitive was concealed in a farm-house about five miles from Plymouth, he proceeded thither, and aided by four constables, searched the premises, but without obtaining any trace of the object of his search. He then proceeded to Tregony, and from thence to Truro, in both of which places he made diligent inquiries after Mr. Stanbury, but was unable to gain any intelligence of his retreat. He returned again to Exeter, and from thence came back to town; and having received directions to go a second time to Plymouth, he repaired thither, but with no better success than before; and he was obliged finally to return to town without having accomplished the object of his

mission.

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

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

SHIPPING INTEREST.] Mr. Alderman Waithman said, that there was already before the House a petition from gentlemen connected with the Shipping Interests of the city of London. He held in his hand a petition of a similar nature, from a body of ship-owners in London, of equal respectability. The two bodies to whom he alluded were associated, and had appointed a committee; and although the petition he was about to present was not united with the preceding, it was of a precisely similar nature. The present petition was signed by more than two hundred and fifty persons. They represented the hardship of their case arising out of the laws recently passed by the House, and by which the House had removed certain restrictions upon foreign shipping which had proved an essential security to the British shipping interest. The petitioners stated, that it was now impossible for them to enter into competition with foreigners,

as they had to bear the disadvantage of from thirty to forty per cent in the prices of implements, wages, and almost all materials. The petitioners also state, that every other class of the community that had been willing to try the experiment of free trade upon the petitioners, had equally shrunk from allowing that experiment to be tried upon themselves. He did not pledge himself as to what he should do when the subject came before the House; but all the petitioners wished was, that their case should undergo an inquiry. For his part, he felt it impossible to put the petitioners upon a fair and proper footing, under the existing law, unless, by a reduction of taxes, and especially of those which operated to raise the price of provisions, they were placed in parallel circumstances with foreign competitors, and with other branches of English industry.

Ordered to lie on the table.

Mr.

MUTINY AT BARRACKPORE.] Hume said, that in rising to submit to the House the question of which he had so long given notice, he felt it necessary to state, that whatever he should now do upon this subject would be done by him with the greatest reluctance. He would not have submitted this matter to their consideration, if he had not been fully convinced of its great importance as relating to our government in India, and to all our connections with the affairs of that country. The occurrence to which he was about to call the attention of the House took place in the early part of the month of November, 1824. When he mentioned that date, a question might naturally arise, why so great a delay had occurred in laying a subject of so much importance before parliament. Upon that point he should only state, that in the middle of the month of July, 1825, in the course of the session of that year, he had requested to know from the President of the Board of Control, whether the government of this country had received any information of the transactions which had taken place in India in the November preceding? The right hon. gentleman answered then in the negative; and gave the same answer up to the last week in the session, when it was too late to take any step on the subject. In the last session he had given two notices upon this subject; but by some of those chances which frequently occurred, he was twice preventVOL. XVI.

ed from making those notices the subjects of discussion; nor had he any opportunity whatever for so doing, until towards the close of the session, when the lateness of the period, together with the expected arrival of that officer, whose conduct was chiefly the subject of discussion, and whose presence in this country was desirable, that he might immediately meet the charge, had induced him to postpone his motion. When the present session arrived, he felt the most anxious wish to introduce the matter to the notice of the House; and he should certainly have done so before this time, but for the important subjects which had occupied so much of their attention. He felt that it was at any time a delicate matter to interfere on subjects relating to the army, perhaps more so on this than on many other occasions; but he felt it to be a positive duty for him now to take upon himself this task, and to bring under the notice of the House the proceedings of the executive in India, with regard to the management of the army. He acknowledged that he should not have been warranted in calling the attention of the House to the subject, but on account of its very great importance. He knew that, in all armies, as well at home as abroad, some instance of insubordination among some of the troops, might, at one time or other, be discovered. The degree of importance of any such instance of insubordination would vary according to time, place and circumstance; and some might be of a very trifling nature; but, in the East Indian army, where there were at least one hundred and twenty thousand native troops to twenty-five thousand British soldiers, any thing which affected it in such a manner, as to tend, in the slightest degree, to create a feeling of insubordination, must always be a matter of the highest importance. It should always be remembered that we held possession of India but by a very small numerical force, at least compared to the number of the natives employed in our service; and it should always be a matter to which our general officers and governors should devote their utmost care and attention, to uphold, as much as possible, the character of our officers and soldiers, not merely for their superiority of military skill, discipline, and courage, but for their moral conduct, in carrying on the government of that immense country.

2 U

Having made these general observations, he should now state the circumstances of that transaction on which he wished to take the opinion of the House. The governor-general of India had, in consequence of some manifestation of enmity on the part of a native prince, deemed it necessary to embark in hostilities against him. That resolution was taken in October, 1824, and in furtherance of it, some troops were sent towards the frontiers. Among these troops were the men composing a battalion of the 47th native regiment, who were marched from Futtaghur, which was about a thousand miles up the country, towards the eastern frontier. What he was now about to move, related to the order given them to march from Barrackpore, where they had assembled, towards the Burmese territory, and to their refusal to obey it; a refusal which, on account of the line of conduct that, he contended, had been improperly pursued by the commander-in-chief, led to the destruction of three or four hundred of their number in a very short space of time. There were two questions upon which he thought the House would require to be informed. In the first place, they would desire to obtain some knowledge as to what had been the causes, the existence of which had led to this insubordination and mutiny; and secondly, they would wish to know whether proper measures, such as were consistent with the maintenance of strict discipline, and at the same time with a spirit of humanity, had been employed to bring these mutineers back to their duty. When they were satisfied upon these two points they would be able to decide, whether the loss of life that had occurred had not been owing to the mischief of not properly carrying into effect those means that might have been resorted to for the purpose of restoring order without having recourse to bloodshed. There was no man who had been in India, that would not readily bear testimony to the general good conduct of the native troops-none that would not agree with bim in saying, that whenever these native troops had been led into action by the side of our countrymen, they had manifested as much zeal and courage in the service as the British soldiers. He was positive that all who knew them would concur in the statement, that on all these occasions they had shewn the same zeal, alacrity, and bravery, and had displayed

the same gallantry, that had so honourably distinguished our countrymen in the service there. At the same time, he was bound to acknowledge, that they had occasionally displayed acts of insubordination. That, however, ought not to be resorted to as an argument against them, any more than against the European troops, for the same thing had occurred in the European corps.

He should now proceed to consider the circumstances to which the mutiny of the native troops was to be attributed, repeating what he had before said, that their insubordination was no more a reproach to them than to our own troops, and that the corps of British and of native troops ought both to be placed on the same footing in that respect. If, as he had already asserted, the native troops were distinguished by general good conduct, and those who had served with them were prepared to bear testimony to their merit, he thought they would concur with him in saying, that the circumstances which had led to the mutiny of these troops must have been of a most extraordinary nature. The battalion of the 47th native regiment had but a short time before been brought down from the upper provinces, from Futtaghur, which was about a thousand miles up the country, and up to the time of their being assembled with the other troops at Barrackpore, he believed that no troops had shewn greater readiness or good will in the service. The service to which they were destined was certainly not one that was likely to create much enthusiasm. Some alarm had arisen throughout the country, not only from the proceedings that had taken place on the eastern frontier, but also from the fear that the native troops of Bengal had acquired religious prejudices that would prevent them from acting with their usual zeal and alacrity; and, indeed, that they would manifest a greater degree of unwillingness than on any other occasion to quit their own territory. That unwillingness might not only have been expected, but could have been easily accounted for, by a variety of circumstances. First of all, it was known that the troops which had preceded them had suffered great privations, that many had been disabled by sickness, and they naturally feared that they should suffer in the same manner; the more especially as they were in a state of destitution, as to many things that were absolutely necessary, In speaking thus