ENGLISH NEWS.

Colonist, Volume II, Issue 167, 27 May 1859, Page 3

ENGLISH NEWS.

• (From the Home News, March 18 J HOUSE OF C6MMONS.--Margh 4. MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER. The third reading of Lord.Bury's bill to legalise marriage with a deceased wife's sister was moved at a late hour on the night of the 3rd of March, or rather at an early hour on the morn-. ing of the 4th. Mr. Hope made a forma! protest against a measure to which he had given, and should continue to give, "an undying, undeviating, and unmitigated opposition;" a declaration that created much merriment. He moved that the bill should be read a third time that day six months. The House divided, and carried the third reading by 137 to 89. The bill then passed. " NAVAL FORCE ON THE AUSTRALIAN ■ COAST. Lord A. Churchill rose to call the atteution of the Government to the inadequate protection at present afforded to the Australian and New Zealand colonies through the smajlnesa of the, naval force stationed there. He, said that many gentlemen connected with the Australian colonies had been disappointed by the omission of the First Lord of the Admiralty, in his speech on the navy estimates, to promise that the naval force in Australia should be increased. The present force consisted of - three or four small vessels, which were a detachment from the forces at the Indian and Chinese stations. The greatest difficulty was therefore experienced in communicating with the admiral During the late war the senior officer at the Australian station expressed his surprise in the strongest terms that colonies so important as the Australian should be protected by so miserable a force. The French had established a naval station in New Caledonia, and wei*e endeavoring in every way to increase their influence on the Pacific 'Ocean. They had now three islands there, one of which —viz.. New Caledonia—was only 900 miles from Sydney. It was a beautiful island, surrounded by coral reef, and had an excellent harbor. It was 400 miles in extent, and was. protected by five French vessels of war; but its trade by no means required so large a force. For what object, then, were those vessels stationed there ? The inhabitants were very savage; and the nominal reason why " the French vessels were maintained was to keep the savages in subjection. But that was not the real reason. The real object was that iv case of any hostilities with France, New Caledonia might be mude the point from which the Australian colonies could be assailed; this could be done with the greatest possible facility. Only a few years ago an American frigate worked her way in the night up the bay to the city of Sydney, and when the people woke in the morning they found themselves under her guns, with nothing to prevent her from laying the city in ashes, or putting it under contribution. The question arose how far it was the. duty of the mother country to protect the country by a naval force, and how far the colonies ought to protect themselves. He thought the mother country ought to afford facilities to the colonies to form a separate naval forco if they chose, and to give them sufficient protection till they had done so. He believed the Australian colonies were ready to form a naval militia for their own defence. One proposition made to the home Government was, that it should send them some of the old ships the. First Lord of the Admiralty stated were not fit to be converted into screw steamers. They might go out jury-rigged, carrying emigrants to defray the expense. They could take., oub heavy ordiiancs ia their holds. When they arrived one might be stationed at Sydney, one at Melbourne, one at Ade'aiile, and one at Hobart Town They would form a naval miiiiia. In the event of any hostilities, they .might be towed-out by a colonial steamer and placed broadside on to the enemy. Such a naval force would give confidence to the colonies; and the fact of their being there might prevent 'any attack." The colonists felt also that they were in a position to demand a separate naval station ; this was recommended by Lord Auckland, but had never been car rind out. He could not see why the admiral in command on the west coast of South America should not have his station extended to Australia; it already extended to within a few hundred miles of New Zealand. These questions excited great interest in the Australian colonies; and be would ask the right hon. barouet whether the Government contemplated forming a separate naval establishment for the better defence of their Australian possessions. Mr. Young could confirm th 9 statements made by the noble lord with regard to the defenceless state of the Australian coasts. The Australian colonies were as loyal and contented as any part of the British empire, their only grievance being the want of moral protection for their extensive seaboard. When rumours of hostilities were rife the colonists were naturally anxious about their safety; and at the commencement of the Russian war great consternation was felt on the same score. The town of Sydney was very exposed to attack; and any French or American sailor who had once been to Sydney harbour could easily take a ship up there during the night. Sir J. Pakington—l entirely agree with my noble friend, that whether it be with respect to naval force or any other matter, the Australian colonies have the fullest right to every friendly consideration at the hands of the Government; but I am not equally disposed to admit the truth of the words used by him in his notice as to the '■' entirely inadequate naval protection" of those colonies. At all events, lam in a position to say that, be their defence adequate or. inadequate, it is much more effective than it was when I succeeded to the Admiralty. At that time the Australian colonies were defended by one vessel, and I believe by one vessel only -—I am sure by not more than two. The Sappho brig was under orders td proceed from the Cape of Good Hope to strengthen that squadron, hut unhappily she was lost, and I am afraid that all hands perished with her. Since that time the Aurelia sloop of war has gone to Australia from the Kooria Mooria Islands; and in the course of the last summer I ordered two other sloops of war to proceed from the China station to strengthen the Australian squadron. The result is that at this time that squadron consists of four men-of-war, two of which are screw steamers; and ia a letter which I re-, ceived very recently from Captain Laurie, the commanding officer of that station, I was assured that in his opinion that squadron was amply sufficient for any necessity which could arise within the colonies. I hope that so far my statement will be satisfactory to my noble friend. This question touches another matter, viz., whether we are prepared to erect a naval station in the Australian colonies. Since I have been at the Admiralty I have been in communication ■with the government of Sydney with a view to obtaining possession of an island in that harbour called " Garden Island," and we prb-

pose to appropriate that island at least to the reception of naval stores for. the benefit and j assistance of her Majesty's vessels in those seas. ' That arrangement is at present in its infancy. I mention it to show my noble friend that we are not unmindful of the necessity of having some naval establishment in those seas, and I hope that it will soon be so far matured as to meet all the requirements of our fleet. My noble friend mentioned a fact of which I was not aware—that it was the intention of Lord Auckland to make the Australian station a separate command. It is my intention to carry out a similar arrangement. The Board of Admiralty have come to the determination that the Australian colonies ought not to be nominally attached to the India and China station, and we therefore propose to make it an independent command. Mr. Bright—The First Lord of the Admiralty has not answered the question of the noble lord the member for Woodstock, with respect to tho expense of the squadron which it is proposed to station in,the neighborhood of the Australian colonies. 'The hon. member for Yarmouth, who spent several years in those colonies,.has given us a pleasing picture, of their condition. He,say3 they have everything they want, with a single exception—that with which it is now proposed to furnish them. (A laugh.) We know that they have all the land of Australia, and a constitution so. free that the people of England are not permitted to hope for anything like it; We also know they have' ah increasing trade, and enjoy a prosperity such as is not equalled in this country. The rate of wages—everything in those colonies—forces us to tho conclusion that the great body of the people there, those whom we should call the working and industrious classes, are in a condition of comfort equal to that of the middle ranks of society in this kingdom. Being so hippy and'prosperous, if there be one thing more wanted, and it consists of ships of war to defend their coasts and harbours, I think it is but fair they should pay the expenses. It is one of the most monstrous things ever heard of, .and probably has never been dreamt of in any country but this, that we should have an extended empire, abounding in colonies, such as Canada and Australia, where the people are infinitely, better off than we are, and yet should contribute not a single farthing in any shape either to the wars, or for the naval and military service of the home country. If they are to be parts of the empire, and allowed to demand military succour, I do not say ; even in time of war, but in time of peace—regiments upon their shores and fleets upon their waters—l say every farthing of the cost th°y ou^ht to defray themselves. I protest against this constant loading of the industry of the people of England for the purpose, whether of protecting our rich and prosperous colonies, or of merely gratifying the ttiste and sentiment of persons living at the other side of the world. If we persist in the ■ course which we have been pursuing for the last j fer years, and if the expense of our naval and military .'establishments is to increase as it has done during the last 20 years, by a sum equal to £10,000,000 or £12,000,000 per annum, notwithstanding the tranquillity which how exists, the time will come when somebody will see that "ugly rush" to which the right lion.. member for Oxfordshire referred the other night, and when, there will be a ferment among the, millions of our people which all the excited and exaggerated fears of the lion, and gallant member for Southwark will be little able to compose. You have bean telling the House." for yews past that the only power inrthe .worM-which-has" a* fleet of,any pretensions whatever is your cordial ally. : You have flattered him, you have fawned upon .him, you have pxpress°d ynur faith in him m ev«ry form of words of which the English ■language is capable ; but at the same time you are constantly increasing your military and naval expenses, for which there would be no sort of pretence whatever if a single sentence of what you s:iy were true, or if you believed your own statements. I say your conduct is monstrous. You are playing false both to your ally i and to your country, and the time will come when Government and Parliament will regret uot having kept down with a strong hand a species of expense which in every a^e of the world has brought disaster upon thrones and States. Sir E. B. Lytton—The hon. member for Birmingham' has not perfectly- comprehended the overtures made to the colonies with respect to the expense of their naval and military defence. In 1856, Sir William Denison proposed a plan for the naval and military defence of Australia. According to that plan he.proposed: that the colony should be at all the expense of, the naval and military force required for purely colonial defence, and that the ; lmperial Government should pay the cost of what was necessary' for Imperial purposes. In fact, it has been the object both of my predecessors and myself to urge upon the colony the necessity of contributing largely towards its defence. (Hear, hear.) Lord J. Russell very much agreed with his lion friend behind him, that the colonies of Australia should provide some means for their own defence. Some years ago, when Secretary for the Colonies, a deputation came to him respecting some expenses, for the harbor of Sydney, and he.iold them they ought to^pay' for them themselves. They expressed great readiness to do so, and he believed that since that time every Colonial Secretary had told the Australian colonies that if they did not want to be surprised by seeing a number of foreign-ships; of war some jmorning before their ports, they ought to take means to defend the approach of the harbors. To expect that this country should be laying a tax qn the people for that purpose was not right. (Hear.) Mr. Lowe said that so long as the home Government disposed of the resources of the Aus-. tralian colonies, while they were, in fact, our penal settlements, no steps were taken to provide them with defences of any sort. vOne or two attempts were made to fortify the entrance to Sydney harbor, but they were failures.* The colonists now were- anxious to have defences, and ready to pay for them, but it,was not unreasonable to ask for one of the old liners, which were rotting in our ports, to serve as a guardship for the harbor, and a naval school for the youth of the colony. He hoped the. lecture of the' member for Birmingham would not deter the Admiralty from making these colonies a stuion for a commodore. We had stations on the coast of Africa and on the coast, of South America, and surely we might afford a squadron to protect the gold ships on their passage to this country. It had always been a matter of astonishment to him that a filibustering establishment had not been set up somewhere near the' Straits of Magellan. No business could be carried on with greater ease, or with more profit. (A laugh.) It might be the duty of the. colony to pay for its own defences,, but it never could be its duty to find fleets to. defend the trade of the home country,. '

ARMY. ESTIMATES. General. Peel moved the Army Estimates. He said that the-troops now in the United Kingdom amount to 105,000 men. Great imr | provements have taken place in military practice and in gunnery, and soldiers have been instructed. in cooking and providing for them- j selves. The total sum required will be £11,168,180, being a decrease of £9000 as compared with last year. The total number of men he asked for was 122,655. This and other votes were agreed to. The remainder of the Army Estimates stood over for discussion till the 7th of March, when more votes were agreed to. PROSPECTS OF INDIA. The second reading of the Indian Loan Bill [March 7] gave several members an opportunity of setting forth their views on the prospects of India. Lord Stanley, without making a speech, moved that the bill should be read a second time. There was no opposition, but a succession of sharp critics arose one after the other, and commented on the vast subject opened to them. . Sir George Lewis led the way. In his earlier observations h« threw out-abundantly his -doubts of the advantage of India to this country. Our trade with China is of more importance than our trade with India. We must not exaggerate our advantages. , Whether India is profitable or not, it is true is not a practical question. But whichever view is correct, we have contracted obligations towards the. natives, and we are bound to fulfil them. Sir George proceeded to set forth that although a change has been made in the Government of India, it does not saddle the imperial exchequer with any liability that did not previously exist, It is" important to maintain rigorously the existing separation between the Indian and Imperial exchequer. What weighs most upon the Indian finances is the military expenditure. The civil expenditure is moderate, with good government it must increase; and therefore Indian finances can only be improved by .diminishing military expenditure. We must reduce that incubus. Now the least objectionable form in which England can aid India, is not by guaranteeing loans, but by. paying a portion of the expense of the troops of the Queen quartered in India. The overgrown army.of native soldiers could be decreased since we need four -no foreign invasion, • nor any native, power. We shmU substitute police /or soldiers. -At all events England should not have to pay the Indian debt. •If we make insurrection so easy we shall remove one of the strongest inducements to orderly conduct, and teach India a dangerous lesson. An increase of fisctl pressure will be a wholesome reproof to those who have wantonly rebelled without provocation. Mr. Bright made an extensive speech. Remarking that Sir George L-nvis' proposal contradicted his doctrine, Mr. B.ight expressed the anxiety he felt when lie read the speech of Lord Stanley touching the liability of England. His statement shewed that it is scarcely possible to conceive anything in a worse condition than the finances of India. There is a constantly increasing debt, a constantly increasing expenditure, and a constantly diminishing re""venue. He. regretted that Lord Stanley had had recourse to the bad argument that, the debt of India is only three or four times tho amount of the net revenue. India in this respect is compared to England, where our debt is ten or twelve times our revenue. But the comparison is as unsound as the argument is bad. Every increase of debt will involve a deficit, unless''a new tax can J>e_jiscpyerel _The bomeiyGjp-^ vernment has no control over tHe expenditure. The revenue is failing;. The land-tax has. fallen. Should the Chinese permit-opium;to be grown in China, the revenue derived from thatdrug would disappear. Nor are the deficits due to the revolt. The system of constant deficits existed before the revolt. 'Now the government of India is not changed. There has been only an alteration in nume. The men are the same, the principles ure the same. Sound Indian finance is impossible under the existing organisation. "Lot us compare ourselves with the native states." They always had full treasuries—surpluses; the greed of surpluses was one temptation to annex them. We have abolished 30 states, and established a central authority.; We have wrung from the people all they could pay and spent it -all;- borrowed ,£8O,O6O;OOO and spent that; and we now find ourselves with broken faith and broken credit, and a deficit increasing from year to year. Nothing has been done iv the way of remedy. More debt, more taxes—if you durst levy taxes r— but no better government. Upon Lord Stanley rests the responsibility of finding a -remedy. Mr. Bright deprecated the payment of such large salaries to civil servants,., and inveighed against the employment of such huge armies. Describing India as inhabited by an industrious people and possessing every element of prosperity, he said that industry and the elements of wealth are garotted because there is not clear ownership and secure tenure of the soil. He called for decentralisation of the government ; suggested the admission of natives to Indian councils and places of trust, and urged Lord Stanley to find a new tax that would touch the rich and spare the poor. " The noble lord is in a position of the highest responsibility and the greatest difficulty. He committed a fatal error last year, when, in obediauce to his colleagues, he proposed to surround, himself with the instruments of the former misgovernment of India. The noble lord may not; find direct votes of want of confidence in himself in his new Council j'but we all know that one man sitting with 15 others—though he does not see the direct opposition to his plans and principles—may find a difficulty constantly brought before him, offering itself at every step iv his path, which he will be utterly unable to overcome." Mr. Bright insisted that in spite of the Queen's proclamation annexation is still persisted in— giving as an instance the recent confiscation of the principality of Dhar. Officers ought to be made to obey the home Government, and those who do not should be recalled. Unless there is a minister here with a firm hand, backed by Parliament, the Queen's proclamation will not change the conditions upon which Englishmen have governed India." : Mr; Bright frankly stated that he considered the revolt justified by bad government, and declared that no one who has lent his money to the Indian government has a shadow of a claim either moral or legal upon the revenues or taxation of India. " I think that the £40,000,000 which the revolt will cost is a grievous burden to place upon the people of India. It has come from the mismanagement of the people and Parliameiit of England. (Cheers.) If every man had what was just, no doubt that .£40,000,000 would have to be paid out of the taxes levied upon the people of this country. (" Hear, hear," and a cry of '• No, no.") -In conclusion, Mr. Bright expressed the greatest confidence in the capabilities of India for trade. A prodigious impetus

has been given to trade in Lancashire by the extraordinary demand for cotton for India. "No doubt a large portion of that arises from the squandering of the many millions which the Government has expended there; but I know very well, as a manufacturer, as a person who has, whether as a manufacturer or member of this House, investigated Indian affairs, that you cannot push your goods a mile further into any part of the country without finding customers waiting for you. There appears to be no limit —there can be no limit that we can reach for a long time in trading with 150,000,000 or 200,000,000 of persons, if you will only give them a chance of reaping the fruits of their industry and securing the enjoyment of (hat which they produce. I hope the noble lord will believe, as I assure Him, that I have not made a single observation for the purpose of finding fault with his Government, or with anything that he has done since he came into office as Minister for India, but I do beseech him well to deliberate whether, with the machinery that now exists, after the 12 months' experience that he has had, it be possible for him or for anybody else to bring about the change of circumstances and the change of policy which are necessary in India, and if he should come to the conclusion, which I believe no Minister of India can escape from, I hope that before long he will be prepared, cither as Minister for India or as a non-offi-cial member of the House, to declare to us what his experience teaches him, that what we did last year was provisional and only for an experiment, and that we must, within a very short period, entirely reconstruct the government of India, not only in this country, but in India itself." _ Mr. Ayrton combated some of Mr. firight's arguments ; objected to land grants in perpetuity; argued in favor of English liability for Indian debt; and recommended economy and the employment of natives.—Mr. Ewart put in a word for irrigation and roads.—Mr. Wilson entered into much detail to shew that the revenue has been improving of late years, and that the debt is not relatively onerous. He objected to the grant of lands in perpetuity; nothing could be more disastrous. He anticipated an increase of revenue from the land, the customs and salt duties, consequent upon the extension of railways, and pointed to native bankers as included in the rich classes who ought to pay a proportion of taxation. He'wasficonfident in the development of Indian resources, and in'the security of our rule. Lord Stanley commented generally on the variety of topics-started in the course of the debate. He promised a careful consideration of the suggestions offered. He set himself to shew that practically the only mode of disposing of lands to private persons in India is in perpetuity. As to the debt., all lie contends for is that it haa not relatively increased, and that it is not greater than the resources of India will bear. He went over again the reasons that have led to high salaries in India, and did not seem sanguine of any great retrenchment. On the subject of imperial liability he admitted that the Indian creditor has no claim whatever except on Indian revenue ; but said that if the revenue proved, deficient the question of liability would certainly be raised. Finally he defended the change of last year, contending that it was a real change and that it has already led to improvement. Sir Erskine Perry and Mr. Cuniing Bruce contended that England must be responsible for the Indian debt, and that it would be better at once to raise whatever money is wanting on the.s» — '".*'" of England. By that means jr-««r Vigilance » respect to Indian affai«^ottld be secured. The bill was read a second time.