ENGLISH NEWS TO FEB. 19.

Otago Witness, Issue 340, 5 June 1858, Page 6

ENGLISH NEWS TO FEB. 19.

_ The Sydney Empire gives the following additional items of important English intelligence received by telegraph via Malta. Lord Palmerston was defeated in the House of Commons, on the Alien Bill, February 19, by the following division : — For the Bill, 215, against it, 234; majority 19. The public excitement was naturally very great, but it was thought that Ministers would

remain in office on the ground of duty to the nation at so critical a juncture. On the 17th Mr. Montagu Manning received the honour of Knighthood. The In.dia Bill was read a first time by 318 to 173. J The " Speedy" had arrived from Sydney. The latest quotations of consols was 97£. Sir Charles A. Fitz Roy died on the 16th February ; and when the news reached Sydney, the Parliament of New South Wales adjourned on the 4th instant, in testimony of its' respect for the memory of their late Governor.

The Causes op the Indian Mutiny.— Of all the occurrences that have aided the mutiny of this viciously constituted army, we sincerely believe that annexation of native States, in defiance of the native laws of inheritance, has been the most operative and useful to their cause. This is to be seen in the atrocities perpetrated at Jhansi, in the rising against us of the whole kingdom of Oude, and now, in the intrigues of Sattara, within the territory of Bombay, followed by the mutiny of one of the regiments of that Presidency, a corps recently levied in the Mahratta territory,— that is, in the territory that was once that of annexed Sattara. It is very true that such annexations, or rather forcible seizures, of territory, under one pretext or another, were at all times normal incidents of Indian histery without occasioning rebellions. Mohammedans seized upon territories belonging to Hindoos, and Hindoos upon those belonging to Mohammedans. Sometimes even one tribe of Mohammedans, or one tribe of Hindoos, seized on territories belonging to other tribes of their respective co-reli-gionists, without insurrection resulting. We ourselves, in the course of our conquests, had done the very same thing in the cases both of Mohammedans and Hindoos, as in the examples of Rohilcund, Benares, and Scinde, without exciting the slightest commotion ; and such would unquestionably have been the case now had there been no currupt army ripe for rebellion to take advantage of our annexations. Some have insisted, but without a tittle of foundation for the assumption, that the conspiracy against our authority is a purely Mohammedan plot, the Hindoos having only been drawn into it by Mohammedan intrigue and seduction. Both religionists have alike united for the overthrow of our power, as they would do in any other movement that presented to their narrow understanding the same oppor-. tunity of license and plunder. The truth is I that the majority of the Mohammedans of India are, as to pretensions of caste, and in everything hut a few religious dogmas <md a few external observances, just as much Hindoos as the Hindoos themselves, differing from them, in fact, not more than the followers of Brahma do from those of Jain among the latter, and less than the followers of Nana, the founder of the religion of the Sikhs, do from either. In the Madras Presidency, where there ha 3 been no mutiny, one-half the infantry and nearly the whole of the cavalry is Mohammedan j whereas in Bengal, where nearly the whole army has revolted, there are in the infantry but two Mohammedans to five Hindoos, while of the cavalry one-half are Hindoos. If the mutiny, then, had been of Mohammedan origin, it ought to have taken place in Madras, and not in Bengal. As we have above said, the mass of the Mohammedans of India are but partially converted Hindoos, while the few whose forefathers were of a different race from Hindoos are at present but half-castes, with all the prejudices of Hindooism lying heavily upon them.— Examiner.