The Press. — London, England, 1858-02-13 00:00:00

150 the force destined against Canton, but that force having been diverted, at the request of Lord Canning, to India, and there being no immediate prospect of immediate active operations in China, by direction of the Commander-in-Chief Oeneral Ashburnhom pro ceeded to India; but, upon arriving at Calcutta, he found that there was no opportunity of giving him active employment in India, and, after waiting three or four weeks, he had thought it best to return home and place himself at the disposal of the Commander. in-Chief. General PEET, with the permission of the house, read an explanation placed in his hands by General Ashburnham, in which that gallant officer said that his services in the field having been dispensed with by Sir Cohn Campbell, and that his offer to take any command, however small, in the field being rejected, and the command of the Lahore division being offered to him instead—a valuable command, which he did not think himself justified in accepting over the heads of so many distinguished Indian officers — be thought it better to return to England. VOTE OF THANKS TO THE ARMY AND NAVY IN INDIA. On the motion of thanks to the military, naval, and civil functionaries who bad rendered service during the mutiny in India, Mr. DISRAELI interposed a question on the point of order. The original notice, he observed, had been given by Lord Palmerston, in general terms, for thanks to the army and navy, but, as now proposed, the vote specified the namev of certain individuals, and especially included that of the Governor-General, respecting whose merits there might arise many doubts. This change in the tenor of the motion was, he submitted, irregular. A brief discussion ensued, when the SPEAKER ruled that the motion as it stood was perfectly in order. Lord PALMERSTON then moved the vote of thanks in the terms that had been inserted in the notice paper, alluding briefly to the services performed by the various personages mentioned in the vote, and also of the general body of military, naval, and civilian employes who had shared in the late opera tions in Hindostan. The services of Sir Cohn Camp bell and other gallant officers the noble lord warmly eulogised : Sir Colin Campbell has displayed the highest qualities which can distinguish a general in the field. The alacrity with which he left England to take the chief command was characteristic of his Highland extraction and of his military genius. When requested to proceed to India he replied that he would be proud to have the trust committed to him ; and on being asked when he could start he answered " To-morrow evening." (Cheers.) He wanted no time for preparation, no delay for arranging his military equipments. He could get everything he required, he said, at Calcutta, and he would not lose an hour in leaving Eng land by the first steamer then under orders to sail. He arrived at Calcutta, and presented himself at the residence of the Governor-General ; and, whatever may have been reported from India to the contrary, the most perfect con fidence, the most perfect harmony, the most perfect recipro cal esteem and goodwill prevailed between him and the Governor-General from the moment that he reached that country down to the latest hour to which our intelligence extends. ( Hear, hear ) I know that Sir Cohn Campbell has written to the Governor-General, expressing his lively sense of the public services performed by Load Canning in the course of this war. Sir C. Campbell has the rare merit of uniting to the greatest intrepidity and the most daring courage that caution, that combination, that adaptation of means to the end which is best calculated to accomplish the object in view with the least possible sacrifice of life to his troops. ( Hear, hear.) This most admirable quality is one which perhaps few of the great leaders whose deeds are recorded on the page of history can be praised for dis playing, but it is nevertheless a quality which his illustrious predecessor, the Duke of Wellington, eminently possessed, and which is always sure not only to command the con fidence of the army, but to render its services doubly effec tual when the day of battle arrives. In his splendid ad vance upon lucknow, in the manner in which he extricated that large train of women and children, and of sick and wounded from the beleaguered Residency, Sir C. Campbell has shown a military skill and ability that were never sur passed. And when he returned to Cawnpore, and had to attack the Gwalior Contingent, instead of rushing to the encounter without preparation, he paused to mature his plans and complete his arrangements, and then indicted upon the enemy a discomfiture all the more signal and decisive for his previous delay. (Hear, hear.) It is a great consolation for the country to know that it possesses so great a commander as Sir C. Campbell has proved him self to be ; and it is equally satisfactory to feel that we have men who the moment they are placed in situations of great responsibility show themselves fully equal to the oetasion, and entitle themselves to the applause and gratitude of their country. He then passed in rapid review the services of Wilson, and Outran], and Greathed, and Cotton, and many other gallant and distinguished men, arriving lastly at those of Colonel Inglis, " a name never to be forgotten, and made illustrious by that gallant defence of Lucknow." Lord Palmerston con cluded by formally moving the vote of thanks. Mr• DISR‘ELI quite agreed with the noble lord in his view of the conduct of individuals during the last year in India. He did not think there had ever been an instance in which character had been so THE PRESS, FEBIttrARY 13, 1858. remarkably exhibited, in which individual energy had shone with so much lustre. Indeed the glory was quite epical. The narrative read almost like an llomeric poem, and every scene produced a hero. In those remarkable events there were two incidents which, by their importance, immediately attracted our attention, and it was curious that in these two instances our countrymen were placed in exactly opposite positions. In one they were besiegers, in the other besieged ; and in both cases they achieved a complete success—gained immortal glory. Be tween the siege of Delhi and that of Lucknow there was, however, one passage which ought never to be forgotten on an occasion like the present, and that was the connecting link between them, the march of Greathed—worthy, he thought, of Caesar. Mr. Disraeli then pronounced a warm panegyric upon the heroism displayed by all grades in India, from the highest general to the rank and file, but he lamented that by the introduction of Lord Canning's name there had been imported into the motion an element of controversy. He did think that if it had been intended to propose a vote of thanks to Lord Canning, due notice should have been given : After all we have heard, I think that the friends of Lord Canning, not to speak of his Excellency himself, could not desire that a vote of such a kind should be sur reptitiously obtained. (Cheers.) I have never brought any charge against Lord Canning, but if the noble viscount challenges me to-night I must express my opinion, which I am sure is not one in the least influenced by pre judice or passion. There are passages in the conduct of Lord Canning which require great explanation and a vin ii cation which I have not yet heard. ( Cheers.) lam not prepared to say that a satisfactory explanation cannot be given, or that a triumphant defence may Lot be made, but I am prepared to say that we ought not to vote these thanks, and Lord Canning ought not to deign to accept them, until we have arrived at the clear conviction that his services are entitled to our approbation. (Hear, hear.) The noble viscount says no one expected what he persists in calling the "mutiny "in India. It took everybody by surprise. There are prophets after the event who explain everything, but nobody expected anything to happen at all. Of course that is intended as an excuse for Lord Canning, but I am still 'of opir.ion that it is not a prima-facie proof of excellence in a Governor-General that he should be taken by surprise when there is an insurrection. ( Hear, hear.) I should like to have upon that subject an explana tion far more satisfactory than that given by the noble viscount. But there are passages of policy in the conduct of the Government of India which demand the most care ful investigation before the house can be so unwise as to commit itself to the approbation of measures which after wards it may find it its duty to impugn. We want infor• 'nation as to the negotiations that took place between the Governor-General and the ruler of Nepaul. That is a matter entirely left in mystery. Why were negotiations commenced with the ruler of Nepanl to induce him to pour troops into Oude at a particular moment? Why were they afterwards countermanded, and why were they once more renewed? It is possible that the friends of Lord Canning may be able to explain his conduct in that particular, but the subject is clearly one which requires explanation; and before we have thoroughly investigated the facts we cannot prudently pass a vote of thanks to his Excellency. (Hear, hear.) I should also like to know what were the motives which induced Lord Canning to order troops from Ran goon, and then to countermand them ? ( Hear, hear.) In the conduct of the administration of India—which, I repeat, may possibly be triumphantly explained and de fended—l see inconsistency and incoherency, and to ask us to thank the Governor-General for pursuing a policy which appears on the surface to have led to great public disasters seems to me to be most unreasonable and im politic. (Cheers.) The noble viscount tells us, as one claim for our approbation of the conduct of Lord Canning, that his Excellency has distinguished himself by the manner in which he has forwarded troops up the country. No doubt the noble viscount is in possession of information of the highest kind. He says that newspapers are not to be trusted, and that private letters should not be attended to. What, then, are we, who have no official despatches, but who are obliged to get our information as we can, to do in order to ascertain the facts? I am bound to say that, having given the most careful attention to that sub ject, and endeavoured to obtain information from the most authentic sources, I have all along been under the impres sion that there was a most lamentable deficiency of trans port at Calcutta. (Cheers.) We have heard of troops arriving there without any preparations having been niade for their reception. (Hear, hear.) In the month of No vember last we had an official telegram announcing the arrival of troops, and at the same time confessing and deploring that there were no means of forwarding them up the country. (Cheers.) The charge against Lord Canning is that he did not take those steps which were absolutely requisite, and upon which the results of the campaign depended, and that by that neglect we are about to enter into that which I took the liberty at the end of last session to warn the house was a most dangerous course—a third campaign. ( Hear, hear.) We want to know why Lord Canning did not send to Madras for 20,0(X) bullocks, which might have been obtained. upon the means of transport depended whether the hostilities in India should be prolonged, and yet, without any inquiry into the conduct of the Governor-General in that particular, we are asked to agree to a vote which would prevent us hereafter from impugning or criticising any part of his public policy. ( Hear, hear.) I should like to have bad a clear account, bef.)re I came to a vote of this kind, of the motives which influenced Lord Canning to adopt the measures which lie did with regard to suppressing the English press. ( Hear, hear.) I am convinced myself from information which I possess —not from writers of anonymous letters in Calcutta papers—( Hear, hear)—that it was an unnecessary step, and that it has entailed great mischief on our interests. k Hear.) I do not want the house to come to a decision upon that subject upon an occasion like the present, though I believe it is one which requires grave deliberation ; but I do say that it is mon. strous to ask us of a sudden to come to a vote which pre. eludes us front hereafter ever offering an opinion upon it, or upon all those topics to which, without preparation, I have referred. (Hear, hear.) In conclusion, Mr. Disraeli suggested that the first vote should be postponed—that fair notice should be given, and the conduct of Lord Canning discussed ; and this suggestion he made, he said, for the sake of Lord Canning himself; who would not be honoured by a smuggled vote. Upon the first vote, therefore, including Lord Canning, Lord Harris, Lord Elphin stone, Sir J. Lawrence, and Mr. Ftere, he moved the previous question. _ _ A lengthened debate then ensued. Mr. LAM!. CRERE contended that the motion before the house would preclude no one from moving a vote of cen sure on Lord Canning. Sir J. PAKINGTON, on the contrary, maintained that the present vote involved approval of Lord Canning's conduct, which he thought had been marked by " great vacillation, indecision, and a want of statesmanlike capacity and vigour." Mr. MANGLES and Colonel SYKES defended Lord Canning. _ _ _ Mr. N VALPOLE regretted that the house should be called upon to vote its thanks to Lord Canning when there was a memorial in a manner before it im peaching his conduct with reference to the very subject-matter of the vote. But looking to the con sequences of the house refusing its assent to the vote when brought before it, which would place the Governor-General in a most disadvantageous position —that of a public servant under a cloud —he would press upon Mr. Disraeli the propriety of not per sisting in his motion. Lord J. RUSSELL expressed a hope that the house would concur in the view of Mr. Walpole. _ Mr. BENTINCK regretted much the introduction of an element into the vote which would prevent the house from coming to a unanimous decision. Under all the circumstances, he should support the previous question, which was opposed by Mr. S. HERBERT, who considered that the Govern ment would not have been justified in excluding from the vote Lord Canning, to whose courage, firmness, and coolness we owed a great part of the success which had attended the military operations in India. He was not called upon to discuss the general policy of Lord Canning's Government ; but even his opponents did homage to his coolness and Mr. KINNAIRD thought the house should have had fuller informatiou before it was asked to agree to this vote. Lord C. HAMILTON considered it was unjust to Lord Canning to place him in the position in which the vote necessarily placed him. Mr. DRUMMOND made a lively speech, in which he justified the Press•gagging Act ; on the ground that the Calcutta press was given to lying. After several other speakers had addressed the house, among whoni was General THOMPSON, who in a discursive speech attributed the revolt to the too large introduction of the European element into India, _ _ Mr. DISRAELI intimated that he would not press his amendment to a division, and added that if the statement which had been made that evening had been made by the noble lord before—viz., that by agreeing to this vote they were not to be held com mitted to any expression of approbation in reference to the general policy of Lord Canning—he should not have interposed any objection. Lord PALMERSTON said : I am quite ready to state now that I consider the bowie, if it agree to this vote, will still be perfectly free to take any course in respect to Lord Canning's general policy they may think fit, and will be in ti.) way bound except as to the conduct of that noble lord in supporting the military operations which have been rendered necessary by the out break of the mutiny. The amendment was then by leave of the house withdrawn, and the first two resolutions were agreed to unanimously. On the third resolution, Sir F. SMITH made some observations eulogistic of the conduct of the British troops during this revolt, and particularly dwelt on the great skill, cou rage, and endurance which marked the conduct of the defence of Lucknow. The other resolutions were then agreed to. HAVELOCK'S ANSHEIT. The report of the resolutions for granting annui ties to Lady Havelock and Sir Henry Havelock were brought up and agreed to, and leave given to bring in a bill founded thereon. EAST INDIA LOAN BILL. Mr. V. SMITH moved the second reading of this bill, urging that, as it was very important that it should pass as soon as possible, the house should allow it to be read a second time and take any fur ther discussion in committee next week.