The Sun. — London, England, 1806-07-09 00:00:00

IAIPERIAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE OF PEERS. TUESVAY, JULY 8 , In the Appeal " 4:ennie v. ,Todd and Others," 13rl Alexander was heard for the Respondent —Fur ther-bearing to-morrow. " ' The Debtors' Relief Bill was read third time and liaised. . Mr. Baldwin, Lord •Wm. Russell, Mr. Dawson, and several other Members of the House of Corn mons, brought up the Irish Roads Bill," 'and soine Private Bills; which were.reada first time. The Irish Poor Bill, the Irish Spirit Duties. Col leaion Bill, the Irish. Customs' Bill, and the. As, sessed Taxes Allowances Bill, passed through coin mittees, and were reported. • The secoad reading of. the '.Slave Ship Limitation Bill was-postponed till Thursday. INDIA. Lord viscount iIISLVILLE rose to make his pro rnised Motion respeaing India. His Lordship said it Wotild be necessary for him to take up more of their Lordships' time thin be could have wished, in consettnence of the refusal ,to cemmunicato-certain Papefs sVhich had been moved for On a former day,--a refUsal.for which he had notyet 1 - iard any sufficient reason. The subjeft was certainly of the greatest im portance, and demanded that every information rela ting to it should . be laid before Parliament. In the ab sence of this information he must continue to have doubts reapeaing the present situation of India, and whether, with respeEf to the Government of Ihdia,,a violation of the law had not taken place. In the ab 'sence also of this information, he must detail to the House some particulars which might otherwise have been spared. Aftef stt , tinsi the circumstances of the ap pointment of Marquis Cornwallis as Governor .Ge neral of India, and the, subsequent death of that Nobleman, his LordAip, proceeded to .observe; tha - t by the,dispatchas sect home, announcing the- Mar qUis's death, Ministers also learnt that Sir George Barlow, upon whom, the• Government then devolved, was carrying on the Negotiation which the Marquis had begun, in consequence of temporary '.es-truelions to Make Peace, if possible, with the Native Powers'. The same dispatches also announced, that Sir Geo. Barloev, in contemplation of : peace 25 the result of that negotiation, had taken measures for the reduc . tion, of the expenditure, and for other purposes, it tieing considered almost a certainty , that peace would take place. It became consequently, on the dispatches - reaching this country, an important and immediate obje& of consideration to consider as to the pr4priety • of giving. Sir George Barlow those additional powers which belongedlo the office of GoVernor-General, and which he could not possess as Seciand in Connell, and succeeding, pro tempore, to the chid Govern ment. It vas wisely, in his opirtion, determined to recommend 'Sir George Barlow immediately, as a fit person to be appointed Governor-General, who was accOrditigly appointed. This was on the 25t1i of February last.. On the Bth of March, only ten days afterwards, the Court of "Directors, as he under were irfortned, by a cOmmunication ' from His Majesy's MiniFaers, that the continuance. of. Site George Barlow in the of ice of Governor-General , was not consonant to the wishes of Government. -The Court :of Dire&ors viewed the subjea in, a dif-. ferent and no further step appeared to 'have '• peen taken till the.2Bth of May, when His Majesty's. Warrant, under the Sign Manual, was issued for the recall of Sir George" Barlow and the whole Conn - cif of ,Bengal: As to what passed since,. he hadkno information ; it was said, however, that one person had been recommended by Government, and that; after some disputes, another had been recommend ed, and was to, be appointed Governor-General in India to-morrow. The recall of Sir . GeOrge Barlow " was, it s appeared, made in the terms of the A& of Parliament. Some of those Noble Lords whom be was addressing:would recollea those great ob jeds of political contention, the two India Bills, one known by the name of Mr. Fox's India Bill, and the other byahat of Mr. Pitt's India Bill, the latter of which was _passed and finally received the Royal Assent in the year 1784'. .The great objection made to the former was, that it would 'destroy the balance of the Constitution by the immense patron age it would give to the Crown. The Bill which passed was 'of course brought in upon opposite prin . ciples, and its professed obje& was e to prevent : the Crown from becoming possessed of the patronage of India. It was provided in that till that the Crown should have the right of recalling the Governor-Gee neral and every Officer in the civil and military ser vice of from the. highest Councillor to the lowest Cadet ; but he appealed to. the Noble Lord at the head of his Majesty's afiairs, whether it was the intention, or in • the contempLition of those who . framed the Act ;of 1784, to give to the Crown any part Of the patronage of India: On the contrary, to wrest from it such a meaning was a violation of the, A&. The intention of this clause was, that it should operate in the case.of undue partiality in the Direc tors, where they should persist in' the appointment of a person ,notoriously unfit to be Governor-Ges neral of India, or that it should-come in aid of the Direaors, where their own right decision was; over ruled by the. Proprietors. A. case'cif this kind had happened just previous. to the passing of the A&, where, notwithstanding a Resolution of - thee House of Commons, concerning the - condud ofMr. Hastings, the Court a Proprietors insisted on approving, his conduel. In either of the two cases he had mention= ed, the clause was legitimately intended to operate;' but there could bent) doubt as to the impropriety of exercising the right of reCall by Government Wantonly • out of whim or caprice, and if that right waS exer cised in any .case with the view of recalling one GoL , vefuor-General, in order •to force another upon the Eat 'lndia Company, he •had no hesitation in say ince that such conduct would be an ,open violation of • the spirit of the A& of Parliament. It would have be ' sides the most pernicious effeet. What might be the consequence suppose the Government recalled a' Governor-General with the view he had just stated ?. Before :the expiration of the two months allowed by the AEt of Parliament; the Dire&ors, irritated at the cumin& of -Government .towards them, ap point, for instance, the Archbishop of Canterbury— the Archbislkop must of course be recalled - ; before the expiration of s another •two months - the Direflors appoint the Lord High Chancellor.of England—the Lord Chancellor would, of course, be recalled. ,Thus they might go on; .and what in the mean time was to become of the Government of India ? This would ,serve to spew the perniCious'effe& Which such con duet on the *tot aGovernment might have on:the affairs of India.. Lar-ge,bodies of Men were very.sub jea to irritation, and•what was more natural than that the'East l India ,Company should' feel much irri lotion at any attempt on the part of Government to force upon the a Gbvernor-General ? He could: not see what pOssibleobje&ion there could be to lay before tie House the ;Correspondence between the Court of. ,Dire - k&s arid, the • Board' of Con troul relative 'to the recall of Sir George Barlow. — It was fit their Lordships should know the reasons for that recall, the first Which had hen sent to India since the passing of the A& of 1784, a period of 22 years. HoW must such -a circumstance operate in In dia ?; It appeared fromahe last dispatches, that nego tiations were still pending - , yet in ,ten -days after appointing Sir •Georg - e Barlow ,Governor-General, it was intimated from 'Government, that it was. not intended to continue him in that office. This in timation would of course be noticed in the dis patches and private lettere, sent out to India, and be - •ing followed - on the,2Bth of May by his a6,"tual recall, What opinion must the native Princes form upon the subject ? Would they not naturally conceive that Sir George Barlow 'was disgraced by the recall ? that he - was recalled on account of .circumstances in his own condu& which had met with disapprobation ? and could they inconsequence have any confidence in a Government thus disgraced in their opinion, and being at the same time merely a' temporary Government, waiting the arrival of its successors ? .In faCt there was at , present no Government General in India, Ills Majesty's warrant having vacated the appoint ment of the,Governbr-General and the whole of the Council. It was true that it was not to be operative till its publication at Calcutta ; but was it to be con tended that it might be kept in the pocket of the Secretary of State 'until :t was thought expedient to send it out ? He contended, on the contrary, that it was 'operative from the moment it was issued,*and that it was the duty of Ministers to have not delayed an hour in sending it out. He had heard it reported; that at the time theappointment of Sir G;-Barlow took place it was intimated to theDiredors that it was not intended to be permanent ; but if that had been the case would there have been that joy and'exultation in Leadenhall-street, which took place on receiving the recommendkion of Government for the appoint ment?, He had also heard - it surmised,' that it was the determination":• of Government that only a man of rank from this conntry should be appointed to the Government of India.---This, as a general principle, was certainly deserving of consideration ;- but it was evident it could not be always operative, unless .they had two or three Governor-Generals in India ready to succeed each other, as,-in the event of the death' of a Governor , General; the senior servant of the, , Company, the First in Council, must of course, for -a time, 'succeed. In this ordinary routine, it might be of little consequence to supersede the person thus. thing as Governor-General ; but was it nothing ibrmally - appointing the, senior servant of the Company Governor-General, to supersede-him with out any reason that appeared, or arising from his con do& in that capacity ? Was it nothing Otis to destroy .theconfidnee of the native Powers in the Govern ment of India, at the time negotiations 'were going on ? and he Observed by the. treaties, that although the Jthnna was, made the general 'boundary of the British EMpire in India, that nothing was said about the large 'territory to the-south and west of Delhi, which:it could not be: intended to keep, but which must become the subject of negOtiation. Under all these circumstances he' put it to His Majesty's Ministers, whether it would not be much better that Sir Geote Barlow should retain the office of. Go vernor-General, for, six:months longer,' in order •to briug to some sort of termination the negotiations and the measures in. contemplation in India; ,and he. put it to.tbe Noble, LOrd whom report stated was go ing out to India, whether it would not be .better to wait that time; than to go out now against ,the wishes and without the confidence of the Court of Di re&ors, and with only the prospe& of being perpe tually thwarted and harassed; in consequence of the want- of that mutual confidence so necessary to the • dpe administration of the affairs of India ? His Lordship concluded by' moving for Copies of Dis, patches from the Governor-General of India, expla natory of the late Treaties; of Dispatches relative to measures Of finance, and other- measures in • con templation ; and of the Correspondence which had passed between.the Board of Controul and the Court of Directors. relative to the recall of Sir George ' Lord GRENVILLE said„it was unnecessary for him to enter into any argument as to the impropriety of laving before the House 'confidential comthuni- . cations relative to the recent treaties_ and measures in _contemplation in indb, when the only reason al 'edged for their produ&ion was, that, in the opinion of the person who urged it, there was some,reason for alarm on account of the situation of India; that there was some g round to apprehend danger. He. 'trusted their Lordships would not consider, thiS a sufficient reason for the produetiOn of such Confiden ti3l comrdunications. On the contrary, betore such 'Papers were ordered to be produced, some parliamen- tary ground ought .to be laid; some special reasons, evidently well founded, ought to be un:*.l. None such were to bP'found in the Noble Lord's ' speech; and it Was only towards the conclusion th?.t any praCti cal proposition was made ; and this", after the Noble 'Viscount bad dep,tecated, iii the strongest terms, the continuance of .a merely temporary Government in India, was nothing less than that this Government, from tile' existence ,of ,which ,he had prediClect i:o thucli evil, .should be still further continued for .six yuonths. 'With respe& to the 'Motion relative to the Correspondence between the Board of Con trout andthe'Court of. DireCtors, he could not con ceive, for the moment, that their Lordships'would - sanetion the produ&ion of 'confidential Corres pondence, which must, frOnythe nature of the case, turn upon the personal'cliara&er and fitness of indi viduals. If such a precedent was established', it would be impossible for the Government' of India to be carried on. Could it be endured with respe& to the Government-of this Country, that confidential•corn munications relative td the, fitness of individuals fur any Office or interest should be, laid before Parlia . ment ? No Government could go on if such were . the 'case. The Ad . ,01.1754„ whether wisely or ' unwisely, he would: not now al-gue„had establish- - ed a system of checks and controul with respe& to the admirlittrztoh of, the ifuirs of India, by , 1 , whiCh two -bodies ailed independently of etch - i _others, but each - havivg - a Check upon the other. , The right of appointment was vested in the. Court , 'of Directors, but the right of recalling, the Dover-,1 nor-General or any of the' Officers, in. India, was in the Government. Was it,to he argued that the right' , vested in Government Without the means of judging -of the expediency of 'exercising it ? and yet the argument. of - the Noble Viscount Went to this crie r I. He rested' himself unoti Zhe law ; not accord 7 ing to the fisociful interpretation put upon it 'by the • ' Noble Viseount, but -according to , t he terms of the - law itself, as clearly and plainly expressed . ; and if it was not intended by that law .to give to the Go- - vernment the right of recallitig the Governor-Gene ral, or any of the Officers civil and military-, in India, then the Legislature who passed it had en-, trapped those who had now' acted under it by a species of fraud. * Ministers had aced, according to the terms of the law, and by the laW 'they would be judged. The Noble Viscount bad appealed to him as to the intentions of those who framed that Ac ; and he had, a dear and distinct 'recollection of the progress through Parliament of that Act, pro ducing as it did an important azra in his life which had impressed it on his memory.' He distinctly re membered that the chief ground of opposition to the very Clause in question was,, that it gave an Unli-: mired right of recall to Government ; so clearly, was it ascertained at the time that such was the intention and operation of the Clause. It was not to ,be an.- ' gOed, that bec,ause the right of 'appointment vested in one bpdy, and the right of recall in anotber, that theiefore they might act in continued - opposition to each other. This argument might equally be applied to theConsl,ltution of: this Country, where the Crown. had the right of appolotmentto dffices, and Parlia ment the right of addressing the King to praT the, re moval' of persons so appointed. ' It might equally be applied to the two Houses of Parliament, and it might be said that if they refused_to act in concert business could not go on, and yet the Constitution . of this Country. bad gone on for many hundred years without ply of these obstacles arising. The Noble. Viscount had assumed that which ha (Lord - Gren ville) utterly disclaimed,' that Sir . George Barlow had been recalled' for the purpose of foreing,another Governor-General on the . East India'Company. He e: admitted, that - .to recall Governor-General with a view to any priVate purpose would be a violation of: the spirit of the Act;. but he utterly disclaimed that any such motive had in the present Instance arcuated. His Majesty's Ministers.. The_right of recall rest 'ed with Government by the terms of the Act, and . that right consequently became'an important duty-to be exercised , by Ministers in their advice to His Ma- • jesty under great responsibility. In the exercise of . that duty many important consideratins must come sunder reviev.r, and it must not be- forgotten how im portant a part of the British Empire Our Possessions in 'lndia fOrmed. How nearly their prosperity was connected with that of this Country, and how im portant it was that these possessions should bego- - verned with ability. That a correspondence Should take place between Ministers and the Court of Di- reaors respecting the fitness and unfitness of in dividuals, was a perfealy natural result from their respective situations .and their respective dutiei; and surely from the Noble . Lord, of all others; was least to be expected any objection to the practice of - recommending to the Court of 'Direaors persons judged fit to govern ,India. From the time the A6t passed sttlsthe year 18 0 1 no Governor had been, sent out to Bengal or to Madras who had not been re commended by the Noble Lord. That practice had been continued to the present' time, and surely Would not be objected to now:. .He did not mean to blame the Noble Lord for that praelice=---if there was- - any blame he was ' ready to take his share of it The Noble Lord had spoken of a determination on the part of Ministers to send out only men of rank ' from this Country as. Governors to India. The advantages to be deri.fed from sending out men of rank and: talent • from this COunta7 to India,. who were free from any partialities which might be sup posed to actuate the servants 'of the Company, and who gave additiOnal *eight and, confidence to the, British,dovernment in India, were obvious. This, : however,••was - 'no new determination ; on the con-. trary, it was one which had 'been repeatedly. acted upon : thus, the Earl of Pow'is, Marquis Welles ley,: the Earl -of BAckin;;hanashire, the Marquis : Cornwallis, and other men of rank and ability had been sent thither,' all of whOro had materially bene fited the British interests in India: In the'present case it was .a matterofpublic notpriety,notwithstand-, ing the assnmption of the Noble Lord,that no attempt- bad been made to force a Governon:General upon the East-India Company ; shut that the direct' contrary was the case. Two individuals had been 'recom- mended, both.of whom Were high in the confidence of Government—both of whom were met of rank in this Country, and of distinguished ability,and ta lent. ,They'had, however, these disadvantages in the eyes or the' Noble Lord, that they were not servants Of .the ComPany, and that ,they were not reborn-, mended by that Noble Lord himself . The Noble, Lord had dotibted that any "intimation : had -. been made to the Court-of Directors, at the time of recom . . mendina Sir George jlarlow, that it was not intended c, -., s -, to 'retain him in the situation of Governor-General..; but the fa& was, that such an intimation . was made at that time. Sir George . Barlow was in a similar situation .at the departure of Marquis Wellesley, and 'until the arrival of, Marquis Cornwallis ; but then he had bean previously appointed provisionally Go vernor-General,' in the eyentof the death or depots- - tare , 4it - Marquis Wellesley... Bl'a culpable neglect, however, on the part e of the late Administration, no such provision was made .oil sending to India Marquis Cornwallis; and though it was evident to every one who knew that. Noble Lord'how much his health was impaired previous to his . setting out; and,though it was scarcely supposed; from the en . feebled state of his constitution, that he could live to Arive in India, yet no provisional appointment was male of a Governor-General to act in case of that melancholy event happening, which,was foreseen by every, one.., Thus it .Was, that within twenty four hours after Ministers had kissed , His Majesty's hand on receiving their appointments, they received two, most affiiaing pieces of intelligence ;, the first, the death of MarquisCornWailis, and the other, that, through the, negio of their predecessors,' there was actually no Governor-General in India. Sir George Barlow succeeded of course, as the Second in.Conn cil, but without those powers, which were so necis-. sary to the British Government in India, and which ) -co.i!d• only Vet in a GUVelii sr •-General. r.e 1 .1'43 ed, riot art hour was to be lost in appOinting a Go - - yernor-general, ,but to nominate-one in whom they could phice entire confidence, and on whose ability and talent they could rely, was a work of deliberation. Nothing else, therefore, could be done at that mo ment, than to apilont Sir George Barlow-Governor' General pro tempctee ; and the ai'pointment was dis patched with every possible expedition to India. The: appointment ; however; was not intended to he per nranent;' and'it was so intkiNted. He did.not mean to. arraign the conduel 'of Sir George. Barlow.; that, Gentle Man; on the contrary, had his esteem for the active co-operation which he aft'ordedto the mea sures. of Lord Wellesley during - the brilliant and gl6- - riot3s Government of that Nobleman.. In his judg inent, the Gnvern t flf Marquis Wellesleyadded lustre tOthe British name, and was inOA advantageous .to the British interests in India. Some persons had arraigned the conduCt of that Nobceman, wit h great se verity ; he •did not mean to celisure them fOr holding such an opinion, but at th9'saole time he claimed the -right of forming an opinion himself ; that apinion he had expressed, and .to that -he adhered. With. respeift to the recall 'of Sit - Geo. Barlow, their• Lor dships might imagine reasons which would render such _a measure necessary; he Should not Stale the reasons which in.: o „ced it. The Noble Lord bad. contended, in died, that no Go . vernor GeDeral ought to be recalled, unless for criminp..4 in his own conduCt, but had _contradiaed this' by his own argument. The. Noble Lord had put supposed eases of Court- of Diredors in hostility with. Govein- Ment appointing the Archbishop of Cauterbury, and - afterwards , the ChiefJustic6 of England.' Supposing such cases to exist, what,motives would operate in the recall of those perSonages ?—certainly not criminality • in their condua, but 'Motives of policy '.anti expe diency.—Such " motives must always operate in. .didating the recall of a Governor-General of India such motites Operate in, the app ointment of his successor, whilst ,M e. inisters 'executed the ditty unposed upon them • by the Aft; under, the responsibility . of their situations. There were some parts of the Noble Lord's speech, which, un intentionally, no doubt, 'tended in etfedt to weaken tbe.cordial co-operation which ought 'to 'subsist be veen Governmea, nd the Court of Direaors ; and other parts of his ,speeeh; which, dpubtless, without intention on . his part, tended to.weaken he con ' fidence of the.iative 'Powers of India in the Britist, (Government. Lipon these, . however, be should make no -other eomment. - 'The Noble. Lord had established . no ground for grant mg the Papers., which he had moved for, nor could he coin:v.4-e that their ,Lordships. would assent, to Rropositions of such a itature—that , a confidential correspond ence between Government 'and the court of Di reaors, necessarily involving a discussion Of the per , - -sonal eharaeter and qualifications .of itadividu4ls, should be made the subject of public discussion in that House, a proposition to wisich :he ". 4 .';:s con vinced' their Lordships would never agree, -nor did it appear that the slightest benefit could be derived from any part Of the public diseussiOh' which the Noble Lord urged rb be necessary. , With this view of the Bubje6t, he must, ~Papers , course, decidedly obje& to the produetion of the Papers moved for by the. Noble Lord. ' Lord ILIIVKESBURY s upported the Motion the Noble Viscount. He did, not do so, however,', solely on the ground of thit:rea4l of-Sir G..13a-rlow, but frotn this circumstance, that not more than ten . , days had intervened bet Ween the time of his app6int- ' rnent and that of his recall. •• • Lord MINTO shewed that no aetriMent to the • affairs of the Company could arise from this circum stance, the one Government remaining whole and entire until another was appointed in its place. Lord ELDOA' supported the Motion, while he at the same. time admitted that alo .commission or Warrant in favour of any Governor or other Officer Could begin to operate till it arrived in India. • .. The Earl o f BUCKINGHAMSHIRE taxalled to the ,recolleaion of the Noble Viscount the period, when, during his Administration, the Noble Earl, then Lord Hobart, had been GoVernor of .IMadras as such he might have been conSideredas one of the CoMpany's. Servants ; , but he presumed to think.. that though removed by the Noble Viscount, he did continue, and would have continued to do his duty till a successor was appointedao him. Lord MELVILLE, in justification of his condaa in theseveral instances alluded to, stated the motives by which he ha 4. been actuated. He had never laid down'as a rule, that the Servants of the Company were not proper persons to be alipointed to the Go.: vernruent General; neither had he:asserted that they. ought exclusively In . be 'appointed to that high (Alice. His condu t ti shewed; that neither had been his rule of. ae:tion.' Whoever shoUld be . appointed ought to.. be a person of chara6ler*id of abilities to fill the ithedrtant office. He ha:i argued 1.1 - th a view to a ruinours which bad gone abroad, that the objj...6tiota to Sir Geo. Barlow was, his having been a 'Servant to the Company. He should say, however, that the suspicions he hid enterttlioed on the sub ea had not been weakened by any thing Ito had heardin that . Debate. If the Papers should be granted, and they should confirm. those suspicions, he intended to found upon them an ulterior proceeding, Lard ELLENBOROUGII could not sit silent whenle•heard an objedion started which he did not expe6f to be repeated. The warrant could. hive nd effeattillcOmmunicated to the party ; and he agreed with the Learned Lord . C,ldony that the clause for pu,blicatary at Caldutta weea nugatory. That the coin manication gave.legal effeot'to fie warrant would aepearsin the instance of the Judges in the event of the r demise of the CrOwn. fie rit:t.;ht on such an eventlie in the discharge of his .ahoy, in an extreme part'olthe country, and if . his CoMMissien . could be vacated without communication, any.excreise of his .pbwer, after Such demise; in ordering a man c'On ' vitlied Of a capital offence for execution, would be murder at Common taw. It was the nnty of, the , persons who advised, HiS,MajeSfy to issue the war, rant to communicate, it to the Court of Directors hi eight days, in order that they might fill up that ap , .ointment. Wit it wts not their du `y , nor, had it ever been intended, that they shoula send out the warrant as rapidly as possible. casteof the ap , pointment of a 'Lard Lieutenant to Iceland was an illustratiQn of this priwipie. Ti'; the instance of the intended recoil of one LOrd Lieutenant, his successor was to be the bearer or the he often :kept with him mapy nionths in this country, until it swa6 his couyenitticu: to VIQCeCti to tia Government.