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, itsappeared, 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& waseto 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 ofs 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