The Sun.
London, England, 1830-02-10 00:00:00

&went', lie would repeat, that it was the true interest of
this country to consult the happiness of the people of India.
LORD ELLENBOROUGH'S LETTER.

Lord DURHAM—My Lords, I so entirely concur with
the motion which has just been submitted, that I should
not have thoug'lt it necessary to address your Lordehips on
the present occasion ; but I do think it would be a dere-
liction of duty to remain silent respecting a circumstance
to which I now beg to call your Lordships' attention. I
think I ant bound to give the Noble Lord an opportunity
of an explanation with regard to a document which has
circulated through the country, and has been a subject of
animadversion in another place. I beg to ask whether
that document is his ? I will not enter into any observa-
tions now ; but I beg to call upon the Noble Lord,' whe-
• they the letter to which I have alluded, purporting to be
addressed by him to Sir J. Malcolm, is his ?
Lord ELLENBOROUGH agreed with the Noble Mar-
quis (Lansdowne) opposite on the vast importance of the
subject, and he also concurred with him in the necessity of
having all the informatien which could be obtained. With
respect to the 'question put to me by the Noble Baron
(continued the Noble Lord), I tees only say that, when
first my attention was called to the letter which is ad-
dressed to Sir John Malcolm, purporting to be written by
me, I had no recollection whatever of having written one
of that nature. But I have since read the letter, as it ap-
peared in the Newspapers, and have no reason to doubt
that substantially it is the same as the one written by me.
--(Hear.)—But there are Variation between the letter
published here and that published in India—variations of
some consevence. I can assure the Noble Lord, had I
again a confidential communication with Sir John Mal-
eolm—an officer acting with me—and bad I the informa-
tion given by that officer, I should act as I have done. If
I had taken any other course with respect to Sir J. Dewar
and Sir William Seymour, than that which I did follow,
I feel that I should have deserted my duty, and have been
unworthy the trust reposed in me.
Lord DURHAM—The Noble Lord then avows the
sentiments-expressed in the letter. At present I am not
prepared to submit any tuition to the House on the. sub-
kct ; but I do regret that he has avowed those sentiments.
I can assure the Noble Lord that his letter has made a
great sensation among those who take a deep interest in
the affairs of India. I do regret that one of his Majesty's
Ministers should have expressed himself unfriendly to the
independence of the Judges of India.—(Hear, hear. )
This, I sin sure, is a matter of great regret to all who
take an interest in the affairs of India. I shall, not, how-
ever, ray Lords, enter into the subject now ; but this I
will say, that it is a matter of the most serious surprise to'
the people of this country. I repeat that I do regret the
Noble Lord has not disavowed the sentiments contained in
that letter.—(Hear.)—Sentiments which, if they ani-
mated the rules respecting the appointment of Judges on
this side the water, would he of more serious detriment
than any question which can affect oar political relations.
As I said in the outset-, I was not prepared to submit a
motion to your Lordships on the subject ; but I consi-
sidered it would be a dereliction of my duty not to inquire
whether the letter was genuine:
The Duke of WELLINGTON—His Noble Friend sit-
ting near him had stated to their Lordships that he was
the author of the letter in question. He was bound, there-
fore, by the terms of that letter; but he was not bound
by the sentiments other persons might attribute to his
Noble Friend. • He did not see one word in that letter de-
rogatory to the independence of the Judges in the East
Indices What his Noble Friend had stated was certain—
for the Judge, Sir J. Grant, had not conducted himself
with discretion. If his Noble Friend had at that time
known the decision of the Privy Council, be would have
had the highest authority for declaring that the Judge had
not conducted himself according to law. His Noble Friend
said he wrote the letter actuated by his public duty. The
law laid down by the Judge was considered hail ; and the
Privy Council had decided that it was. The Judge, then,
in pronouncing it was good law, had conthested himself in-
discreetly. His Noble Friend then said he had recom-
mended the appointment of two discreet Judges to con-
trout the one individual—(A laugh)—and this was con-
sidered an attack on the independence of the Judges,
though there was not one word in the letter that went to
that point. His Noble Friend further said that, since the
transaction occurred, the East India Company had applied
to the Privy Council to have Sir J. P. Grant recalled,
and the Privy-Council had recommended that he should be
recalled, in toiler to answer for his conduct respecting the
transaction referred to in the private letter. He moat say
that his Noble Friend was to blame for writing a private
• letter ..enneerning such a transaction; for that he would
not defend his Noble Friend ; but it was never to he ex-
pected; that in a- correspondence of a private and confielen-
tiel nature every word was to be weighed ; and if it were
so, no man would be a Minister.
Lord DURHAM thought he could point out some pas-
sages of the letter- which the Noble Duke seemed not to
have rend attentively [" I have," from the Duke of Wel-
lington], which was an attack on the independence of the
Judges. The Noble Lord then referred to that part of
the letter which describes Sir J. Grant to he like a wild
elephant led away between two tame ones, as an attack on
the independence of the Judges. He thought the country
would not agree with the Duke of Wellington's opinion of
the law; and that even the Noble Lord on the Woolsack
would not like his interpretation of law.
Lord Viscount MELVILLE entertained opinions en-
tirely in conformity with those expressed by the Noble
Duke, with regard to the letter in question. He would
take the liberty of saying that a great deal of flippancy had
been used on the subject of the letter, but not by the Noble
Baron who wrote it. A great deal of misconception
existed with respect to the situation of Judges in the Co-
lonies, by comparing them to the Judges of this country.
But what was the fact? The Jndges were learned per-
pens, who sometimes conceived that their Courts possessed
a power which must be executed, and if not executed by
others, that they must put their decrees in force. The
Governor of Bombay had said on such an occasion—
" You are wrong, you hare no jurisdiction—you must
not, and ought not, to execute your decrees." The
Judge, however, persisted ; the Governor resisted ; he was
justified in opposing the Judge's decrees; and he was
told he was wrong. He entertained an opinion totally dif-
ferent from some he had heard, and the authority he quoted
for his opinion was that of Parliament itself. What hap..
pened with respect to the Courts of -India fifty years before?
The Supreme Com t at Bengal then entertained a notion
of its power, which it carried to a greater length than
Sir J. P. Grant had done, and it employed a large num-
ber of persons to enforce its decrees, by which it caused
the greatest confusion. What did the Government do ?
It sent a military officer to oppose the Judge's forces; and
when the Governor was informed that this officer was not
sufficient, he sent an additional force. What did the Par-
liament
do ? It supported the Governor, and very near
impeached the Chief Justice. It passed an Act, which is
now on the Statute Book, enacting that the Governors of
Colonies must be supported ; and by the first clause, it
exempted the Governor-General of India, and the Gover-
nor of Bombay and Madras, from the authority of the
Supreme Court. It enacted, too, that if the acts of the
Government were challenged by the Supreme Court, it
should be sufficient to plead the order of the Governor as
a bar to all proceeding. It further indemnified the Go-
vernors for resisting the Judges. It was very well to
talk about the independence of the Judges in India,
but it was not an independence in truth. They must
have that sort of discretion not to put the country into
danger, by exercising the power which belonged to their
Courts. The case which lately occurred at Bombay
was similar to what occurred at Bengal fifty years ago.
The Judge had directed a habeas corpus to issue con-
cerning a Zemindar of influence and property, and hold-
ing a high office, which the Government stopped. A
complaint was made that the Judge had misunderstood the
law. He did not blame the Judge for acting on his own
opinion of the law ;—in that he did right. But what
did he do to support his decrees? Why, he shut up his
Court. The Governor did that which he had a right to
do, and the Judge therefore shut up his Court, and denied
all the people justice. The case had hardly been de-
scribed fairly; it was not only necessary, as his Noble
Friend said, that the Judges should be of discreet minds, they
must also be full of integrity, and learned in the law. It
had happened to him more than once to have to advise his
Majesty to recall a Judge from India. He had not the
slightest doubt, that on such occasions he had expressed
himself.in a manner similar to the sentiments of his Noble
Friend. There was not a year passed when there were
net confidential communications between the Governors and
the Judges, and the Judges had a right to give an opinion,
and caution the Governors when they were likely to do
any thing wrong. If any doubt arose about the power of
the Governor, it was customary to caution him not to
come into contact with the law. There was a confiden-
tial intercourse between the Judge and the Governor, and
the Judge cautioned the Governor to keep out of his
Court; and if the Governor found it necessary, an appli-
cation was made to Parliament to provide a remedy. He
contended that the Judges of this country must not show
their independence when they went to India ; they must
be careful not to commit the Governor ; they must not
set up their own notions of law ; the Judge must agree
with what the authority of the Governor declares wrong.
If the Judges set up their own authority, it was impossible
to say what was the extent of their jurisdiction, or whom
they might not make subject to it. Disputes might be
referred home, but the Judge could not be suffered to shot

up Lis Court. The conduct of Sir J. P. Grant was in his
opinion extremely blameable, and so thought the Privy
Council. Finally, if any person conceived that the inde-
pendence of Judges in India stood upon the same footing
as the independence of Judges in this country, it was alto-
gether a mistake; and for asserting that such opinion was
erroneous, he had much higher authority than any he had
hitherto heard quoted against it.
Lord HOLLAND said, that when the Noble Viscount
opposite rose, he was afraid that that Noble Lord was
about to read his Noble Friend (Lord Ellenhorough) a
severe lecture upon the style and tenour of the letter in
question, seeing that the Noble Viscount at the outset
deprecated any flippancy upon a subject so grave and im-
portant ; but instead of so turning round upon his friend,
he pursued a course altogether the reverse, and en-
deavoured to bear out the Noble writer of that letter in
the assertion that the question of law was one of com-
parative. insignificance. That was the very sentiment of
the letter, upon which those who objected to it might lay
no inconsiderable stress. The Noble Lord, in his letter,
declared that the question of law runs one of comparative
insignificance, and that what he chiefly objected to was
the tone and temper of the Judges—the tenour of the
language which they delivered from the Bench. However,
it was scarcely fair to come to any conclusion upon mat-
ters turning upon the mere language of the letter, as the
Noble Lord had not thought proper to inform the House
what parts of the letter were authentic, and what were
not so ; but thus much lie (Lord Holland) could not help
saying, that the effect of the letter had been to produce a
considerable sensation in that country, and it was calcu-
lated to produce a considerable sensation here, that any
Member of his Majesty's Government should be found
writing to a public functionary in India that errors in
matters of laW were comparatively of little importance,
and that the speeches from the Judges on the Bench—the
tone and temper of those speeches, constituted the whole
ground of offence. That it was much worse to touch the
Supreme Government than to be guilty of illegal proceed-
ings.--(Hear, bear.)—But, after all, the real question
was, what impression such a letter was calculated to make
upon the public mind here and in India? He knew that
in this country at least an impression was created, that in
the appointment of the new Judges an improper bias and
sway had been permitted to operate in the recommendation
of the individuals appointed. He begged most un-
feignedly to assure their Lordships that he felt
much dislike to the discussion of such topics, and no
man could doubt that it would be infinitely more plea-
surable even to have been the writer of that letter
than the person by whom it was made public ; but with
observations on that subject he would not trouble their
Lordships ; he would merely state, as a matter of fact, that
an opinion prevailed in England that it was expected sub-
serviency, and not knowledge and integrity, which recom-
mended to favour in the appointment in question. That
was his opinion; and unless he was very much misin-
formed, it was likely to he the opinion in India, and it was
one likely to be productive of serious ill consequences—un-
less, indeed, the Noble Lord could prove it to be without
feundation. He (Lord Holland) was perfectly willing to
allow for the privacy of the communication ; but he could
not forget that it was a letter from one public officer to
another, and it had been written by the Noble Lord op-
posite, and its contents had transpired ; and if they were
at all such as had been described, he could not doubt that
the effects of it would be unfortunate both icr England and
for India.

Lord ELLENBOP.OUGH said he thought he should
be the last man in that House, or in the country, who
should be accused of the smallest attempt to trench upon
the independence of Judges. To be incapable of such an
act was that for which, he thmlght, all men who had the
slightest knowledge of him, would give him the most
ample credit. He had too strong a recollection of the
high qualities of his Noble and Learned Father, not to
respect the independence of Judges, and do all in his
power fir the maintenance and preservation cf that inde-
pendence. Had he entertained the most distant idea of
subverting or weakening, or in any respect assailing the
independence of Judges in India, there could be no question
of his deserving the severest reprobation ; but of such con-
duct he declared himself totally incapable. He was not
opposed to the independence of Judges, but he was'deter-
mined to resist their usurpations. He was determined to
resist any attempt they might make to grasp at powers
which were not given, but expressly taken from them by
the law. Power which, if his information was to be
depended on, and he had no reason to doubt its accuracy,
could not be exercised without the most imminent danger
to the tranquillity of India, and the stability of that in-
fluence which we there possessed. Much needless im-
portance had been attached to the expression that legal
errors were comparatively of little importance ; lie would
repeat and maintain that assertion ; they were, compara-
tively, insignificant; errors In law were as nothing, com-
pared with the tenour of language coaling from the ele-
vation of the Bench—proceeding from the lips of men
clothed, as it were, with royal authority, and directed
against the Executive Government of the country. He
would affirm to their Lordships, that unless the integrity
of that Government were maintained in insulated and
unapproached power, British authority could not
he maintained in India. That authority depended
upon opinion, and it could not be maintained if ex-
posed to cavil or liable to obstruction. Again he
would declare that the sentiments contained in that
letter were such as he felt commanded to express by
his sense of public duty. As to the appointment which
had been made the subject of animadversion, lie believed,
if the qualifications of the individual in question were in-
quired into, it would be found that none need he better
qualified than he was for filling that situation. He made
the fullest inquiry into that gentleman's character, and he
found it to be in all respects suited to the office. In the
correspondence held by him with the §upreme Govern-
ment, he had displayed a complete possession of the legal
knowledge required : but not only did he posses■ the
knowledge of law, but also what was, if possible, of more
importance—he possessed that discretion which pecu-
liarly fitted him for the situation of Chief Justice.
Influenced by such information, and decided by such
evidence as satisfied his mind of the perfect fitness
of that gentleman, he hesitated not to offer his
advice to his Majesty, recommending his appoint-
ment ; that advice he certainly never should have
given, had lie not been assured that the object of
it was in an eminent degree possessed of that discretion
for which he gave him credit, and also for that gentle-
manly conduct which would impart dignity and efficiency
to the discharge of his duties. In one of the interviews
which he (Lord Ellenhorough) bad with that gentleman,
he read a passage from the writings of Sir William Jones,
descriptive of the duties of a Judge, expressing his de-
liberate determination to govern his conduct as a Judge by
the rules which Sir William Jones laid down. Now, if
he made as good a Judge as Sir William Jones wished to
be, the House or the country would have little reason to
complain of the appointment. In a country situated as
India was, nothing became of greater importance than to
maintain the character of those who were charged with
great responsibility, and he submitted that such authority
and influence as was there required could never be main-
tained otherwise than by resisting the interference of one
department with another.
The Ques'ion on the appointment of the Committee
was then put and agreed to.
POOR RATES.

Lord TEYNHAM rose, amidst much noise and con-
fusion, to move for certain Returns connected with the
Poor Rates ; but the purport of his Lordship's observa-
tions, or the exact tenour of his motion, it was impossible
to catch—amongst other matters, it was understood to
embrace the number of agricultural labourers paid in part
out of the Poor's Rates. The Noble Lord made trone
remarks upon the present distressed state of the agricul-
tural class, and the great obligation which lay upon Par-
liament to take measures for their immediate relief.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said he should not have
the slightest ajection to afford the House or the Noble
Lord all the information which could possibly be required,
but the last time that similar information had been ap-
plied for, a year and a half elapsed before it could be
procured—considerable expense was incurred for the pur-
pose—and he really believed that after the Returns had
been made out they were never once looked at. The Re-
turns for which the Noble Lord sought would demand
reference to 14,000 parishes. He therefore put it to the
Noble Lord, whether for such a purpose it was worth
while to incur so heavy an expense as would unavoidably
be incurred by calling for these Returns.
The Duke of RICHMOND was quite sure that the Re-
turns already before the House would prove amply suffi-
cient to establish any degree of agricultural distress for
which the Noble Lord might be disposed to contend. If
his object were to prove that the land was unduly bur-
thened, turn where lie might, he need he• at no loss for
evidence in support of that position ; but it would be in-
finitely better if the Noble Lord, instead of moving for
tho.e Returns, would give his vete against the measures of
the Noble Duke's Government. If the Noble Lord, on
the first night.of the Session, bad voted in the minority
instead of swelling the ranks of the Noble Duke, it would
have been a muck greater public service than moving for
Returns of that description. To do real service to the
State, Noble Purrs ought to support a general Parliamen-
tary inquiry into the state of the country, and there they
wooki,learn quite enough to- Supersede the necessity of
moving for any further Returns. Let the Noble Lord

only withdraw his support from tl►e Government of the
Noble Duke, and to that extent at least he will do a pub-
lic service—not but that he (the Duke of Richmond) re-
*gretted as much as any Noble Peer could do, the necessity
tinder which he felt himself of opposing the measures of
the Noble Duke, especially on subjects connected with the
state of the landed interests.
Lord TEYN HAM consented to withdraw his motion ;
but accompanied that withdrawal with a notice, that on
Tuesday, the 20th of April, he should move for a Com-
mittee to inquire into the state of the Poor Laws—previous
to which, he should move certain Resolutions declaratory of
his views upon that subject, allowing sufficient time for
Noble Lords to make up their minds as to the most expe-
dient measures of relief. He excused himself for voting
with Government on the first night of the Session, on the
ground that respect to his Majesty required that the Ad-
dress proposed by his Ministers en that occasion should
experience the general support of the House, but no one
could more cordially concur than be did in the assertion
that the state of the country demanded immediate inquiry.
The House adjourned at Twenty Minutes past Six.

HOUSE OF COMAIONS--(LAST NIGHT.)
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock.
NEW WRITS.

On the motion of Mr. PLANTA, a New Writ was
ordered for Winehelsea, in the room of Mr. 11. Brougham,
who has accepted the Chiltern Hundreds.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from a parish
in the county of Cork, praying for a repeal of the Sub-
letting Oct. The petitioners stated that the repeal of this
Act would have the effect of greatly relieving the agricul-
tural distress in England, as it would keep the Irish
paupers at home. The Honourable Member then pre-
sented several other petitions of a similar nature, and
gave notice that on a subsequent day he should bring in a
Bill for the repeal of that Act.