The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-08 00:00:00

EMIGRATION.

The Earl if LINCOLN ruse for the purpose of making
an explanation relative to what had been stated a few
even.iqgi Igo, that he (Lord Lincoln) intended to bring
krward the plan fur e.nigration which hld b,?en pro-
post,' oy Mr. Gridly. It had been asserted that the
deputation haq stat!7d to ;he Government that they had
authority to say thlt he (Lord Lincoln) should brig?

fel-wardMr. Godley's ectieme hef Iv the House. New,
as that assertion was obviously intended to apply that
he was to bring forwani his in eion in a hostile form,
and thit he ititen led taking advantage of the Govern.
ment as far as 1 ty in his power, he begged to give that
assertion his mesa t roil is l tieitiel. lie had stated
•-ey ieitly to Mr. G t.d y, and the other gentlemen who
ever! +len hilt:, ti,t• form 1f m-44in, and tne ele in
ho intend, 11 to tiring that yeestioci forward. He
led never for an intent deviated from tire fordo, and if
tirese epee lemee were deo:ie....a. i 6 iy,is their own fault.
He fiti7l told them each efei ail what he had intended to
do. With reference to Mr. Godley he held a lettertrom
him, in which be expres ,ed his regret that such state-
ments should have tone abroad. He regretted the
matter the more that Mr. Godley, who anxiouelv desired
to benefit his kind, who was sinceri ly desirous of serving
his country, should have also been subjected to the
petty filppancies of anonymous writers. Unfortunately
his Noble Friend the Member for Dorsetshire was not
present, but perhaps the Hon. Member for Kerry would
sunstantiate th aecuracy of his statements.
Mr. NIORGAN O'CONNELL said that as far as his
recollection extended Mr. Godley had carried the in-
tentions of the Noble Lord into eff.ct. The fact was,
that two subjects were started when the deputation went
to the Treasury. Two subjects were leid before the
Government, one was Mr. Godley's scheme, and the
other was the Government's consent to such an inquiry
as the Noble Led proposed the other night. The Go-
vernment did not consent to this inviry, and Mr. '
Godley said he was authorised by the Noble Lord oppo-
site, to say, that he would bring the matter before the
House. He (Mr. M. J. O'Connell) understood by that
that he should forward the general subject of colonisa-
tion, and not the Wan of Mr. Godley.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that the Hon. Member
!or Kerry had stated that which was in perfect confir-
mation of his owa recollection of the subject. Two
subjects were mentionel One was Mr. Godleys' plan,
and the other was the question of appointing a Com-
mittee to invire into the subject of colonization. It
did not appear to him that the subject of Mr. Godley's
plan was brought especially before the notice of the
Government. When informed that the Government did
not intend to support the appointment of a Committee
of Inquiry, he understood Mr. Godley to say, that the
subject would be brought forward before the House.
He (Lord John Russell) was left in doubt whether it
was the appointment of a Committee or the general
subject of colonization, that would be brought forward ;
but he never for a moment thought that it was intended
that Mr. Godley's plan was to be the matter brought
before the House.
CASE OF SIR E. WILMOT.

Mr. SPOONER, rose to bring the case of the late
Governor of Van Diemen's Land before the House. The
Hon. Member, who was very indistinctly heard
throughout, prayed that the House would grant
him its indulgence while he proceeded to lay before
them the facts connected with the dismimial of the late
Bir Eardley Wilmor.'nhich had excited so deep a sensa-
tion both in that House and out of doors. That lamented
individual was now beyond the power of persecution ;
but it was due to his memory to clear it from the charges
which had been made against him. These charges bad
never been stated in plain terms ; even the dispatch of
Mr. Gladitont:.. stated that they were defined with the
words " living in a state of coneubinege with convict
women ;" and to his dying day the subject of them was
la') more than this : What were the charges, or who
Were the persons behind his back, who advanced what
he 01r. Spooner) had no hesitation i sa • ' , were mere
eharg,,, _.•.n n ifrfl.,
alike unfounded and nnjuit? What were the
facts,an.* hnw did they originate ? Three gentlemen
came to this country from the eebny, and had certain
communications with the Colonial olth;e. Two of these
gentlemen laid no restraieti.7,nupon the use of their names, j
ipbbaot
no:
an one o
notf th.reefneirdibay;,:r.ot, therarou,, he (Mr. Spm,ner)
thento either of til..ni. Having
made the charges, theSecretary of State (Mr,
Gladstone) sent off a dispatch—a
—to Sir
E rile), Wilmot, with which, as it dis Pate h
my j ct of tie charges, he oira.llusled not to the
(a
anpooner) had
r ottiiug to do. But, he sent
dispatch, dated the other and a
13th day of
which stated h
ar lc excited
. no small surprise,
private6.pr, l 8"46,
made I,' .lf htat 42"umunication
bad been to him
related to his private life: T
Inasmuch as they re o these
would not advert, but he said that
charges he said he
the Government felt it ~
imperative to request his reiigna.
those charges that could
lead There was nothing in . .
for his own vindication
lead him to form any plan d " '
They were so uncertain in their chaneter, an so vague
in their description, that he was utterly at a loss how to
deal with them. But he did what Sir George Arthur
had done under similar circumstances ; he called his
Council together, and said—Here are certain charge.;
preferred against me by the Government at home ; if I
lull guilty, say so ; if I am not guilty, then represent to
the English Government that they were unfounded.
During the time that this subject was under discussion a
paragraph appeared in the Naval and if iligarg Gazelle,
recap: tulating the charges. To that paragraph the Lord
Chief Justice of the colony replied in a letter to the
editor, giving the statement his unqualified contradiction.
The Hon. Member then read the letter of the Chief
Justice, to the effect that there was no truth in the latter
part of the charge, which stated, that no persons of
character or respectability went to the Government-
house except on business. The reply of Sir E. Wilmot
en the sth of October, 1846, denied the imputations con- .