The Sun.
London, England, 1858-05-22 00:00:00

EVENING, MAY 22, 1858.

to dispossess the military proprietors, and to allow the
taloolcdars on submitting to re-enter their lands.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Sir, in
exercising the privilege which every gentlemen in this
house possesses, namely, to agree to or to refuse the per-
mission which the right hon. gentleman the member fur
Oxford asks to withdraw his motion, 1 am obliged to
consider the proposition in two lights. I must not
merely consider those general interests which affect,
naturally, the opinions of all, but I must remember,
that, so far as regards myself and my right hon. friends
on this bench, the motion of the right hon. gentleman
had a peculiar character and object. (Hear.) That
motion was brought forward avowedly by the right hon.
gentleman as a censure upon the conduct of her Meje -
ty's Government. The indictment only last night was
elaborately amplified by the learned knight the member
for Aylce bury, not merely with a vote or censure for
some casual passage of our conduct, but undoubtedly one
of general want of confidence in our policy and beha-
viour. And therefore, sir, when lam asked to agree to
the withdrawal of the motion, I say, in the first place,
that that is a proposition which I myself could under no
circumstances originate ; and that when the right hon.
gentleman asks me to assent to it, I beg to say it is not
because we shrink from the consequences of the motion.
(Loud Ministerial cheers.) We should have looked at
that result without apprehension, and the consequences
of that division we are even now ready to encou-ter.
(Ministerial cheers.) But there are undoubtedly higher
considerations than those with respect to the convenience
of a Government. (Hear.) And I wish that those
higher considerations bad throughout this debate in-
fluenced more of the views and arguments of our oppo-
nents. (Corset...) So far as this debate is concerned,
even though its existence is brought t e an untimely close,
I think no Ministry that ever was on its trial could look
back to a discus o i of this importance with more satis-
faction. (Cheers.) For the opposition to the motion in
the debate has not been sustained by members of the
Administration—who I think have very wisely and pro-
perly withdrawn from it as much as possible—out by
members opposed to us in many respects, and members
inferior to none in this house for the power of their intel-
lect or the weight of their authority; and by the power
of their arguments and the force of their eloquence the
opinion of this house ha• been so much worked upon that
we at last witnessed the strange result which we have seen
to-night. (Laughter and cheers.) But, sir, if I am asked it
I can consent to the withdrawal of this motion on other
grounds than those which concern the convenience of a
ministry, I am bound to say that I think there are grave
and weighty reasons why we should take that course.
(Cheers.) I confess I did look forward with some appre-
hension to what min ht be the con& qaences in India of a
dividon—a near division—upon a theme of the imperial
importance which this discussion has ra,surned- (Cheers.)
If, indeed, it had been narrowed withinn the petty issue
wbice we had at first relented to our notice—if it ceu:d
have been stripped of those which are its necessary irici-
e• its, it might have been of light importance; but no
sooner did it break the bonds which it was idly attempted
to place upon it, no sooner was the question launcsel
into the house, than with an in-tiact worthy of a great
public assembly it felt the importance of tke appeal which
was snide upon it. (Cheers ) The country has also felt
the force of that appeal, and our debate have reached
and agitated every nook in her Majesty's dominions.
(Hear.) Wel, sir, if lam asked whether, without any
considera:ion of pary, I think it is best for the interests
of the country and for the emp re, for England and India,
that no division should take place, I have a deep con-
viction that it would be for the pu dic welfare that this
debate should terminate in the manner now proposed ;
and therefore I do not feel authorised to resist the pro-
position which has been made by the right hon, gentle-
man the member for Oxford. (Cheers.) The house may
perhaps, however, permit me to observe that with the
exception of tbe mum( reble despatch which has been
ct iiiresed so much ie the course of this discussion, •an
which was intended for the eye of the Governor-General
alone, the Government have in every opinion they have
expressed given th- Governor-General their sincere and
he arty and cordial support. (Hear.) It was our very
first duty when we acceded to office, after dealing with
the immediate peril connected with c ntinental politics,
and the urgency of which could not be exaggerated—it
was our first duty to consider what should be our
course with respect to India, and what the character
of the policy that we should recoincrAend. After
great deliberation we arrived at a result which was
embodied in a secret despatch to the Governor-General,
which now lies upon the tattle of the house. I way ob-
serve that in teat despatch the Government of her Ma-
kes y gave to the GovernorGsnerel at that time the as-
surance of their most cordial support. I wish the house
would look at the significant description of that despatch
Its title at once explains the important character of its
contents. It is a "Letter from the Secret Committee
to the Governor-Ger eral relative to the Policy to be pur-
sued to wards the Natives of Provinces lately in a state
of hostility." (lear.) Now, sir, there is not one word
in that despatch, there is no stateineut which it contains,
to which I hope the great majority of this house and the
country are not prepared to give their adhesion. (Coeere)
It contains to my mind a wise and great policy which is
alone calculsted to rebul.l our Indian empire in a man-
ner satisfactory to tee people of this country. (Cheers.)
But when we arrived at this result we believed that in
Lord Canning we had a willeog and cordial agent ; and
I believe that this despatch expresses the policy of Lord
Canning. It concludes in these words :—" In carrying
these views into execution you may meet with obstruc-
t'on from those who, maddened by the scenes they have
witnessed, may desire to substitute their own policy for
Mat of the Government ; but persevere firmly in doing
wbat you may think right; wake those who would coun-
' erect you feel that you are resolved to rule, and that
you will be served by none who wi 1 net obey. Acting
in this spirit, you may rely upon our unqualified sup•
port." (Cheers.) Looking at this policy, arid remember-
ing tbe charact r and career of theCioverner-Ge. eral, no
one could doubt the sincerity of our determination to
support LerdCs,nning. (a a .) Af or what has occurred
I will not touch upon the despatch of Aerie 19th, or
the unfortunate circurnstar ces connected with it. After
the turn which the debate has taken I feel that I should
err aga net taste if I were to obtrude up n tbis
house a vindication of my personal conduct. There
is a mach greater matter at stake than the vindice-
tree of my conduct. I will only state to the house, if it
wi.l permit me, that at the very beginning, when the
question of our policy was introduced into the house by
the bon. memne r for Devonport, I expressed, without
hosita i.)n nr reluctance, the policy which the Govern-
mont intended to pursue before the despatch of the 24th
March was laid upon the table. (hear.) That p dicy was,
to quote the words of Sir J. Lawrence, a policy of "di' -
or:in:Dating amnesty," respect for private property, reli-
gieus toleration, and a decent regard to rights and usages
of the people. (Cheers.) When, there.` ire, I was asked
whether I approved of the proclamation which sane ioned
confiscation, I c dill give but one answer after the ex-
pression of opinion contained in the despatch of the 24th
Nlerch. (Hear.) But now with respect to the conduct of
Lord Canning, what is the best course to pursue under
these circumstances ? As soon as these unfortunate or-
currencee took place, we communicated by telegraph
with Lord Canning, and we assured him th ‘t in the di:-
&mit position in which both he and the Government
were placed he might rely upon our support. (Cheers.)
We are now asked to agree to the withdrawal of this ,
motion, and I do not wish to make any personal difficulty
about it. It is not, therefore, from any feeling of exulta-
tion or from any desire to triumph that I suggest to the
right hon. gentleman that the most convenient course
would be to negative his motion, because I don't other-
wise see how we can o insider the amendment which we
are asked to adopt by the right hon. gentleman the mem-
ber for the University. (Caeers.) At the same time I
have no objection to the withdrawal of the motion, be-
cause I have not the slightest doubt that we can commu-
nicate with the Governor-General lir a much more satie-
factory manner than by a vote of the House cf Commons,
adopted without any very great consideration, and with
reference to a motion which no longer exists. I think,
therefore, the simplest course would be that this motion
and all the adjuncts of it should be withdrawn. (Loud
ch ors.) I beg the house to believe that in making
this suggestion I have no ill-feeling towards the Governor-
General. The Governor-General of India is a servant of
the Queen ; we are also her Majesty's responsible ser-
vants, and it is of the utmost importance that we should
cordially act together. (Cheers.) Wa never anticipated
ha publication of this despatch which has produced all
this dismission ; but permit me to say, that if the revela-
tions between her Majesty's Government and the Governor-
General of India should be cordial they should also be sin-
cere. (Hear.) If the house supposes for a moment that I
and those with whom I act are prepared in any way to re-
tract the opinions which we have expressed respecting that
policy of confiscation which we believe Lord Canning
under some evil influence has unhappily adopted--(no no)
the house will indeed have misinterpreted all that I have
said. (Hear.) I trust that Lord Canning will be distin-
guished by those sentiments which marked his career up to
the time that these sad disturbances first broke out.
(Cheers.) This is notethe time, nor an I in the mood to
enter into any great controversy, but still I may perhaps
here be allowed a few observations in self-defence and in
vindication of those who are placed by their official posi-
tion in confidential communication with Lord Canning. I
roust say I was surprised that the noble lord (Lord John
Russell) should the other night have intimated to the
house, as a matter of astonishment, that we, who sit on
the Treasury bench, profess, d the policy of mercy. The
noble lord expressed surprise at finding us criticising Lord
Canning, as if we were adopting a different policy from
that which we had previously proessed. But I should like
to know what has been said or done by her Majesty's ser-
vants in this house which would justify, I will not say such
an insinuation, but such a charge'? (Cheers.) When it was
made I looked round with some amazement, for I remem-
bered that a year ago, when the news first came of this
great disaster, I ventured to call the attention of the house
to the great importance of considering the whole state of
India. I told the house that what it looked upon as a mere
fleeting military mutiny was probably the commencement
of greet disasters, that might call upon them to exert their
utmost energies. I said that this mutiny, if you called it so,
might be put down, but it would require a great effort, eveniu
for England. I remarked that if, through supplying ii
(-1
cieut means, you allowed the revolt to enter upon. a third
campaign. the consequences might be most perilous.l
told you th while you diet not neglect your militarypye-
parations, you ought not to overlook the social condition
of India, for unless we discovered the causes of this dis-
order and applied an adequate remedy we should be landed
in dangers and difficulties which the most sagacious would'
be unable at the moment to perceive. (Cheers.) But was
the policy I then recommended a ruthless one ? Did I not
rather entreat and implore the house to respect the reli-
gion of the natives, and not to disturb the tenure of the
land ? (Cheers.) Did I not press it to consider and accu-
rately ascertain the considerable causes of this disorder,
and not to be led away by the belief that it was only a
transient calamity ? But the house was then in a mood for
nothing but violent :sefir,n, therieh nothing is more -ncril-
violent :Action which is founded upon ignorance.
(Hear, hear.) But what have I and my colleagues done
since to give the noble lord the idea that we were ever op-
ponents of Lord Canning's benevolent policy? (Hear.)