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

22-, 1858.-

to dispossess the military proprietors, and to allow the
talookdars on snbmitting 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 for
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 Aide,-
Ws Government. The indictment only last night was
elaborately amplified by the learned knight the member

for Aylet-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 wh►ch 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 havo looked at

hat result without apprehension, and the consequences
of that division we are even now ready to encounter.
(Ministerial cheers.) But there are undoubtedly higher
considerations than those with respect to the convenience
of a Government. (dear.) And I wish that those
higher considerations had throughout this debate in-
fluenced more of the views and arguments of our oppo-
nents. (Cheers.) So far as this debate is concerned,
even though its existence is brought to an untimely close,
I think no Ministry that ever was on its trial could look
back to a discu,sWe 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perly withdrawn from it as much as possible—but by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; ariti 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 theetrange result which we have seen
to-night. (Leughter and cheers.) But, air, ii I am asked if
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 for ward with some appre-
hension to what might be the rouse quences in India of a
division—a near division—upon a theme of the imperial
importance which this discussion has assumed. (Cheers.)
If, indeed, it had been narrowed withinn the petty issue
whica we had at first presented to our notice—if it could
have been strippedof those which are its necessary incl.
divots, 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 launceed
into the house, than with an instinct worthy of a great
public assembly it felt the importance of the appeal which
was made 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.) Well, sir, if lam asked whether, without any
consideration of par y, 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 puelic 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 the memorable despatch which has been
critioised so much iu the course of this discussion, and
which was intended for the eye of the Governor-General
alone, the Government have in every opinion they have
expressed given the Governor-General their sincere aad
hesrty and cordial support. (Hear.) It was our very
first duty when we acceded to office, atter dealing with
the immediate peril connected with continental 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 ludia, and what the character
of the policy that we should recommend. After
great deliberation we arrived at a result which was
embodied in a secret despatch to the Governor-General,
which now lies upon the table of the house. I may ob-
serve that in that despatch the Government of her Ma-
ley), gave to the GovernmoGeneral 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-Gereral relative to the Policy to be pur-
sued towards the Natives of Provinces lately in a state
of hostility." (Hear.) Now, sir, there is not one word
in that despatch, there is no statement which it contains,
to which I hope the great majority of this house and the
country are not prepared to give their adhesion. (Cheers)
It contains to my mind a wise and great policy which is
alone calculated to rebuild our Indian empire in a man-
ner satisfactory to the people of this country. (Cheers.)
But when we arrived at this result we believed that in
Lord Canning we had a willing and cordial agent ; and
I believe that tnis despatch expresses the policy of Lerd
Canning. It concludes in these words In carrying
law execution you may meet with obstruc-
tion from those who, maddened by the scenes they have
witnessed, may desire to substitute their own policy for
teat of the Government ; but persevere firmly in doing
what you may think right; make those who would coun-
teract you feel that you are resolved to rule, and that
you will be served by none who will not obey. Acting
in this spirit, you may rely upon our unqualified sup•
port." (Cheers.) Looking at this policy, and remember-
ing the cliaractr and career of the Govern or-Ger eral, no
one could doubt the sincerity of our determination to
support Lot Warming. (fl. a s) Aber what has occurred
I will not touch upon the despatch of April 19th, or
the unfortunate circumstar ces connected with it. After
the turn which the debate has taken I feel that I should
err against taste if I were to obtrude upon this
house a vindication of my personal conduct. There
is a much greater matter at stake than the vindica-
tion of my conduct. I will only state to the house, if it
will permit tne, that at the very beginning, when the
question of our policy was introduced into the house by
the hon. member fur Devonport, I expressed, without
hesitation or reluctance, the policy which the Govern-
ment intended to pursue before the despatch of the 24th
March was laid upon the table. (Hear.) That policy was,
to quote the words of Sir J. Lawrence, a policy of "dis-
criminating amnesty," respect for private property, reli-
gious toleration, and a decent regard to rights and usages
of the people. (Cheers.) When, therefore, I was asked
whether I approved of the proclamation which sanctioned
confiscation, I could give but one answer after the ex-
pression of opinion contained in the despatch of the 24th
March. (Hear.) But now with respect to the conduct of
Lord Canning, what is the beat course to pursue under
these circumstances I As soon as these unfortunate oc-
currences took place, we communicated by telegraph
with Lord Canning, and we assured him that in the dif-
ficult 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 trimph 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 consider the amendment which we
are asked to adopt by the right hon, gentleman the mem-
ber for the University. (Cheers.) 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 in a much more satis-
factory manner than by a vote of the House of 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, ore.) 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.) We never anticipated
he publication of this despatch which has produced all
this discussion ; 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 oft 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 not the time, nor ate 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
must say I was surprised that the noble lard (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 wo had previously professed. 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
fleetinguailitary mutiny was probably the commencement
of great 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, even
for England. I remarked that if, through supplying it a itil-
cient means, you allowed the revolt to enter upon a third
campaign, the consequences might be most perilous. I
told you th ct while you did net neglect your military pre-
paratiens, you ought lot to overlook the social condition
of India, for unless we discovered the causes of this dis-
order and appiie,l 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 acid not to disturb the tenure of the
laud ? (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.? Bet the house was then in a mood for
nothing but violent action, though nothing is more peril-
ous then violent action which is founded upon ignorance.
(Hear, hear.): But.whit 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.)