The Sun.
London, England, 1858-05-18 00:00:00

hon. and learned gentleman who seconded the motion, of
whose great astuteness and whose competence to under-
stand the English language there can be no doubt. The
hon. and learned member for Cork against sense, against
law, and, as I say against the plain meaning of the English
tongue, contends that the proclamation does not mean what
he says it meant. (Laughter.) Following the same extra-
ordinary argument as the late Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, he forgets the resolution and the speech of the right
hon. member, but, having a laudable terror of his consti-
tuents, he declares that if it could really be shown to his
satisfaction that if the inhabitants of a country means the
people who therein do dwell -(laughter)—that the people
of Oude means the people who dwell in Oude, and that
landowners means the l eople who owns land, ho has such
a strong opinion of tenant right—(loud laughter)—of fixity
of tenure, and the right which all men have to reap the
fruits of their industry, that if you could only satisfy him
that confiscation means confiscation he would be ono of
the most resolute supporters of the Government. (Hear,
hear, and laughter.) I trust when next my hon, and
learned friend stands upon the hustings of Cork and ad-
dresses a brave and generous people his opponent will meet
him with this proclamation in one band and its condom-
nation in the other. (Hear.) Let him read the sentence
of confiscation upon the property of a nation, and the sen-
tence of censure upon the condemnation ; and will then
his constituents believe that he is the sincere advocate of
their opinions, who bases his principles upon philanthropy
and his humanity upon justice ? (Hear, hoar.) Why, may
I ask the hon. and learned gentleman, has ne never read
the meaning of confiscation? Is not confiscation the con-
veyence of property to others by way offonalty upon its
present holders for offences committed by them ? (Hear.)
What does he think of transferring the property of a
nation, innocent and guilty alike—(hear)--those who have
committed no offence the same as those who have offended
us? (Hear, hear.) Lot me draw the attention of the
house to a date, which, amidst all the particularity of
dates we have had in the course of this discussion, has not
been mentioned. The argument is, that the plain and
sincere answer of my right hon. friend the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, in reply to a plain question from the hon.
member for Birmingham, justifies a censure upon the
Government. But if it be that the opinion expressed
then, that the policy avowed not in one but in three
despatches is just the policy which one of yourselves
distinctly called upon the Government to adopt, and
which amidst your cheers my right hon. friend said the
Government would adopt, how as politicians, as men
of sense and consistency, can you agree to this reso-
lution. (Cheers.) What occurred upon the 23d of April ?
I believe my hon. friend the member for Devonport (Sir
E. Perry) is in his place, for I am about to call him as
a witness. (A laugh.) Remember, you are asked to cen-
sure the Government for censuring the despatch of Lord
Canning. Upon the day I have mentioned the hon. gentle-
man the member for Devonport asked the Chancellor of
the Exchequer whether instructions had been sent to India
that terms of amnesty, including protection to life and
property—(hear, hear, and laughter)—and full toleration
in matters of religion, should be held out to the inhabitants
of Oude, excepting in gross cases of heinous crimes ; and
if no such instructions had been seat, whether in the opinion
of her Majesty's Government it was not expedient to do
so? (Hear, hear.) Now, how anybody who proposed such
a question or favoured its import could support such a re-
solution as this is to me perfectly enigmatical. (Hear,
hear.) The hon. and learned gentleman went on to say
ho firmly believed that if certain principles, arising from a
spirit of vengeance, were allowed to operate, our tenure of
India was not worth six months' purchase. The hon. and
learned gentleman then went on to observe, "A remarkable
document had within the last few days appeared in the
Times—the proclamation of the Hindoos. These Hindoos
declared that the four great things which a man valued—his
religion, his bonen., his life, and his property—were safer
under native States than under British rule. If that doc-
trine were generally entertained throughout India, we
need not look upon that dependency any longer as our
own, and it was incumbent on the Government to take
steps to pat an end to that belief." The hon. and learned
gentleman then went on to say that "as to Oude, arms
having been successful there, he hoped that Government
would act on what he was sure all the statesmen of the
country believed the sound doctrine, and try to rule by
beneficence and mercy, as well as by strength of arms.
He did not 'wish to revive the controversy on the annexa-
tion of that country in 1856, but ho contended that Oude
must be looked on as a conquered province, and the
inhabitants who hail risen in Prins against us were en-
titled to all the protection which international law and
the rights of war afforded to persons in such a posi-
tion." (Hear, hear.) Now, the noble lord opposite
(Lord J. Russell) heard every word of that statement and
cheered it, and yet he has made a speech now denying that
the principles of international law have any reference to
Oude. (Hoar, hear.) But what further did the hon. and
learned gentleman add ? "He hoped the Government
would now open the widest door to these men, who had
fought for what they believed to be their rights, and that
they would be assured of the utmost protection"—to what?
—" to life, property, the enjoyment of their religion, and
what they called their honour." (Loud cheers.) The Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer was called upon to answer whether
he wound send instructions to that effect—to protect the
property of the people of Oude, to carry out the policy
which the hon. and learned gentleman recommended, and
which was alike creditable to his heart and his understand-
ing. The Government can answer for my right hon. friend
the Chancellor of the Exchequer that despatches had been
sent out in conformity with his views, and having suc-
ceeded in obtaining that answer—that it was the policy of
the Government to protect life and property in Oude, and
to treat the people of that country as a conquered people,
entitled to the benefits of international law—the very same
men who called upon the Government to do this, and
cheered the announcement of the fact, turn round and say,
Why did you send out a despatch recommending such a
course. (Loud cheers.) The right hon. gentleman the
member for Northampton (Mr. V. Smith) made a speech
iu our hearing the other evening, and in that speech he
said,—" I approve the policy of that proclamation, and I
say that is the very way to deal with the people of the
East." Would the house believe that on the 23d of April
that right hon. gentleman stood up and re-echoed every
word that was spoken by the hon. baronet the member for
Devon in direct contrast and contradiction? (Cheers.) My
right hon. friend did not state what that unfortunate pro-
clamation contained, because there were no desire unne-
cessarily to publish that document to the world. (A laugh,
answered by counter cheery) Let no gentleman suppcoe
that I am about to evade the consideration of the argu-
ment of publication. I pray the house to consider care-
fully, and to scrutinize closely, a part of these transactions
which I do not think has received sufficient attention
from the house, and that is the state of things with refer.
enco to a second letter, which has been most anxiously
inquired after, but without effect. I have now to inform
the house that to-day this curious fact has been
ascertained. By the mail of Saturday Lord Ellenborough
received three private letters from Lord Canning, not ad.
dressed to him at the Board of Control, but at his resi-
dence; and every word of those three letters, marked pri-
vate, concerned the public business of this department.
(Cheers.) But that is not the only singularity of the tran-
saction. Those three letters, marked private, came by ono
post, and from beginning to end there is not one single
line in any of them in reference to this proclamation,
which, therefore, still remains unexplained by any docu-
ment whatever. (Cheers.) Let us now pursue the inquiry.
Referring for a moment to a particular inquiry which has
been so eagerly desired, but which there has been such
an inffexible resolution to withhold —(a laugh)—l ask whet
was stated in that letter? Why, that a full explanation
of that extraordinary proclamation would be forwarded
by the mail. I have these words "by the mail," and the
letter stated th tt a full explanation would be sent. (" No,
,no " from the Opposition, and vehement cries of "Read,
read," and "The letter," from the Ministerial benches.) I
agree that the human memory is fallible, but a written
document is not so ; produce the document and then I shall
be satisfied. (Cheers.) That letter not having been pro-
duced, I say, unless you violate all the rules of evidence
and all the maxims of law, you will make every presump-
tion against the man, who being called on to produce a
written document, refuses under sago advise to do so, and
then quibbles about its meaning. (Cheers.) And those
are the men who, with loud protestations on their lips of
their regard for the honour of their country, appear to be
a little forgetful of what is due to their own. My real be-
lief is this—that when the right hon. gentleman the mem-
ber for Northampton got the private letter he considered
what was due to the Prime Minister that was, and the
" Primo Minister that wished to be. (A. laugh) Being.
puzzled, therefore, as the right hon. gentleman states, by
a question which overtasked his faculties, he could not'de-
cide it. Why did he not consult the churchwarden of his
parish? (Loud laughter and cheers.) I can fancy him
saying to himself, "Here is a passage in a letter that re-
lates to a. Royal proclamation ; now let me consider, is
float public or private ! (A laugh.) lam unable to fathom
the mystery ; I shall consult my noble friend the member
for Tiverton--(a laugh)—he is the only man who can ease
my puzzled understanding; upon that subject I will un-
bosom myself to him ; he will tell me the public effect
of a private letter; I will be governed by the advice of one
who made me Minister of India, and who may make IP. 0
Minister of India again. (Laughter and cheers.) He con-
sulted the noble viscount accordingly, and the noble vis-
count is here to tell the House of Commons—men of busi-
ness anal men of sense, with quick and clear perceptions—
after half a century's experience as a member of this As-
sembly, that a letter relating to a royal proclamation from
the ruler of a State—a declaration of the sovereign will
affecting the inhabitants of a country—was in his opinion
so entirely unimportant that it did not require to be men-
tioned
to the Minister of tho department whom it con-
cerned. (Cheers.) The noble lord is a man of great tact,
and tact does wonderful things ? but there are some things
that a man of tact even cannot explain, and this is one of
them. I ask the noble viscount why he said to the right
hon. gentleman that the document did not require to be
delivered to the Minister at the Board of Control ; Was
there ever anything so unconstitutional committed by two
ex-Ministers of the Crown ? (Cheers.) Did they hold a
cabal to consider the effect of that document? Was it for
them to deliberate on that question ? and if they did de-
liberate upon it, why did they not give the benefit of their
deliberation to the gentleman for whom the document was
intended ? I say it is an insult to your understandings for
any noble lord or any right hon. gentleman to say that a
document of that kind ought to b© suppressed. (Cheers.)
If the right hon. gentleman the member for Northampton
was averse to the production of this private letter he might
have copied from it the paragraph relating to the procla-
mation and forwarded it to Lord Ellenborough, leaving it
to him to consider whether it was necessary or expedient
that he should attend to it. (Cheers.) There never wes
a more unconstitution doctrine uttered in this house than
that an ex-Minister, after consulting another ox-Minister,
was at liberty to withhold or not, as he pleased, a docu-
ment relating to public business, because it happened to
come into his hand in the form of a private letter, and then
to be allowed to make use of it to eertract an answer from an
unwilling Minister in the other House of Tarliament.
(Cheers.) But I Laws another question to put before I
have done with this subject. Were there no other letters
of a private nature ? (Loud cheers.) For aught we know
the right hon, gentleman, and the noble lord may have
a bagful of private letters—(laughter) —for we have no w
this extraordinary fact, that in the letters which hate ar-
rived since no allusion whatever is made to the proclama-
tion. (Hear, hear.) It is not an unnatural inference, there-
fore, that the promised explanation of which eve have
heard so much may have beenforwarded by some other
channel than that which leads to the office of the Board of
Control, and therefore has never reached the hands of Lord
Ellenborough. (Laughter.) It lies with those who have
withheld one documet to explain satisfactorily and dis-
tinctly to the house whether, in
point of fact, that other
document is in existence or has been destroyed, and whe-
ther they are in a condition to produce it to the house—
(hear, hear)—whether, in fact, any letters have been re-
ceived and submitted to a Cabinet Council of ex-Ministers
to say whether they should be produced or not. (Laugh-
ter.) It is not for me to impute motives—(ironical cheers)
—but I have so high an opinion, of tho noble viscount, and
I have so very decided a conviction that he never does any-
thing without having some good reason for doing it, that
though I am not at liberty to surmise what his reasons
were, I have no doubt he had excellent reasons in his own
neiud for the advice which he gave to the right hon. gentle.