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

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY IWENING, MAY 18, 1858.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-(YESTERDAY.)

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.

THE EARL OF SUAFTESBURY'S RESOLU.

TIONS.

The Earl of DONOUGI3IIfORE called their lord-
ships' attention to the fact of Viscount Falkland having
voted in the division on these resolutions on Friday
last, both in person and by proxy. The majority of the
Government was thus diminished by one, and should
lye 10 instead of 9. He hoped the house would adopt
means to prevent such mistakes in future.
The Earl of BESSBOROUGH said that if their lord-
ships looked at the division lists, they would find that
Viscount Falkland's proxy bad not been tendered.

piness it must be a merciful Government. (Hear, hear.)
Now, having acquired this dominion in India there
arose a rebellion against us. We had a wonderful army
and that army mutinied. Let no one for an instant sup-
pose that I stand up as one not feeling, deeply feeling all
the atrocities that mutinous army has perpetrated. No
man has been more ready to raise his voice against them
than I have been, and I will say let punishment to the
uttermost follow those atrocities ; but I draw a broad
distinction between the mutinous army and the people
of India. (Hear, hear.) And now I come to Oude.
The Governor-General of India and the Directors of
the East India C ,mpany were pleased to annex
Oude to our dominions. I hold some peculiar opinions on
this matter. (Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) You do
not know what these opinions are, why do you cheer ?
(Laughter.) The opinions I hold aro that I think the first
injustice the least—(hear, hear)—that when you have
conquered a country you ought to annex it at once and
not el eate intermediate authorities and enter into treaties
with them ; but that having done so you are bound by
those treaties. (Hear, hear.) Let me take the instance of
Scinde. There we began unjustly, but still we conquered
Scinde, and we annexed it. That I think a better mode
of proceeding than we followed in Oude. We entered
into treaties with Oude as far back as 1801, and these
treaties contained certain stipulations with regard to the
dominions of Oude. Another treaty was made after that,
but though laid on the table of this house it has been
declared to be no treaty at all. (Hear.) Ultimately it
was declared, on the ground of the treaty, that because
the King of Oude did not behave to his people as he
ought to have done his kingdom was to be annexed to
our dominions. Now, I say that was an injustice which
it would have been far better to avoid by annexing Gado
at once. (Hear.) Be that as it may, it pleased the Go-
vernor-General and the Court of Directors to annex
Oude to our dominions. We ought to recollect chat the I
people of Oude were accustomed to their native dominion,
and when the annexation took place they expressed
strong feelings of dissatisfaction, and when the mutiny
of the army broke out they joined the mutineers. We
warred against them, but will any man tell me that we
warred against the people of Oude as a band of muti-
neers, and not as a nation ? (Hear.) It was a nation war-
ring against a nation, and we conquered them. Now, I
solicit the attention of the house to what followed. A
scene was enacted to which the history of mankind shows
no parallel. (Hear,) Annexing Oude, we immediately
proceeded to dispossess the landowners. That created dis-
content. When the mutiny broke out the people of Oude,
as I have said, joined the mutineers, and we conquered
them. But before Oude was conquered the present Go-
' vernor-General issued a proclamation, by which he con-
fiscated—l use the term in English as it was written in
English—he confiscated, with the exception of that of
six persons, all the landed property of Oude. (Hear.) I
say that the history of mankind affords no parallel to
such a case. (Hear.) I know that the Normans in their
day confiscated a great deal of the land, but they did not
go the length of confiscating all with the exception of
the property of six persons. (Hear.) But to come to the
commencement of the question now before us. The Go-
vernment of India in this country receives from India a
proclamation that was or3ered to be issued on the fall of
Lucknow ; and what did that Government do ? It sees
that a proclamation is about to be issued which in that
Government's opinion would make the whole people of
Oude rebellious to the very end of their lives. (Cheers.)
And I ask gentlemen to observe that it has been said,
and I believe cannot be contradicted, that this procla-
mation,the opinions and wishes of Sir Colin Campbell, Sir J.
otram so issued,
and
ndsir o
J. declared,Lawrence.
was done in opposition to
(Hear) I have seen pri-
vate letters in London from India which say that the
effect of tills pr :clamation was trpiiealent to a demand
for 20,000 troupe in addition to those we have already
in India. I say, then, that the Government which would
have passed over a proclamation of that description in
silence would have deserved impeachment—(hear, hear),
and I believe there would have been none so ready to
say so as the gentlemen now on that (the Opposition)
bench. (Laughter.) The President of the Board of Con-
trol, on receiving such a proclamation, was bound to
express an opinion. Whose opinion ? What opinion ? His
own. (Hoar.) He was bound, under-
standing,acting to tell Lord Canning what he thought of it,
and he did tell hint. (Hear, hear on his own )
Waat other con-
clusion could he have come to when he read of the con-
fiscation fur ever-of the lanes ef
the people of Oude
—for it is idle to tell me this proclamation does not
confiscate the whole land of Oade ? (Hear, hear.)
There are some ugly words in that proclamation,
the true sense of which the house cannot fail
to see if it will only be guided by it's own judg-
ment instead of being led away by party feeling. (Hear,
hear.) The Governor-General in this proclamation, it
w'll be observed, informs tee people of Oude that the
Government will remunerate those who preserve their
allegiance, and he names six parsons who are to be per-
mitted to retain their property. But he says farther—
and, mark you, this proclamation is addressed to the
people of Oude—(cheers)—not to the chiefs, not to the
landed proprietors, not to the Dukes of Bedford—
(cheers and laughter)—but to the people of Oude, with
six exceptions, and to them he says that "The proprie-
tary
right in the soil of the province is confiscated to
the British Government, which will dispose of that right
in such manner as it may seem fitting." (Cheers.) You
will recollect this was written in Euglish—(hear)—and
that words more complete could not be used to signify
that the whole landed property of Oude was confiscated
to the Government of England. (Hear.) And now I
will make an observation, if the house will allow me,
upon the statement made by the nob'e lord the member
for the oily of London on the injustice of publishing
that proclamation and the despatch of the noble lord the
President of the Board of Control. Now, let us hear
how it did occur. This intended proclereatien was sent
home, but the proclamation was issued at Lucknow,
after the fall of Lucknow, and differed in some respects
from that proclamation. My hon. friend the member
for Birmingham (Mr. Bright) read the actual proclama-
tion as it was published in the newspapers. Ile put a
question, and an answer was given to him, to which by
and bye I will refer. The answer given was the answer
to this proclamation that I have read, and he was pro-
mised that the answer should be laid on the table. It
was laid on the table. Could you lay on the table an
answer that was not gison (" Oh All the Govern-
ment could do was to say, " We have sent an answer
to the intended proclamation, and that answer you shall
know." You did know it, and what was there wrong
in that ? It is a very simple statement, but a very true
one. Therefore, I Kay that Lord Ellenborough was
bound to give an answer; that, in the second place,
he was bound to give that answer which in his
honest mind he intended to give ; and that this
answer was made. And now I come to the third ques-
tion involved. It has been said that Lord Eilenborongh
ought to haveenade an answer, but that he had no right
to publish that despatch. Therein was the gravamen of
the charge made by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Card-
well). I would ask the house whether there are not cer-
tain questions that compel au answer? If I go up to the
Secretary to the India Board and say—" Would you rob
au
a mar.?" and if the hon. gentleman replied, "Considera-
tionshave seengh.) a proclamation
of public policy prevent my answering the quest-
time" the presumption would be that he would rob him.
(A laugh.) The e hon . memberfrom fort
the
e Birmingham
said,Governor-General
India
about Oude, and I wantto know if you have heard
oflf
of it, whether you have answered it, and the nature of
your answer ?" What occurred ? The Secretary to the
India Board got up and answered one -half of that ques-
tion. He said, • "We have answered that proclamation,
and you shall see the answer." Upon which my hon.
friend, who is not a roan to be put off, said, " I hope the
Government are not satisfied with that answer ; I am
net. I want to know what you said. Did you agree with
the proclamation 1" " No," said the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, " we did not agree with it ; we differed from
the policy indicated in every sense." Now I ask the
house, as men of common sense, whether, if the right
hon. gentleman had got up and said, "considerations of
public policy prevent my answering the question," the
conclusion, of every man would not' have been that the
Government blamed that proclamation? (Hear.) It is as
certain as daylight. If he had approved the proclamation
he would have told us so, and by declining to answer he
would have answered that the Government did not agree
with the proclamation. (Hear.) What then was the con-
duct 'to be pursued by the right hon. gentleman? That
which he did pursue. Ile said, "We did disagree with
the proclamation." Will you tell me about paralysing
the Governor-General's arm ? Who was to blame ?
(Hear, hear.) Was not Lord Ellenborough bound to
answer the proclamation as his own judgment told
him it should be answered ? and, if you comdelled
the publication of that despatch, the evil of it rests here,
and not with the Government. (Cheers.) There is this
wonderful peculiarity—l will not say mischief —of a Go•
vernment like ours—that the people should know what
is going on. I believe that the arguments used in this
debate go further than some hoc, gentlemen think, and
that they condemn the hidden diplomacy which is the
curse of this country. (Cheers.) I firmly believe that,
if we knew from day to day what the Government are
doing, we should be better off than we are. (Cheers,)
Now, we are led blindfold into every error. War comes
on us, and we are told we must not inquire. Peace
ernes on u', and we are told we are too late. (Hear.)
When it is important that we Should know the public
interests step in, and when to know is of no use at all
we are told all. (Loud cheers.) Sir, I want to know if this
is not a fair description ? There was no other course be-
fore the Government except that which they pursued.
Tney were called upon to give an opinion. They did
give an opinion, and they gave it according to the
honest bias of their own minds. (Cheers.) When they
were called upon to publish that opinion it was by this
side of the house, and they had
no alternative. It was
published in spite of themselves, and the publication is
not (Cheers.)
to be laid at their door.
Well, then, if we
are to regard our Indian dominion as a matter in which
we have an interest, we have a yet greater interest iii
truth and justice. (Hear.) If you wanted to pacify
India it would be by the course pointed out in the des-
patch
despatch ought to be printed in letters of gold. Sir, I
believe so. That was an honest despatch, and Ido not
know my own countrymen if they do not come to the
same conclusion. (Cheers.) I entreat my countrymen
to remember that there are things:above party. If they
are to consider mere party moves I will ask them
what they will get if the Government are in a minority
to-night ? Why, a Government that we have cashiered
lately—(loud cheers)—because they neglected the
honour of England. (Continued cheering.) We
are to allow hon. gentlemen on this side of the house
after passing a few weeks in the cold regions of
Opposition, to go in State across to that (the Treasury)
bench. (Cheers.) And for what? Do the people of
change in the policy of the late Go•
England expect any
vernment ? If they do they are wof ally deceived. Sir,
I believe that good government, that happiness for the
people, that the advance of liberal measures, which we
all desire, are more to be obtained from that weak Go-
vernment—(pointing to the Treasury bench)—than from
the strong insolence of this. (Pointing to the front Op.

position bench amid great cheering.) I have seen, Sir,
both, I have tried them both, and I am sure that we
are further advanced in a course of improvement and
liberty than we should have been under the guidance of
the noble lord (Lord Palmerston). (Cheers.) If wo
seek simple honesty—if we want justice for the people
of England—if we seek the happiness of the people of
England and good government for England, we shall
give a decided negative to the resolutions of the right
hon. gentleman the member for Oxford. (Loud elitetrs.)
Sir C. WOOD considered that the object of the last
speaker was to divert the attention of the house from the
question before them, It was not a question of a strong
or a weak Government, but whether Lord Canning had
done anything calling for the censure of Parliament. He
was not prepared to consider Lord Canning's policy and
he asked the house if they were ? (Hear, hear, and cries
of yes, yes.) He wished to enter on the question irre-
spective of party feeling. (Ironical cheers ) He as-
sured the house that he was not actuated in defending
Lord Canning and condemning the Government from
the paltry love of office (ironical cheers) but from a be.
lief that pulite interests in this country and India were
perilled by the course her Majesty's Government had
taken. (Hear, hear.) He proceeded to defend the

proclamation which he said was only addressed, as
regarded confiscation, to those who had been in arms
against our authority in India. There was a distinc-
tion drawn between the landholder and the people.
Up to the sixteenth paragraph the proclamation had
reference to the former and what followed to the

latter, and as such, he contended, the proclama-
tion would be read and understood in Oude. The
right hon. gentleman read numerous extracts from
Col. Sleeman's report, and also that of Sir J. Outran
in reference to the rapacious conduct of the talookdbars,
or landowners of Oude towards the people, observing it
was their property only that had been confiscated.
The proclamation must be looked at in the manner
in which it was issued to the people of Oude;
and in doing so, it appeared to him it would
produce benefit by inducing the disaffected to return to
the British authority. The proclamation, as issued by
Lord Canning with regard to confiscation was similar in
language to those issued by a predecessor with reference
to the Punjaub. After that portion of India had been
for a long time in a state of anarchy by a decided policy
such as that which had dictated the present proclama-
tion, it had become tranquil, and had furnished us with
means for suppressing the mutiny. Was the proclaina•
tion, then, a fit subject for censure ? (Hear, hear, from
the Opposition benches.) Was Lord Canning, placed as
he had been in a position of peril, and having acted with
consummate judgment under the most trying circum-
stances, to be the target of vituperation ? (Hear, hear.)
But if the proclamation gave offence, it might have been
repiied to with much more fitting language. (Hear,
hear) Never until Friday last had he heard the lan-
guage of a subordinate quoted against a man in Lord
Canning's exalted station. (Hear, hear.) Public ser-
vants abroad had of late years been attacked in their
absence, but he (Sir C. Wood) contended that this was
the first instance in which a high Minister of State had
been so attacked by his own Government. (Hear, bear.)
It would be difficult for Lord Canning to avoid resigna-
tion under such accumulated attacks, but his sense of
patriotism might rise superior to the bad taste of his
colleagues. He did net think he should have bad to
contend against the wisdom of publishing the despatch.
He thought the Government stood unmistakably con-
victed on that point. The Government were responsible
for the publication, although Lord Ellenborocgla with
that high-spirited and chivalrous feeling which charac-
terised him, took upon himself the whole responsibility.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer bad been the delinquent
in the matter, for his words of disapproval cf the do
spatch might have been recalled, but the promise of
Lord Ellenborough to produce it could not. (Hear.)
If one Minister was to be responsible for the whole
of his colleagues, the right boo, gentleman ought to
take his fair share of the responsibility attaching to the
publication of the despatch. (Hear, bear.) When
it was stated by the Government it would be iocsn-
venierst to produce certain papers asked for in refer-
ence to the Cagliari, the motion was not persisted
in, nor would the production of this despatch if her
jesty's Government hart given a similar answer.
(Hoar.) He wovld not allude to- that part of the S
ili-
citorGeneral's defence, that a copy of the despatch had
been given to Earl Granville and Mr. Bright, because
from the dates it appeared the conies were not given
till after its publication, but the noble bird the Secretary,
for the CulAnies distinctly stated on Friday the circum-
stances on which it should or should not have been
given. If this despatch had only been intended for
Lord Cenning's eye, there would not have been so much
cause for complaint, but proclaiming it at the same time
to the people of India was the most disastrous thing pas-
sable. (Hear, hear ) It was, however, writtou and in-
tended for publication, for it partook more of the charac-
ter of a proclamation than a despatch. (Hear, hear.)
It was a document in its terms derogatory to the Go-
vernor-General end dangerous to the peace of the
country. If there was just cause of complaint against
the Governor-General, it was the duty of the Govern-
ment to have recalled him in a manly and honest man-
ner, but it not they ought not to undermine and weaken
his authority. (Hoar.) The efr !ct of this despatch on
the people of India would be far beyond that on the
Governor-General, and twenty changes of the Homo
Government were as nothing in comparison to it. (Hear,
bear.) It would encourage the people of Oude to con
tinue their resistance against the British authority ; and
the right hon. baronet asked the house if there was t
be no settled policy in India, but that in every change
of home government a change of policy was also to take
place in India. If, ai they now said, the annexation of
Oude was unjust, why did not the house state so two or
three yearn since ? Then, no breath was whispered
against it, at d ought now not to have been condemned,
as it had been in the despatch referred to. If they
were prepared to restore Oude and reinstate the king,
let them do so ; hut:if not, let them Fay so, and then
they would have credit for consistency. They, ho w-
ever, appeared to shrink from doing so, yet they
told the people of Oude they were acting right in re•
sisting the authority of England. It was impossible this
despatch could facilitate the pacification of Oade or
encourage those they bad called on to come in to lay
do wn their arms. When it told the people they were
doing right in resisting British authority, on that de-
spatch would lie the blood of those soldiers shed in paci-
fleeting Oude. (Cheers.) It would be published in every
native newspaper in India, and the people would be told
that the former rule, though bad, was at least native,
and in consequence no part of India would be free from
insurrection and war. (Hear, and cheers.( That was a
question ten thousand times more important than the
change of the Home Government, and he held that the
despatch, so far from proving a ineeeage of peace to
India, would prove to be a firebrand of war. (Cheers.)
Tee publication of the despatch could not now be re-
traced ; but he held it to be their duty to protest at the
earliest possible moment against the writing and pub-
lishing of such a docurnoht, and counteract its prejudi-
cial effects as much as possible, by censuring the con
duct of those who had taken a step so fatal to our autltio-
rity in India, and to assure the people of that country
that we were prepared to maintain our possessions there
which the valour of our soldiers and the skill of our
statesmen had hitherto obtained, and to rule them with
justice and clemency.
Mr. HARDY said on rising to fellew the right hon.
gentleman who had addressed the house with so much
eloquence and so much vigour be felt that some apology
was required from him, seeing that he so seldom ad-
dressed the house. He never addressed it, however, with-
out a strong conviction of the justice of the cause that
he advocated, and he never felt more strongly the jus-
tice of his cause than he did now. The right hon. gentle-
man had spoken of the annexation of Oude, but, passing
that by, he would at once came to the question whether
this despatch was one which did justice to the people of
England and to the people of India. The right hon. gen-
tleman told them that he had three objections to take—
that they had prematurely condemned Lord Canning,
that they bad done it in unfit terms, and that the pub-
lication of the despatch ie India was dangerous to
British power. Now, as to the premature condem-
nation of Lord Canning, when was the time at which
they were to condemn ? if he was told that one of the
servants of tLie country had published a proclamation
which was in itself bad, was he to hesitate ? He had re•
ceived no intimation that any such proclamation was
about to be issued, (Hear, hear.) He knew nothing,
he heard nothing, but that a letter bad come to a right
hon. gentleman containing explanations. That letter
bad never been produced to the President of the Board
of Control ; but it had been shown to a noble lord in
another place, that he might use it as an attack on Lord
Ellenborough. (Cheers.) That letter had been much
spoken of ; but who produced it ? It was not produced
on that side of the house ; and was it produced on the
other by any fair means ? But when it was stated by
Lord Ellenborough, the noble lord who led the opposi-
tion in the other house got up, and said he had not seen
the letter. The noble lord,i t appeared was not in the
secret ; it,was not communicated to him. He did not
see in his plece that evening the right hon. gentleman, '
whose portrait, painted by himself, would be handed
down to posterity. But he turned from that which was
small point of the case. (Opposition cheers.) Hon.
gentemeia opposite cheered, but not one of them bad
been found to defend the right hon. gentleman. But he
should pass from that point. And now with regard to
the speech they had just heard. He bad no fault to,find
with it, except that the right hon. gentleman had en-
deavoured to alter the issue, and put the question on
the issue raised by the noble lord (Lord J. Russell), who
told them that in the despatch the Government not
merely:condemned Lord Canning, but declared him unfit
to hold the meanest office. Now, he asked if that was
a fair representation of what had been done on the occa-
sion ? Then the noble lord threw out his taunts on those
who sat on the Treasury bench, and said they had shown
a spirit of animosity towards Lord Canning, and had
endeavoured to deprive him of the just tribute which was
his due. NOW, he should like to kr.ow to whom Lord
Canning was more indebted for his defence, when he
was attacked on a former occasion, than to the right
hon. gentleman, the member for the University of Cam-
bridge and the right hon. member for Oxfordshire, and
who damned him with faint praise more than the noble
lord the member for the City of London. The noble
lord did not then look with the same feeling on the occu,
Ipants of the Treasury bench, and in his desire to do
them a little harm he did not care about disparaging
Lord Canning. The noble lord the member for Tiverton,
on the motion for the vote of thanks to Lord Canning,
said they would not be at all committed on the question
of the memorial of the inhabitants of Calcutta. The
noble lord (Lord J. Russell) said he did not pretend to
jndge of the manner in which Lord Canning had con-
ducted these operations, and then he went on to praise
if
H
Lord Canning. (Cheers.) Hon. members cheered as
he had omitted to state that. No stated in the first. in-
stance that the noble Lord had praised Lord Canning,

(Cries of Road.) He had not got a copy of the speech 4
(Cries of Oh, oh.) Ile could only say he concurred in
what the noble lord had said as to the moral courage of
Lord Canning. But the noble lord ought to be the last
man to say that the occupants of the Treasury bench
were ready to withhold from Lord Canning the tribute
of praise which was due. He was quite ready that they
Mould take this question on the ground that the right
hon. gentleman had put it—that they should treat it as
affecting the interest of India, though at the same time
he could not give entire credit to the right hon, gentle-
man for being uninfluenced by party considerations. He
could not say that the motion placed before them was a
sort of motion on which they ought to be called upon to
vote. He had never heard it called an honest motion,
but he had heard it characterised as an adroit one. It
was a trap in which to catch members of different
opinions. They were told that they had no right to con-
sider the meaning of the proclamation which Lord Can-
ning had issued, and then those who said that immedi-
ately went into an elaborate defence of it, and the right
hon. gentleman who had just sat down told them he per-
fectly understood the meaning of it. The right hon.
gentleman the member for Northamptonshire, whom he
did not see in his place, told them that he approved
cf it. He should like to ask the right hon. gentle-
man whether he had any knowledge of the isroclarna,
tion before it was published, and whether he had
issued any directions for its publication. But the right
hon. gentleman was not there. [A MEMBEII—Ho could
not answer if he was.] He presumed that there were
members of the late government that could answer that
question. His hon. and leerned friend the member for
Sheffield spoke of the proclamation in terms so distinct
that neither in England nor in India could it be
.misun-
derstood ; and when the right hon. gentleman who had
just sat down told them it would not be understood in
India in the same sense, he could only say, on the con-
trary, that he had been informed by those who had re-
sided in Oude, or the neighbourhood, that so far from
that being the case, it would be distinctly understood as
taking possession of every right in the laud, not only of
the talookdars, but of the smallest holders. It was ad-
dressed to them all, and under it the whole of the pro-
perty would be seized. And when he read the letter of
Mr. Edmonstone he found that all that was saved to
the landowners was their lives and their honour ; their
lives we had not the power to take, nor their honour, as
they were spread over the whole of Cowie, while we had
only possession of Luckoow. If ever there was a docu-
ment which carried its own explanation with it, it was
that proclamation—(hear, hear)—for if it wis not in-
tended to apply generally, why were six exceptions spe•
cified by name ? Or, again, if it destroyed no proprie-
tary rights, what was the valve of the exception made
in favour of the six loyal talookdars ? Throughout the
whole kingdom the people, and not tie talookdars and
chiefs only, were in arms against us. It wag, in fact, a
national revolt, as it had been described by Lord Ellei
borough and the Court of Directors. (Hear, hear) It
was not his (Mr. Hardy's) intention to go into the an-
rexation of Oude, for the present was not the proper
time to discuss that ; but this he would ray, there was
not a single averment in Lord Ei!enborough's despatch
which could not be proved by the most irrefragable evi
deuce. (Cheers.) The noble lord did not say that the peo-
ple of Oude had been unjustly treated, but he recom-
mended the Governor-General to consider the position in
which they were placed, and what their feelings must ns-
cesserily be. He asked the Governor-General to boar
all that in mind in dealing with them ; and that was
exactly what the Court of Directors had also done. Io
their letter to the Governor-General, dated the sth of
May, they said—" In dealing with the people of Oude
you wid aoubtles3 be move I by special considerations of
justice and of policy. Throughout the recent contest we
have ever regarded such of the inhabitants of that cow,-
try as, not being sepoys or pensioners of our own army,
have been in arms against us as an exc ptional cites.
They cannot be considered as traitors or eaor. rebels, for
they had not pledged their fidelity to us, and they had
scarcely become our subjects. Many, by the introduc-
tion of a new system of government, had necessarily
been deprived of the maintenance they had latterly en-
joyed ; and c there feared that the speedy loss of the it
means of subsistence must follow from the same course.
It was natural that such persons should avail them,eives
of the opportunity presented by the distracted state of
the country to strike a blow far the restoration of the
native rule, under which the permitted disorganisation
of the country had been so long to them a eource of un •
lawful profit. Neither the disbanded soldiers of the
native Government, nor the great talookdars and their
retainers, were under any obligation of fidelity to our
Government for benefits conferred upon them, You
would be jtt-ttfie-d, therefore, in dealing with them as
you would with a foreign enemy, and in erasing to c n-
elder them obk•cts of punishment after they have once
laid down their arms." (Cheers.) Teat was the view of
the despatch to which he (Hr. Hardy) would invite at-
ttmtion ; and what, ho would a•k, was the position of
Lord Ell.mborough on the 12th of April, when tho pro-
clamation arrived ? The Government had not been back•
ward in expressing their opinions as to the mode in which
the people of India should be treated. They had sent
out a state paper dated the 2I h March, and laid it on
the table of the house on the 29th of April ; and in that
despatch they declared the mode in which they bad
deteracin-sl to act with regard to the people of
[ elr. Hardy read the fourth paragraph
of this document.] Thu document went on to state
that for a hundred years the people of Oade
had been faithful allies of the G everamedit ; that
whatever wrongs might have been perpetrated by th-m
had been committed one urn another ; and that they
had never off,red any opposition to the British rule, but
had, on the contrary, assisted it wilt money and soldiers
in times of emergency. It was after that despatch had
been sent cut that Lord Eilenborough wrote the letter
which eves now complained ef. It seas said that his
right hon. friend (NIL'. Disraeli) had stated in the house
that the proclamation was disapproved of by the govern-
ment in every sense ; but how was it possible, after
having indited the despatch of the 24th of March, they
could do other a les than di,approve of it ! (Che'.!rs.) But
the right bon. gentlena en (gr. Vernon Smith) said he
would never have agreed to make one of his colleagu is a
scapegoat. The right hon. gentleman did not seem to
recollect all the passages in his political career —(laughter
and cheer-)--ctheretise, the right hon. gentleman might
have cafle i to mind a motion brought forward by an
bon. baronet (Sir E. B. Lytton), involving one of the
colleagues cf the right hon. gentleman, namely, the
noble lord the member for the city of L endon. But that

colleague was abandoned. The noble lord retired from
the cabinet, and the motion was given up. (Rear.)
Upon the noble lord was thrown the onus whi h
belonged to the whole ministry ; and they refused to
bear any part of it. (Beer, hear.) So that it would
seem that the right horn gentleman had after all been a
party to the abandonment of a c lloague. (Cheer=.)
The present government did not, however, wish to thro
over the despatch of Lord Ellenb rough. On the con-
trary, they adopted it from beginning to end. They
adopted it as laying down the principles upon which
they were prepared to treat the inhabitents of Oude;
and they adopted it as embodying sentiments of humanity
which were as necessary for the honour of this country
as they were fer the happiness of the people of India.
The despatch reminded the Governor-General of thews
principles, but it did not encourage those who were in
revolt. And here (said the hon. gentleman) I certainly
do complain of the noble lord the member for the
City, in having in the course of his speech made use
of an expression which I am sure in his cooler
moments he will regret. (Hear.) Thu noble lord
tell us that the mutineers, when they read the despatch
would say, " True it is we have the G ivernor-General
for our foe, but we have a friend in England." (Opposi-
tion cheers.) Hon. gentlemen opposite say they are free
from party spirit, and yet they are ready to applaud that
sentiment. (Ministerial cheers.) Are they not ashamed to
say that we whose friends are fighting the battles of the
country would wish to encourage those who are in arms
against it ? (Loud ministerial cheers.) When have we ever
been neglt,gent of the interests and honour of the country
—we who, in support of those interests and that honour,
assisted in sending the late Government out of office ?
(Loud laughter and cheers.) Has it ever been said that
the noble earl who was so lately at the Board e f Control
was slow to strike those who were in arms again-t him ?
Has it ever been said that his arm was shortened against
rebellion ? But the noble lord is one that knew how to
temper justice with mercy, and he was the first to receive
those who came and submitted themselves to his mercy.
(Loud cheers.) The house was told that they must not
regard the despatch as expressing certain sentiments,
but that they must look at the tone in which it was
written. (Hear.) Yet surely when the interests of mil-
lions were at stake, when the honour of England was in
peril, and when the cause of humanity was in question,
people were not to dip their pens in milk and water.
(Laughter and cheers.) They ought rather to state their
sentiments with frankness, though without insult, as he
believed Lord Edeoborough had done. (Ole, oh, and
cheers.) He (Mr. Hardy) had not the honour of Lord
Canning's acquaintance, but he believed him to be a man
of the highest probity and humanity. (Cheers.) In fact no
man could command so many and such devoted friends,
except his character was deserving the respect of all.
(Loud cheers.) If, then, Lord Canning was actuated by
those noble and patriotic motives which had been
ascribed to him, he would read the despatch in a very dif-
ferent light from that in which it was regarded by hon.
gentlemen opposite, (Hear.) He would look on it, not
as intending an insult, but as calling his attention, no
doubt in strong and forcible terms, to the opinions enter-
tained by Government with reference to the conduct he
should pursue towards the inhabitants of India. (Hear,
hear.) The passage which the noble lord had specially
reprobated was the 17th paragraph, " We cannot but
think that the precedents from which you have departed
will appear to be ccnceived in a spirit of wisdom supe-
riorhlve
to that which appears in the precedent 3
made." (Opposition cheers ) Well, that might.
in two ways. (Laughter.) He ventured to say that in
addressing that despatch to Lord Canning, Lord
like ,
ouread
be
Ellen-
borough thought he was dealing wiikthe
If had the
good of India at heart, and who would not suffer any
like
him-
self—(laughter)—with one who,
feeling of wounded pride tO
b
stand for one moment in
competition with the interestsoth of Oude arid of this
He (Mr. Hardy) believed that
country. (Loud cheers,)
Lord Canning, so far fromwishing to resign, would
bow to the arguments contained in Lord Ellenborough's
letter,
which had
tbeen
greatestsubmitted
considerationto him
by
numerous
and weight. Indeed,ose in India
would have he hoped that long before now
adopted different course,
tof
to
persona h
Lord Canning
in proclamation.
and would have offered to the people
h.of Oude terms
more suitable than those contained
But it was said that the Government had sent out this
despatch without waiting to see what explanation the
Governor-General
.had to offer. Well, but this was
not the first occasion on which the same thing had taken
place with regard to Oude. In 1832 there was a Go-
vernment of which the noble viscount (Lard Palmer.
ston), the noble lord (Lord J. Russell), and he did not
know how many right hon. and hon. gentlemen opposite
were members, Lord Auckland was then Governor.