The Sun.
London, England, 1859-03-19 00:00:00

ESTATES IN OUDE.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE called their lord-
ships' attention to the proclamation, despatches, and letters
which had been interchanged respecting the settlement of
the land question in Oude. Lord Canning was supposed
to have announced a measure of universal confiscation, but
no such.extreme measure was ever contemplated by the
Governor-General. He wished to know if any informa-
tion had been received upon the subject, or what were the
intentions of the Government with respect to the tenure of
land in thatportion of our Eastern empire?
The Earl of DERBY said he hardly knew what question
he was called on to answer, and having listened with the
greatest attention to the observations of the noble marquis
he did not exactly see the point of his remarks, and still less
the policy and expediency of entering on the various topics
to which the noble marquis had referred. In the first place,
the noble marquis was mistaken inand had misapprehended
the expressions of the despatch of Lord Stanley when he
said that it stated that Lord Canning had reversed his
policy and cancelled his proclamation. He (Lord Derby)
regretted that this question which had been .raised last
year with regard to Lord Canning had not been suffered to
rest by all parties who desired to see that mutual respect
and confidence which ought to exist between the Govern-
ment in this country and the Governor-General of India
maintained, and he could not but think that the recurrence
to such a subject was not calculated to promote the good
understanding which ought to be maintained between the
Government and the Governor General. There was a dis-
tinction between the proclamation of Lord Canning and the
course he had practically pursued, and it was on that ac-
count that his noble friend (Lord Ellenborough) had just
taken exception to that proclamation. Lord Canning by his
proclamation declared a universal confiscation, with six ex-
ceptions only, of the whole of the land of Oude. It was to
that sweeping system of confiscation, which, if it had gone
forth in the proclamation, wouldhave prevented the natives
from coming in and submitting to the Government, that
his noble friend objected ; and he (Lord Derby) had never
ceased to regret that the expression of his noble friend's
opinions in his despatch had been prematurely made public,
and which had caused some strong feeling in many quarters.
As regarded the imprudence of the language of the procla-
mation, as it appeared in its naked and unexplained form, he
(Lord Derby) had not altered his opinion, and he still main-
tained that the form in which the proclamation was drawn
was not the best calculated to attain the object desired. But
when the noble marquis charged Lord Stanley with stating
that Lord Canning had reversed his policy, he charged him
with that which was not the case. What Lord Stanley said
was, that practically, and in effect, Lord Canning had acted
on a policy opposite to that laid down in his proclamation,
inasmuch as he had made confiscation the exception and not
the rule.—and it' was even admitted by the noble marquis
himself that Lord Canning had acted sparingly on the prin-
ciple of his proclamation. Lord Canning had in the first
instance put forth a policy which consisted in a sweeping
confiscation, but he had acted on a principle the reverse
of such a system. If, in the opinion of the Government,
the course taken should have been the other way, and
that opinion had not been shaken by the very able argu-
meats used by Lord Canning in his reply to the despatch
of his noble friend, the noble marquis, he thought, could
not say that in the despatch of the Secretary of State for
India to Lord Canning to which he had alluded there
was anything inconsistent with the utmost respect. The
despatch stated—" I do not propose to follow, paragraph
by paragraph, the elaborate arguments contained in
these letters. They have been considered with the atten-
tion which was due to the high character and the distin-
guished position of your lordship ; and I observe with satis-
faction that the policy indicated in the document adverted
to,. as regards the claims of the talookdars and other pro-
prietors in Oude, has not in practice been adopted by you,
and is declared, on your own authority, never to have been
intended to have been carried into effect. However indis-
criminate and unsparing may have been the sentence of
confiscation which your proclamation pronounced, that
sentence has not been put in force ; and the issuing of it
would appear to have been merely a menace, designed to
strike awe into the minds of those still arrayed in arms
against the British Government." Lord Canning in all
the instructions which he gave to his various officers had
universally shown an intention that though there had
been a threat of universal confiscation held out, it was not
to be practically carried into effect. He said in the 38th
paragraph of his despatch :—" I afterwards had occasion
to send my military secretary, Colonel Stuart, to head-
quarters, and I took the opportunity to explain to the Chief
Comnaissioner that I wished him to give the most libe-
real interpretation to, the proclamation : that, for instance,
the proclamation left it free to notify to any talookdar who
was deserving of consideration, that if he made submission
and supported the Government the confiscation of his lands
-would not take effect, and that his claims to property of
'which he might have been deprived upon the annexation of
the province would be reheard ; and that in the case of
their having been resumed by him he might retain them
until the rehearing.". If those instructions and such ex-
planations had accompanied the draft of his proclamation
to England, and if it had been accompanied by such a
glossary and such explanations when it was conveyed to
the knowledge of the natives of Oude, no doubt the despatch
of his noble friend (Lord Ellenborough) would have been
much modified ; but the proclamation was not accompanied
by such explanation as was said to have been contained in
the private letter which had never been communicated to
1 he then President of the Board of Control. Her Majesty's
Government concurred in the policy of Lord Canning as it
had been acted on and carried out, but they said that that
policy was not that which was indicated in his proclama-
tion ; but that, on the contrary, he had there laid down con-
fiscation as the rule and not as the exception. That was
precisely the policy that those who were now the Govern-
ment had recommended all along, but it was not that which,
ljdging from his proclamation, it could be supposed that
ord Canning intended to pursue. Therefore it was that
lord Stanley stated that he was glad to perceive, not that
Lord Canning had changed his views, but that he pursued
practically and in effect a course different to that which he
had laid down in his proclamation as the principle by which
he was to be guided. The Government did not charge Lord
Canning with having entertained any other intentions than
those which he had carried out, but all they said was that
his proclamation conveyed a very different, as they thought
a dangerous, impression as to the policy by which he was
to ead. He thought that it would be perceived
s
that in Loris Stanley's letter he stated that the proclama-
tion was liable to be interpreted in Oude as it was inter-
preted in this country. and was calculated to produce an in-
jurious effect; but the noble marquis must, ho thought,
do Lord Stanley the justice to admit that that opinion was
conveyed in a friendly spirit, and that he expressed the satis
faction which the Government felt at the course which Lord
the Canning had pursued, and the confidence
whichho d it was
Go-
vernment reposed in him. He (Lord Derby)hoped
of
consistent with entire respect and perfect uniformitybe
action and confidence,that the Government should allowed
to express a difference of opinion with Lord Canning,
hoped that that expression of feeling with regard to the
Governor-General of India having been an ill-used and in-
jured man, which was at one time so prevalent, would not
be revived, or any attempt made to interrupt the friendly
and confidential relations which existed between that noble
lord and the Government. If any such impression still pre-
vailed with regard to the relations which existed between
Lord Canning and the Government, it might perhaps be
satisfactory to the personal friends of that noble lord to
know that some months ago he (Lord Derby) directed it to
be stated to him that it was her Majesty's pleasure that the
grand cross of the Bath should be conferred upon him, and
that so soon as it should be in his power to announce the
complete pacification of India his services would be re-
warded by an advancement in the grade of their lordships'
house, to whichhe hoped they would all see the noble lord
return in health and honour. He hoped that the country of
Oude was rapidly settling down into peace and repose, and
that it would be shortly in the power of the Government
to announce the entire pacification not only of Oude, but
of the whole of India. Nothing 'had done so much to-
wards the attainment of that most desired object as her
Majesty's gracious proclamation, and he was sure that no-
thing could tend more to unsettle and to disturb the present
condition of affairs in Indiri than the existence of any idea
that a difference of opinion prevailed in this country with
regard to the policy to be pursued. He was convinced that
Lord Canning was acting on the principles laid down in
her Majesty's proclamation, and he was convinced that
by an adherence to those principles all traces of the
late struggle would ere long be obliterated. If we were to
retain a hold upon Oude, if it was desired that the state of
that country' should te tranquil and undisturbed, we must
govern through and by means of the people in that country,
and through the influence of the talookdars, who however
and in whatever mannerthey might have obtained their pro..

perty undoubtedly exercised great influence over the people, '
and it would afford the best means of maintaining our power
in that country if we acted justly and scrupulously fulfilled
all the engagements into which we had entered. The papers
for which the noble marquis had asked had been already
produced, and as regarded the proclamation, it did not re-
quire to be moved for, but ought to have been laid on the
table by command of her Majesty, and he was unable to say
why that had not been done. He need not say that there
was no desire on the part of Government to withhold from
that house any information which had been given to the
other branch of the Legislature, nor was there any desire to
conceal the feelings and opinions which were entertained by
Government with regard to any part of the correspondence.
It wasthe wish of the Government that it should be publicly
known in what manner Lord Canning had vindicated his
policy, and on the other hand, on what grounds the Govern-
ment had come to the conclusion that that noble lord
had departed from the policy originally laid down in his
proclamation. Having done that, it should be also known
that, as between the Government and the Governor-Gene-
ral of India the most frank and cordial confidence existed,
and that on the part of the Government there was an ear-
nest desire to act with that noble lord with the utmost har-
mony, and that being so he trusted that discussions of this '
nature would now be brought to an end, and that we should
not hear again of any supposed differences between the Go-
vernment and the Governor-General of India.
Earl GRANTILLE said that no one was more anxious
than he was to avoid all snbjects of discussion which were
likely to disturb the amicable feelings which existed be-
tween the Government and Lord Canning so long as that
noble lord was employed by her Majesty's Ministry. Al-
though he had had no communication with Lord Canning
for many months, yet the personal relation in which he
stood towards his noble friend had made him (Earl Gran-
ville) anxious to avoid bringing on any question which con-
cerned him, and he was not aware that the noble marquis
was about to make this motion until he saw his notice on
the paper. But when the noble earl expressed his astonish-
ment that the noble marquis should have brought forward
this question, and that the house should receive the de-
spatch of Lord Stanley as a very friendly production, he
must take leave to enter his protest against any such as-
sumption. He did not propose to re-open the discussion
which took place last year with regard to the proclamation
of Lord Canning. The question now raised was raised for
the first time on account of a despatch which was written
three months ago. What were the circumstances connected
with that despatch ? In answer to a despatch of Lord
taCaininnyinrgem,
remarkable
for h
able for
rtitis powers of argument, and cer-
tainly more than the calm dignity
with which the personal question was discussed—(hear)—
and the absence of all personal recrimination, and in which
Lord Canning defended his policy in the clearest manner,
and which, whether right or wrong, laid down the reasons
why ho should have published his proclamation at once in-
stead of threatening some course which might be supposed
to have an effect on the native mind and on the land tenure
of Oude—in answer to that despatch was sent out a letter
four months after the despatch itself had been received. He
was not sure whether the despatch of Lord Canning was
received before the close of last session.
The Earl of DERBY was understood to say that it was
after the close of the session.
Earl GRANVILLE—It must have been soon after. At
any rate, six or seven weeks elapsed after the despatch had
been received, when, in consequence of some remarks in the
newspapers with regard to its non-publication, it was givers
to the public through the usual channels of information.
After some months had elapsed since it was received this
was the despatch in which it was answered, and any one
who took the trouble to read it, short as it was, would
see that in one of its sentences it was declared that the policy
laid down by Lord Canning in his ploclamation had not been
carried out ; but while regretting that which was oalled a
mistaken act on his part, it was stated that it was hoped
that the measures taken by him for the suppression of the
insurrection would be successful. He would really appeal
to the house whether it could be said that a friendly feeling
was the characteristic of that despatch ?
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH rejoiced that the paci-
fication of Oude had been accomplished, and if her Majesty's
proclamation was bone
_fide carried out by the Government,
he entertained an earnest, perhaps a sangine hope, that
the peace which had now been established would be main-
tained.
After a few words from the Earl of HARDWICK;

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE observed that the dif-
ference of opinion between the Government and Lord Can-
ning had been brought under the notice of Parliament in
the first instance by the Government themselves.

The motion was then withdrawn.
INCLOSURE BILL.

The bill was read a third time and passed.
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YEsTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Public Offices Extension Bill and Court of Probate,
&c. (Acquisition of Site) Bill were read a second time, and
ordered to be committed.
The following bills were considered, and ordered for third
reading :—Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Chester Junction
Railway; and Caledonian Railway.