The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-09 00:00:00

by the Ameers : no rain had fallen for six years, and
that the reduction of taxation which had taken place
had secured to us the affection of the people ; that five
months before our conquest every Beloochee had
strutted about armed, but that now none except the
chiefs were armed.) Sir Charles Napier had been ac
cused of insulting the Ameers, while it appeared fron
these letters that although he had disarmed the Beloo
chees generally, he had returned to the chieftains their
arms, because he did not wish to wound their honour.—
(Hear, hear.) The letter then went on to state that
Sir Charles Napier was endeavouring to get rid of the
military tenures ; to give the jagheerdars a property in
their jagheers, which they did not possess under the
Ameers, and to turn the military chieftains into farmers.
The; body of the Sindian people were glad to escape
from the tyranny of the Ameers. Colonel Pottinger
bore evidence to the happy effects of our conquest ofSinde.
The inhabitants were becoming industrious, and labourers
from Kandahar were flocking into Sinde to obtain employ-
ment. Would it be just after all to the Sindian people to
bring back the Ameers ?—(Cheers.) He agreed with
the Noble Lord that every consideration should be paid
to them, that everything- that could be done should be done
to alleviate their misfortunes—(Cheers)—but he could
not consent to the restoration.—(Cheers.) The Noble
Lord had spoken of the sons of Tippoo Saib. It should
be recollected that their father had been slain in battle,
and that they had lost a throne. The conquest of the
country was a fatal necessity, but the same kind treat-
ment which they as captives had received from the
Marquis of Cornwallis the Ameers, he doubted not. '
had received from Lorel Ellenborough.—(Cheers.)
He was convinced that they had not been subjected to
more restraint than was absolutely necessary to prevent
them from escaping and returning to Sinde.—(Hear.)
He believed that he had travelled over most of the topics
which had been alluded to by the Noble Lord. He had
shown that the negotiations of Lord Auckland with the
Ameers had been conducted with unnecessary harsh-
ness and cruelty. He believed that the position of Lord
Ellenborough had been one of the greatest difficulty,
but that he had adopted the wisest course of policy that
he could have pursued. He believed that the steps which
Lord Ellenborough had taken were the fatal, but necessary,
consequences of the policy which had been pursued by
his predecessor.—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.)
The people of Sinde were glad to escape from the rule
of the Talpoore family ; and he believed that the people
of England would never consent to place the Sindians
again under the cruel tyranny of the Ameers. The
subject was one of immense importance, and he hoped it
would not go off without a vote_ If the House nega-
tived the proposition of the Noble Lord, then his (Mr.
Roebuck's) resolutions could be submitted seriatim', and
the House would decide upon each step which had been
taken—they would decide first, whether the policy of
Lord Auckland was right or wrong ; secondly, whether
the policy of Lord Ellenborough was right or wrong ;
and thirdly, whether it would be right to restore these
unhappy Princes who had by force of' arms been com-
pelled to surrender their territories.—(Cheers from the
Ministerial benches )
Mr. EMERSON TENNENT considered the House a
most unsatisfactory tribunal for the decision of questions of this
nature. In order to come to a proper judgment on the sub-
ject, Hon. Members should have given all the papers relating
to the case, not only an attentive perusal, but a careful consi-
deration; and he thought the House was scarcely qualified to
decide, considering that those documents had scarcely been
one week before them. The Noble Lord and the Hon. and
Learned Member for Bath had both gone into a mass of details
to which he did not think it necessary to allude. There was
no necessity for alluding to the early policy of Lord Auckland.
The justification of the policy of the present Governor-
General rested not upon the condemnation or the acquittal
of Lord Auckland, but upon the circumstances which
had occurred since he had assumed the Government
of India.—(Cheers.) By those alone was Lord Ellen-
borough to be judged.—(Loud cheers.) With regard to the
policy of Lord Auckiand, that had been completed in 1839,
and the dethronement of the Ameers had been occasioned
by their conduct since that period. The Noble Lord had
alluded to what he called the previous meritorious conduct of
the Ameers in relation to this country—he could fol-
low the Noble Lord step by step, and could show that
throughout those negotiations the conduct of the Ameers
had been marked by the same treaehery and false-
hood which had led to their ultimate downfal.
The Noble Lord alluded to the treaty of 1809, when this
country took every security to strengthen themselves against
the attempts of Napoleon. About this time Colonel Pottinger
appeared in connection with these negotiations, and he more
than once expressed his unwillingness to proceed in conse-
quence of the conduct of the Ameers. The presence of five
thousand men was necessary to compel the Ameers to observe
the provisions of the treaty. Then came the treaties of 1832
and 1834, which conferred mutual advantages on both sides,
but the Ameers were unwilling to permit, not only any English,
but any European agent, to reside in the Indus.—(Hear,
hear.) Then came the treaty of 1836, when Runjeet Singh
threatened to destroy the country, and when this country inter-
posed. Then they received a British Resident, but they entered
into negotiations with the Durbar of Lahore for the purpose of
opposing British interests. The Noble Lord had referred to what
he believed was an apocryphal letter of Col. Pottinger's, for
there was nothing to show that Col. Pottinger ever published
such a document, and there was external evidence of all kinds
to show that he did not. No one living so well understood the ,
character of the Ameers as he did. He would be able to show,
from the correspondence of Col. Pottinger, that the Ameers
were a wicked and vicious race, and that they even predicted
the fate which overtook them in their destiny. (The Hon.
Gentleman then quoted several passages from the correspondence
of Col. Pottinger, to show that the Ameers were unworthy of
being trusted and full of perfidy.) With regard to the treaty
of 1839, there were circumstances to prove that it was not cal-
culated to be oppressive, and was not even unpopular in
Sinde. For two years after the treaty, and when there
was time to consider its operation, None Mahomed, one of
the enemies of British connection, applied to have a similar
treaty and even submitted to be placed on a similar footing
with those who were parties to the
in 184
hetreatyof2, says, that lI 1839.—(Hear,
hear.) Sir Charles Napier, writing
treaty, if rigidly adhered to, would render the Ameers more;
rich and powerful, and even more happy than they were before
but it was rendered abortive by violence on the part of the one
and by bad faith on the part of the others. It was but
justice, not only to Lord Ellenborough, but also to Lord Auck-
land, to insist upon those effects of the treaty of 1839. There
MU nothing whatever in his correspondence to show that its
provisions had been set aside by the British Government,
whilst on the other hand the Ameers of Hyderabad entered
upon a persevering course of violence to violate the treaty. It
was but justice to the policy of Lord Ellenborough to
say. that he was bound to defeat the machinations set
ageing to destroy British connections, which had been
put into more active motion in consequence of the reverses
they had met with in Caubul. The Noble Lord then referred
with great confidence to the testimony of Major Outram, who,
as a resident in the counrry, had every opportunity of observ-
ing the conduct of the Ameers. The Noble Lord had com-
mitted a most material error in supposing that some of the
Ameers only were guilty. He (Mr. E. Tennent) was pre-
pared to show that all of them had been guilty, though there
might be some shade of difference in their conduct with regard
to this country, and that the conduct of the Government was in
every single instance approved by Majot Outram himself. It
was quite true that Major Outram mentioned that there was a
difference of feeling existing among the chiefs, but he says that
the entire family were promiscuously iavolved in the transaction
of which the British Government complained. He says that
at first the Meer Soojah professed open friendship for them, but
when the crisis arose, he became hostile to them, and was found
associated with the rest of their enemies.—(Hear, hear.)
Major Outram said that all the Khans of Hyderabad were con-
scious of their guilt, and that all of them were, more or less,
guilty of treasonable practices. The Hon. Gentleman then
referred to the correspondence of Major Outram, which
suggested the measures which the Government ought
to pursue with regard to the Ameers who had im-
peded the commerce on the Indus, and violated the
treaty which had been agread upon between them.
These, then, were the facts of the case; that not (as stated by
the Noble Lord) on a mere opinion, or a mere allegation of
treachery by the Ameers, but on proof of falsehood and of
crime, the Governor-General had taken such measures as at
once awarded punishment for the past and promised security for
the future. The integrity of the Ameers was an integrity in
appearance only—it was external but totally unsubstantial.
The treaty had been signed without any one of its prov:sions
being even objected to, and at the same time we were attacked
by ten thousand armed Beloochees, stirred up to do so
by the Ameers themselves, which led to that
action, than which a more brilliant or glorious one could not
be found in the annals of this or any other country. The
enemy was signally overthrown—those who had encouraged
and brought it into existence, were subjected, and properly
subjected, to imprisonment. Now one word with regard to
the transaction of depriving the families of the Ameers of
their possessions. He (Mr. Tennent) thought that
Major Outram was the last man in the world that ought
to make any complaint on that subject. Why he was
the very individual who started the idea of their
misconduct and merited chastisement. In passing, let
him say one word in regard to Sir Charles Napier. It was
obvious on the face of events that he was perfectly innocent of
the charges which had been attempted to be fastened on him,
and that he was called upon to act upon the exigency of the
moment.—( Hear, hear.) There was one point on which the
Noble Lord had strongly appealed to the feelings of the House.
It was in reference to Meer Soojah. Why, he (Mr. Tennent)
was prepared to prove that a foul murder of a British
officer had taken place, and that Meere Soojah was
a party to it. This Meere Soojah came insi-
diously to Major Outram, warned him and other British
officers of their danger, and next morning was found at the
head of the very assassins who had murdered this officer. It
had been asserted by the Noble Lord and the Hon. Member
for Bath, that treachery and design were ever at work by the
English in India, on purpose to get hold of more territory and
more power than that which we already possessed. Now he
denied, this, and he most strongly asserted that the conquest of
Sinde, from first to last, had not been the result of any
scheme or preconcerted plan whatever, but the na-
tural consequence of events. On behalf of Lord Ellenborough
especially, he could declare that he neither desired, approved,
nor practised any scheming whatever, and this was further
proved by his own declarations, made from time to time, that
with all the native chiefs who kept faith and honour with Eng-
land, every friendship should be exercised and every reason-
able concession made. With regard to the immediate ques-
tion before the House, and also to the amendment of the Hon.
Member for Bath, he was not
_prepared to give any support
to either of them.—(Hear.) He was authorised, however, to
state that in all the instructions sent out for the
guidance of Lord Eflepboroagh the strongest injunctions had
been given to treat the Ameers with every respect and con-
sideration consistent with their safe custody.—( Hear, hear.)
Every provision was made for their personal comfort, and every
regard ss's paid to their rank. Twenty.four thousand pounds
per annum was awarded for their maintenance, and no in-
terference was I:ad? in any way that might in the slightest
degree impair their comforts. As to their restoration
to liberty, he could hold out no hope of that
—for it was wholly iiixompatible with the fu-
ture peace and tranquillity of 1°42. The House might rest
assured that the Ameers would never be debarred from any
comfort or enjoyment they might desire to have, provided it
was compatible with their safe custody ; for it was not to be
supposed that the British authorities would permit them to re-
turn to the scene of their former treachery, intrigue, and
crime, only to repeat what it had cost us so much to struggle
hreearpo.r)ters(,TshaelleHryonali Gentleman,the
etime
he
whowas speaking, was most indistinctly beard throughout, and at
with
turned andsuphpirseshs. back
on (Hear,
ther'
times was wholly inaudible. )
Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE and Sir C. Napier rose to-
gether,he latter Honourable Member immediately
gave way. Sir John Hobbouse said, before he addressed him-
self but t
rather, to the assertions, of the
to the arguments, or, (5
must take the opportunity of Hon. and Learned Member for Bath Ir. Roebuck), he
referring to a remark which had
fallen from that Hon. Gentleman as to his (Sir John's) being
then in the House, and of making to himhis place last year when this
subject was under discussion. But,
an apology for not being in
and to the House
himself that, having in the
be must be permitted to say for
. in making that apology,