The Sun.
London, England, 1850-02-07 00:00:00

the House that this inquiry was got up by a small band
of persons, who were conspiring against the Governor
of Ceylon? If the House really believed that statement,
let them look into a petition which had come from the
colony, and see the deeds of blood and atrocity which
had been committed under the sanction of the
law When they did that ho was sure the House
would forgive him and his Honourable Friend
opposite if they felt no confidence in the Noble Lord the
Secretary for the Colenies, or in the manner in which he
proposed to have the inquiry conducted. But, said the
lion. Gentleman who had last addressed them, why
stop the inquiry when the witnesses were on the
spot who had been named by the Honourable
Member for Montrose? Ho named the witnesses! He
was against doing anything of the sort, but it was stated
to th Committee that Captain Wa'son had superire
tended the burning of villages, the confiscating of pro-
perty, and afterwards purchasing it; and they said at
once this man must be had over to explain his conduct.
He, however, could give no impartial evidence on the real
merits of the case. Again, there was Mr. Selby; what was
he sent for? Why simply because he could explain the mur-
dering of the priest. The evidence against the priest was
given by two men, a f Aber and son, who were candidates
for offices under the Government, but it was prove I
beyond all doubt that the priest was innocent of the
charges made against bin. Lord Torrington, however,
said if all the priests in the colony would vouch for his
innocence he should be hanged, and hanged he was.
Surely, then, all that Mr. Selby could do was to explain
the trial and act of hanging. The next witness
who it, sesined was present in this country was Sir
Emerson Tennent, but he was secretary to the very
Council who had ordered the execution of the abhor-
rent acts complained of by the petitioners,
and no confidence could be placed on any evidence he
could give. He had no confidence in the Colonial-
office, he never had, but be did think the Noble Lord
at the head of the department entertained a
sufficient sense of justice to take care that
an inquiry like this should be impartially conducted;
but he had been mistaken, and he was astounded now to
find the Noble Lord proposing that they should go into
the inquiry with witnesses who were implicated in the
charges to be investigated. The stability of the colonies
was involved in this question, for twenty-eight men had
been shot, twenty- two banished, and sixty-eight impri-
soned through the misconduct of the Governor of Ceylon,
and if they refused to investigate the matter, or allowed it
to be swamped by the influence of the Government, what
confidence would the other colonies have in appeal to that
House against any injustice or wrong committed by
their local Governments?
Mr. DISRAELI said the question which the House
has to consider to-day is, I think, of a very simple cha-
racter, and should be confined entirely to the considera-
tion by the House of the understanding that was arrived
at between the Committee and the Government. I shall
therefore make no reference to the proceedings at Ceylon of
which we have no testimony or might have testimony,
but I shall endeavour to place before the House the
question on which I think they are called on to give a
decision and to express an opinion. The House will
recollect that on nearly the last day of the last
session, when the Committee reported the expression
of their opinion that a commission should be
sent to Ceylon to inquire on the spot into certain cir-
cumstances, I mentioned, what was the fact, that I had
proposed a compromise between the Committee—(Hear,
hear)—and the Hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary
of State ; and I recollect afterward that the Right
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Ripon, observing
on that compromise, regretted very much that
the Under-Secretary had not accepted it. Nevertheless,
the Hon. Gentleman did not think it best that the reso-
lution of the Committee should be sanctioned, but he
expressed a very qualified opinion of the course that
was indicated. After the circumstances that occurred
in the House, what happened in the Committee
appears to me to be quite decisive as to the
intention both of the Government and the
Committee ; and I do not feel for a moment tc-day
that any doubt on the minds of the Committee and the
Government could have been entertained, bad not the
Hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary, in placing the
circumstances before the House, so transposed the im-
portant documents, on which the whole merits of this
question depend, that he conveyed to the House an im-
pression exactly contrary to that which occurred. Now
the Hon. Gentleman said he read the documents,
but he happened to read first the document which oc-
curred last.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) This is not
.a matter of argument but of fact.; and I think there can
be no difference of opinion between the Under-Secre-
tary, or among any of us. The Hon. Gentleman read
a resolution as one that occurred in the Committee,
namely, a motion made and question put, that the Chair-
man be authorised and requested to communicate with
her Majesty's Secretary of State as to the necessary wit-
nesses to be ordered home to give evidence before the
Committee to be re-appointed on the next meeting of Par-
liament, a motion made apparently by Mr. Hume ; and
after that, the Under Secretary of State said, making that
resolution the basis of the report which he read after-
wards—a report which was drawn up to the effect that the
Committee regretted on the termination of the session
that they had not been able to conclude their inquiry
respecting the colony of Ceylon, and especially into the
cause of the late insurrection in that colony, but from the
gravity of the circumstances, which their inquiry had
elicited, the Committee expressed their opinion that
they should be appointed next session, and that
Captain Watson and some others capable of
explaining the circumstances attending certain courts-
martial in the colony should be summoned home to give
evidence before the Committee and the Government
Now this report was drawn up, and this paragraph of
the report was proposed and carried. It was an amend-
ment proposed by himself before the resolution which
the Under-Secretary has referred to as the basis
of the report which was carried.—(Hear, hear.) When
I drew up that paragraph, which was adopted by the
Committee, I put in the name of the Queen's Advocate
at Ceylon and of Captain Watson, and I left space in
which to put other names; upon which a member
of the Committee (Lord Hotham) proposed the
addition of the name of Colonel Fraser ;
but it was immediately observed that as we
had agreed not to insert the names of witnesses, it
was better to have some understanding with the Colo-
nial-office in order that the subject might be more
matured, and that it was inexpedient to put in
the name of Colonel Fraser, although he was a
very proper person to be summoned; and there-
fire we negatived the proposition of Lord
Hotham, and it was proposed that the Chairman be au-
thorised to communicate with her Majesty's Secretary
f State as to the necessary witnesses to be ordered
home to give evidence before the Committee.—(Cheers.)
In my opinion the case is a complete one.—(Heir,
t ear.) , I don't think it will be creditable to
the House, if, under these circumstances, it desert this
Committee ; and I feel great confidence that, if the
Right Hon. Gentleman the Member for Ripon will fa-
vour us with his frank opinion, he must be of opinion
that the conduct of the Government, on this
occasion, has been of a tendency as least ccl-
culated to fetter our inquiry.—(Hear, hear.) I am
not one of those who would avoid this inquiry. I think
the tone of the Under-Secretary of State on this subject
has not only been unusual, but unauthorised. What are
the circumstances ? A grave charge was brought against
the Government. What was the defence of the Gc-
vernment ? Not a modest defence, certainly, but
the same tone of ready indignation which
the same gentleman has on more than one occasion ex-
pressed. Yet, whatever may be the ultimate opinion of
the Committee, whatever may be the final decision of
the House, there is no one but will admit that the invesV-
gation into these affairs was a necessary and a most im-
portant one; and when the Hon. Gentleman calls my
Hon. Friend the Member for Inverness to account for
the personal courtesy or conduct of a gentleman
who is to be called before us as a witness, let
me remind the Under-Secretary of State that
he is to show in the most- unequivocal manner that the
whole of this is a conspiracy in the island of Ceylon, and
that he, insinuated that we are to have the
evidence of witnesses who were parties to that conspiracy.
[ \tr. IlAwes—" No, no."] I don't say the
Under-Secretary of State used those words,
but yet that was the unavoidable inference
from what he did say. I am for pursuing this inves-
tigation; and I would add these words as an
amendment. I would agree that the Select
Committee be re-appointed to inquire into
the grievances of the colony of Ceylon in connexion
with the proceedings of the Government of that colony,
and to report their opinion with respect to the redress of
any,, grievances of which there has been reason to
complain, and that this House deems it expedient to
express its disapprobation of the manner in which
her Majesty's Government have evaded the understand-
ing of last session, that they would further the produc-
tion of such witnesses as were necessary for the proper
pursuit of this investigation.—(Loud cheers.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said that as he:was the person who
was mainly instrumental in the institution of this Com-
mittee, perhaps the House would expect him to express
something of an opinion respecting the vote of censure
which had just been proposed by the Hon. Member for
Buckinghamshire. He would beg the House to remem-
ber that, at the close of last session, he bad, contrary to
the advice of the Honourable Member for Ripon (Sir
J. Graham) refused to allow the Honourable Member
at the head of the Committee to withdraw his motion,
and had pressed the House to a division. The House
agreed with him that the commission which it was pro-
posed to send out to Ceylon to gather evidence, ought
not to be sent. The Hon. Member fer Buckinghamshre
hadttthhhhadeeayt
nextmadeuwm itgdnhse
oestanssnseboit
witnesses
nhsar
.heet roao,
ducßayl
occasion,
to
dsbe oai h e thought a preferable proposal,
oarnseieti
eehsnreeednnf
ttcoheioentrr fromode
the
tahtattwhCtoeheryed lsopnwu , s
beginning
rhpi oocrhtthhooa
he
them was, thantehesaw no objection to these witnesses
eofreantyhepChyosmicmalittieme,peadnidmethn that with-
outrleipgthseuind occurrenceb
mo
was no expectation but that they could be
present,t.thTehe
House had agreed with him, and bad negatived the mo-
tion. The Committee then eagle to a resolution which
went far beyond what ho had said in that House,
far beyond the intent of any word which he
had uttered, and far beyond the power which
any Parliamentary Committee was entitled to exercise.
They decided that certain witnesses should be summoned
from Ceylon. By the passing of this resolution, they
meant one of two things. They either meant that the
words which he had uttered were far beyond any con-
struction that could reasonably be put upon them; for
he had said that thirty witnesses could be summoned
from Ceylon, and the Committee had decreed that an
unlimited number should be summoned, or else that her
Majesty's Secretary of State was to be at the beck and
call of their chairman for six months. Now it was not
to be supposed that the Queen's Secretary of State
was likely in any way to be subject to the dictation
of any Committee whatever. Towards the end
Novembex the Chairmou of the Committee