The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-30 00:00:00

ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.
Sir J. GRAHAM (for Sir George Grey) moved for
returns relating to the Ecclesiastical Courts.—Agreed to

BANK CHARTER.

Sir G. CLERK moved that the Bank Charter Acts be
laid on the table.—Agreed to.
The RIGHT ZION. BARONET then gave notice, that on
Monday next his Right Hon. Friend would move that
the House do resolve itself into a Committee of the
whole House, for the purpose of taking the question of
the Bank Charter into consideration.
The remaining orders of the day having been disposed
of, the House adjourned at a Quarter before Twelve.

MOUSE OF LORDS, April 29.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool-
sack shortly before Five o'Clock.
The Earl of ROSEBERY presented two petitions
against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
The Marquis of NORMANBY presented a peti-
tion from Newtown Limavady, in the North of Ire-
land, praying the House would adopt some measures
to legalise marriages by Presbyterian ministers.
The Bishop of ECETER presented a petition
again3t the union of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor.
Lord BEAUMONT laid upon the table a Bill for
the purpose of removing certain disabilities which
pressed upon Roman Catholics in the case of grants
being made to them for corporate purposes.
The Bill was read a first time, and ordered to be
printed.
RECAL OF LORD ELLENBOROUGII

Lord COLCHESTER —I take the liberty of asking a
question of the Noble Duke below me, relating to a
subject of great importance, which has excited much
surprise in the public mind within the last two days.
The recal of the Governor-General of India was an-
nounced to your Lordships on Friday, and it was at the
same time stated that it had not met with the approba-
tion of her Majesty's Ministers. I will take the liberty
of now asking, whether the communication made by the
Board of Directors to her Majesty's Government was
secon4amied by any reasons for recalling the Governor-
General ? I will further take the liberty of asking the
Noble Duke, if he has no objection, to state to the
House what were thoae reasons, if there were any, and,
further, whether the Court of Directors had sufficient
authority for the step they had taken ?
The Duke of WELLINGTON—I regret that my
Noble Friend the President of the Board of Control
should be absent from his place, on account of indispo-
sition. In relation to the Noble Lord's questions, I be-
lieve one has been put with the same object in another
place, and I am glad that I am enabled to answer it.
There is no doubt whatever, my Lord, that the Court of
Directors have stated reasons fur the measure which they
have adopted, which reasons have not been concurred in
by her Majesty's Government. Those reasons have not
been considered valid, and, therefore, her Majesty's Go-
vernment have not concurred in the measure adopted—
nay more, my Lords, I will add, in answer to the
last part of the Noble Lord's question, that her Ma-
jesty's Government did remonstrate against the mea-
sure proposed to be adopted by the Court of Directors,
and the resolution of recalling Lord Ellenborough from

the office of Governor-General of India. I must add
that there can be no doubt whatever—although a doubt
was expi essed by a very great authority, my Noble and
Learned Friend opposite—of the legal right of the
Court of Directors to recal the Governor-Genera); which
right is conferred upon that body by statute. I imagine
it has existed at all times since 1784, but it was con-
- ferred particularly by the law passed in the year 1813,
which has been replaced by the law passed under the
auspices of my Noble and Learned Friend in 1833, the
3d and 4th William IV. That Jaw gives the Court the
undoubted right to recal the Governor-General. But,
my Lords, I conceive that that right is one which that
body is bound to exercise with discretion—(Hear, hear)
• —as all bodies and all individuals invested with extra-
ordinary powers by the provisions of law are bound to
exercise such powers with discretion. Now, my Lords,
I venture to submit to your Lordships, as the opinion of
an individual who has had some experience in these
matters, that this exercise of power, to say the least of it,
is not a. discreet exercise of power. My Lords, the
Court of Directoei• has that power—it has the power of
nominating a successor to the noble person who is thus
recalled ; but it has no other power whatever, as your
• Lordships will find on • examining the law, excepting
under the direction and control of the Board of Com-
missioners, of which my Noble Friend, who is now
absent, happens to be at the head, and for the acts
- of-which Board her Majesty's_ Government are respon-
sible. Under these circumstances, my Lords, I venture
to say, and it is, I think, the least that can be said of
it—that it is not a discreet act of authority to recal from
power, and from such a situation as that h, an officer
who has been in his high office but little more than two
years, and who has given satisfaction to those by whom
he was instructed and employed, whose acts have been
concurred in and sanctioned in every instance—to recal
that officer suddenly, making no provision for the per-
formance of the great duties which devolve upon the Go-
vernor-General in that country—to recal that officer,
who was confided in by the Government, who were re-
sponsible for the condition of public affairs, without
the concurrence of that Government, is, my Lords, an
act, to say the least of it, which cannot be called a dis-
creet exercise of the power with which that body is in-
vested. My Lords, Ido not mean to refer to anything
on this occasion which is not notorious and is not in the
Act of Parliament ; but I beg your Lordships to ob-
serve, that the body which has carried into execution
this act, which I must call an act of indiscretion, at least
• —I say, at least, I call it an act of indiscretion—this
body, as your Lordships, by looking at the Act of Parlia-
ment, will see, has no knowledge whatever of the in-
structions under which this officer is acting.—(hear,
hear.) They have stated reasons for withdrawing him,
founded, of course, on his public conduct—but as a body,
those who have proposed it, except those who are acting
on the Secret Committee, have no knowledge whatever
of the instructions under which he has been acting, or
of the events which have taken place in that country,
excepting what has been in the general knowledge
of this and the other House of Parliament, and
the whole public of this country and the world.
And yet, my Lords, those gentlemen, pretending their re-
sponsibility, having had no share whatever in giving
this officer instruction, having had no knowledge, as
the Act of Parliament will show they are bound to have
none, of the instructions that have been sent him, pro-
nounce their judgment upon his conduct and recal him,
this depriving the Government of that country of the
best instrument—the best instrument, I say it again—
that they could find to carry on the duties of that great
office, and making no provision whatever, nor proposing
any, except that there should be another Governor-
General, for the performance of those duties, and for
satisfying the responsibility of her Majesty's Govern-
ment. As I have said so much on this subject, in
order to illustrate the indiscretion of this act—the indis-
cretion, I say—l will just go a little further. My Lords,
although I believe that this is the first time in the his-
tory of the government of India that this measure of
recal by the Court of Directors had been on the point of
being carried into execution, and will be carried into ex-
ecution, it has more than once been in contemplation,
but always been withdrawn, upon the advice and remon-
strance of the Minister of the day ; and, my Lords, it
is the fact that it had been in contemplation by the
same gentlemen, in respect to this very Governor-Gene-
ral in the course of the last twelve months, and they
were prevailed upon to withdraw their resolution and not
to proceed to determine his renal. My Lords, this was
previous to the late great operation, of which we have
all read with so much satisfaction, in Gwalior—an opera-
tion which I am sure your Lordships will have perceived,
from a perusal of the reports which have been made, must,
have been founded upon the most just and discrimi-
na'e -treasures adopted by the Government for the
equipment, the support, and the maintenance of the
armies which were to be put into the field under the di-
rection and superintendence of the Government. We
all must have seen that the preparations made, not only
for the support and maintenance of the troops in the
field, but for their military communications, whatever
might be the course of the operations, for their advance
and retreat, and, in short, all that could tend to their
success, were amply provided for. Well then, my Lords,
what would have occurred if the Court had thought
proper to meal that Noble Lord six or eight months ago,
when they had the measure in contemplation ? What
would have become of the great operation carried on,
as I said. under the superior management and direction
-of my Noble Friend the Governor-General ? Why,
-my Lords, it must have been left to be carried on by
the gentlemen who happened to be senior member
of tie. council, a very respectable gentleman, I doubt
not, but without the eculiar experience and talents in
that. very branch of the: government as respects the
equipment, management, and superior direction of
armies. It would have heel' left to be carried on in that
way ; and 1. le ive your Lordships to judge of what the
situation of the Government in India would have been
if that expedition had failed, and such an army as
we have se.n described in one of the blue.. books
. on your table had remained in existence, threw-
ened, as we were at the same moment, by a si-
tnilar body on the north-Nest frontiers, with the pro-
vince of Sinde still unsettled, and
.that army' destroyed,
s
as it has been, under the superior
the
direction of my
Noble Friend, within reach of
north-west
communications be-
tween our army employed on therds the frontier
and the Bengal provinces. Why, myldan-
gers would have been imminent, and this would have
been the consequence of the recal of my Noble Friend
six or eight months ago, which was in contemplation,
and was only prevented by representations being made ,
to those who have now committed that gross indiscre-
tion of recalling the Noble Lord. It was prevented only
by the representa..ions made to those gentlemen of the
dangers which would ensue to the public interest from
the measures which they were about to adopt, the dan-
gers resulting from the impossibility that they would be
ab:e to provide for events which nio a probably would
occur it they recalled their officer without the consent of
her Majesty's Government, who would thus be deprived
of the instrument in their hands best geed for carrying
their policy into execution, while the Directors in this
country must be unable to direct the means in existence
for securing the safety of their troops, for guarding
their frontier, for upholdicg the honour of her Majesty a
arms, and the security of our vast dominion in that part
of the world. I say agaig, as I have said before, and I
say the least of it when I pronounce it to be the most
indiscreet exercise of power that I have heard carried
into execution by any body who possessed the power
since I have had a knowledge of public affairs, which
ae3 sorry to say has now been for about fifty years.
Lord BROUGHAM—As my Noble Friend has refer-
. red tome, I beg to set him right in his supposition that I
questioned the legality of the act of the Court of Llirec-
tors.
My Lords, I did not question it ; I wa.s quite
aware that there was, by the strict letter of the law, an
independent power given, in very ample terms, to the
Directors to recal any officers at their will and pleasure
vp.tho words are, "at their own pleasure." But I yen-
mired' to express, to say the least of it, ray doubts

I.fl

whether any law so absurd as that had ever been suffered
to exist on the statute-book. of any rational people, be-
cause, as my Noble Friend has justly stated, while three
only of the twenty-four Directors are by law allowed to
know the instructions sent out, under the sanction of a
solemn oath not to communicate them to any of the
others ; yet the whole twenty-four, by that extraor-
dinary law, are entitled to act, as they could only be
justified in acting, if they had a perfect knowledge of all
those communications—namely, to recal the Governor-
General fur acting on instructions which they knew no-
thing about, and for refusing to act on which he would
be liable to be impeached, he being bound to obey those
instructions. I therefore took the liberty of calling your
Lordships' attention to this most anomalous law, and I
was reminded by my Noble Friend that it was renewed
when I held the great seal. I then stated that it was re-
newed without consideration at the time, at all events
without discussion, while my Noble Friend, not now in
his place, talked of it as if it had been the subject
of a very grave and solemn deliberation. I had no re-
collection of that ; I was quite confident my Noble Friend
was imagining the fact ; and accordingly I have since
looked into th very accurate report of those discussions
which at that day, in the Mirror of Parliament, were
given word for word in both Houses. Now, my Lords,
it appears there was not a single word said of it iu either
House. I have looked into the papers of the corre-
spondence between the Directors and the Board of Con-
trol, and there is not one single word said of it in these
on either side ; and I -have looked into the debates of
1784, when Mr. Pitt first brought in the Bill containing
this ill-omened clause, for it was in that originally, and
I find not one single word said on either side in either
House of this extraordinary power. And for this rea-
son, that before that Act the Court had the absolute
power in its own hands, and all the debate arose on the
limitations of that power, not on granting them any new
authority. I verily believe it was left in one India Bill
after another from a perfect persuasion that it would
never be acted upon, but would remain a dead letter,
unless some extraordinary emergency, some crisis of the
fate of our Indian empire, should call upon the
Directors to exercise this most anomalous and extraor-
dinary jurisdiction. I quite agree with my Noble Friend
that this exercise was intended to be, not at the sport or
caprice of individuals, or without great reason and most
weighty and urgent necessity, the very statement of
which would be its own vindication. Whether the Di-
rectors have acted on such grounds or not, I leave
your Lordships to gather from the most weighty cen-
sure, or at all events disapproval, which my Noble
Friend has, in the exercise of his duty, deemed it ne-
cessary publicly to give, with an authority which will
be universal in this country, in Europe, and in India,
wherever a name is known, and an authority is ap-
pealed to which is as illustrious and as much enshrined
in the greatest renown of successful councils and suc-
cessful arms as any that can be found in either hemi-
sphere of the globe. There is an appeal, no doubt, but
I do not expect that any one will be so venturous as to
call on either House of Parliament to pronounce their
approval, I would almost say their patient bearing, of
the proceeding which has now been discussed. I believe
if any proposition were made in either House of Par-
liament for a vote approving of this extraordinary pro-
ceeding, that it would be met by as triumphant a debate,
and as decisive a majority against it, as any ill-fated
proposition ever met in either House of Parliament.—
(Hear, hear.) It will be for my Noble Friend opposite
and her Majesty's Government, in the exercise of their
sound discretion as administering the Government, and
as Peers of Parliament, or Members of the other House,
to consider whether enough has now been done in order
to convey to India the decision that the policy—the
brilliant and successful policy—of my Noble Friend the
Governor-General has met with the entire sanction and
approbation of the Parliament of this country. If they
do not think it necessary to take any further step in
the matter, I shall not. But if any attempt be made to
obtain the sanction by Parliament of the course pursued
by the Court of Directors, there is no hazard, I think,
in predicting what the fate of such an experiment will be.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE—If we were now
discussing the extent of power conferred by the charter
of the East India Company, I should venture to ex-
press my dissent from the opinion pronounced by my
Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Brougham). Nor
can I think my Noble Friend as accurate to-night
in his recollection of facts as I have generally known
him to be. It may be true there was no discus-
sion in Parliament as to the power of recal by
the Directors of the East India Company ; but in the
negotiations which took place in '33 between the Go-
vernment and the East India Company, this power is
most distinctly and directly adverted to, and the propo-
sition made by the Government of the day to limit this
power within narrower limits was after much discussion
and deliberation withdrawn. But that point is not what
we have now to consider ; and, unfurnished as we must
all necessarily be with the information requisite for the
discussion of such a topic as that adverted to, I should
certainly not have risen, if it were not for what I mnst
take leave to call the somewhat extraordinary speech of
the Noble Duke. Without any notice whatever—with-
out our being in a position in. any way to judge of the
justness of his strictures, the Noble and Illustrious
Duke—relying on that undoubtedly high authority
which everything that falls from him carries with it—
has pronounced a most grave censure on the conduct of
the East India Company. My Noble and Learned
Friend (Lord Brougham) next rises, and challenges
any Member of Parliament to call in question the pro-
priety of the censure pronounced by the Noble Duke,
or to ask a contrary opinion from either House
of Parliament. Why, my Lords, how are we
to judge of the propriety of this censure ?
What knowledge have we of tho circumstances
which induced the East India Company to take this
unexpected and strange step, and what right have we to
suppose—with all precedents leading to a central?, con-
clusion, and this power never having been exercised by
the Company up to this time—that it was now exercised
without just and extraordinary reasons? The Noble
Duke stated, and my Noble and Learned Friend re•
peated the assertion, that the Directors must be neces-
sarily ignorant of the instructions under which the Go-
vernor-General acted, with the exception of the Secret
Committee. But must we not suppose that this Com-
mittee, being elected, is constituted of men in whom the
Directors have confidence, and roust not the decision of
the Committee influence in turn the opinions of the
Directors ? The Noble Duke told us (what is well
known to the public) that this step was in former times
in contemplation, but that the influence of the Govern-
ment prevented its being carried into effect. Why, my
Lords, what a censure is this on the Government of the
day, when we know that the great body of the Directors
consists of persons who are in general most favourable
to the views of the present Government, who cannot be
supposed to have acted as they have done except on the
gravest consideration, and who could not have refused
to listen to the advice of Government ; nay—after what
has passed to-night—who seemed to have passed a reso-
lution in defiance of this recommendation. And of this
resolution, allow me to say, we know nothing, except
what we have learned to-night, and we now bear it has
been under consideration seven or eight months. The
Noble Duke illustrated the injudicious exercise of the
power of the Directors, by stating the difficulties that
might have occurred if exercised sooner. Why, does
not the fact that they took such a period fur delibera-
tion show that they listened with calmness, forbear-
anee, and patience to whatever argument could be
urged against the exercise of a power with which
they were entrusted, for the well-being of a great
empire ? The Noble Duke must permit me to say,
that I have read the papers relating to Gwalior a ith
little satisfaction. I think it a little unfair to have
entered on the discussion of this part of the subject,
when my Noble Friend (the Marquis of Normanby),
who had given notice of a motion on the subject, had, for
the present, withdrawn it ; but if our opinion be asked,
I, for one, must say that, looking at the papers generally,
if thew ar is great in extent, great in loss of life, and
great in the consequences which must result from it, I
cannot look on it with satisfaction, because I have the
misfortune to feel convinced that every good object
which has been attained by the gallantry and ability of
our troops, could have been attained without the blood-
shed that has arisen. lam not going to argue that
point now ; but when an opinion has been expressed on
one side, 1 thought it right to say that the House was
not unanimous in it. All sides, I thought, concurred.the
other evening in the opinion that the discussion should,
for the present, be postponed until Lord Ellenborough's
arrival, unless Parliament should at once be called on
to take some decided step in the matter. After what
has passed, I feel no hesitation in asking the Noble Duke
whether it is the intention of the Government to lay on
the table any communications which may have passed
between the Board of Control and the East India Com-
pany on this subject ?
The Duke of WELLINGTON—AIthough ho was
anxious to afford their Lordships every information yet he
thought at the present moment it was notdesirable to do so.
A question had been put to him by his Noble Friend
(Lord Colchester), aid in reply he said no more than
what he considered to be his duty, and nothing which
had fallen from the Noble Marquis opposite would induce
him to alter his opinion as to the indiscretion of the con-
duct of the Court of Directors.
The Marquis of NORMANDY was sorry the Noble
Duke opposite said that he would not lay upon the table
the papers referred to. He did not think such a course
was in accordance with the usual straightforward con-
duct of the Noble Duke, because otherwise the Court of
Directors would not have an opportunity of having a
fair trial.
The Duko of WELLINGTON (as we could under-
stand) said he thought he had a right to speak his
sentiments, and he also should say that the conduct of
Lord Ellenborough met with the entire approval of her
Majesty's Government.
Lord CAMPBELL thought it was essential that the
Court of Directors should be allowed to exercise their
undoubted and legal right over the Governorship of
India, without being unduly interfered with.
After a few words from the Duke of BUCCLEUCH
the matter dropped.
Lord DENMAN presented a petition from the Dis-
senters of Birmingham against the Dissenters' Chapels
Bill, •

The Marquis of LONDONDFR-RY presented a pe-
tition from the Mayor, Aldermen,4 and Burgesses
proposed duty on coal
of Sunderland against the
imported into London. In
he thought it most unfair to doing
he said
interest
of the large coal-owners and their nuMerouste dependents,
by imposing a tax for the purpose of suc
chime-
rical objects as the embankment of the Thames. '
Lord WHARNCLIFPit: said the Government had
not as yot decided upon imposing this tax.
The Marquis of NORMANBY said he had intended
this evening to move for a Committee to . in-
quire into the regulation and application of the funds
of the Board of Charities in Ireland. However, he
would postpne his motion for a week, in order
that he might afford an opportunity to the Government
of taking the matter into thLeir
ord own
C hasurnul, and th
After a few WOO§ rom

_

LORD CHANCELLOIL the Local Process Bill was_ read a
second time.
Their Lordships then Adjourned.

---
Tills EVENING.—THE WORKMEN'S
SINGING CLASS, under the sanction of the Committee df
Council on Education, will COMMENCE THIS EVENING, April
30, at Nine o'Clock, under the direction of Mr. JOHN HULLAH,
at
the APOLLONICON ROOMS, St. Martin's-lane, and will meet every
Monday and Thursday Evening, at the same hour. Terms, Bs. for
the Course, or Is. Gd. per Mouth.
Apply at the Office, 101, St. Martin's-lane.
•

Now Ready,
VOL. VII. of MISS STRICKLAND'S
LIVES OF TIIE QUEENS OF ENGLAND.
Containing
THE SEQUEL of the LIFE of QUEEN ELIZABETH, and the
complete LIFE of AN of DENMARK.
N.B. New and Revised Editions of the First Six Volumes are
also new ready.
" These volumes have the fascination of a romance united to the
integrity of history."—Times.
Henry Collnurn, Publisher, 13, Great Marlborough-street.