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

RECAL of LORD ELLENBOROUGH.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE MORNING POST.
Sir,—Since the announcements made in both Houses of
Parliament, on Friday evening, relative to Indian affairs,
little else has been talked of in political circles but the recal of
Lord Ellenborough. It is, indeed, a very reifiarkable circum-
stance. Here we find the representative of the British Go-
vernment presiding over an extent of country, and an amount
of population, very far exceeding the territory and the popu-
lation under the more immediate sway of British sovereignty,
and yet this mighty representative is recalled without the
consent of the political Government of Great Britain ! He is
in the midst of action—of deeds which are pregnant possibly
with the most important political consequences to the whole
empire, yet at once, by. the fiat of a company of British mer-
chants, he is stopped in mid-career, and recalled i This, in-
deed, is a bold step; and I agree with one of your contempo-
raries, that it cannot have been taken without the greatest
reluctance, and a deep sense of the urgent and overpowering
necessity of taking such a step. Ido not, however, intend to
follow your contemporary's example, by attempting to show
reasons why such a step was just and necessary, and then
stating that I am not prepared to give your readers any sufli-
cient insight into the real state of the matter.
One thing has transpired with reference to this affair since
the brief announcement of Friday evening, and that is, that
it was by no narrow majority that so remarkable a decision
was arrived at in the Directors' room of the East India Com-
pany. The belief of the necessity for Lord Ellenborough's
recal appears to have been general, if not unanimous, in the
East India Direction. The reason for this belief remains a
secret, but it will probably be found to rest upon no isolated
fact, but to be based upon deliberate objection to the leading
points of his policy, even those points which have given'oc-
casion to examples of British bravery and prowess scarcely
exceeded by any in the whole history of British military
achievement.
The friends of Lord Ellenborough say that the Directors
are angry with him on account of the freedom with which
he pursued a course of retrenchment and reform, regardless
of the effect upon the private interests of persons closely
connected with the Directors. Perhaps this may have
had some share in sharpening the feeling against
him, which on more important grounds was the re-
verse of favourable. But whatever the cause of the dis-
trustful feelings regarding Lord Ellenborough may have
been, the curious point is that these feelings have found no
sympathy with her Majesty's Ministers, and the Directors
have had to take advantage of their own " absolute shall" to
remove the nominee of her Majesty from the Indian Vice-
Royalty. There are some persons who say that the Govern-
ment, though not participating in the recal, have neither
done anything to prevent it, nor regret it, now that it has
taken place, the favourite object being to send out, in Lord
Ellenborough's place, one of the present Secretaries of State
who has not succeeded in making his administration parti-
cularly pleasing to the British public. I confess, however,
that I am inclined to acquit Government of the fisesse
which is thus attributed to them. Very possibly
it may have been wished that there were a comfort-
able retiring place for the unpopular Secretary of
State ; and it may have been intended that, if circumstancee
were favourable for transporting him to India, that he should
go there, but it is too much to suppose that Government
should attain their end through the East India Directors,
and then throw the whole responsibility of the act upon those
gentlemen.
lint there has been in this affair mismanagement some-
where. By some means or other there ought to have been
greater harmony between her Majesty's Ministers and the
East India Company. If the Company were known to have
the power of recalling the Governor of India, as of course
they were, there ought to have been that sort of confidential
co-operation between the Government and Company which
would have prevented any such strange event as that upon
which all eyes are at present directed. I suspect, that in this
case, as in so many others, it will be found that less of power
—loss of willing co-operation on the part of those who can
afford useful co-operation—has been the result of some defect
in the Government. I hardly know how to describe this de-
fect. Were I to call it cold and repulsive self-sufficiency,
I might perhaps be thought to use language too harsh for the
occasion. I am therefore willing it should be called by any
mild phrase that can be thought of, but there does appear to
be in the Government a something which is very unfavour-
able to a friendly union with the various subordinate powers,
whose co- operation; in a free country, is necessary to the
carrying on, in a satisfactory manner, of public affairs.
Yours, &c., TIMETIS.

MR. FERRAND AND MR. HOGG.
TO J. W. HOGG, ESQ., M.P.
Sir,—The proceedings in the House ofCommons being now
terminated, I think it a duty I owe to myself. to volunteer
that explanation of the exact meaning my words at Leeds
were intended to convey, which I never should for one mo-
ment have withheld, had you made that personal and pri-
vate application to me which has hitherto been the inva-
riable custom among gentlemen, instead of adopting the in-
direct and public course of appealing to Parliament.
Against the course you and others chose to pursue, I
deemed it my duty, as a British subject, to make a constitu-
tional stand. I protested against the right of the House oaf
Commons to interfere in such cases; and had that House
ventured to assei t such power, either by censuring me, or by
any other act of a tangible nature, it was my intention to
have resisted such assumption of power on its part, and to
have tried that right in another and a constitutional court.
For the anomalous position in which the House has last night
placed itself I am in no way responsible.
With regard to yourself, and the expression I made use of
at Leeds respecting you, I much regret that my assurance
on Monday night that you were " labouring under a mis-
take" when you supposed that " I had charged you with
what was dishonest and dishonourable" was not, as I think
it Ought to have been, satisfactory to you ; and that
marteyoaum. per-
sistedag in driving me to the alternative of either
silent, or of submitting to an unconstitutionaltribn tribunal.
mean,al °ll I
Monday night I distinctly told you what I did
now tell you what I did mean. It always was, and still its
opinion,enleyction was
unjust,t hat your
and
directlydecision
opposedrespecting
to
theth e Nottingham
evidence i
ad
before you ; it is further my opinion, that in coming to this
decision you were influenced by a bias, of which you were
probably unconscious, that such decision would be very ac-
ceptable to a Government whom you were anxious to sup-
port, and more particularly acceptable to that individual
member of it to whose favourite legislative measure . Mr.
Walter had ever been the strenuous opponent.. Further than
this I never did, I never could intend to say. I never for one
moment believed that you had been personally corrupted, or
that you either were or are to receive the reward of that cor-
ruption. Had Iso believed, or had I intended to convey
such belief, it would have been done in plain English, and
not by faint inuendo. I therefore wish to express my regret
that your feelings, as a man of honour, should have been
womided by unfortunately straining my words into a mean-
ing they were never intended to convey.
With regard to your conduct during this past week, no one
can regret more deeply than I do, that you shonld have lent
yourself to the personal persecution with which I have been
assailed. That, however, is mere matter of private feeling
to myself. But it is still more to be regretted on public
grounds, when considered, as I fear the country will consider
it, as having so materially contributed towards placing the
House of Commons in the embarrassing and unconstitu-
tional position in which it now finds itself—a position ill cal-
culated to maintain its efficiency in public estimation—a po-
sition, in short, which presents it to the country no longer as
the defender, but as the direct invader of one of the dearest
privileges of the subject.--I sin, Sir, your most obedient and
humble servant, W. B. FERBAND.
Carlton Club, April 27, 1844.

Trr.L.Es.—lf mortals on earth—if children of dust
and death, if poor small creatures of the day, choose to ad-
dress one another as My Lord, Your Grace, Your rlolinear‘
Reverend, Very Reverend, Right Reverend, Most Reverend
Father in God, is it for us, as Dissenters, like so many par-
rots, to repeat the blasphemy ?—(Tremendous cheering.)
Whether they choose to address one another as My Lord, or
My Lawn Sleeves—(Great laughter)—aa Your Grace, or
Your Graceless, as Tour Holiness, or Your Haughtiness.
(Renewed laughter)--as Your Right Reverend Father, or
Your Right Reverend Grandmother—(Shouts of laughter
what have we to do with it ?—(Loud cheers.)—Res. Mr
Giles, of Leeds.—( Cheltenham Free Press.)
It is with great satisfaction we state that the ap-
pearance and efficiency of the pensioners, enrolled on the 25th
instant, more than equalled the general expectation. Vast
steady and sober conduct merits notice also, for all Amounts
agree that in very few cases were men rejected from balsa-
perance. We regretted to observe that neither arms, seam-
trements, or clothing had been issued morally. In alms*
every district the pensioners paraded in %Ad; work*lll
clatlies.-21aval and Military Gazette.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, April 29.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his. seat on the Wool-
sack shortly before Five o'Clock.
The Earl of ROSEBER Y presented two petitions
against the Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
The Marquis of .NORM ANBY 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 EYETER presented a petition
against 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 ELLENBOROUGH.

Lord COLCHESTER wished to put a question on
a subject of vast importance to the Noble Duke near
him—namely, whether the communication of the
Court of Directors announcing the recal of Lord
Ellenborough was accompanied by a statement of
their reasons for that act ?
The Duke of WELLINGTON said that there was
no doubt that the Court of Directors had given
such reasons as they could advance, and which
reasons had been most decidedly at variance
with the opinions of her Majesty s Government,
and therefore her Majesty's Government did not
concur in the measure—nay more, he should say,
that her Majesty's Government did strongly remon-
strate against the measure, and pointed out in a
eliarked mariner to the Court of Directors the error
which they had committed. At the same time he
felt bound to say that he was aware the Court of
Directors possessed the power of removing the
Governor-General in a strict point of law, for that
power, which existed since 1784, was again renewed,
or rather retained in 1833, by the 3d and 4th Wm.
IV. But he felt bound to say that this body, like
every other body, a4l every other individual, was
bound to exercise its powers with discretion.—
(Cheers.) He would say to their Lordships as
a person who had had considerable experience,
that he thought the conduct of the Board of Direc-
tors was most indiscreet. (The Noble Duke here
spoke with considerable warmth, and laid much stress
upon the last word of the sentence.) Although the
Court ofDirectors possessed the power of recalling
the Governor-General, yet they had no power to
nominate his successor, nor, indeed, to do
anything, except under the direction of the
Board of Control. Lord Ellenborough had
been only two years in India now, and had afforded
the greatest satisfaction to those from whom he re-
ceived his instructions in every instance. He thought
he was justified again in stigmatising as indiscreet
a line of conduct such as that adopted by the
Court of Directors when they had not the slightest
knowledge ,of the nature of the instructions which the
Governor-General received from the Home Government,
or indeed had no further notice of the private circum-
stances of the case than had either of the
Houses of Parliament, or the public, or the
world generally. He should say that the Court of 1)i-
-rectors, being in this state of ignorance, acted very
wrongly in depriving the Government ofthe country of the
benefit of the services of such an officer as Lord Ellenbo-
.' rough at this moment. This was the first instance
they had of the exercise of this power by the Court of
Directors, and certainly a dangerous power it might
turn out to be ; for, he would ask their Lord-
ship-,, what would have been the consequence if
the Court ha.l chose:, to issue such an order dur-
ing the time when those extensive operations
were carrying on against Gwalior ? Why that result
would be that the carrying out of them would be left to
. soma gentleman—a very respectable gentleman lie
might be, no doubt, connected with the Council, but
who lacked experience in that particular branch of the
Government in which his Noble Friend (Lon: Ellen •
• borough) was so distinguished. He should azain repeat
• the word ‘• indiscreet," and say that a more indiscreet
exercise of power than that of recalling the Governor-
General, he hid never witnessed since the first time he
became connected with public affairs. (The Noble
Duke appeared much excited at the chose of his speech.)
Lord BROUGHAM wished to explain, that he had
never said he doubted the legality of the act of the Court
of Directors, in recalling the Governor-General; but he
fully e,neurred in what had fallen from the
Noble Duke opposite, with regard to the in-
discretion of their cinduct—indeed lie wfaild have
almost inclined to go further ; for out cf the twenty-
four members, composing the Court of Directors, only
three were inforine I of the future of the instructions
.given to the Govern;r-General, and they were bound by
oath not to reveal to their brother Directors what
those instructions were, yet the whole body
excepting three, acting in ignorance, adopted a measure
which alone could be justified by having the fullest know-
ledge of the whole bearings of the ease.—(Hear, hear.)
He need say but little on this matter after what had
fallen from the Noble Duke who had just sat down—
one whose name was respected not alone in
India, hut in every part of the known world, and whose
opinions carne t that high respect with them to which
his splendid achievments and high character entitled
them

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said he should
not have been indu: el to ri,e were it not for
the extraordinary spee2h made by the Noble Duke
opposite (the Duke of Wellington). Ile (the
(Marquis of Clanricarde) thought it a most extraordi-
nary course for the Noble athe to adopt, to rise up in
his pluce in that.llouse, and, without giving the slightest
notice of his intention, to pronounce a ready censure
upon the Court of Arcetors. Ile ( Marquis Clanricarde)
would ask what right had they, when they knew that the
East India Company possessed the power by
law of adopting the course they did, to con-
demn them, without first examining into the matter
further, and affording them an opportunity of jus
tifying themselves fur the steps they took ? He
should ask the Noble Duke if it were his intention
to lay upon the table the communication which passed
upon this subject between the Board of Control and the
Court of Directors Of the East India Company.
The Duke of WELLINGTON—AIthough he was
anxious to afford their Lordships every information yet he
thousht at the present moment it was not desirable to do so.
A question had been put to him by has Noble Friend
(Lord Colchester), and 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 NORMANBY 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, bemuse otherwise the Court of
Directors would not have an opportunity of having a
fair trial.

The Duke of WELLINGTON (as we could under-
stand) said he thought he had a right to speak his
sentiment,, and he also should say that the conduct of
Lord Etlenberough met with the entire approval of her
Majesty's c4overnmelt.

Lord CAMPBELL thought it was essential that the
Court of Directors should be allowed to exercise their
unrloubted and legal ri,.;ht over the Governorship of
India, without being unduly interfered with.
After a few word's 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 LONDONDERRY presented a pe-
tition from the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses
of Sunderland against the proposed duty on coal
imported into London. In doing so, he said
he thought it most unfair to injure the interest
of the lar4e coal-Owners and their numerous dependents;
by imposing a tax for the purpose of such chime-
rical olueets.as the embankment of the Thames.
Lord WHABNCLIFFA.: said the Government had
not as yet decided upon imposing this tax.
The Marquis of NOR \IANBY 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 postpone his motion for a week, in order
that he might afford an opportunity to the Government
of taking the matter into their own hands.

After -a
few words from Lord CAMPBELL and the
Loan CHANCELLOR the Local Process Bill was read a

second time.

Their Lordships then Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 29.
The Senakta took the Chair at Pour o'clock.
Mr. HOPE .JOHNSTONE presented a petition
from a Presbytery in Scotland against the abolition
of tests in col!eges.
Mr. SCHOLEPIELD presented petitions from
the British and. Foreiga Anti-Slavery Societies at
Chester-le-street, Newton Abbott ' • nelstone, Corn-
wall ; Darlingtbn and vicinity ; Reigate, Surrey ;
Torquay, and Oswestry, against any fiscal regulations
being adopted that will admit of the introduction of
the produce of slave labour into this country ; and
praying that fiscal regulations be adopted in favour of
the produce of free labour.
Mr. I\l-LINDY presented a petition from Scar-
borough, in Yorkshire, in favour of agricultural pro-
tection.
Mr. HIND LEY presented a petition from the
Anti-Slavery Society, signed by the venerable Clark-
son, against any alteration in the duties on foreign
sugar, which would tend to admit the article from
countries where slave labour ►sa.s allowed.
Ivti. T. DUNCOMBE presented three petitions
from Liverpool, Dublin, and
,stem, and praying
Bradford, complaining
of the prevalence of the truck system,
..that the House would take the matter into its serious
consideratioti.
Mr: S. CRAWFORD presented a petition from
'Certain operatives: connected with factory
;BelfaStt Signed by 8,300 names, praying for the
in
;here-
-stsietion'of ten hours' labour daily to factory work.
-Mr-R-.IIOWARD presented a petition from Car-
lisle ao•ainst the Masters and Servants Bill, and stat-
•Jij'g that it sVits harsh in its provisions, and trenching
;:litcul trial. by jury.
~Mr;, ROSS, presented several petitions from Pres-
jtylerianeongregations against the present marriage
-Taws as affecting persons of their religious persuasion.
1\114.1-IARDy presented a petition in favour of
kieletlertral p3rotet49,r.), fhin a place in Lancashire.

Mr. FERRAND presented a petition from the
West Riding of York,hire against the Masters and
Servants Bill.
Mr. W. 0. STANLEY presented a petition from
the Chairman and Board of Guardians of a place, the
name of which we could not catch, complaining of
the clause in the Poor-law Amendment Act relative
to -the burial of paupers; also, a petition from the
Isle of Wight against the union of the Sees of St.
Asaph and Bangor.
Captain PLUMRIDGE presented a petition from
Falmouth, on the subject of the Small Debts Bill.
Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND presented a pe-
tition from Preston against the Masters and Servants
Bill.

Mr. MILES presented petitions against the union
of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor. Also a petition
from the Deanery of Bath and Wells, praying the
House to address the Queen for the purpose of ob-
taining for the clergy the right of meeting in con-
vocation.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND presented a petition
from Stoke-upon-Trent against any further grant
to the College of Maynooth.
.Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN presented several
petitions from the county of Kent against the union
of the sees of St. Asaph and Bangor.
HAIL-STORM POLICIES OF INSURANCE.
Petitions, praying for a repeal of the Stamp Duty
upon hail-storm policies, were presented by the
Earl of March, Mr. Blackstone, Mr. Yorke, Admiral
Dundas, Mr. Round, Mr. J. Round, and Mr. Hussey.
Mr. F. FRENCH gave notice that he should to-
morrow bring forward a motion with respect to poor-
laws in Ireland.

SAVINGS BANKS.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER

gave notice that, on Thursday next, he should move
for leave to bring in a Bill for the regulation of
savings banks.
TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES
AND THE ZOLLVEREIN.

Dr. BOWRING wished to know from the Right
Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government, whe-
ther he would have any objection to lay on the table
of the House the correspondence which had taken
place between the British and Prussian Glvernments
on the subject of the late treaty concluded between
the United States and the Zoliverein.
Sir R. PEEL was understood to say that he had
no objection.
FACADE OF THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

Mr. M. MILNES wished to put the question of
which he had given notice, to the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman (Sir R. Peel), respecting the new facade of
the British Museum. He wished to know whether
the plan proposed had been definitively agreed upon ?
Sir R. PEEL begged to state that he considered
there never was any architectural plan which received
more mature consideration than the present, and the
decision of the trustees had been always understood
to be final and complete. So long ago as 1822 a re-
solution was moved in the House that no plan for
the British Museum should be proceeded with on
the mere consent of the trustees, but that the
consent of Parliament should be had. In
1823 all of the trustees had approved of the
plan now in course of being carried into execution.
The plan had been submitted to Committees, one in
the year 1836 and one in 1838, and it received the
implied sanction of both. Some courses of stone had
actually been laid according to the plan, and no devia-
tion from the plan could he made without causing
considerable expense; under these circumstances he
trusted the Hon. Gentleman would see the necessity
of not disturbing a plan which emanated from a most
eminent architect, and had received the sanction of
the Lords of the Treasury, and subsequently of two
Committees of the House of Commons.
GOVERNOR-GENERALSHIP OF INDIA.
On the motion that the Order of the Day for going
into Committee of Ways and Means be read,
Mr. ROEBUCK rose. He begged to solicit the
attention of the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of
her Majesty's Government to the questions which he
was about to put to him. On Friday, in answer to a
question from the Right Honourable Gentleman the
Member for Edinburgh (Mr. Macaulay), the Right
Honourable Baronet had made it clear to the
House, and to the country, that the Court of
Directors of the East India Company had
recalled the Governor-General. As that was
a matter which might be attended with very im-
portant consequences, he was now induced to solicit
the attention of the Right Hon. Gentleman to his
question. -He (Mr. Roebuck) understood that on
Wednesday last a dispatch had been sent from this
country to India, on the receipt of which
the Noble Lord at the head of the Indian Govern-
ment would cease to be Governor-General, and the
government of that country would be transferred to
others. The question to which he solicited attention
was, who was now, to be considered responsible
for the Government of India? Whether was it
the Government of this country, namely, the
Administration, the members of which he saw oppo-
site to him, or the parties who had the power of dis-
missing the Governor-General, who were to be
considered responsible for the government of that
country ? He wanted also to know if the Right
Honourable Baronet were able to give him an
answer, and he should be sorry to put the question if
an answer were at all inconvenient, as he had not
given the Right Hon. Baronet notice of his motion,
though perhaps the Right Hon. Gentleman was not
wholly unaware of his intention to put it.
A dispatch went from this country which
would alter the whole nature of the Go-
vernment of India, and anybody who knew
anything of that country knew that from Cape Comorin
to the Himalayas the greatest commotion—(Cries of
" Order" from the Ministerial benches, amidst
hich Sir R. Inglis rose to " Order" and immediately
sat down.) Mr. Roebuck resumed.—He had so often
been subjected to this species of interruption,
that he could not but believe that there
was some meaning in it.—(Hear, hear.) They were
now on an Order of the Day for Supply—for a Com-
mittee of Ways and Means—which involved every
question interesting to the state of the nation—so
that he was perfectly in order, and he was astonished
that so old a Member as the fion. Gentleman opposite
should have interrupted him. He was about to re-
mark, that any one who knew India must he aware
that the reception of news such as that to which he
had alluded would create a great sensation among
all the native powers from Cape Comorin to the
Himalayas. Now nothing could be more dangerous
to our dominions in India than the effect which might
be produced by such a dispatch. He therefore
wished to know from the Right Honourable
Baronet whether he was prepared to maintain
the policy which had hitherto been maintained
by the person representing the Government in
India; and, with respect to the Government of India at
the present time, considering the extraordinary and
anomalous position in which it was placed, he was
anxious to learn if the Right lion. Baronet was prepared
to take upon hinriself the responsibility of carrying
out the policy of the Directors of the East India Com- ,
pany. He was aware of the difficulty of the question,
and he admitted that he had not given• notice of his
intention to put it.
Sir R. PEEL had not known of the intention of
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to put the ques-
tion on the important subject to which he had re-
ferred, and he (Sir R. Peel) should certainly have
wished for a little time for consideration. In the
111-.4 place, with regard to the provisions of the ex-
isting law, the House was probably aware .that the
relations of the Executive Government with regard
to. the administration of the affairs of India were
extremely anomalous. The respective positions of
the Government and of the East India Company were
not very well defined. The Crown and the East
India Company had each certain powers ; but with
regard to the nature and extent of those powers, he
must refer to the acts of the Legislature. The East
India Company possessed the power of appointing the
Governor-General of India. That power could only
be exercised subject to the approbation of the. Crown
—that approbation was signified by the sign-manual,
counter signed by the Secretary of State. That was the
exact provision of the law with respect to the appoint-
ment. The appointment wai made under ordinary cir-
cumstances, by concert and mutual understanding, be-
tween the Government and the East India Company ;
but the letter of the law was that the right of nomi-
nation was with the East India Company, subject to the
approbation of the Crown. The right of the East India
Company to remove the Governor- General, without the
concurrence of the Crown was, he apprehended, unques-
tionable. In the last Act, which comprised the charter of
the East India Company, and extended it for a certain
time, there was a proviso that nothing in that Act
should be construed in any degree to diminish or in-
terfere with the power of the Board of Directors to
recal the Governor-General of India. Now, all
that he was at liberty, consistently with his
sense of public duty, to state on that occasion, was
that the Court of Directors had, in the case of the
removal of Lord Ellenborough, exercised the right
which they unquestionably possessed under an Act of
the Legislature, to recal and dismiss at their will and
pleasure, the Governor-General of India.—
(Hear, hear.) The determination to recal was taken
by them on their undivided and exclusive
responsibility. The act of recal was an act which had
not received the sanction and concurrence of the
servants of the Crown. Without that sanction and
concurrence the act was unquestionably a legal and a
valid act. With respect to the question of the Hon.
Gentleman, whether her Majesty's Government con-
sidered itself responsible for the government of
India, he must, under present circumstances, decline
entering into any discussion of that question.—(Hear,
hear.) All he could say was, that with reference to
the fact, whether her Majesty's Government did or
did not coincide with the Court of Directors, their
sense of public duty would induce them to take that
course which should appear to them best calculated to

diminish the risk of embarrassment and danger which
they foresaw from the act of the Court of Directors.
Sir R. INGLIS said he had no wish to interrupt
the Hon. Member for Bath unnecessarily. He
thought, however, that great inconvenience would
arise, if Hon. Members persisted in exercising their
right in a case like that before the House.
Mr. FRENCH said he thought there was another
question which ought to be put to the Right Hon.
Gentleman at th 3 head of her Majesty's Go-
vernment. His answer would leave the country
under the impression that the Court of Directors
bad •taken the Government by surprise. Now
he wished to know whether it was not true that they
had had considerable notice of the intention of the
Court of Directors to remove the Governor-General
of India ?
Sir R. PEEL thought he had not said a word
from which any Hon. Gentleman could infer that the
Government had been taken by surprise. The Go-
vernment most certainly was not taken by surprise;
but they had had the opportunity of stating their
views to the Court of Directors, who had certainly
given a fair and full consideration to their repre-
sentations before they took the step in question.
Now he must beg to decline answering any further
question. He had given the House all the informa-
tion that could be expected from him, in answer to a
question of which he had not notice, and he trusted
that the House would not suppose that he acted with
disrespect in declining to answer anything further.
THE CHINA COMPENSATION.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS said that, before the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer proceeded with his exposition
of the Ways and Means, he should beg leave to ask
the Right Hon. Gentleman to explain how it was
that the money was borrowed upon Exchequer Bill;,
to pay the opium compensation, whereas the revenue
of the last year exceeded the expenditure by a very
large sum ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that the amount of the opium compensation was
1,200,000/., and the expenses of the war 800,0001.,
making in the whole 2,000,0001., which would be re•
paid by the Chinese Government, and from that fund
the Exchequer Bills (as we understood) would be
paid off. The loan was made for the double purpose
of paying the compensation and the defraying the
expense of the war.
Mr. HUME said his Hon. Friend was not aware
that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in order to
have a surplus income, had borrowed the sum of two
millions upon Exchequer Bills. Had his Hon.
Friend consulted him (Mr. Hume) upon the subject,
he could have explained the matter to him —(Laugh-
ter.) His Hon. Friend, however, was quite right
in putting his qnestion. He (Mr. Hume) was
aware that last year the Chancellor of the Exchequer
did explain this matter, and the late Chancellor of the
Exchequer pointed out to the House the cheat that
the Chancellor of the Exchequer was then putting
upon the public. But he (Mr. Hume) perfectly
understood at the time the money was borrowed that
it was to be paid as soon as the remittances from
China were received.
Mr. WILLIAMS said he had another question to
put to the Right Hon. Gentleman.—(Cries of " Oh,
oh.") Ile had been informed that a very large
amount of money had been laid out by the Commis-
sioners for Reducing the National Debt in the pur-
chase of Consols. He understood that something
like from 150,0001. to 200,0001. per week
had been expended for some time past. He wished,
therefore, to ask how much money had been laid out
by the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National
Debt since the commencement of this year, on ac-
count of surplus revenue—on account of savings'
banks, and on account of money received for the pur-
chase of Government annuities.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said he was sorry that he could not give the Hon.
Gentleman the figures he required at the moment, not
having had the slightest expectation that the question
was about to be put to him.—(Hear, hear.) He
would be, however, perfectly ready to give the lion
Gentleman the required information to-morrow.
THE BUDGET.

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER the House then went into a Com-
mittee of Ways and Means—Mr. Greene in the Chair.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
rose and said :—Mr. Greene, the motion I shall have
the honour to put into your hand is for a vote of Ex-
chequer Bills, to be appropriated to the exchange of
other Exchequer Bills, which will come due, in the
ordinary course of business, in about six weeks time ;
and I think it desirable to avail myself of this oppor-
tunity of bringing under the consideration of the
House the view of the financial condition of the
country which the House is entitled to expect,
and which it must be anxious to receive at the
hands of her Majesty's Government. It will
be in the recollection of the House, that
when, in the course of last year, I made a simi-
lar statement, there was, on the part of some Hon.
Gentlemen, an expression of great surprise as to the
actual state and future prospects of the country. We
were told that the country was still labouring under
the severest distress, and that it was not likely to re-
cover from its state of depression. We were also told

hat, notwithstanding the imposition of heavy addi•
ional taxation, the year had still closed with a
deficiency of revenue. The explanations given by the
Government were not satisfactory; and there were
those who argued that a similar depression
would be observala!e in the coming year.
On my own part, I was disposed net
to invite rash expectations to future pros-
perity, nor to draw an overgrown statement of
public fear, but I then took the liberty of stating to
the House, that there were indications of improve-
ment which led me to anticipate a revival of in-
dustry, and an extension of commercial enterprise,
and which must of course lead to a considerable im-
provement of the financial condition of the country.
I am happy—and I am sure those Honourable Gen-
tlemen who differed from my views will be happy
also—that the views which I then entertained, have
been since realised, and that the alarming forebodings
which were indulged in have turned out to be ground-
less. lam anxious, Sir, not to encroach upon the
time of the House, and I therefore will not detain
you by further prefatory observations. I will
proceed at once to state what was the revenue and
expenditure of last year, and then I will go to the
revenue and expenditure of this. It will be neces-
sary, hoWever, before I do so, to call the attention
of the House to the situation in which we
stood when this question was last before
us; and more particularly, to explain to the
Hon. Member for Coventry (Mr. Williams) the par-
ticular circumstances with respect to the China
opium debt, and the East India Company to
which he has just adverted. The balance-sheet, to
which he has referred, comprises all the actual
payments made in the year, and all moneys
received within the year. Therefore, on the
one side, 2,000,0001. have been received from the East
India Company and the China opium claim ; and on
the other side, is the expenditure for those two objects.
But the House will be kind enough to understand
that in the schemes of finance, I exclude those state-
ments from the debtor and creditor side of the account.
And the Hon. Member for Montrose is perfectly
correct in stating that I was then charged with
having done so in order to make the appearance of a
surplus when it was not the fact. The estimate
which I made of the public income during the course
of last year, has undoubtedly been very greatly ex-
ceeded. I stated at that time to the House, that
after the depression we had been sustaining, and the
disappointment of previous expectations with respect to
that income, I had endeavoured to make my statement of
such a character that at all events it should not err
on the score of being beyond what was likely to be
produced. If there was any error, indeed, it was
quite in the contrary direction. The estimate which
I made of the amount of revenue from the Customs
for the year to come was 19,000,0001., taking for my
guide the amount that had been produced
by the Customs during the preceding year.
But in the course of the past year the
amount that has been received from the Customs is
21,426,0001., instead of the 19,000,0001. at which I
had estimated it. This arose, in a great degree, from
the following circumstance :—I had not anticipated
that there would be any considerable importation of
corn ; that article, however, has produced 800,000/.
I speak in round numbers, in order to save trouble to
the House. A further sum was produced to the revenue
by a great improvement in the wine duties arising from
the termination of those negotiations which had laid
a sort of paralysis on the trade. The amount derived
from this source was 350,000/. Other items
of the Customs exhibited that a general im-
provement had taken place ; the most remarkable
items in this increase arose from the duties on sugar,
amounting to 200,0001.; upon tea, 300,000/. ; both satis-
factory indications of the revived power of consumption
in the labouring population of the country. Lastly
there was an augmentation in the duties on cotton
wool, amounting to 200,0001., an indication of in-
creased activity in that department of industry on which
the happiness of so large a portion of the manufactur-
ing population of this country depends. In addi-
tion to these items, which make together a
very large proportion of the excess on the
Customs' revenue, there have been several minor
articles, which have exhibited, generally speaking,
an uniform augmentation, keeping pace with
the extension of our commerce and the greater
employment of the population. The estimates
which I made with respect to the Excise
have turned out to be nearly as accurate as it is
possible for estimates to be. The estimate I
tmahnaadt: ot
fherthfeo Excise revenue was 13,000,0001.,
d the
eamountrz it has .
yfioerldedlititsle
observation,l2,9oo ,000/.