The Sun.
London, England, 1826-05-10 00:00:00

property which' haiad created by his literary and political talent.
The= regulations Which gave to the Indian Government the power
of granting or of Withdrawing the licence for Newspapers, had been
registered inthe Supreme Court by Sir F. M`Naughten, who de-
- 'clued that be recorded them only because be felt stained that they
Would not be levelled against existing literary property. 'm Not-
• Withstandieg this declaration, however, after repeated attempts to
'harass foul injure the establishment of Mr. Buckingham, his
publication was at length suspended by order of the Govern-
-enent. This step was 'fitness/ed by much negociation for the re-
newel of the licence ; but, after a considerable lapse of time,
-the Government distinctly 'mall that 'they would, never renew
the lieenee for the Calcutta Jourtal, so long as Mr. Bucking-
ham, or any of his Co-proprietors, had any interest in, or
contned over it ; and they afterwards went so far as to de-
clare, that'the licence would be granted to no other person than
pr. Mutton, the son-in-law of a Member of Council. Thus did
the Gsvernmeut by an arbitrary act either annihilate the copy-
right, or transfer it to a favourite of. their own. The petitioner
stated; that in consequence of these proceedings, he had lost a
valnable property, and was besides involved in debts to the amount
of 10,0001. He (the Noble Lord) would only mew one or
two observations on these statements of the petitioner. The con-
shmet of the Indian Government had been supposed to have the
sanction of the Marquis of Hastings.. From letters he had seen
from that Noble Lord, he could not suppose this to be correct.
He could not but consider the case as one of very great hard-
ship. The most rigid censorship upon the press would have been
preferable to these regulations, if they were to be employed,
as in the present instance, to the destruction of property. Lord
Hastings hail indeed thought this kind of power held over the
heads of Editors a beneficial mode of carrying on the Indian
e• Press; but if he had remained in•lndia, he would not have em-
ployed it so harshly. His successor, however, did thus employ
it. Mr. Buckingham having been encouraged by the notion of
a free press to establish this literary property, he (the Noble. Lord)
did ,consider its destruction in the manner in which that haul been
accomplished, as a dreadfel hardship—as a personal (grievance of
fetch magnitude es to demand the interposition of that House.
He should therefore, after the petition had been brought up and
read, instead of moving that it do lay open the table, move that
its contents
,be referred to a Select Committee.
Mr. C. W. 'WYNN said, that taken the case of this individual
was on a former occasion bConght before the House, . he had de-
precated anysdittemetsien of the subject, on the ground that an
action had been threatened by Mr. Buckingham against Mr.
Adams, under whose goverment the transactions had taken
platy. Unfortunately, the death of Mr. Adams had rendered
it impossible for that action now to •proceed. But he had the
most perfect conviction, that if it had gone to issue,, its result
would have been the complete vindication of that lamented Gen-
tlenien, for whose character he could sot express too warmly his
admiration and respect. The motion contemplated by the
Noble toed was so unusuil on a Petition of this nature, that on
further. reflection he thonght the Noble Lord would probably
not'peraevere in that intention. The question was now perfectly
unshackled, and 6 was fully prepared to meet it. He agreed
that here, nosier a free Representative Government, such pub.;
licationa would not be dangerous. The case was very different
in India. If they thought proper to alter the Government
of India, it • was within the competency of Parliament to do
vu ;hut an absolute government, such as existed at present-in India,
and a free press, could not co-exist. Let them reflect upon what
sthe'Covernment of India was. The natives were systematically
excludesl:from'eny of its higher functions. Such a Government
could not co-exist With a free press. The contemn observation
that the natives were entitled' to a share in the Government,
which, for instance, would he perfectly innocent in' England,
would he perfect firebrand in' India. If charges were brought
against a Itepreeentative Government, 'the public assemblies
nfl'orded them noprotte.reies to answer etul repel them, the Go-
vernmeet of belittled no Fetch opportunity. By what means
could push acenettinna be tried? What public was there except
• the natives to he influenced by them, when the Europeans in
India were, for the moat part, Officers of the. Government
themselves. lisfere he proceeded furthers be would sreed the
rzgolations prormilifed bye that Government : for. the guid-
ance of press. The prohibited any 'animadversions on orders
sent out from En ;land by the Ceurt. of Directors, any corn-
in uts fon the conduct of the. Indian, Government, any strie.
terse on the ptestmal coomluct of any Member of the local
Geeernment, and any estraets front European publications
of a character inecoHiwtent with any of the former probi-
hithAis The Nubile 1,,0rd haul stated that the petitioner haul no
sufficient wanting. He would show, by. extracts frent official
letters sent to him by the Secretary of the *Marquis of Hastings,
that he had received repeated and solemn warnings of the
certain consequences of Ilia conduct. These letters were sent by
Order of Council, and with the fall concurrence of Lord Hest-
info, and the 'could not believe that Noble Lord would have
failed on sfinding them obstinately and contemptuously disrem.
• garmled,'ln give effect. to the threats they contained. After re-
peated infractiona of the regulatious, the first notice sent him by
Government contained these words That by any'repetition
of ii cirniher offeSee.you will forfeit all claim to the protection of
t!;m! Governnient; and that you will' subject :yotneelf to be pro-
ceeded against; under the Act which empowers GoVernment lu
sonl you to England, acid to withdraw the licence from your
pablicetion." The Right Iletiourable Gentleman then; read ex-
tesete from throe other notiees,, the last of which said, You
are now finally appriZed that if you persevere in -the -course
you have hitherto poissied, end indulge in animadversions upon
any order of the .Goyerninent, either past or future, )(Our licence
will be withdrawn, ereLyou will be sent out of the country.".....s.
After this the Calcutta Journal ventured to animadvert with
nnich severity on an appointment made; by the Government.
Merin these .cirettmstarrees:was Mr. Adams to do? It was im-
tesesible to pass it over unless without bringing contempt upon the
eathority of Government,. 'lt was. due to the memory of Mr.
Alms to pay that what • be did warm Merely carrying into execu-
lion the policy of the Marquis of Hastings, and.that severity was
nst resorted to till repeated warnings had (seen given in vain.
The proper check upon the authorities in India was not the public
opinion of belie, hot the public opinion of England. The tees-
Asians adopted by the Indian Government are conVantly heist be-
fore Parliament, and the Noble Lord might at any time move to
reSeind those which affected the: press. The declaration of Sir
F. MiNaughten' did not apply, ass a new offence haul been commit-
Then with regard to the license having passed to the son-in-law
of a Memher •of •t3ouncil; the facts were that the liceuselutd
ilten completely withdrawn, and the granting si license to Dr.
Moisten was a- perfect new and distinct transaction ; th'at this
G,tritiernan was not a partizan, but , rather in opposition to Go-
vernment ; and that he was suggested, by the agents ofMr. Buck-
, Ingham themselves, as a proper person to receive.it. Ile main-
tained that, after the conduct pursued for five years by the Cal-
cutta Journal, the Government were fully justified in, refusing a
has to any of the former proprietors or conductors of that Pa-
per. Mr. Buckingham, ?pretended to
,have been misled by the
opinion that the press was free. Ile could not but know that the
of India had never been free fur a single moment. On the
~ye,orship being .removed,. the exiting regnlations had been imme-
di ,rely adopted. On theSe grounds, if the Noble Lord moved for
.
COYfirnitt64lll; should certainly resist .
Mr. SCAIILI?.TT thought that much of: the reasoning of the
Itisie lion. Gentleman rather favoured the motion for a Com-
mittee; -.lf, as be believed, there was no other check opan the
arbitrary novernmentof India than what existed in tins country,
aidie,also believed, no action could be brought such as that
which Mr. Buckingham had contemplated With any prospect of
siowess; he knew of no other way in whicli on injured party coul.l
obtain 'redress than by means of an inquiry in that House. If
there afar any truth in the allegationlof the petition that a con-
siderable part of the copyright of this journal had been taken
front the petitioner and given without any consideration to the
son,in-law of a mamber, of Council, it was certainly an instance
of most corrupt and oppriessive.Conduct on the part of the Indian
'Government. If 'l,l un
4, Noble Friend moved for a Conittee, he
should on these grininds -give him his support.
Mr. WYNN, in explunatit,m, scull that the licenee hail been
altogether taken away:front Mr. I.'L:44oam, and- after the lapse
rt'e.iinsideraidulttne, P. lirmicehall,lovn given to Dr. Muston to
eltatilish another paper.
pAri;J. SMlTl.l.thought the case ,of Mr. Buckingham a hard
one. After the confiscation of his whole property, mid finding
bitneelf pressed down by debte, he applied only for something to
assiet hint in 'preVitling far hie large familyrand was told that he
could laws nothing. There was nothing in England enalogous to
this severity of penislimeet. Ifs' hoped Parliainvnt would do
justice to this u.nfortonate
IW. AtiTliLL s,s elc a feW observations in vindication of the
(when Governmeet. A leree majority of the ri.oprietors of Last
India stock had exptc:scd by their votes an untiwonrable opinimme
of time claims of Mr. limiclsingitats,, although his moss had 1),„;}
tileinied:in their Court with g reat
y.
The -Petition Wits _then brought up and reeds
Lewd :J. 'II.USSF,LL moved that it he referred to a Selves
Gersintittees
PIIIIIIMORE quite agreoi with his:. Learned Instil,
that this House was the quarter in which thus petitioner sommld
most properly seek redress. And if reasonable grounds a com-
plaint were stated, he should not resist the motion. Maiming,
however, in his opinion, could be more unsubstantial than the
complaints of the petitioner. It was not pretenshsl that any thing
hsd been done but what was in conformity to the law. At the