East India House.
The Times, 1824-03-06T00:00:00

Yesterday the adjourned' debate upon the state of Hailevbury CoUege was resumed in the Court of Proprietors, at the East India House. Before the regular business commenced, Greneral TIn(RNTON made an inquiry respecting th}e value of East India Bonds, which the CUAIRTtIA" declined answering,as the Court bad met for special business ot a different description. 1IAILEYRURY COLLEGE. The CHAIRMAN renewed the debate by requesting permisgion to state tbe reasons wlich induced him to give a negative to the moition of the hon. proprietor (rle. Douglas Kinnaird.) In all that had been said throughout the long discussion which had taken place, no individual had contended that the college was not generally benefi- cial. andl all had agreeid that a system of edutcation was necessary for thcse whnm thev destined for their eniployment as functionaries in India. The question mnainly resolved itself into this-wliich was the more preferable, acollegiate or a scholastic system I-whether, in fact, they should inmpose ore uniform and consistent plan, or throw their ediucation generally open ? He haIl had no predisposition in ivour of this college at one time, but exnerience had shown him that it performed what could fairlv have been expected from it, and hs was now nmore satisfied of that beneficial fact, than lie had been on any previous; occaLsion. HYe confessed, wvhen he looked at the clharaC^^er of those wvho wecre sent frorn the college to India, the effiiency and utility of their services, hc was, upon mature consider- ation, imnpresse: withl the necessity of touching with caution the systern zhich lla~ Produced such results. The honourable gentle- tnan who had introdu^cd this subject did certainly oflir them an- other mode of test as a substitute tbr their present collegiate exaami- nation. Biut the honourablt gentleman's test was not like that which he wished to remove, ased which was n test for conduct as well as nualification. (Hear, hear.) He entirely acquitted the hon. mnember of harbouring any intention of overtbrowing the esta- b1iehznent, but he was not so satisfied of the intentions of other pro- prietoirs who had followed him in the coarse of the debate. It was, however, obvious, that to carry into effect the test proposed by the horn mover, they must have 3 distinct and separate examination for thev never could intend placing the Profcssors at Haileybury in the invidious light of estimnating, and possibly refusing, the claims of those sittidents who were not educated under their auspices. It would be no it;mpeachment upon their character to feel a nredilection for those studen?c wbose habits of obedience. and aptitude for acquirements, they had had a long opportunity of witnessing. He must deny that the domestic education so highly spoken of by the honourable mover was a proper system for them to depend upon; for all knevw that those boys who were closest kept at home often becarme the most riotous when the superintend- cnce over them became relaxed. But at Maileybury, the system of early control was a probation, in the way in wbieb it was managed, which was felt by the young men in their futare career in India. When he declared his preference for the establishment at Hailey- bury, he was far from insinuating that the system was incapable of improvement; on the contrary, he thought it open to great ameliora- tion ; but he doubted whether that object was likely to be obtained bv the proposed mode of submitting the subject to the consideration oa tPrharment whiere, the moment the matter was introduced, it might be considered as thrown open, ant they could not foresee the possible result. Hear.) He was therefore most anxious to see this motion neeatiaed, and to bave the subject left to the executive body, who, under the control of the college visiter (the Bishop of' London), would, he had lio doubt, suggest eve.y proper remedy of which the systemn was found susceptibe. (HEl erear.) Mr. ELrssrr1sT 5 E was of opinion, that as good education could easily be found elsewhere as that of vlhich they so much boasted at Hileybury. When be said this, he was not one of those ,wbo wished to abolish the college altogether; on the contrary, bt thought that if a fair competition were thrown open, the Soligc would becomt ultimately raised in the jlblie estimation. de could not sAprove of the ie'le time on the hands of the students ftier 2 o'lock in the da.y: it was nonsense to expect thBt they w,^ould retire every evening to the.r apartments, and study some'es- sentiaThrancl of in8tractiOn. On the contrary, all who-reieimber. cd what they were after at the age of 17 yars (end he, though now ---- dA __ - emh' r h; rA- Pai. at thaLt line of life), need not be told that very different occupations besides toluntary sttudy' were the pursuits of juvenility. (A laugh.) HeI loped to see the college very greatly improved under a different ystem, anti not sending up its young men to the nightly range of London, and to flourish about the town, in too many cases, as iniahed coxco-alba, and blown up with the idea of their own import- ance. He believed that very expensive habits influenced their con- iuct, and were carried with them out to India. There was a number of nmeritorious persons who might have access to patronage, and whr, could not, without very great inconvenience, pay the expense of this college education, but if left to themselves, could elsewherc qualify their children in a fit and adequate manner. Such people ought not te be shut out from that chance. He should therefore sup- port the motion. (Hear.) Mr. DANIEL said, that he would hava preferred sa motion which went to establish a sciool on the foundationi of this college. The time for amusement was at present tdo liberally granted to the stu- dents, and he thought the Court of Directors had done wrong in di- vesting itself of the control over the Professors, who were now only amenabSe to the College Coin'.c&land, thev'3saiter. Ie should supporct the m-otion. Mr. BRoCWNE thought the Court had acted unwisely in giving up the control over the Professors. When a difference of feeling arose in the college, at one side were the students standing in the situa- tion of ofFenders, and at the other the Professors complaining of be. ing off en)ded. WVho was to decide between the parties ?-The Col- lege Cour,cil. Who composed that ?-The Professors themselves. So that, in their owrn cause,they stood in the light of accusers, judge, andjury. ( Hear.) He did not mean to impute any abuseof au- thority to the Protessors,who did their duty, lie believed,ashonour- ably as any other set of men could do in the same situation; but lie did not think it wise to invest any set of men with rhis self-acting aluthoritv. (Hear.) He deprecated in the strongest teets the powverof seleetingtor punishment any number of students upon general character alone, where the real offenders were not forth- coming: such a power was a disgrace to their statute book, and cot3- trary to thle lhumllane provision oflavw, which preferred the excape of.9 gujIty inen to the punishment of one iniocent. He saw no reason for refraining tro:ni improving the system of their college, although i he confessed lie disliked, in the present temper of Parliament about mono 'olies and such matters, trusting the matter into the hands ot the Legislature. If, however, they were left withoat a positive and specific assurance from the Court of Directors, that they would re- move the obnoxious clauses, theti, as the lesser evil of the two, lie j should vote for the present motion. Mr. Z. ?VIACALLAY opposed the motion, and saw no reason why they should go to Parliament for an improvement on so delicate a subject, which the Court of Directors were ready to consider without i (lelav; and they were called upon to take this step in the absence of all official information to guide theirjudgment witli safety. He de- niedi that the Directors had divested themselves of their power over the Professors. and contended that they retained the power of dis- missal whenever they pleased to exercise it. In his opinion no ade- quate test could supply the present college system, and on these grounds lie should oppose the motion. Mr. PATTrIsoec opposed the motion. and contended for the ad- vantages of the present effective mode of ascertaining the morals, qua- lifications, and attainments of those who were destined to serve them in India. He denied' that young men when sent to Haileybury were to be conisidereSi as ipso facto writers-that was not the fact; they were merelv passing a probationary time there, to ascertain If they were fi to hll sucl situations evetitually. It was true that some dhiffcrence liad taken place on a former occasion, between the Court of Directors and the Professors, abnut the employment by the latter of a portion ot that time which the students had for so many holurs in the evening at their own disposal. This was, however deemed rather anti-co I *ate (a laugh), although he hclieved the Professors were actuated with a sincere desire to do their duty in the best manner to the college. He asserted the power of the Court over the Professors, and believed that every propcr arrangement would be made without the aid of the present motion. Colonel BArILLIr opposed the motion, on the ground of the pre- sent system of education affbrding a proper precaution for that great corporate holy to hold, for the ultimate securitv and benefit of the 30,010,000 of their Indian population, and in tne place of which he knew of no adequate rest for theattrinmentofthcsamtcesscntialend. GIeneral TstnRsi'ro supported thne motion. M\lr. AS a EI.I. (the deputy Chairman) entirely concurred in the observations which had fexlln ifrom their Chairman in opposition to the motion. He felt no disposition to carry such a subject into Par- liament, when the remedy could be provided vithiout. He denied thatany test could afford the same general securitv for the efficiency of tiieir servants as that which was now furnished by their colle- giate probation. Sir G. RoliNsxsos disapproved ofthis motion, although hestrong. Iv censured the power of selection exercised bv the college, and also the irrevocable tendency of their present system of expulsion. He strongly urged the propriety of substitutitiga plan of rustication in place of the punishments now in force, and to be applied in those cases where no moral turpitude had been committed. Mlr. DounGLks KiSNAIRD replied, and the question was put fromii the chair. A ballot was, however, demanded in thetusual form, intl fixed by the Chairman for Wednesday, the 30th of Mfarch. SE.4s7T I.7D!A JIOUSE,