Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

been fairer on the part of Mr. Baillie and Mr. Hume to have proposed a direct vote of censure upon the Ministers, whom this motion was designed to embarrass, in order to get up a reactionary movement in favour of protection. This had been the covert object of the party which refused supplies in the Court of Demerara, which might have reduced salaries, but had preferred to attack the civil list. It was to the honour of Lord Grey that he had dared to encounter odium rather than shrink from carrying out, when in office, principles which he had maintained in opposition.

Mr. Hawes said Mr. Baillie had made grave charges against Lord Grey and the Colonial Office, but he had supported them by statements singularly disingenuous and unfair. His charges were general, tinctured with bitterness and personality, without stating what was in reality the colonial policy of this country. He had enlarged upon the supposed errors of Lord Torrington; but he had carefully abstained from noticing the many beneficial reforms that noble Lord had introduced in Ceylon, some of which Mr. Hawes explained, and then justified the taxes to which Mr. Baillie had incorrectly ascribed the rebellion. The measures taken to suppress the rebellion, and to punish the guilty agents, Mr. Hawes contended were justifiable or unavoidable; and he cited the testimony of Sir Herbert Maddock to the judicious manner in which the rebellion had been dealt with by the authorities of Ceylon; at the same time vindicating the conduct of the soldiery. With regard to British Guiana, Mr. Baillie's statement appeared a burlesque of the facts, which Mr. Hawes minutely

developed; and deduced from them evidence that the Combined Court, in refusing supplies, was actuated by a desire, not to make salutary reductions, but to embarrass the Government, and force upon it the principle of protection; and it was Lord Grey's resistance to this attempt that had brought upon him so much bitterness and obloquy. Mr. Hawes took a review of the

results of the policy pursued by Earl Grey, and the appointments made by him in our various colonies; and said that, although an inquiry, conducted in the spirit which had manifested itself in this discussion, was not likely to be beneficial to the colonies, yet, on the part of Lord Grey, who courted inquiry, he assented to the motion for a Committee, with the amendment of Mr. Ricardo.

Sir W. Molesworth entered into a long examination of the financial state of Ceylon, to show the extravagant scale of its establishments; and complained of the improper appointments made in that colony, which he charged to the abuse of patronage by the Colonial Office. Financial embarrassment had led to the enacting of bad laws. Lord Torrington had been placed in a dilemma; but the blame of the obnoxious and injudicious taxordinances rested mainly with his Council. These taxes, however, naturally engendered discontent amongst the Cingalese; and, though not the sole cause of insurrection, no agitation could have excited insurrection but for such discontent. Like Mr. Baillie, the honourable Baronet censured the military executions after the rebellion, and expressed his surprise that Mr. Hawes should have attempted to excuse the shooting. of a priest in his pontifical robes.

As Lord Grey had pronounced his unqualified approbation of these proceedings, some change was called for in the government of Ceylon; and he recommended that it should be re-transferred to the East India Company, a change which would be beneficial to the colony and economical to this country.

Mr. Adderley was surprised that a great national question like this should have been so miserably met, first, by an amendment which would convey a stronger censure upon the Government, and next, by a simple personal defence from the Under Secretary for the Colonies. As far as regarded Lord Grey, he would vote that noble Lord thanks instead of censure, for he seemed to have been raised up by Providence to damn the system pursued towards the colonies. The honourable Member then criticized Lord Torrington's administration of Ceylon, and combated the attempt of Mr. Hawes to separate the causes of rebellion from the taxes imposed by that noble Lord. Mr. Scott, in supporting the motion, complained of the denial to the colonies of self-government, and of the mismanagement of their affairs by the Colonial Depart

ment.

Sir R. Peel said, as the House seemed to be agreed upon the main point, that there should be some inquiry into the conduct of the government of the colonies, he wished it were possible that by common consent they might so modify the terms of reference to the Committee-for he neither liked the original motion nor the amendment-as to effect an inquiry, not into the conduct of any Colonial Secretary, but calmly and dis

ssionately into the system of co

lonial government, with a view of ascertaining whether some change might not be made in that system that would give general satisfaction. To any modification of our system of commercial policy he should be decidedly opposed. The right honourable Baronet then entered at some length into the history of the rebellion in Ceylon, the general tone of his observations upon the conduct of the local authorities being one of censure, especially with reference to their treatment of the Buddhist priests. The execution of a priest in his sacerdotal dress, thereby stigmatizing and insulting the whole class, and the flogging of the pseudo-King of Candy before he was transported, he observed, converted regret into indignation. Giving Lord Torrington credit for vigour and resolution in putting down the rebellion, he thought that nobleman might have abstained from acts calculated not to deter from crime but to alienate the minds of the native population.

Lord John Russell, prefacing his observations by a remark upon the personal bitterness betrayed by Mr. Baillie, censured the injustice and partiality of his attack upon Lord Torrington, and complained that, having suppressed the truth in his own speech, he had closed it with a most unusual charge against Lord Grey, founded merely upon the report of a speech in the House of Lords. regard to the insurrection in Ceylon, he believed that the account given by Lord Torrington, confirmed by the authorities, was the true account of its origin, and, looking at former rebellions long protracted in that island, he thought the country was indebted to his Lordship for its speedy and com

With

plete suppression. The noble Lord avowed that he was not a competent judge of the punishments afterwards inflicted, but he presumed they were deemed necessary; and as to the two instances referred to by Sir R. Peel, he declared (amidst considerable cheering) that he declined to give any opinion at all. The line, however, between tolerating and encouraging superstition was not always very distinct to the local governments in the East. The noble Lord dismissed, in a few words, the charges preferred against the Government in respect to Guiana; he vindicated the care and impartiality evinced by Lord Grey in his selection of colonial governors, without reference to party, and complained that Mr. Baillie had nevertheless chosen to make this motion the occasion of hardly anything else than a bitter personal attack upon the Colonial Secretary.

Mr. Disraeli called the attention of the House to the terms of Mr. Baillie's motion, which pointed to measures for the better administration and government" of the two colonies. Nothing was further from his thoughts than that the inquiry should touch upon any commercial relations, or any fiscal questions connected with commerce. The amendment of Mr. Ricardo, therefore, was a piece of strategy, which had afforded Mr. Hawes an opportunity to tack to the motion a condition which he knew would not be accepted, and which it would not be creditable to the House to accept. After some playful remarks upon the qualifications of Lord Torrington, as whimsically described by Mr. Hawes, Mr. Disraeli concluded by vindicating the motives of Mr. Baillie in bringing forward this subject.

Mr. Labouchere thought it would not be difficult to frame a motion for a Committee that should not, on the one hand, send out an impression to the colonies that there was an intention to make the Committee a vehicle of free-trade discussions, nor on the other deprive the colonies of the benefit of inquiry; he therefore proposed to omit the words, "to inquire into the grievances complained of," so that the Committee would have to inquire and report as to measures for the better administration and government of the two Crown colonies.

Mr. Osborne protested against the subject of free trade being employed to hoodwink the House. The object of the inquiry ought to be to examine into a colonial system which sat like an incubus upon the energies of the colonies.

A discussion of some length and perplexity then took place, several Members proposing changes in the phraseology of the motion; at length, Mr. Ricardo having withdrawn his amendment, the motion for a Committee was agreed to in terms not differing substantially from those of the original motion.

The Committee appointed in pursuance of this determination of the House was actively engaged for the principal part of the session in the inquiries thus delegated to them. It was not, however, found practicable to bring their labours to a close before the prorogation of Parliament, but a great deal of evidence having been taken, and the inquiry, so far as related to Guiana, pretty well completed, Mr. Hume, just before the close of the session, gave notice of a motion intended to elicit from the House an expression of its opinion touching the case of that colony. On

the 24th of July the honourable Member proposed a resolution in the following terms:

"That it appears by the evidence taken before the Select Committee on British Guiana, that that Government has been carried on for the last ten years in opposition to the expressed views and opinions of the elective members of the Colonial Legislature; and that the supplies are now stopped in the colony by continued opposition, to the great injury of the colony. That this House is of opinion that the time has arrived when the public expenditure of the colony should be reduced, as desired by the colonists; and also for the establishment of a responsible local government, which should have full power to decide on the extent and nature of their establishments, and to provide the means for paying the same."

[ocr errors]

In support of his motion, Mr. Hume recapitulated the main features of the controversy between the Colonial Office and the colony of British Guiana: the consent of the latter to a civil list in 1841, upon condition of obtaining an immigrant ordinance and a vagrant law-neither of which were passed till 1844; the re-grant of the civil list in 1844, upon the understanding which was violated in 1846 by the passing of the Sugar Act; the attempts at economy made by the impoverished colony, and unfeelingly resisted by Lord Grey on the ground of a compact which the Colonial Office itself had never adhered to; and the subsequent arbitrary and illegal proceedings of Governor Light, acting under the directions of the Colonial Office; in consequence of which the supplies had been topped for a year, and the colony

had been brought, in the language of Governor Light himself, to a state of utter ruin. Mr. Hume asked why British Guiana should not be possessed, as Canada was, of officers who had the means of ascertaining on the spot what were the capabilities and wants of the colony, and who were enabled to minister to those wants as occasion might render necessary.

He

Mr. Henry Baillie seconded and supported the motion. observed that Sir Henry Light, who was described by the functionaries of the Colonial Office as a governor of extraordinary abilities, and who had had the Order of the Bath conferred on him in the most flattering terms, himself informed the Committee, that for the ten years during which he administered the affairs of British Guiana, he governed them contrary to the views of all the elected members of the Legislature, and he observed that such had been the practice for the last twenty years. By the constitution of the colony, the Combined Court had the power to regulate the official affairs of the colony; but that power had been set aside by the Governor. It was against the powers exercised by the present and former Governors that the inhabitants had been contending; and unless they were disposed to submit to the tender mercies of the Colonial Office, there was every reason to apprehend that they would be handed over to the black population, among whom crimes of all descriptions had been greatly upon the increase.

Mr. Hawes vindicated the conduct of the Colonial Office. In 1844 the civil list was bargained and fixed till 1854, and could not be reduced without breach of faith

to old public servants: the revision of new appointments had been conceded. The civil list was only 27,000l. a year; while the general revenue was 227,000l. a year; over which the Combined Court had never attempted to exercise their unquestioned control for any purpose of retrenchment: and the revenue had increased, instead of diminishing, as was anticipated when the retrenchment was proposed. Governor Barkly had introduced a measure to modify the constitution of the Court of Policy; a mere oligarchical body, having very little influence in the colony. The constituency at present did not amount to more than 700 or 800. Under the new measure, it would be increased to 3000 or 4000. It was not to be supposed that in extending the franchise so greatly, the object of the Governor was to obtain representatives who would agree to his civil list. On the contrary, it was evident from the conduct of the Governor, that, in his judgment, the opinions of the colony at large were not in accordance with those of the Court of Policy.

Mr. Stuart moved the adjournment of the debate, which was negatived by 94 to 17; and the original motion was negatived without a division.

a measure intended to provide compensation to parties whose property had been destroyed during the rebellion in 1837-8. The Tory party in Canada, perceiving or apprehending that the effect of this Bill would be to afford compensation at the cost of the community to some persons whom they regarded as the guilty authors or abettors of the insurrection, opposed the enactment of it with all their power. The Bill, however, notwithstanding all their efforts, having received the concurrence of the majority of the Assembly, their hopes were then directed to the Governor-General, who, as they thought, might not improbably withhold his sanction, and prevent the obnoxious measure from becoming law. In this anticipation, however, they were disappointed. Lord Elgin, having determined to give his assent to the Bill, proceeded for that purpose to the Parliament House, where his arrival at the time was somewhat unexpected. On his return he was pelted by the populace; the streets were filled by a riotous mob; the Parliament House was attacked and burnt down; the Ministers were hustled, and the houses of some of them were sacked. Throughout the whole province, the greatest excitement was reported to prevail, and a sentiment of alienation from the Imperial Government to be gaining ground, not only in the minds of the populace, but even among the educated and more influential classes. This alarming demonstration produced a strong sensation in England when the news arrived.

Early in the month of May the public were startled by the arrival of intelligence from Canada of a very serious character. It appeared that riots, attended with considerable loss of property and menacing demonstrations towards Her Majesty's representative, had broken out at Montreal. The immediate occasion of the ebullition The subject was immediately was the assent given by the Go- mooted in both Houses of Parliavernor-General, Lord Elgin, to the ment. In the House of Lords, Rebellion Losses Indemnity Bill, Lord Stanley called the attention

« ZurückWeiter »