cretion on this occasion; and I stated my reasons for so thinking. That was the full amount of what I stated; and I guarded myself over and over again in stating that it was a power which I thought had not been exercised with discretion. I stated my reasons for thinking so, with no desire to give offence at all. I had no intention to offend any body. I certainly thought, as my silence on the former day had been considered as reflecting a censure on the Governor-General, which was far from expressing what I felt-and moreover, as, when there is any doubt of that description, it is incumbent on the person who addresses the House for Her Majesty's Government to protect the absent public servant who is engaged in the performance of his duties-in my opinion, I say, it was my duty to protect him from the great authority who had so far censured him as to recall him from the performance of the duties of his office." The Duke also said, that if Parliament thought proper to call for the reasons stated by the Court of Directors for adopting this measure of recalling the noble Lord, Parliament ought to have those reasons, as far as they could be communicated without injury to the public interest.

The Marquess of Normanby said he had not charged the Duke of Wellington with intending to bring forward any measure detrimental to the interests of the East India Company.

The Marquess of Clanricarde approved of Sir Henry Hardinge's appointment, but he could not at all jump to the conclusion to which Lord Brougham had come in his usual rapid manner, and he firmly relied on the new Governor taking

a course materially different from that of his predecessor.

In answer to a further question from Lord Normanby, the Earl of Ripon stated that some papers relating to Scinde had been communicated to the Court of Directors, but not those that went through the Secret Committee; all the papers relating to Gwalior had been communicated.

Lord Colchester and the Earl of Winchelsea regretted that the papers had not been produced in vindication of Lord Ellenborough.

66

Lord Campbell observed, that the course taken by Government had given universal dissatisfaction; if they thought it necessary to repudiate the recall of Lord Ellenborough they might simply have said, "It is not our act," without denouncing it as the greatest indiscretion." What would have been said if the Government had recalled him, and the Directors had charged the Government with gross indiscretion? He did not believe that Sir H. Hardinge would be guilty of any Somnauth proclamation; and he thought that in making that appointment the Directors had been guilty of rather a felicitous indiscretion; he might say with Hamlet,

"Indiscretion sometimes serves us well When our deep plots do fail." The discussion here dropped. An attempt to discover the specific grounds on which the removal of the Governor-General had taken place was afterwards made by Mr. Hume, who on the 7th of May moved for copies of the corre spondence between the Court of Directors and Her Majesty's Government respecting the recall of Lord Ellenborough from India :He

alluded to the anomalous method of governing India partly

by the Court of Directors, who may appoint and recall Governors. In 1833, Mr. Charles Grant, then President of the Board of Control, had hinted at taking away that power of recall; but the step was strongly opposed by the Directors, and by Mr. Tucker, who feared that the Directors would then "only be come a screen between the British Government and the British people;" and Mr. Charles Grant gave up the point. Out of the twen ty-four existing Directors, eighteen were supporters of Government: it could therefore have been no ordinary reasons which made them unanimous in recalling Lord Ellenborough; and judging by what had fallen from Mr. Hogg and Mr. Astell, he believed that the Directors wished the information to be produced to the House. He asked for information, because an important Minister of the Crown, in another place, had pronounced this to be "the indiscreetest exercise of power he had ever known.' The cause of that accusation should be explained and cleared up.

Sir R. Peel gave the motion his most decided opposition. The same considerations of justice which had induced Mr. Macaulay to postpone his motion on the subject of Gwalior would operate with the House to postpone its judgment on Lord Ellenborough in his absence: and therefore, even if Mr. Hume got the papers he required, he could not make much advance towards an inquiry. But he resisted the motion on the ground of the interest of India and the maintenance of British power. No doubt, the East India Company had recalled Lord Ellenborough, and Government had dissented from that recall. They thought that there was nothing in

Lord Ellenborough's conduct that made it wise or just towards him for him to be recalled. Lord Ellenborough's conduct met with their approbation. If they contrasted the present state of India with that in which he found it-seeing the devotion with which he had performed every duty, and looking at his conduct throughout his administration, and at the results of his policy, the Ministers of the Crown thought that nothing had passed which, in their opinion, should diminish the confidence which they had placed in him originally. But, however, the Court of Directors, having full power, took a different view of this subject, and exercised their power of recall. The question then arose, what was to be done with respect to the appointment of a new Governor-General? Ministers might have thrown the responsibility on the Court of Directors; but they thought it best to continue to act in friendly concert. "I had interviews with the Chairman and Deputy-Chairman of the Court of Directors, and I gave it as my opinion that all considerations connected with past differences should be merged in the deliberation of this question, What is best to be done in the present crisis?' I said, 'You have appealed to Her Majesty's Government to assist you in the appointment of a successor; on the part of the Government, I am willing to concert with you for that purpose; but I can suggest no one on the part of the Government unless I can have the assurance that he will have the confidence of the Court of Directors, and that it is probable that the line of policy which he will pursue will be approved. I named to the

much reluctance and great pain. He had only to add, that, if the Court of Directors were to remain subject to the imputation of having acted indiscreetly, he decidedly would remain subject to that charge rather than consent to the production of papers, the publicity of which might be injurious to the public interest, which he considered to be the present state of the case.

Mr. Macaulay advised Mr. Hume not to press his motion; though he had as yet heard no argument why it should not be made on a future occasion, after Lord Ellenborough's return. The Directors were charged with the greatest indiscretion known in history an exercise of power compared to which the sending forth the Walcheren expedition was trifling the Bill imposing pains and penalties on the Queen a slight indiscretion; and that was a charge which ought not to be made except to be substantiated. After Lord Ellenborough's return, therefore, the papers must be granted, unless the House meant to abdicate all control over Government, and unless Ministerial responsibility were to become a mere name. He gave credit to the skill with which Sir Robert Peel had managed the subject, flying away as fast as possible from the past to the future; but since the House was to be left in doubt for months to come-since a menace had been held out that the Directors were to be deprived of a power which they had abused-he felt bound to stand up for their power as one which they ought to retain, and which should not be taken from them without a long and an obstinate struggle. The very com

position of the Court of Directors ought to prevent a precipitate judgment. "I know that there is to be found in that Court one gentleman, for example, who himself acted as Governor-General of India for some time. I know that there are persons to be found there of the highest distinction, whether in war or diplomacy, or any other branch of the public service. I believe most firmly,and I believe that no person who is acquainted with India will dispute what I am about to say,-that there are at least ten gentlemen in that Court, the least informed of whom is better acquainted with, and is better informed upon India, than (I say it without any disrespect to them) the whole of the Treasury bench opposite. Those gentlemen are unanimous and can it be said that they are not informed upon the subject on which they sat in judgment? It has been said-it has been ignorantly said that they see nothing of what goes out to India; that they are mere organs of conveyance. The fact is not so: there is not one paper in two hundred goes to India which does not pass under the survey of the Court of Directors. The few papers that issue from the Secret Department pass under the eyes of three of the Directors; and we know that the Directors were unanimous."

Mr. Mangles and Lord John Russell viewed the production of the papers much in the same light with Mr. Macaulay.

Mr. Roebuck asked, whether the Court of Directors removed Lord Ellenborough for his public or his private conduct; whether there had been any compromise or agreement between Government and the Directors; and

whether they, having removed Lord Ellenborough from some private pique or personal feeling, would allow his successor to govern the country after the policy of his predecessor?

Sir R. Peel answered that there had been no compromise or agreement of the kind: he added, "My belief is, that as regards the principles which will govern his conduct, Sir Henry Hardinge will decide for himself; and that they will be the principles of justice and moderation I have every confidence."

Mr. Hume persisting to devide the House, the motion was negatived by 197 to 21.

On the 30th of May a discussion was raised in the House of Commons affecting the administration of another important dependency of the British Crown. Mr. Roebuck took the opportunity of a motion to bring up the Report of a Committee of Supply to call the attention of the House to the subject of the Government of Canada. He said, it seemed to have been thought, that when they made the country no longer French they were making it English but the truth washere was the rock on which they were in danger of splitting-they were going near to make it American-to give it a sympathy with the democracy of the United States. Mr. Roebuck then took a review of the recent history of the Canadas. He charged the late Lord Sydenham with having endeavoured unduly to influence the elections; upon which topic he went into much detail, imputing fraud, violence, and corruption. Then came Sir C. Bagot, who declared that he would govern by a Ministry responsible to VOL. LXXXVI.

66

the colonists, and selected his Executive Council accordingly. was sometimes said that the intervening power of the Home Government prevented any complete responsibility of the Canadian Ministry to the Canadian people. That might be true upon Imperial questions, but not upon questions merely Canadian, that is, merely internal. The Canadian people welcomed the policy of Sir C. Bagot: it was a touching thing to see how a whole population forgot all they had suffered, and poured forth their feelings of grateful adherence. The House ought to hear what the present Colonial Secretary, Lord Stanley, meant by responsible Government." The settler in Canada was divided by a river from the United States, where all professional, all political courses were open to him. What was that settler to understand as to his position in his own colony? The new Governor, Sir C. Metcalfe, had extinguished all hope in this respect. He had acted in direct opposition to public opinion there; his executive officers had consequently resigned; and the colony had remained ever since without an Administration. "After another session, your existing Assembly would expire, and a new one would be elected, with a majority against you still larger than in the present; and that Assembly, being the united representation of the two colonies, would be too strong for you to deal with. There was no way of trimming; you would have your choice only between Sir C. Metcalfe on the one hand, and a really responsible Government on the other." He complained that private bills, as in the instance of the Coloniza[E]