HOUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 12TH, 1802. the Greeks conquered it, became nothing in Dr. LAURENCE rose and said, that, having their own country. Wherever the rights of given way for some days past to public and others had been invaded, he should not hesiprivate business, he was happy to find himself tate to condemn that invasion. The authority at length at liberty to make the motion ot of this country was substituted for that of the which he had given notice. Nothing had Great Mogul. He hoped that when he was passed on any other day, or on this (notwith-forced to give an opinion on that substitution, standing the flattering picture that had been he should give a sincere and honest opinion, given of the state of public credit in the sister but till called upon he should give no opinion. Kingdom), that could induce him to abandon There was a question to come shortly before the opinion he entertained, that the treaty of the House, in the discussion of which this matpeace lately signed was, in many respects, most ter might be somewhat elucidated; for the prefatal to the interest of the country. Let any sent, he should only disclaim the necessity of person consider of what importance to this being the advocate of every thing that this country were its possessions in the East; and country might have chosen to do. It was now let him at the same time consider how the se- necessary to see what rights had been asserted, curity and well-being of these possessions were though for his part he acknowledged no rights; endangered by the non-renewal of the treaties to see what claims had been set up by France by which they were heretofore protected. Let and Holland, and how those claims had been it be considered what advantages were given urged; to see what the triumphant treaty of to the enemy by this neglect, or omission, or 1763 had done for the adjustment of these by whatever other name it was to be called; claims. First, as to what related to Coroman. advantages which the enemy himself already del: France, in that treaty, renounced all the exaggerated. He would content himself with acquisitions she had made on the coast of Coroa confined and limited consideration of the mandel and Orissa since 1749. It had been dangers to which our possessions in the East said, that papers were unnecessary in debating were exposed, though perhaps the whole were a subject like this, for that history was suf involved. He moved for information, not so ficient. With pleasure and delight he appealed much for himself as for the House; he re to a history so honourable as that of the period quired explanation, that the House might acof which he now spoke. We were then uncept it where it should appear satisfactory; assuming merchants, trading to the East, but and he entered into discussion, that the facts perhaps more firmly established than now, might be fairly ascertained; so that when the when the people of the country were disgusted House should come to debate on another day with our ambitious encroachments. We were the most extensive and important subject that then satisfied with a neutrality; but the French, had ever been before it, Gentlemen might not whose power was become more dangerous as be involved in assertions, contradictions, and it was more extended, were not so moderate. errors. If, in his attempt to explain this sub- Dupleix, the first European governor who ject to the House, he should fall short, he was assumed the style of an eastern prince, invaded happy that there were persons present, who, our rights, and roused exertions which sucfrom the share that they had taken in the trans- ceeded in repelling him. In Bengal, at the actions of India, were fully adequate to make same period, in consequence of a similar agup any deficiency on his part. He saw a Noble gression, we had made a like exertion to vinLord (Hawkesbury) smile; but if he had any dicate ourselves, and by that exertion had conception of the magnitude of the interests acquired power. The French had acquired which he had bartered away, he must be satisfied some power in Coromandel, and the five that such gaiety but ill became him. The treaties northern circars, of which we afterwards between this country, and France, and Hol- obtained a grant from the Mogul. By this land, relative to India, were few and short; grant our title was superior to theirs. They but as the countries to which they related were had, by subsequent treaties, formally reso distant, it was hardly possible that Gentle-nounced their claim; but, by the present men could be so clear as to the necessity and treaty, that renunciation was done away, and effect of their particular provisions, as of those a door opened for future contention. He now of the treaties affecting the contiguous councame to Bengal. The French King had contries of Europe. When we were but simple sented to keep no troops, and to erect no formerchants trading to the East, as all the natifications on that coast; there was now notions of Europe had been previous to the con- thing to hinder the French from doing so. quests made by this country, a barren rock on There was no natural reason why they should the coast of Newfoundland was held to be an not fortify themselves, and endeavour to renobject of more importance then, than the set- der their establishments as secure as possible. tlement of Madras, the most valuable of that It was true, the sovereign of the country part of India where it was situated. From might object if these fortifications were carried simple merchants we had advanced to the ex- to any improper length-( A cry of Hear! hear! ercise of a delegated authority under the peo- from the ministerial bench);-but would the atple of the country; in time our authority be-tempt to fortify be deemed a sufficient cause came paramount; and a people which was for war? There was no prohibition from forfound capable of instructing the Greeks, when tifying in the present treaty. By former trea

ties the French had acknowledged Mohammed Ali as sovereign of the Carnatic, and consequently had subscribed to our authority; possibly even from that family some persons might now be found whose title could be set up in opposition to ours. The stipulation in 1763, that no fortifications should be erected on the coast of Bengal, was so scrupulously adhered to in the negotiation of 1783, that when a stipulation was made for a ditch to carry off the water from the fort of Chandernagore, a jealousy arose; and it was not without a critical explanation, and a full security that nothing further would be attempted, that permission was given; and the delay arising from the arrangement of this matter was the excuse stated by the Secretary of State for not bringing the definitive treaty to a more speedy conclusion. The jurisdiction of the factories may, on the ground of application for the surrender of persons taking refuge in them, again produce contention. The convention of 1787 granted a general exemption to all factories, and a general jurisdiction over all persons within certain limits. The omission of any regula-pany on certain stipulations and fixed prices, tion to this effect in the present treaty, might renew the ancient jealousies. Independent of this, there were many claims and pretensions arising out of the trade itself. The French, even when they were admitted to trade under our protection, refused to allow us to regulate their trade, and insisted on carrying it on in their own way; so that no advantage could be derived from it to the revenue of the Company, which, when its collection was attempted to be enforced, they often resisted with force. A perpetual correspondence was carried on, on the subject of these aggressions; so copious, and filled with facts so numerous, that a whole session would not be fit for the detail. The first objection to the treaty was in 1765, when Chandernagore was given up. Mr. Law objected against the strict enforcement of the treaty, and required permission to make lodgments for the protection of those engaged in the trade, which, together with his other demands, was made the subject of a letter from Lord Clive. The complaints of foreigners would grow louder, unless the Company entered into an agreement to supply them with cargoes to a certain amount, out of the private trade of its servants. When Mr. Francis proposed to add a paragraph to the dispatches, saying that the Nabob of Arcot was a legal sovereign, Mr. Hastings was unwilling to do so. The Dutch and Danes applied to this country as the sovereign power, and, under the name of a protection, were granted an indulgence; but they soon refused to submit to the payment of the duties, and we were compelled to exact them by force; and so far did their contumacy extend, that in time of scarcity they exported corn, which they knew their colours would protect, though a general embargo was laid. Nor could it be said that the knowledge of the embarrassment

of this country, in consequence of the American war, was the cause of this spirit of resistance; for it manifested itself in 1775, when the disturbances in America had only commenced, and the knowledge of them could not yet have reached India. By the treaty of 1783, his Britannic Majesty is to take such means as are in his power (not even then avowing the direct sovereignty) to procure certain facilities for the French trade: but two years had not elapsed when disputes arose which soon came to a question of force, and ended in the firing of a vessel; a transaction which Sir John Macpherson thought necessary to make the subject of a particular negotiation. Dr. Laurence then adverted to the treaty of 1787, which caused a board of justice to be holden, and in which the French brought forward their claims to the trade in India, particularly in the articles of salt, saltpetre, and opium, and which claims were only settled by a convention entered into with the Govern ment of this country, in which they were allowed to traffic with our East India Com

in which it had been contended that our East India Company sustained a loss, but which he asserted was only a moderated gain. He then begged to call the attention of the House to the Dutch claims. By the definitive treaty in 1784, their carrying trade was allowed, even to that of naval stores, and the freedom of navigation in the Indian seas. At all times the Dutch were jealous of our obtaining any settlement between our possessions in India and China, which might enable us to send the commodities of Bengal to that vast empire, instead of carrying on our trade with it through the medium of dollars and bullion from England. They were then jealous, he said, even in those periods when they were in alliance and connexion with us: by the alliance formed between France and Holland in 1795, they had become alienated from this country, and might now bring forward claims which before they would not have thought of. They had now become closely connected with that nation, which did not like any other logic than the ultima ratio regum, which was called the last reason of kings, but was now become the first of the republic; and if these claims should be advanced, we should have not only France to contend with, but Holland also, with a recruited navy. He then adverted to the Cape of Good Hope, which he stated to be of essential consequence to this country, both in time of peace and war. It might be urged, he said, in defence of the non-revival of former treaties, that we did not give up our rights, but were prepared to defend them to the utmost. But, though they had not been revived generally, it was surely worth while to revive specifically that part which protected our commerce in the East Indies. "Thus," said he, " I have stated what was stipulated in our favour by former treaties, and is now relinquished, with

out giving my opinion whether the concession was voluntary, or extorted by force. It is not, however, in India, but here, that these affairs must be settled either by negotiation or force. We must now say, that in proportion to the magnitude of the concessions we have made, we are prepared to defend what remains to the last." He concluded by moving, "That "there be laid before this House an account "of the acquisitions made, or pretended to "be made, by his Most Christian Majesty on "the coast of Coromandel and Orissa, between "the years 1748 and 1763."

as we may please, or think advisable, yet with regard to European powers, to them we say freely and distinctly, We have gained this country by our arms, and by our arms we will keep it." For upon all the grounds which he had already stated, it was manifest that the provinces of Bengal, Bahar, Orissa, &c. had come to Great Britain by conquest, as much as any country ever came into the hands of another; and from the period when it became so under the government of Lord Clive to the present day, the French never had, directly or indirectly, from the treaty of 1763, any right whatever to interfere with the provinces of Bengal, Bahar, and Orissa, &c.; but that they were by right of conquest subject to the sointents and purposes; which sovereignty was to be exercised through the medium of the India Company, and through the different organs established for the preservation of our provinces, as much as any other part of his Majesty's dominions. He need not dwell upon these points; the facts were clear and well authenticated in the history of those dominions; and therefore he laid it down as a clear and indisputable proposition, that what we had gained thus by conquest, was to be considered with reference to any other European power, as totally subject to our sovereignty, without any interference of theirs, that we were actually the sovereigns of India, and no European power had any right whatever to dispute our title to this power, which we possess de facto. Such was the state of the British power in India; the situation of France was extremely different, without one inch of territory, except what they might claim by the definitive treaty under consideration. He would beg the House to pause for a moment, and then ask itself this question, Was there a man within hearing of his voice who had any doubt whatever as to these facts at this moment? Certainly none.-Was there any one man within hearing of his voice who thought, that if these facts, and the right arising out of them, were to be called in question, this country would not go the length of risking its last stake to support those rights, and refuse giving up one iota of them? He had no reason to be satisfied in any point of curiosity, by asking why it was expedient in the present moment to avoid references to ancient treaties in the present definitive treaty of peace. It was a subject upon which he did not think it necessary to dwell at present; it was sufficient for him to say, that there was no diminution thereby of our power in India, no foundation whatever for any other to dispute our sovereignty there, nor any thing which entitled others to contest with us the rights upon which that sovereignty was founded. Nor was that all: he would go farther, and say, he mistook greatly if any doubt was now entertained, that, with regard to Great Britain, her sovereignty in India stood at that moment upon a better footing than if

Mr. DUNDAS said, that, whether our situation was to be decided by negotiation or by the sword, in India or elsewhere, as the Learn-vereignty of the King of Great Britain to all ed Gentleman had stated, he would dare say, that there was no difference of opinion between them upon this point, namely, that it was essential to the interests of this country, whereever our claims were to be supported, and where our rights were clear and indisputable, not to do any thing ourselves to bring these rights into doubt. He stated it as a general maxim, on which he apprehended there was no difference of opinion in that House or elsewhere; and yet, notwithstanding no doubt was entertained of the truth of this general maxim, he was afraid that, if motions like these were persevered in, much difference of opinion would arise upon the application of that principle; his proposition was such as he held to be clear as the sun at noon-day, namely, that no doubt could be entertained on the relative situation of this country and of France in India. No doubt had been expressed upon that subject till lately in that House, nor would any doubt be entertained elsewhere, but by bringing forward speculations of our own in that House, and making that doubtful in debate which was long acknowledged to be clear in principle. He then entered into an historical detail of the rise and progress of the British power in India, the contests which had taken place from the earliest periods, and the share taken therein by the French, in order to oppose our progress in India, down to the period in which Lord Clive had so distinguished himself; to whom, for his valour as a soldier, and wisdom as a statesman, he paid the highest compliments; the result of whose measures he stated to have consummated the British power in India, and settled our sovereignty there by right of conquest, which right he reconciled to the inhabitants by the wise respect he paid to their prejudices. Having gone through a history of these events, and having given a compendious account of the progress of the Mogul empire, and of its revolutions for eight centuries, he proceeded to state the conclusion which he drew from all these premises; which conclusion was this, "That though we may feel it just and expedient to make such allowances to the prejudices of the inhabitants, and to make such regulations in our territories

|

saying, it was the wisdom of this country, in the same proportion, to wait until those claims were made which Gentlemen spoke of with so much apprehension, and in the mean time to stand upon our right, our paramount right of sovereignty. What course the French would

the former treaties had been renewed by it. | French should be disposed to renew the By the treaty of 1783, which was unquestion- pretensions of 1783, or any other period, ably the very worst treaty this country ever they would be prevented from so doing by a entered into on the subject of Indian affairs, few scraps of paper being laid on the table of it was the business of his Majesty's govern- that House, a species of artillery that would not ment, and a very laborious one it was, in the be equal to the operation of a single field-piece for convention of 1787, to do away the evil crea- balf a minute? But the Learned Gentleman ted by the treaty of 1783. By that of 1783, would say, that the treaty of 1783 would estaour sovereignty in India was rendered dis- blish the disposition of the French at that time putable; by the convention of 1787, our so- to dispute our sovereignty in India; it would, vereignty was re-established. Having expati- indeed, establish that which there was no need of ated at considerable length upon the merits of establishing, because the thing was well known. the convention of 1787, and the demerits of The French did on that occasion, as they would the treaty of 1783, he proceeded to say, that, do on every other occasion, provided they had the treaty now upon the table renewed thought they could succeed in the attempt any former treaty, it would have been impos- namely, endeavour to diminish the greatness sible to refer to the convention of 1787, with- of this country, and enlarge their own; but, out also renewing the contests which were in proportion as they were disposed to be hosbrought forward in 1783. It would have been tile to our interest, or querulous while we enimpossible to have introduced the one, with-joyed our advantages, he had no difficulty in out also calling for an explanation of the other; and therefore the affairs of that country were much better, considering all the circumstances of the relative situation of this country and of France, in suffering all treaties whatever to be passed over in silence. We might, perhaps, by renewing some of the declarations and ad-take to enlarge their commercial interest in missions of our sovereignty in India, as settled India, was not for us to anticipate. It was by the convention of 1787, have employed enough for us, that if they endeavoured to do some antidote against the evil of which we had so by the exertions of individuals, or othertoo much reason to complain; but it was wise, they could never do so without being manifest to him that we could not have such liable to be interrupted by this country. If antidote without having also a certain portion they were to try to erect commercial factories, of the poison, by the renewal of any discus- or to do any thing that interfered with our sosion whatever upon the subject of treaties; vereignty in India, we should be fully warand therefore he had no difficulty whatever in ranted, and, what was better, we were in possaying, that upon a review of the whole con- session of means, to resist such an attempt. dition of our affairs, considered with relation But those means would not be increased by a to those of France, we were infinitely better in few papers being laid before the House: such passing the subject over in silence, than we should documents would not help us to any argihave been in endeavouring to renew any of them. ments which we had not already, for the proHe confessed, he said, that when the rumour priety of resisting such attempts; thank God reached him, that the provisions of the con- we had never wanted arguments to resist the vention of 1787 were left out of the present encroachments of the French on our sovereign treaty, he shrunk under an apprehension that power in India, nor had we wanted strength our power in India would be destroyed; and for that purpose. From all this it was perhe was the more alarmed when he heard it fectly clear, that before the French could exsaid, that this was brought about in conse-ercise any trade in India, they must come to quence of the views of France to undermine, and finally to overturn, our sovereignty in India. This led him to turn the subject very seriously in his mind, and to look at all the ancient documents, to consider the whole matter deliberately; and the result was, that it was infinitely better for us to have no reference whatever to any treaty, as he had already stated. But the Learned Gentleman asked, if the House could really think that we could be secure in India against the ambitious claims of France, as they had appeared in 1783, and which were done away in 1787? Did he really think we were safe now, without having renewed, by the present treaty, the provisions of the convention of 1787? This he would answer, by putting to the Learned Gentleman this question: Did he really think, that in the

us in the character of suppliants; for nothing that they had yet obtained would enable them to carry on trade in India without our leave. He had stated the difference between the treaty of 1783 and the convention of 1787, already. He had to observe, that we were not now in a situation similar to that in which we stood in 1787. There was now no treaty in existence between us and France, nor any regulation on the subject of India, except the single clause in the convention now upon the table of the House. And with regard to the trade of France in India, if any they were to have, they could have it only through the indulgence of the British power in India; and therefore he said again, we were better off as the case stood upon the present treaty of peace, than if we had renewed any of the former treaties. What

ever matter of complaint was to be urged, or wards the trade of this country, and was enrather of lamentation, upon this subject, it deavouring to prevail on Holland, Spain, and could only be, that his Majesty's government other countries to do all they could to disdid not settle the whole of the provisions of all courage our trade, and to prohibit some of it former treaties, by taking notice of them all, in their dominions, he would ask, Are they and finally adjusting them all. This, however so? And if they be, is this the precise period in the abstract it might appear desirable, ought in which you would make them a voluntary not to have been attempted in the present gift of commerce in India, when you are case, because it would have been impossible doubtful in what relation they choose to to accomplish it, without protracting the ne- stand with you in regard to other commercial gotiation to a length that would have been in- connexions? "I own,' ," said he, "this is a consistent with the interests of the states of subject on which I feel deeply; I have it much Europe. The articles in all these treaties must at heart; and when I say that, I am sure there have been all gone over, if any of them were is not one man in this House who would feel noticed; in the course of which a thousand more sorrow than I should, if I conceived it explanations would become necessary, and possible for you to surrender any one of the which might have made the negotiation in rights of which I have been speaking. At the many respects appear to some, idle and ridicu- same time that I feel these reasons I have been Ius. But there were other considerations stating, I desire not to be misrepresented; I which, he hoped, would operate on the con- am one of the last men in the world (my conduct of those who may have the future direc- duct, I think, proves it) who would wish to tion of the affairs of India; and they related plead for the system of this country narrowto other powers, as well as to the French and ing the trade of foreigners in India: ever since ourselves in India; we were not to consider | I thought I understood any thing of the affairs merely our own concerns and those of France in India. He stated it as a solid ground of consideration for the East India Company, to regulate, not only the trade of the French, but to look to the regulation of other subjects, to have an eye upon other commercial connexions. But it might be said, Why not stipulate these things in negotiation, and finally determine them by treaty? To which he would answer, It is much better as it is, for at present we have the sovereignty of India; and he would ask, if it appeared to any Member of that House to be a wise course to exclude the Government of this country from all discretionary power to regulate the trade of India? If the French, or any other power, should claim the right of carrying their goods up the Ganges, or to do any other act, was it not sufficient that we had the power to prevent them? The French trade in India, the Dutch trade in India, and the trade of other powers in India, might go hand in hand, so that it was not detrimental to us; but if detrimental to us, we had the power to stop it, and that was enough for our present purpose at least. He wanted this subject to be considered upon a large and comprehensive scale, and not confined merely to ourselves and France. He did not mean to pretend, or to insinuate, that he was in possession of the reasons which actuated his Majesty's servants upon this occasion, when they came to the conclusion which was now before the public; but he felt himself entitled to state, that if they had done that which some Gentlemen blamed them for not doing, they would have put it out of their own power to do their country much service, which they will now be enabled to render by consulting those who are best qualified to advise them, and that more especially on the affairs of India. But when he heard it said that France was hostile in its disposition to

of India, my maxim has been to enlarge that trade; and that we might as well attempt to prohibit any foreigners from buying our manufactures of Yorkshire or of Birmingham, or any other manufacture of this country, as prohibit foreigners from trading with our territories in India. But I should guard against misconception of this opinion of mine. When I say we should not prevent the French, or any other nation, from trading with our ter ritorial provinces in India, I mean to say, that I am not afraid of them as merchants; I am not unwilling to give them a boon as merchants, with a chance of reciprocity, and I ask no more; but I think I am not going too far, when I desire this country to guard against that which I know the French have endeavoured to make, and will endeavour to make, if they see any probability of its success; I mean an encroachment on your sovereignty in India. This they have done; and if an opportunity offers, this they will do under the pretence of pursuing trade. They will ask you civilly, for in no other way can they ask it, to allow them to do a number of things for the purpose of carrying on trade, when their object will be to encroach upon your sovereignty. It was in this way that they formerly endeavoured to encroach upon your sovereignty in 1787, when they told us they could not recover their debts without a certain enlargement of power in India: we resisted that directly; and I hope this will be the conduct of this country in future. The very first article insisted upon by Lord Auckland in 1787 was, that nothing in the most distant degree touching our sovereignty in India would, on any terms or conditions whatever, be assented to on the part of this country. I hope it is not presumptuous in me to say, that I trust his Majesty's Government will adopt the same principle, and stand upon the same ground as we did then; and if we do so,