THE AMEERS OF SCINDE. (Hansard, 23 June 1852)

§ VISCOUNT JOCELYN
^* said, that in rising to move for the papers of which he had given notice, he should venture to ask the permission of the House to trespass upon their attention whilst he brought to their consideration certain facts, to which those papers referred, bearing on the present state and condition of the ex-rulers of Scinde.
He was aware that he might be met by the objection that this question was one that had been considered some years ago, and that the policy that was then brought under the consideration of Parliament had the sanction of the House; but it should be recollected that at that time grave doubts were entertained, by many persons, as to the justice of that policy. Since that period matters and facts had been brought to light bearing strongly upon those acts, which he thought proved that the views that were taken at that time by those who were opposed to the policy of the annexation of Scinde were correct, and that he was justified in again asking Parliament to reconsider the case of those unfortunate princes.
He could have wished that some individual of greater weight than himself had undertaken their cause—some one whose abilities would have insured more ample justice being done to the case of these unfortunate princes; and when he recollected that his right hon. Friend the Member for the University of Oxford (Mr. Gladstone) only a short time since had advocated so powerfully the cause of an oppressed people in a neighbouring country, he felt more than ever his own inadequacy to the task he had undertaken. He had a satisfaction, however, in believing that the ear of the House had never yet been deaf to the claim of justice; and the fact that the persons on whose behalf he pleaded were princes of India—once their faithful allies, now exiles from their native land—afforded no reason why they should be thought undeserving of the sympathy and commiseration of the British House of Commons.
He believed he was justified in asking for those papers on the ground, that as matters of history they should be given to the House. The documents connected with the affairs of Scinde, up to 1842, had been furnished to Parliament, and brought before them the proceedings by which the British Government came into the possession of that territory. Since the year 1842 various transactions of great political importance had taken 1242 place, together with great changes in the internal arrangements of that country; therefore, it seemed most desirable that the documents containing the additional information should also be laid before Parliament. When they considered more especially that an inquiry was going on upstairs in reference to the future government of India, they must feel that these were papers which bore peculiarly upon many points connected with that inquiry, should be furnished to them without delay.
He concurred in an opinion which he had lately read in the work of an hon. and learned Friend of his, a Member of the House—the hon. Member for Sheffield (Mr. Roebuck)—that "to form a just appreciation of the conduct of those who had taken part in the government of mankind, was one of the great purposes for which history was written," and that it was therefore right that the transactions in which they had been engaged should be fully and fairly-laid before the public. With this view, he considered that it was necessary for the due appreciation of the characters of the public men who took part in the transactions in Scinde that the House should be furnished with all the documents having reference to those transactions.
Perhaps the House was not aware that a few weeks since a similar Motion to that which he now made was brought forward by a noble Earl (the Earl of Ellen-borough) in another place; but that noble Earl, in moving for documents, moved only for a portion of the papers for which he (Viscount Jocelyn) now asked. That noble Earl moved for a Report of a Commission appointed in India twelve months since, for the purpose of investigating certain charges of fraud and forgery that were laid against his highness Meer Ali Moorad, Ameer of Upper Scinde—a Commission by which that prince was tried and convicted of the crimes for which he was arraigned; but the noble Earl, though he moved for the papers, stated at the same time his own doubt as to the character for fairness of that Commission. Considering the high position of that noble Earl, his knowledge of Indian matters, and his experience on this question, it seemed to him that anything that had fallen from him was deserving of great weight; and that therefore the House should have before it further documents to enable it to come to a more satisfactory conclusion with regard to the Report of that Commission.
1243 The documents which he thought he was justified in requesting were—first, the Report of Sir George Clerk, late Governor of Bombay, one of the ablest servants of the Indian Government, on whose opinion it was that the Commission was appointed; secondly, the Minutes of the Members of the Government of Bombay, to whom the Report of that Commission was submitted; thirdly, the Minute of the Governor General in Council—the first authority in India—who was bound to see justice done between all persons, and to maintain the honour and dignity of the British name.
He felt that he was justified in asking for those documents, as they all bore on the question at issue. They were not in the secret department, but had been furnished to the Court of Directors, and it was not unusual to give such documents to Parliament on questions of this nature. More than that, he firmly believed in his own mind that those documents, if produced, would do honour to the servants of the British Government in India by whom that investigation was conducted, and demonstrate the impartiality of the tribunal.
He asked for the documents at that moment, because there were means at the disposal of the British Government by which reparation to some extent might be afforded. It might be asked, why not leave the matter to the Governor General of India? In reply, he would say, that he felt confident no person could be found more willing to ameliorate the condition of those unfortunate princes than the noble Marquess at the head of the Government of India; but at the same time it was his conviction that, in a case which had given rise to so much discussion, and concerning which there had been such diversity of opinion, an expression of sympathy on the part of the British House of Commons would aid the Governor General of India in carrying out a just and righteous course of policy.
He would beseech the House to give him a patient hearing, whilst he attempted (but feebly he feared) to plead the cause of men who had now no other person in the House to speak in their behalf. He would recall to the recollection of the House the circumstances which took place on the first acquisition of Scinde; and he needed not to go farther back than the year 1838. That was the year, it will be recollected, which gave birth to that policy for the carrying out of which a British army was marched into Central Asia. It 1244 was considered necessary to secure the friendly feeling and cordial co-operation of the rulers of Scinde, to insure its success, A treaty was proposed by the British Government, and in that treaty the Ameers, after lengthened negotiations, concurred. In the year 1838 the first intimate political connexion was established between them and the British Government. There were treaties previously, but merely commercial. At that period, three brothers were rulers of Upper Scinde,—Meer Roostum Khan, Meer Mobarik Khan, and Meer Ali Moorad. Their father's name was Meer Sohrab Khan, a chief of the Talpoor dynasty. He died in 1830, dividing his territory into four portions, leaving to each son a portion as a patrimony, and attaching the fourth portion to the turban, or chiefship, which devolved upon Meer Roostum Khan, the eldest of the three brothers.
From 1838 to 1841 disputes at various times arose between Ali Moorad and the two eldest brothers, in reference to territory. Those disputes were decided by the British Resident under an agreement made by the treaty of 1838. In 1842, Ali Moorad placed himself at the head of an army, attacked the forces of his brother, defeated him, and forced him to sign a treaty, called the treaty of Nounahar, by which Roostum Khan agreed to make over to him certain villages belonging to himself and Meer Nusseer, son of Meer Mobarik Khan. Those villages formed the subject matter of inquiry under a Commission issued in 1850 by the British Government.
From an early period Ali Moorad—who had been described by those who knew him intimately as a crafty and designing prince—commenced a series of intrigues against his eldest brother, Meer Roostum Khan: these intrigues were unfortunately too successful. He placed in the hands of the British Resident in Scinde certain letters, which he said he had intercepted—letters purporting to be hostile to the British Government, and which he alleged to have passed between Meer Roostum and the Court of Lahore.
Meer Roostum denied the authenticity of those letters, and asked for an opportunity of proving their fabrication. He also begged to be confronted with his accusers. But both those reasonable requests were refused. The letters were sent to certain officers of the British Government, who were supposed to be most competent to pronounce an opinion on documents of that description. Their authenticity was doubted 1245 at the time by those officers, one of whom was Sir George Clerk, who declared that he doubted not only the authenticity of the documents, but more especially the seals attached to them. About this period, in the autumn of the year 1842, Sir Charles Napier made his appearance in Scinde, and soon after became the chief civil and military authority. Contrary to the opinion of the officers to whom reference had been made, and who had seen the letters in question, Sir Charles Napier declared, upon the opinion of Captain Brown—who, according to Colonel Outram, and other evidence, knew nothing of Persian—the language in which the letters were written—that they were authentic, and immediately took possession of a large portion of the territory of Roostum Khan.
Another question had been raised between Roostum Khan and Ali Moorad, namely, the succession to the turban. Meer Roostum Khan, nearly eighty years of age, was desirous of leaving the turban to his eldest son. But it was also claimed by Ah Moorad. Sir Charles Napier took part with Ali Moorad, with whom he had entered into close communication soon after his arrival in Upper Scinde. Meer Roostum Khan, with a view to escape from the intrigues of his unnatural brother, asked permission to enter the camp of Sir Charles Napier, and to place himself entirely in the hands of the British general. Sir Charles Napier, instead of eagerly taking advantage of such an opportunity of unravelling the tangled skein of Upper Scinde politics, refused at that time to receive him, but directed him to the camp of Ali Moorad, the very person who had probably forged the letters which were so derogatory to his brother's character, and the very person who was at that moment engaged in plots to compass the poor old chieftain's destruction. The House, perhaps, could scarcely believe that a British representative should have taken such a mistaken step, under the peculiar circumstances in which the unfortunate Meer Roostum was placed. But Sir Charles Napier himself recorded the remarkable fact. He wrote to the Governor General on the 20th of December, 1842, that Meer Roostum was anxious to take refuge in the British camp adding— I did not like this, as it would have embarrassed me how to act; but the idea struck me at once that he might go to Ali Moorad, who might induce him, as a family arrangement, to resign the turban; I therefore secretly wrote to Koos- 1246 tum and Ali Moorad, and about ten o 'clock I had an express from Ali Morad to say, 'that his brother was safe with him.' It appears that subsequently Meer Roostum Khan was prevailed upon to cede to Ali Moorad the turban; but the latter at the same time entered into an agreement, by which he promised to secure to Meer Roostum that portion of his territory which was left to him by his father as a patrimony. The treaty of cession reached the British General; but the agreement between the two brothers, which accompanied it, never came into that gallant officer's hands. Ali Moorad still continued his intrigues with a view to the ruin of his unfortunate brother, and led the British general to believe that Roostum Khan was about to raise troops to attack the British army. Hence the destruction of Emaumghur, the first commencement of hostilities. Sir Charles Napier marched a force to the point where he was told Roostum Khan was encamped; but on his arrival found there was no enemy to oppose him. He had, however, the satisfaction of blowing up the fortification without mischief to a single man. On the other hand, the unfortunate Meer Roostum, who had fled to the desert, alarmed by an intimation from his brother that the British general wished to make him prisoner, was found by Colonel Outram surrounded by only a few followers, and his wives and children. Distracted and perplexed, in his agony he implored to be taken to the British general, for the purpose of throwing himself on his mercy; but the interview was again prevented by the intrigues of Ali Moorad, and subsequently Meer Roostum was directed to proceed to Hyderabad.
In Lower Scinde, however, he found that sympathy which he had not met with at the hands of the British representative, or from his relatives in Upper Scinde. The Beloochees, who have always been described as a wild and warlike race, stung to madness at the treachery experienced by the aged prince from his near kinsman, and the harsh treatment he had received from the British general, dashed into the field against the British troops at Meanee, under the very walls of Hyderabad. There, however, they were defeated by the skill of the British general and the valour of our army; the result of this action was, that some of the Ameers were sent as captives to British India, while others were left under the control of Ali Moorad. Such was the first chapter in this painful 1247 history. He would now proceed to the second.
In 1846 Sir Charles Napier, who was about to leave Scinde, appeared to have changed his opinion in regard to the character of Ali Moorad. It seemed the general left a memorandum in his office, stating that he had grave doubts of the honesty of Ali Moorad, and that he had reason to believe that he had possessed himself of certain lands which were not his of right, and which belonged to the British Government. Sir George Clerk, the Governor of Bombay, proceeded on a tour to Scinde in 1848, and instituted an investigation regarding this memorandum. He found on his arrival in Scinde, that there were two individuals, named Sheik Ali Hassan and Peer Gohur, one of whom had been Prime Minister to Ali Moorad, and the other his confidential adviser, who were prepared to give evidence against Ali Moorad to the effect that the leaf of the Koran on which the treaty of Nounahar was written had been torn from the volume, and that another leaf had been inserted, in which the word "district" had been substituted for "villages," and that, therefore, property of considerable value, to which the British Government was entitled by right of conquest, had been wrongfully held by Ali Moorad. Although the characters of these witnesses were doubtful, there was such corroborating evidence of the circumstance, that Sir George Clerk was induced to consider it the duty of the Government to appoint a Commission to inquire into the whole case. A Commission was appointed, consisting of Mr. Pringle, a man of judgment and ability, and Major Jacobs and Major Lang, both officers of great political experience and high reputation, before whom Ali Moorad was cited to appear. He appeared accordingly, and was allowed to examine and cross-examine witnesses, but was unable to rebut the charges brought against him. The very leaf on which the treaty of Nounahar had been written was produced; the chief was convicted of fraud and forgery; and had since been compelled to relinquish the territory of which he had so wrongfully held possession, and the turban which he had so disgraced.
Now he (Viscount Jocelyn) wished to point out to the House the bearing which that inquiry had on the charges originally brought against the Ameers of Scinde. It would be recollected that one of the first charges made against those princes had 1248 reference to the letters said to be intercepted, which were furnished to the British resident by Ali Moorad, who alleged that those douments had passed between Roostum Khan and the Court of Lahore. Roostum Khan asked to be confronted with his accusers, and to be shown the documents, but both requests were refused him. It had now been proved that Ali Moorad was, from the commencement, plotting to effect his brother's destruction; in which he unfortunately succeeded: and this very Ali Moorad, who furnished the letters on which his brother was condemned, had since been convicted of fraud and forgery against the British Government, to which he had such abundant reason for showing the greatest gratitude.
But there was another fact—a most important one—namely, that when that Commission was sitting, Ameer Mahomed Houssein, the eldest son of Roostum Khan, who, since the conquest of Scinde, had been living on the bounty of the Mahomedan chiefs on the banks of the Indus—for he would never deign to ask or accept a favour from the British Government, so long as a stigma rested on his name and family—at the risk of his life and liberty, appeared before that Commission, saying— The British Government is about to institute an inquiry into the iniquities of my uncle Ali Moorad; I wish to vindicate the honour and good faith of my father, and to wipe away the stain which now rests on my family, and I have brought evidence to prove that every one of the charges against my family is false. The Commissioners said they regretted not to be able to enter into that inquiry, and that they were obliged to confine themselves to the matters to which they were restricted by the instructions they had received from the British Government. But he (Viscount Jocelyn) believed there was not a man, from the First Commissioner down to the humblest individual present at that inquiry, who was not convinced that the family of Meer Roostum Khan were wholly guiltless of the charges originally brought against them.
Another charge brought against Meer Roostum was that of stopping and robbing the Dawk; on which, it would be recollected, Sir Charles Napier laid such stress. Roostum Khan declared at the time that he and his family were innocent of that charge; and proof had since been tendered that the man who caused the Dawk to be intercepted was Ali Moorad himself for the purpose of laying the crime 1249 at the door of his unfortunate brother: to this point the Ameer Mohamed Houssein was ready to give evidence.
The next scene in this painful drama was the cession of the turban, and that was proved to have been forced from Roostum Khan when in confinement; and whilst the treaty ratifying the cession was duly conveyed to the British general, another messenger, who bore the other agreement, by which Meer Roostum's patrimony was secured to his family, was stopped on his way by a horseman of Ali Moorad, and the document taken from him.
Another most important fact was elicited by the Commission: that the principal moonshees, or native clerks, in the office of the Government of Scinde, through whom the information was furnished, on which the whole of the proceedings was based, were bribed by Ali Moorad. There was one point to which he roust allude, namely, the attack of the Beloochees on the British forces at Hyderabad. Considering that the feelings of the people had been greatly exasperated by the treatment which Roostum Khan had received at the hands of the British representative, he found no fault with brave soldiers seeking with their lives to vindicate the honour of their ancient rulers, and dashing into the field to their support.
He would now wish to point out to the House the claims which he thought those princes had to the consideration of the British House of Commons, and of the British Government. At the time of the invasion of Affghanistan, it was stated by the military authorities that Scinde being the base for the operations of our army, it was a matter of the greatest importance to obtain possession of the strong fort of Bukhur, on the Indus. At our request, Meer Roostum Khan, contrary to the wishes of his family and of the Beloochee soldiery, surrendered the fort of Bukhur to the British Government, although it was considered the heart of his country. So important was the cession of that fort thought to be, that Lord Auckland and Sir Henry Pottinger declared that the gratitude of the British Government was due to Meer Roostum Khan; and Sir Alexander Burns wrote about the same time in these words: "I have never doubted their (the Ameers') sincere desire to serve us, but in their weak state, I did not expect such firmness in the day of need." Again, the British envoy writes to the Governor General: "Meer Roos- 1250 tum has shown in the day of trial what he professed at all times, that he was the sincere and devoted friend of the British nation."
Such were the services that were performed by the family of Meer Roostum in 1838, and such were the opinions expressed with regard to those services. No Englishman can forget the year 1841, when clouds arose which seemed to threaten the annihilation of the British rule in India; but at that moment the Ameers of Scinde, deaf to bribery, and to the religious cry that was then raised by the Mahomedans from one end of India to the other—regardless of all personal considerations—remained true to British interests. So valuable were the services they rendered at that time, that it was said by the highest military authorities, that if it had not been for those services, and especially the supplies they furnished to the army of Brigadier England, that army could never have advanced or retired, and British honour could never have been retrieved under the walls of Cabool.
In smaller matters also they showed their anxiety to assist the British forces: Colonel Outram, acknowledging the services of the Ameers in remitting all customs on supplies furnished to the British troops, wrote in these terms on the 24th of June, 1841—"That he was instructed by the Governor-General to acknowledge the satisfaction with which he had received this additional mark of their friendly disposition, and of the liberal policy with which their administration is conducted."
Such was the letter addressed to Meer Roostum in June 1841. He would now read the account given of the same prince a few months subsequent, when, branded and hunted by his unnatural relative, assisted by the forces of Sir C. Napier, he was found a fugitive in the desert: Colonel Out ram writes— I beheld the sovereign of Upper Scinde, whose important services a Governor General had deemed fitting to acknowledge, become a houseless wanderer; one who, nursed in the lap of luxury, had not known what an ungratified wish might mean. I met him in the jungle, surrounded by his faithful retainers, unprovided with the decencies of life. A tent with a single awning, not ten feet square, afforded the sole protection from the weather enjoyed by the party during heavy and long-continued rains; and is it to be wondered at, that I felt intensely for the poor old man? He should not do justice to the true character of the Ameers if be did not allude to the charges which had been heaped 1251 on them by the first military historian of this country. He could have wished, for the honour of the British Army, that those accusations had never been penned; for there was no language to he found which was not used to asperse those princes, and no crimes of which they were not said to be guilty. It must he recollected that the historian had never been in Scinde, and had no personal knowledge of the circumstances he related; whereas, in direct contradiction to his statements, there was the evidence of British officers, who had lived in daily intercourse with these calumniated princes in the days of their prosperity, who, one and all, repudiated the charges against them, and bore the strongest testimony to their conduct and character. He had perused letters from many of these gentlemen, but he would select only one to read to the House, because the writer was well known in India, and because he was for a considerable time in constant intercourse with those princes—he meant Captain Postans. That gentleman, who was many years political agent in Scinde, pronounced them to be— Merciful to a fault, and just where they judge for themselves. As men (he added) I consider them exemplary characters; and the devotion and respect evinced towards them by their children and all around them, was a conclusive proof of the domestic harmony which reigned in this singularly constituted family. Now he would ask the House to allow him to advert to the condition in which the Ameers had been ever since our occupation of their territory. After the battle of Hyderabad some of these princes were despatched to British India, and others of them were left to the tender mercies of Ali Moorad. Among the princes sent to India was the aged Meer Roostum Khan, who shortly afterwards sunk under the weight of years and anxiety, and, to use his own touching language, descended into the tomb "with his face blackened in the sight of his countrymen, and his grey hairs dishonoured." He left behind him a son and a nephew, who were still prisoners in India. Besides these princes, there were the members of the families of the Lower Scinde Ameers, against some of whom there was no charge, save that of defending their country, and against others not even that charge. One, Meer Shadad, after four years' close confinement in the fort of Surat on certain charges, of which he understood he was acquitted after investigation, and released by order of the 1252 Governor General of India, still remained a prisoner in Hindostan.
With reference to the other members of their family, there were some eighteen sons and nephews of Roostum Khan, who were left to the tender mercies of Ali Moorad, at whose hands they experienced treatment which is not to be described. On that subject he would read to the House an extract from a very graphic and painfully-interesting work called Dry Leaves from Young Egypt, the author of which held political office in Scinde, and writes what he himself saw and knew. It is as follows:— The younger Ameers, the children of Meer Roostum and Meer Mobarik, were handed over by Sir Charles Napier to Meer Ali Moorad, who has inflicted on them every cruelty and insult that malice and hatred can suggest; born princes, hunger, cold, and nakedness have been their portion. In their memorial to Sir Charles Napier, they stated that death would be preferable to their condition. In 1848 the resident at Kypore reported that not one of Ali Moorad's shikarees was not better off than they. They had been reduced by want to the sale of their wives' ornaments and their own wearing apparel; and it was a well-known fact, that the fourth son of the late Meer Roostum appeared as a suppliant for assistance before the door, and is now living on the bounty of her who was in his father's lifetime a low courtesan in the Kypore bazaar. Such was the state of some of the Ameers of Upper Scinde, whose fathers had earned the commendation of the Governor General, who had proved themselves our faithful allies, and stood by us in the day of adversity and trial.
Although at the risk of wearying the House, there was one more fact to which he must allude, and it was a painful one. After the battle of Hyderabad the ladies of the captive Ameers remained in Scinde. Those who knew anything of the Eastern character, know that the religious feelings and the habits of the people were such, that it was almost impossible for ladies of that high rank to take long journeys, more especially across the seas. It would be recollected on a former discussion on this question, they were horrified with details of the brutal conduct on the part of the Ameers towards their wives, which were then told with every air of authenticity; but the extract he was about to quote was the best reply to those monstrous assertions.
The extract he held in his hand was from a letter written by the wife of a British officer in Scinde, in reference to the condition of those unhappy ladies, 1253 which he would read to the House, She said— They looked and acted like what they were, the ladies of the land, and very different from the native women we were in the habit of seeing; not that they were particularly beautiful, on the contrary there were few of them that had any claims to youth or good looks, but, as I said before, there was a bearing which stamped them at once of a superior class. There they were: whose bare feet had previously never pressed the ground uncovered by the richest carpets, with every luxury around them, living in a place without even a mat to the floor; common bazaar charpoys to sleep upon, and the roof leaking every shower of rain that fell. I thought at the time that the prize agents might have spared the carpets and other little luxuries from the thousands we had taken from them. They were too proud to ask for them, nor did I even hear them complain of this, although they did of having their clothes sold. They said,' Our jewels and gold we consider as forfeited; but we did not expect to be stripped; it is our fate.' It appeared a day of great rejoicing when a letter arrived from the Meers (their absent lords). They generally sent me a request that I would come and see them, and hear all about the Meers. It appeared as if they thought I could enter into all their little joys, as well as feel for their misfortunes, which in truth I did, although I always avoided touching on a subject so painful to them. It appeared to him (Viscount Jocelyn) that this was one of the most painful stories connected with the British rule in India, and one of the darkest pages in its history—a tale known not only in Scinde, hut throughout Central Asia—a tale which had often been cited by the Mahomedans to the detriment of the honour and character of Christian and British rulers. Nor was it alone confined to Mahomedan Asia: Central Africa re-echoed this story of violence and wrong. He found the following passage in a work of Dr. Richardson, a traveller in Central Africa:— The conversation was stopped by the entrance of a remarkable personage—the quasi Sultan of Ben Walid. Having heard that I was present, he said, 'Christian, do you know Seinde?' Yes, I said; he then turned and said something to the people in the Ghadamsi language. I afterwards learnt it was, 'You see these Christians are eating up all the Mussulman countries.' He then abruptly turned to me, Why do the English go there and eat up all the Mussulmen? Afterwards you will come here.'….. I replied the Ameers were foolish, and engaged in conspiracy against the English in India, hut the Mussulmen in Scinde enjoyed the same privileges as the English themselves. 'That is what you say,' he rejoined, and then continued, 'Why do you go so far from home to take other people's countries from them? I replied, The Turks do the same, they come to the desert. 'Ay, you wish to he such oppressors as the Turks.' He then told me not to talk any more, and a painful silence continued for some time. 1254 He would ask the House if this was not a question worthy the consideration of Parliament, one in which British honour, British justice, and British humanity were so deeply involved. It was painful to think, whilst they expressed sympathy for the oppressed people of Hungary, whilst they received the Poles with open arms, whilst a right hon. Friend of his, only a few weeks' since, made a powerful appeal on behalf of the people of Naples, and whilst they blamed our gallant neighbours for their want of faith towards Abdool Kader, that the British Government sanctioned conduct equally unjust and oppressive. But hero partial redress was in our own hands, and, after the facts that had been elicited, they would be doubly culpable if they did not make all the reparation in their power to those they bad so grievously injured. He bad undertaken to bring the subject before the House from a sense of duty and a sense of justice, and he might truly say, he never recollected feeling a warmer interest in any case, or a more solemn conviction of the truth of the cause he advocated.
He had endeavoured—he feared very inadequately—to place before the House, first, the charges that were originally made against these princes; next, the bearing which the late Commission of Inquiry had in reference to those charges; then to point out the intrigues and machinations of Ali Moorad; and, lastly, to compare the condition of that felon prince, still in the enjoyment of his patrimony, with that of the unfortunate princes, the victims of his treachery.
He knew well there was great difficulty in retracing our steps, and that there was an idea that, where civilisation and babarism came into contact, it was a proof of weakness in the former to recede. He was aware that, in a country which had been for some years under our rule, new ties were formed, and new interests were created, which could not be disturbed without the hazard of committing a second injustice on the people whom we bad taken under our protection; but he did not ask on behalf of the Ameers of Scinde that they should be replaced as rulers of their country, they did not ask it for themselves: in their own touching language they made known the earnest desire of their hearts—"A tree in our own land is better than a palace in a foreign country;" they asked merely to be allowed to return to their native land. The Government had it now 1255 in their power to grant that boon; and he could not conceive it possible that it would be refused. At the same time it would ill become a private individual to point out the exact mode in which reparation should be afforded; he was therefore prepared to leave it in the hands of the Government of India, confident in its integrity and its humanity. But this he might be permitted to say, that little injury was to be feared when honour and character were to be maintained, in a Government, like that of India, firm and united, acknowledging to the Hindoo and Mahomedan nations under its sway, that unwittingly a grave error had been committed, and showing their desire to remedy that error, as far as possible, in a magnanimous and generous spirit. On behalf, therefore, of the Ameers of Scinde, once honoured, powerful, and wealthy, now fallen, crushed, and poverty-stricken, long our faithful friends and allies, he implored the sympathy of the House, and asked for the papers which bore out the statements he had felt it his duty to make; satisfied that the facts had only to be thoroughly understood, to obtain for those unfortunate princes, not all that justice demanded, but all that it was now left in the power of the British Government to bestow.

§ SIR R. H. INGLIS
rose to second the Motion of his noble Friend; and regarded it an honour and a privilege to be the earliest to thank him for the powerful, highminded, and indignant eloquence of the speech with which he had introduced it. At this hour, within a few minutes of the time when the debate must close, he felt it due to Her Majesty's Ministers to leave to them almost the whole of that brief interval, and he would therefore confine himself to a few questions. Thirty years ago were not the Ameers of Scinde as independent as any of the Princes on the Rhine? Are not the survivors of them, all but one, captives in the hands of England? What was the intermediate 1256 history? Did England send an officer to survey their river, the highway of their country, without acquainting them with his objects? Notwithstanding this act, by which the future subjugation of their country was facilitated, did the Ameers of Scinde, or did they not, permit—when they could have prevented, or, at least, have checked—the march of British armies into Affghanistan? Above all, in the withdrawal of those armies from Affghanistan, did the Ameers use the power which they possessed, of joining the enemies of the English, and interposing new difficulties in the way of their return to India? Did they, or did they not, facilitate the supplies of provisions for those armies? Have not some of them been deprived of their hereditary rights by treachery, supported by forgery? and was not the power which so deprived them the power of England? Is that forgery now proved to be such to the satisfaction of English Judges? Have they, or have they not (indepondent princes as they once were), been not merely exiled, but imprisoned by English power? And now, when by tardy justice, some means are provided for restoring some of the survivors, not to independent sovereignty, but, at least, to some of their landed possessions, is England nevertheless to retain those possessions, and not replace in them such of their ancient owners as can still receive this poor compensation? The pages of the history of the English in India were not all unsullied; but he verily believed that, in no country and in no age, had such a history been written as that of the Ameers of Scinde under the English rule. He charged it on the conscience of his right hon. Friend the President of the Indian Board—he spoke most solemnly when he said it—not to lose the present opportunity of redressing a part of the wrong which England had done to those Princes.

§ MR. BAILLIE
said, he believed the House would agree with him that the speech of his noble Friend had little reference to the notice of Motion placed on the books. When he saw that notice of Motion, he was under the impression that his noble Friend was anxious to obtain information with respect to the proceedings instituted by the Indian Government against Ali Moorad; but the speech of his noble Friend showed him to be desirous to bring under the notice of the House not only the state and condition of the ex-Ameers of Scinde, but to enter into the question of 1257 the justice and policy of the conduct of the Government of India. He (Mr. Baillie) would not, upon this occasion, enter into any discussion with regard to the justice of the policy originally adopted by the British Government as to the conquest of Scinde and the deposition of the Ameers. Whatever might he the opinion of the House with respect to those transactions, they must bear in mind that this policy and these acts received the full sanction and approbation of the Government of the late Sir Robert Peel; and that when that policy was called into question upon a Motion by Lord Ashley in 1844 it was justified, and received the full sanction and approbation of a large majority of the House of Commons. Now if blame attached with respect to these transactions, to whom was it to be attributed? To the Government of India, to the Earl of Ellenborough, or Sir Charles Napier? No. If blame attached anywhere, it was to the Government who sanctioned and approved of the policy pursued; and he must express his surprise that the noble Lord should, in 1852, after having served the Government of Sir Robert Peel in the capacity of assistant to the President of the Board of Trade, rake up this old disputed question with respect to the policy of our acts in 1842. As to the papers for which his noble Friend had now moved, the Government had no objection whatever to produce all those which related to the proceedings against Ali Moorad, together with the proclamation of the Commissioners of Scinde, which contained the sentence. But his noble Friend wanted the whole of the Minutes of Council with respect to these transactions; and he must be perfectly well aware that they contained the opinions of the officers of the Government with regard to the original conquest of Scinde and the acts of the Government. If the object of his noble Friend in moving for these papers was to excite sympathy on behalf of the unfortunate princes of Scinde, and if by this means he wished to force the attention of the Government to their present condition, he (Mr. Baillie) was happy to inform his noble Friend that the condition of the Ameers of Scinde had for some time been under the consideration of the Government; and that before the present Government—

§ MR. HERRIES
said, he must beg to interrupt his hon. Friend; and to suggest that, in a matter of such importance as the one now under discussion, nothing like 1258 justice could be done to it by his hon. Friend in the few minutes which would only elapse before the adjournment of the House (it being then just upon six o'clock). He would, therefore, move the adjournment of the debate.