§ Mr. Johnstonerose, pursuant to notice, to move for copies of two letters written by lord Cornwallis to the court of directors; as also of a letter from sir George Barlow, his successor in the government of India. He disclaimed any personal animosity to the marquis Wellesley, or any wish to bring charges against him, but he thought it was necessary that the house should at length turn its attention to the mode in which India had been for a long time governed, and that the members should compare the system of lord Cornwallis with that of his predecessor, and make up their minds on the subject. As for his part, he felt that the empire was indebted to the marquis Wellesley for so much of his system as established our military reputation and ascendancy in India, but he highly disapproved of the lengths to which that system was afterwards pushed, when, under pretence of defensive war, all the native powers of India were forced to receive British garrisons, and were kept in greater subjection in their own capitals, than the kings of Whirtemburgh and Bavaria are at this moment by the emperor of France. Under vague pretences, a great 381 part of the territory of our ally, the nabob of Oude, was wrested from him, and the possessions of the nabob of Arcot were seized under the pretence of treason, said to have been committed by that prince almost under the eyes of lord Cornwallis. Highly as he disapproved of that part of lord Wellesley's system, be by no means meant to bring any charge against him on that account, as he could not impute to him any improper motives. He only considered that his lordship was possessed of too ardent a mind, and views of too great ambition. He hoped the house would recur to their former resolution, and that that would be for the future the established system of Indian government. Under the former system, a noble lord (Castlereagh) had often expatiated on advantages that were to result from it, but which promises were never realized; whereas, on the other side, it appeared that the real situation of our affairs in India has become so distressed, that 200,000l. have been stopped from the treasure destined for China, and 50,000l. borrowed from the government of Madras to help to defray the arrears of pay to a number of irregular troops, which are kept up at an expence of 60,000l. per month, and whose support is stated to be much more injurious to the company than their hostility in the field could possibly be. The hon. gent. then took a review of the various treaties entered into by the marquis Wellesley, with the native powers, most of which he thought highly impolitic. A very short time after the treaty with the rajah of Bhurtpore, that prince admitted our enemies into his fortresses, and the British army lost above 3000 men in vainly endeavouring to take his capital. The treaty with Scindia he equally disapproved of. Some disputes had arisen about the construction of some of the articles of that treaty, and Scindia immediately seized and imprisoned the British resident in his dominions, which was the occasion of the present war in India. He thought it was full time for parliament to lay down sonic fixed principle, and he hoped the right hon. gent. (Mr. Fox) would consent to the papers he now moved for, and would pursue, in practice, those principles which he had so often professed on Indian affairs. He thought it necessary, that the government should now declare the precise plan, on which they meant that India should be governed in future. The hon. gent. concluded by moving for "copies of letters from lord 382 Cornwallis to the court of directors and select committee, dated 1st Aug. 1805, and to the court of directors, dated 9th Aug.: 2. Copy of a letter from sir George Barlow to the chairman, dated 6th Oct.: and copies of letters from lord Cornwallis to Scindia and lord Lake, dated 18th and 19th Sept., and enclosed in sir George Barlow's letter: 3. Copy of a letter from sir George Barlow, dated 23d Oct."
Mr. Secretary Foxsaid, that he had no intention whatever to object to the production of the papers moved for, although he must observe, that his hon. friend did not appear to him to have stated any necessity or parliamentary ground, upon which they ought to be laid before the house. As to the hon. gent.'s allusion to the propriety of a declaration on the part of his majesty's ministers, relative to the system of government meant to be acted upon with regard to India, he was at a loss to conceive any reason upon which that demand could be justified. No disposition was manifested to deviate from the course which was now pursuing respecting India; and until such disposition should appear, he apprehended that it was quite unnecessary in ministers to make any declaration upon the subject. Indeed, it seemed to his mind that, according to practice, some resolution should be adopted by the house, expressive of its opinion and wish, before ministers were called upon to enter into the question. The hon. gent. had alluded to the opinions formerly delivered by him, relative to the government of India. To these opinions, he could assure his hon. friend, that he still completely adhered. They were declared above 24 years ago; and as far as he had since had opportunity of observing the affairs of India, to which, perhaps, he had not attended as much as other men had done, or as much as he ought, he had never seen or heard of a transaction which served to weaken the confidence he entertained in the justice of his original opinions, but winch did not rather tend to their complete justification. However, an act had passed in consequence of the resolutions upon the subject of India, which he had the honour of supporting. That act had been now proceeded upon for a series of years, and when the subject should be regularly brought forward for discussion, he would be perfectly ready to state his sentiments respecting it. At present he should only say, that under that act, a board of controul had been appointed, and of all the boards which had presi- 383 ded over the government of India, he saw least ground to question the intentions, or to ask explanations as to the views, of the present, by whom every disposition was shewn to follow the course prescribed in the resolutions formerly adopted by the house, and of which the hon. mover professed to approve. No one could doubt the propriety of entering into an investigation of the affairs of India: but the present did not appear to him to be the proper time. When the India budget shall be brought before the house, his hon. friend was aware, that the statement to be looked for on that occasion, would naturally be connected with the political system of India, and that then would be the proper time to select for a full discussion of that subject. The right hon. gent. repeated his disinclination to oppose the production of those papers, although no adequate reason was assigned by the mover, although no intention was announced, proposing an enquiry, or of grounding any proceeding upon them. At the same time he took occasion to remark, that he could not conceive any good reason for the alarm and anxiety which was, by his hon. friend, and by other friends, for whom he had a high respect, so particularly stated to prevail with regard to the government of India. It really appeared to him very strange, that a much greater degree of jealousy should seem to apply to the present board of controul, than to that which preceded it.—Upon the whole, the right hon. gent. did not feel the propriety of calling upon ministers for any distinct pledge as to the course of policy which they meant to follow with regard to India. No intention appeared to exist, either on the part of his majesty's government, the board of controul, or the court of directors, to abandon the course of which all sides of the house expressed their approbation; and therefore no pledge was requisite. If any variation of circumstances should call for a change of system, an explanation would of course become necessary. But in the present instance he did not think that any further explanation or pledge could be fairly required.
§ Mr. Hiley Addingtonconcurred with what had fallen from the right hen. gent. (Mr. For): he did not see that any necessity had been shewn for the production of the papers which had been moved, but at the same time he saw no objection to their being produced, especially as the contents of them were already pretty public, and as 384 the hon. mover had, in his speech, read a long extract from one of those letters (which, as an East-India proprietor, he had seen) he thought that it would be the best way to produce the papers, in order that the whole of the letters might be before the house instead of a partial extract. He, as a member of the board of controul, had considered those treaties on which the hon. mover had made so many observations; and he viewed those transactions in a very different light. As to that with the Rajah of Bhurtpore, it would not be fair to charge the failure of the treaty upon the maker of it. The failure was owing to the unexampled treachery and perfidy of that prince, and not to any improper conduct in Lord Wellesley, who concluded the treaty with him. He sincerely gave the hon. mover the greatest credit, for the motives which had induced him to bring forward the present motion, and was sure, that it was not at all dictated by any personal animosity to marquis Wellesley. He hoped he might also obtain credit, when he stated, that it was from public motives alone, that he was averse to prejudging any part of the conduct of lord Wellesley, which, on a future day, would come before them more regularly for discussion.
§ Mr. Charles Grantallowed, that the system pursued by lord Wellesley, Was, as a military system, very splendid, and at tended with many advantages. But he could not think that a fit system for tranquillizing India, the effect of which had been to involve us in quarrels with all the native princes. In order to procure the re-establishment of the pacific system, the court of directors had with all their exertions promoted the return of lord Cornwallis to India. This noblemans death was much to be lamented, but there was no doubt that his successor would follow up his plans. He was happy to hear this system was to have the support of his majesty's government. With respect to the measures of lord Wellesley, the court of directors neither approved of them, nor was aware of them till they Were carried into effect. He thought that the name and character of sir George Barlow ought not to be called in question, because he was not here to defend himself.
Mr. Huddlestone. —I rise, sir, to support the motion, and shall endeavour, as briefly as I can, to state the views in Which I think it of importance, that the papers moved for should be laid before the house. The 385 usual argument of danger to the public interest from the disclosure of papers, is effectually done away with respect to Indian papers by those which have been already published, and most especially by the late intercepted letters which have been published, both in France and in this country, in which whatever can either inform or irritate our implacable enemy is laid open to his view. After that complete development, I apprehend no one will talk of danger to the public interests, from the disclosure of any India papers; but, with respect to those now moved for, I am of opinion the disclosure of them, instead of producing mischief, will tend to correct the mischief which the publication of the late intercepted letters was calculated to produce, by destroying the hopes which the enemy must have indulged, of our persevering in a system that was leading us to ruin. And here, sir, the production of these papers will be of solid benefit, by chewing the true nature of that system, stripped of these ornaments and decorations which dazzled the eyes, and, for a time, led captive the understandings of good and able men in this country. They will shew, upon an authority which no eloquence can gainsay, the real value of that for which so tremendous an expense of blood and treasure has been incurred. With respect to the executive body of the East-India company, I have no hesitation in confessing, that I am glad these papers have been moved for, and by an hon. member who is unconnected with the court of directors. It is true another hon. member, who has given more attention to India affairs, perhaps, than any other person, and who has brought to the subject talents proportioned to its magnitude, has declared the India directors free from any blame for the existing evils. But these papers will shew that the. directors have been as anxious to terminate those evils as they could have been if they had themselves been the authors of them; and they will give the house the satisfaction to know, that much was done towards the termination of them, even in the few weeks that lord Cornwallis was spares after his arrival in India. They will enable the house to appreciate the great services rendered by his lordship, even in that short period, and they will shew how and by whom those services were procured. These papers will also have the effect of removing all doubts as to a fact, of which I have beard, with sur- 386 prise, that doubts have been expressed in this house, namely—that the Mahratta war has been the great preponderating cause of the present deranged state of the finances of the East-India company. Not the only cause, I admit: for, the same system which gave birth to the war, gave birth to a system of finance and expenditure which would nearly have absorbed the whole revenue, even on a peace-establishment. But when war was added to the scale, it was impossible for the finances to bear up under the accumulated weight. These papers then, sir, will shew that the present financial difficulties of the East-India company are among the serious evils occasioned by the late system; a system of which I question only the wisdom, not the intention or integrity of mind with which it was undertaken. I can also, as well as the hon. gent., with the utmost sincerity, disclaim any motives of personal ill-will to lord Wellesley, and whatever may prove to have been the object of calling for a great variety of India papers, I concur entirely with the hon. mover of the question, that it is extremely desirable that parliament should come to some resolution that should re-establish the principle unanimously adopted and declared by this house in the year 1784. The papers in question will shew, that a change of system, in India, is both resolved and entered upon; but the transactions of the three past years, and the death of the marquis Cornwallis, may make it difficult to induce a belief that the change is sincere, or likely to be permanent; painful experience has wrought the conviction here, which reason and argument failed to produce;—that if India is deemed worth preserving, the system and principles of that great man whom the whole Indian world is now lamenting, must be followed up; and faithfully to adhere to his policy, was the only true wisdom for governing India; and its wisdom consisted in its simplicity, in its justice, moderation, and forbearance, alike to the strong and to the weak, alike in success and under adverse fortune. Had the marquis Cornwallis remained in India, instead of coming home, after his first administration, the most sanguine expectations of advantages from India would have been realized, and that for which we have contended at such dreadful hazard and expence, would have been forced upon us by the affections of the people. The British government would have been voluntarily looked up to as the universal 387 umpire throughout India, the dispenser of peace and happiness through regions larger than the whole extent of Europe.—I am anxious then, sir, for a resolution that should pledge this house in favour of the system and principles of the late marquis Cornwallis, and bind all our future governments in India to emulate his example. And if an hon. gent. below me (Mr. Francis) would permit me, I would call upon him to bring forward such a resolution, or to renew a proposal which he brought forward last session, and which was then unhappily rejected.—I say unhappily rejected, because I am persuaded that that resolution, had it been carried, would have proved of great importance, by strengthening the hands of lord Cornwallis, and enabling him to spew the Indian states, that the principles on which he professed to act, were not his only, but those of parliament and the country at large. Sir, it was a resolution directly in the spirit of that great man, on the re-appointment of lord Cornwallis to the government general, to which his majesty's ministers had just given their sanction. And I therefore witnessed, with equal surprise and concern, the exertion of that transcendant eloquence which prevailed on the house to reject it; how often that eloquence was exerted for the welfare of the country, on one can be more sensible than I am; but, in this instance, I shall ever think it was misapplied.—I rejoice in the belief that his majesty's present ministers have not entangled themselves in the mazes of the late system, nor been deluded by the splendour and glare attached to it. I have heard with pleasure the sentiments delivered this evening, by a right hon. gent. (Mr. Fox). I recollect with pleasure the sentiments delivered last session, by a right hon. gent. now high in his majesty's councils. I hope and trust that right hon. gent. and his colleagues will now act up to them, and if they do, much may yet be retrieved. In the present moment, which I believe to be not less awful in respect to India than Europe, nothing—no individual measure, could produce of the discarded principles to which I have alluded. And the hon. gent. who brought forward the resolution last session, might now offer it under happier auspices. I owe it to myself, as well as to than hon. gent., to declare that I concur in almost all I have heard that right hon. gent. deliver in this house on the affairs of India; his view of 388 the whole subject is that, which, without any conversation with him, my mind has long taken; and whether he be a friend to the company or not, of this I am sure, that the most determined friend of the company could not have offered opinions and advice more friendly to their interests than those which I have heard that right hon. gent. deliver in this house. It is in reliance on that friendly disposition towards the East-India company, that I have presumed to urge him to renew his proposition, and my apology must be the perception which I have, in common with him, of the calamities which have followed our departure from the wise principles which it was the object of the proposition to enforce. And I hope the house will accept the same apology for my trepassing so long on their patience. Few other subjects could overcome my reluctance to such an intrusion.
§ Mr. Paulldenied that the failure of the treaty with the rajah of Bhurtpore was owing entirely to the treachery of that prince; and read an extract from a letter of lord Wellesley, written in the month of Oct. 1803, which shewed diet his lordship had a high opinion of him. He took notice of the appointment of sir George Barlow, as a proof of the acknowledged necessity of changing the Indian system.
Mr. Secretary Foxrequested the indulgence of the house, merely to state, in allusion to what had fallen from the hon. director (Mr. Grant), that this majesty's ministers did not, in the appointment of sir G. Barlow, mean to pledge themselves to the pursuit of any particular system of government in India. The fact was, that the appointment of the hon. bart. referred to, for whom he entertained a high respect, was made even before the present administration was fully formed, in order to prevent the inconvenience of any interregnum in India.
Lord Templedeclared, that he would not have said a word about the transaction of Bhurtpore, were it not for an extract having been read from a commendatory letter, written by lord Wellesley at the time that he entertained a favourable opinion of the rajah; but, in a very short time after, he detected a correspondence of his with Holkar, for the purpose of forming a project to drive the English out of India. He piedged himself to prove, when the discussion came on, direct treachery on the part of that prince; and that the ruin of Holkar was only prevented by his lending him the cannon of the fort of Bhurtpore, at the time 389 that he was himself in alliance with the company. He begged of the house to suspend, till the discussion came on, their opinion of the conduct of the noble marquis, which was approved of by the secret committee of the court of directors, whose orders he was bound to obey.
§ Mr. Francis. —Sir; Before I begin what I intended to say on the present motion, or rather on some collateral subjects connected with it, I beg leave to take notice of a passage in the latter part of the speech of the hon. director Op the other side (Mr. Grant). He said that the name and character of sir George Barlow ought not to be called in question, because he was not here to defend himself; much less was it just or decent to canvass the merits of any man by anonymous publications in the newspapers. That he was a person of long standing and great merit in the company's service; that, on this ground, he had been confirmed in the office of governor-general by an unanimous resolution of the court of directors, confirmed and ratified by a most deliberate and most solemn act of his majesty's present government, which he had no reason to think was not the act of the whole administration. At all events, he was now fixed in his office by concurrent resolutions of all the lawful authorities of this country. That he ought to have fair play; that his merits should be tried by his future conduct; and that, on no account, would it be just to condemn the said sir George Barlow unheard; with many other general topics of the same. Now, sir, I desire it to be observed, that though this gentleman's name and merits have been repeatedly introduced in this house, they never were mentioned, much less have they ever been canvassed by me, either here or any where else; and for a very good reason; because I myself know nothing about him. In that question I have no personal interest or information, nor a concern of any kind. What I have heard of his conduct in office, from pretty good authority, is certainly not in his favour. My information comes to me, in various ways, from the India House, and nominally from some gentlemen in the direction, who, till very lately, made no secret of their opinion. Now I would ask the hon. director, a few plain and, as I think, parliamentary questions on the case in hand, if he will allow me that freedom. Do the court of directors, does he himself approve of lord Wellesley's proceedings?—of what part? and to what 390 extent? Or do they and he condemn those proceedings, without any saving clause, without a reserve or a qualification of any kind, excepting perhaps the second war against Tippoo Sultan? If he answers this last question in the affirmative, as I am sure he will, I then ask him what was the conduct of sir George Barlow, who stood next to the governor-general, and was the first in his council? Did he ever oppose or even remonstrate against any one act of lord Wellesley's government, good, bad, or indifferent? Did he not vigorously support, did he not heartily concur in all those acts? Did this conduct of sir George Barlow entitle him to the approbation of his hon. employers, or did it meet with their severest indignation? But now he is immoveably fixed in his high station, and we ought to look forward. I think so, not generally, but in this special case, because it will not bear a retrospect.—As I perceive that the motion made by my hon. friend is not to be opposed, I shall content myself with saying that I should vote for it on the same general principle on which I have always acted. And indeed, how is it possible, that this particular motion should he resisted? The papers in question have been made public by the court of directors. They have been communicated to a general court of proprietors, and laid open to the inspection of every individual owner of India stock. Can the intelligence contained in such papers be called a secret? Or is the house of commons alone unfit to be trusted with it? Why, sir, a most material article in this intelligence is already in print. I have read this day in a newspaper, an extract of a letter from lord Cornwallis, dated the 9th of August 1805, in which he tells the directors, that an enquiry into the state of "their finances afforded the most discouraging prospect; that, unless some very speedy measures were taken to reduce their expences, it would be impossible to meet with effect the contingency of war; that the most burthensome and least useful part of the existing military expences arose from very numerous bodies of irregular troops, entertained at an expence of near 60,000l. sterling per month; who, if dismissed, would be less formidable to us in the field, than while they remain so distressing a drain upon our finances! At this period, your regular troops are little short of live months, and many of your public 391 departments, on which any movement of your armies depends, still more in arrear!" The only expedient which occurs to his lordship for relief, is "the detention of the treasure destined for China, viz. 200,000l. and strongly to urge the government of Madras to spare 50,000l. of the specie allotted for the service of that presidency." This is had news certainly, and impossible to be concealed. Or would it mend the matter, if you were able and willing, to suppress it? I shall vote, I say, for this motion on the same general principle, on which I have always acted, and which has been professed by persons of greater authority, full as explicitly as by myself, I mean by the board of controul, ever since its institution, and particularly by Mr. Dundas and lord Castlereagh at all times. Their avowed principle, with regard to all Indian transactions or concerns, was publicity. They courted, they invited discussion. On these subjects, they were quite delighted to have their accounts examined, and their opinions sifted to the bottom. Nothing could exceed the good humour of Mr. Dundas, or the politeness of the noble lord. They always appeared to listen to me with an air of civility and sometimes, I confess with an appearance of attention. But I hope no man suspects me of the vanity of presuming that they ever paid the least regard to any thing I said. I am sure they will both acquit me of baying ever interrupted their Indian repose for one moment. For my own part, sir, I have no idea of what can be seriously meant by an Indian state secret. As to an European enemy they are full as well informed as we are; sometimes much sooner, and much better. But perhaps the papers printed for the use of the house of commons, and our debates on the contents, may be carried back to India, may be read by the natives, an either alienate the princes of that country from us, or furnish them with dangerous information. Now, sir, I remain to h convinced, that, out of Calcutta and above the rank of a Banian, there exists a Hindoo a Mohammedan, or a Mahratta, who ever did or could read, I believe I might safely add, who ever heard of an English newspaper. But, were it otherwise; the distance alone would make the publication of any opinions in England, on any given transaction in India, utterly useless and indifferent to those princes, who might have been originally most concerned in it. Observe 392 the case as it always is, and more, or less, as it always must be. An act done ten or twelve months ago, many hundred miles north-west of Calcutta, falls under the consideration of this house. After many adjournments, and sundry debates too, either here or at the India house, some rapid resolution is taken in three or four months. Another year carries back the echo of the first intelligence from London to Lucknow, to Agra, to Delhi, to Ugein, or to Nagpour. Why, sir, long before it is possible for the act or resolution here to reach its destination, a brilliant victory has put an end not only to the original question, but to all the adverse parties concerned in it. The survivors, if any are left, and if any of them can read English, may find a sufficient consolation, where they are not very likely to look for it, in the English newspapers, namely, that all such proceedings are severely condemned by the British parliament; I ask pardon of the house: I am ashamed of arguing these absurdities any longer. The only imaginable case, in which it might be dangerous to publish any information, would be a return of the state of our military force in India, supposing it to be weak in numbers, or otherwise unprepared for service. Not that I believe that even such a publication would tell the enemy on the spot, much more than he might easily have known without it. But is it possible that a member of this house, that any but a fool or traitor, that any man in his senses would offer such a motion? And, if he did, could such a motion prevail? Would the house suffer it to pass? Would they endure to hear it proposed? I put the case only as applied to an army greatly reduced, and actually weak or unserviceable. For otherwise, if the army in India were strong and complete to its establishment, and as well equipped as it ought to be, I am not at all satisfied that there might not be an advantage in making it known to our enemies on the continent. It might probably deter them from attempting to disturb us in India. Sir, I will not descend so low as to disclaim any idea of personal emnity to lord Wellesley, or to admit the possibility that such a disclaimer, on my part, should be necessary. I defy the acutest human sagacity to assign a rational motive, of any kind, for such animosity. But, without a ray of wit or wisdom, it is easy enough to discover a very sufficient motive, which might have induced me to take oppo- 393 site course. Setting aside these low as well as useless personalities, what has been the general current of the debate this night, with only one exception? Has it not run entirely on the rectitude of the principles exclusively attributed to lord Cornwallis, and the merit of his conduct acknowledged by all men? Why? Because the principles and the conduct, so universally approved, were in direct and irreconcileable opposition to those of lord Wellesley, whose acts were cut down, whose whole system was subverted root and branch, without reserve, without even the form of a personal palliation, by his noble successor. Now I appeal to the honour and to the justice of the house, and of every man who hears me. What do all these acknowledgments of exalted merit in lord Cornwallis, and all this approbation of his conduct amount to, but an admission, nay much more than an admission, a positive parliamentary assertion, that, front first to last, every thing I have said and done about India was right? Is it possible for the Court of directors, or for my right hon. friend (Mr. Fox) to concur in the principles, and to applaud the proceedings of lord Cornwallis, and not to condemn lord Wellesley? Those extremities can never meet. No human faculty can reconcile such contradictions. To endeavour to trim or to balance between them would be as useless and ineffectual as it would be criminal and contemptible. I shall now, sir, request the benevolent attention of the house to a short digression, by no means unconnected with the subject of this debate, though relating immediately to myself and to my own situation. It is the only return I shall ask, for a faithful service of thirty years in this department; because it is all that I expect to receive on that account. I hope the house will hear me with indulgence; and the rather as it will probably be the last time, that I shall ever address you on any interest of mine connected with the subject of India. I state it then as a narrative merely, and not to revive any former argument or difference with any man, that I passed six years in Bengal in perpetual contest and misery, and finally with the imminent hazard of my life. For the truth of this assertion, I appeal to the testimony of the hon. chairman of the court of directors, who was on the spot and knows the facts.—Then a wretched passage of ten months to England; and, from that time, a con- 394 tinued labour and perseverance of two-and-twenty years in the same unprofitable course, unsupported and alone, without thanks or reward, and DOW without hope. By endeavouring, through that long portion of my life, to maintain, as I thought, right against wrong, I have incurred many enmities, and secured no friendship; I have sacrificed my happiness and my repose, and forfeited every prospect of personal advantage. Have you a doubt on this point? Look at the state of dereliction, in which I am left. I make no complaint of what is past: but I have a right to pause, and consider how I shall proceed hereafter. I have done so. I have considered my situation, and I have made up my mind upon it. It is for others to weigh the probable consequences and natural effect of the example, now in their view, upon the public service not only in India, but in every other department. What practical lesson does it inculcate, but simply this; Take care of yourselves? I do not know that the instruction was much wanted; but I am sure it will not be neglected. My deliberate intention is to withdraw myself generally from the discussion of political questions purely and properly Indian, and not involving any immediate British interest; and specially not to take an active part, much less a lead in the impeachment, prosecution, or censure of any Indian delinquency whatsoever. This intention concerns nobody but myself. I make no contract with any man, and I bold myself completely at liberty to depart from it whenever I think proper. This, sir, is not a resolution wholly new in me, or suddenly taken on the present occasion. That principal part of it, which relates to the invidious though meritorious office of a prosecutor, as I still think it, was taken long ago. I will never be concerned in impeaching any body. The impeachment of Mr. Hastings has cured me of that folly. I was tried, and he was acquitted. In all the late proceedings concerning lord Melville, I have never uttered one word; though, considering the contest and contradiction in which I stood against Mr. Dundas in this house for twenty years together, it cannot be denied that I had spurs and provocations enough, if I were capable of yielding to such motives, to stimulate me to take part in the impeachment of lord Melville. Nor will I now concern myself in any proceeding to prosecute or censure lord Wellesley. On the subject of 395 his administration I have already done all that I meant to do, and more than I promised. What I said, was in my place. What I have written, is on record. I do not think that, on the whole, my speech on the 5th of April, 1805, was ill received by any man. In particular, I do believe that, generally at least, I had the concurrence of the eminent person and most eloquent minister, who is gone. He sat opposite to me. He gave me a fair uninterrupted attention, and, as I thought, with many expressive though silent indications of assent. It is indeed to be regretted that he yielded to the noble lord on the other side (lord Castlereagh) in setting aside the motion of that day, though neither of them thought fit to contradict it. They, who are disposed to enquire what I really meant by that proceeding, and to do me fair and honourable justice, are requested to consult the record. I said expressly that "the motion, with which I should conclude, was not directed to personal accusation or to parliamentary censure. My purpose was to do a public service; not to criminate, but to correct; by engaging the house of commons to revert to their principles, to avow them once more, and to adhere to them hereafter." I thought it would have strengthened lord Cornwallis; and assisted him essentially in his endeavours to satisfy the minds , and to recover the confidence of the Mahratta chiefs and other princes of India. For though I believe that his name, and their opinion of his personal character might have gone a great way in reconciling them to the British government, still it would have been a powerful auxiliary argument in his hand, if he had been specially commissioned by the house of Commons to declare to them, in the name of his country, that he had a security to offer them, which would not perish with him; that the principles he professed, and the pledge he gave them for their future tranquillity, were not confined to the life of any individual. They were the permanent principles and the irrevocable pledge, by which the legislature of Great Britain had declared they would be bound for ever. I agree with the hon. director (Mr. Huddle-stone) in lamenting that so useful and inoffensive a, proposition should have been rejected, and that so favourable an opportunity of applying it should have been lost. But while I acknowledge and thank him for the kind and honourable terms, in 396 which he has been pleased to address me, I cannot accede to his request. I cannot say more than I have done in favour of the motion, which he wishes me to revive, and I will not expose it to the hazard of a second rejection. A similar motion could not be resumed by any man with greater propriety than by himself. Whoever makes it, shall have all the support that it is in my little power to give him. On another point the hon. and worthy director is perfectly right, and has done justice to my opinion. I should be happy if I could impute any part of the honour he has done me this night, to personal friendship. My acquaintance with him is too slight and of too late a date to intitle me to any claim of that kind. He says that "I have declared the directors free from any- blame for the evils existing in India." It is true. In the transactions, to which my opinion refers, the court of directors, as such, are not parties, and are not to be condemned. They are not merely passive, but, as I have reason to believe, most studiously and constantly kept in the dark. The political power of the court is in fact confined to a select committee of three, who alone are intrusted with the state secrets of the company, and who deliberate and transact with nobody but the president of the board of controul. These two powers keep faith with one another; that is, they observe a profound silence not only to the public, but even to their colleagues in the direction, until the secret bursts of itself with ruin on their heads. The noble lord near me (lord Temple) who, I perceive with sorrow, is not so lavish as he has been heretofore, in favouring me with the title of his hon. friend," declares that lord Wellesley has acted always, as to the great points in question, under the orders or instructions of this secret committee. It may be so. The house of commons have no knowledge of the documents the noble lord alludes to; nor have I ever seen a single line of them. If lord Wellesley has such orders to plead, undoubtedly he will produce them in his own justification. Until I see what they contain, I can say nothing on that subject. With respect to the declaration, which I have made this night, I wish to add a few words before I conclude, because it is of importance to me that my meaning should not be misunderstood. I am not, nor will I be, standing counsel for the company, or for the nation, on the subject of India. I have laboured too, long, I need hardly 397 say, without fee or reward, in that unthankful and most invidious office. Has any individual, or any party, has this house, or has the nation, a right to expect more of me? Neither am I able, if I were ever so well disposed to continue this unavailing labour. My spirits are exhausted. My mind is subdued. And, if it were otherwise, my assistance new is not so necessary in this department as I have thought it hitherto. Several younger men with a spirit as high as their rank, and of great ability, are coming forward in this line. I congratulate the house and the country on this flattering appearance and premise on the part of the rising generation. They will do more than I could, and much more than supply the little place, which I have occupied. I hope they will not be discouraged by difficulties or by labour, nor even by the example that has been made of their humble predecessor. Above all things, I conjure this house once more, not to throw any discouragement in their way. I have stated my intention clearly; but, again I say, I am my own master, and I will give no account of my future conduct to any man. There is one view only, in which I shall at .all times hold myself bound to attend to future proceedings in parliament on questions connected with the India company; nor is it possible for me to do otherwise, without abdicating the duties of my station in this house. As long as I have the honour of a seat in parliament, I shall watch and take care, to the utmost of my power, to prevent the finances of Britain from being ruined by those of India. I have now passed more than 30 year in endeavouring to support the lawful authority of the East-India company over their nominal servants abroad; to guard their rights, and to protect their property from ruin. I have laboured to preserve the peace of India, and to shelter the native princes of that unfortunate country from injustice, conquest, and oppression. In the execution of these labours I confess I have had no success, nor scarce a good word from any man: the only duly that is new left to me, the only chance I yet have of being useful either to this country or even to the India company, is to protect England not against the company, but against India and its government.
§ Sir T. Metcalferead a passage from a letter of lord Lake to the governor-general, in which the treachery of the rajah of Bhurtpore was placed in the strongest light. 398 That rajah had received one third more than his right of the country conquered from Scindia, and it was immediately after receiving that boon, that his treacherous connection with Holkar was discovered. As to marquis Wellesley, he knew little of him but as a public man; he had no hesitation to say, however, that he considered him as the greatest statesman that had ever been in India. Such a man exercising such talents for the public good, was rather hardly treated, when he was received, on his return home, with accusation instead of acclamation. He wished the noble marquis's conduct to be sifted, however; as, the more it was sifted, the more the result would be to his honour.
Lord Folkestonerose and said: Mr. Speaker; the hon. bart. (sir T. Metcalfe) below me, has in his speech renewed the charge just brought by the noble lord (Temple) below him, of treachery on the part of the Rajah of Bhurtpore. I will not at present enter into that transaction; because it is likely to be more fully discussed to-morrow, and is therefore now premature, and because perhaps I know less of the motion than I ought. But on the first blush of the business I must say, that the term treachery seems to be here most strangely applied. This rajah is a native prince of India, having natural connections with the country; we have none such, but ere really invaders, seeking to establish a dominion and to acquire an empire. In these circumstances, if these or other native chiefs should take measures for preventing us, or for expelling us, it seems to me that it might be attributed to other dispositions than those of perfidy, and such conduct be called by another name than treachery. However, we shall hear more of this hereafter.—I should not, sir, have made this observation, if I had not been called up by something else which fell, in the course of his speech, from the hon. bart. He complains that my lord Wellesley's character is continually attacked by a side-wind; and of the ungenerous reception which he has met with on his return to this country. Now, it seems to me I confess, very natural, and I am sure it is very competent, for members of this house, who have the good of the country at heart, to make the enquiries and to stir the questions, which the hon. bart. complains of. For when we consider what we have witnessed in the last 12 months, and what we now daily bear on the subject of India af- 399 fairs; when we recollect, that lord Cornwallis was sent out to India for the express purpose of undoing all lord Wellesley had done, of overturning all his schemes, and putting an end to all his projects; when we observe too, the joy that has been expressed by all those most interested in India affairs, at the expectation that those schemes and projects are now put an end to, and never to be renewed;—when we observe that every person who has spoken in this debate, with the exception of the hon. bart and the noble lord, have joined in that expression of joy; it does not appear to me very extraordinary, that some enquiries should be made into the nature and plan of that administration, the termination of which is so great and so general a matter of exultation. But, sir, this is not all; the derangement of the affairs, and the exhausted state of the finances, of the East-India company are now confessed and allowed: and when we know that the company is now reduced to the necessity of coming to us to give them aid and relief, and we hear that they are most unwilling to bring any charge against lord Wellesley, and abstain, not because they do not condemn his policy, but because they think well of his intentions, it is not surprising that others, less placable than these gentlemen, should now and then in the course of debate express sentiments of disapprobation at his conduct.—The noble bart. says this is attacking the noble lord by a side-wind. I do not agree with him. I do not think it is fair to complain of so natural a proceeding. Sir; after the length to which this debate has run, I shall not add any more. I have been called up by the observations of the hon. bart. and I was glad to have an opportunity of noticing the universal expression of dissatisfaction from all sides of the house at the conduct of lord Wellesley.
§ Mr. Charles Grantrose to explain. With respect to sir G. Barlow, he observed, that whatever part he had taken in the measures of marquis Wellesley, was not inconsistent with the system he was now to pursue. The two Mahratta wars had come on so rapidly, that it was impossible to have any opinion upon them from this country. He was at present in possession of the opinion of his superiors, and had honestly declared his determination to act in conformity with it. Whatever other gentlemen might think upon the subject, he was himself convinced, that there was nothing dishonourable in the part that gentleman took in the mea- 400 sures of the marquis Wellesley's administration. The hon. director, before he sat down, said, he could not help bearing his testimony to the rectitude of the principles and conduct of the hon. gent. (Mr. Francis), not only in Bengal, but in Enggland.
§ Mr. Francis,in explanation, said:—Sir, I am obliged to the worthy direct for the testimony he has borne to the rectitude of my principles and conduct, not only in Bengal, but in England, that is, with respect to the government of India, and the true interests of the India company. In fact, however, he has done more than I asked, or expected of him. The appeal I made to him, related solely and expressly to my labours and sufferings in India, and not to my merits at home or abroad. Of the former he was an eye-witness: no man has a higher opinion of his moral character than I have. On the facts in question, there cannot be a more competent witness, nor any human evidence less to be suspected.
§ Mr. Wallacewas of opinion that the policy, the measures, and the whole of the system acted upon by lord Wellesley, were wise and highly beneficial, and when the subject came under discussion, he should be ready to state the grounds upon which he thought the services of that noble lord entitled him to the gratitude of the house and of the country.
§ Mr. Johnstonerose to express his thanks to the right hon. gent. (Mr. Fox) for consenting to the production of the papers. He was glad to find that the court of directors were disposed to support the present system begun by lord Cornwallis, and that his right hon. friend retained his former sentiments on this subject. He remarked upon the difference which was known to prevail as to the system of government which ought to be acted upon in India, between the opinions formerly expressed by some of the present ministers, and the course now pursuing in that quarter. He was glad, however, now to have the. doubts which naturally rose out of the difference alluded to, completely removed by a declared change of sentiment.
Mr. Secretary Foxobserved upon the logic and the prudence evinced by the last speaker. His logic, he thought, by no means just, and his prudence was certainly not laudable. For as to his logic, it did not follow that because gentlemen thought proper to adopt a certain line of policy, 401 under certain circumstances, they would be subject to the imputation of inconsistency in pursuing a different line where those circumstances had undergone a material change; and as to the hon. gent.'s prudeuce, it surely was not laudable to press the charge of inconsistency upon any men who might shew a disposition to abandon opinions which the hon. gent. himself pronounced erroneous, and to adopt those which he professed to consider correctly right.—The several papers moved for were ordered to be laid before the house.