APPOINTMENT OF MR. LAWLEY TO THE GOVERNORSHIP OF SOUTH AUSTRA LIA.

HC Deb 03 August 1854 vol 135 cc1225-59

On the Order of the Day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means,

SIR GEORGE GREY

—Sir, the right hon. Baronet the Member for Droitwich (Sir John Pakington) has given notice of his intention to call the attention of the House to the circumstances under which Her Majesty has been pleased to appoint the hon. Francis Lawley to the office of Governor of South Australia. Circumstances, Sir, have come to my knowledge within the last few days which induced me, not long ago, to address a note to the right hon. Baronet to say that I was anxious before he addressed the House in pur suance of that notice to make a statement to the House, which with its permission I will now proceed to do. Of course, after I have made that statement it will be for the right hon. Baronet or any other hon. Member to adopt such course as his sense of public duty may lead him to think fitting. I am desirous in the first place—as I am responsible for submitting to Her Majesty the name of Mr. Lawley for appointment to the governorship of South Australia—to state frankly and unreservedly at once the circumstances under which I submitted that advice to Her Majesty. When I was intrusted with the seals of the Colonial Department, but a day or two before I had actually received them from Her Majesty, I had several conferences with the Duke of Newcastle, my immediate predecessor, in which was stated the various matters of business then pending in that department, over which he had presided. Among other things he communicated to me the arrangements which he had recently made with respect to filling up various important colonial governments which were becoming in course of time vacant. He stated to me the arrangements he had made with respect to the governments of Canada, of New Brunswick, and of Norfolk Island. He stated that Sir Charles Fitzroy's term of service having expired some time ago, it had been intimated to him that he would be released from his duties in the course of the present year, and he had submitted to Her Majesty the name of Sir William Denison, the present Governor of Van Diemen's Land, as the successor to Sir Charles Fitzroy, in New South Wales. The noble Duke told me also that he had submitted to Her Majesty the name of Sir Henry Young, the present Governor of South Australia, for the governorship of New Zealand, which had become vacant by the appointment of the Governor of New Zealand to be the Governor of the Cape of Good Hope. He then informed me that, being of opinion that among gentlemen administering the government of other colonies of less importance there was no one who had particular claims on the grounds of public service or public conduct, upon the consideration of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, he had offered the governorship of South Australia to Mr. Lawley. He stated to me that his acquaintance with Mr. Lawley was not of above six months duration, but that from the acquaintance which he had had, and the opinion which he had received of Mr. Lawley's character from those in whom he could place confidence, he was of opinion that it was desirable that a gentleman in his position, of his character, and with his abilities, should accept colonial service under the Crown. He stated to me that he had been anxious to obtain the services of Mr. Lawley as Governor of South Australia, but that, as he was then on the point of surrendering the seals of the Colonial Office, he had requested Mr. Lawley to give him an immediate decision with respect to whether he was, or was not, willing to accept the governorship of South Australia. Mr. Lawley was inclined to accept the governorship, but was anxious, as a man must naturally be under such circumstances, to hold some communication with his family and his friends before he gave a decision which might affect the whole course of his future life. He asked, therefore, that a delay of a few days might be given him for deliberation. The Duke of Newcastle informed me that he had stated, in answer to that request, to Mr. Lawley, that, as he only held the seals of the Colonial Department till I had received those seals, as I should do on the next or following day, and as he should merely transact the business of the department while I was absent from London during my re-election, he did not feel that he could give the three days for deliberation which Mr. Lawley had asked for, but that he must give an affirmative or negative decision at once. He undertook, however, if the decision were a negative one, to mention the name of Mr. Lawley to me, to state all that had passed with respect to his appointment, and to inform me that had he remained Secretary of State for the Colonies he should have submitted the name of Mr. Lawley to Her Majesty for appointment to the governorship of South Australia, if Mr. Lawley, after the few days' deliberation he desired, had been disposed to accept that appointment. I am anxious to state frankly and unreservedly to the House—and I have the Duke of Newcastle's full permission to do so—what passed between us on the occasion to which I refer. Mr. Lawley was wholly unknown to me. I have seen him engaged within this House, and have sat on the same side of the House with him during the last year and a half; but certainly I have never been thrown into his society, nor been upon such terms with him as could authorise me to claim him as the most common acquaintance. The Duke of Newcastle informed me that he thought it right to state the only drawback which in his opinion might be alleged against the appointment of Mr. Lawley arose from a fact which, under the circumstances, he did not consider to be a sufficient bar to his appointment. The Duke of Newcastle told me that, like many young men, I fear, in his position in society, he had early in life been addicted to—I hardly know hew to describe it in ordinary language, but all will understand what I mean—had been unfortunately "on the turf." He had, in early life, been inclined to horse-racing, a habit adopted in common with many other men of high rank and society in this country; but he submitted to me that, so far from thinking this circumstance a bar to the appointment of Mr. Lawley, or as constituting an objection to his appointment, it was, on the contrary, a recommendation under the circumstances which I am about to state. [Laughter.] Hon. Gentlemen opposite may laugh, but I certainly should not have expected theta party which recognised the late lamented Lord George Bentinck as their leader in this House, and who have served under the Government of Lord Derby, would have considered this as an objection. I certainly should not have thought to have heard them sneer at the employment of a person who had been so engaged, or consider that it was an absolute disqualification for office that a man had been so engaged. I pass that by, however, because if hon. Gentlemen will wait till they hear the whole facts, perhaps they will find that their sneers might have been spared. The Duke of Newcastle told me that Mr. Lawley had become deeply impressed with the conviction that the course was one which could not be abandoned too early; and he had stated that his earnest desire was to break off from those habits in which, unfortunately, I say, and say it honestly, he had been employed. Mr. Lawley stated that he had accepted the office of private secretary to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer with a view to engage himself in higher and more useful pursuits, and that his desire for colonial government was partly prompted by a wish that he might be removed absolutely beyond the reach of temptation, and a recurrence to those habits which it had been his anxious desire to break off. The Duke of Newcastle further informed me that he did not con- sider I was bound by what had passed between himself and Mr. Lawley. He gave me his opinion, as I have already stated, that Mr. Lawley was well qualified for the appointment in question, and that it would conduce to the public service if he were so appointed. When I accepted the seals of the Colonial Office, I found that the governorship of South Australia was vacant by Her Majesty having approved of the appointment of Sir Henry Young, the then Governor of that colony, to another important government. I had not, as I said before, the slightest personal acquaintance with Mr. Lawley; and under these circumstances I did not feel myself bound, after what had passed between the Duke of Newcastle and myself, to renew the offer of that appointment to Mr. Lawley. I understood that I was perfectly free; and wishing to shrink from no responsibility in this matter, I wish to state explicitly to the House that I considered myself perfectly free to submit to Her Majesty the name of any gentleman for the appointment of Governor of South Australia. So much was I under that conviction, that I had actually made inquiries with respect to another gentleman, in order to ascertain his qualifications and his willingness to undertake that office, and I intended to have made the offer to that other gentleman, if, under all the circumstances, he, had been willing to accept it. But before any decisive steps were taken with respect to filling up this government—about three weeks ago, or less—I received a communication through my private secretary from Mr. Lawley, which, I confess, gave a very different aspect to the case from that in which I had before viewed it. I was then informed, for the first time, that Mr. Lawley was under a different impression from that under which the Duke of Newcastle was, and what he had communicated to me as his impression, and which, in justice to the Duke of Newcastle, I am bound to say, he has since most explicitly confirmed. Mr. Lawley stated that he conceived, from what bad passed between the Duke of Newcastle and himself, that he was not to be considered as having declined the appointment—that the time for which he asked had been allowed him, in order to consider the subject—and that for a period, during the continuance of the present Session, he had understood that it was at his option either to decline or accept the appointment. He stated that he had made up his mind, upon full consideration and com- munication with those with whom be had previously desired to consult, to accept the governorship of South Australia, and he expressed some surprise that he had not received any communication from me on the subject. I received this information, certainly, with some surprise, because it was contrary to the impressions which, as I have already said, I had formed from the statement of the Duke of Newcastle. I spoke to a right hon. Friend of mine, a relative of Mr. Lawley, in this House, and I found that he was under the same impression as Mr. Lawley, and that not only Mr. Lawley, but that his family and friends were under the impression that the governorship of the colony had been offered to him, and that it was in his power to decline or accept the office. I stated this fact to the Duke of Newcastle; and, again, I am bound to say, in justification of the noble Duke, he stated that the impression existing in the mind of Mr. Lawley, and of his friends, was not that which they were warranted in entertaining; that Mr. Lawley had not, it was true, declined the appointment, and that the Duke of Newcastle had undertaken to mention it to me; but that I was as free to deal with the appointment as if, instead of being a colleague of the noble Duke's, I had succeeded him as a political opponent. With me, therefore, must rest the responsibility of having submitted the name of Mr. Lawley to Her Majesty, for the appointment to the governorship of the colony of South Australia. I had to consider what my public duty required of me. I knew nothing whatever of Mr. Lawley—nothing I may say against him, not even a whisper of suspicion with respect to any transactions in which he had been engaged; and, as honourable men as any that live in this country are engaged on the turf and in horse-racing, I did not think the circumstance of Mr. Lawley having been so concerned constituted a sufficient reason why I, in the position in which I stood, should reverse the decision to which the Duke of Newcastle had come to with respect to the person to be appointed to the governorship of an important colony. Upon the other hand, I knew nothing of Mr. Lawley, and not having known anything of him, I did not, as I have said before, feel justified in making any renewed offer to him. He certainly is not a gentleman to whom—entirely front the absence of all knowledge of him, whether positive or negative, as regards his character—to whom I should have offered the government, nor was his a name which I should have submitted to Her Majesty for the Governor of an important colony. But when I found that he had been for some weeks under the impression that he was to succeed Sir Henry Young in the government of South Australia—when I found from inquiries among his friends, and when, from contemporaries at the University—who certainly cannot be considered as inferior judges of a man's abilities, where he obtained high distinction—I received the highest testimonials as to the ability and character of Mr. Lawley—I felt that I was in this position—I must either submit his name to Her Majesty, confiding in the assurances of those who had the means of knowing him, and all whose opinions would lead me to suppose that he was admirably qualified for the post which he desired to occupy; or, upon the other hand, without a breath of suspicion having reached me against Mr. Lawley, that I should be acting contrary to their opinions by pronouncing his unfitness for the appointment, in refusing to submit his name to Her Majesty, and thus have cast a stigma upon him which was wholly unmerited. Having obtained all the information I could from every quarter with respect to the ability of Mr. Lawley, I told my right hon. Friend (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), that although I knew nothing of that gentleman, and should not have chosen him myself, still that under all the circumstances of the case I was prepared, in accordance with his opinion, with that of the Duke of Newcastle, and of others who knew Mr. Lawley, and had had opportunities of judging of his character which I did not possess, rather than do any injury or wrong to him, and believing from all that I had heard that he would make an efficient Governor of South Australia, to submit his name to Her Majesty for that appointment. I did so submit the name to Her Majesty, and Her Majesty approved the appointment. For that recommendation I am responsible to Her Majesty, and for Her Majesty's approval of Mr. Lawley's appointment I alone am responsible. Immediately after that appointment was known—and it was known, I think, on the very day on which I received Her Majesty's approval of the appointment—the right hon. Baronet the Member for Droitwich placed upon the notice paper of the House a question to be addressed to me on the following day, asking whether Mr. Lawley had been appointed, and whether it was the intention of the Government to submit the name of Mr. Lawley to Her Majesty for appointment as Governor of South Australia, or any other colony. When I saw that notice, I can assure the House I had not even a suspicion of any circumstances connected with Mr. Lawley to which that notice could point. I came down to the House prepared to have heard from the right hon. Baronet the grounds which would have justified his putting a question which certainly was one of an unusual character. The right hon. Baronet stated no grounds for putting his question, and I need not say I do not complain of this, because the right hon. Baronet is a political opponent, and was not bound to communicate to me any public or private information which he possessed. From that day to this I have received not the slightest information with respect to the grounds upon which that question was put. I answered the question, therefore, in the only way in which I could answer it in accordance with the strictest truth, namely, that Her Majesty had been advised to appoint Mr. Lawley to the government of South Australia, and that I had advised the appointment. That question was put to me this day week, and I stated, in private to Members of this House, that I was utterly at a loss to know what that question pointed at, and that I should be thankful to be informed, in order that any valid objection to Mr. Lawley might have been investigated fairly and fully, but I was unable to take the slightest movement towards instituting such an inquiry. I should state that immediately before I submitted the name of Mr. Lawley to Her Majesty, I spoke to my right hon. Friend the Recorder of London (Mr. Stuart Wortley), in order to ascertain what his impressions were with respect to the effect of what had passed between the Duke of Newcastle and Mr. Lawley with respect to this appointment. He, as I should have expected from him, fairly told me what the Duke of Newcastle had told me before, namely, that Mr. Lawley had been "upon the turf," and he felt that that might be an objection; but he stated at the same time, in the most explicit terms which I could desire, that there was not a single debt or liability outstanding to which Mr. Lawley was now subject, or in order to evade which he might be desirous of leaving this country on receiving the appointment. The facts, therefore, as they were known to me were—that Mr. Lawley, as I have said has been the case with too many young men to their loss, and it may be to their ultimate ruin, had been early engaged in transactions on "the turf;" but that not one whisper of dishonourable conduct in connection with that pursuit had then reached or has yet reached me; and that there was no outstanding debt or liability to which Mr. Lawley was subject on that account. If there had been, I should have felt that I was departing widely from my duty as a Minister of the Crown in submitting to Her Majesty the name of a gentleman with whom it might be an object to remove himself from the reach of those means which might be used against him in order to enforce the settlement of his liabilities. Upon this point the statement made to me by my right hon. Friend the Recorder of London was clear and unambiguous. On Friday last, after the morning sitting of the House, I returned to my office, and shortly before six o'clock, when about to return to the House, the Duke of Newcastle came to my room, and told me that he felt it his duty to come to me and inform me at the earliest moment he could, that from two separate quarters, in the course of that day, he had received information of rumours being in circulation highly injurious to the character of Mr. Lawley. He did not tell me from whom the information was derived, but stated that it was received in one instance from a Peer, and in the other from a right hon. Gentleman well known to himself as well as to me, but whose name he did not state. He told me the nature of those rumours, and as I am anxious that the House should be in full possession of all the circumstances connected with the case, hon. Members will think, perhaps, that I am only doing my duty if I state what was the nature of those rumours which were stated to me in the course of conversation. The communication was made in conversation, and I have no record of it, but I believe I shall be able to state the purport. The Duke of Newcastle stated that he had been informed that very recently Mr. Lawley had become subject to heavy liabilities and debts in connection with transactions on the turf. He told me besides that there were rumours of a much more serious character as affecting the conduct, position, and character of Mr. Lawley—namely, that Mr. Lawley had availed himself of the official knowlege ac- quired as private secretary to the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to engage in extensive speculations in the funds. The Duke of Newcastle was on his way to the House of Lords, and was obliged to leave me almost immediately. I believe that I stated to him the course I should pursue under these circumstances, but at all events the purport of what the noble Duke stated to me I have now stated to the House, and there could be no doubt as to the course which I ought immediately to adopt. I immediately put aside the business on which I was engaged, and addressed a letter to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer—Mr. Lawley then being out of town—and I told him the extreme surprise and concern with which I had just received this information from the Duke of Newcastle. I told him that I was assured of his entire concurrence in what I said, and that it would likewise meet with the concurrence of the Duke of Newcastle, that if there was any foundation of truth in these rumours it would be impossible that the appointment of Mr. Lawley could proceed. I stated my most earnest hope that he would be able to disprove the truth of these rumours, and that they would be found to be destitute of foundation, and that until the receipt of satisfactory information I should suspend all further proceedings with respect to the appointment of Mr. Lawley; and that in justice to him, in justice to myself, in justice to the Government, and in justice to the colony to which he was to be appointed, these reports should be communicated to Mr. Lawley at the earliest opportunity in order that he might have the means and opportunity which every man was justly entitled to, of knowing what had been said in regard to him, and having every opportunity of explaining or refuting the charges. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer immediately came to me. He told me that Mr. Lawley was out of town, that he would be in London on the following night, and I asked him what course it would be best to take with the view of bringing these facts and rumours under the notice of Mr. Lawley. He said that Mr. Lawley was to be in town the next day, and asked my opinion as to whether it was desirable that he should transmit by the post of that evening my letter to him to Mr. Lawley. As Mr. Lawley was to be in town the following day, we thought that, by sending the letter, we might incur the risk of his not only receiving it, and I thought the best way was, that my right hon. Friend should write to Mr. Lawley to say that he had received such a letter, in order to ensure his early arrival in town. On Monday morning the House sat at twelve o'clock. I was present, and asked my right hon. Friend the Recorder of London (Mr. Stuart Wortley) whether he had seen Mr. Lawley, and I was informed by him that Mr. Lawley had gone to my office in Downing-street with a view to see me there. I was in this House at the time, and my private secretary, who is also a Member of this House, was likewise here. Very shortly after that communication was made to me, after I had been informed of Mr. Lawley's desire to see me, with the view of completely denying the truth of these reports, I received through my private secretary a letter addressed to him, which he put into my hands in this House, and which contained, as it appeared to me, a clear, satisfactory, and conclusive denial of by far the most serious charge and imputation which had been brought against Mr. Lawley, namely, the fact of his having speculated in the funds upon his official information as the private secretary of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I transmitted that letter immediately to the Duke of Newcastle, because, as it was through his Grace alone that these reports had reached me, I was desirous that he should see the terms in which the charges had been met, and I was anxious not to rely wholly on my own judgment, though I fairly avow that in writing to his Grace, I stated my belief that the terms in which Mr. Lawley's denial was expressed were quite conclusive in regard to by far the most serious of these imputations. The Duke of Newcastle concurred with me in that view. Subsequently, on meeting the Recorder of London, he renewed to me, as he was empowered to do, the direct denial of there being any liability or debt existing to which Mr. Lawley could be subject, and with a view to avoid which he was desirous of leaving this country. And with reference to that matter, I am anxious to state that in the only interview which I had with Mr. Lawley—the only opportunity which I had of speaking to him on the subject of his appointment—he appeared desirous to fix a time for his departure from this country which I thought too remote, and I told him that if he accepted the appointment I should hold him liable to proceed to the colony whenever I required him to do so, without suiting his own convenience by waiting till a more distant period. I mention that circumstance, because I think it shows that in the only conversation which I had with Mr. Lawley, there was clearly in his mind no desire to leave this country, so as to avoid any liability to which he might be subject, and that, in truth, in accepting the appointment he contemplated a longer residence here than I thought consistent with the public interests to sanction. So matters stood until this day. The right hon. Baronet opposite, in the mean time, gave notice that he would call the attention of the House to the appointment; and I then thought that I should have the opportunity of making this statement to the House, in order that it might be known precisely under what circumstances this appointment had been made, and that I might have an opportunity of referring to the testimonials, certainly of the most satisfactory kind, so far as any man's judgment can be formed from such documents, which I had received as to the ability, the honour, and the integrity of Mr. Lawley. But in the course of this morning I received from my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer a communication which he made, no doubt, with the deepest regret and concern, and which I need not say I received with the same feelings. From that communication it appeared that Mr. Lawley had been engaged in transactions in the funds within the last few months which, to a certain extent, justified those rumours which had been stated to me, and with regard to which I had expressed my opinion—an opinion in which my noble Friend the Duke of Newcastle entirely concurred—that if there was any foundation of truth in them the appointment of Mr. Lawley could not proceed. It is due, in justice to Mr. Lawley, to state—and it is within the knowledge of my right hon. Friend that I am able to state with certainty—that the information with regard to these transactions is derived exclusively from Mr. Lawley himself. I am informed that late last night he felt it his duty to communicate to my right hon. Friend the facts, the purport of which was communicated to me to-day. I have stated before that the charge which I understood to have been made against Mr. Lawley was this: that he had availed himself of his official knowledge as private secretary to my right hon. Friend to engage in these speculations in the funds. I have no reason to believe that that is the case. I am informed that the speculations in which Mr. Lawley engaged were losing speculations and not gaining speculations. Mr. Lawley is entitled to the benefit of that statement; but, however he may be affected by it, I am bound to say that in my opinion it did not in the least affect my duty to the Crown, to this country, and to the colony, and I immediately addressed a letter to Her Majesty, expressing my great regret and concern that I had recently submitted for the approval of Her Majesty an appointment which I now felt it my imperative duty, under circumstances which had just come to my knowledge, humbly to advise Her Majesty to revoke. I believe I have now submitted the whole of this painful case. Painful I may say to me it has been to make this statement. Though I have thought it right to state what passed between the Duke of Newcastle and myself before I accepted the seals of the Colonial Office in correction of the impression which existed in the mind of Mr. Lawley and that of his Friends, yet I feel that the responsibility of submitting the name of Mr. Lawley to Her Majesty devolves no doubt on myself; and any censure which the House may feel is due to that act I will humbly and patiently submit to, though, as I have already said, the motives which influenced me were such as I venture to think would have influenced any other man in my position. In the absence of the slightest shadow of suspicion which had been suggested to me as attaching to the integrity and honour of Mr. Lawley, and with the strong testimonials I had in my hand to his ability and qualifications from those in whom I had confidence, I think I could not have acted otherwise than I did. I believe I have now stated, fully, frankly, and unreservedly to the House all the circumstances of this transaction. Having done so, it is for the right hon. Baronet opposite to take any course which his sense of public duty may lead him to take with regard to this subject. I am at this moment absolutely in ignorance of the grounds upon which the right hon. Baronet placed his notice upon the paper. I am told that an application was made to him, before the facts I have stated were known, to ascertain whether he intended to impugn the appointment of Mr. Lawley upon public or private grounds, but that the right hon. Gentleman, in the exercise of a discretion which I do not question, declined to give any such information. If it had not been for Mr. Lawley's own act —if he had not stated fully, freely, and unreservedly to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer the whole circumstances of his transactions in the funds—I should have come down to this House to-night ignorant of the grounds upon which the right hon. Baronet meant to impugn the appointment, and I might thereby have been led to make statements which I might afterwards deeply have regretted, but which Mr. Lawley has now prevented me from being induced to make by the statement which he has himself made. The appointment, as I said before, Her Majesty has been advised to revoke; and I may state here that, when Mr. Lawley made his statement last night, he felt that he was making a statement which would prove fatal to his prospects in the Colonies, and at once declared that he considered his appointment altogether at an end. I have only to add that if, after the statement I have made, the House wishes for further information upon the subject, or thinks that an investigation into all the circumstances of the case should take place, Her Majesty's Government is in the hands of the House and is ready and willing to agree to whatever may be considered necessary.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

notwithstanding the observations with which the right hon. Baronet has closed his speech, I beg to state that I am deeply sensible of the perfect candour with which the right hon. Gentleman has now addressed the House, and that I am no less sensible of the honourable feeling which has distinguished that speech. I can assure the right hon. Baronet that, whatever political differences may divide us, I do not believe that he is a man who would recommend to the Sovereign the appointment of any person to exercise the high and responsible duties of a Colonial Governor, unless he was satisfied of the fitness of that individual; and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will do me equal justice, and will believe that I have approached this painful subject solely and exclusively from a strong and paramount sense of public duty, arising from the deep interest which I naturally take in the welfare of our colonial dependencies. I had no desire to impede the fair advancement of a gentleman towards whom I did not feel, or could not feel, a shadow of personal enmity; nor could I have any desire to wound the feelings of the friends of that gentleman, many of whom are personal friends of my own. But I am unable to agree altogether in the opinion which appears to have been entertained by the Duke of Newcastle, and which the right hon. Baronet, as I understood him, has himself avowed of the personal fitness. irrespective of these painful rumours and transactions, of Mr. Lawley for the situation to which he was appointed. The right hon. Baronet has stated that I gave him no grounds for the question which I put to him this day week. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that if he thought I was deficient in courtesy in the course I then took, or wanting in fairness in not having held communication with him, with regard to the course which I intended to take to-day, no such discourtesy was meant by me. I deeply felt the difficulty and delicacy of the duty which I had undertaken. I was desirous not to say a word more upon this painful subject than I could possibly help; and I can assure the right hon. Baronet, in consequence of the reference which he has made to me, that it was not till within the last few hours that I could conclusively make up my mind as to the course which my public duty required me to take. I have said that I could not concur in the opinion of the Duke of Newcastle with regard to the personal fitness of Mr. Lawley for this appointment; but I think the right hon. Baronet will agree with me, that among the patronage of the Crown, which is exercised by the advisers of the Crown, there is scarcely any which ought to be exercised with greater care and with a more anxious and single-minded reference to the public interests than the appointment of governors for our colonies. Those appointments ought to be made in such a manner as not only to secure the satisfaction and confidence of this country, but what is still more important, to satisfy the colonists over whom the gentlemen so chosen are to preside, that these appointments have been made solely with reference to the interests and welfare of the colonies. If this is true generally, it is especially and peculiarly so with reference to the Australian Colonies at the present moment. The discoveries of gold have put these colonies in a most critical position. They require the anxious care and attention of the Imperial and of the Colonial Governments. The Colony of Victoria at a very recent period, I may without exaggeration say, was almost disorganised. The Colony of South Australia, immediately contiguous to Victoria, although no discoveries of gold have been made within it, has undergone a period of great social and commercial disturbance; and it was desirable for the interests of that colony, and, indeed, of all the Australian Colonies, that any gentleman selected to be governor should possess statesman-like qualities and known abilities. He ought to be a man of great experience in public affairs, of great firmness, and of great judgment. He ought to be a man whose character should at once inspire confidence in his qualifications, and enable him to give a healthy moral tone to that society of which he is to be the head, and ought to be the leader and the guide. Now, sir, I do not think that I at all disparage the claims of Mr. Lawley—I think I say nothing to which the friends of Mr. Lawley can take any fair exception—when I state that, considering his age and position, and his limited experience in public affairs, the appointment of Mr. Lawley, under any circumstances, as governor of one of the Australian colonies at this moment, was one that was but too likely to excite feelings of dissatisfaction in the colony, and was one not likely to conduce to the advantage of those rising communities. But, irrespective of this consideration, when I gave notice of my intended Motion two days ago, the hon. and learned Gentleman the Recorder of London (Mr. Stuart Wortley) adverted to what he spoke of as calumnious rumours, and expressed very naturally his anxiety for an opportunity to meet and dispose of those rumours. The right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Colonies has now again referred to these rumours. He has given fresh proof of their extended currency. They have been commented upon by the public press. [Sir GEORGE GREY: I had not seen them.] They have become the subject of remark in society; and under these circumstances I did feel that my public duty required that I should call the attention of the House and of the Government to this appointment, in order that, before Mr. Lawley left this country to undertake the government of the important colony of South Australia, these rumours, which had become current in every circle, might be set at rest one way or the other. I did feel that it was due to Mr. Lawley himself, that it was due to the Government who appointed him, but, above all, that it was due to the colony, that Mr. Lawley should not commence his career under the dis- advantage of having these rumours preceding his arrival in the colony, and therefore under circumstances which could not but be disadvantageous to him as well as to those whom he was appointed to govern. It was, therefore, really as a matter of public duty, and in a spirit of fairness to all parties, that I did venture to give my opinion, that before Mr. Lawley commenced the important duties which the Government has assigned to him, these rumours should be disposed of one way or the other. After the speech which the right hon. Baronet has made, and after the distressing conclusion of that speech, I think it is hardly necessary for me to say that I should certainly not have considered that the mere fact of having been connected with the sport of horse-racing was of itself a disqualification for holding the office of Governor of South Australia or any other high appointment. I believe, without reference to party considerations, without regard to one side of the House or the other, I may affirm that noblemen rind gentlemen of as high and unimpeachable honour as ever adorned society in this country have taken an interest in the sport of horse-racing; and that it would be an absurdity to contend that a mere taste for that sport was of itself a disqualification for holding office under the Crown; this, however, must be a question of degree, but I will not further press that subject. The right hon. Baronet has asked me what course I intend to take. To that I can return but one answer—the course taken by the right hon. Baronet himself has spared me from a painful duty. I think that, under the circumstances which have occurred, Mr. Lawley has acted as a gentleman in his position ought to have acted, and so far as I am concerned, nothing further will fall from me upon this subject. The subject must now be considered to be at an end. I cannot but think that the information which has been communicated to us justifies me in the course which I thought it my duty to take. I shall say no more upon that point, but shall conclude by expressing the hope, which I trust may be considered almost as superfluous, that the House will believe that nothing but a paramount sense of public duty has induced me to take any part at all in this transaction.

MR. STUART WORTLEY

I need not say that I rise upon the present occasion with feelings of the most painful nature, not on account of the explanation which I feel to be due to the House with respect to what took place upon a former evening, but because I feel that I have in my hands the interests of one who must ever be dear to me, and because I am apprehensive that any imprudent expression on my part would be dangerous to a reputation which hitherto has been untarnished. The right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Colonies has expressed his regret that the right hon. Gentleman opposite has up to the present moment never intimated, either to the minister who was responsible for the appointment, or to the friends of Mr. Lawley, the nature of the charge which he intended to make—whether it was upon public grounds as to the fitness of the individual selected, or whether it was upon such private grounds as those which have been referred to this evening. Under these circumstances, there was nothing for Mr. Lawley and his friends to do but to collect from public rumour what it was that the right hon. Gentleman opposite meant, and that public rumour undoubtedly embodied the charges which have been already referred to. By far the gravest and most important of these charges was this, that Mr. Lawley had availed himself of his official knowledge as private Secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to speculate in the funds. The moment that I heard that imputation I utterly disbelieved it. But before entering upon that subject, allow me to confirm some of the statements which have been made by the Colonial Secretary in justification of Mr. Lawley. I must tell the House, in the first place, that this appointment was obtained by Mr. Lawley solely by his own exertions. No person applied for it in his behalf; no influence was used by his relatives or others at the Colonial Office to obtain it for him; it was his merits, and his merits alone—his services in the last eighteen months, during which he has been a most able, efficient, and faithful servant of the Chancellor of the Exchequer—which recommended him to official men for that appointment. I myself heard of the appointment with surprise. At first I was informed that the appointment was to the governorship of West Australia, and as a relative of Mr. Lawley I more than once remonstrated, and expressed my regret that so able and so promising a man should thus place himself in exile. I found I was mistaken, and that the appointment was to South Australia. But even then it was with great reluctance that the friends of Mr. Lawley could approve of his leaving this country. When, however, we were told that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had recommended him to accept the appointment, and that it would afford him an opportunity of withdrawing from that unhappy connection which has been the unfortunate cause of all this mischief, we rejoiced that an opportunity, which I knew he was himself anxious to obtain, had been placed within his reach. A connection with the turf, as it is called, is unfortunately one from which a man cannot withdraw himself in a minute. He has contracted obligations to which he must be attentive in order to avert great losses at a future time, and it is impossible to withdraw himself from such a connection suddenly. I was consequently aware that prior to the time when this appointment was offered to him Mr. Lawley had not been able entirely to extricate himself; but I knew at the same time that he was anxiously desirous to do so as soon as possible, and it was upon that ground that his family were prepared to recommend him to accept the governorship of South Australia, though they certainly were of opinion that the acceptance of such an appointment on the part of a man with his connections, with his fortune, with his abilities, and his determination to devote them to the public service, and above all, with a seat in Parliament, would certainly involve some sacrifice. Not that I mean to depreciate so high and important an office as the governorship of South Australia; I merely state what our views were; but at all events Mr. Lawley was advised to accept the appointment. The right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Colonies, as he has already stated to the House, came to me and asked me what was the understanding of Mr. Lawley's family with reference to what had passed between him and the Duke of Newcastle. My answer was, that we had all understood that the office was placed at Mr. Lawley's disposal, but that he had asked and obtained time to consider the subject. The right hon. Baronet, in the handsomest and kindest manner, immediately said that there was an end to all further question in regard to the appointment, and that he was willing to take the whole responsibility of Mr. Lawley's nomination. I then thought it my duty to state to the right hon. Baronet that Mr. Lawley had not only been on the turf, but had also incurred losses and embarrassments—that he had made a full statement of all his difficulties to his friends, and that care would be taken, he having considerable expectations, that by the time he left this country he should not be a single farthing in debt. Under these circumstances, I was much astonished when a question was put by the right hon. Baronet opposite on the subject. I should not have been astonished if the right hon. Baronet had at once stated his objection to the appointment to be on political grounds, for, when I considered Mr. Lawley's youth, I had no right to be surprised that some objection would be entertained. I applied to the right hon. Baronet, and asked him if it was his intention to follow his question by taking any other step. The right hon. Gentleman declined giving any information on the subject. I then asked him whether he would found his objections on public or private grounds. The right hon. Baronet again declined giving any information.

SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

I did not decline giving information, but what I said was, that I was unable at that time to give an answer, but that I would let the right hon. Gentleman know my intention as soon as I possibly could.

MR. STUART WORTLEY

You said that you would give me an answer on the following Thursday, which was the day on which you were to bring forward your question. This was by word of mouth; but I had received a letter from the right hon. Gentleman stating that he could not tell me what his intentions were. Mr. Lawley was out of town at that time. I wrote to him immediately that it was necessary he should come to London. He came. I saw him the moment he arrived. He told me that he had seen attacks against him in the newspapers, not on private, but on public grounds, and frankly admitted that the appointment of so young a man to an office of such importance might very fairly be made the subject of comment and animadversion in the press. I told him that there were charges affecting his personal honour, which he must be prepared to meet if he intended to hold the appointment. I said I was unable to ascertain the grounds or purport of the Motion which the right hon. Baronet intended to make in this House, but I added it was rumoured, and that the rumour had reached the Duke of Newcastle and Sir George Grey, that he had availed himself of the official information which he obtained as private secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the purpose of speculating in the funds. He denied that charge in the strongest and most indignant terms. I rejoiced that he did so, and advised him to write immediately to Sir George Grey to that effect. Such were the circumstances which led me upon a former occasion to refer to what I called the "calumnious rumours" which were afloat concerning Mr. Lawley. To this moment I believe I have Mr. Lawley's authority for saying that he never has used his official knowledge as private secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the purpose of speculating in the funds; and, indeed, it is clear and manifest that he has never done so, for, as has been already stated, his speculations have been losing speculations, and have only increased his difficulties. Subsequently, however, he thought it right—having up to that time concealed the fact, under the false impression that he was bound not to disclose the names of others—to state to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he had been engaged in speculating in the funds, but that those speculations had been wholly unconnected with any official information which he might have possessed. Under these circumstances, Mr. Lawley does not complain in the slightest degree of the step which has been taken by the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Colonies; on the contrary, he has no doubt that the public service required it, and that, after such a great indiscretion as he had been guilty of, it was of course utterly impossible that his appointment could proceed. I have stated that it was by his own merits alone that he obtained this appointment. I do not rely upon my own opinion upon that point. It might be biassed by partiality. Nor do I rely upon the opinion of his friends merely, but upon that of public men having the greatest opportunities of judging of Mr. Lawley, his capacity and qualifications. I hold in my hand a letter from one of the most distinguished public servants in the country—a gentleman unconnected with Mr. Lawley in politics—Mr. John Wood, Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue. He had frequently spoken to me about this appointment, and had referred in the highest terms to the ability and fitness of Mr. Lawley for the office. I asked him if he would have any objection to put his opinion upon paper. His words are these— I wish I had the opportunity to give my public testimony to his fitness for the appoint- ment. I could refer to my knowledge of him for very many years, and more particularly to my experience during the two Sessions he has acted as private secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Seldom has a day passed during that period in which I have not had communication with him, and this is by no means the first occasion on which I have expressed my admiration of his talents, his indefatigable industry, and his singular aptitude for business. These qualities are enhanced by a most amiable temper and an earnest sincerity, which are peculiarly valuable in official life. I am well aware that he has long entertained a partiality for colonial government, and has been desirous to qualify himself for it; and, much as I wish that he had remained in this country, I am in some degree reconciled to his going, believing that an honourable career of distinguished usefulness is before him. That is the opinion of a disinterested and certainly most capable witness. But I have another testimony—not from a gentleman belonging to the same political party as Mr. Lawley—not from an old friend—but from a distinguished man, holding a high and important office. It is to the following effect— I shall much regret your departure from Downing Street, whoever may be your successor, and you have my hearty good wishes for your success in your government, of which I cannot have a doubt, for you will bring to the discharge of your duties talents, activity, and honesty of purpose, and every quality requisite to ensure succes. That is the opinion of the Chairman of the Board of Customs, Sir Thomas Free-mantle. I feel it due to the Government who made this appointment to bring before the House these testimonies to the fitness of Mr. Lawley; and I do so also for the purpose of confirming what I have already said, that he obtained the appointment, not by the influence of friends, but by his own merits, and of showing that it was an honourable ambition which prompted him to accept it. I likewise wish to state that until a late hour last night neither his own family nor any Member of the Government could have been at all aware of his transactions in the funds. I can only repeat most emphatically that I believe on no occasion has Mr. Lawley used his official information for the purpose of assisting in these speculations. They are the unfortunate consequence of a habit acquired in former years, when he kept the society of men who indulged in gambling transactions of this description, but in no instance has he availed himself of his official position. If there be the slightest doubt of that, Mr. Lawley is willing to lay bare his breast, and submit to any inquiry or examination, either by a Committee or any other tribunal the House of Commons may think necessary. I have again to assert that, though there may be, as I deeply regret there are, reflections on his prudence, on his honour there are none—that though there may have been a connection with transactions of the kind referred to, yet that that connection was not of a nature that could in any way detract from his usefulness as a public servant; and I trust he will survive to resume, at some future time, the career from which he is at present displaced, with better hopes and under better auspices.

LORD DUDLEY STUART

said, although he had not the honour of Mr. Lawley's acquaintance, and although it might seem strange that, sitting on the same side of the House, he did not even know that gentleman by sight, he was exceedingly desirous of having one question answered by the right hon. Gentleman the secretary for the Colonies, for the sake of Mr. Lawley himself, and he earnestly wished and expected the answer would be favourable to him. The right hon. Gentleman said that he had received information which satisfied him that Mr. Lawley, during the time he had filled the office of secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had not speculated in the funds. The right hon. Gentleman also stated, that subsequently he had received from Mr. Lawley himself a letter, acknowledging that unfortunately he had during that time fallen into the error of speculating in the funds, or entering into some transactions connected with the funds, although he had not availed himself of his official information in any way for the purpose of conducting those speculations. Many hon. Gentlemen near him understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that he had received a letter from Mr. Lawley, at first stating that he had not during the period he held the office of secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer speculated in the funds. He wished to know whether that impression was correct? Whether, what Mr. Lawley stated was—that he had not used his official information in speculating in the funds; or was it, that he had not speculated in the funds during the time he was secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer?

SIR GEORGE GREY

had stated before, that, in consequence of rumours which reached the Duke of Newcastle, which the Duke of Newcastle communicated to him, and which he immediately communicated in writing to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, which were that Mr. Lawley had made use of his official knowledge, as private secretary of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to speculate in the funds, on Monday he received a communication, not addressed directly to himself, but a communication which he thought, and had a right to think, was satisfactory and conclusive on these grounds. He certainly understood the purport of that communication to cover the denial of any speculation in the funds during the time Mr. Lawley was private secretary to his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. But, as he had distinctly stated, a reply was required directly to the point, had he made use of his official knowledge for the purpose of speculating in the funds? and he was bound to believe that the denial, whatever the terms, had reference to the charge which was communicated in writing to his right hon. Friend.

MR. DISRAELI

When the conduct of an individual is under discussion, it is not agreeable to interfere, especially after the painful conclusion which has taken place to-day; but there were some observations which fell from the right hon. Gentleman the Recorder of London, differing in some degree from the Secretary of State for the Colonies, with respect to the conduct of my right hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich (Sir John Pakington) which I do not think I ought to pass over unnoticed. Those right hon. Gentlemen seem to charge my right hon. Friend with want of straightforwardness and candour, because, after he felt it his duty to give notice that he should bring this subject of the appointment of Mr. Lawley as Governor of South Australia before the consideration of the House, he did not state explicitly what were the grounds upon which he was about to challenge the propriety of that appointment. I think the House will feel, after what it has heard this evening, that my right hon. Friend was placed in a situation of extreme difficulty, and that it was impossible for him definitely and precisely to state what were the charges he had to make against Mr. Lawley, or on what particular grounds he would challenge the propriety of that appointment. I am myself individually aware of the extreme pain which my right bon. Friend felt during the few days which have elapsed with regard to this question. On more than one occasion he did me the honour of consulting me, and certainly the opinion I gave him was not one which at all encouraged him in any precipitate conduct in the affair. My right hon. Friend was actuated by as pure a sense of public duty as would influence any gentleman. I am sure if the letter referred to by the learned Recorder were read to the House, it would show that my right hon. Friend was influenced by feelings of the utmost courtesy and cordiality, and I feel it my duty, after the observations which have been made, to express my own opinion (and I hope and believe it is the opinion of a majority of this House, of Gentlemen on both sides) that the conduct of my right hon. Friend the Member for Droitwich has been perfectly justified by all that has passed.

MR. BRIGHT

I think the House will be disposed to pass from the consideration of a case, certainly the most painful that has occurred since I have had the honour to be a Member of it, and I should not say a syllable with regard to a gentleman who, possibly without intending anything wrong, is placed in a position which must give great pain to himself and his friends. But there is another point involved in this notice which has been very much concealed, or rather pressed out of sight by the urgency of the personal case, and that is the fact of the appointment of a gentleman to an office of high responsibility under circumstances, apart from all private character, which, I think, deserves the attention of the House. I think the right hon. Gentleman the Colonial Secretary partly, if not entirely, admitted that when this appointment was brought under his notice, he himself had some doubt as to the propriety of it, and I think the right hon. Gentleman the Recorder of the City of London said that he heard of the appointment with astonishment. I may say, I believe that feeling of astonishment was almost universal among Members of this House; and if a feeling of astonishment was created here, I should like to ask what must we expect to be the feeling in the Colony over which this appointment was made? I am not one of those who think that colonial appointments of this kind are unimportant; for let the House bear in mind, almost the only tie which connects our Colonies with the mother country is the tie of the colonial government, and probably nothing in the whole colonial system is more important than the appointment of the individuals who in those Colonies shall represent the Crown. My opinion is, that it is indispensable that in appointments of this character you should have, not men who have shown great proficiency at Oxford or great abilities as private secretaries here, but men, if possible, known to the public, whose conduct has been approved before the country, and in whom the Colony itself should have good reason for placing great confidence. Now, in this case it is admitted that this gentleman was almost unknown. There are not a few Members, I will undertake to say, on this side of the House, who actually have no knowledge of his personal appearance. It is admitted that he had been in this House for nearly two years, and taken no part whatever, that I have heard of, in its deliberations; and without saying one single syllable against him, but allowing everything which has been said in his favour, I put it to the House whether it be desirable, having regard to our position in connection with the Colonies, that appointments of men, however excellent or admirable, who are unknown, should be thus made. And I hope what has taken place to-night will have an influence on the Colonial Secretary with regard to other appointments which are before long to be made. I have heard also rumours of appointments which are looming in the not distant future, and although I have no expectation that we shall ever have such another scene as we have had to-night, yet I can quite conceive it possible that vast interests may be jeopardised—I will not say the peace, but the satisfaction and good-will of colonies may be jeopardised—by appointments for which there are no solid foundations. I think the Duke of Newcastle was wrong in the course he took in this particular matter, and that the present Colonial Secretary, out of deference and delicacy to what was done, was not sufficiently alive to the interests of the country and the wants of the Colony, in the appointment of its Governor. With regard to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Droitwich (Sir John Pakington), I cannot conceive that any one can say for a moment he has not performed precisely his duty in this matter. The right hon. Gentleman knew what rumours were afloat. He did not want to make a parade of these things, and to bring them unnecessarily before the House. He asked a question which was sufficient to create inquiry in the mind of the Colonial Secretary. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Droitwich may have been in hopes that if any of these charges, the rumour of which was confined to himself, were true, that then, without any exposure such as has taken place, the appointment might have been rescinded, and the whole matter terminated without any unpleasant discussion such as has taken place to-night. Therefore the right hon. Gentleman, performing clearly his public duty with that knowledge which had come to him, performed it not only in a manner due to the public service, but also with the greatest possible delicacy towards individuals concerned. For myself, though extremely sorry that this question has come before the House as it has done, I hope it may be a warning to the present Colonial Secretary and his successors that the men to be appointed to these onerous and responsible offices—to be sent to the other side of the globe to represent the Monarch of these realms, and to carry out the behests of the Imperial Parliament—should at least be men to whom no one here can point a finger, and men who can at least deserve, if not obtain, the full confidence of the population they are intended to govern.

MR. ADDERLEY

thought that everybody must allow that the appointment of Mr. Lawley was a most unfortunate one, and more especially unfortunate for that gentleman himself, though, after all, he had not been guilty of anything dishonourable. He was known as a young man of very first-rate abilities, and he believed that there was no reflection cast on his honour, the only charge to which he could be held liable being want of discretion in his private station. But he had been sacrificed by a still greater want of discretion on the part of Her Majesty's Ministers in making such an appointment. It seemed, from the statement of the Secretary of the Colonies himself, that he did not approve of it. The hon. Member for Manchester was perfectly justified in saying that this was not an appointment in times like the present for the improvement of our colonies in Australia. The colonies at this moment were very sensitive on these points. They had a suspicion that these appointments were made more with a view to the interests of those at home than to the interests of those who were on the spot, and, at all events, it must be admitted that the appointment of this gentleman had shown that such a suspicion was well founded. It should be borne in mind, too, that this was in sequence of the recent appointment of Mr. Stonor, as Judge in Victoria, which was another of these questionable appointments, and he thought that an appointment of so kindred a character occurring so immediately after was most unfortunate. In both cases the interests of the Colonies were not considered with that deliberation they should have been, and in both cases the unfortunate men had been sacrificed for want of discretion on the part of the Government who made the appointments. By those who thought that the loss of her Colonies would cause England to sink in the scale of nations, any want of discretion on the part of the Government must be considered as a matter of most serious concern. What did the colonists say? They said, "You give us constitutions, you want us to manage our own affairs, and if you want good governors and cannot find them at home we can supply them." The Colonies had furnished such men. Washington, as all knew, was one of the very first men in history. There was one observation used by the right hon. Gentleman the Recorder of London to which he must call attention. That right hon. Gentleman said that, when he heard of this appointment, he gave Mr. Lawley advice, and told him not to exile himself by accepting such an appointment. It might be, certainly, a great condescension on the part of a young gentleman to give up his prospects in this country and become an exile, although a governor in the Colonies; but, if that was the feeling of English gentlemen, the colonists themselves might seek to be raised to such positions of influence and dignity in the administration of their affairs which they best understood, and in which they were most deeply concerned.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

I do not think it necessary for me to enter on the personal and more painful part of this subject, except only that as I still feel a warm and affectionate interest in the future of Mr. Lawley, I cannot refrain from tendering my thanks to the House, and to those who have spoken in this debate, for the fair and considerate spirit in which they have approached this question. And I think it only justice to the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir J. Pakington) to tender him my thanks, particularly as I am one who might question the discretion in the exercise he has used of his undoubted right to bring this subject forward, and to say that the speech he has made to-night has entirely convinced me that he is not only governed in these proceedings by a sense of public duty, but that he is sincerely desirous to unite the performance of that duty with every consideration and tenderness towards the gentleman who is the subject of discussion. It is not altogether usual, perhaps, for colleagues to endeavour to do justice to one another in this House, or to offer explanations on one another's behalf, when they are challenged as to the mode in which they exercise their particular functions; but, at the same time, in the intimate relations I have stood to Mr. Lawley—first, as a private connection, and secondly, in my official capacity—and bearing in mind the peculiar circumstances under which my right hon. Friend near me (Sir G. Grey) has become, as he manfully says, responsible for this appointment—I feel that something is due to him, also, from me. But a few weeks have elapsed since my right hon. Friend assumed his present office, having immediately before occupied the position of an independent Member of this House; and I think the House will feel that although my right hon. Friend has challenged that responsibility, yet the greater part of it, in fact, belongs to those who, not ostensibly, were the authors of the appointment; and I am quite certain my noble Friend (the Duke of Newcastle), who recently presided over the Colonial Departments, is the very last man to desire that any one should relieve him of one grain or tittle of any responsibility which attaches to him in the discharge of his official duties. Sir, undoubtedly the origin of that appointment, as I believe, lay in suggestions made to the Duke of Newcastle, not by my hon. Friend (Mr. Lawley), or any of his family, but by those who made the suggestions upon personal knowledge and public grounds, on the distinct conviction the appointment would be one beneficial to the interests of the Colony. I will not conceal the fact that my noble Friend the Duke of Newcastle did not determine to recommend Mr. Lawley for that appointment without reference to me. He naturally looked to me to supply him with information, and to give distinctly an answer to the question, whether in my judgment Mr. Lawley was or was not a fit person for that appointment. Between the Duke of Newcastle and myself the principal part of the responsibility of the appointment is shared—the Duke of Newcastle, in the first instance, being the official author of the proposal, and I being the principal witness to whom he referred.

I cannot consent—(and that is the main reason why I rose)—I cannot consent to leave this question on the footing on which it is placed by my hon. Friend who has just sat down. I agree with him in all he has said with respect to colonial government. I may agree with him, though, perhaps, few will accompany us, that, if it were the desire of the people of South Australia to recommend their own governor, it would be a wise act of the Government of this country to gratify that desire. But when it is said on this occasion, "Why not let the people of South Australia choose a governor themselves," it is enough for me to point out that the people of South Australia had expressed no such wish, and my belief, I am bound to say, is this, that it is the desire of the people of the Colonies at this moment to receive governors selected, as best they can, by Ministers from among qualified persons known to them in this country. Can it be said that Mr. Lawley's was, on public grounds, a questionable appointment, and discreditable to the Government? My hon. Friend the Member for Manchester says he was totally unknown in this House. I think he said he did not know him by sight. Why was Mr. Lawley unknown to this House? It may be perfectly true he was not well known, for as long as he held the office of private secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer it was impossible for Mr. Lawley to acquire that distinction in this House which his abilities and knowledge fairly entitled him to. There was something in the nature of the duties of secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer which would prevent an individual from doing justice to himself. My right hon. Friend near me (Sir C. Wood), who has filled the office, and the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli), if he had not left the House, would bear me out when I say that the duties of private secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer are not analogous to those of private secretaries to other Ministers, but are in a great degree official and departmental duties. In the anomalous position of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who is placed more outside the Treasury than inside it, and who has important communications with the Board of Inland Revenue, with the Customs, with the Bank of England, with the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, in the discharge of almost all the important functions of his office, he uses his private secretary as the medium, and calls on him to discharge duties more usually discharged by officials in departments. I do not scruple to tell the hon. Member for Manchester that in my judgment, although my friend Mr. Lawley has not had an opportunity of acquiring distinction in this house so as to make himself well known, yet he has done more labour for the public during the last Session and the present, and acquired more experience in public business of an important and difficult character, than falls to the lot of most of those who sit here for, I do not say one or two, but who have sat five, six, or it may be ten, Sessions in this House. That I say on the strength of my own official knowledge. It is very well to say that you ought not to appoint unknown men to be governors of colonies. That is very sound doctrine, but those who call upon the Government to adopt it as an invariable rule should consider what we offer the governor of a colony, and what we have to expect from him. You have to ask that he should expatriate himself, that he should place himself in a society often comparatively rude, in a climate frequently insalubrious, with a great risk of not maintaining his popularity for any lengthened period; and, therefore, almost with the certainty of his term of office being short, and also with the liability of being recalled at any time through the caprice of a Colonial Secretary, without, perhaps, any reason being assigned. With this prospect, I do not hesitate to say the remuneration in most instances is miserably low. Therefore it is vain to come forward, like the hon. Member for Manchester, and say, "It is the duty of the Government to select only well-known men." You may ask well-known men, and they will not go. No man who is well and favourably known in this country will have such an appointment. Those who have had to make these appointments know the extreme difficulty of finding competent persons who will accept them, and the only resource is to fall back upon men not well known, but who, having had some opportunities of estimating their qualifications, you feel assured will hereafter be well known, and fit for the duties which you propose to impose upon them. That is no new doctrine. I should like to know who are the men who are now most distinguished in the government of colonies. There may be rare exceptions in which they were known to the public before their appointment, as in the case of Lord Metcalfe, who was sent out by Lord Derby to Canada. Lord Metcalfe being one of the most heroic and munificent spirits that ever entered the public service—one who disregarded personal advantage, but went straight to the performance of public duty after he had indeed become well known. I shall have to refer to another appointment of Lord Derby in terms of commendation. That appointment of Lord Metcalfe was a happy selection; but I should like to know how many other well-known men were well known when appointed. I need only mention the gentleman who has just been promoted to the governorship of New South Wales—Sir William Denison. Did the hon. Member for Manchester know him by sight? Had he been in this House? Had he ever been in political life? Had he ever discharged any political duties? No, nothing of the sort. He was an able engineer; and I am the person who selected him. [Sir JOHN PAKINGTON: Hear, hear!] I do not know what the right hon. Gentleman means by that cheer, but I think I am justified in referring to the case when it is made a charge against the Government that they have appointed a governor of a colony who was totally inexperienced in public affairs. Sir William Denison was then perfectly inexperienced. He is now well known, honourably known, and has well earned the promotion he has received. That is one case; but in point of fact, that case represents the general rule. But now we are told that no Government ought to appoint anybody but a man of distinguished abilities, and that Mr. Lawley's youth and inexperience unfitted him for this appointment. I will support the appointment of my hon. Friend by reference to an appointment which, I think, no man will question. If the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Adderley) condemns the appointment of Mr. Lawley because he is inexperienced and young, I want to know what he will say to the appointment of Lord Elgin. I refer to Lord Elgin as one of the most distinguished, and one of the most successful of colonial governors, and who has been recently engaged in political negotiations of the most difficult description. What was the age of Lord Elgin when he was appointed? I believe precisely the same age as Mr. Lawley. What was the post to which Lord Elgin was appointed as compared with that of Mr. Lawley's? Mr. Lawley was appointed Governor of South Australia, with a popu- lation of 40,000 or 50,000 persons. Lord Elgin was appointed Governor of Jamaica when the Colony was in the agonising struggles which followed emancipation, and with a population of 400,000 or 500,000 persons. Mr. Lawley was appointed after two years' arduous service as secretary to the Chancellor of the Exchequer—after two Sessions in this House. Lord Elgin had been six weeks in this House, during which he had the opportunity of proving his ability by a speech which he made. But it must be recollected that the ability of Mr. Lawley is not called in question; it is only his inexperience in public affairs which is objected to. Lord Elgin had no opportunity of acquiring experience in public affairs. That appointment was made by Lord Derby? Does it reflect discredit on Lord Derby? Does not every one feel that it can only reflect honour upon Lord Derby, and that it supports the proposition that we must look in some degree to the responsibility of the Minister who makes these appointments. It is vain to appoint old men and distinguished men, who have served their time in this House, to posts of such a character as that of colonial governor. My right hon. Friend near me reminds me of another case, almost precisely similar, the appointment of Lord Harris. Is there a name more honoured than the name of Lord Harris? It was my lot to make that appointment, and I remember the circumstances. A gentleman wrote to me on behalf of his son, and speaking of Lord Harris, admitted that he was an amiable Peer, but of infirm health, totally without experience, and unknown. It was true Lord Harris was an amiable man in indifferent health, for he had gone to the West Indies on account of his health, and totally inexperienced; but, from my knowledge of the man, I thought he was qualified to serve his country, and offered him the appointment. He accepted it, and a most efficient servant he made. These are really considerations with respect to the appointment of colonial governors, which I feel bound to lay before the House, as they not only affect the present but every Government, and I am free to say, with the appearances which were before the Duke of Newcastle and my right hon. Friend (Sir G. Grey), that until within the last twenty-four hours I did not repent having borne testimony to them that Mr. Lawley was a qualified man, and in many respects an eminently and admirably qualified man, for this appointment. I again thank the House for the kind manner in which the question has been dealt with, and I earnestly trust that, inasmuch as Mr. Lawley is chargeable only with grave imprudence, and as it does not involve the smallest stain of pecuniary corruption, the door of hope will not be barred against him, and that his future career will not be stopped. I am confident the kindness of this House, and the forbearance and tenderness with which it has approached this question, will be an encouragement to him to repair his error by the sedulous performance of his duty, and that at some future period he will re-establish his character not for honour, but for judgment, which must be the desire, I am sure, of every Member of this House.

MR. VERNON SMITH

agreed in opinion with the hon. Member for Manchester (Mr. Bright) and the hon. Member for North Staffordshire (Mr. Adderley), that the question of the appointment of colonial governors was one of the most important to which that House could address itself. Totally independent of Mr. Lawley's character was the question whether he was a proper person to appoint at all. He agreed with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he ought not to be disqualified upon the mere ground of age; but he considered that the fact of his being of so early an age made it a duty incumbent upon those who gave him the appointment to inform themselves thoroughly and especially with respect to steadiness of character. It was in that respect that the utmost investigation was essential, and he thought that it was in reference to this that great blame rested upon those who recommended Mr. Lawley, and not upon his right hon. Friend the present Secretary for the Colonies, although he had so honourably taken the responsibility upon himself. He agreed to some extent with his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the difficulty of finding good colonial governors, and he thought that the measure of Lord Howick, by which the salaries of those officers had been cut down, was an impolitic and injudicious one, as the qualities required in a colonial governor were rare, and therefore they ought to be adequately paid for; but he also agreed with his hon. Friend the Member for North Staffordshire, that the field was not so limited as had been represented, and that the Colonies themselves contained men whom it might be most proper to appoint. There could be no objection to the selection of men of known ability, to fill, in the first instance, the appointments of secretaries in the Colonies, and to be afterwards promoted as they might prove themselves deserving, and as opportunity might occur. The circumstances of this very Colony pointed out, in fact, the course which ought to have been pursued, for Sir Henry Young had filled the office of colonial secretary in British Guiana before he had been appointed a colonial governor. He had always understood that there was a rule in the Colonial Office that, instead of sending men long distances upon small stipends, there should be a regular rule of promotion, and that men who had distinguished themselves in the Colonies in subordinate positions should be promoted to superior positions. He thought that the salaries were too small, and that promotion should be substituted for salary; and he felt assured that if that course were adopted there would not be the same difficulty in finding proper governors hereafter. Parliamentary experience in this country might be valuable, but the right hon. Gentleman had deprived himself of this argument in the case of Mr. Lawley, for he had stated that his official duties as secretary of the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been so heavy as to prevent his attendance in Parliament, or gaining Parliamentary experience. He thought the moral to be learnt from all this was, that the appointment of a governor of a colony was a duty involving the most serious responsibility upon those who had to make it, and that Secretaries of State ought therefore to take great pains in investigating both the public and the private character of those who might be recommended to them to go out.

Motion agreed to.

House in Committee of Ways and Means.