HL Deb 01 May 1834 vol 23 cc358-60
Lord Ellen-borough

, with reference to his Motion to the claim of Mr. Prendergast, as representative of two native bankers, on the King of Oude, inquired whether Ministers would state the grounds on which the mandamus obtained by the Board of Control had been abandoned; and whether the information which ultimately led to that result had been received before or after the mandamus was applied for?

The Lord Chancellor

said, the noble Baron must have anticipated what his answer to this interrogatory, first and last, must be. He was not prepared, and the President of the Board of Control was not ready, consistently with his duty and with a due regard to the public service, to accede to the noble Baron's request. Nothing certainly could be worse than to lay before the House documents connected with a transaction which was at the present moment by no means finished, although certain resolutions, or a certain plan or course of proceeding, had been agreed upon by the East-India Company and the Board of Control—that was, his Majesty's Government. The matter was not concluded with respect to its general bearing, and still less with reference to its details. Therefore, to lay the information required before the House would be extremely wrong. With respect to the second question, it would appear, that it was intended to make some disparaging observations with regard to the conduct of the individual who was at the head of the Board of Control. In that case, he (the Lord Chancellor) would be prepared to meet any such charge. But he would put it to the good feeling of the noble Baron himself, whether it would be acting fairly towards that high and responsible officer, to bring the subject forward when the matter in question was in such a situation as rendered it impossible, in meeting any observations which the noble Baron might make, to deal in any other than general allusions. With respect to producing details and evidence, as he had already stated in answer to the first question, it was impossible that such a course could be taken. He should only add, that he and his noble and learned friend, the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, would be placed in a better situation if the subject were brought forward, than the President of the Board of Control, who, if any attack were made on his conduct, could not be present to defend himself.

Lord Ellenborough

said, the answer of the noble and learned Lord was not, he thought, quite so clear and distinct as the questions which he had thought it necessary to put. One of his questions was, whether the information on which new measures were adopted was received by the Board of Control before they applied for the mandamus, or subsequently to that proceeding. To that question no answer had been returned.

The Lord Chancellor

said, he should reserve any observations which he might have to make on the subject till Monday, as he found that the noble Baron still persisted in his purpose, which evidently was that of attacking an individual on account of his official conduct, after the noble Baron had been told, as he did tell him on his own official knowledge, that he was about to introduce his attack at a moment when the Government could not, consistently with their duty to the King, and with a proper regard for the public service, bring forward the documents that were necessary to elucidate the case.

Lord Ellenborough

hoped their Lordships would, in fairness, judge of his intentions from what he had uttered, and not from the interpretation which the noble and learned Lord chose to put upon his words. He repeated, that his second question had not been answered; and he believed, that it never would be answered.

Subject dropped.