HL Deb 10 April 1856 vol 141 cc775-8
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE

, in rising to ask what course was pursued by the East India Company with reference to the treaty concluded by the Governor General with the King of Oude in 1837, said that in the late proclamation with reference to the kingdom of Oude, no reference was made to any treaty except a treaty of 1801, between the East India Company and the Government of Luck-now. Now there was a treaty in 1837—or rather a treaty had been drawn up—which most materially affected the present question. The object he had in making the inquiry was, to know whether the treaty of 1837 was or was not considered as valid. He held in his hand a full collection of treaties which he found in their Lordships' library, authorised, he supposed, by the Board of Control, and stated to be compiled from the records of the Foreign Office. It contained this treaty among others, which appeared never to have been treated as non-existent; and it appeared to have been signed by Lord Auckland and others. It was of the highest importance with reference to the question of the engagement which imposed upon the King of Oude the necessity of maintaining a, military force. Were they to consider that the treaty of 1837 was or was not a valid and binding treaty, upon both parties, except so far as regarded a payment exacted from the King of Oude, which was remitted on consideration by the Government at home?

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL

said, it was perfectly true that the treaty in question had been ratified by the Governor General of India, but not by the Home Government.

THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE

As to the whole of it?

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL

As to the whole of it. It was not ratified by the Home Government at all. In the year 1838 that document was, amongst other papers connected with the kingdom of Oude, moved for in the House of Commons. The answer to that Motion made by the then President of the Board of Control on the part of the Government was, no such treaty being considered as existing by the Government at home, its production must be refused, and that refusal was assented to by the House of Commons. He was quite sure that their Lordships would agree with him that it was premature to enter upon a discussion now, as the whole subject must soon be considered when all the papers relating to it were placed before the House. It was most inconvenient to have anticipatory discussions which would tend to prejudice their Lordships' minds. He trusted that they would soon have all the papers before them, and that they would soon have the presence of Lord Dalhousie in that House, who would of course take a leading part in the discussions upon this subject. With the expectation of the speedy arrival of Lord Dalhousie in this country he (the Duke of Argyll) was sure that their Lordships would disapprove of a debate upon this question at the present moment.

THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH

said, that although the treaty referred to was not laid on the table, it appeared in the collection of papers before their Lordships, which had been laid on the table when the discussion upon the renewal of the East India charter took place. The Directors did not disallow the whole of that treaty of 1837, but only that portion of it which related to the payment to the King of Oude of £160,000 for a military establishment of British officers. In addition to this stipulation the treaty contained another in its seventh article, which modified the sixth article of the treaty of 1801, the sixth article being the one on which the Governor General relied for the justification of the step he had taken in the annexation of Oude. By the seventh article of the treaty of 1837 it was stated that there was no remedy provided in the sixth article of the treaty of 1801, and it therefore proceeded to modify that, and to provide that if the King of Oude did not succeed in securing order amongst his subjects the Governor General might send an English officer into the country for the purpose of administering the Government; and in that case there should be handed over to the King of Oude the surplus revenue, after the payment of the, ordinary expenditure. Now, the Directors disallowed the stipulation as to the military establishment; but the other stipulation would not be affected by the refusal of the Company to ratify the other, It appeared to him therefore, that the treaty of 1837 was good to the extent of modifying the treaty of 1801; being, indeed, the very point on which the Governor General relied for his justification.

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL

said, he had omitted to state that the collection of papers was compiled in India, and was sent over here, when it was laid upon the table of the House of Commons, and that it was by error that the treaty of 1837 had been included in it.

THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH

said, there had been no act of hostility committed by the King of Oude; on the contrary, he had afforded assistance upon every occasion it was required. We were at present indebted to the King of Oude's Government to the extent of £2,500,000, being the amount of a loan granted us when we were in difficulties. The papers should be at once laid upon the table, in order that their Lordships might understand the grounds upon which the recent steps had been taken.

LORD BROUGHTON

said, that his notion of the matter was quite in accordance with that stated by the noble Marquess and the noble Earl opposite, that it was only the money part of the treaty, that which referred to the payment of the British troops, which was disallowed at home. He (Lord Broughton) had had a long correspondence with Lord Auckland upon the subject both public and private, and it was his impression certainly that the treaty of 1837 was ratified by the Government at home after the disallowance he had referred to. The whole of the treaty was not disallowed, but only one portion of it. The present Governor General would be home shortly, when the subject could be more satisfactorily entered upon. When the discussion did come on, he hoped that the present Commander in Chief also would find it convenient to attend, because it so happened that while Lord Hardinge was Governor General of India he had an interview with the King of Oude at Lucknow and threatened him with the consequences of his continued misgovernment.

THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH

said, it was quite evident that the public part of the correspondence between the Court of Directors under the direction of the noble Lord (Lord Broughton) and Lord Auckland, must be produced, and also not only the speech of Lord Hardinge, but the official record, which must exist, of what that noble Lord had said upon the occasion referred to. Those documents were of great importance. Lord Hardinge must have written a dispatch detailing what he had said to the King of Oude upon this subject.

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL

said, the papers relating to the affairs of Oude were being printed, and would be laid upon the table of the House immediately. He thought that the recollection of the noble Lord (Lord Broughton) must be at fault, because he found, in 1838, when those papers were moved for, that an answer had been given by the President of the Board of Control to this effect:—"There had been no treaty with the King of Oude which had been ratified by the East India Company, with the approbation of the Commissioners for the affairs of India."

THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDE

said, he did not find that in the collection of treaties to which he had referred there was a statement of the ratification of any of the treaties included in it. That the collection had been sent home from India seemed to him to make it more certain that the treaty of 1837 was in existence.

THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH

said, that perhaps the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) would be good enough to inquire whether any trace of the pecuniary transactions in which he (the Earl of Ellenborough) was engaged was to be found in the papers. He could not find any trace of them. At a time when he was under great difficulty of a pecuniary character, arising from the necessity of bringing buck the army of Afghanistan, he asked the King of Oude, as well as other native princes, to accommodate him with a loan. He obtained from the King of Oude £100,000. He confessed he was rather disappointed at the amount he had received from the King of Oude at a time when he had obtained loans from the other sovereigns. In six weeks; after the return of the army he had paid back the other loans; but left the loan of the King of Oude in the hands of other parties to deal with it.

House adjourned till To-morrow.