§ THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, that as that was probably the last evening on which their Lordships' House would meet before the Christmas holidays, he wished to say one word, and he trusted it would be the last, in reference to the extraordinary controversy which had arisen out of the statement made by him on the first night of the Session. In the first place, however, before he proceeded to the particular statement to which he referred, he must correct two inaccuracies into which he had been led in making that statement, although they were not of much importance to the argument he was supporting. He had stated that the first offer made to the Government to send troops across the Isthmus of Suez was made by the Peninsular and Oriental Company. He believed the fact was, that it was made by the European and American Company in July, and was rejected by the Government. It was singular that in the papers laid on the table within the last few days he found a letter from the Governor General, dated August 7, in which he stated that if the Government were not in communication with the Peninsular and Oriental Company, the Government of India were, and that he fully expected that the Home Government would avail themselves of the advantages offered by that route. [The noble Earl read a passage from Lord Canning's despatch, from which it appeared, that, supposing the Government at home might send troops via Suez, he had communicated with the company on the point of bringing them on to India by their steam-boats, and that they had informed him that each vessel would carry 600.] The other inaccuracy 522 into which he had been led was this. He had stated that the time when the offer of the Peninsular and Oriental Company to send troops overland was made was in the latter end of August, whereas he found by a letter from Mr. Willcox that the offer was made on September 6, and accepted September 8. The third question to which he wished to call attention was the much controverted letter said by him to have been written by the President of the Board of Control to the Directors of the Peninsular and Oriental Company. Even up to that moment he was unable to explain the discrepancy which exists between the noble Earl's denial of the accuracy of my statement and the information on which that statement was based. As my noble Friend (the Earl of Hardwicke) stated to the House the other evening, he made to me in November last the statement he (the Earl of Derby) had made to the House. It appeared, however, to him to be so incredible that he took no further notice of it. When, however, he (the Earl of Derby) came to town, he had the same statement made to him in another quarter, and he then began to think that it was necessary to make some further inquiry into the matter, and he then held in his hand the original of the first written communication he received on the subject after he arrived in town. He would rather not mention the name of the gentleman from whom it proceeded: it would probably be sufficient when he stated that he was a gentleman of character and position. The part of it which was material was as follows—
When the negotiations were completed, the arrangements all made, and the men getting ready, all having been settled between the Peninsular Company and Captain Sheppard, on behalf of the East India Directors, so little did Mr. Vernon Smith know of what was in progress, that he wrote to Mr. Anderson, to inquire of him whether it would then be possible to organize some such plan as had been already organized and brought into operation without the knowledge of Mr. Vernon Smith, or of the Board of Control. Mr. Anderson told me that in reply he informed him that it not only could be done, but that it had been done.He still thought there must be some mistake, and he therefore begged his informant to go to Mr. Anderson and ascertain whether the statement was undoubtedly correct. In reply, he was informed that Mr. Anderson had left England on his way to Egypt, but that his informant would have an opportunity of 523 seeing another director in the course of the day, and would ascertain the truth from him. The gentleman to whom he referred came to him at eleven o'clock on the night before Parliament met and told him that he had seen Mr. Allen, another director, that day, and that he had confirmed the fact that Mr. Anderson had made that statement. He (the Earl of Derby) believed that Mr. Anderson was said to have made this statement not only to the person from whom he heard it, but publicly in various quarters. After hearing this confirmation of the story he (the Earl of Derby) thought himself entitled to make the statement he had done on the first night of the Session. He thought the noble Earl (Earl Granville) did not so absolutely contradict it as to say there could not be any foundation for it, but he gave it such a contradiction as led him to send for his informant the next day, and he then learnt that Mr. Anderson was still in Paris, on his way to Egypt. He accordingly begged his informant to write by that post, and he had now in his possession a copy of the letter which he wrote to Mr. Anderson, stating the contradiction which had been given to his (the Earl of Derby's) statement, and requesting him to mention how the fact really stood. That letter was written on Tuesday, and necessarily no answer could yet have been received; but it was remark-able that, although Mr. Anderson was in Paris at the time when the report of the debates reached him, and had written over to England after seeing the statement which he made in Parliament, he had not in the slightest degree repudiated the allegations he made. Mr. Anderson now appeared to have left Paris and gone on his way to Egypt. He had, however, in his hand a letter from Mr. Allen, which he received yesterday, but had retained until that day, expecting that a reply would be received from Mr. Anderson. In the letter from Mr. Allen, that gentleman stated that Mr. Anderson was under the impression that after the arrangements for sending troops by the Suez route had been made, the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Control wrote to make inquiries of the Peninsular and Oriental Company as to the possibility of making them; hut he added that from subsequent inquiries, made at the office of the company, coupled with the declaration of Mr. Vernon 524 Smith, he (Mr. Allen) "had no hesitation in saying that there must be some misapprehension on the point on the part of his colleague." Thus, while this gentleman intimated his belief that there was a misapprehension on the subject on the part of Mr. Anderson, he recognised the fact that there was an impression on Mr. Anderson's mind that there had been such a communication and answer as had been referred to. He confessed, for his own part, he did not understand how such a thing should be the subject of an impression. A man could hardly be under an impression that he had received and answered a letter; and even supposing the communication was a verbal one, he must know one way or the other whether he had received and replied to it. The statement that there was such an impression on Mr. Anderson's mind vindicated the person on whose authority he made the statement, and who naturally supposed that he had received the fact from a source that could not be mistaken. Mr. Anderson had now gone to Egypt, and any further inquiry must be a matter between him and the President of the Board of Trade. Or, possibly, Mr. Anderson on his return might have an opportunity of explaining the matter before the Committee of the other House, which was about to inquire into the subject. But as the thing stood, and after the declaration of his noble Friend opposite, and the denial of the right hon. Gentleman himself, he (the Earl of Derby) felt, as a man of honour, bound to give the President of the Board of Control the full benefit of his explicit denial, and to express his regret that he should have made a statement which could not but be injurious to him in his public capacity. He believed, however, that their Lordships would be of opinion, not only that he did not make the statement without believing it to be true, but also that he did not make it except after such inquiry and upon such authority as fairly led him to suppose that it could not be successfully contradicted. He repeated, however, again that he now felt bound to give the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Control the fullest credit for his disclaimer, and to assume that some incomprehensible misunderstanding must have led to the statement which was made to him, and which he repeated.
§ EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that he was 525 from the first quite sure that any misstatement made by the noble Earl was perfectly unintentional on his part; and after what he had stated the other night, and again that evening, he (Earl Granville) was quite ready to admit that the noble Earl had apparently ample ground for making the statement he did. The noble Earl seemed to have made several inquiries, the answers to which were of such a nature that he might have well believed they were true, and correctly represented the facts of the case. At the same time he (Earl Granville) was prepared to deny that there was any truth in the statement. When the noble Earl made the charge against his right hon. Friend, he (Earl Granville) might have contradicted it at once, but not exactly in the decided manner he could have wished to have done; but seeing his right hon. Friend (Mr. Vernon Smith) at the time in the House, he sent a message to him asking him whether the statement made was true or not. The answer he received was, it was not true. Of course thereon he contradicted the statement; but in consequence of the extreme positiveness of the noble Earl's manner, and the positive face he put upon it—knowing too how often and how easily mistakes and misunderstandings arise—he did not contradict it so decidedly as he might have done, but contented himself with a simple denial of the charge, and refrained from making any violent assertion. Since then he had seen his right hon. Friend, who told him that he had not the slightest recollection of having written such a letter, or of having received such a reply, as were stated. He had also questioned his private secretary and the Secretary of the Board of Control, with the same result. His right hon. Friend had then, he believed, placed himself in communication with the secretary of the Peninsular and Oriental Company. That functionary had also expressed himself wholly ignorant of this alleged correspondence. The gentleman, therefore, whose name they did not as yet know, had furnished the information which, he said, he had received from Mr. Anderson, who was now abroad, and upon which the noble Lord opposite had founded his statement. The noble Earl said that this person had gone to Mr. Allen to obtain corroboration of what he had stated, that he had returned from that 526 gentleman and said Mr. Allen had informed him that it was all correct. Such a statement was somewhat extraordinary, inasmuch as it was in direct contradiction to Mr. Allen's version of the affair.
§ THE EARL OF DERBYI beg the noble Earl's pardon. I did not say that this gentleman stated that Mr. Allen had declared the information to he perfectly true, but that Mr. Allen knew that Mr. Anderson had made such a statement.
§ EARL GRANVILLETherefore, when all the reasons were given, he felt it impossible that this letter could have been written, or the alleged reply have been given. Under all the circumstances of the case, he must protest against his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Control having imposed upon him the burden of taking any further steps in the matter to clear his character, because the gentleman who gave the information, and whose name they did not know, was now bound to substantiate his case if he could. Having said thus much, he begged to acknowledge the courteous and cordial manner with which his noble Friend, in the most honourable manner, had acknowledged his own inability to substantiate his statement, and expressed his regret at having, under such circumstances, made the statement so injurious to the official character of the right hon. Gentleman. He begged to thank the noble Earl for that acknowledgment.