Lords Sitting of 4 February 1859

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Vexatious Indictments; Juries in Civil Causes.

SIR JOHN LAWRENCE.—EXPLANATION.
EARL GRANVILLE: I am anxious, my Lords, to take this early opportunity of making a statement with regard to one of the most distinguished men in India—one to whom this country is greatly indebted for the part which he took in the suppression of the recent rebellion in India. I allude to Sir John Lawrence. I have had a correspondence with that gentleman with respect to a statement which I made last year, and, with the permission of the House, I will state the result of that correspondence. In the course of a debate in the last Session I stated, as a proof of the firmness of Lord Canning, that on hearing that negotiations had arisen with the insurgents at Delhi, he took upon himself to send a telegraphic message, objecting to their being proceeded with, although they had been regarded favourably by Sir John Lawrence and by the military authorities. Now, this statement was made upon information of the most reliable character. But from the communications which I have received from Sir John Lawrence, it appears that the negotiations were not with the body of the insurgents, but were proposed by the King of Delhi to the general in command, (General Reed) not General Wilson, as I supposed at the time; and Sir John Lawrence concurred in the opinion that it was desirable to negotiate with the King of Delhi, on condition that he could give an assurance that he had never issued orders for the murder of any of our fellow-countrymen, and on his giving a guarantee to deliver into our hands the gates of his palace, thereby enabling us to take the other positions of the insurgents in the reverse. The chief reasor assigned by Sir John Lawrence for agreeing to those negotiations is the small number of our troops, the inefficiency of our siege trains, the immense disproportion of the field guns of the enemy, the almost hopelessness of the prospect of taking Delhi, and other considerations, which in his opinion made this measure desirable and which would moreover save many valuable lives. At that period the communications between Sir John Lawrence and Calcutta were entirely suspended Sir John Lawrence sent information to

105
Lord Canning as to his views on this matter, but I have reason to believe that that particular despatch was not received by Lord Canning. It appears that afterwards a message was received from Lord Canning, stating that he had heard rumours of such negotiations being on foot, and objecting to any negotiations which would have for their result the replacing of the King of Delhi in his former position. That telegraphic message arrived after the negotiations had been found to be fruitless, and at the time when our troops had been reinforced, and the siege had been very nearly completed. These statements are the result of a very long letter with which it is scarcely necessary to trouble your Lordships; but the statements in this letter are fortified by confirmatory documents. My Lords, I have never doubted for a moment that any course taken by Sir J. Lawrence was supported by most weighty reasons; and, at the same time, I am still of opinion that it required great moral courage on the part of Lord Canning, when he heard of the rumour of negotiations, to take upon himself to forbid such negotiations. Although I have no doubt that Sir John Lawrence was right, and if possession of the place could have been obtained at that time it would have prevented the loss of valuable lives; still, upon the other hand, judging after the event, it was of some advantage that Delhi should have been taken by our troops without any such negotiations having been completed with the king, who was at the head of the insurgents. No person can imagine that I wish to disparage the merits of either of those distinguished men in order to raise the character of the other. That is certainly not my intention; on the contrary, I believe that both in their different capacities performed their duty in a manner which is now fully appreciated both in this country and in India. What is especially satisfactory to me is, that in his letter Sir John Lawrence speaks in the highest terms of Lord Canning, and Lord Canning has never failed in his private letters to me to acknowledge in the warmest terms the great services of Sir J. Lawrence.

TEE QUEEN'S ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.
THE LORD STEWARD OF THE HOUSEHOLD (the Marquess of EXETER)brought up the following gracious Message from HER MAJESTY, in answer to the Address:—
106
MY LORDS,
I thank you sincerely for your loyal and dutiful Address.
I have great Satisfaction in receiving the Assurance of your careful Consideration of the different Measures which will be submitted to you; and you may rely on My cordial Co-operation in your Endeavours to improve and strengthen the Institutions of the Country, and to promote the Happiness and Prosperity of My People.

IMMIGRATION ACT (JAMAICA) PETITION.
LORD BROUGHAM presented a petition from emancipated labourers, and others, of Arnatto Bay, in the Island of Jamaica, complaining of a Bill having been passed, without due consideration and in great haste, seriously detrimental to their interests: the Bill related to the immigration of free labour, and the Petition prayed that the same might be disallowed. The petitioners complained that the Petition had been passed through the Legislature with such haste, that they had no opportunity of raising their voice against its enactment, They further stated that there was no want of labourers in that country, and that all attempts which had been made to obtain a further supply of them had proved absolute failures. The petitioners also complained that the introduction of these labourers lowered the rate of their own wages; and herein he could not altogether agree with the Petitioners, but it tended to make him lean towards their view if the Bill imposed taxes upon the Island so as to make them pay for a premium for this very importation. It was also a grievance that the work of the clergy was frustrated, as the immigrants introduced a vast amount of superstition and immorality; and they therefore prayed that their Lordships would, by an address to the Crown, use their influence to prevent the Royal Assent being given to the measure. He should not now go further into the matter, than give notice that he should on Monday ask a question of the noble Lord, the Under Secretary for the Colonies, as to whether the Royal assent had or had not been given to this Bill.
House adjourned at half-past five o'clock, Monday nest, half-past four o'clock,