his Majesty to recall the person whom they had originally recommended to be appointed as Governor-general. For the whole period of twenty-two years, since this act was passed, there was no instance of his Majesty's ministers having exercised this power, and they should be aware that the most pernicious consequences might result from an indiscreet exercise of it. The situation of India now was delicate in the extreme. The negociations which were pending with the native powers, and the retrenchments which were to be carried on, required a Government armed with the usual powers and confidence. If then, at such a time, this power of recall was exercised altogether without reason, and apparently with no other view than patronage, it was enough to irritate the Court of Directors. If, then, the Court of Directors were irritated by such conduct (and it was known, that whim and ill-humour had often influence on the determination of public bodies); if they supposed that this power of recall was exercised capriciously and wantonly, they could find from the words of the law sufficient means of resisting any appointment that his Majesty's ministers might wish to make. I have already stated to your lordships the situation in which India was placed at the death of Marquis Cornwallis, and at the time that Sir George Barlow succeeded to the government; and also that the first act of his Majesty's ministers upon that occasion was to recommend to the Court of Directors the extending the power of Sir George Barlow. On this recommendation there was great joy in Leadenhall-street; for never was there an individual in the service of the Company, whose conduct had received more marked approbation than that of Sir George Barlow, nor did the records of the Company shew a greater number of testimonies of approbation of the conduct of any individual that ever was in their service. The former administration had concurred with the Company in their opinion of his merits; for when Marquis Wellesley was about to depart from India in 1802, Sir George Barlow was the person whom they had named as bis successor. When, however, Lord Cornwallis was recommended to supersede Sir George Barlow, the Court of Directors gave no opposition, and he himself readily gave way to the appointment of the noble Marquis. Sir George Ba low received Marquis Cornwallis with open arms, be cause he knew that his appointment was made merely on

public grounds, and for the public good but when it should appear that an appointment was made from other motives, it cannot be expected that it would be acquiesced in so cheerfully. Sir George Barlow most readily joined in all the plans introduced by Marquis Cornwallis, both for securing the tranquillity of India, and for the retrench-1 ments that were to be made in the expenditure. In speaking on that subject, I beg that I may not be considered as giving any opinion on the conduct of a noble Marquis (Lord Wellesley), which is now the subject of conversation. If, upon the appointment of Sir George Barlow, there was much joy and exultation, that joy was quite suppressed, when in ten little days after that appointment, Government intimated their wish to have him recalled. If this were done capriciously, and without suflicient reason, ministers were much to blame; but if it were done for the purpose of seizing the patronage of India, it was worse-it was a direct violation of the spirit and the meaning of the act of Parliament. I have heard it, however, surmised, that in the original recommendation of Sir George Barlow, the government never deceived the Court of Directors, but that they told them at that time, that the appointment was merely temporary and liable to be changed. This appointment, however, which lasted but ten days, would not enable him to do any good, while the suddenness of his recall must be felt by him as a mortification and disgrace. It would have been a very different thing to have left him in a subordinate situation, from what it was to appoint him Governor-general, and recall him after he had been only ten days appointed. It certainly appeared like some disgrace, or as if, in the course of the ten days, ministers had found out something in his conduct that rendered him unworthy of their confidence. The reason would not be confined to the cabinets of Downing-street or of Leadenhall-street, but it would be reported through the metropolis, and the report would reach to India, that Sir George Barlow, in whom they had been accustomed to repose great confidence, was found unworthy to retain the government of India. I should therefore now wish, that the corre spondence on the subject between the Directors and the Board of Controul should be laid before the House. cannot be said to be a secret: not only the twenty-four Directors,

7

It

Directors, but their children, their wives, their daughters, and their servants, must all of them be acquainted with the nature of this correspondence. As I have no official document to go on, and am obliged to rest upon reports, I must state, that it is also reported that the principal reason for recalling Sir George Barlow is, that it is the system of the present administration that none but men of rank in this country should ever be appointed to the situation of Governor-general in India. I do not know how this doctrine will be relished by the gentlemen in India, who have spent the greater part of their lives in the service of the Company in that country, but I think it never can be taken as a general rule of con duct. If the Governor-general should die in India, it must necessarily follow, that he should be succeeded in the government by the senior of the Supreme Council. This person must, of course, exercise the of fice of Governor-general until time should elapse sufficient to transmit the news of such decease to this country, and until a successor should be actually appointed. It therefore appears, that on the death of a Governorgeneral, it happens of necessity that the senior of the Supreme Council will have that situation for a year. It will, however, be necessary, that the Company's servants in India may know to what extent his Majesty's ministers think that confidence may be reposed in them. It would be right that they should know what situations they might aspire to, and what situations they should ever be debarred from, It should be told them at once, that the whole career that was open to them was this, that from writers they might get to be factors, and from that to be junior merchants, senior merchants, and collectors of the salt duties; and arrive to all the lucrative situations of the country, but that they must not, in any case, hope to attain to the honours of Governor-general, which some, who passed their lives in the service of the Company, in the burning climate of India, might hope to aspire to. I myself, my lords, have often heard the private opi nions of the directors of the East India Company upon the subject of appointing none but men of great family and high rank to the government of India. They have always thought that a person of this description, who was really distinguished for talents and the qualities desired, would be

of

of all men the most proper, as he would arrive at India free from those partialities in favour of particular servants of the Company, which might interfere with the right administration of the country. It would, however, appear very strange in the ears of Lord Teignmouth, Sir Charles Oakly, and many other servants of the Company, who had held the highest situations in India, to tell them, that, by the modern system, it was discovered that persons of their description ought not to have been placed in the highest situations, and that, if they had been in India in modern times, they could have no pretensions to such distinction. This would be, indeed, strange music to their ears. Upon all these grounds I conceive I am warranted in stating that, prima facie, it is a most extraordinary thing that ministers should have conceived themselves warranted in exercising the power of recall, which a clause in the act of Parliament vested in his Majesty. I should wish to learn from the noble secretary (Lord Grenville), whether the instrument, under the sign manual, for recalling Sir George Barlow, was ever sent to India? I apprehend, that, from the repeal of the commission, there is now no existing government in India; and I cannot conceive in what manner the Court of Directors are to proceed to fill up the vacancies in the Supreme Council in India. If the instrument of recall has remained for two months in the pocket of the noble secretary, how are the Court of Directors to make out their warrant? It must also be considered in what situation the temporary government that subsists in India is placed. Although the treaties may be concluded, the negotiations and the consequences of them may not yet be at an end. There were probably yet remaining many things which were most important in the - execution. By the treaties which Lord Cornwallis was on the point of negotiating, the river Jummah was to be the western boundary of the British possessions in India. Lord Cornwallis had sent to General Lake instructions to fix that river as the boundary of that part of the conquered countries which the Company meant to retain. There was, however, a most extensive district of the conquered countries respecting which the treaty, which was lately published, was entirely silent. Whatever might be the disposition of them, Holkar and Scindiah had no right to complain; but as Marquis Cornwallis had renounced the occupation of them, it would be a matter of the most serious moment how

they

they were to be disposed of. They must be reserved for some one of the native princes; but, until it was ascertained to which of these they were to be given, India could never be considered in a settled state of tranquillity. Under these circumstances, I declare most solemnly, that if the person appointed to the government of India were my brother, or my nearest and dearest friend, I should deprecate his appointment at the present time. The court of directors did not insist upon the appointment of Sir George Barlow, in any other light than as a temporary measure, in consideration of the circumstances of the present time. If therefore the person who should be appointed would consent to delay for six months the gratification of his ambition, I make no doubt that he would meet with no opposition from the court of directors. If he should, however, go out now, and raise his rank upon the unmerited disgrace of Sir George Barlow, he must feel that he goes out with the disrespect and ill-will of the court of directors, and he must consider how he is likely to be received in India. He must consider what ef fect the doctrine will produce there, that none but men of rank and title can ever hope to attain the highest offices in India. I can venture to foretel that with the degradation of Sir George Barlow, a servant who has their hearts and their confidence, all the servants of the Company in India' will feel themselves degraded. I repeat again, that if my brother or my nearest friend were going to India under these circumstances, I should endeavour to dissuade him. I should tell him, that even the support of the board of controul would not balance the disgust with which his appointment would be received by the court of directors, and the servants of the Company in general. I should therefore most sincerely recommend to whoever may be appointed, to defer for six months the gratification of what may be a very laudable ambition; at the expiration of that time I have very little doubt that he may go to India with the perfect acquiescence of the court of directors, and the good wish of their servants in India. I have nothing more to add at present, and shall conclude with moving, 1st, for copies of all letters and dispatches from the governorgeneral of India to the court of directors, respecting the finances of the Company, and the retrenchments proposed to be made; and when that motion is disposed of, I shall move for copies of the correspondence between the board of controul