« PreviousContinue »
pursued by him in the course of his administration in that same country from 1814 to 1819, which course has deservedly been the theme of applause and admiration. The measures adopted by the two eminent and distinguished noblemen at the head of affairs in India at each of the above-mentioned periods* ended in acquisition of territory; they were stated by their respective go. vernments to be the result of necessity, and on each occasion the East-India Company pressed on their serious attention the principles which the Legislature had laid down for the government of India.
The statements made by the late Mr. Canning, on the occasion of his moving a vote of thanks to the Marquess of Hastings and the British army in India, in March 1819, are so much in point, as regards the conduct of the East-India Company, on the subject of the Company's foreign policy, that it is impossible to avoid quoting them. The right honourable gentleman, whose eloquence could impart even an interest to matters connected with India, expressed himself in the following terms:
“ I approach the subject, sir, with the greater cau'« tion and delicacy, because I know with how much “ jealousy the House and the country are in the habit “ of appreciating the triumphs of our arms in India. .“ I know well that, almost uniformly successful as our “ military operations in that part of the world have “ been, they have almost as uniformly been considered “ as questionable in point of justice. Hence the ter“ mination of a war in India, however glorious, is “ seldom contemplated with unmixed satisfaction. “ That sentiment generally receives some qualification
" from * Marquess Wellesley and the Marquess of Hastings.
“ from a notion, in most cases perhaps rather assumed “ than defined, that the war is likely to have been pro“ voked on our part, with motives very different from " those of self-defence. Notions of this soft have “ undoubtedly taken deep root in the public mind: “ but I am confident that in the present instance • (and I verily believe on former occasions which are “ gone by, and with which it is no business of mine “ to meddle at present) a case is to be made out as « clear for the justice of the British cause, as for the “ prowess of the British arms. Neither, however, do “ I accuse of want of candour those who entertain “ such notions ; nor do I pretend to deny that the 6 course of Indian history, since our first acquaint“ ance with that country, furnishes some apparent “ foundation for them. It is not unnatural that, in 6 surveying that vast continent, presenting as it does, “ from the Boorampooter to the Indus, and from the « northern mountains to the sea, an area of some66 where about one million of square miles, and con“ taining not less than one hundred millions of inha“ bitants; in looking back to the period when our s possessions there consisted only of a simple factory “ on the coast for the purposes of a permitted trade;
and in comparing that period with the present, when " that factory has swelled into an empire; when about “ one-third in point of extent, and about three-fifths « in point of population, of those immense territories “ are subject immediately to British Government; “ when not less than another fourth of the land, and 6 another fifth of the inhabitants, are under rulers “ either tributary to the British power or connected
with it by close alliance; it is not unnatural that, “ upon such survey and comparison, prejudices should
“ have arisen against the rapid growth of our Indian “ establishment; that its increase should have been “ ascribed, not only by enemies or rivals, but by “ sober reflexion and by impartial philosophy, to a “ spirit of systematic encroachment and ambition.
“ On the other hand, in a power so situated as ours, “ a power planted in a foreign soil, and without natu“ ral root in the habits or affections of the people; “ compelled to struggle, first for its existence, and " then for its security, and, in process of time, for the “ defence of allies, from whom it might have derived “ encouragement and aid, against nations in the habit “ of changing their masters on every turn of fortune, “ and the greater part already reduced under govern“ ments founded by successful invasion; in a power “ so situated, it can hardly be matter of surprise that " there should have been found an irrepressible ten6. dency to expansion. It may be a mitigation, if not “ a justification, of such a tendency, that the inroads 66 which it has occasioned have grown out of circum“ stances hard to be controlled ; that the alternative “ has been, in each successive instance, conquest or “ extinction; and that, in consequence, we have pre“ vailed for the most part over preceding conquerors, “ and have usurped, if usurped, upon older usurpa“ tions.
“ I refer to the wise and sober enactments of the 6. British Parliament, not to dispute their authority or " to set aside their operation, but because I can with « confidence assert, that at no period of our Indian “ history have the recorded acts and votes of Parlia“ ment been made more faithfully the basis of instruc“ tions to the Government in India than at the period 66 when the Marquess of Hastings assumed the supreme
“ authority. It is but justice to the executive body of “ the East-India Company to say, that the whole course “ and tenour of their instructions has been uniformly “ and steadily adverse to schemes of aggrandizement, “ and to any war which could safely and honourably “ be avoided. It is but justice to the memory of the “ noble person whom I succeeded in the office which “ I have the honour to hold, to say, that he uniformly “ inculcated the same forbearing policy, and laboured “ to turn the attention of the Indian governments “ from the extension of external acquisitions or con" nexions to the promotion of internal improvement. « And having said this, it may not be an unpardonable “ degree of presumption in me to add, that I have “ continued to walk in the path of my predecessor; " that I have omitted no occasion of adding my exhor“ tations to those which I found recorded in my office “ against enterprizes of ambition and wars of con" quest. So strongly and so recently had the pacific “ system been recommended, that upon the eve of the “ breaking out of the late hostilities, the hands of the • Supreme Government were absolutely tied up from “ any foreign undertakings, except in a case of the “ most pressing exigency. Such an exigency alone “ produced, or could justify the war, the glorious re“ sult of which the House is now called upon to mark “ by its vote,"
In the second report from the Committee of the Honourable House of Commons on the public income and expenditure of the United Kingdom laid before the House in June last:
The Committee, after stating that they have inquired into the salaries given to clerks in the India House, the Bank of England, two insurance offices, and one of
the 'principal banking-houses of London, observe, “ there is a material difference in the scales of the * salaries of these establishments." · After adverting to the terms on which clerks are admitted, the Committee remark: “ The chief clerks “ receive salaries from £800 to £2,000 a-year, and “ are taken from the body of the clerks ; but the * India House is not of the character of a purely " commercial establishment, and is by no means an * example of economical arrangement.” Had reference been made to the plan laid before Parliament in the year 1814, in pursuance of the act of 53d Geo. III, cap. 155, sec. 54, it would have at once been perceived, that half of the establishment of the India House is a political charge, the duties performed by such part being territorial and political, and separate and distinct from the commercial branch. It may likewise be confidently asserted, that very many of the duties performed, even in the commercial branch, differ most materially from any transacted by other establishments which are referred to.
Had the Committee of Finance been aware of the duties discharged at the India House under the direction and instruction of the Chairs and the Court of Directors, it would have been apparent that the comparison which has been drawn will by no means hold good. Let any body look at the various despatches to the several governments in India in the political, revenue, judicial, military, financial, and ecclesiastical departments, to which Mr. Canning (and perhaps a more competent judge could scarcely have been selected) alluded in the following terms in the debate on a motion by Mr. Creevy as to the Board of Control, on the 14th March 1822. “ He had seen a military despatch accompanied with