to the noble lord, who, when he heard them, would be able to judge whether or not he could agree to their production. The first document he should move for was, "An account of all sums of money paid or advanced to the king of Sweden, or for his service, with the respective dates of such advances.' The next information he would call for was, " The specific day on which the Swedish army landed on the continent" (as it was termed in the Treaty, a manner, certainly, in which he should not have expressed himself, as it seemed to imply that Sweden formed no part of the continent of Europe)" in conformity with the stipulations contained in the first Article of the Treaty laid before the House by the command of the Prince Regent." He should next call for "A copy of the Treaty concluded between his Majesty and the Emperor of Russia," if any such had been entered into, relating to the same subject. He did not know how this fact stood, whether Russia acted under a separate treaty, concluded with her, or only in conformity with the Convention entered into between her and Sweden. And, therefore, the information which he should derive from the noble lord, on this point, would direct him in shaping his motion properly. The last papers he should move for would be," copies or extracts of all correspondence between his Majesty's minister for Foreign Affairs and any accredited minister of the king of Denmark." He conceived information on these points, absolutely necessary to the forming a correct estimate of the Treaty with Sweden. If the noble lord could point out any error in the form of his intended motions, he would willingly alter it. If, however, he did not, and that he resisted the production of the papers, he then gave notice, that he would, tomorrow, move for them. jesty's government possessed the information, they were perfectly willing to state the day on which the landing of the Swedish troops took place. This latter infor mation, he believed, would be as accurate as the right hon. gentleman could wish, for any purpose he might have in view. He felt very considerable difficulty with reference to the Treaty concluded between Sweden and Russia, which had been confidentially communicated to his Majesty's government, but which neither of the two powers had promulgated. He was, however, aware, that it was impossible for the right hon. gentleman to argue on the propriety of the stipulations entered into with Sweden, unless the nature of her connec tion with Russia was understood. Still, however, the right hon. gentleman must perceive the situation of delicacy in which his Majesty's government stood, and would, perhaps, be satisfied, if the articles, immediately connected with the recent Swedish Treaty, were substantially laid before the House, instead of pressing for the production of the Treaty itself. Mr. Ponsonby inquired in what manner the noble lord meant to give this information? He did not think it would be satisfactory, if he intended merely to give it in the course of his speech. Lord Castlereagh replied, that the information should be regularly laid on the table. Mr. Ponsonby said, that would answer perfectly well. He did not wish the government to take any step which might be prejudicial to the public service. It should be understood, however, that the noble lord would give all the substantial information necessary on the Russian and Swedish Convention; the choice and selection of the extracts depending on himself. With respect to his wish to know the day on which the Swedish troops landed, Lord Castlereagh, in answer, observed, the noble lord would recollect, that, by that, as to the production of the corres- the Treaty, Sweden promised to employ a pondence between his Majesty's govern- corps of not less than 30,000 men, in direct ment and that of Denmark, he was not operation upon the continent, and, by the prepared to accede to the proposition of fourth article of the Treaty it was stipu the right hon. gentleman. With respect lated, that all the future advances to be to the inquiry, whether any Treaty had made by this country, after the first, were been entered into with Russia, he had to to depend on the actual employment of inform the right hon. gentleman that no the Swedish army. These were the very such Treaty had been concluded. Russia words of the Treaty. Now, he wished to acted in consequence of her stipulations know in what way Sweden was considered, with Sweden. As to the amount of ad- by the government of this country, as havvances made to Sweden, with their dates, ing so far fulfilled her stipulations, that there could be no difficulty in furnishing she became entitled to the promised subsuch an account. And, so far as his Ma-sidy? He thought it was necessary to learn, whether only a part of the Swedish troops had landed, or whether the entire number had been furnished, before they considered that power as having a right to claim the intended succours. Lord Castlereagh intimated that every possible information should be granted. Mr. Marryat was desirous of learning from the noble lord, whether it was intended, along with Guadaloupe, to cede the islands of St. Martin, Marigalante, Deseada, and the Saintes, which were always considered as its dependencies? Lord Castlereagh answered, that nothing was ceded, except Guadaloupe, properly so called. Mr. Ponsonby then observed, that there appeared to be no point of difference between him and the noble lord, except as far as related to the correspondence between this government and that of Denmark, for the production of which he would submit a motion to the House to morrow. Mr. Whitbread wished to ask the noble lord whether he had any objection to postpone the debate on the Swedish Treaty, from Wednesday until Friday? Such an arrangement would be most convenient to himself and some of his friends, who were anxious to take part in the debate. Lord Castlereagh said that it was desirable for the House to take the Treaty as early as possible into consideration; but under such circumstances, he had no hesitation in complying with the hon. gentleman's request. HELLESTONE ELECTION.] On the order of the day, for taking into further consideration the Resolution which, upon the 24th of March last, was reported from the select committee appointed to try and determine the merits of the Petition of sir Christopher Hawkins, of Trewithin, in the county of Cornwall, baronet, complaining of an undue election and return for the borough of Helleston, Lord Castlereagh moved, that the farther consideration be postponed to Monday, in order to let the House go into a committee upon the affairs of the East India Company. Lord Archibald Hamilton objected to the question being farther postponed, as it had already been inserted twice in the orders of the day. The question deeply involved the character of the House, and he conceived it would not be consistent with their dignity to delay a decision longer. Mr. Wynn said, the Report had been on the table since the 24th of March. He was in favour of proceeding in the question. Mr. Bathurst wished the subject to be postponed, but not until next session, Mr. Swan acceded to the proposition of the noble lord (Castlereagh), but did not know how it would affect the prosecu, tion which he intended to advise. The Attorney General could tell him. The Attorney General said, if the business were proceeded in, it would be im possible to bring the persons to trial, or even to obtain a plea from them, by the next assizes. Mr. Preston spoke in favour of an immediate proceeding. Mr. Swan said, he would not have delayed the business one hour, if it had not been to suit the convenience of gentlemen. When the present motion was disposed of, it was his intention to move, "That the Attorney-General do forthwith prosecute the most noble George Frederick, duke of Leeds, and four of the aldermen of the borough of Helston, for practices subversive of the freedom of election.” The House, if they thought proper, might order proceedings against such of the freemen as were concerned in the business, though he conceived they would not appear so culpable as the parties he had mentioned. He would also move for leave to bring in a Bill to prevent bribery and corruption in the elections for the said borough. Mr. D. Giddy said, he would move that the fifth alderman be included in the prosecution. Mr. Swan shortly stated his reasons for confining the prosecution to four of the aldermen. The Report was then ordered to be taken into consideration on Monday. EAST INDIA COMPANY'S AFFAIRS.] Lord Castlereagh moved the order of the day, for resuming the adjourned proceeding upon the further consideration of the Report, which upon the 3d day of June was made from the Committee of the whole House to whom it was referred to consider further of the Affairs of the East India Company. Mr. Howorth said :-Sir, to the Resolu tions in the form now submitted to the consideration of the House, there are, as I conceive, important objections; but reflecting on the vast variety and extent of this subject, in all its bearings and rela tions, on its magnitude as it regards the people of this country, and on its extreme importance to the natives of India, I am convinced that his Majesty's ministers, with the best intentions for the public service, and with the most impartial disposition to provide for, and satisfy if possible, the various and adverse interests engaged in, and involved in this great question, could not form a plan, to which some plausible, some serious, and perhaps, some solid objections may not be opposed. The situation in which we stand with regard to India, is an anomaly so extraordinary, as to set aside all theories: an immense empire in the East, brought under the control of a little island in the West, acquired, maintained, and preserved through the instrumentality of a commercial body, is a new case, unprecedented in the events of the world; and the only safe way in which legislation can be introduced under such circumstances is, by the rational application of rules, drawn from the practical knowledge acquired, in the course of this unexampled accession of territory. But with regard to the Resolutions now brought up, surely it is important, that the first Resolution should declare in whom the sovereignty of India is vested, and by whom the sovereign authority is to be executed, parliament should determine in what form it should be avowed, and to what extent it should be exercised. The question of right to the territorial possessions in India, between the government and the East India Company, has always been mooted, and even in these Resolutions, the right of sovereignty is foisted in the body of an appropriation resolve, and not where I think it ought to be, in the preamble of the Bill. An explicit unqualified declaration of sovereignty is absolutely necessary; the lately published speech of a noble lord in the other House of Parliament, states, "that the territory of India belongs to the crown." Under a monarchy no subject or class of subjects can acquire a political dominion but for the crown; at present, India acknowledges no British sovereign, it acknowledges and submits to the power of the East India Company, transferred to them as they believe by various grants of their native princes, and all the treaties hitherto made in the East Indies, are made in the name and on the behalf of the East India Company. We are known as merchants, but not as monarchs; what may eventually result from undeceiving them, it is not in my power to determine : I have no intention of following up these remarks with any specific motion, but merely to suggest that it appears to me of importance that the preamble to the intended Bill should declare in whom the actual sovereignty of the territorial possessions in India is vested, and by whom that authority is to be exercised. Sir John Newport so perfectly agreed in the sentiments expressed by the hon. gentleman who had just sat down, that he had himself prepared a resolution, declaratory of the right of sovereignty, which he would propose to the House. It was the more necessary that this declaration of sovereignty should be plainly and explicitly made, because the Company, in one of their resolutions, laid a claim to that sovereignty, to which, he contended, they had no right. He conceived, that previous to any commercial regulation, previous to any regulation of taxes and revenue, it should be decided to whom the right of territory and revenue belonged. He had, therefore, drawn up a resolution for that purpose, which he would move as an amendment to the first resolution of the noble lord. He would not detain the House longer, but move his resolution, to which he could conceive no ground of opposition, unless it were shewn that a necessity existed for departing from those principles by which every government was regulated. His resolu⚫ tion was, "That the sovereignty of the crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, over the territory and population of India, is paramount and undoubted-and with it the receipt of territorial revenues is inseparably connected; that parliament, in legislating for that great population, is bound primarily to provide for the security of their civil and religious rights-for the administration of speedy and impartial justice-and for their moral improvement and happiness; that with these sacred obligations of sovereign power, no prospect of commercial advantage can be allowed to enter into competition." His motive for mentioning civil and religious liberty was, because, as it was intended to give the natives an opportunity of becoming Christians, he would, in the first instance, give them to understand, that their adoption of Christianity was a matter of free choice. He also adverted to the speedy administration of justice, the necessity for which must be apparent to every person who recollected paramount to all others, that a Resolution, similar to that proposed by his right hon. friend, ought to stand in the fore-ground of the picture. Though he was ready to admit, that the situation of the inhabitants of India was improved considerably from former times, still he attributed that improvement to the exertions of individuals, and not to the excellence of the Com approved of. When he recollected, for 30 years past, the mode adopted in canvassing for the Direction in the city of London-when such a person was stated to be supported by the shipping interest, and another person by a different interest that one of the gentlemen examined at their bar stated, in evidence, that no less than 60,000 cases were pending in the principal court of one province alone. He concluded by moving his Amendment. Lord Castlereagh thought they ought not to proceed in putting this proposition forward, until they had well considered what parliament had done on a former occasion, when as great an anxiety was felt to dis-pany's constitution, which he by no means charge the great social trust to the people of India with fidelity, as could be entertained by any persons in the present day. They had come to certain practical resolutions, on which a Bill was to be founded; and he was sure, unless some great advantage could be pointed out, it would not be wise to depart from the course of proceed ing pursued by parliament at a former period. But he believed, it was not customary in matters of a practical nature, to set out with stating those great moral principles by which they must be guided upon all occasions. He was not aware of any resolution by which the Company claimed from the crown the sovereignty of India, although they had claimed the rights of property and revenue under the crown. He did not think it would be good policy to labour too much the authority of parliament on this subject; because, as no resolution to this effect, was introduced when the charter was formerly renewed, it would seem to be throwing a doubt, where no doubt existed, if á specific resolution were agreed to, on this point. It was also rendered the less necessary, because there was, in one of the resolutions, an incidental declaration on the subject: and that he conceived was the most proper way to introduce it. Mr. William Smith spoke in favour of the Amendment. He did not think they had any thing to do with the conduct of parliament on a former occasion. If that parliament omitted to do that which was necessary, it only formed a strong argument against their neglecting it at present. When he looked at the Resolutions, and found that they all, with the exception of one which was lately introduced, referred to matters of private commerce, trade and revenue-when he saw but one Resolution, which adverted to the general interests of such an immense population, he could not agree that parliament had done its duty; and whatever slur might thereby be cast on any former parliament, he contended, as the consideration of the happiness and improvement of the people were (VOL. XXVI.) he could only say, that if India were well governed under such a system, it must either have been the effect of individual ability, or else the mere work of chancefor many of the persons thus elected were as much fitted, by their habits and education, to fill any employment in the whole course of human existence, as to become governors of India. But even if the people of India were improved under the go. vernment of the India Company, it was the duty of that House to consider whether these people were capable of further improvement, either in their personal comforts or moral habits, and if so, to provide that such improvements should be communicated to them. The House, however, had heard it stated in evidence, that this improved people were in such a situa tion, that although their country yielded almost spontaneously all the productions necessary to subsistence, they were still destitute of every comfort, and therefore unlikely at any time to become purchasers of British manufactures. How this could be the case appeared rather extraordinary. It was said of the people of Sicily, that notwithstanding the peculiar fertility of their soil, and the favourable circumstances of their climate, they were still in a state of extreme wretchedness;—and to what was this owing? Why, to the exe. crable nature of their government, and was it not excusable under all the circumstances, to make a similar inference with respect to the system of government in India, especially when told that the people of India were not only wretched in their condition, but totally indifferent to the obligations of truth? Mr. Bathurst did not approve of the amendment. It contained two propositions, neither of which it was necessary to assert and he had yet to learn that it was (2 S) intended to follow up with any practical measure this Resolution, if adopted. It was not necessary to assert the sovereignty of the crown, as it had not been disputed; and the other proposition which the amendment contained was even still more unnecessary. Mr. Horner concurred with the opinion that any such recital of the duties of a government as that proposed was not necessary, and that it might therefore be dispensed with, particularly as it referred to the government of India, which never appeared to have been much influenced by such declarations. For he recollected a declaration, or resolution, of both Houses of Parliament, that the Indian government should not engage in any wars of aggression or conquest; yet from the period of passing that resolution, the Indian government had been marked by a 'continued progression of such wars. But there was another part of his right hon. friend's proposition which he was anxious to support, namely, the declaration of the paramount Sovereignty of the crown over the territory of India. This declaration he thought peculiarly necessary, as well from certain assertions which had been made by an honourable director in that House, as to a claim of property in India, independent of the crown, as from several publications which had gone forth affecting to support the pretensions of the East India Company. But this declaration was also expedient with reference to the claims frequently advanced heretofore by foreign powers; which claims might be renewed on the return of peace. actually purchased by the Company or obtained in grauts from the native princes, belonged de jure to the crown. For himself, he declared that he could not think it consistent with truth or justice to vote for such a proposition. Mr. Bruce said, that he had been for many years in the habit of reviewing the documents and authentic publications of the India Company, and that he never saw a line to justify the charge of any pretension on their part to the sovereignty of India. On the contrary this Company, which was on all occasions most distinguished for its loyalty, distinctly acknowledged the sovereignty of the crown, and for that reason combined with other considerations, he saw no necessity for the declaration proposed by the right hon. baronet. Mr. Horner, in explanation, stated that he did not mean to assert the claim of the crown to any such property in India as that described by his hon. and learned friend (Mr. Stephen), namely, property obtained by purchase or grant; but any territory in India acquired by arms or conquest, was, he contended, acquired for the crown, and that in such territory the India Company had no claim of property whatever. Mr. Tierney observed, that the great question properly before the House was, whether the charter of the East India Company granting them an exclusive trade to India should be renewed, and upon this discussion as to the claim of property, it would he right to look to the charters of the Company. By these charters it apMr. Stephen argued against the correct peared that the Company were invested ness of that part of the proposition which with the right of building ships and emhis hon. and learned friend had supported; ploying armies, and it seemed an extraorfor according to the terms of that propo- dinary assumption, that to territory acsition the crown would be entitled to re- quired by these armies, which were paid ceive the territorial revenue of India; nay, by the Company, as was the army of the more, the crown would not only be invest- crown when it assisted them, that Comed with the sovereignty, but become the pany had no right of property whatever. landed proprietor of India, would not only He did not mean to offer any peremptory receive the taxes as sovereign but the rent opinion upon this point, and all he desired as landlord. If such were the object of was, that no peremptory opinion should the proposer-["No," from sir J. New- be offered on the other side, that nothing port] as it appeared from his proposition, should at present take place affecting the he appealed to the consideration of the rights either of the crown or the ComHouse, whether it was prepared to adopt pany, but that this matter should be left such a resolution—whether it would be for fuller consideration. Indeed, this fair towards the India Company (particu- point and the resolution referring to it aplarly if that Company should decline to peared to have arisen out of lord Grenaccept the charter under the new arrange-ville's speech, but he could not deem it ments) to publish a declaration that all just to support such a resolution. He apthe land in India, much of which had been pealed to the candour of the House, whe |