an attack. It might also be inexpedient to disclose the state of any negotiation carrying on in the island by the governor. He only wished that no prejudicial impression might remain in the mind of gentlemen. The Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Creevey) had stated the war to have originated in a dispute about property to the amount of only 3001. but the value was of little consequence. The Government of Candia had long demonstrated an hostile mind towards us,and the detention of property, about which the first dispute took place, was only one of the symptoms of that hostile disposition. The form of the motion was, he said, not accurate, as Ceylon formed no part of the dominions of the East India Company, but was annexed to the crown: he had, therefore, framed a motion which he would make if the Honourable Gentleman would consent to withdraw bis: he concluded by reading his motion, "that an humble address be presented to his Majesty praying that his Majesty would be graciously pleased to order to be laid before the house, copies or extracts of such letters and papers, as have been received from the Honourable F. North, governor of Ceylon, relative to the causes of the hostilities which had taken place between his Majesty's government and the King of Candy." Mr. Creevey having consented to withdraw his motion, the motion of Lord Castlereagh was agreed to. Mr. Creevey then moved for the copies of all dispatches and letters from the Governor of Ceylon to the British Officers employed there, and from the latter to the former. Lord Castlereagh objected to this motion, as calling for information which it would be inexpedient to produce, and therefore moved the previous question. Mr. Fox was utterly astonished at the language held by the Noble Lord as to the production of this paper. The Noble Lord had asserted that a time would come when no objection could exist to the production of the papers; but had he given the least argument against its production at the present moment? had he offered a single tittle of reasons to prove that the present time was not the fit moment for its being laid before parliament? Was it a matter undeserving of instant inquiry that a part of our force in Ceylon had sustained, not only disaster, but disgrace; that blame had been thrown on the conduct of the officer who commanded the party of troops by the governor; and that no document was laid before parliament to enable them to ascertain whether such an imputation was, or was not, well founded? He could not conceive a stronger ground of parliamentary inquiry than that laid down by his Honourable Friend. It was really extraordinary to have ministers resisting the production of information on a subject when the necessity was admitted by every description of mankind, who chose for a moment to exercise their judgment. If this was not the moment for inquiry, he wished to know when that moment would arrive? Did the Noble Lord mean to say, that no inquiry should be made till the conclusion of the war ? If that was to be the case, the grand object of the motion would be lost. Nothing could then be gained, but the punishment of the criminal party. But the great object object was to prevent the continuance of existing disasters. Viewing the motion as founded on the clearest grounds, it had his most cordial support. General MAITLAND thought the Honourable Member who spoke last had not fully understood the force of the Noble Lord's observations. To him it appeared, that from the Noble Lord's statement the production of the paper in question would be attended with inconvenience, and this was a fair parliamentary ground for refusing its production. If the description of the state of Ceylon was such as the Honourable Mover described, he thought that the papers relative to this matter ought not to be produced. It could only have the effect of conveying dangerous information to the enemy. The first paper contained every thing now wanted; a time for the production of the others would arrive, he trusted not remote. Mr. G. JOHNSTONE was of opinion that any argument drawn from the impolicy of giving information to the enemy was quite inapplicable. If we looked to the situation of Ceylon, it was evident that before this time the war must have come to a crisis. Our troops must either have prevailed, or been expelled from the settlement, or destroyed. Under existing circumstances besides, it could not be conceived for a moment, that the French government would entertain the project of sending such a body of troops to India as would endanger our Indian, possessions. Ile was decidedly, therefore, for the inquiry. The Noble Lord had said that government was in possession of very scanty information; this was the general complaint against the governors of all our foreign possessions. They gave such unsatisfactory details as to the most important events, that neither parliament nor the public were able to form correct opinions ou the subject. The motion was calculated to procure more infornation, and the Honourable Member who introduced it deserved the thanks both of the house and the public. He was so entitled for the motion, and the ability with which he had defended it. Lord CASTLEREAGH, in explanation, stated, that when he spoke of the scanty information of government, he alluded to the unfortunate massacre of the garrison of Candy. Sir WM. GEARY strongly sup ported the motion. Mr. WALLACE against it. Mr. CALCRAFT was astonished at the argument of the Honourable General; he had asserted that if the garrison of Ceylon was in a weak state, it should not be disclosed, but denies that it was so. He was for the inqui ry. Lord HENRY PETTY was astonished at the sort of argument ministers set up against this motion. If would be curious if the officers of a ship going to sea were to reply, when a proposition was made to examine her timbers, or general state, that such an inquiry would come better when the vessel had arrived into port. But this was precisely the argument of ministers. It was surely proper to inquire into the means of defence before a resolution was taken to protract so arduous a combat. He had heard the Governor-Genial of India had destined destined 10,000 men, to attempt the conquest of Candy. It behoved the house to know the grounds for the war, and probas bility of its success, before the lives of so many brave men were idly sacrificed. He was, therefore, decidedly in favour of the motion. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that the papers already ordered would give sufficient information to ground any ulterior decision upon, as to the point whether the war in Ceylon was undertaken on justifiable grounds. The object, causes, and circumstances of the war would be explained by these papers; and if the house should then think that the war was unjust, it would be competent for them to advise his majesty to prevent its further prosecution. His majesty's ministers had received no official information that 10,000 men were about to be sent from Madras to Ceylon. that in the motion which I pros pose to submit to the honse, I am governed by that resolution, and aim at nothing but to inforce thể execution of that law. In this purpose and on this ground, I hope for the support and concurrence of the house; because I do not believe it will be asserted by any man, that it is very right to pass laws for the better government of a distant dominion, and very wrong to inquire whether such laws are obeyed or not. In my opinion it would be a wiser policy, and a safer practice, not to make any laws, than to suffer them to be slighted with impunity. Habits ofdisobedience are very catching, and they are the more dangerous in proportion to the distance of the offending parties, and to the facility which that distance gives them to conceal or disguise their transactions. I state these principles generally, as a rational ground of parliamentary suspicion and inquiry, whenever the government of India a appears to be engaged in measures which the law prohibits; and not at all meaning to affirm, that such mea23 sures, when they are thoroughly examined, may not admit of a sufficient justification. The business and duty of this day does not call upon me to accuse any man, or to affirm that any thing deserving the censure of parliament has been done. Myobject is to inquire, and then, according to the result of the inquiry, to desist or to proceed. All I contend for, in the first instance, is, that a British Governor who commences a war in India, is prima facie doing that which the law prohibits; that his own act of itself puts him on his defence; that he is bound to justify on the case; and that until he The question was loudly called Majority against the motion, 47 70 MAHRATTA WAR. Mr. FRANCIS moved that the 35th clause of the 24th of his majesty should be read, viz. "Whereas to pursue schemes of conquest, and extension of dominion, are measures repugnant to the wish and policy of this nation, be it enacted," &c. and then spoke to the following effect. "Sir, in moving to have this clause now read, I have two objects, 1st, to remind the house of their own unanimous resolution, on which the subsequent acts of parliament was founded, and then to shew bas has so justified his conduct, the presumptions are against him. All the authorities of the country have united with one voice, to condemn and forbid the carrying on war in India for any purpose but defence, or on any ground but necessity. I need not tell the house that the practice in India has been almost uniform ly, or with short exceptions, directly opposed to the prohibition. While the directors of the India Company had any power, they certainly laid down very wise principles, and gave very proper orders on this subject. When their power over their own Go vernors was found to be insuffici ent, the Legislature interposed, but, as it appears by the facts, with no more success than the directors. Since the prohibitory act passed in 1783, I appeal to the house whether we have heard of any thing from India but war and conquest; many victories and great acquisitions, with only now and then a short interval of repose, to take breath and begin anew. There is another ground of presumption against the necessity and justice of these wars, which seems to me as strong and conclusive as any presumption can be, before the contrary is proved, I mean, Sir, that almost all these wars are supposed to originate in acts of provocation and aggression committed by the weak against the strong. The strength of any single Indian state at any time, and now, I believe, of all of them put together, is not to be compared with the military power and resources of the English. I do not say, that those nations have no means of defence, or that the Mahrattas, for example, can ao us no mischief; but that considering the great disparity of VOL 0. force, it requires very clear evi dence to make it credible, that the disposition of the British power in India is always, if possible, to preserve the peace, and to be satisfied with what wé possess; this excellent disposition is never suffered to prevail, because the Indian Princes are so restless and unruly, that we cannot in common justice to ourselves refrain from invading them. The fable says, the fierce rebellious lamb would never suffer the mild, gentle, moderate wolf to be quiet : if it was not you, it was your father. These propositions may be true, but they require some proof, and when it is produced, I shall dosire it always to be observed and remembered, that the evidence that comes before us is ex parte. We hear little or nothing of what the opposite, and possibly the injured party have to say for themselves. Ever since I have known any thing of Indian affairs, i have found that the prevailing disease of our government there has been a rage for making war. The strong, the ineffectual remedies that have from time to time been applied to this dis order, are a sufficient proof of its existence. That individuals may find their account in the conduct of such wars, I do not mean to dispute; but I deny that they are, or can be for the benefit of the India Company, or the nation, particularly in the present state of the Honourable Company's affairs. In these circumstances, and in actual possession of half the peninsula, you engage in a new war with the Mahrattas, the success of which can give you nothing but an addition of territory, which you cannot keep without an intolerab e increase of your military esta #X blishments, blishments, and a perpetual drain not make the same attempts again, cil |