Volume II Part 26 (1/2)
The enemies of the late House of Commons resolved, if possible, to bring on that event. They therefore endeavored to misrepresent the provident means adopted by the House of Commons for keeping off this invidious necessity, as an attack on the rights of the East India Company: for they well knew, that, on the one hand, if, for want of proper regulation and relief, the Company should become insolvent, or even stop payment, the national credit and commerce would sustain a heavy blow; and that calamity would be justly imputed to Parliament, which, after such long inquiries, and such frequent admonitions from his Majesty, had neglected so essential and so urgent an article of their duty: on the other hand, they knew, that, wholly corrupted as the Company is, nothing effectual could be done to preserve that interest from ruin, without taking for a time the national objects of their trust out of their hands; and then a cry would be industriously raised against the House of Commons, as depriving British subjects of their legal privileges. The restraint, being plain and simple, must be easily understood by those who would be brought with great difficulty to comprehend the intricate detail of matters of fact which rendered this suspension of the administration of India absolutely necessary on motives of justice, of policy, of public honor, and public safety.
The House of Commons had not been able to devise a method by which the redress of grievances could be effected through the authors of those grievances; nor could they imagine how corruptions could be purified by the corrupters and the corrupted; nor do we now conceive how any reformation can proceed from the known abettors and supporters of the persons who have been guilty of the misdemeanors which Parliament has reprobated, and who for their own ill purposes have given countenance to a false and delusive state of the Company's affairs, fabricated to mislead Parliament and to impose upon the nation.[67]
Your Commons feel, with a just resentment, the inadequate estimate which your ministers have formed of the importance of this great concern.
They call on us to act upon the principles of those who have not inquired into the subject, and to condemn those who with the most laudable diligence have examined and scrutinized every part of it. The deliberations of Parliament have been broken; the season of the year is unfavorable; many of us are new members, who must be wholly unacquainted with the subject, which lies remote from the ordinary course of general information.
We are cautioned against an infringement of the Const.i.tution; and it is impossible to know what the secret advisers of the crown, who have driven out the late ministers for their conduct in Parliament, and have dissolved the late Parliament for a pretended attack upon prerogative, will consider as such an infringement. We are not furnished with a rule, the observance of which can make us safe from the resentment of the crown, even by an implicit obedience to the dictates of the ministers who have advised that speech; we know not how soon those ministers may be disavowed, and how soon the members of this House, for our very agreement with them, may be considered as objects of his Majesty's displeasure. Until by his Majesty's goodness and wisdom the late example is completely done away, we are not free.
We are well aware, in providing for the affairs of the East, with what an adult strength of abuse, and of wealth and influence growing out of that abuse, his Majesty's Commons had, in the last Parliament, and still have, to struggle. We are sensible that the influence of that wealth, in a much larger degree and measure than at any former period, may have penetrated into the very quarter from whence alone any real reformation can be expected.[68]
If, therefore, in the arduous affairs recommended to us, our proceedings should be ill adapted, feeble, and ineffectual,--if no delinquency should be prevented, and no delinquent should be called to account,--if every person should be caressed, promoted, and raised in power, in proportion to the enormity of his offences,--if no relief should be given to any of the natives unjustly dispossessed of their rights, jurisdictions, and properties,--if no cruel and unjust exactions should be forborne,--if the source of no peculation or oppressive gain should be cut off,--if, by the omission of the opportunities that were in our hands, our Indian empire should fall into ruin irretrievable, and in its fall crush the credit and overwhelm the revenues of this country,--we stand acquitted to our honor and to our conscience, who have reluctantly seen the weightiest interests of our country, at times the most critical to its dignity and safety, rendered the sport of the inconsiderate and unmeasured ambition of individuals, and by that means the wisdom of his Majesty's government degraded in the public estimation, and the policy and character of this renowned nation rendered contemptible in the eyes of all Europe.
It pa.s.sed in the negative.
FOOTNOTES:
[59] See King's Speech, Dec. 5, 1782, and May 19, 1784.
[60] ”I shall never submit to the doctrines I have heard this day from the woolsack, that the other House [House of Commons] are the only representatives and guardians of the people's rights. I boldly maintain the contrary. I say this House [House of Lords] _is equally the representatives of the people_.”--Lord Shelburne's Speech, April 8, 1778. _Vide_ Parliamentary Register, Vol. X. p. 892.
[61] In that Parliament the House of Commons by two several resolutions put an end to the American war. Immediately on the change of ministry which ensued, in order to secure their own independence, and to prevent the acc.u.mulation of new burdens on the people by the growth of a civil list debt, they pa.s.sed the Establishment Bill. By that bill thirty-six offices tenable by members of Parliament were suppressed, and an order of payment was framed by which the growth of any fresh debt was rendered impracticable. The debt on the civil list from the beginning of the present reign had amounted to one million three hundred thousand pounds and upwards. Another act was pa.s.sed for regulating the office of the Paymaster-General and the offices subordinate to it. A million of public money had sometimes been in the hands of the paymasters: this act prevented the possibility of any money whatsoever being acc.u.mulated in that office in future. The offices of the Exchequer, whose emoluments in time of war were excessive, and grew in exact proportion to the public burdens, were regulated,--some of them suppressed, and the rest reduced to fixed salaries. To secure the freedom of election against the crown, a bill was pa.s.sed to disqualify all officers concerned in the collection of the revenue in any of its branches from voting in elections: a most important act, not only with regard to its primary object, the freedom of election, but as materially forwarding the due collection of revenue.
For the same end, (the preserving the freedom of election,) the House rescinded the famous judgment relative to the Middles.e.x election, and expunged it from the journals. On the principle of reformation of their own House, connected with a principle of public economy, an act pa.s.sed for rendering contractors with government incapable of a seat in Parliament. The India Bill (unfortunately lost in the House of Lords) pursued the same idea to its completion, and disabled all servants of the East India Company from a seat in that House for a certain time, and until their conduct was examined into and cleared. The remedy of infinite corruptions and of infinite disorders and oppressions, as well as the security of the most important objects of public economy, perished with that bill and that Parliament. That Parliament also inst.i.tuted a committee to inquire into the collection of the revenue in all its branches, which prosecuted its duty with great vigor, and suggested several material improvements.
[62] If these speculations are let loose, the House of Lords may quarrel with their share of the legislature, as being limited with regard to the origination of grants to the crown and the origination of money bills.
The advisers of the crown may think proper to bring its negative into ordinary use,--and even to dispute, whether a mere negative, compared with the deliberative power exercised in the other Houses, be such a share in the legislature as to produce a due balance in favor of that branch, and thus justify the previous interference of the crown in the manner lately used. The following will serve to show how much foundation there is for great caution concerning these novel speculations. Lord Shelburne, in his celebrated speech, April 8th, 1778, expresses himself as follows. (_Vide_ Parliamentary Register, Vol. X.)