Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

circumstances in which the deceased Director was placed for the adoption of this motion, without dwelling upon specific details. He did not conceive there was much stress to be laid upon the want of precedent, which had been referred to; the want of a precedent, for an act in itself just and right, was no reason why they should exclude themselves from the performance of a duty which they felt incumbent upon them to discharge. (Hear! hear!) There might have been others who deserved similar tributes of respect in times past, and they ought not perhaps to have been overlooked; there may be more who will yet earn `such; but all that is matter of speculation, which ought not to exclude them from the fulfilment of an act of justice incurred in their own time, and of which they had derived the benefit. (Hear! -hear!) Neither did he see any reason for anticipating, as some gentlemen had done, future danger, from the accumulation of "mural monuments," and the preservation of such a monopoly for their Directors. The accumulation could never in fact occur, it would defeat itself; for the frequency would diminish the value of the honour, and destroy the intended compliment. He did not think it worth while, in argument, to speculate upon such cases as may arise where high desert would demand a repetition of those tributes; as - those cases arose, let them be decided upon their own intrinsic merits, and not be called up to their imaginations now, to deter them from the act which was proposed. He -trusted, that on an occasion like this they would forget private differences of opinion, and, in the consideration of the general merits of so zealous and devoted a

servant, come to the just and gratifying conclusion, that while they were perpetuating the example of zeal and honesty, most assiduously and honourably con. tinued for a long series of years, in arduous and high employments, they were also pursuing a great moral good, by holding out to all parts of the community the incitement of such an example. There was, he always thought, in the appropriation of posthumous honours for distinguished merit, as much of judgment as there was of feeling; and he entreated of them not to overlook the opportunity now afforded to them, in the case of a man to whom he might with truth apply the line of the poet

Multis ille bonis flebilis occidit. In the experience of life they often saw men carried away at the first dawning of brilliant genius-they often saw others called from existence in the midst of a career of honour-and again, how often did they see men swept off while occupied in the pursuit of profligacy, and destroyed in the perpetration of the most atrocious

crimes: not so in the case of the late Mr. Grant, he was not soon cut off from their service, and from the wide sphere of his utility, but died mature and grey in years, and long ripe in the practice and dispensation of virtue. True, this maturity of life and service, the long career he had filled in the course of nature, materially lessened the poignancy of their regret, while it furnished an additional reason in support of the claim now made upon them; and which, he repeated, from the very length of the services of the deceased, did not require, nor could be expected to require or pledge any individual Proprietor to an entire approval of every act of Mr. Grant's long life; while, at the same time, it gave enough of service, enough of the general opportunities for weighing and appreciating that service, to entitle the individual who performed it to the tribute now offered to his memory. (Hear! hear!) He regretted the opposition which had been made to the original motion, and still earnestly trusted that the Hon. Proprietor would withdraw his amendment, and let the original question stand unaffected. In conclusion, he had only to regret his inability to do justice to the subject, but it was one in which he could not reconcile it to his feelings to give a silent vote. (Hear! hear!)

Mr. Gahagan said that it was his first intention to have simply supported the amendment by his vote, but he now felt under the necessity of saying a few words in reply to the Hon. Proprietor who had just sat down. He gave credit to his declaration that he, in common with the other friends of the late Mr. Grant, when they had determined upon bringing forward this proposition, never intended by their motion to invite invidious comparisons; he went on to say that a complete unanimity of sentiment for any public character was not to be expected; and the Hon. Proprietor then added the expression of his hope, that a sufficient quantity of prominent good would be found in the history of Mr. Grant's services to justify the erection of the proposed monument. He (Mr. Gahagan) was compelled upon that point, namely, on the main principle upon which the Hon. Proprietor had founded the motion before them, to quote against him the high authority of Mr. Grant himself; and it must be considered a singular coincidence, that on the first day when that Court had the opportunity of beholding the new statue to the late Warren Hastings, they should be called upon to vote another monumental tribute of the same kind to the Director who had firmly opposed its erection. The present resolution was for the erection of a statue or monument. Suppose the former, and that the site, instead of being in Bloomsbury church, was in that Court; suppose

[ocr errors]

the marble figures could imbibe the spirit of life, how could Charles Grant look Warren Hastings in the face, or Warren Hastings, Charles Grant?-(A laugh.) He would recall to them the language used by Mr. Grant, in the discussion upon Mr. Hastings' monument; language which he did not copy from any unauthenticated report, but from the paper used by Mr. Grant, and which he had read in that Court, as containing his premeditated and fixed sentiments upon the subject. The words of Mr. Grant were these: Mr. Grant on that occasion observed, "The measure now proposed is to decree by a public act the erection of a statue in honour of Mr. Hastings. Thus, to decree in honour of any person, goes to hold up that person to the admiration of the world, and to transmit a solemn testimony of his pre-eminent excellence to all future ages. On the present occasion, the terms in which this act is proposed, "long, zealous, and successful services,' will sanction, at least, the more prominent measures of a long administration; and, to be truly honourable to Mr. Hastings, must be supposed to sanction also as wise and just, the political and moral involved in them. In such a testimony and such an act, I feel myself utterly unable to join; and as silence might imply concurrence, I am obliged expressly to declare my dissent." Now then, upon Mr. Grant's own deliberate shewing, it was not a sufficient quantify of prominent good, that in his opinion justified the tribute of monumental honours, which was to hold up to future ages the example of the man; but it was that "pre-eminent excellence," which was worthy of being held up as an example to all succeeding ages. Apply then Mr. Grant's own test to his own case: where was his "pre-eminent excellence?" Excellence he had, and a large share of it; private virtues he had, and who denied them? These then being admitted, there was no doubt that his private friends had a right to cherish his memory. They had a right to pay what tribute they pleased, and in his parish church if they liked, to the recollection of his departed worth. Public bodies were not, however, to be called upon to consecrate private virtue, but to distinguish public services. The other tablet was consigned to the friends and family who were endeared to the deceased. (Hear!) He must deny, as he had before said, to Mr. Grant the possession of "pre-eminent excellence," in the sense in which he had himself most properly con. sidered it; and, so far from assenting to the general view which had been taken of Mr. Grant's exertions, he believed there would be found many who thought that the majority of that gentleman's efforts had been wrongly directed. On the quesAsiatic Journ.-No. 97.

tion of the opening of the trade, for instance, his view had been proved to have been decidedly erroneous. The Hon. Mover, in estimating the claims of Mr. Grant, first begged the question, and then raised his argument upon it. He assumed the force of public opinion, and next ar gued that he had it with him. He described it as being overwhelming and paramount; even superior (and in that he did not agree with him) to the monarchial influence. Who can fly from it? asked the Hon. Proprietor; and, in an eloquent strain, he shewed that solitude afforded no shelter from the pangs occasioned by public obloquy, and no relief from the contemplation of one's-self; whilst, on the other hand, the busy world was shut against the victim of public opinion. The idea was good, the words were fine, but the position was not correct. How many are there who do not perpetrate flagrant evil, yet whose ways are bad, and who do escape the punishment of their mis-deeds? Then take the argument the other way. If mere possession of zeal, integrity, and ability, entitle a man to the gratitude of posterity, where are such monuments to stop? Does the virtuous discharge of a man's duty in the rotation of the career of life, however useful and admirable to those who love the good picture of domestic example, entitle the possessor to public reward? Where was its claim upon Mr. Grant's own axiom? Sure he was, that if the principle were once admitted, they would never have another poet to write for them another beautiful elegy, "on a country church-yard;" (a laugh.) for there would be no cemetery without its groupe of mural monuments. Do gentlemen forget how rare is the distribution of public honours by the erection of such posthumous tributes? In Parliament the utmost circumspection is used, even in cases where the services of the highest Statesmen, whose acts involved the fate and prosperity of nations, were concerned. Even in the case of the immortal Pitt, who so long swayed, as Prime Minister, the destinies of this kingdom; who was the frons, the caput, the origo, of the national system; even in his case, there was some difference of opinion as to the application of monumental honours, Was the late Mr. Grant the prime mover of any great system which swayed the destiny of their Indian empire? Was he the frons, the caput, the origo of any such system? He was, no doubt, a man of much merit; a man who deserved to be respected: but the distinction was wide between such a sphere of utility and esteem, and the public and pre-eminent merit which could alone justify the compliment, at their corporate expense, intended for his memory. (Hear! hear!) Even in the case of Lord Cornwallis, who had so early selected Mr. Grant VOL. XVII.

L

for his friendship, the late Lord Londonderry, in moving the monument to that Governor-General, distinctly told the House of Commons, that he was aware he called for a tribute which ought to be rarely asked, and never except for some great and signal service, on which common opinion was, by common consent, universally fixed. Of this nature were the transcendant services of such men as a Nelson and a St. Vincent. On warlike enterprize of that description there could be no variance of opinion: not so of many efforts which were made in civil life, and in political pursuits. There were a variety of opinions upon parts of Mr. Grant's services; upon his share in the shipping reformation, on his view of the opening of the free trade, and on the establishment of the college system. He was quite convinced, that if this motion were carried, there was so singular and neutralizing an incongruity in its principle, that it would fail to answer its intended purpose. When the Charter of that great Company should cease to exist (for no man could say its security and stability were perpetual), what then would remain to commemorate the fame of their Body? Were they to refer to a parish church in Bloomsbury-square? When he made this local allusion, far be it from him to disparage a parochial cemetery; he knew its sanctity, and the solemn reverence with which it ought to be referred to, and there he hoped, when the business of this fleeting life had closed upon him, to repose in the same pious hope, and serene tranquillity, with which their late honourable director had sunk into the tomb. (Hear! hear!) he must repeat, that a parish church was not the place where a great public monument ought to be erected. If they must have one, let it be erected in some conspicuous situation; let it be placed, for instance, in the square of Haileybury College; let it be consigned to a situation where its durability for the incitement of posterity would be assured:

But

Dum domus Æneæ Capitoli immobile sarum, Accolet, imperiumque pater Romanus habebit. There was no precedent, he would again repeat, for one particle of the present proposition, which was the mingled offspring of an amiable weakness and a want of prudence. He could appreciate this mode of paying the tribute of admiration to the private virtues and steady worth of Mr. Grant, if the friends who survived the object of their esteem and attachment had themselves called in the aid of the chisel of Mr. Chantry, or of some other eminent sculptor, to construct the memorial of their regard. They would then have been properly employed in testifying their sense of private worth, and not in promoting an opinion that his life had been an example of pre-eminent public service, in which sense alone the deceased would himself,

could he have a voice on the occasion, consent to receive the trophy. (Hear! hear!)

Mr. Trant was sorry, at so advanced a period of the discussion, to occupy the attion of the Court; but he could not on such an occasion overlook the many mistakes and misconceptions into which several of the gentlemen had fallen who had opposed the original motion. It had been insinuated, if not directly asserted, by one Hon. Proprietor (Mr. Hume), that the late Mr. Grant had not been the friend of the education and moral improvement of their Indian population, and that he was only the advocate for the establishment of a college at home, in the hope of putting down that established by the Marquess Wellesley in Fort William. Now he had attended very particularly to all the discussions that had taken place upon the establishment of Haileybury College, and he had the honour of being himself one of the first members of the college of Fort William, and he could positively affirm, that there was no act of Mr. Grant that could by any degree of justice or fairness be construed into a desire to take a hostile view of any of the plans laid down by Lord Wellesley for the cultivation and advancement of education in India. He could himself, on the contrary, bear his humble testimony to the services of Mr. Grant, in the promotion of every thing which related to the moral and intellectual improvement of the inhabitants of their possessions in Asia. (Hear! hear!) Mr. Burke had forty years ago said, that if the English power were, by any sudden revulsion, to be expelled from India, no trace would remain that a civilized people had ever had that country under their rule and dominion, or had ever set their foot upon the soil, except to conduct the desolation of war, However applicable was the remark of Mr. Burke at the earlier period of their history, the stain which had been cast upon their conduct had since been, happily for them, removed,

"Pudet hæc opprobria nobis Et dici potuisse ;”—

but the remainder of the sentence, “et non potuisse repelli," could no longer be applied to them. He thanked God that the charge could no longer be made against them with even the shadow of truth, and in his conscience he thought that much of the modern amelioration was due to the services and continued labours of the late Mr. Grant. (Hear! hear!) With respect to the mode of conducting the education of their officers, and he had had many opportunities of knowing how dear that object was to Mr. Grant, his view was, that it had better be effectively commenced at home than in India. On that view alone had Mr. Grant acted: but never was he actuated, at any period of his long life, by

any desire to remit his most zealous, sincere and efficient exertions for the promotion of education in India. Respecting the general question, he should say, that although there was no precedent to guide them, it was yet time that there should be one to meet such a case. He agreed that there might have been others who had equal claims for the extent and duration of past services; but was it any reason that because they, or their predecessors, had neglected to do justice to others, they should continue to refrain from giving to merit its due? (Hear! hear!) If they had not (and he was ashamed of the fact) a precedent on their own records, the Chancellor of the Exchequer had on a late occasion furnished one which it was fit they should imitate; he meant, when that right Hon. Gentleman, in proposing the monument to Earl St. Vincent, recollected that Parliament had omitted to furnish a similar tribute to Lord Duncan, and took that opportunity of supplying the omission. (Hear! hear!) Let them, acting on the same generous principle, repair the omission, if such it was, to the memories of Sir Hugh Inglis and Sir Francis Baring, and taking this opportunity, when erecting a monument to Mr. Grant, to acknowledge the claims of those gentlemen. (Hear! hear!) Upon the score of public services, he would ask, whose claim stood in competition with Mr. Grant's, during a life of fifty years laboriously and eminently devoted to the cultivation and enlargement of every branch of their interests? Were these to be called services of an ordinary nature, or as discharged in the mere rotation of duty? On the contrary, he would assert them to be in the rank of "pre-eminent services," and which justly entitled the dispenser to the approbation and gratitude of posterity. (Hear, hear!) These being his opinions, the original motion should have his cor. dial support.

Mr. Carruthers said, that after the very able manner in which the motion had been supported, he should only regret the proposition of the amendment, and express a hope that the Hon. Mover would withdraw it, and permit the original question to be disposed of with unanimity. He deeply regretted that a motion which carried conviction with it should have met any opposition in that Court, where the various merits of Mr. Grant were so well known. It would be his humble duty to endeavour to bring the Court to a state of reason, after the delusion which had been shed over the subject by the Hon. Proprietor (Mr. Hume), and the eloquent and animated address of the Hon. Proprietor behind him (Mr. Gahagan). He should confine himself to the consideration of the want of precedent which had been so forcibly urged, and the dangers which were ascribed to the

adoption of the particular precedent now called for. He could only say, in reply to these arguments and apprehensions, that if those who had gone before them, and had had the advantage of eminent services, were nevertheless so blind to their value, and insensible to their public worth, as to disregard the example which they ought to have held out for the benefit and emulation of their successors, the precedent of their inactivity and ingratitude was one which he would not follow, nor envy the feelings and principles of those who either had traced or would trace their steps. (Hear ! hear!) In reply to the observations of the Hon. Director (Mr. Elphinstone), who had spoken within the bar, that there were many who would have a similar claim in times to come, if the present motion were agreed to, he would say, that when the time came, and with all of them he hoped it was very distant, it would be for the Court to do them that justice which was now sought for the memory of Mr. Grant. (Hear! hear!) With respect to the allu... sion to the meeting of the Bar for Lord Erskine's statue, that was, he thought, a different case. Lord Erskine might be said to have represented the whole body of the law; that body were called upon to honour his memory. But the East-India Company was not constituted in the same manner; they were a chartered and a corporate body, and could only act in a particular form. With reference to the invidious use that might be made of this motion, if the same honour were not paid to other men, he would ask the Hon. Member (Mr. Hume) if, when he was, for his zealous and active parliamentary labours, thanked by various bodies of the people, he had considered those marks of popular respect paid to himself as disparaging the principles or labours of other Members of

Parliament with whom he was in the habit of acting, and who were not included in the like complimentary tributes? (Hear! hear!) He would not believe that the Hon. Member had ever considered them in such a light, or as furnishing the least ground for an uncomfortable feeling, or a jealous spirit in the minds of others; neither would he think that any Director now sat within that bar, or was ever likely to sit there, who could be actuated by so narrow and i!liberal a feeling towards any contemporary. (Hear! hear!) His maxim was always to do justice to merit as he found it.

" Palmam qui meruit ferat,"

was a salutary maxim, which he hoped that Court would be always found to follow. He therefore hoped that the question of precedent or no precedent would be thrown out of the present consideration, and not be suffered to influence their vote; it would be idle to delay their decision until they could found it upon detailed documents; they had before them the

broad fact of a life usefully, zealously, and honourably spent in their service; and upon the general impression of the merits of a man so well known as the late Mr. Grant, he thought they were authorized in proceeding to a decision upon the prima facie case which had been brought under their consideration. (Hear!)

Mr. Samuel Diron said, he meant not to depreciate the merits or services of the late Mr. Grant, both of which he acknowledged; but he was still afraid of the consequence of setting the proposed precedent. Allowing all the merits and public labours of the late Director, still it could not be contended that he had acted more for the benefit of the East-India Company than many other Directors, who had performed similar offices within the same period, and for whom motions of this kind had never been made. If the motion now before the Court were agreed to, it would be impossible in future to overlook the services of other Directors, without creating a feeling of invidious distinction which would be very unwise and impolitic. He had some objections to the verbal framing of the motion (to that part, for instance, where the meagre expression relative to Mr. Grant's services "in Parliament and elsewhere" was used; but he opposed it on the broad principle of its inexpediency.

Mr. Sheriff Laurie said, that although he came to the Court resolved to vote for the original question, yet, after hearing the discussion which had taken place, he was now prepared to vote against it. They had met there as an Assembly of British Merchants; but really, from the number of elegant Latin quotations that had been made in the course of the debate, a stranger might be led to suppose that it was a meeting of the members of one of the universities. (A laugh!) It was true, the late Mr. Grant appeared to have been the best organ of communication among their Directors upon several occasions; there he certainly had had an advantage over others of them, for he (the Sheriff) was perfectly ready to admit that they were not all alike. (A laugh!) On consideration, he thought it an injudicious step to have sent forth a requisition, signed by so many influential names: for how could they expect to have a fair division upon any subject which they might meet to discuss, after it had received the avowed sanction of persons of such weight and authority amongst them? A question already considered in such a manner, left little chance of being afterwards heard as it otherwise would have been. In future he thought it would be a good plan were members restricted from furnishing to their requisitions more than the nine names required by the bye-law, and then there would be a fairer chance of their coming unbiassed to the consideration of the subject. With respect to the substantive

question before them, he thought there was on the face of it something injudicious, in the erection, by a public body, of a monument in a parish church. If any man in their service deserved that distinguished mark of posthumous recollection, let his statue be erected within the walls of that Court, to stand as a polar star to guide their future course. When he objected to the mode proposed for the purpose of commemorating the services of their late Director, Mr. Grant, he was far from undervaluing that gentleman's abilities; he was the clearest speaker and the best reasoner he had ever heard inside that bar. The Directors would, of course, all vote for the original question, for who could blame them for all wishing to have monuments erected to their memory in their parish churches? It was this consequence, however favourable to them, which induced him, on public grounds, to oppose the motion.

Mr. Impey said, he had never before been witness to any discussion, in which so many parties suffered their party feelings so far to mislead the minds of men ;-he never recollected a case where individuals were induced by the strength of those feelings, to argue a question of this nature, upon such grounds as had been this day advanced, and which were any thing but just and proper, on an occasion like the present (Hear! hear!) There was one thing which was quite clear from the speeches they had heard, that the late Mr. Grant was no friend either to the characters or the measures of Mr. Hastings and Lord Wellesley; but whether he was, or was not, had nothing to do with the present question. He was sorry that, on such an occasion as this, the friends and supporters of either of the systems of these Governors General, should have turned aside from the subject which they were met to consider, and been led to consider Mr. Grant as merely their opponent upon these points of policy. He was sorry, also, that Mr. Grant had manifested his opposition to the statue proposed to Mr. Hastings;-he was sorry for it, because he differed from him respecting the conduct of that eminent individual; and the more so, because he found that the arguments then used by Mr. Grant were now directed against himself by those who opposed this tribute to his memory. But of what, in plain terms, did Mr. Grant's argument against Mr. Hastings consist? "I admit," said he, "the great merits of Mr. Hastings, I admit his great and eminent services to his country,-but I differ from him in the view which he took of certain public measures, and I alone shall oppose this monument." At that period, a speech was made against Mr. Hastings similar to that which was now made by the Hon. Proprietor (Mr. Hume) against Mr. Grant, item by item; the

« AnteriorContinuar »