niated, and denies to the injured party the benefit of his testimony, is himself as gross a calumniator as if he had given birth to the scandal. (Hear, hear!) Silence will not do on such an occasion. Falsehood may be propagated by silence as well as by open assertion. Indeed the former is the more base and villainous mode of giving currency to slander, inasmuch as it is the more sculking and cowardly. (Hear, hear!) There is not a more dangerous or a more certain way of aiding the views of a caluminator than by silent acquiescence -by adopting that phrase, that figure of speech, which the French call réticence. A more effective, a deeper wound cannot be inflicted on reputation, than by maintaining a mysterious silence when calumny is afloat. I believe, when Englishmen read the newspapers of to-morrow, they will not be able to persuade themselves that this discussion really took place here. They will not suppose it possible that you could treat any man in this way: much less will they believe that such conduct was observed towards the Marquess of Hastings; towards one to whom your thanks and gratitude are due to an amount which history will scarcely credit. (Hear, hear!) But if he were an individual in the lowest situation, without any claims whatever on your feelings, and if the question were put to you, have you discovered any thing derogatory to his character, any thing inconsistent with his honour?'-you are bound to answer the interrogatory as men of principle and integrity. (Hear, heur !) Sir, I am yet to learn what inconvenience is likely to result from giving an answer; and I leave it to the gentlemen who are silent, and to the public, who will, in spite of all evasions, be scrupulous judges of men's conduct, to say what the inference will be when it is stated that, having been called on to put down calumny, and being bound in honour and justice to accede to that call, a suspicious silence was observed. (Hear, hear!) The public, sir, cannot do you injustice by the worst interpretation, since you withhold your evidence, and thus strengthen the slander. I say it is right that we should not delay a moment in doing justice to the Marquess of Hastings. The Court of Proprietors ought immediately to take his case into their own hands. (Hear, hear!) I will not trust it to the Court of Directors. I will not trust it to that body who have negatived a grant to the Noble Marquess, and then suffer it to be insinuated that the ne. gative was put on that proposition, in consequence of some discovered embezzlement. (Hear!) The Marquess of Hastings chal. lenges the Proprietors to decide on his character. He challenges them to decide whether that character is to be placed on a level with preceding Governor-generals, or to be consigned to obloquy. Let not the

Marquess of Hastings remain, not only your most successful, but your most illrewarded and most calumniated Governorgeneral. (Hear, hear!) After the exhibition I have witnessed this day, I do not value the opinion of the Court of Direc tors, as it regards him, one fig's end. They are incompetent to decide on his case; they have disqualified themselves from acting as impartial jurors, and cannot there. fore decide on this charge. I say they are rather themselves to be brought to trial for their conduct on this occasion; they stand as the accused calumniators of the Marquess of Hastings; and certain I am, that the indignant feelings of Englishmen will compel them, however tardily or reluctantly, not only to clear the character of the Noble Marquess, but to reward him properly for his manifold services. (Hear!) These are my feelings, and the feelings of the public in every quarter of the empire; and I leave it to the Chairman to explain, for he has not yet explained, his reasons for having remained silent this day. Perhaps the Hon. Gent. on the other side of the Court (Mr. Trant) may be retained as the best expounder of the reasons why, when a great and gallant officer is accused and calumniated, and the Chairman is asked officially for an answer on the subject, he may with propriety acquiesce in the calumny, by preserving an impenetrable silence. (Hear, hear!) I regret that I am compelled to be so direct in my observations, but I feel for the character of that body of which I am a member. For the Court of Directors I have ever manifested a proper respect; I know they are often placed in situations of delicacy. But when it comes to the question, whether, by tamely acquiescing in the dictum of authority, I am to do injustice, or to put myself in the breach for the purpose of resisting it, I cannot pause as to the course which I ought to prefer. In such a case, I must call those whom I think in error to account for their conduct; and I hope that, in doing so, I shall receive credit for the feelings which actuate me, and of which I am not ashamed. (Hear, hear!) I have no private or personal motive in advocating the cause of the Marquess of Hastings: I have been but twice in his company since he returned from India, and but once before. I came to this Court perfectly un.. fettered, not bound to take any course but what circumstances would justify; and I vow to God, if a proposition were made to reward the Marquess of Hastings, and it were shewn to me that he was unworthy of your bounty, that he had in any way tarnished his great character, I should forget his rank, and the exalted situation he had filled, and strenuously oppose it. (Hear, hear !)

Mr. Lowndes. The zeal now shewn for the character of the Marquess of Hastings will act as a warning, not rashly to publish

an accusation against any individual, with out hearing what he has to say in his defence.-(Order!)

The Chairman.-"I hope the Hon. Proprietor, who has addressed the Court several times, will desist, and suffer us now to proceed to the regular business of the day. The Court must feel that a great deal of time has already been consumed."

Mr. Hume.-"I rise to ask whether, after what has passed, we are in a situation, labouring as we must be under stronglyexcited feelings, to proceed with the order of the day? When such a subject as the East-India College is to be considered, we ought to meet in a cool and temperate manner, without any party feeling whatsoever. Certainly, after what has occurred, I for one do not feel myself calculated to proceed to the discussion of that question. I wish to consider the College Establishment fairly, and to apply to it my best and calmest observation, therefore I should rather decline going into the subject at present. I hope also that the gentlemen within the bar will feel the necessity of delay, since the benefit of their institution will mainly depend on the success of my Hon. Friend's motion, and they certainly will not act wisely if it be hurried on this day. I know the business of the Court of Directors was so regulated as to admit of the question being discussed on this occasion; but unforeseen circumstances have occurred, which render delay, in my opinion, advisable. (Hear!) I therefore submit, that this debate be adjourned to this day fortnight. I think, at that time, we shall all meet together with better feelings.

The motion having been seconded,A Proprietor observed, that it would be exceedingly inconvenient to gentlemen residing at the other end of the town if the motion were adjourned. He believed all the parties had come prepared for the discussion.

Another Proprietor was of opinion, that it would be an act of great injustice if the subject were brought forward to-day.

The Chairman then put the motion"That this (the College) question be adjourned to this day fortnight."

Mr. Lowndes opposed the adjournment. He saw no rational ground for it. He should be absent 170 miles from town a fortnight hence, though that, perhaps, with some of the Proprietors, would alone be a good reason for adjourning the question. (A laugh.)

General Thornton." In rising to support the motion, I take the opportunity of entering my protest against the conduct of the Hon. Chairman this day, without, however, meaning any personal disrespect to him. Having had the honour of a seat in Parliament for some years, and having, during that time, sat with him, I am a

good deal surprised at what has happened this day. Look, said the Hon. Chairman, to the interruption which has been given to the regular business. But why was it? If he had answered the question at once, no difficulty would have arisen. In the House of Commons, if the Minister refuse to answer a plain question, a debate ensues; but, if a plain answer be returned, the matter is at an end."

Mr. Carruthers rose to order. The question is, "whether the debate on the College Establishment shall be adjourned or not?" The matter to which the gallant General is addressing himself has been disposed of.

General Thornton insisted on his right to proceed.

Mr. Lowndes said the gallant General was decidedly out of order.

General Thornton,-"We are not, after what has happened, in a situation to proceed with the regular business of the day; and I have a right, in supporting the motion for adjournment, to make a few observations. I think the Hon. Chairman is bound to answer any fair question: but more particularly so, when such a man as the Marquess of Hastings is concerned. It is astonishing to me that any subterfuge should be resorted to for the purpose of evading an answer. But perhaps I have no right to wonder at it after the letter written by Colonel Doyle to the Chairman, and which has been so improperly answered. I hope that, in future, the disposition of the Chairman and Directors will be to answer any questions that may be put to them by the Proprietors in a respectful manner, instead of avoiding, under the colour of a strict adherence to form, the granting to their constituents information of importance."

Mr. Lowndes again argued that they ought to go on with the regular business. The charge against the Marquess of Hastings had ended like the story of the three black crows. Had he (Mr. Lowndes) in addressing the Court, dared or ventured to make such observations as some gentlemen had done, he would have been clamoured down.

The question of adjournment was then put; and, on a show of hands, carried by a large majority.

wished to know whether it was intended to reduce it.

The Chairman said it was a matter that must be left to the judgment of the Direc tors. He was now in the same situation as before; and considering himself as the organ of the Court of Directors, he could not, without their authority, give an answer to the question.

The Court was then adjourned.

East-India House, Feb. 25.

HAILEYBURY COLLEGE.

A General Court of Proprietors of East-India Stock was this day held, by adjournment, at the Company's House, in Leadenhall Street, for the purpose of taking into consideration the following proposition, contained in a letter addressed to the Court of Directors by more than nine Proprietors, vix.

"That application be made to Parliament for the repeal of the 46th clause of the Act of the 53d Geo. III. cap. 155, by which the Court of Directors is prohibited from sending to India, in the capacity of a writer, any person who shall not have resided during four terms at the Haileybury College; and for introducing into the said Act a clause, appointing a public examination, at such times and under such regulations as the Court of Directors, with the approbation of the Board of Controul, may direct, to which examination all persons shall submit their acquirements and qualifications for approval, previous to their being permitted to proceed in the capacity of Writers to either of the Presidencies of Fort William, Fort St. George, or Bombay."

The minutes of the last Court having been read, and the usual routine business gone through,

The Chairman (Wm. Wigram, Esq.) stated to the Proprietors the special purpose for which they were assembled.

The requisition was then read by the Clerk.

The Hon. D. Kinnaird immediately rose. He begged the Court to be assured that, when he placed his name at the bottom of the writing which had just been read, he was deeply impressed with, because he had fully considered the importance of introducing into that Court, the subject of Haileybury College. He not only felt the importance of such a discussion as it regarded the institution itself, but also with reference to the unpleasant feelings to which it might give rise. He was of opinion that the Court of Proprietors was the last place in which the subject should be considered, if it were possible to avoid noticing it there; therefore, in the hope that one discussion would prevent the necessity of bringing forward this question in future, he had signed that paper.

With

the full confidence that the discussion now about to commence would be the last that would ever be necessary in that Court on the subject of the College, he had deemed it to be his duty to introduce it to the notice of the Proprietors. Before he came to discuss the merits of the proposition with which he would have the honour to conclude, he claimed for himself, and for those who acted with him, a fair interpretation of their conduct; and, to prove the sincerity of their professions, he would state what had been their general course of conduct. In the year 1822 a very unfortunate circumstauce occurred in the College at Haileybury, which ended in the expulsion and ruin of some half dozen of students. He thought at the time, as several of his friends did, that if discussion were entered into at that moment, while the occurrence was still fresh in the memory, such a discussion would neces. sarily be attended with all those angry feelings of reproach and recrimination, which were perfectly natural under the peculiar circumstances of the case. He, therefore, abstained from bringing the question forward on that occasion; and he recollected, that when he put a question to the then Chairman (Mr. Pattison), he was informed that the subject was under dis. cussion in the Court of Directors; which was a satisfactory reason for not pressing the matter at that moment, and making such a proposition to the Court, as appeared both to himself and to the public to be necessary. At a later period, he applied to the Chair to know what progress had been made in the investigation: and the answer was, that a report had been made on the subject; but that the Court of Directors did not think proper to found any measure on that report; and that the Chairman was not authorized by the Executive Body to make any communication to the Proprietors. He confessed that this answer did not astonish him in the least because he was quite certain, from the first, that it was out of the power of any member of the Court of Directors, or of that whole body, to amend the evils which he would undertake to shew were inherent in the Institution; and he flattered himself he would be able to prove to the Court that, so long as those evils remained, the College would be the scene of periodical commotion. It was his particular object on this occasion, and to that object he meant to adhere most strictly, to point out those defects which existed in the College at present; which, from its formation, were naturally to be found there; which had been connected with it from the beginning; and which would for ever continue attached to it, unless the Court adopted the measure he meant to propose. He did not intend to advert to any particular occurrence which had taken place in

the College; it would be sufficient for him to shew that, from the nature of the regula. tions, it was impossible to prevent the recurrence of periodical commotion. He had no intention, and indeed there was no necessity, to go over the grounds which were formerly discussed, when this subject was debated for three or four days together; he would not detail the history, nor criticize the policy of this Institution. He did not care whether it originated in motives perfectly pure, or whether it was established to pull down another institution. He had nothing to do with any party. He gave the Directors full credit for endeavouring to obtain (that which was now admitted to be of the utmost importance all over the world) an "improved education," for those young men who were candidates for their service. To effect this object, two things appeared to be necessary: one, that the period of proceeding to India should be later than it formerly was; and next, that facilities should be given for a particular description of education. The question then came to this: "Were there facilities in this country for acquiring those branches of knowledge which were desirable to be possessed by persons proceeding to India?" It seemed that, at the period of which he spoke, there was no specific institution for this purpose; and if the Company demanded certain qualifications, they were answered, that the means of acquiring them in this country did not exist. The Directors then said, "the Company, at their own expense, will afford you, the candidates for civil situations, all the necessary facilities; and we trust, and have a right to expect, that you will profit by the facilities thus established, and that the Company also will be benefited by them." Farther than this, he thought it was utterly impossible that the Directors could have had any object; there, if they had stopped, they would have been rewarded by the sincere good wishes of all parties, and the College would not have been the source of incessant discussion, in and out of that Court. Unfortunately, how ever, one clause was introduced into the Act of Parliament, the probable consequences of which were not duly appreciated at the time. He alluded to that unnatural clause, which converted their boon into a penalty, which rendered their benevolent design an object of terror and alarm-of, he would say, just and natural terror and alarm. He spoke of the clause making it absolutely necessary, that every candidate presenting himself at the bar of the Court of Directors, before going ont to India as a civil servant, should pass four terms at Haileybury College. Now, it is quite clear, that a person could not pass four terms there without strictly obeying all the regulations; and, by the law, as it now stood, if an individual committed an in

fraction of any of those regulations, he was subject to expulsion; and, when that took place, all his hopes of employment in the Company's service were put an end to. He would contend that no institution, in any part of the world, and under any circumstances, where a number of young men were placed, in statu pupillari, could succeed, unless the professors were invested with sovereign authority. It was impossible that any such institution could exist with advantage, unless a discretionary power were granted to individuals in office, to govern those who were placed under their care by such rules as appeared to them best for the purpose of preventing moral contagion. They ought to be entrusted, not only with the power of punishing vice, but of preventing its contagious growth. If a young man misconducted himself, he ought to be at once removed. Those under whose government he was placed should be authorized to say to him, " your habits are so dissolute, your conduct is so improper, that it is unfit you should longer remain here. You are spreading the contagion of your evil example around, and, should your principles be disseminated while we are endeavouring to correct you, more mischief will be engendered than the expulsion of twenty youths can remove: we will endeavour to prevent this by sending you away." That power must be lodged in the principals of every establishment devoted to education, or else it could not prosper. It was so lodged, and safely lodged, with those who were at the head of schools, public and private. Why did he say that it was safely lodged? Because no individual at the head of any scholastic establishment, from a regard to his interest as well as his character, would dare to abuse that power. He would feel, when he resorted to the measure of publicly expelling a boy from the institution over which he presided, that he put himself on his trial before the public, by whom his conduct would be canvassed; and he would know that, if the public heard of ten or twelve students being expelled from time to time, their natural inference must be that the school was bad, and they would have nothing to do with it. Nothing, however, could be fairer than to say to a young man who misbehaved, " your habits are such that it is impossible you can continue in this institution; you have done that which is contrary to our rules; retire, therefore, and seek for instruction elsewhere." In that case, the punishment would extend only to the immediate act of removal; it would not have the effect of wholly blighting a young man's prospects in life. How different was the case in this institution ! He would suppose the case of an inidvidual entering this establishment (and here it ought not to be overlooked, that you compelled them to enter) who, unfortu

nately from his previous habits, from his having the command of a vast deal of money, or from any other cause, was unwilling to accept of an Indian appointment, was it, he asked, to be endured, that such a person was to be forced on the establishment? Was he to remain until he infringed some positive regulation? Should not the Professors be allow ed to say, "if you retire, the business of the institution will proceed correctly; if you do not, all our time will be taken up in correcting those vicious habits which you have previously acquired." Ought not the Professors to be placed in loco parentis, with full authority to prevent, on the moment, the contagion of bad example? This was one inherent evil of the system, and was particularly insisted on by Mr. Malthus.

That gentleman said,

speaking of the inherent evils of the institution," the next permanent difficulty which the College had to contend with, is the chance that some of the young men, whose parents have obtained appointments for them, may be indisposed to the service, and not really wish to go out to India. Instances have not been uncommon of a persevering opposition to the regulations of the College, which could only be rationally accounted for by supposing a positive disinclination to the service. It is to be feared that there are young men who would prefer expulsion, on occasion of some general disturbance, when many are involved, to an open and manly rejection of an appointment, which is considered by their parents as so valuable." This was a remarkably candid statement. From this it appeared, that young men were forced on you, whose sole object was to get expelled. It was a most harsh measure, that a young man was obliged to go on in a course for which he had no inclination, or which he absolutely disliked, until, having violated some statute to the letter, he was driven out of the College by a sentence of expulsion, confirmed by the Bishop of London, as visitor. In the mean time, from the period of his entrance to his dismissal, he may have been spreading the contagion of his evil habits, and rendering others, whose fortunes depended on their keeping four terms strictly, as idle and as dissolute as himself. Would it not be much better to co-operate in some measure less decisive than that which was now adopted, instead of being obliged, from its extreme severity, to pause before it was carried into effect; instead of suffering an unfit student to remain till a regular sentence of expulsion was pronounced against him, after all the mischief which could be effected by bad example had been effected? If such were the true state of the case, why should he be asked to send his sons to an institution where such subjects were not only admitted, but

retained for a considerable period? Why should it be demanded of him to send his child to a seminary, from which they could not remove a young man, however indif. ferent his previously acquired habits were, until he had broken one of the statutes? Mr. Malthus pretty strongly pointed out the impossibility of removing a vicious or refractory character without clamour and cavil; without putting, as it were, the College and its authorities on trial. When that which he had described was the fact, when such a heavy punishment as expulsion, with all its lamentable consequences, was resorted to; when a great penalty was inflicted, but the disgrace was not removed; certainly, under such circumstances, they were put upon their trial. He contended, that a parent ought not send his son to a school where crime was suffered to grow up, and was then punished: but to a seminary where a good system, the system of preventing the recurrence of crime, prevailed. Where a young man shewed an indisposition to attend to his scholastic duties, the parent ought to be thus addressed: "Sir, this institntion was founded for the benefit of all young men intended for a particular service; your son has come here, but he does not avail himself of the facilities which it affords therefore take him away." What could be fairer or more just than this? By the existing system, the young men were forced to proceed to the College; it was not their voluntary act, nor that of their parents. Mr. Malthus farther observed: "The collegiate authorities now legally possess the power both of expelling and of refusing certificates; but, unfortunate. ly, from the disposition shewn by the founders and patrons of the College, and that part of the public connected with India, in every case where the loss of an appointment is in question, a full support in the exercise of this power cannot be depended upon. If this difficulty could be removed, the best hopes might be entertained of the result." This was what he wished for. He should like the collegiate authorities to have the power of saying, when the conduct of a youth was objectionable, "Sir, you must depart: we will not ruin you, but we will prevent you from ruining others. Here is the wellhead, as clear as fountain water can be; but none shall approach it who come here, not to drink, but to trouble the waters." Surely this could be easily effected, since every regulation made by the Directors became law, and had the force of law under this statute. Mr. Malthus proceeded in these words: "If the College were so supported as to enable it gradually to subdue the spirit of insubordination, by removing refractory and vicious characters without clamour or cavil, and to exercise its discretionary power in refusing certifi