« AnteriorContinuar »
qualified comfort to be told, that the average amount of expulsions from the college was in the ratio of about four per cent. of the number of scholars, or about an expulsion once in every two years. He (Mr. Jackson) stated on that occasion, that he had made out a case for inquiry—not so strong a case, he was obliged to say, as was able to bear up against the previous question moved at the late hour of six o'clock, when all who were desired to come were sure to come, and all the volunteers would go away. He had a right to complain that the question was argued as if it had been intended by this motion to impugn the propriety of educating the civil servants of the Company. Had they denied that it was useful for those persons to be educated up to a certain point 2 Was it necessary to refer to the minutes of Lord Wellesley, in order to confirm them in the expediency, the absolute necessity there was for giving an improved scale of education to their civil servants? As if they had ever attempted to underrate the efiects of proper instruction—as if they had not, in fact, moved the resolution of 1805, which he had already read to the Court. They admitted then, fully, its necessity, but in doing so they were not prepared to go the length of saying that that process which was adopted at Hertford College was that of all others that was to have their exclusive approbation. And when the learned Gentleman stated to them the eulogiums which had been passed upon the beneficial effects of the Haileybury College institution, as it developed itself in the characters and conduct of a certain class of persons sent out to India, he should have also referred to that humiliating contrast which was placed before the Court, as coming from at least equal authority with the former statement, by his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume). But was it not a duty which all were equally interested in discharging, to find out how they could improve this college? Was it not a favourite institution ? Could they not feel a pride in promoting its welfare? He remembered very well its being said, “much as we lament these disturbances, we hope they will be rectified, and that the institution will mend.” Yet, it was not until 1809 that the executive body said any thing to the Proprietors on the subject; and it was not until 1810, after the riots had taken place, that he put those resolutions on the table which eulogized the state of the college. He knew that he had stated at that time, also, that they expected an improvement in the moral conduct of the scholars—they had said, upon that occasion, “Can we justify ourselves in compelling parents to send their children to a place where such unhappy scenes take place-can we satisfy ourselves that we are doing right in thus putting them to the alternative (in their
opinion) of risking the moral principles of their children on the prospect of his worldly welfare?”—They were then told that these disturbances would not recur; that order was now confirmed : but, instead of that being the case, disturbances still broke out afresh. There were now three questions for their consideration. The first was, were they resolved to continne to put parents into that distressing condition of mind which would be induced by the opposite considerations acting on their minds, the desire to promote the welfare of their children on the one hand, and the fear of his mind being corrupted by the intercourse which from what he reads he has reason to fear he would meet with in the college on the other : where could be the disadvantage of allowing parents to have a choice of the place where their children should be brought up 2 They should suppose the case of a family residing at Aberdeen or Glasgow, or any of those places, where ample means of education were at hand; and that the parents, having a son destined for the India service, were anxious to give him the instruction which would enable him to fulfil his future duties in a creditable manner. Would they compel, would any man in Court have the heart to compel that parent to yield up his son, condemned as they already were to a separation of twenty years, two years sooner, in order to comply with a law which had no reason in its principle, and no certainty of benefit in its aim, and deprive him thus of the opportunity of superintending the moral improvement of his child, during the critical period when he was receiving the instructions that were to fit him for his public duties? If it was open to parents residing even fifty or more miles from some seat of education, to place their child in that establishment, it would be in their power, even by occasional visits, which would be then practicable, to exercise a most useful controul over his moral progress; he could be instilling the seeds of virtue into his mind, and gradually introducing him to that knowledge of the world, which was truly described by an eminent statesman (Lord Grenville), to be the most necessary acquisition that a young man can hope to obtain. Instead, however, of any such information being held to be estimable at Hertford, the principle was to keep him at Hertford, and the ship's side, from a ten
der age, until he was actually in the dis
charge of his functions. If the parent
had the choice of educating his child where
he pleased, and thus satisfying himself that he was giving him the fullest oppor
tunity of improving himself in morality,
the evils that now called for their attention
would not have existed, and the young
men would not go out to India in such
complete ignorance of mankind. What
were the objections to this alteration of their system? Could there be a better
means of determining the qualifications of a young man than a test? If this principle of a test were wrong, and leading to error, what, he would ask, was to become of the health of the inhabitants of those vast regions which they ruled over, because they had no better mode of ascertaining the capacity of the surgeons, to whom they confided the care of the health of that population, than referring them to undergo an examination which was appointed by the executive part of the Company themselves. And what disadvantage was there ever mentioned as arising out of this course? Was there any statement made at any time, was it ever suggested that the medical gentlemen, who had obtained their appointments through this process, had failed in the adequate discharge of their important duties? Then again the same principle prevailed in the selection of those who were to administer the functions of the naval department of their affairs. It was notorions, that the persons to whom they entrusted the management of their proud Arguses, laden with their prodigious cargoes, were all chosen by the application of the proper test of examination. The college at Addiscombe, which never caused them the least uneasiness, adopted no better principle whereon to recommend their youth than by the process of a public examination. It was thus that they supplied engineers, and thus that they were able to give to their artillery efficient and serviceable men. Why then, if it appearss that in three-fourths of their appointments they adopted the principle of a test merely, and that no evil resulted—on the contrary, an uniform course of useful consequences flowed from it, was it not a good reason why they should carry that principle still further into their system, and substitute it in the place of other principles, which not only were not attended in their operation by so much good, but which were the fruitful source of a great many evils 2 What ground could they have for continuing to require this interval of residence at a place, which for so many reasons had been feared and disliked by parents? Did they suppose that a fond parent could have less regard for the timoral advancement of his child than a set of professors? Did they suppose that those combustible materials, those inflammable ingredients, of which the Indian population was composed, were in less danger of being lighted up by a young man educated at a seminary such as this, than by him who had but just left the arms of a fond parent? It was argued, that if the compulsory claims were taken away, the number of boys sent to Haileybury would be scarcely sufficient to maintain it, and down it must come. Now he was prepared to show that no consequences
of that fatal nature would ensue; because the Directors of that college, seeing the extent of competition, would be stimulated to greater and more determined exertion; and the consequence would be, that the remaining thirty or forty boys who would be left in the college, would shew proofs of such proficiency, as to turn the balance again in favour of their process of edu
cation. The most inglorious part of the Hon. Gentleman's argument ccrtainly
was that which referred to the loss of the funds that would be sustained by the dimimution of the students: for certainly an argument of this nature, used before a Company which had expended £200,000 in the erection of the building, seemed to him a little too extravagant. With respect to that part of the learned Gentleman's address, in which he endeavoured to satisfy the Court, that there was really no ground for parents apprehending the probable corruption of their children at Haileybury, he had a few words to offer. Now he was not prepared to gointo particulars with the Learned Gentleman; he only knew that Mr. Malthus, a gentleman who usually spoke out his opinion very sensibly, had put upon record a sort of testimony that was very ambiguous indeed. The attestation of this gentleman to the moral character of the college was one of comparison—“ They are not as bad as the Oxford students!” By the way, he had been charged by the Learned Gentleman (Mr. Impey) with an interpolated reading of a passage of Mr. Malthus's, of which he was not conscious. But he only noticed the observation for the purpose of making a charge in his turn, for when the Learned Gentleman, some time ago, was reading an extract from the pamphlet of Mr. Malthus, it so happened that when he came to a certain part he was actually observed to wince, and when he (Mr. Jackson) cried heart which according to invariable custom was always accepted as a challenge to go on ; the Lcarned Gentleman, instead of doing so, held up the book. But to proceed to the evidence of Mr. Malthus, which, as he said before, was merely a comparative attestation to character: “of the general conduct of the students,” said Mr. Malthus, “I can affirm from my own knowledge, that they are beyond all comparison more free from the general vices that relate to wine, women, gaming, extravagance, riding, shooting, and driving, than the under graduates at our universities.” If this was to be the full extent of Mr. Malthus's testimony from his own knowledge, what consolation did it afford to the parent who valued the morals of his child as he did his life-blood 2 After reading this, would any man have the heart to compel parents to send their children to a place, where the utmost that he can expect will be, that his child will not be so fond of the vices of drinking, gaining, &c. as the students of Oxford are supposed to be He was charged with a secret wish to destroy the College. He owned that it was very doubtful if it would not be best to abolish a system of which their own professors themselves taught them to despair. At all events, he was sure that, without some alteration, such as that now proposed, the College could not effect good. If some improvement of this nature were introduced, it might, perhaps, flourish, and repay their care with abundant fruit. He had his hopes that it would produce good upon that condition. Should such a qualification be embodied in "the system, it would so fully answer all the ends of those who were desirous of seeing it converted into an instrument of unmixed good, that they would very likely cease to trouble the Court any more upon that subject, except, indeed, they made an effort (when the statutes were undergoing a revision) to modify the power of the College Council, so as that they should not be at liberty to expel a student, and thereby ruin his prospects for ever, on a trivial ground. That part of the subject, however, it was not necessary that he should here discuss. Whether his views upon that particular point were right or wrong, he had no doubt as to the propriety of their concurring in the motion now before them. (Hear /) . Mr. Impey shortly adverted to the exhausted state of the Court, and moved the adjournment of the debate till Friday next. On a division, there appeared for the adjournment a majority of 30.
East. India House, Feb. 27.
AN adjourned General Court of Proprietors of East-India Stock was this day held, for the purpose of resuming the consideration of the propriety of petitioning Parliament for the repeal of the compui. sory clause of the Act of the 53d Geo. III., which directs that no writer shall be sent out to India who shall not have previously resided for four terms at Haileybury College.
The motion was then read.
Mr. Money rose, and in a very eloquent speech pointed out the various benefits which the Company derived from the institution at Haileybury; and concluded by imploring the Proprietors to put a direct negative on a proposition, which, if carried, would effect the demolition of the College.
Mr. Traut expressed himself decidedly in favour of the motion. He argued that the young men ought rather to be educated at Oxford and Cambridge than at Haileybury; and in support of his opinion, quoted the speech delivered by Lord
Grenville in 1813, who censured the establishment of a separate college for the education of young men going out to India. His Lordship considered it most unwise to rear up the young men as a sort of caste, instead of allowing them to mix in general society, by which means alone they could form a strong and masculine character. Mr. Bebb stated, that when the institution was first projected, he, deceived by the speciousness of the plan, was zealous in its support. But he would not be acting justly if he did not say that eighteen years' experience, with a vigilant eye on what passed during that period, had greatly altered his opinion. He then pointed out a variety of defects in the system, and reprobated in strong terms that statute of the college, by which confessions of delinquency were extracted from the students. He lamented the expulsion of the young men in 1822, on account of mere boyish thoughtless tricks. He was grateful to those who brought forward this proposition, which, he thought, would produce very beneficial effects. Mr. R. Grant, though of opinion that those discussions tended to injure the college, would yet add, that the injury was considerably lessened by the tone of calmness and temper with which the motion had been brought forward, and which had characterized the whole debate. The Learned Gentleman contended, that if there were any defects in the laws by which the college was governed, the proper course would be that proposed by his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume), namely, to refer it to the Court of Directors to consider what steps it would be necessary to take to remedy those defect", instead of proceeding at once to Parliament, and, as must be the case, opening the whole question to the decision of the Legislature. TheLearned Geatleman then proceeded to inquire—1st, Whether the college had, in any fair degree, answered the purposes for which it was intended; and next, whether there was any probability of those purposes being answered by the substituted cstablishment now proposed. The Learned Gentleman argued, that the college had fulfilled the objects which it was instituted to attain, and pointed out the defects of the system which would be established, if the motion were agreed to. In point of integrity and efficiency for the performance of their duties, the great body of their civil servants were more distinguished at present than at any former period. No less than 5-7thof those servants were supplied from Haileybury College; and the source which supplied so large a portion of meritorious
functionaries could not be corrupt an
worthless, as it had been described. To prove the general improvement of the junior department of the service in India, he quoted the addresses of the Marquess of Hastings, at the College of Fort William, in 1818 and 1822, and observed, that the individuals who were there the most distinguished, were members of the calumniated institution at Haileybury. From these and a variety of other facts, he contended that the college had answered the purposes for which it was instituted. The Learned Gentleman then compared, with great minuteness, the system of examination, in public, vice voce, which was now recommended, and the examination, in writing, at present pursued at the College, and gave his opinion decidedly in favour of the latter. He also defended, at con
siderable length, the practice of allowing the examinations to be conducted by the Professors. The Learned Gentleman then adverted to the charge of immorality which had been levelled against the college, and contended that at Haileybury there was more moral conduct than was to be found at either of the universities.
At six o'clock an adjournment of the debate, till Friday, March 5, was moved and agreed to.
*...* A full report of the Debate on the 27th, Feb. and subsequent Debate will be given in our nert number.
BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS.
Births. Jan. 26. At Castlecraig, the Right Hon. Lady Napier, of a daughter. 31. In Manchester-square, the lady of John Moonyat, Esq., of Madras, of a daughter. Feb. 1. At Ickwell Bury, near Biggleswade, Lady Johnstone, of a son. 8. At Greensted Hall, the lady of Major Robert H. Ord, of a son. 5. In Dominick-street, Dublin, Her Grace the Duchess of Leinster, of a daughter. 6. The daughter. - At Woollterton, the Countess of Orford, of a daughter. 7. The lady of Col. White, of a son. 8. At the Principal's Lodge, East-India College, Herts, the lady of the Rev. Dr. Batten, of a daughter. 9. In Grosvenor-square, the Right Hon. Lady Petre, of a son. 10. At Belton House, Lincolnshire, the Countess Brownlow, of a daughter. — At Roughton Hall, Lincolnshire, the lady of Henry Dymoke, Esq., of a son. — At Powis Castle, the Right Hon. Lady Lucy Clive, of a daughter. 16. In Montague-square, the lady of Colonel Weguelin, of a son. 17. In Whitehall-place, the Right Hon. Lady James Stuart, of a son.
Countess of Bective, of a
MARRIAGES. Dec. 10. At Cultmalundie, by the Rev. Dr. Taylor, Lieut.-Col. J. Cunningham, Bombay Army, to Miss M. Ritchie, daughter of George Ritchie, Esq., of Blackruthven. Jan. 22. At Edinburgh, Lieut. W. H. Smith, 4th regt. Madras N.I., and eldest son of Rear-Admiral Smith, to Eliza, youngest daughter of John Wilson, Esq., of Cumledge, Berkwickshire. 29. At Worthing, Sussex, Charles Wm. Elwood, Esq., Major in the service of the Hon. East-India Company, to Anne Ka
therine, daughter of E. J. Curteis, M. P. for the county of Sussex.
30. At Springfield, Philip Pitt Nind, Esq., of the Hon. East-India Company's 3d regt. of Bengal Light Cavalry, to Caroline, fifth daughter of the late Wm. Davis, Esq., of Winterbourne Abbas, Dorsetshire.
Feb. 3. At Marylebone church, New Road, by the very Reverend the Dean of Canterbury, the Rev. William Heberden, of Great-Bookham, Surrey, eldest son of Dr. Heberden, to Elvina Rainier, second daughter of John Underwood, Esq., of Glocester-place.
7. At Newington church, Surrey, Mr. William Bell, of the East-India House, to Charlotte Elizabeth, only daughter of the late Everard Van Stock, Esq., of Oporto.
Draths. Jan. 11. Capt. Wm. Niven, late Sur. veyor of the Customs at Greenock. 13. At Newhailes, near Edinburgh, Lady Home, relict of Vice-Admiral Sir George Home, of Blackadder, Bart. – At Largs, Capt. Patrick Carnegie, Royal Navy, who fought under Rodney on the memorable 12th of April 1782. 14. At Edinburgh, John, infant son of John Bruce, Esq., Herriot Hill. 15. At Brompton, Kent, Thos. Vivian, Esq., aged 77 years, fifty-five of which he was a purser in the Royal Navy. – At Shandwick-place (N.B.) General Francis Dundas, Col. of the 71st regt. of Light Infantry, and Governor of Dumbarton Castle. 17. At Malta, of an apoplectic fit, Sir Thomas Maitland, Lord High Commissioner in the Ionian Islands, and Governor of Malta. 20. At Collon, in the county of Louth, the Right Hon. Margaret Wiscountess Ferrard, Baroness of Oriel, in her 87th year. – At Edinburgh, James Bissett, Esq., Rear-Admiral of the Red.
21. At Ilford, the Rev. Richard Glover. 22. At Redborne, the Rev. E. Pole, LL.B., Rector of the above place. 23. At Boulogne, in his 80th year, Sir Brooke Boothby, Bart., F.L.S., of Ashbourn Hall, in the county of Derby. — At Binfield, Berks, Lieut.-General Sir Francis Welder, aged 49. At Caen, Capt. John Willoughby Marshall, K. S. G. and S. Royal Navy, aged 45. — At Oxted, Lieut.-Col. Francis Wm. Bellis. 25. Stephen Smith Ward, Esq., of Plaistow, Essex, in his 73d year. 26. At Chislehurst, W. Westall, Esq., aged 84, formerly of High-street, Southwark. – In Percy.street, Jas. Hervey, M.D. Fellow of the Royal College of Phy
– At Bromley, Charlotte, daughter of
the late Henry Holland, Esq., of Sloaneplace. 27. At Coolen, Sir Rich. Harte, Knight, aged 88 years. He was one of the oldest Magistrates of the county of Limerick. — At the Surrey Dispensary, Southwark, Mr. Benjamin Huggett, late apothecary to the institution. 28. At her residence, near Worthing, Mrs. Harris, the lady of Lieut. G. S. Harris, R. N. 29. At the Rectory House, Martha, the wife of the Rev. G. S. Townley, Rector of St. Stephen, Walbrook. — At Bath, Sir Hugh Bateman, Bart, of Hartington Hall, Derbyshire. 30. At Castle-Howard, Yorkshire, the Right Hon. Margaret Caroline, Countess of Carlisle, in her 71st year. – At his residence, South-street, David Samuda, Esq., in his 58th year. 31. On Lambeth Terrace, Thomas Woodhouse, Esq., Deputy Auditor of India Accounts, in his 53d year. Feb. 1. Sir Fred. Flood, Bart., Custos Rotulorum of the county of Wexford, which county he formerly represented in the Imperial Parliament. — In Southampton-street, Strand, the Rev. John Lempriere, D.D., Rector of Meeth and Newton Petrock, county of Devon. - In Queen's-square, in his 85th year, Isaac Ogden, Esq. — At Cheltenham, the Rev. Sir Henry Bate Dudley, Bart., aged 78. — In Trinity-square, Capt. Stephen Rains, R.N., in his 59th year. 2. At the Rectory House, St. Andrew's, Holborn, Anne, eldest daughter of the Rev. Gilbert Beresford, aged 17 years. — John Phillips, Esq., of Bank. 3. In Wigmore-street, William Childe, Esq., of Kinlet, Shropshire, aged 69. — At Lymington, James Grieve Livett, Esq., aged 49.
3. The infant son of Lieut.-General Sir John Oswald, of Dunnikier. 4. At Bisham Abbey, General Vansittart, eldest son of George Vansittart, Esq. — Sir John Simeon, one of the Masters of the Court of Chancery. 6. In Upper Charlotte-street, Fitzroysquare, Capt. Robert Giles, R.N. in his 49th year. 7. At Market Drayton, Shropshire, Mrs. Woolley, of Southampton-row, aged 90, relict of the late T. Woolley, sister to the celebrated Lord Clive. 9. In Dover-street, Margaret, relict of the late Hon. General Thomas Gage, in her 90th year. — In Great George-street, Westminster, John Fane, Esq. of Warmesley, Oxfordshire, M. P. for that county, in his 74th year. 10. Of an apoplectic attack, Edward Bullock, Esq. of Upper Bedford-place, in his 52d year. — In Piccadilly, Sir Wm. Paxton, of Middleton Hall, Carmarthenshire, in his 80th year. – At Brighton, George Roebuck, Esq., of Russell-place, Fitzroy-square. — At Cadogan-place, Jane, the wife of Alfred Thrale Perkins, Esq. 11. At Walton, the Lady Harriet Bennet, youngest daughter of the Earl of Tankerville. — At Cavendish Hall, county of Suffolk, Georgiana Lucy Mackworth, youngest daughter of Sir Digby Mackworth, Bart., aged 20. — In the Tower, Edmond Donnellan, Esq. late of the Stock Exchange, aged 58. — Charles Peregrine Pearse Darnford, only son of Chas. Beavan, Esq., Solicitor. — At Roughton Hall, the infant son of Henry Dymoke, Esq. 12. In Queen-square, in his 70th year, Richard Cheslyn Cresswell, Esq., Proctor, Doctors' Commons. – At her house in Hill-street, in the 86th year of her age, Lady Strachey.— She was first married to Capt. Latham, R. N. who served under Admiral Watson in the East Indies. By this marriage, she had two sons and one daughter. The sons died in the Civil Service of the Company in India. She afterwards married Mr. Strachey, who had accompanied Lord Clive to Bengal in 1764 as his Secretary, was created a Baronet in 1801, and died in 1810. She had, by this second marriage, three sons and two daughters. The sons were in the Civil Service of the Company in Bengal, and survive her. A daughter also survives her. — At Senwick, Kirkcudbright, Lady Gordon, of Earlston. 14. At Gloucester, Caroline, the wife of Alex. Maitland, Esq. 15. At Sleaford, in Lincolnshire, Benj. Cheales, Esq., in his 68th year.