SIR GEORGE GREY.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLIII, Issue 113, 11 May 1909, Page 2

SIR GEORGE GREY.

' THE INDIAN MUTINY

AN OLD CONTROVERSY REVIVED.

j>ROM OtTR CORRESPONDENT.] WELLINGTON, Saturday. jm* New Zealand Times this morn- /" ing contains a four-column review of the new "Life of Sir George Grey, ~by Mr James Collier, who for some years wa3 Parliamentary Librarian here. Mr Collier does not devote so much attention to Grey's South African period as did previous biographers, such as Mr Rees and Professor Henderson, but on one point he is very outspoken, and his remarks may not improbably revive the old controversy as to whether Grey, and Grey alone, was responsible--for diverting transports, containing troops* for China, to India. lhe Times reviewer deals as follows with this section of Mr Collier's work: — Arrived at the Cape, to whicn the Colonial Office, wanting the strongest man it could get, and for once, very sensibly, not standing on its dignity, had despatched the man it had so' often called to task for disregarding and even disobeying its behests, Grey at once threw himself into his work with all the zeal, the energy, the enthusiasm. which had characterised his assumption of the reins upon his arrival in New Zealand from South Australia. The story of his work in South Africa is told by Mr Collier at some length, but to most leaders the most interesting chapter will be that in wnich certain episodes connected with the Indian Mutiny are discussed. The accepted story is that, having received news from the Governor of Bombay of the outbreak of the Mutiny in India, Grey not only sent a man-of-war, then lying in Table Bay, to India with two batteries of the Royal Artillery, ammunition, stores, and some horses, but that it was to him, and him alone, that credit is due for having diverted certain troops that had arrived" at Capetown on their way to China (to support Lord Elgin in forcibly concluding a treaty with the Chinese Government), anl " despatched them to India. The troops arrived in India in time to enable Sir Colin Campbell to relieve Lucknow. But for this unexpected reinforcement Lucknow would have fallen, and India itself might have been re-conquered.

Such, we have said, is the commonly accepted version, the version which Mr Rees took for' granted was correct, and, indeed, which Grey himself quite commonly alluded to as being accurate. But Mr Collier tslls a very different story—too long to give in full, but of which we may give a few salient points. Mr Collier bluntly says: "Not a tittle of evidence supports this chain of assumption" (that the diversion of the troops must be credited to Grey, and Grey alone). What he says actually happened was as follows: — The officer in command (Colonel Hope) only laughed at the mock orders he received from the Governor, and continued his voyage to SingaSore, as he had been instructed to o. There Lord Elgin received a despatch from Lord Canning, the Governor-General of India, informing him of the outbreak of the Mutiny and tho critical situation of Central India. Then he rose from the table, where he sat at dinner, and paced the balcony for two or three hours, evidently deliberating what steps he should take in this grave emergency. "To his eternal honour^' according <to Lord Malmesbury, he decided to sacrifice the means of accomplishing the mission that had been entrusted to' him, and divert to India the troops that had been arranged. . . . Lord

Blgin, arid he alone, diverted tio troops to Calcutta; and Sir George Grey had no more to do with the diversion than the "Man An the Moon." /

Mr Collier admits that "evidence is deficient on the one side and altogether lacking on the other." It certainly is a curious fact that whilst Grey "for thirty-three years, to all who would listen to him," claimed the credit, Sir Henry Loch, who had been secretary to Lord Elgin, wrote to The Times when Mr Rees' narrative was published "giving his statements a specific denial and scouting the claims made by and on behalf of Sir George Grey." Who was right? Sir Henry Loch or Sir George Grey ? To whom is the credit due? Mr Collier, who, apparently, desires to let Grey down lightly, says that "His (Grey's) contention, which looks like the delusion of a distempered brain, is at least arguable." Whately's "Historic Doubts About Lord Napoleon" might have a counterpart in "Historic Doubts About Lord Elgin." The evidence is, we imist say, largely on the side of Grey. Perhaps Mr Rees may think fit to enter the lists again and set Mr Collier right—and Sir Henry Loch right—if he can.

There is a direct and distinct conflict as *to facts between the two narratives or Mr Ilees and Mr Collier. Turning to Mr Rees' book we find, on page 205: —

The military officers required from Sir George Grey his command in writing for this deviation from their orders in London, to authorise their voyage to Calcutta. The commands were given. The responsibility, though great, was willingly accepted by Sir George Grey and the vai-ious officers, who, led by Colonel Hope, nobly acquiesced, set sail with the troops.

And yet Mr Collier distinctly says: "The officer in command only laughed, etc., etc."-—see above. Further, Mr Collier says: —

The facts, clearly stated and irresistibly argued, were placed before him in a New Zealand journal in 1890, by an officer who had been on board the transport" when they touched at Capetown, but nothing could eradicate the deep-seated delusion. By deputy (for he was too proud to enter personally into controversy with any colonist), and that deputy (if I mistake not) Mr Rees, he maintained in the same journal his old contentions, as he had done for thirty-three years to all who would listen to him, and thus furnished convincing proof that megalomania had permanently disturbed the balance of his mind.

Mr Collier's opinion that "it is a case for the Society of Psychical Research, from the beginning to end the narrative" (Sir George's narrative through Mr Rees, we presume), "is a pure hallucination/ or a tissue of hallucinations." It seems 'to us that there must still be living several officers, military and naval, who could give valuable conclusive testimony on this much debated problem, a problem which, it is due to Grey, should be set at rest one way or the other. Meanwhile wo/must pass on io other matters.