DEBATE ON THE AFFAIRS Of CEYLON. [(From the "Times." )]

New Zealander, Volume 7, Issue 590, 10 December 1851, Page 4

DEBATE ON THE AFFAIRS Of CEYLON. [(From the "Times." )]

Tt ii not much to flip credit of this country that while an exhibitions Hyde I'.nk Ins become the great event of the age our veneiable legisl.itme shonlil l)i l nightly employed in discussions of which the be^t that can be •hoped is that they may >>c shortly toigotten. Oui vi-itora, if they are at all abletopntei into the mysteries ot the British Constitution, will nnJ all that is precious beautiful, and useful in one place, m the other all that is nugatory, lmpiacticable, and ti.wsient. They will naturally be surpused at results so little in piopoition to the authority of the two assemblages. What was the debate last night in our House of Commons, that famous ous model of represenmtive wisdom and popular powei It was a debate adjourned from a previous nisht, and iollowing on a long series of PailiamenMry operations, backed by a good deal of clever wilting out of doois, on the conduct of a colonial Governor in the suppression of hw share of the woi ld-wide rebellion of 1318. Foreigners will a«k, with Sir J. Hogg last night, '• What is the practical object of the motion ? What is the object of resuscitating a crisis that was buried, as it weie, in its consequences'" Rightly or wrongly, all bus been settled. To single out Ceylon for inquiry is absolutely invidious. There weie llueats and distuibances at Ceylon ; so were th n-e in England and li eland. It iaa question wbelhei tlieie was leal danger and ac tualtieason in the colony: the same doubt extends to the ciibis at home. Perhaps Loul Toiringtou multiplied the number ot bis foes; peihaps he was too much terrified by priests and pretenders ; and with half the woild in a state of successful revolt tlnough the concessions and vacillations of i uleis it is possible that he thought it better to err on the side of decision. Perhaps, also, lo some extent he made his law for the occasion. But we mv.st reconcile all paities, and extinguish all eontioversies, as to the hidtoiy and suppiession of oui own ciims 'at home, befoie we can enter on the affairs of Ceylon with nny piospeit of an unnnimous \euhct. We must settle whether or not our own feais were altogether rational, and whether wo werp justified m the extraordinaiy measures taken to set me tho peace of the country. We must also find, the man who eveiywhere showed the gotden mean between dangerous indulgence ami offensive seventy, and who preserved older without making it odious. It may be propel ly .isked why, if we aie evidently unable to agiee on all the-e points of domestic inteiest, the Legislature should plungo once more into the pet plenties and peisoiuhties of a colonial quarrel tin ee years old. The thiee chief speakers in favour of the resolutions last night were Sir F. Thesis, Mr. Gladstone, -and I\Jr. Disiaeli, and it is remaikable that the two first warmly deprecated the peisonahties which they alleged bad been imported into tho question by Lord Tonington's apologists. They wore both anxious, as they said, to regaid the question in its purest and subhmest light, as one affecting the character of the einpue and tho policy of the Colonial-office. The sensitiveness of these gentlemen on the subject of personalities shows a proper estimate of legislative dignity and duty, but we must say that we think the feeling might have suggested another line of conduct on their pait. It might Lave suggested that it was better not to rale up a quarrel ft om winch personalities were inseparable. " 1 1 he mysteries of Ceylon" aie all personalities. Loid Torrmgfou's conduct is a personal question. His defence is, that in a position of surprise, difficulty, and disordei, forming, as we have said, part of an agitation that shook the whole, world, he found his own advisers and servants factious, divided, and^iefiactory. A new governor, in a colony 12,000 miles from home, assailed bv an msurlection, and molested by a cabal, was in a position that might excuse some .excess of duty. Was he, or was ho not 1 , in this position 1 Was the character of the ciisis aggravated by the misconduct of the colonial ofhoals? In coming forwaid con annne to testify against the Governor do they enter court with clean hands ; and are they interested or not in exculpating themselves? /ire they not also on their trial ? The whole question in a peisonahty between Lord Torrington and the other colonial functionaries. We must say that gentlemen whose mild spirits revolt against the personalities impoited into the debate should deal equal charity to all parties. They ought not to throw themselves into the pack which is hunting down its prey at full cry, and only discover a sudden honor of personalities when the victim stands at bay and retaliates on his pursuers. Lord Torrington did that which wise roonarchs, experienced statesmen, and renowned generals bnd failed to do in similar circumstances, or in circuuustmros the difference of which can be moie easily asserted than proved. We have not to inquire whether he did it well — whether be showed moderation in triumph, or whethei he did not affoid his officials a handle against him. But impropriety is one thing, and criminality another. Many a public servant has done himself no credit, or impaired the glory of his services, by harshness or impiudence. Lord Toirington has been dismissed. Does he also deserve impeachment ? Government has retracted, as it were, its own choice of a servant, and thereby made some amends. Is it also to be turned, out because its servant three years ago permitted the execution of a few more rebels than the crisis absolutely required, and prolonged martial law some weeks more than necessary ? These are the ciimes to which Mr. Baillie at last reduces the charge, for in the course of the inquiry a good deal of the indictment disappeared. Time itself is beginning to tlnow a veil of oblmon over the shop-tax, and road-tax, the dog-tax, the gun-tax, and nil the other taxes which once seemed so shocking to the untaxed Englishman at home. Time, indeed, while it has suppressed parts of the story, has magnified what remains, and, in the hands of Mr. Baillie and Mr. Hume. Lord Torrington's punishments are assuming a fabulous bulk. Prolong the debate one more year and a new personage will be added to the mythology of Ceylon. Mr. Hume has already run up the black list of attrocities to 381. But assuming that Lord Torrington erred, as, indeed, is confessed, ought we not to give him the benefit of that favourable interpretation which be would certainly have enjoyed had he been rather milder, and much less successful? Had his Lordship dealt so tenderly with the insni gents ment to the liveliest writers and the clumsiest debaters of the day, and after suffering one death already in the loss of his place, Lord Torrington will now be allowed to take a quiet niche in the fabric of history. Posterity will not set him down quite as a Colonel Kirke, though it will certainly recoid the number of his enormities. It will not forget the date of his alleged convictions, jior elude the obvious comparison between the insurrection at Ceylon and those ot some scoie other countnes at the epoch. It will not disguise the fact that Lord Torrington was at least successful, which was not the case generally elsewhere. They who read the story will form their own judgments on the matter ; and, if we mistake not, they will think it exceedingly natural that England did not visit Lord Torrington with fine and imprisonment for his administration of Ceylon in the year 1848.