PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE.

Wellington Independent, Volume I, Issue 36, 2 August 1845, Page 4

PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, March 15.

Mr. G. W. Hope : I wish to call the attention of tho house to a matter of very great importance. It will be in the recollection of the house that the other evening a charge was made against the noble lord who presides over the department to which I belong, arising out of his course of conduct towards the New Zealand Company. A charge was made against my noble fiiend of deception and a gross want of faith. I perceive that the honorable and learned member forLiskeaid (Mr. C. Buller) has given notice of a motion for Tuesday next, relative to the affairs of New Zealand, but it will not give any opportunity for vindicating the character of the noble lord. Now, I submit to the house such a course is not fair. The noble lord has been distinctly charged in this house with conduct which is not becoming either a public officer or a gentleman ; and a petition I find is in the course of preparation, and persons of high character in the City have been solicited to sign it, imputing to the noble lord misconduct in regard to the New Zealand Company. I, therefore, think the house will agree with me that it is not fair such a charge should be made, and yet not brought forward, and an attempt made to substantiate it [cheers]. Perceiving, however, from the notice which stands for Tuesday, that it is not the intention of the New Zealand Company to bring forward and substantiate that charge before Easter, I am sure the house will feel that it is due to the position of the noble lord, as it would be only fair play to every Englishman, than an early opportunity should be afforded for the purpose of vindicating his character from such a charge [hear, hear]. I shall, therefore, on Tuesday next, bring forward a motion for papers which shall raise the question, and enable the New Zealand Company to substantiate their charge, if it be in their power to do so. With respect to the papers which the honourable member for Liskeard complained the other night had not been produced, I shall lay them on the table "by command," so that he may be in possession of them before the motion is made. Mr. Aglionby : I am perfectly willing to repeat the charge I made, or give my opinion of any charge that may be made, against Lord Stanley, so that the house may be perfectly aware of the course I mean to take on Tuesday. I do not mean to touch the question of the New Zealand Company on that occasion. Lord Howick : Whatever may be the papers produced by the honourabfe member for Southampton (Mr. G. W. Hope), I hope he will not think it necessary to raise the whole question of the policy pursued by the Government towards the colony of New Zealand. I hope at a later period of the session, when all the papers shall have been produced, and members shall have had an opportunity of reading them, the New Zealand question will be fully and fairly discussed. Mr. Mangles-. Having been the party who, I believe, in the first instance, and in the strongest terms, expressed my opinion with respect to the conduct of the noble lord at the head of the Colonial Office, I may be allowed to say, in answer to what has fallen from the honourable Under- Secretary (Mr. Hope,) partly in the shape of accusation and partly of taunt, that I shall be quite ready to substantiate any charge I brought against Lord Stanley; but at the same time I will not allow the honourable gentleman to dictate to me in the manner in which I should discharge my duty in this house (hear, hear.) I do not think it is fair that the authorities at the 'Colonial Office, besides the other advantages they take of individuals, should take this other advantage ("hear, hear'" and loud cries of " Order," amidst which the honourable gentleman sat down.) Mr. Hume wished the Under-Secretary of the Colonies to state specifically the charge which had been made against the noble lord. Mk. G. Hope: The charge made I understand to be this, that the noble lord entered into what was stated to have been an agreement with the New Zealand Company; that, having so done, he undertook to give certain instructions to the Governor of New Zealand, and that he gave one set of instructions to the New Zealand Company and another set of instructions to the Governor of New Zealand inconsistent with the other instructions; so that on his arrival in the colony Captain Fitzroy found himself with instructions which could not enable him to carry out the arrangement made by the noble lord with the Company. Mr. Mangles: If the honourable gentleman 'thinks that there is any disposition on the part of the New Zealand Companyorthose who represent ithat body, to shrink from any charge they have made against the Colonial Office in general, or of Lord Stanley in particular, he is exceedingly mistaken (hear, hear.) The honourable Under Secretary for the Colonies need be under no apprehension that he will not have the opportunity hilly to discuss the w.hole charge. As to the petition io which he had said signatures have been solicited in the City, he may depend upon it the great merchants and bankers there are ;not parties likely to be induced to sign a petition against the Colonial or any other public Department without being thoroughly convinced .of the justice of their case (hear, hear.) If the honourable Under Secretary supposes that the •Colonial Office stands well with the country, he labours under a delusion. That office is repro•rm,,^'! l^' 1,01600 ("hear, hear," and • ü b \ ohl i I re P eat it—the Colonial Office is .held to be the plague and nuisance of the -country.! and I believe the honourable gentleman opposite (Mr. Hope) and the noble lord at the head of the office are the only persons who do not hold that opinion ("hear, , "' and " Oh !") Sir R. Inglis: After the challenge which .has been thrown out, it will be necessary for the honourable Under-Secretary to bring forward .his motion in a shape to elicit the opinion ■■at the house, when it, will appear whether it be n U? fj? 8 1 e F d , by the honourable member for Guildford, that the. conduct of the Colonial Government is reprobated by every individual in the country except by Lord' Stanley and his Under-Secretary, who has a seat in this house I believe the contrary will appear by the votes" of an immense majority of this house, and that

the great majority of the people of the country are in favour of the conduct of the nohle lord [hear, hear]. Sir R. Peel: After the discussion the other night, few gentlemen will doubt that there would be, on the part of my noble friend at the head of the Colonial Department and his colleagues, an earnest desire that the sense of the house should be taken in some form or other with respect to the policy he has pursued in relation to New Zealand and the New Zealand Company ! and if any gentleman did entertain a doubt, the expressions used to-night might have altogether removed it from his mind [hear, hear]. The honourable member for Guildford (Mr. Mangles), a member, I believe of the New Zealand Company, has declared that the Colonial Department is viewed by the commercial interests of this country as a pest and a nuisance ; and the honourable gentleman must feel, I am sure, that he is under an obligation to bring forward a charge of that kind [hear, hear]. Whether speaking as a member of the New Zealand Company or as a member of Parliament, he is bound to give the house an opportunity of pronouncing an opinion on that subject [hear, hear]. I am quite aware that we cannot compel an honourable gentleman to bring forward any motion implying a charge against any particular department of the Government. That lies within the discretion of every honourable gentleman. It was left in doubt the other night whether any such motion would be brought forward. I think the honourable gentleman said such a motion might be brought forward. I did not understand him to pledge himself to bring it forward. The honourable gentleman who seconded the motion the other night did not pledge himself absolutely to bring it forward. He used expressions implying that he might, but gave no pledge that he would, bring it forward. Whenever that question may be brought forward, then will be the time to move such an amendment, in case the words of the motion are at all equivocal, as shall call distinctly and definitely for an expression of the opinion of the house [hear, hear]. Apart altogether from the question of his general policy, there is a point on which my noble friend must feel most strongly. A distinct charge has been brought against him, implying a want of good faith in his dealing with the New Zealand Company. It was brought forward towards the close of the debate the other night, after both my honourable friend (Mr. Hope) and I had addressed the house. Now, my noble friend (Lord Stanley) is most anxious that we should not separate for the holidays without his having an opportunity of distinctly explaining his conduct to the house, and, by referring to the documents, of showing, as I think he can conclusively shovy, that this accusation of a want of good faith in his transations with the New Zealand Company is without foundation (cheers.) I don't apprehend that my honourable friend (Mr. Hope) would propose on Tuesday next to call on the house for any expression of opinion; but as the representative of my noble friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies, he is most anxious on a matter not immediately nor necessarily provoking a discussion on the general policy of the department, but in respect of which his personal conduct and good faith have been tailed in question, not to allow the house to separate without giving some explanation of that particular point (loud cheers.) Mr. Aglionb-st admitted the fairness of the course suggested; but he thought he had reason to complain that the honourable Under Secretary had not given private notice to himself and other members connected with the New Zealland Company that he intended to bring this matter forward. He had merely stated the circumstance to the honourable member for Guildford five minutes before behind the Speaker's chair. Parliamentary usuage and gentlemanly courtesy required longer notice than this. If he (Mr. Aglionby) rightly understood the honourable gentleman the Colonial Under Secretary, it was not his object immediately to bring before the house for discussion and division the whole question of the complaints of the New Zealand Company against the Colonial Office, and their demand for reparation and redress, but to confine himself to the case of Lord Stanj ' c Company, however, were not to be dragged into the discussion when and in what way that honourable gentleman might please (hear, hear.) What he (Mr. Aglionby) had said m the late debate had been correctly stated by the right honourable baronet (Sir R. Peel,) and he used advisedly the expressions referred to not then believing the debate would take the somewhat angry turn it afterwards did, but alluding to the probability of the subject being again brought forward as a dernier ressort. For weeks past a petition had been framing with a view to bring before the house the whole case ot the New Zealand Company, but it required great consideration as to the best way of shaping the application to the justice of the house and the Government; it had been modelled and remodelled to make it as perfect as possible, and there was some doubt whether it would be ready to be presented before Easter. Until then, it would be hopelees to suppose that honourable members would make themselves acquainted with the facts, by mastering the whole of the large blue-book on the table. He feared, if they were dragged prematurely into the subject, the strong pnma facia feeling, which it was right and natural should exist in favour of any department of the Government, would not be met by any clear knowledge of facts, showing how the Company had been thwarted in its efforts by the Colonial Office. He did believe that if the right honourable baronet (Sir r' Peel) saw all the circumstances of the case, and the justice of the claims of the Company, with the injuries they had sustained in disappointed expectations then an ultimate appeal to the house; as far as the Company was concerned, might be dispensed with; and it was under this impression lie (Mr. Aglionby) spoke as he did. hie had not the slightest objection to state what his charge was. In the late debate there was a contention between the honourable gentleman ur e S nde r Secret ary for the Colonies (Mr. G W. Hope) and the honourable member for Liskeard (Mr. C. Buller,) on the subject of striking out the word "agreement" and inserting he words 'instructions." He (Mr. Aglionbv) had felt an objection to the words " instructions "

in the plural, not knowing how it might be evaded, or what it might include. For the facts were these :—After much negotiation with the Colonial Office, a very angry and hostile letter, which was written on the part of the New Zealand Company, exposing what they called the misconduct of the Colonial Office, was agreed to be withdrawn. After many discussions on terms, Lord Stanley stated that he could not offer his terms; he could not condescend to originate a proposal; but that the Company had better make their own proposal, sending it first in draft (and not officially) to his lordship, that he might point out any particulars to which he might point out any particulars to which he should not be able to assent. This was done, an alterations were made, and the draft was settled by the Colonial Office, though he (Mr. Aglionby) did not know whether by Lord Stanley himself. The Company had this agreement copied and sent in exactly as they had received it, and Lord Stanley promised to send out instructions to Governor Fitzroy, founded on that document. Its terms were many times discussed with that gentleman; he (Mr. Aglionby) met Captain Fitzroy at the Colonial Office, in the presence of Lord Stanley, and with others of the New Zealand Company's Directors. He (Mr. Aglionby) never was informed during the whole of these discussions that any other letter had passed upon the subject of that agreement (as he would call it) than .the letter of the honourable gentleman (Mr. Hope) of the 12th of May, 1843, printed in the report, though every item had been carefully considered and discussed between the Company and Lord Stanley. Would it be believed that, during all these meetings, Lord Staniey had in his possession a letter from Captain Fitzroy, expressing doubts as to the construction of the letter of the 12th of May, 1843, and had written to the captain ? |

Sir R. Peel though the honourable and learned member might state what his charge was, without reasoning upon it [hear, hear]. Mr. Aglionby agreed, and would avoid doing so. The letter of Captain Fitzroy never was made known to the Company, nor the answer of Lord Stanley, giving his construction of the document referred to. He (Mr. Aglionby) met Captain Fitzroy from time to time for weeks, saw him on board ship, took leave of him with the best wishes for his prosperity; but never, during all that time, was this correspondence communicated. It was not disclosed until December, six months after he had sailed. How these letters could have been kept secret by Captain Fitzroy, he (Mr. Aglionby) did not understand. When at last produced, there was an erasure at the top, and the word "confidential" appeared to have been upon it. The charge then, was this—that in such a negotiation good faith required that all which passed on the subject of discussion should be made known to the parties concerned [hear, hear]. The honour able gentleman the Under-Secretary (Mr. Hope) had argued, that Lord Stanley's second letter, which was thus concealed, was not inconsistent with the letter which was disclosed; he (Mr. Aglionby would venture to say, he should show to every thinking man on Tuesday lhat it was; but, be it so or not, there ought to have been no private letters, letters not communicated, but kept secret. Such an act of duplicity would •prevent his ever treating with Lord Stanley again upon any subject, unless some security could be given that good faith would be kept [hear, hear]. Mr. Hume thought the personal charge against Lord Stanley should be separated from the general charge against the department. Many might think, with himself, that the Colonial Department was not in the power of any single human b.-ing to conduct; that was a very distinct subject from the personal charge of misconduct against the noble lord. Nothing could be more unpleasant to any one than to have such a charge hanging over his head; and therefore it would be better for the Government to take one of their own days—an order-day. Sir R Peel said that a regard to the public business rendered that impossible; it was essential that progress should be made before baster in the financial measures before the house.

Lord J. Russel : I entirely agree with the honourable member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) in this—that whatever be the day selected, we should endeavour to separate any personal charge which there may be against the noble lord irom another question—the question of the government of New Zealand [hear, hearl. I cannot wonder that the noble lord should wish that the charge made against him of breach of taith with respect to an engagement of any kind should be cleared, and every explanation given which may have to be offered on his part. As to the result of that debate, there is no doubt, as the honourable member for Oxford (Sir R Inghs) has said, that if it comes to a division in this house there will be a large majority in favour of the noble lord; but there is another question, and a most important one, upon which 1 hope the house will not look as merely conhned to the character or honour or immediate interests of the Administration-it is the question of the government of this important colony. I believe that New Zealand, if its resources a?e properly cultivated and if it is rightly governed is destined te have a great influence on that part Innm v ra n * bel i eve *?' the 18,000 or 20,000 Englishmen who are there are destined m all probability to be the progenitors of the fwT S f VW of that hemisphere [hear hear]. But if this question is of great importance, it is fit that we should discuss it if possible, separately from all personal questions. f "l y va ?' ! ™ally have not formed an opinion, whether.the New Zealand Company are righ in bringing the charge against Lord Stanley, or whether the noble lord is right in saying that ffi B ,™ foundation whatever for the charge : but of this I feel very well convinced, that the one used by the Colonial Office i n writing to 7 P i W r Zealand . Com W and by the New Zealand Company in writing to the noble lord, is far too angry and controversial for a correspondence between a department of the Government and a public company [hear, hearl. Whatever question there may be, therefore be£d en if tl s2 ew z , ealand c . om P an y and *Me ord, if that controversy is to be continued in he same sp.nt in this house in which the letters have been written which are published, that ought to be made a separate discussion; and I

hope that at some other time we may come in the calmest manner to the consideration of th instructions which have been framed for thp guidance of Governor Fitzroy, and to discuss ing whether those instructions were judicious" and whether the conduct of that Governor \l such as is likely to promote harmony, nnd tend to the welfare of the colony. Without wishim) to pronounce any opinion as to the propriety of bringing on the personal question, I do wish to put in this word on the part of the public [hear hear], that the question maybe kept separate' and that the house may endeavour to rescue the important colony of New Zealand from the diatress and misfortune in which, it is at present involved [cheers]. If it should appear in the course of the discussion that any proceedings of mine shall be liable to any part of the blarno I am ready to bear that blame [hear, hear]'* only let us, if uossible, lay down some rule for the future by which that colony may have hope of prosperity [cheers], * Mr. G. W. Hope, after referring to the state of the paper for Tuesday, stated that if he found it impossible to bring on the motion on that day, he would take Thursday.