circumstances. I would therefore most respectfully, but most earuestly, impress on the minds of those whom I address, the importance of giving to the institution an entire, and a cordial, and a consistent support. If it is to be looked on with dislike and jealousy; if its slightest faults, real or supposed, are to be magnified into crying and irremediable abuses; if the clamour raised against it by interest and préjudice are to be countenanced by respectable members of this court; if the disturbances which have originated in its want of a firm support from power and opinion, are to be made the very ground of weakening the support which it actually possesses if the question is familiarly to be raised, whether the establishment shall be continued or destroyed: it is certainly impossible to answer for the event, or to say how soon the evils imputed to it may be brought to pass by the very imputation. But if a different course is pursued; if we cherish the institution in the real spirit of kindness; if we promote its interests with a real unity of effort: I will venture to predict-I could almost stake my existence upon the truth of the prediction that it will fulfil our most sanguine hopes. What, therefore I would implore both the directors and the proprietors to remember is this, that if such an establishment is' worth supporting at all, it is worth supporting with all our hearts, and at all hazards. I well know that its operation may occasionally be attended with inconvenience to individuals. I am aware that parental hopes may occasionally be disappointed, and the difficulties of deserving families be increased; I am sensible that the value of Indian patronage, in the vulgar mode of estimating that value, has suffered some dimination. But I have i estimated the sentiments and the principles of the members of this court, if, when intérésts of so mighty a nature are involved, they allow considerations like these to weigh even a feather in the scale. I have ill judged them, if they are not feelingly alive to all those momentous questions which the present enquiry involves: Whether such an institution as this is not necessary for the due formation of the functionaries to whose administration the resources and the happiness of one of the largest empires in the world are to be entrusted-whether, if it be thus necessary, the collective utility does not a million times outweigh the individual inconvenience:whether, even as to itself, that individual inconvenience is worth thought, which still leaves the Indian civil service, for the certainty, the celerity, and the magnitude of its returns, unrivalled among ordinary professions :--whether it is not highly just and reasonable that persons presented with such noble apa pointments for theirfamilies, should be at

a

the expense of qualifying those who are to fill them :--whether, in the view of all just, all exalted feeling, the value of those” appointments is not raised by a system which consecrates them to the acceptance of the worthy-by a system which renders them at once the reward and the opportu2 nity of talent and of virtue-by a system under which they become less accessible only by becoming more exalted—by a syst tem which compensates to them on the one hand all that it takes on the other and what it subtracts in interest, overpays in honor-these, these, I say, are the great questions which the subject suggests'; and ill indeed have I estimated the court of proprietors, and deeply indeed will they disappoiut my expectations, if I do not find them keenly alive to those important enquiries, in all their force and comprehensiveness.(Hear! hear !')

It is impossible, sir, to reflect on the topics I have touched, without turning our eyes on the situation which the Com pany now occupy, relatively to the nation' -without turning our thoughts on the memorable contest in which we were, no long time ago, engaged-the contest which terminated in the grant of our présent charter. I had, on that important occa sion, the honor, in common with many worthier persons, of fighting in your ranks -a feeble, I confess, but, I am sure, a faithful assistant; and I think I may say, that, on that field, though we lost some thing of power, we lost nothing of credit. With some abatement, we might adopt the language of the poet

the strife

"Was not inglorious, though th' event "was dire."

Our arms, indeed, were somewhat unfortunate, but our scutcheons were not distronored.-Why is it, sir, that I now refer to that memorable battle ?-Because throughout the whole of it we professedly stood before parliament and before the nation, on this specific ground—that' we desired the privileges we demandéd, not on account of the benefits they would produce to us, but on account of the benefits they would enable us to bestow on others;

On the principle that the great body of India proprietors were anxious; not for their dividend of the Company's stock, but for their contingent of the Company's power, prosperity, and fame :-On the principle, that we regarded our Indian po sessions, not as a mine from whence we were to draw the treasures of the East, but as a field on which we were to diffuse the nobler treasures of western light and knowledge and refinement ;-uot as scene of exertion for chartered rapacity, or for avarice sheltering itself under the name of privilege, but as a theatre on which high qualities were to be displayed, on which great talents were to be exer

cised and extended, on which all the charities and amenities of domestic life were to be developed and established.-This was the ground, sir, which the Company then took in the view of the legislature and the nation. On this you gained, what you did gain, of the national good-will and confidence. And how, I ask, has that confidence been justified? How have the promises you held out been fulfilled? I hear charges brought against you, of profusion and extravagance.-Of profusion and extravagance for what purpose? For the purpose of erecting institutions dedicated to science and literature and moral improvement :-for the purpose of laying restraints on Indian patronage :-for the purpose of erecting barriers against the oppression and the misgovernment of the people of India.-The prodigality of privation!-the indulgence of self-denial !the luxury of doing good!-a profusion which, I am sure, will flow in streams of happiness over your Indian subjects, and return in showers of benedictions and blessings on yourselves. This is, indeed, a glorious accusation ;-your charge is your triumph, and long may you be guilty! Wherever else you are frugal, here be lavish ;-wherever else you are penurious, here be prodigal; assured that posterity will find your highest and dearest fame in the imputation which describes you as being seduced, not by the pride of imperial power, or the glare of imperial wealth, but by the dignity of imperial wisdom, and the austerity of imperial vir

tue!

On these principles it is, sir, that I would rest the fate of the present question ; nor can I suffer myself to doubt the result. In the observations I have offered, it has been my earnest and my laborious endeavour to avoid the unnecessary introduction of topics of irritation, in the unfeigned wish that all who concur in the general views I have taken, may meet as far as possible on a basis of union. I have no interest, personal or otherwise, in, the subject; on the contrary, the expenditure of time and attention which it has cost me, has, from particular circumstances, been productive to me of a degree of inconvenience quite unutterable. But I could not sit silent when a cause, of which I so well knew the merits, was so committed, and I should almost have been ready to tear a day out of my life, rather than not have come down here to raise a humble but a sincere voice in favour of what I firmly, deliberately, and in my inmost heart believe to be the interests of truth and justice; and at the same time to be the best, because the noblest, the loftiest, most valuable, most durable, interests of that respectable and respected body, whom I have now only to thank for the honor of their patient hearing. (Hear! hear!) Asiatic Journ.-No. 18.

Mr. Impey said he had purposely ábstained from offering himself to the attention of the court until after his learned friend who had just sat down, had spoken: for after all the calumnies which seemed to have been industriously disseminated against the college, (he did not speak about what passed in this court, but in public) he thought it but right that the college should be heard in its own defence. The court would agree with him, he had no doubt, that the college had shown no small degree of judgment in the choice of their advocate; and would give him thanks for having allowed them to listen with untired and uninterrupted attention to the speech of his honorable and learned friend, which, he maintained, for eloquence, for argument, and for information, had not been exceeded by any speech delivered in modern times in this or in any other place.

He was glad he took the resolution of abstaining from offering himself to the court until that speech had been delivered, for he was persuaded that the time had now arrived that the court must themselves be satisfied of this discussion being so unfounded in argument, so unfounded in fact, and so wholly unreasonable, that it ought to be put an end to; and for that purpose it was his intention to propose to put an end to it, by moving the previous question.

The court had often occasion to complain of the gross ignorance of the public respecting Indian affairs, and the facility which was thereby given to the dissemination of calumny, and to the excitement of prejudice against the Company. The same complaint the college had great cause to make of the ignorance of the public respecting the principles, the history, and all the facts connected with that institution. The same ignorance gave rise to the same species of calumuies, and he apprehended that the same species of prejudice had been excited against the college. The public clamour had been industriously raised the facts respecting the college had been mistaken-its history had been falsified. (Hear! hear! hear!) He repeated, its history had been falsified.(Hear! hear! from the Oppositionists.) Its history had been falsified, and this debate would give an opportunity to the college to deny the facts that had been stated against it, and to remove the impressions which had been made, adverse to its character.

In treating of this subject, he should with very great unwillingness touch upon any points that had been so ably argued by his honorable and learned friend; but he could not wholly avoid saying something upon so important a question, upon the general principles which had been stated in this court respecting the college, VOL. III. 4 I

The first and main point for consideration seemed to be the principle and object of the institution. Upon that point he could hardly conceive that his honorable and learned friend who began the debate, differed much with those who advocated the interests of the college; for although it might be inferred from the deserved enlogium which had been passed on the talents displayed by many eminent servants of the Company, by that honorable gentleman before the college existed, that it was uunecessary, the object of it having been already sufficiently attained; yet that could not possibly have been his meaning, as he had bestowed so much laboured eulogium upon the wisdom of Lord Wellesley, who had enforced upon the Company the absolute necessity of an appropriate education of the Company's servants. Now if the argument of Lord Wellesley on that head could be successfully impugned, nothing could be more foolish than the conduct of Lord Wellesley in establishing the college at Calcutta. But it only required a statement of the facts, fully to confirm Lord Wellesley's argument. The Company had under their dominion about sixty millions of people, essentially different from the people of this country, and from each other in religion, laws, language, institutions, and, in short, different in every circumstance by which people of different nations were distinguished. In the original state of the Company's officers it was their policy, in matters of government, to entrust the distribution of justice, and the collection of the revenue to Hindus and Muhammadans, and other natives of the country. But the policy of the Company had since been totally changed-whether wisely or not, nothing but experience could determine nothing but history could pronounce. But at this time the whole system of Indian government was in the hands of the Company's European subjects. They were distributed all over the country administering justice in the minutest details, and collecting the tributes which the Company had imposed on their subjects. How was it possible that such high functions could be performed, not only without a general knowledge of the principles of law and finance, but even without a particular and minute acquaintance with the laws, the language, and the religion of the people over whom such servants were placed? It seemed to be utterly impossible to answer that question, except in one way; for although the genius of Lord Clive and Mr. Hastings might enable them to conquer and organise the extensive territories in possession of the Company without these advantages, yet every man would concur with Lord Wellesley, that it was impossible, without some appropriate education, that the servants of the Company

could extend over that vast country in de-` tail the blessings of a wise and good government. The next question (and certainly a great one it was in the beginning), was, whether it were more advantageous to the Company that the education of their servants, from the age of sixteen to nineteen, should be completed in this country or in India? Upon this subject, even his hon. and learned friend had given a very satisfactory answer; for although he had panegyrized the plau of Lord We lesley in the highest possible strain, and had held that nobleman up as a paragon of wisdom; yet he had given such conclusive reasons in favour of the establishment in this country, that it was only necessary to repeat his own observations to maintain the proposition in favour of the English college. The absurdity of exporting young men to India for the purpose of being educated in European literature, and exporting European professors to educate them at Calcutta, appeared at first sight so manifest, as clearly to strike the dinimest sight. It might be asked, then, how could Lord Wellesley, with his acknowledged abilities, have fallen into so great an absurdity? The answer was, that the sphere of Lord Wellesley's power did not extend beyond India. He could not erect a college in England, but he could in Calcutta. He could establish a college there, however incongruous his plan might be in some of its parts, he was forced to accommodate himself to his circumstances. He merely established the college there, because he could not establish it here.

But the main point upon which his hon. and learned friend seemed to insist, was that this establishment should have been a school and not a college. In the first place, what said the Marquis Wellesley upon this proposition? (for he was a model of wisdom upon this subject!) His plan clearly was for a college, and not a school ; and according to his notions of a colleg, an institution of that kind was established at Calcutta. Was it not reasonable, that if his college was the model for the college here, as asserted, the name as well as the thing shou'd be retained. But when the court applied its mind to this part of the question, it would find that this was little more than a dispute about words. The terms school or college were of a doubtful and ambiguous nature. They were sometimes applied indiscrimi→ nately, and sometimes substituted one for the other. The original meaning of the word school was a place where grown persons were instructed, and in our universities the places where the young men performed their exercises, were called, schools. And it was well know to every body that the seminaries at Westminster, Eton, and Winchester, were called colleges.

J

The hon. and learned gentleman seemed to make the essential difference consist in the mode of punishment; and he seemed to recommend the use of the rod at Haileybury. (Mr. Jackson denied this.) His hon, and learned friend denied this. The hon. and learned gentleman might draw back if he chose; but he certainly did recommend it; and he (Mr. I.) appealed to the recollection of the court, whether that recommendation had not come from the hon. and learned gentleman ? His (Mr. 1.'s) recollection was the stronger, because the hon. and learned gentleman, in commenting upon that part of Mr. Malthus's pamphlet respecting the application of punishment, had not denied his recommendation that the students at Haileybury should be made to feel, but denied his recommendation of that punishment for mere stupidity. He certainly should not quarrel with his learned friend for his taste upon the subject; but the hon. and learned gentleman must know that there were persons who had deeply studied the subject of education and the nature of the human mind, who doubted very much whether the punishment of the rod was an eligible mode of inculcating even the rudiments of education; though probably he did not know that in the Charter-house school, an example cited by himself, the punishment of the rod had been quite abolished.

He could not help alluding here to an extraordinay misapplication of terms by his hon. and learned friend. His hon. and learned friend had talked of children in speaking of the students of Hertford college. Never was a term more misapplied or more calculated to lead the court into error. It was not half an hour ago that an hon. proprietor asked him (Mr. I.) this question:-"Pray, at what age do these children go to Hertford college ?" To which he replied," The earliest age is sixteen; and the age at which they are there is from sixteen to nineteen." To call these young men children was really an abuse of words, and tended to mislead the court. At that age young men were as capable of discerning right from wrong as at any period of their lives. They were amenable for all their actions to the laws of their country. They were able to enter into the most important of all contracts, although certainly under restrictions of a modern date, and peculiar to this country. The question then was not in what manner boys learning their rudiments should be treated, but how young men, from the age of sixteen to nineteen, pursuing the higher branches of studies, were to be dealt with in the college? It could hardly be supposed that young men well educated and their minds considerably ripened, could be treated like mere school-boys, and flogged like children into discipline.

Certain he was, that if any attempt was made to apply the punishment recommended by the hon. gentleman, in order to reduce them to discipline, the probability would be, that the court would hear of much more outrageous riots than had ever been known to exist in the college.

Great cries of hear! hear! had been raised when he (Mr. I.) talked of the history of the college having been falsified. His hon. and learned friend had given the court a long history of the origin of the college, and he (Mr. 1.) really thought that not only the college and the directors, but the court itself, had much to complain of the learned gentleman, when, in stating facts for which he claimed credit, as being within his own knowledge, he indulged his fancy, and gave a fabulous history instead of a real one. But he (Mr. I.) was persuaded that the court would not be content to take that history as authentic in all its circumstances. They would at least look to this side of the bar for some genuine information upon the subject before they concluded that the hon. and learned gentleman was correct in all his statements. His hon. friend, the ex-director (Mr. Grant) had corrected the hon. and learned gentleman in some most important facts. The hon. and learned gentleman had stated, that the foundation of the college was laid upon the reduction of the college in India. But that fact the hon. ex-director had contradicted most directly, by stating, that the college of Hertford was in contemplation long before the Calcutta college existed. The hon. and learned gentleman had next told the court that the original intention was to erect a school and not a college, and that the idea of a college had arisen with Dr. Henley. But here again the hon. and learned gentleman was corrected by the hon. ex-director, who positively asserted that a school never was in contemplation -never was named; and that the college did not take its rise from any suggestions of Dr. Henley. But it was not with respect to the history of this college, as given by the hon. and learned gentleman, that the court had to complain. They had also to complain that he did not even confine his misstatements to the college, but he extended them to the universities. In the first place he had to complain of his hon. and learned friend, in stating, that the average age of students at the university was twenty-five.

Mr. Jackson.-I said the average was twenty-two.

Mr. Impey. Still the hon. and learned gentleman was in error; for he, (Mr. I.) would pledge his veracity to the court upon the accuracy of every word he should state to them upon this subject. He happened to be well acquainted with both the universities, and from his knowledeg

of them he undertook to assert that the period at which young men usually went to the university was from sixteen to nineteen; some went even earlier. He took upon himself to assert it was a rare thing for a young man to remain at the university without having taken a degree before the age of twenty-one; and the average age of under graduates at the universities was between eighteen and nineteen. He himself went to the university before seventeen. The late Mr. Pitt went to the University of Cambridge at thirteen; but certainly that was a rare instance, and did not furnish the means of judging correctly upon the subject. The next erroneous statement of the hon. gentleman, was that, after dusk the students of the University of Oxford were called in, and that after dark no such thing as a student was to be seen about the town. A more erroneous statement never was made. He (Mr. I.) would venture to say that in the universities of this country no such regularity was kept up: In scarcely any of the colleges did any of the students retire before nine o'clock; in some of them not before ten, and in others not before eleven. At Cambridge he recollected that ten was the hour, but not sooner. So that if the court of proprietors should take the measure of the present college from the statements which the hon. and learned gentlemen laid before them, they would undoubtedly come to a wrong conclusion; for nothing could be more erroneous than his statements of facts. But it was still more pernicious to state in that court that the students at Haileybury were bound in honor to refuse all information to their superiors of the irregularities that might take place there. If they read our debates, they shall learn by them, that their first and highest duty was to conform to the discipline of the college, and whatever false point of honor was set up against that duty could not be binding. Their first and highest obligation was to observe a due subordination to the regulations of the institution under which they derived their education. If this obligation was lost sight of, in vain would any attempt be made to improve their morality or expand their minds by education. This obligation superseded all others and without it the college could not stand.

He (Mr. Impey), would state to the court as shortly as he could, and with the utmost candour, what he thought of Hertford college. The principle upon which it was instituted could not be doubted. When the court of directors undertook to establish this college, they undertook a very arduous task and had great difficulties to encounter. They proposed to educate young men fit for their service in every department. They proposed to qualify

them in such a manner as to enable them to meet every probable difficulty in the administration of so vast an empire as India. Perhaps, the court of directors were not the persons best qualified from their general habits, and from their constant and laborious attention to other most important duties, to carry into complete effect all the objects which they had in view. He had no difficulty in saying that the original powers given to the principal and professors of the college were perhaps much too small whilst on the other hand the power of the directors was much too large. Inder these circumstances it was not surprising that in the early proceedings of the college there was a great deal of confusion. But experience and the interference of the legislature had in a great degree corrected these evils. It would be impossible perhaps to bring this college precisely to the model exhibited by the universities. Indeed, from the nature of things the same relation could not subsist between the students in a college of this description and their instructors as in the regular universities of the country. He thought, however, that the more the Company could accomplish a resemblance between this college and the universities, the more perfect would be the institution. The Fast India Company, by the liberal stipend which they paid, had very wisely endeavoured to attract into their service en the most celebrated for their distinguished learning and abilities: and if those abilities were allowed to have a free scope, there could be no doubt entertained, that the college would at last be reduced to as perfect a model of academic discipline and learning as the nature and circumstances of the institution would permit.

There was another part of the hon. and learned gent.'s speech to which he could not allude without pain and regret. The hon. and learned gentleman had indulged himself in a vein of sarcasm against the principal and professors of the college, as members of the church of England; and in speaking of the bishop of London, as visitor, he had contemptuously called him their fellow clergyman." Surely this mode of meeting the case was not very consistent with candour or liberality. This was the first time he had ever heard that the members of that learned body were peculiarly unfit to be trusted with uncontroled power in an institution of this kind, and that they acted upon rules of morality not acknowledged by other men. If these observations had proceeded from some sour schismatic, he should not have been surprised; but coming from his hon. and learned friend who was a son and disciple of that church which he ridiculed, and whose principles of morality must have been drawn from the ministers of that church of which he was a