Well, then, looking at all that Lord Mayo did, and at the grants which had been made to his predecessors, the sole doubt was whether the grant which had been now made went far enough. They had happily but one parallel case in this country-that of Mr. Perceval. The grants made to his family from the Imperial Treasury were £2,000 a-year to the widow, £1,000 a-year to the eldest son-afterwards exchanged for a valuable appointment-and £50,000 to the other children. Compare this with the present grant of £1,000 a-year. For his own part, he could wish that there were added £1,000 a-year to the eldest son of Lord Mayo-that it might thus be shown that England had at least an equal sense of his services with India.

except that which it involved-the sacri- | can mitigate the sorrows of Lady Mayo, this will fice of his own life. Enough, perhaps, not be wanting." had been said to show that, looking at precedents only, the grants made to Lord Mayo's family in reward of his services were, in the first instance, wholly inadequate, and must have been so regarded by the people of India. It was matter of rejoicing, therefore, that Her Majesty's Government had consented to supplement those grants. But he owned he wished they had gone a little further. There were peculiar reasons why the Government should mark, in an emphatic way, their sense of the value of Lord Mayo's career. The great rewards which were given to such men as Lord Wellesley and Lord Hardinge were given for dethroning Native Princes and for warlike triumphs. The triumphs of Lord Mayo were preeminently those of peace, and were therefore, in his humble opinion, far more important. His foreign policy was such as to allay the apprehensions of the nations bordering on our frontier, and to change them from enemies into allies. His internal policy was a complete assurance to the Princes of India that the Proclamation of 1858 would be carried out, so that they were henceforth safe. As regarded finance, Lord Mayo converted a deficit of millions into a surplus, and he laid the foundations of many most valuable reforms. But that which, above all things, distinguished his government was the prodigious activity he showed in the discharge of his duties, and the manner in which he made British rule popular in India. In the three years of his rule he was said to have traversed 20,000 miles, and he certainly learnt more of India in that brief period than most Indian officials had in a long life. As to his popularity, he would content himself with citing one authority. It was that of a well-known writer of the Anglo-Indian Press. He said

"With respect to Lord Mayo personally, it is not easy to say how deeply he will be mourned. Of a noble, dignified, and kingly presence, he became his high office in all that pertained to the externals of Royalty. In social life he was good nature itself. Pride, other than proper pride, was not in him. Free, frank, and courteous to all, without offence to any, he could not but be popu lar. Hospitable, generous, ready to encourage sport or work, a willing patron of all that the people could enjoy, he will be missed and mourned. Unlike some of his predecessors in the high office, no breath of scandal was ever breathed against him or his Court, and so far as general sympathy

MR. T. E. SMITH said, that as one of the few Members of the House of Commons who had been in India during Lord Mayo's Administration, and as the last Member of the House who had seen him alive, he wished to bear testimony to the fact that in India there was at the

time but one opinion as to the manner in which Lord Mayo had devoted himself to the service of his country. In India, as in England, it was possible to differ on political subjects; but whether men agreed with him or differed from him, all alike bore testimony that there never had been a Governor General of India who more unceasingly and unselfishly devoted himself to promote what he believed to be the good of that country than did Lord Mayo. Whether they looked at his policy towards the natives, the way in which he conciliated and made friends of the Princes of the country-among whom he was popular in a degree that no Viceroy had ever been before-whether they looked at the way in which he promoted the material development of the country or husbanded its resources, there could be but one feeling as to the spirit animating his government of India. He would not follow the hon. Member opposite into a criticism of whether the pension proposed was sufficient or not, because, after all, the real question was not as to the amount voted, but as to the appreciation which it expressed and the testimony which it bore to the value of the services rendered by Lord Mayo. The finances of India were now in a very

different state, and were administered on | most arduous offices on behalf of his widely different principles, from what country in every climate of the globe. they were in the days which had been He ought to have known that the penreferred to. He felt sure, however, that sion voted by this House to the widow both in this country and throughout the of Lord Elgin was not voted for Indian length and breadth of India it would be services at all. It was a contribution matter of satisfaction to Europeans, as made in respect of other than Indian well as natives, that Her Majesty's Go- services to the aggregate pension, the vernment had thought it right to supple- Indian portion of which was granted by ment, even though it might be tardily, the Indian Government. And, therethe somewhat meagre provision made fore, it would be absurd to make a comfor Lady Mayo. parison between that pension, not given for Indian services, and the one which is given now; and it would have been great affectation on my part if I had done anything more than rely on the very simple statement, as I conceived it to be, which Her Majesty's Government made of their position in reference to this case. We did not find, at the time we examined the case, any precedent for granting from British sources a pension to the widow of a Governor General for Indian services. We could find no such precedent-for Lord Elgin's case was no precedent and we did not think, on the whole, it lay within our discretion properly to ask Parliament to make one. But the extraordinary circumstances of Lord Mayo's death, combined with the admirable manner in which he had discharged his duty, made an appeal to the feelings of Parliament and the public which we felt would justify us in paying a willing deference to those feelings. We never took the credit of being the originators of the proposition; but we did not think it our duty to offer it an obstinate resistance. On the contrary, we were as willing as the rules of the public service could enable us to be to show some alacrity in coming forward to meet the public desire. The hon. Gentleman probably did not pay attention to the words of the Message from the Throne; he did not consider them

MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, I do not regret that the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Eastwick), or that an hon. Member on this side of the House, should have taken the opportunity of reminding Parliament and the country of the merits and services of the late Lord Mayo. But I regret, and it is quite without reason, that the hon. Gentleman should have thought fit to give a controversial and reproachful turn to the Vote in acknowledgment of those distinguished services. The hon. Gentleman has forgotten that not three months or four months after receiving the tidings of Lord Mayo's death, but immediately afterwards, my noble Friend in the other House, and I myself in this House, endeavoured to express, as appropriately and emphatically as we could, what we thought of those services. I confess it appears to me that it would have been in singularly bad taste if we had reserved till this time our opinion upon those services, and had then come down with a laboured eulogium upon Lord Mayo. The hon. Member complains of me for not referring to precedents, and he himself has gone through precedents totally irrelevant, and having no connection with this case-gifts given by the East India Company from their Indian Revenues, and not, as this is, proceedings in which Parliament is called on to take a part. He has referred, indeed, to one prece-worthy of his notice. Yet he must have dent which approaches, in some degree, to a parallel case, but he has completely misapprehended and misunderstood it. The hon. Gentleman has made up his mind that Lord Elgin's going to China had no connection with his death. The hon. Gentleman made an announcement on that head, which, to my mind, is not as certain as the hon. Gentleman seems to consider it. But the hon. Gentleman must have known that for 20 or 30 years before that period Lord Elgin had discharged with the highest honours the Mr. T. E. Smith

known that those words have been advised by Her Majesty's Government, and that they contained a most distinct reference to the remarkable services and lamentable end of Lord Mayo. The peculiarity of this pension is to be found not in the amount, but in the fact that it is given to all. It is on account of the strong public feeling and the particular circumstances of this case that Parliament has thought fit-and that the Government meeting the wishes of Parliament have thought fit-to go out of their

way to the extent of creating a precedent | for a Vote of Parliament to carry with it where no precedent existed to meet this the sentiments that inspire it, this Vote very peculiar case. The hon. Gentleman does express our feelings; but, of course, ought also to have recollected, before he the value of the Vote depends much entered upon his criticism, that this was more upon the manner and grace of the a mere completion-a mere postscript to gift than upon the actual amount. Those arrangements substantially complete. who know Lord Mayo's work in India, Everything had been said which could and the spirit with which he set about it, be said; and, as we thought, the Indian will, I am sure, be anxious that in whatGovernment had taken on itself the re- ever we do for his family we shall act in sponsibility which had always lain upon the spirit which distinguished him-not it before. It had dealt with the ques- in a grudging or eye-serving spirit, but tion of the provision to be made for Lady by asking what can be done and doing Mayo; and it was only after careful con- it. We who know something of his sideration of the feeling that existed in worth, know that he went out to India this country that we made the proposal under circumstances of very peculiar diffiwhich we have laid upon the Table, and culty. He succeeded a Governor General I must say that I do not feel that we are who above all for many years had filled open to the reproaches of the hon. Gen- the office, and was intimately acquainted tleman. The hon. Gentleman raises the with all the circumstances of the country question of amount. I believe my hon. which he was administering. Friend who spoke last was quite right Mayo went out without that advantage, in saying that the value of the pension and he determined from the first to make is not to be estimated from its amount. up for the disadvantage by his own perIt is not the business of Parliament to sonal activity. He resolved to see everyprovide for the widows of Governors thing for himself, and it was by working General. That being so, it appears to in that spirit that he made himself so me, I must confess, that what has been popular in India, and also, unfortunately, done has been done in due order and in it was by working in that spirit that he a becoming manner. And I feel bound brought upon himself the untimely end to repel the taunts of the hon. Gentle- that overtook him. I trust, therefore, man, although, at the same time, I am that nothing will be done to mar the extremely glad that he has taken the grace of the Vote which we are about to opportunity, from his own knowledge, to pass, and which will, I am sure, receive revive again in the mind of Parliament the approval of the country. a remembrance of the services and the sad fate of the late Lord Mayo.

SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE: I speak what I am sure must be the feeling of every friend of Lady Mayo and of every member of the late Lord Mayo's family, when I say that I honestly trust the effect and grace of this Vote may not be marred by any controversial turn that may have been given to the question. The right hon. Gentleman has fairly said, and I myself should desire to put this Vote-not as one proposed by the Government, by any particular party in this House, or even by the House itself, but as the Vote of the English people. It is no use canvassing precedents, for the case is one to which precedent does not apply. It is no use canvassing whether the Vote in itself is inadequate—any sum would be inadequate to express our sense of the loss we have sustained, and still more of the loss sustained by Lord Mayo's family and friends. Nevertheless, to such an extent as it is possible

Lord

MR. EASTWICK wished the Committee to believe that it was the furthest thing from his mind in what he had said to reproach the right hon. Gentleman at the head of Her Majesty's Government, or to disturb the unanimity with which this grant was about to be made. He accepted most complacently the censure which had been passed upon him, because it had brought forward an expression of Lord Mayo's merits, which he thought ought to have been made before.

not before Parliament, nor the Votes for the money that would be required for their erection. It was also said that the line would not be consistent with Whitehall Gardens, which would have to be pulled down; but it could not be done this autumn, it having a lease of 30 or 40 years more to run, and therefore it was that he urged that they need not be called on on the 22nd July to decide this question. The Chancellor of the Exchequer in like manner had ridiculed the idea that Northumberland House had anything to do with the question, but everybody knew that Northumberland House was the key to the whole position, and that the Duke of Northumberland had a veto on the question-if, however, he complied with the wishes of the Metropolitan Board of Works, the aspects of the question would be entirely changed. Since negotiations were now going on between the Duke and the Board, he felt sure that if this Bill were withdrawn the points at issue would be amicably settled during the Recess without the time of the House being wasted. He would conclude by moving, as an Amendment, that at this period of the Session it was not expedient to proceed further with the measure.

Government had that day thrown overboard the most important remaining Bill of the Session-the Corrupt Practices Bill-because they had not time to discuss it. That the Bill would require protracted discussion was proved by the fact that there were no less than five different parties at issue on this pointfirst, the Committee of last Session; then the Committee of this Session, who disagreed with that of last; thirdly, the Government, who differed from both; fourthly, the hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson), who differed from all three; and, fifthly, the Metropolitan Board of Works, who were not satisfied with the arrangement proposed; so that the House was to take on itself, on the 22nd of July, to arbitrate between all these parties. The House was, therefore, asked to enter upon a discussion as complicated as the Geneva Arbitration, and, supposing they got through the Committee on the Bill, they would be met again with those numerous means of resistance which at this period of the Session were all-powerful in the hands of a defeated party. Was it worth while, therefore, to waste these precious moments of the Session by throwing overboard the Committee of Supply, and spending time that might be devoted to the Licensing Bill, in settling a squabble which ought to be determined by the Treasury and the Metropolitan Board of Works by private arrangement? The question was not so simple as the right hon. Gentleman seemed to think, because its discussion would involve, among other things, a consideration of the way in which the public lands of the country-instead thereof. were and ought to be administered. Then there was further the aesthetic question of taste as to which was the best architectural line to be adopted-a question which he never entered upon, MR. GLADSTONE said, this was a because he did not understand it. He, practical rather than a controversial however, had never considered this as a question, which had been long discussed, question of taste, and had always con- but was now ripe for settlement; for sidered it as a question of how much instance, the hon. Member for Westopen space could be secured for the in-minster had placed on the Notice Paper habitants of London. There could be no harm in postponing the Bill until next Session. Three precious weeks at the opening of the present Session had been occupied by the Parks Bill; let this Bill be put down for consideration at the opening of next Session. The plans for the public buildings intended to be built upon this space of ground were

Amendment proposed,

To leave out from the word "That" to the

end of the Question, in order to add the words having regard to the advanced period of the Session and the pressure of more important

public business in which the House is already engaged, it is not expedient to proceed further with the consideration of this Bill,”—(Mr. Vernon Harcourt,)

Question proposed, "That the words. proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."

views of the question adverse to those entertained by the hon. and learned Member for Oxford, and his view was shared in by the Government, and they were willing to accept it. Several of the five parties to whom the hon. and learned Member had referred had no existence. The Government had clearly stated to what extent it deferred to the