cussion on the address, Mr. Sharman Crawford
had threatened to move the stoppage of supplies. In accordance with this
threat, on the 6th of February, after enumerating the grievances which
the house had refused to inquire into, such as class legislations
consisting of various commercial monopolies, he moved his resolution.
After a few words in favour of the motion by Mr. Hume, and against it by
Colonel Sibthorp and Mr. Trelawny, it was negatived by a majority of one
hundred and thirty against twenty-two.

AFFAIRS OF INDIA.

During this session the policy of government in relation to the affairs
of India became the subject of discussion on several occasions. On the
12th of February motions were brought forward in both houses for the
thanks of parliament to Sir Charles Napier and the army employed in the
operations of Scinde, which motions were agreed to unanimously. Soon
after this an event occurred which produced a startling effect. On the
21st of April Sir Robert Peel, in answer to a question put to him by
Mr. T. B. Macaulay, said, "I beg to state that, on Wednesday last,
her Majesty's government received a communication from the court of
directors, that they had exercised the power which the law gives them,
to recall at their will and pleasure the governor-general of India."
This announcement soon spread abroad; and in the house of lords, on the
29th of April, Lord Colchester addressed to the Duke of Wellington these
questions:--"Whether the communication from the court of directors to
government alleged any reason for the recall of the governor-general?
If so, whether there was any objection to state such reason? and whether
the reasons were considered satisfactory by government?" In reply, the
noble duke stated that reasons had been given for the recall of the
governor-general, but that those reasons had not been concurred in
by her majesty's government; nay, more, they remonstrated against
the measure. The noble duke, in fact, roundly condemned the court
of directors for taking such a step, pronouncing it to be the most
indiscreet exercise of power he had ever known. Several discussions
subsequently took place in both houses of parliament on the recall
of Lord Ellenborough; and motions were moved for copies of the
correspondence between the court of directors and her majesty's
government relative to this subject; but these motions were negatived,
and the discussions led to no practical result. They were, in