256 
tion of asystem of internal policy on 
which such high and deserved com- 
mendation was on this occasion be- 
stowed. 
When the new ministers came in- 
to-office, the first object that =called 
their attention, was the necessity 
of making some immediate provision 
for the supreme government of In- 
dia, and as the circumstances of that 
country would not bear delay, they 
determined till some permanent ar- 
rangement should be devised on re- 
commending to the court of direc- 
tors the continuance of sir G. Bar- 
low in his present situation, with the 
necessary powers for bringing to a 
conclusion the treaties with the na- 
tive princes, which he was then ne- 
gotiating. With this recommen- 
dation the court of directors readily 
and cheerfully complied. 
Whatever consequences were af- 
terwards attempted to be drawn from 
this nomination, aJl the parties con. 
cerned in the transaction, under- 
stood when it took place, that the 
appointment was merely a tempo- 
rary one, and liable to be changed.* 
Yet when some time afterwards,t 
the wishes of his majesty’s govern™ 
ment were conveyed to the court of 
directors, in the usual manner, 
through the board of controul, that 
sir George Barlow might be recalled, 
and lord Lauderdale sent to India, 
in his place, the directors shewed 
the greatest repugnance both to the 
yecal of the one and to the nomina- 
tion of the other, and after much 
discussion. and correspondence, the 
question being put by their chairman 
on the recal of sir G. Barlow, it 
was carried in the negative by a great 
~ 
ANNUAL REGISTER, 1806. 
majority.t To what. causes we 
should attribute this, the first op- 
position ever made by a court of 
directors to the recommendation of 
a governor general by his majesty’s 
ministers, we are ata loss to deter- 
mine. The honourable court may 
have considered lord Lauderdale as 
a personal and political friend of 
Mr. Fox, and embraced this oppor- 
tunity of shewing, that the events of 
1784 were not yet effaced from their 
memory. They may have thought 
that the commencement of a new 
and as many persons supposed, a 
disjointed administration, was a fa- 
vourable opportunity for advancing 
pretensions, which under the ma- 
nagement of lords Melville and 
Castlereagh, they had never ventur. 
ed to bring forward. They may 
have been influenced by persons 
hostilely disposed towards the new 
administration, and desirous to im. 
pede and embarrass it by so unexpect~ 
ed an opposition. But, whatever 
were their motives, his majesty’s 
ministers, who had not recommend- 
ed the recal of sir G. Barlow without 
just grounds, in their opinion, for 
that recommendation, felt themselves 
compelled, when they found the 
directors as obstinate as they were 
refractory, to advise his majesty to 
exercise the power vested in him by 
law§, of reealling sir G. Barlow by 
a warrant under his sign manual 
This exertion of authority was vio- 
Iently impugned in the house of 
lords by lord Melville,|} who con- 
tended, that, though the words of 
Mr. Pitt’s ludia bill authorized minis- 
ters in what they had done, the spi- 
ritand meaning of the act were con- 
* Lord Melville’s speech, July 8th, Cobbett's debates, vol. 6. p. 953. 
+ May 12th. ; 
|} July Sth. 
May 20th, 
9 
me 
§ 24 Geo. 3. sess. 2. cap. 25. § 
trary 
