The Sun. — London, England, 1848-12-22 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 22, 1848, The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN.--I rise to second the Q otion. It is quite impossible for the Court of Di rectors to listen to this motion without surrendering their own proper functions. The subject is at this moment on the table of the Court of Directors ; when they have passed an opinion on it, then of course it may be taken up by the Court of Proprietors. Mr. Sergeant GAZELEB wished to know whether it was the intention of the Chairman to adjourn the Special Court only, or the special and quarterly General Court together F The CHAIRMAN replied, that the effect of his amendment, if carried, would be to postpone the quarterly General Court till the next quarterly meeting. Mr. Sergeant GAZELEE thought that was the most extraordinary proceeding he had ever heard of in his life. The CHAIRMAN maintained that it was according to custom and precedent, and when a motion for adjournment was carried it put an end to all further business. Mr. LEWIN rose to a point of order. He had sent a question to the Chairman, which the Chairman bad refused to put. Mr. Lewin was here inter rupted by Mr. FIELDER, who stated that the only question before the Court was the question of adjournment.— (Cries of " Order, order.") Mr. CLARK' said there was an anxiety on the part of several proprietors to bring forward motions of which they had given notice ; an adjournment had been moved upon the resolution of the special Court, the effect of which amendment was to get rid of all other business. Every proprietor had a right to stand up and ask the reason of such a course being pursued. The CHAIRMAN assured the Court that it was not by his wish that such a course had been taken. The Court had been made special upon a requisition of nine proprietors, and from the nature of th e resolu tion submitted, he (the Chairman) had felt it his duty to move an amendment of adjournment ; that of course, if carried, would preclude the transaction of any other business. If the Hon. Proprietor (Mr. Lewis) would withdraw his resolution, other questions might be taken into consideration. So far as he (the Chair man) was concerned, he was sorry that the matter had assumed the shape it had done. Mr. Lzwrs again rose to speak to the question of adjournment, but was called to order by Mr. SALOMONS, who objected to that Hon. Pro prietor's introducing, upon a motion of adjournment, a sort of zigzag debate. He (Air. Salomons) had the same right to bring on his motion as the Hon. Proprietor, but he had not attempted to do so after the Chairman had moved the question of adjourn ment. If they tolerated such a course the Court would become the laughing stock not alone of the country, but of the whole world. However incon venient, inconsistent, and in some instances unjust the rule regarding m,tions for adjournment might be, it would never do to allow another subject to be intro duced upon a motion for adjournment. As a pro prietor desirous of seeing order maintained in that Court, he (Mr. Sa!omons) deprecated and protested against such proceedings. Mr. LEWIN doubted the correctness of the opinion cf the Chairman. Ile wished to know whether the making any Court special was to have the effect of get ting rid ot all other bu,iness ? It appeared to him (Mr. (Lewin) to be a manceuvre to get rid of the other business. Mr. Sergeant GAZELEE suggested that perhaps the standing counsel of the Court had better be asked the question as to the legitimacy of the course proposed to be taken. The CHAIRMAN said the fault was not his. He was prepared with a perfect answer to every one of the subsequent motions in the paper. The Chair man (with great warmth) appealed to the Court whether they thought the motion of an adjournment was a " mat ceuvre ' of the Court of Directors to get rid of other business ? (Hear.) Mr. FIELDER said that the requisition of the nine proprietors had tied the hands of the directors. Mr. LEWIN could assure the meeting that the sup pressien of the other business was entirely against the wish of those who had made the Court special. Mr. CLARKE would offer a few remarks on the question of adjournment. It had been said that the bringing forward the resolution of the Hon. Proprie tor. (Mr. Lewis) interfered with the executive of the Court, who were then considering the subject. If they had perfected their arrangements, the decision would have been given, and there would not have been the slightest reason for a special Court to consider the question. If the Court of Directors had decided upon that very im portant question—important because it involved the character of their government for good faith—there was an end of the whole question, in the same way as by a motion fur adjournment ; but, with submis sion to the Chairman, he (Mx. Clarke) contended that it was not neces=ary, in order to prevent any discussion upon the main question, to have recourse to a motion for adjournment. It was not acting with much deference towards the opinion of a great many proprietors who took great interest in the Sattara question to endeavour to prevent them having a full discussion of the case. The question had long occu pied the time of the Court, he (Mr. Clarke) thought too long; but much sympathy had not been shown to the friends of the Raja, who had come there, as it were, for the last time, upon the last branch of the subject—the division of the Sattara territory. Ile hoped and trusted that the proprietors would rise and speak their sentiments upon the subject, in order that the public might know the grounds upon which that meeting had taken place. As to the word " manoeuvre," it was an improper term, and no doubt had escaped unwittingly from the Hon. Proprietor. He deplored the bringing gentlemen there upon other questions, at great per sonal inconvenience, and then not allowing the busi ness to proceed. He (Mr. Clarke) for one opposed the question of adjournment. A PROPRIETOR suggested that the difficulty might be got over by the withdrawal of Mr. Lewis's mo tion, and also of the amendment, which would allow the other business to be disposed of. Mr. LEWIS stated that he was anxious that the proprietors should be put in iossession of the views of the friends of the Raja of batters; but when the proprietors had had an opportunity of so doing he should not object to the withdrawal of the resolution. Mr. FIELDER denied the competency of the mover to withdraw his resolution, except by consent of the whole Court. The CHAIRMAN stated, that if the resolution were withdrawn he would have no objection to withdraw the amendment, and allow the business to proceed. Mr. Sergeant GAZELIR felt great surprise at what he confessed he frequently had great difficulty in ravelling out—the practice of the India House. By their Act of Parliament the proprietors were to have four different meetings in the year, but by adopting the course the Chairman had followed that day they would reduce them to three. It was also a new doe. trine to him (Mr. Sergeant Gazelee), that by fixing a special Court for the day for which previous notice had been given of the general Court—by fixing that day, in preference to all others, for the special Court might have been appointed for the yesterday, the morrow, or any other day—they could, by simply moving an amendment of adjournment, get rid of the whole business of the general Court as well as the special Court. If the directors had the power of adopting such a course as that, they would be making the proprietary body more ridiculous and absurd in their powers than they had hitherto been.—(Cheers.) He (Mr. Sergeant Gazelee) denied that they had the power of acting thus legally and p roperly. The very idea was monstrous. He was a h fr t aid that in his mode of putting th e question he mis take, and rendered himself washavermadeculous, it in tention, by the motio n for adjournm ent, e Chairman' s to bundl e o them all, general and special, out th e room toge theraamt ?—(Laughter.) For his (Mr. Sergeant Gaze lee's) own part, he wished that w standing counsel, bad been present. It was right their that he should attend these cou rts, especially when questions of such momentous importance t o their constitution, rotten as it was, were under considera tion.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. FIELDER—" Rotten constitution !" Mr. Chair man, " Rotten constitution !" Mr. Sergeant GAZELEE denied that the Chairman possessed any such power, even by their constitution, rotten as it was. The CHAIRMAN said he did not understand such expressions. The question would be determined by the proprietors. If it were the sense of the proprietors that there should be no such adjournment, but that they should proceed at once to the other business, they could do so. Mr. Sergeant GAZELEE thought that the Chairman surely should allow him to speak. For his (Mr. Ser geaat Gaztlee's) own part, he confessed he thought it not one of the least objections to the mode of pro ceeding adopted at Courts of Proprietors, that the chairman, who ought to be impartial and decide fairly between the parties, should himself be the individual to bring for ward a motion or amendment. With all due respect, therefore, he would say to Mr. Fielder, and also to the Chairman, that he believed the Chairman to be honest in his Et.3ntions, but like most other people, he had his bias, for when any man proposed a motion he was apt to b.-come enamoured of that motion, and would do his best to have it passed. He could not help feeling a bias towards his own motion. That bias was proved by the very interruption he (Mr. Sergeant Gazelee) had met with that day, which showed that the Chairman could not help feeling for his own motion, and not for that of his opponent. He (Mr. Sergeant Gazelee) again denied the power of the Chairman to adjourn the general Court; he might get rid of the fpecial Court by that means, but not the general Court. Why there was the directors' own notice staring them in the face ! Why :,was not their standing counsel present, to say that it was by his advice that course had been taken ? They were justified neither by law nor honesty in the proceeding ; nor was it treating the Court with respect. He (Mr. Sergeant Gazelee) was aware that the Chairman was conscious that he had a majority present to support him, and as lon4 as the Court was constituted as it was—so long as there was the influence of patronage to be exercised by the directors, it would always be so.—(" Oh, oh !" from Mr. Fielder.) He (Mr. Sergeant Gazelee) thought people ought to speak out upon such subjects. It was in consequence of the mealy-mouthedness of the proprietors that that Court had become what it was. From time to time they were met with the argument, "We are now considering the matter. Trust to us, and it will all be right.' Why the directors held their seats by the election of the proprietors, although it was true that election, which the Act of Parlia ment had made annual, the directors themselves had made permanent ; what right, therefore, had they to turn their powers against those by whom they were appointed ? Why were the directors to be permitted to stifle discussion in that Court ? He (Mr. Sergeant Gazelee) did not want the directors to do wrong, although they very o ft e n did so, and it woutd be a splendid exception if they did right.—(Laughter.) He knew how the thing had been managed just as well as though he had been behind the scenes. When they came to the discussion upon the Charter of that company in the House of Commons, it would be a very proper objection to its renewal to allege that when proprietors brought forward motions they were met by counter-motions from the chairman, and called to order if they ventured to call the constitu tion of the company rotten, the chairman and deputy chairman being at the time the di s p ensers o f a ll t h e patronage of India. The Honourable Proprietor who spoke second had put the Sattara question upon its proper footing; they had made a treaty, and these were the plain words of the treaty by which they were bound. He (Mr. Sergeant Gazelee) had come there unbiassed to listen to the case, unprepared to vote one way or the other. He had, when he felt it his duty, opposed the course taken by the advocates of the Raja, and was prepared to do so again when he believed them wrong; but he had been convinced by the arguments in favour of the resolution, and had it gone to a vote he would have supported it. The directors said they had the matter under consideration, and a little pressure, a little light from without, would do them good; for without that he was sure the question would never come before the Court. On one Court day they were told by the directors, " Oh, we have got the case under consider ation ;" and the next time they were told, " Oh, we have decided and settled it." The Raja's case fur nished an example of the disinclination of bodies of men, when they had deposed an individual in error, to retract the false step they had taken. The present time, with the directors, was like that when Members of Parliament were about coming before their constituents. They had riot often such oppor tunitiss. For his own part, he should like to see the directors on the hustings, in order that he might ca techise them a little.—(Laughter.) At present there was no opportunity of asking them questions. Surely, if they wished to decide righteously upon the Sat tara case, they ought to be anxious to get all the in formation they could upon the subject. It appeared hat there was at the present time an adopted heir and a collateral heir to the Sattara throne, and the whole thing certainly seemed to be a question of jus tice against power. The case lay in a nutshell ; he would say so with great respect to the Chairman, who ought to have gone deeper into the matter than himself. The present was a good and convenient time to repair their error. The question was, whether might should overcome right; for his (Mr. Sergeant Gazelee's) own part he thought the case of the Raja was right, and therefore he supported it. It was an important question for the proprietors to consider whether, w h e never they pro posed any motion, they were to be met by the motion of adjournment of the Chairman and Deputy-Chair man, and sent away like a pack of schoolboys.— (Hear and laughter.) He (Mr. Sergeant Gazelee) hoped the Court would meet the motion for adjourn ment with a flat denial.—(Cheers.) Mr. WEispisio thought that if the Hon. Gentleman who had just spoken had looked calmly at the ques tion he would have spared himself many of those re marks w hich he had made. The motion for adjourn ment did not preclude the gentlemen present from entering largely into the question which had been brought before the Court by the Hon. Proprietor, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Sergeant Gawlee was, therefore, wrong in saying that the Court had been pre cluded by the course adopted from hearing and judging of what would otherwise have been brought forward. He (Mr. Weedirg) agreed with the position of the Chairman, that the question had been already decided by the Court some time ago, when the Court refused to sanction it ; the present was, therefore, an attempt to come indirectly to the same conclusion. It was very true that there had been an adoption by the Prince who had been deposed, and also by Appa Sahib. He agreed with the Hon. Gentleman that the ques.ion lay in a nutshell, depending entirely upon the fair consideration of the treaty and upon the law and customs of India. For himself, he did not sacrifice, nor call upon the gentlemen about him to sacrifice, any of his rights as a proprietor, by leaving the question to be decided by the Court of Directors. They had before them the judgments of men better versed in the affairs of India than the Court of Proprietors were, and were, there fore, in a position to come to a sounder conclusion. Fcr his own part, he would say that it would be for the interest of the people of India that the Company's sway should extend over Ithose principlalties ; that security, peace, and prosperity wereimore likely to be obtained for the mass of the people of that country, and their progress in civilization would be better secured by the extension of the British arms and the administration of British justice; and therefore, he (Mr. 'Weeding), hoped that if the directors could do it, without violating justice, they would assume the sovereignty of Sattara. He thought they could not have better judges than those in whose hands the question stood at present, in whom he reposed entire con fidence. The Chairman had done what he ought to have done in moving the question of adjournment, and leaving the argument till another time, leaving the Honourable Gentlemen to enlighten one another ; for nothing had been done to prevent the Honourable Gentleman below him, or any one else, from hearing everything that could be said upon the question. Mr. FIELDER thought that if any blame attached with reference to the proceedings of the C ourt that day, it did not attach to the Court of Directors, but to the nine gentlemen who had made - that Court spe cial ; for, by so doing, that had excluded other business; whereas, if they had, made the Court " special and general," theylwould have allowed other business to have been transacted. What Mr. Lewis had said was all very true, supposing the Raja of Sattara had been an independent Prince, but he (Mr. Fielder) denied that he was an independent Prince. With regard to the word " heirs," that Prince might have heirs to his private property, but not to the rajaship of Sattara, which was a very different thing. With regard to the word " successors," it did not mean any one allied by blood, but actually in possession, whether by might or right it was the same thing. The whole of the rajasbip had fallen into the hands of the East India Company, to whom it belonged, and they could do with it as they thought right. He thought that the Court would do wisely in leaving the question at present in the hands of the directors, more especially when the Chairman had pledged himself that they would give it their most serious consideration. General BRIGGS then rose, and said—Sir, I had not proposed to speak on this question at this moment, but as it has been met by a motion for adjournment I shall say a few words upon the character of the treaty formed with the Raja of Sattara. It has been said that the Raja of Sattara is not an independent Prince. It is distinctly stated in Mr. Elphinstone's report to the Governor-Genoral, that he proposed to give an independent sovereignty to the Raja of Sattara, and used the expression ," restoring him to his rights." The treaty was made and ratified more than a year afterwards, when Sattara was taken, the Raja b e i ng s till i n th e P es h wa ' s h an d s, b y General, afterwards Sir Lionel, Smith. A proclama tion was thereupon issued i n th e name o f th e Raja of Sattara, as th e sovere i gn o f t h e country. he Mr. was E l Before any treaty by Sir Lionel S m ith, b y or d er o f y was formed with hi m , th ere f ore , prhinstoneco as a sove re i gn pr i nce, as t h e R a j a of Sattara. I t ;" as b li m s an independent sovereign that am n ba every instance. You re• you treated with ceived from hyim. His Minister,ssadolr plenipotentiary to ittul Punt, treated make the treat with you; it was not with theßVa was made— but the ambas sadoron the of the Raja, that the tre j a a i name, h t e a e name by his Minister, Wittul Punt, in his y s one hand, and by Captain Grant, Captain James of the British Government, on " This treaty, consisting of eleven articles, bein g oth tn day settled and concluded at Sattara, by James Grant and Wittul Punt Furnaweese, Captain Grant has delivered to his Highness, Pertaub Sh ea; Maharaja, a copy of the same in English, Mahratta, and Persian, under the seal and signature of the said Captain James Grant ; and his Highness, Maharaja Pertaub Shean has delivered to the said Captain James Grant a copy also in English, Mahratta, and Persian, baring his Highness's seal and signature ; and the aforesaid Captain James Grant has engaged to procure and deliver to his Highness, without delay, a copy of the same, duly ratified by his Excellency the most Noble Francis, Marquis of Ilastings, K.G , one of his Britannic Majesty's Most Honourable , Privy Council, Governor-General in Council, ap pointed by the Honourable Company to direct and control all their affairs in the East Indies, Corn mander-in•Chief of his Majesty's and the Honourable Company's Forces, &c., on the receipt of which by his said Highness, this said treaty shall be deemed complete and binding on the honourable East India Company, and on his Highness the Raja Pertaub Shean, and the copy now delivered to his said Highness shall be now returned." That treaty, made on the 25th September, 1819, was ratified by the Governor-General in council on the 29th of November of the same year. In the first article of that treaty it is stated that "the British Government agrees to cede in perpetual sovereignty to the Raja of Sattara, his heirs and successors, the districts specified in the amended schedule." Tow, my Honourable Friend who moved this motion has adverted to the words in that article in the original. The word " heirs," as he stated .truly " forzund," signifying son, " warns," signifying heir direct or collateral, and "koyan m oo k am ," signifying a representative. I pledge myself as an Oriental scholar that the word "koyan mookam" signifies representative. It is a word constantly made use fof when a father during his life-time delegates to his son or to a minister the full power which he himself possessed, such delegate or representative is called "koyan mookam." It may also be applied to heirs adopted by Hindoos, and, therefore, the literal trans lation of that article would have been lineal descendants, collateral descendants, and adopted children. That ought to have been the translation of the words, which are here rendered "heirs and suc cessors." But it is not necessary to dispute the English translation, because the word " successors" embraces all. This " koyam mookam" signifies very much the same as our English expression "execu tors,' administrators, and assigns ;" or—as it is sug gested to me—locum tenens. Mr. FIELDER—III there any heirship in " execu tors, administrators, and assigns ?" General BRIGGS—Now, with regard to this ques tion, of course it never could have been contemplated that when a perpetual sovereignty was granted, like that of Sattara, in the course of a few years, at a time when there was a legal heir living and an adopted child also, that the British Government should resume the territory. What is the meaning of "perpetual sovereignty ?" Why it was in tended that the territory guaranteed by law to him (the Raja restored to his sovereign power) should be secured to him and his heirs for ever. It never was contemplated that the country should be resumed. It was to remain, I say, as a perpetual sovereignty. With respect to the question before us now, the ex-Raja of Sattara adopted, accord ing to the Hindoo law and practice, with the cogni zance of the British Government, the nearest relative of his family. I say " the nearest relative of his family." I hold in my hand, sir, a pedigree, which I find I have brought with me from India, obtained by me from the records of the house of Sattara, while resident at the Court. And here it will be seen that Babji was the common ancestor; that he had two sons Vittoji and Maloji. From the son Maloji came Shaliji, and one of his sons, Sivaji, was the first Raja of Sattara, while another son, Venkoji, became Raja of Tanjore. Subsequently, the second son of Sviaji became Raja of Colapoor. There were three independent Sovereigns arose from the line of Maloji; Maloji had, as I have stated, a brother named Vittoji. Vittoji had eight children ; the eldest child died without issue; from the second son , Keloji, there was in the fourth degree a child adopted by the house of Sattara, who was entitled Shahu 11., the father of the two brothers who afterwards filled the throne. The Rajas of Tanjore have been in the habit of adopting c hildren from the lines of Mumbaji an d Trimbacji, the sixth and seventh sons of Vittoji, while the Rojas of Colapoor have adopted from another son of Vittoji. The descendants of the house of Maloji, therefore, have for many generations been in the habit of adopting children from the line Vittoji, the younger brother of Maloji, from whom came the houses of Sattara, Tanjore, and Colapoor. The late Raja of Sattara, Per taub Sheen, who was dethroned, and his brother, Appa Sahib, who was sub3e quently enthroned by the British Government, died without direct issue. But there was a collateral heir, Trimbucji, who was the grand-nephew of the late Raja, a lineal de s cendant, through the male line, of Vittaji, the brother of the ancestors of the first Raja of Sattara. He is, therefore, the nearest sur viving heir to that family. If you will allow me, I will deliver in this pedigree to the Court. The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN intimated that the Hon. Proprietor might do so if he pleased. General BRIGGS—I will put it in as part of my speech if you please. The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN—I must tell you, how ever, the custom is, that, although received, it cannot be recorded. Mr. FIELDEZ-If we were to admit this pedigree to he good, just, and proper, that does not entitle this ycuth to the rajaship. General BRIGGS—I can only state that that pedi gree was obtained by me when I was acting as your ambassador at the court of Sattara. It was procured from the records of the house of Sattara twenty years ago, and it is not likely, therefore, that u:;der such circumstances it should be false. lr. Lewis—My Hon. Friend putsit in for the use of the Court, if they like to look at it. General BRIGGS—I maintain, therefore, the right of this nearest heir to the succession to the sove reignty of Sattara. But, sir, there is another more important question before us—an infringement upon the custom, as I venture to say it is, in the sentiment maintained on the other side, that the Princes of India have no right to adopt children without asking the sanction of the Governor-General. I do say, sir, that that is a most dangerous principle to set forth. The Government of Gualiar is now wielded by the third successive adopted heir of the house of Suidia. The Raja of Tangore is an adopted heir. The Raja of Sattara, the father of the two late Rajas of Sattara, was himself, as you have heard, an adopted heir—(almost al. the Hindoo sovereigns of India are adopted children); and are you now going to assume the principle that the adopted children of Hindoos shall not succeed to the rights and property of those adopting them ? The Govern ment of British India, it appears, now assumes to be lord paramount of India. Sir, I deny the fact.— (Hear.) Its power is paramount, but that does not constitute a lord paramount. The Government of India did not confer sovereignty on the princes of the house of Sattara, which you are now seeking to put an end to. It is almost the oldest dynasty in lnilia, established before our time. I say, sir, you did not create a new sovereign in the Raja of Sattara in 1819. You restored him to his power and his possessions, it is true, as Mr. Elphinstone stated, but established no new sovereignty. Now, sir, while touching upon this question of adoption, I will state to the Court the convenience of the principle as applicable to India. The Hindoo land and personal property is, by law, equally divisible amongst the sons of the person dying, and, by the same law, it would be equally divided on the death of the individual amongst all collateral heirs, but to prevent this divi sion, and, in fact, the extinction of the integrity of an estate, a person is permitted to adopt out of the collateral heirs one person to inherit the whole pro perty. Not only is he permitted to do so during his lifetime, but his widow is bound to do so after his death, because a young man in the prime of life may be suddenly cut off by accident or otherwise, without having adopted an heir; and in such case, or in any case, as I have stated, the widow is required to adopt, in order to prevent the estate being frittered away amongst collateral relations, or subjected to ruin in legal litigation. And a very convenient thing this custom of adoption is. But, sir, if you are to do away with the right of adoption with respect to the princes of India, the next question will be, whether the estates which you have conferred on officers or other individuals for services, should be allowed to pass by adoption or not. Sir, you are here treading on most delicate ground. Your power in India has been obtained through the instrumenta lity of your native armies ; it has been maintained by the general opinion of your justice throughout the ' country, aided by the attachment of that army. Let the fidelity of that army be once shaken, and your power is gone. Sir, these are not times to trifle with the constitutional rights of nations. Who would have dreamed, on the 22d of last February, that Louis Philippe would be where he is now ?—(Cries of " Question.") Sir, it is the question—it is a great question of principle ; for I maintain that if you are to do away with the consti tutional rights of individuals to adopt, you will shake the integrity and faith of the people of India; you will influence that opinion which has hitherto maintained you in your position, and that feeling will thrill through your native army, and you will find some day, as Lord Metcalfe has more than once pre dicted, " We shall rise some morning and hear of a conflagration throughout the whole of India, such as a few Europeans among millions cannot extinguish." What has Lord Hastings said with respect to that army, and the rights of property ? He said it was quite time that you should do something to settle the question of the land tenure. " Your army," he tells utupon, you, eoir " is deriv e d f rom th e p easan t ry o f t h e coun t ry , who h ave r i g h ts, and i f those rights are infringed integrity ."no y l o o u ng w er eil h k al n - e ow a , ny sir, dependence u o s n t look on this great engine of ours, that has gained and ma maintainedmainly ti b y t bo s yu i r n o tnh u ae r t empire emight a r m i y n I n o T d f i h a s : ulrt has w a n s oetffee beent Europeand troops your . u rpower, 250 alone. oer fasoll.dieYrsou You have now an army of and it will en t it, sir, if in India o support may rely t is on the fidelity of those troops yout Rt ' 0 oyouo infringe tnaanstdiav that that army institutions.. of the people of India, in fringement you make on constitutional mpat t h i Ise with them. They are a part of and represent 3 viduals must aid will affect, orlatlio.n.hEverry it may be their sons, cr their ' infaotuheiroosnablurtigattahslioe‘,lne:iti: it must indirectly come home to r e the l: m e o ss ; u t pon ar o t t n h y e r ; relations. What awful events have been passing around us in Europe, and how little expected. My Honourable Friend the mover of this motion has spoken of the catastrophe in Caubul, in consequence brought on by unrighteous proceedings in our ag gression upon the Affghans, and forcing upon the nation a twice-expelled tyrant Some idea of the disastrous result of that proceeding may be formed, when I remind you, that of that army of 5,000 or 6,000 soldiers, and several thousand followers, amounting together to 10,000 souls, only one individual out of that host escaped without being wounded, killed, or made prisoner. There is not another such instance in history, modern or ancient, sacred or profane : There is no example of a whole army being annihilated, with the excep tion of one single individual, Dr. Bridon. That was the case then. I oppose, therefore, this adjournment. I think the directors should be obliged to us for warning them and affording them the benefit of the experience of those who, like me, have been so long in that country, and which enables me to speak with some degree of confidence upon such a question. The Honourable Chairman smiles, he is certainly my se nior by some years; but still it is something like forty-seven years since I went to India, thirty-three of which I spent in the country, and, therefore, I must have had some experience amongst the people. Before I sit down, sir, I will just quote from the in structions to his assistants, which were given by my poor lamented friend and diplomatic master, Sir John Malcolm. In speaking of the institution of India, he observes— " Nothing can keep you right on all these points but constant efforts to add to your knowledge, and accus toming your minds (as I have before urged you) to dwell upon the character of the British power in India, and that of the empire over which it is esta blished. The latter comprehending numerous tribes and nations, with all their various institutions and governments, may truly, .though metaphorically, be viewed as a vast and ancient fabric, neither without shape nor beauty, but of which many parts are in a dilapidated state, and all more or less soiled or decayed ; still it is a whole, and connected in its parts, the foundations are deep laid, and to the very summit arch rests upon arch. We are now its pos sessors, and if we desire to preserve while we improve it, we must make ourselves completely masters of the frame of the structure to its minutest ornaments and defects. Nor must we remove the smallest stone till another is ready suited to fill the vacant niche, other wise we may inadvertently bring a ruin upon our own heads and those of others, on that spot where we too eagerly sought to erect a monument of glory." Well, what a monument of glory is this you are now going to erect? To seize upon a small territory yielding a surplus revenue of forty thousand pounds a year, which will hardly pay your European establishment in collecting it. This is the monument of glory you are going to raise I A monument of glory, whi c h if erec t e d u p on the principle of not allowing the native princes to adopt, or permitting collateral heirs to succeed, will sooner or later bring upon our own heads the very destruction which has been predicted by my friend Sir John Malcolm. Colonel DICKINSON then rose and said, Mr. Chair man, the innocence or guilt of the late ex-Raja of Sattara, the competency of himself or of his brother, the late Raja, to adopt an heir to the Sovereignty with out the previous consent of the British Government, are not, in my humble opinion, the topics whieh we are called upon to discuss ; but as the question before the Court is one, in the decision of which, the honour of our Indian Government is not less deeply involved, I conceive it due to this Court and to all native states so circumstanced as that of Sattara, that the Hon. Chairman, or one of his colleagues, should he requested to make known to us the grounds on which it is contended, that the sovereignty of the late Raja A ppa Sahib lapses to the British Govern ment. The question to be considered is not the expediency or otherwise of such annexation, founded on political or financial considerations ; it is one founded on good faith and the plain interpretation of existing treaties; and to justify such sequestration of a nation's rights, it becomes the bounden duty of the Indian Government to satisfy the public that a mea sure so rarely if ever resorted to, and so opposed to the feelings and interests of all classes of the Sattara State, is in accordance with the spirit and provisions of the existing treaty ; and if there be any doubts on this all essential point, these might be easily and effectually cleared up by a reference to the eminent authorities run statesman,etdah toyisover ei gnty rnfieelosBnlf in boo9efr wmauscaniacsttwoyft framed a d lr‘ Nlm a ai ni n et wg c hd e a t;sw a os v hh i g t ooi husveeldbe nignant hwhoseheo reco g nis e dAs, ae s a r u n e g darr g ,a e t vsht state remodelledo4ltn. ens s d t itta he hhnee, benefit of an appeal to so impartial and enlightened an umpire, it is of importance to bear in mind that in the treaty whi c h was a l so d rawn up b y M r. Elphinstone about the same time with the contiguous state of Colobah, Article 4th expressly provides for the right of the British Government to confer inves titure on the chief on any vacancy of the musnud ; the omission of which, or of anything of a like im port, in the treaties of 1819 and 1839, is perhaps the strongest evidence that can be adduced to justify a valid fact, that the Sattara state is exempted from all interference of the British Government as regards succession, unless that takes place in a manner at variance with the first article of the treaty of 1819, which in failure of lineal, provides most unequivocally, in my opinion, for collateral descent. Mr. CLARKE said, that althou g h h e h a d spo k en upon the question of adjournment, he would say a word or two upon the resolution before the C our t, as he understood discussion was permitted upon it. It was quite clear that the desire of the Court was, that the treaty made with the Raja of Sattara i n 1819, an d that subsequently made with his brother, should be effectually carried out. All the gen tl emen w h o h a d spoken on either side had professed no other object than that. If there was a doubt about the construction of the treaty, let them refer the question to Mr. Mountstuart Elphinstone, who understood all its bearings, if that gentleman were still alive ; he (Mr. Clarke) hoped that, as Mr. Elphinstone was the framer of the treaty, and must well know its spirit and character, that the directors would, therefore, put themselves in commun ic ation with him, and get his opinion upon the question. All that was wanted, both by the Hon. Proprietors and the Court of Di rectors, was to establish the character of the Company for good faith throughout India. They must have moral influence to maintain their footing in that country, and as that was the c oncur rent object avowed by all parties, his (Mr. Clarke's) conviction was, that they should obtain the opinion of the gentleman who framed the treaty. Mr. FIELDER—To explain it thirty years after it was first framed I Mr. LEWIS most readily concurred in the views expressed by Mr. Clarke with regard to the motion he (Mr. Lewis) had made, he admitted that the Chairman had, of c ourse , a r i g h t, as h e h a d done on former occasions, to move an amendment of adjournment thereupon ; but he denied that they alleged, namely, that it c w o a u s l d thedo upons s o se m o the tia n g r whichd had been made before. When the question was before the Court on the previous occasion, the Chairman himself stated that the directors were then waiting f or i n f orma ti on f rom India, and when that informatio n h a d b een r ece i ve d it would be communicated to the proprietors. The motion for ajournment, in his opinion, was not cour teous to the Court of Proprietors; if motions intro duced there were to be treated in that manner, their proceedings would become a subject of perfect mock ery and ridicule. He must enter his protest against the effect of the adjournment. It appeared to him perfectly clear that they had no right to get rid of the General Court along with the Special Court, for by the Act of Parliament they were obliged to hold four general quarterly Courts for the dispatch of business. He thought that the opinion of their legal adviser ought to be taken upon the subject.--(Hear.) The CHAIRMAN said that the Hon. Proprietor must have forgotten the debate which took place in July, when the resol u ti on w hi c h was submitted to th e C ourt was that the C om p any h av ing entered into a tre a ty with Pertaub Sheen, the Raja of • Setters, on the 25th of September, 1819, and ceded the territory to him, his heirs and successors, they could not take possession of the territory with out a breach of good faith. In substance, therefore, he thought the present motion was precisely the same. He had only to say, that he thought it was not right that there should be a discussion, until the Court of Directors had come to some decision upon the sub ject. He was quite sure it would receive every at tention, and would be discussed at great length by the Court of Directors. It was well known that there was considerable difference of opinion on the subject, but they were all anxious not to dispose of the subject without coming to a proper decision. Th e a dj o urnment of the Court, if it were adjourned, would be the act of the proprietors themselves and not that of the directors. The resolution was then put and negatived. Mr. Law's then demanded a division. The Court then divided, when the numbers were— For the adjournment 45 Against it The Court then adjourned. THE DIAMOND AND THE PEARL.—The contrast in the characters and fortunes of two sisters is the sub ject of this novel, which is capitally well written. Old "Squire Pro" is a capital sketch, and the progress of his clever son to eminence through all the obstructions that beset the aspiring commoner in England has more of Mrs. Gore's better spirit than anytning in the book. The mere writing i s a l ways p o i n t e d an d c l eve r, and there is also plenty of mirth in the amusing hits at female pretenders, from sanctimonious Duchesses to Mrs. Euphrasia Primwells ; and in whimsical descrip tions of high life, from " the little crowing thing in the nursery entitled to a coronet on i ts pap -b oa t," to the condescending great lady in the country dance, " trying to look joyous and Great British while undergoing the fatniliarities of hands across." In short, there is plenty to amuse the novel reader in Mrs. Gore's " Diamond and Yearl."—Examiner. Now ready, in 2 vols. post Bvo., A . NECDOTES of the ARISTOCRACY. By J. BERNARD BURKE, Esq. Author of " The History of the Landed Gentry," " The Peerage and Baronetage," &c. Henry Celburn, Publisher, 13, Great Marlborough-street. MR. AINSWORTH'S NEW ROMANCE. Now ready, at all the Libraries, in 3 vols., THE LANCASHIRE WITCHES. Ity W. HARRISON AINSWORTH, Esq. Henry Colburn, publisher, 13, Great Marlborough-street. THEATRE ROYAL, HAYMARKET. Mr. B. Webster, Sole Lessee and Manager, Old Brompton. _ . _ . The public is respectfully informed that this Theatre has, during the recess, undergone very extensive repairs mid alterations and the whole re-decorated. THIS EVENING. Will be performed the Tragedy of THE GAMESTER. Beverley, Mr. Charles Kean ; Mrs. Beverley, Mrs. Charles Kean. After which, THE WONDER. Don Felix, Mr. C. Kean ; DORLIEL Violante, 31r2. C. Kean. To conclude with a new Farce, entitled 'TOUR LIFE'S IN DANGER. THEATRE ROYAL, ADELPHI. Under the direction of Madame Celeste During the Recess this Theatre has been entirely re-decorated, the original designs by Digby Wyatt, Esq., executed by Mr. Sang. A new Stage, Curtain, Act Drop, and Chandelier. An approved sys tem of Ventilation, &c., Jac. The Private Boxes enlarged, Backs added to the Seats, and Stalls rendered more comfortable. PRINCESS'S THEATftI , :. Mr. J. M. Maddox, Sole Lessee and Manager. During the Recess this Theatre has been re-decorated and embel lished in a superb and costly manner ty Mr llurwitz. ♦ new Chan delier has been fitted, and the best arrarr.re men is have been made for the due Ventilation of the Theatre, and the couuort and convenience et the audience. THIS EVENING, Will be perfornted a new Ballad Opera, entitled ROBIN GOOD FELLOW. After wkieh, A CUTLET FOR TWO. To be followed by a New DIVERTISSEMENT. To conclude with the Farce, entitled HIS FIRST PECCADILLO. ST. JAMES'S THEATRE. DUMBOLTON'S SERENADERS. This celebrated Troupe, whose performances save excited univer sal admiration throughout the United States, will repeat a short series of their popular ETHIOPIAN ENTERTAINMENT at the above Theatre THIS EVENING. The Programme will include a Tarlety of original Songs, Glees, &c., entirely new to this country. Doors open at Eight. Day Performance commences at Half-past Two. Boxes, 4a. ; Pit, 2s. Boxes and Stalls at Mr. Mitchell's Royal Li brary, 33, Old Bond-street ; and at the Box. office. TO CORRESPONDEts TS. No communication can be attended to tiuless authenti cated by the name and address of the writer. tiejected‘communications cannot be returned. THE WEATHER.—SuN OFFICE, DECEMBER 22. THERMOMETER, Lowest, 27; Highest, 31; Noon, 38. BAROMETER, 30.38. WIND E.N.E.; fine frosty weather. HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE THIS DAY. Morning .. 57 min after 11 ! Even!ng 0 min. after 0 Washington acting under the instigation of Mr. POLE, to secure by treaty, by force of arms, by cajo lery, or by open seizure, Oregon, New Mexico, and California. True it is that the acquisition of the two latter cost the United States no less than 25,000,0001. in hard cash, a considerable expenditure of blood, and the odium and execration of the whole civilized world; yet, on taking these things into consideration, the result of the Polk policy can only prove beneficial in the end; first, because of the mineral and agricultural fruitfulness of the new provinces ; secondly, because the late campaign has added to the renown of the Union for its strength and glory; and, thirdly, because of the elastic and ductile consciences of its citizens as a na tion. The materials which have been thus hurriedly heaped together by President PoLK will have to be developed from this normal condition, and welded into one concrete mass by the administration of President TAYLOR. With what lenity of manner this will be accomplished may be conjectured from the rumour already prevalent that the Ministry now on the eve of its accession to power are resolved to apply to New Mexico and California the celebrated Wilmot proviso. Whether this report be true or inaccurate, we are sanguine as to the moderate Whig policy which will be very soon introduced under the auspices of old Rough and Ready. Never, perhaps, since the work of civilization commenced has a more brilliant example been af forded of the blessings flowing to the people of this earth from the operation of democratic institutions than that which is now visible in the condition of the United States. Of this fact President POLY has been fully conscious. The tone of his Mes sage is, on this account, a grand organ-tone of ex ultation. Referring to the convulsions which have during 1848 shaken to their foundations the old princedoms and powers of Europe, he can say of his own country—of that democracy which has sprung from the loins of the Anglo- Saxons—" the nation is prosperous, contented, and happy !" The sentence is full of golden auguries. It is of itself a justification (if any such were re quired) of the revolution which has transformed France into a Republic, and which is now ferment ing in Germany, in Italy, in Hungary, in Poland, and in the Spanish and Portuguese peninsula. The light which was kindled beyond the Atlantic by the patriotism of GEORGE WASHINGTON has grown at last into the Pharos of the Liberty of the nations of Christendom. Mr. COBDEN has buckled on his armour for the forthcoming strife. He has put forward his views on the all-important questions of economy and retrench ment, and he has done so through an association formed for the express purpose of enforcing upon the Legislature the absolute necessity of great, compre hensive, and speedy measures of reform on these points. Such an ally is indeed a valuable acquisition. The Hon. Member for the West Riding of Yorkshire has already afforded sufficient evidence of his skill and power in the direction of a popular movement. Great as have been the Par liamentary achievements of the Hon. Gentleman, they vanish into insignificance when compared with his exploits beyond the walls of Parliament. He is peculiarly qualified to act as the leader of a calm and thinking people. He appeals not to their passions, but to their reason. Ile endeavours not to work upon their feelings, but to convince their understandings, and when w e find him again submitting his plans to an assemblage of the people, and detailing the alteration that he conceives to be essential to the well-being of the country, we are forcibly reminded of the good old times when the free-trade agitation was at its height, when RICHARD COBDEN day by day gained new adherents to the noble cause by his simple and unadorned, but clear and convincing eloquence. Would that he were with us on every point, and that he laboured with the same indefatigable zeal and de votion in the cause of monetary reform that he has already exhibited in agitating for the total and un conditional repeal of the corn-laws, or that he now appears inclined to evince in the cause of economy and retrenchment—that he would labour as well for an alteration in the entire financial system, and the ab solute substitution of direct for indirect taxation in every particular, so that his own free-trade prin ciples might be carried out to the fullest extent. It is by no means necessary that any of these great reforms should be abandoned even for a time, in order that all our energies may be concentrated upon one of them, and one only. It is by no means necessary that we should relax in our exertions for monetary reform, and the obtaining a currency adequate to the wants and exigencies of the nation, because we also desire a considerable reduction in the na tional burdens. We may strive simultaneously for an alteration in the mode of taxation as well as in the amount thereof; and the popular desires will not be slighted because these topics are forced upon the attention of the Legislature, with equal energy and determination. Indeed, the questions are intimately connected together, and cannot be severed. The anxiety for monetary and fiscal reform is no less urgent than for economy and retrenchment. We cannot, therefore, agree with Mr. COBDEN in his suggestion that the question of direct taxation should be thrown overboard, or put upon the shelf, even for a brief period. It is one, and by no means the least important, of the objects for the attainment of which the Association was called into existence, and its abandonment would excite the greatest dissatisfaction among many of the most strenuous and determined members of that body. Much as we desire the assistance and co-operation of RICHARD CORDEN, we cannot afford to obtain it at thef cost of deserting that which is especially the cause o the poor man—a determined agitation for the imme diate abolition of the iniquitous and impolitic system of indirect imposts. We shall now briefly allude to the various sugges tions put forward by the Hon. Gentleman. He first proposes " to take for the basis of the budget—to inscribe as the motto upon the banner of the as sociation—the expenditure of 1835, which will be a reduction of 10,000,0001. from this year's budget." He does not state definitively the details of the various reductions' that should take place. Their character is, indeed, indicated by the emphatic assertion that " all hope of material relief from taxation hinges Lpon the question of a large reduction in the cost of our army, navy, and ordnance." He adopts the view of Sir HENRY PARNELL, who, sshil3t arguing for a reduction in the expenditure of the military department, said " Fix upon a much smaller sum, and tell them they must make it answer." We might be disposed to coincide with the lion. Gentleman, if assured that the pruning knife would be applied to the excrescences—that superfluities only would be lopped off—but we fear that the real strength and power of our armaments would be unduly reduced if such a course were adopted—that our effective force, naval and military, would be reduced below that which the honour and the safety of our country de mand. We are fully aware that there is a needlessly heavy outlay in many respects, which might easily be spared ; but if a certain sum only should be given, it is more than probable that the bone and sinew would be dispensed with—that hardy sailors la ould be cast adrift, in place of super annuated Admirals—that jobbing would stir.l prevail in our dockyards—that the unnecessary portions of our expenditure would be continued, while that which is really the result of a wise and prudent economy, would be first discarded. We confess, therefore, that before we can assent to any fixed limit, we should have pointed out the exact items in the various esti mates that should be struck out or reduced in amount, and those that should be retained. Such information could easily be given. We doubt not that the Honourable Member has full access to the evidence taken during the past session before the Committee on the Naval and Military Estimates, and that he is quite aware of the character of the intended recommendations to be proposed by the members favourable to economy and retrenchment. In addition to the saving of 10,000,0001. to be effected by a recurrence to the budget of 1831, Mr. COWAN proposes a new source of revenue of the most unobjectionable character, which would, he calculates, produce 1,500,0001. per siainum, viz., by an extension of the probate and legacy duty to real property. With all the arguments of the Hon. Gentleman in this respect we coincide to the fullest extent. A more unfair or partial exemption from taxation has never been suffered to prevail in any country or in favour of any class. The hard-earned savings of industry—the sums that have been . - a.,4 t.,. „ 4 .,,: .., ~.,- . . 4 , ~i1v.:...,,,,,, • . :, auto .. . , .... *.':;t, • , "L.) . • .M.• -,•:" -.•,,- ?,,,,,,4; d-1 , 2•71Lc ...,,,„. t i. „ .. 1 .1t.,... . ' l % ~......, - ' ' ' 111 ,- - • Nir1. 2 , 114.:. , 'l O r- - !. -, . ''" V:* -' ,. .i'.!1:- . . ~.„„ibl, • •,....,, , ,,ri b i t ....., ,:::, . ze...4. , ,, , ,.. • 4 0. ..ir: - ....e .$1... , " - s , -. 1 tc.,,, ~, ..,.... - . . ,;•:',..,, , z0i5..,.k : ; ...,7' ; • , . ot. l',%L.'" •ft t: 1,1'...C:A .. ... , :•! ,, i , ~ 1.:1',.. '. - '' ." THIS EVENING Will be performed a new Drama, founded on Mr. Dickens's Christ mas Book, entitled THE HAUNTED MAN. Mr. ltedlaw, Mr. Hughes : the Phantom, Mr. 0. Smith ; A. Tetterby and Co., Mr. Wright ; the Boy, Miss E. Chaplin; Milly, Miss Woolgar ; Mrs. Tet terby, Mrs. F. Matthews. To be followed by THE ENCHANTED ISLE. Alonzo, Mr. Paul Bedford; Prospero, Mr. 0. Smith; Ariel, Madame Celeste. To conclude with a new Farce called SLASHER AND CRASHER. Mr. Slasher, Mr. Wright ; Mr. Crasher, Mr. Paul Bedford. Citening LONDON, FRIDAY, DECE'OBER 22. 1848. Another of those enormous documents called Pre sidential Messages has just arrived from the United States. It is invested, however, in the present in stance, with a mole than usual interest from the cir cumstance of its being the farewell manifesto of JAMES K. PoLx. It is a prolonged plain over the triumphs of his administration, a flourish of trumpets, by which he proclaims the successful issue of his policy. Not a syllable is whispered in reference to his successor, although many eulogistic allusions are, of course, made to the military capacity displayed by ZACHARY TAYLOR in the conquest of Mexico and Ca lifornia. The message—a mere condensation of which occupies so many columns in this evening's impression of our journal—is rather retrospective than anticipa tive : it reviews in language of confident satisfaction the course pursued by the Government of the Union during the last four years —years fraught with vic tory and emolument to the Cabinet at Washington. Other matters relating to subjects of a strictly local or national interest are, undoubtedly, considered but the principal portion of the manifesto published by President PoLx, on the approximation to the period of his retirement from office, may be divided into paragraphs relating to the territorial acquisitions of the States ; to its financial prosperity resulting from the felicitous working of free trade as a system of commerce ; to the prospects of emigration ; to the projected alterations in the postal arrangements with Europe ; to the continuance or abolition of negro slavery ; to the prospective remuneration to be de rived from the Californian mines of gold and quick silver; and to the general efficiency of the American citizens as impromptu soldiers, an instinctive capa city for participating in the perils and manouvres of war, which, while it relieves the Executive from the necessity of maintaining a standing army, perpetually holds at its disposal an efficient force of nearly two millions of men, skilled in the management of the rifle, and immured to the hardships of a campaign by their hunting expeditions into the primeval forests and their chase of the buffalo over the prairies. At the present moment it is desirable only to take into account the operation of the new tariff, the spoliative policy of Mr. POLK, and the beneficent influences of a moderate democracy as exemplified in the extraordi nary destinies—the rise, the development, and the almost unparalleled prosperity—of the great Republic of the United States. As to the working of the principles of free trade in America since the fiscal innovations of 1846, nothing could, most certainly, have afforded a more direct contradiction to the whining prophecies of the Pro tectionists on either side of the Atlantic. We cannot but feel satisfied that this division of the Presidential Message will be perused with the profoundest gratification by CHARLES VILLIERS, the Copernicus, by RICHARD COBDEN, the Galileo, by Sir ROBERT PEEL, the Newton, of the novel and rational science of political economy as adapted to international commerce. What the Member for Wolverhampton foresaw, the Member for the West Riding demonstrated, and the Right Honourable the Representative of Tamworth accomplished. The accuracy of their calculations has been proved beyond all further cavil by the remarkable results of a tariff, the advantages of which have not, as in our instance, been counterbalanced by an accu mulation of severe national calamities. In the United States, where neither the funds nor the vegetable produce have been injuri ously affected by a variety of unforeseen blights and difficulties, the results of the reductions effected in 1846 have been fortunate beyond even the most sanguine anticipations. The gloomy forebodings of the Duke of RICHMOND in one country, and of Mr. WEBSTER in the other, have been alike falsified. Whereas in 1825 the imports amounted to nearly 117,000,000 dollars, producing from 25,000,000 to 27,000,000 dollars of revenue—they have attained for the past year very nearly the sum of 15 5,000,000 dollars, yielding upwards of 31,000,000 dollars of revenue to the Exchequer While, in 1825, no less than 15,000,000 worth of im ports, out of the 117, were re-exported, leaving barely 102,000,000 worth for home consumption— during the past year only 21,000,000 worth of im ports, out of the 155, have been exported, leaving in consequence, a gross_amount of 13 3,000,000 worth for consumption by the population of the United States! While, in 1826, the exports of domestic produce hardly exceeded 99,000,000 worth in the aggregate—they have this year attained no less an amount than 133,000,0001 Such have been the memorable consequences of the measures inaugurative of the system of free trade in America. The deduc• tions deriveable from these calculations, officially re corded by President Pcout, can only strengthen the conviction of the English advocates of free trade, and afford a direful blow and discomfiture to the scat tered ranks of the Protectionist Opposition. When referring to the territorial extension of the dominions of the Union, it was impossible but that the President should speak in terms of the warmest self-gratulation. Since his installation as Chief Ma gistrate of the Republic the boundaries of the States have extended with such astounding rapidity that the area obedient to the legislative influences of the Con gress now amounts in squar e m il es almost to the magnitude of the whole of the European continent. Unsatisfied with the acquisition of Texas, the greed of empire has induced the Government at spared from present necessities, in order to make future provision for the family that would otherwise be wholly destitute when deprived of a father and protector, are diminished by heavy duties ; while princely domains and wide• spread territories are exempted from any contribution on a change of ownership consequent upon the death of the former proprietor. This is neither equitable or just. The sympathies of the nation will indeed be with Mr. COBDEN in his efforts to reform this crying grievance. We have only space left briefly to refer to the manner in which the Hon. Gentleman proposes to dispose of the amount thus rendered available, which will be shown in the tabular summary contained in his letter, to which we refer our readers. In the Customs he proposes to reduce the duty on tea to one shilling per pound, or to on ad valorem duty pro ducing the same amount of revenue—to abolish the duties on timber, wood, butter, cheese, and about 100 smaller items in the tariff. In the Excise, to abolish the duties on malt, hops, soap, and paper, and to do away with the window- tax and the adver tisement duties, in the Stamps and Taxes. When a Government persists in committing wrong, be it private or public, time never fails to aggravate the difficulties into which the Government flounders as it proceeds in perpetuating that wrong. So it is in the case of the East India Com pany with respect to the Raja of SATTARI. Often as that question has been before the Court of Directors, and often as it has been discussed before the Proprie tors, in both Quarterly and Special Courts, still the same ungenerous system of evasion is resorted to, and the real question at issue shuffled aside or blinked, merely to gain time and weary out the advocates of an unfortunate Prince in their in deavour to restore his dynasty, and vindicate the character of our country for the impartial adminis tration of justice. And, true to that pur pose, the Chairman, on Wednesday, contrived to play the old game of delay—the papers were before the Court, and it would be useless to discuss the question until the Court had time to come to a decision. Why ! they have been making a show of deciding for the last ten or twelve years, and yet there is no result but that of the wolf and the lamb I—" I have you, and mine you must remain be it right or wrong 1" Even so with the Ittija ship of SATTIRA ! The East India Company are numerous—they are mighty, and they can afford to do wrong because they have the power. And this they term British justice. They make treaties, and after wards explain them away if any unforeseen obstacle interfere with their projects of ambition. But if we are not mistaken, the manceuvre of Wednesday last, in abruptly adjourning the Court, and so quashing discussion, is strong presumptive evidence that the Court of Directors only want some plausible excuse to confess their errors, and do justice .with more becoming grace. 'THE FRENCH REPUBLIC. We have received the Paris papers of yesterday. A Moniteur Extraordinary appeared on Wednes day night with the following : "At six o'clock this evening the President of the National Assembly received the following Message from the President of the Republic:—' M. le President, I re quest you to announce to the National Assembly that, in conformity with Article 64 of the Constitution, I have by a decree of this day named— " M. Odilon Barret, representative of the people, Minister of Justice, charged with the Presidency of the Council of Ministers in the absence of the President of the Republic. " M. Drouyn de Lhuys, representative of the people, Minister of Foreign Affairs. " M. Lion de Malleville, representative of the people, Minister of the Interior. " M. Rulhieres, General of Division, representative of the people, Minister of War. " M. de Tracfy, representative of the people, Minister of the. Marine and Colonies. " M. Fallout, representative of the people, Minister of Public Instruction and Worship. " M. Le'on Faucher, representative of the people, Minister of Public Works. M. Bixio, Vice-President of the National Assembly, Minister of Agriculture. " M. Passy (Hypolite), member of the Institute, Minister of the Finances. Accept, Monsieur le President, the assurance of my high consideration. " LOUIS NAPOLEON BONAPARTE. " ' (Countersigned) ODILLON BARROT, " ' Minister of Justice.' " _ _ Another decree appoints M.BERQER, former Mayor of the 2d Arrondissement, Prefect of the Department of the Seine; and Colonel REZILLOT, Colonel of the Gendarmerie of Paris, Prefect of Police. By another decree all the troops of the garrison of Paris and of the towns comprised within the first military division, together with the Garde Mobile, are placed under the orders of General CHANGARNIBRI who is to preserve the command of the National Guard of the Seine, and to assume the title of Com mander-in-Chief of the National Guards of the Seine, and of the troops of the first military division. General CHANGANNIES had immediately issued an order of the day, in which he states that the organiza tion of the divi s i ons su bdi v i s i ons , an d brigades, 15 maintained, and that he has established bis head quarters in the Palace of the Tuileries. "In taking possession of his command," says the General, " the General-in-Chief relies on the patriotism, courage, and discipline, of which the troops have given so many proofs, as they may rely on the solicitude of the Commander-in-Chief for their welfare and interest. Another decree of the President of the Republic, dated the 20th inst., names Marshal BUGEAUD Com mander•in-Chief of the army of the Alps. M. VARAGUAT, Secretary-General of the Ministry of Marine, had resigned that •fhce. M. BAROCHB was to be appointed Attorney-Gene. , ral, in the place of M. CORNE. M. ETIENNE ARAGO has resigned the office of Director• General of the Post•ofhce. There was a partial illumination in Paris on Wed nesday evening, in honour of the new President of the Itepublic. M. RECURT has resigned the office of Prefect of the Seine. The Toulonnais, of the 10th, announces that all idea of armed intervention in the affairs of Rome had been abandoned, and that the steam-frigates, on board of whi c h th e troops of the proposed expedition had been embarked at Marseilles, had returned to Toulon. It was decided early on Wednesday morning that the proclamation of the President of the Republic should take place on the afternoon of that day. General CAVAIGNAC, immediately after the Cabinet had agreed to this resolution, invested General CHAN' GASMEN with the command in chief of all the troops of every denomination quartered in Paris or the Ban lieu. General CIIANGAIINIBIL at once made t h e arrangements necessary for the preservation of public tranquillity, and for rendering all suitable military honours to the PRESIDENT of the Republic on his proclamation. When the PRESIDENT of the Republic arrived sit his official residence, the Palace of the Elysee Na tional, he found the Prefect of Police, Colonel RS' BEILLOT awaiting his orders. A Cabinet Council was held in the evening, after which the PRESIDENT held a levee. He slept in the last bedchamber occupied by the Emperor NAPOLEON in Paris. The Prince de Montfort (JzaomE BONAPARTE): the only surviving brother of the EMPEROR, Was at the Elysee National to receive the President of the Republic on his arrival. JEROME BONAPARTE went forth to meet him, and they embraced. JERous was affected to tears; he had met his nephew on the same spot on which he had parted from his brother the EMPEROR for the last time. The PRESIDENT of the Republic has appointed his uncle, JEROME BONAPARTE, Governor of the In• valides, and Marshal MOLITOR Grand Chancellor of the Legion of Honour. The following is the address read to the National Assembly by the PRESIDENT of the Republic, after tailing the oath : " Citizen Representatives, The suffrages of the nation, and the oath I have just taken, trace out for ms my future conduct. I shall follow it as a man of honour. I shall regard as enemies of our country all those who should attempt to change by illegal means what all France has established B e t ween you and me, Citizen Representatives, there cannot be any real difference of opinion. Our wishes, our desires, are the same. I wish, like you, to place society on its true basis ; to strengthen democratic institutions, and to alleviate the miseries of that generous and intelligent people which has just given me such a striking proof of its confidence. The majority which I have obtained not only penetrates me with gratitude, but it will give to the new Govern• enent that moral force, without which there is no autho rity. With peace and order our country can again im prove—can cure its wounds, bring back the men that have been misled, and calm down passions. Animated by a sincere spirit of conciliation, I hive called round me capable and patriotic men, who, in spite of the diver• sity of their political origin, are ready to devote thera• selves with you to the application of the Constitution, tie improvement of the laws, and the glory of the Republic. A Government coming into power owes 2 debt of thanks to its predecessors when the deposit of its authority is handed over to it intact, and in par. ticular I owe it to the Hon. General Cavaignac to say that his conduct is worthy of the generosity of his character, and that seatiment of duty which is the first quality o' len Repr 1 461 vornmeni of progre Let us IN end, wit]] ceznot ac The 2 eonditiot Par, is made Year th, sources t the folk ~." Low ziorthen tion), 75 40,000,01 The f dressed 3 fonitev Numb pill gier Numb Major Lou Cai Led Rasp; Lama Chant Diver At ti ODILOp AIALLE BURN Boulo And Li , Bordeau 14 —R ot Tours a Mad The that cb rial cai the M( the car. At t dared The Was co GOD opposii Gen The leave l MA 201,1 buyer, 31 to Adi Tjpwa Berlin The el 22d J Ad but tf aylvat Valaq left 81 Th new lished be ac Ac contii Th prote Repu 111 Unco Engll Irish. Fore l Info Seco ?tin Prize Lare Prin Suet lac] wit ste Inii inc Su ch Ali foi jui