The Sun. — London, England, 1841-09-24 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 1841. HISTORICAL SKETCH OF T E his sway. At last, in the latter end of the year 1835, I known to be too foul, contemptible, and unsubstantial, to CASE OF THE RAJA OF SATT,',':.I ' years the date of his elevation to the ; he made the subject of a moment's inqpiry on the part (From the ./3 / /ti s k I n di an A dvocate of Se t. l. teen one, sixteen troll, signing ✓ of the treaty, and four- of those who are sworn to m a int a in the ilitegrity of her from the period when he assumed the entire rue- Maje s ty' s doininions, and t o brin:; to justice al!, whoen- It is my object to call y our attent i on to a narrative of nagement of the affairs of his kingdom the Court of soe ver th e y ma y b e , w h o me dit a te th e di s memberment or facts, connected with the d e th ronement o f an Ind i an Di rec t ors , desirous of bestowing upon him the highest i ruin of her empire. prince, the confiscation of his property, and the banish- and most gratifying mark of their admiration and respect, I The third and last charge against the Raja is in perfect msnt of his p erson to a di stance of 800 miles from the resolved that h e s h ou ld b e p resen t e d w ith a swor d, an d k eep i ng w i t h t h e two I h ave a l rea d y expose d. It i s se t principality over which he ruled. The case lam about at the same time with ti suitable letter. In the letter, forth that the Raja, with the same design of overthrow to. . .hring before you is important in every aspect in which received the signature of every one of the twenty- ing the English, intrigued with the ex-Raja of Nagpore. hichit c an b e view e d. Important—if regard be had four Directors, they complimented the Raja upon the And who, pray, is he? Why, at the time, a wretched to the person who now complains of unjust and un- exemplary fulfilment of the duties of his elevated situa- fugitive ; subsisting on the bounty of the Raja of Jud * English treatment at the hands of the British Indian tion ; they declared that the whole course of his con- pore ; a dethroned Prince, residing in obscurity, with- Government. That person is a Hindoo of high birth ; duct reflected the highest credit on his character—that out money and without friends ; state prisoner in -I!_decendant f rom one o f t h e most renowned among In - h e had won their unqualified approbation—that his closed w ithi n a c ourt-yard, twenty feet by twelve. ' Yet. !thin warriors: therepresentative of the Sevajee, who, liberality in executing, at his own cost, various public with this poor spectre of a pauper Prince, the Raja of in the middl e o f the seventeenth century, succeeded in works of great utility , had justly raised his reputation Sattara is charged with conspiracy, for the purpose of bursting the thraldom of th e M ogu l p ower , ami b ecam e in [the eyes of the Princes and people of India ; and overthrowing the colossal power of the British in India ; the founder of the powerful and wide-spread empire of the that , therefore, they had sent him a present of a sword and the overwhelming proof, at once of guilt and danger Mahratt as . The successor of this g rea t man has recently in estimation of their high admiration and high esteem. is, that the ex-Raja of Nagpore sent the Raja of. Sat been h ur l e d f rom hi s throne in the sight of all India, and Such was the Raja of Sattara in 1835. The sword and tara a complimentary letter, and that the Raja of Sattara appeals fro m the power, and alleged injustice of those letter went out in 1836, but never r e ach e d the Prince. sent the ex-Ra j a of Na gp ore a p air of shoes! who ha ve d epose d hi m , t o th e p eo pl e in whose name the Before they arrived he had incurred the displeasure of So much for the charges. Now for the use made of deed has been done. The case is important—if you con- the Bombay Government, and engines were already at them, by men who are citizens of a State, in which the nett it with the past history of British India, and view it work to effect his ruin. Unhappily, they succeeded, and meanest person, accused of the most petty of offmce, as another illustration of the gra sping policy of the rulers this exemplary Prince is now—the ex-Raja of Sattara. may not be condemned unheard Did they call on the of that country ; who, from the condition of lowly mer- We proceed to the story of his downfal—a story reflect- Raja for explanation? No, Did they send him copies 6 chants, soliciting, with bated breath, permission to ex- ing the deepest and most indelible disgrace upon all the of the charges brought against him? No. Did the chang e commo di t i es w i t h t h e su bj ects o f t h e M ogu l, parties concerne d i n effecting it. tell him who were his accusers, and confront him with have risen, by the conquest of the sword, to be the lords- The treaty which placed the Raja on the throne, se- them? No. What, then, did they. do? They, made up paramount of India ; and claim the right of dethroning, cured to him the absolute sovereignty over certain their minds that he was guilty. The evidence was so at their pleasure, the hereditary occupants of oriental estates, or jagheers, as they are in India called, which, clear, so satisfactory, so complete, so irresistible, that it thrones. The case of the Baja is but a late act, in a on the death of their then occupants, were to lapse would have been a waste of justice to call up the Raja to long career of bold and often guilty ambition, stretching to the Raja of Sattara. It may be proper to ob- rebut it, or even to let him know what it was. What over more than half a cent ur y. The case before us is serve, that it is the practice in India to reward services mattered it that he felt himself innocent, if they believed important, as indicating the fate which awaits the rendered to the State, by the bestowment of jagheers, or him to be guilty! What need of putting the Raja to the still remaining States of India which, to use the certain portions of territory, _over which the parties to trouble defending himself, when he is already tried, words of the - rate Governor of Bombay, who deposed the Raji, seems doomed, the whole of them, " to fall, at no distant day, into the vortex of British power." The case is a most important one, when viewed in connection with its natural and inevitable • effects upon the minds of the natives of India. It reveals • the true source of our present danger—a danger grow ing, not out of the designs of foreign foes, but out of the suspicion, the jealousy, and the hatred, which are begotten by our continued acts of egression and usurpation. It is not possible that the enlightened naives of India can witness our almost daily encroachments upon territory which we have declared to be sacred to the pos session of others, without being reminded of the near ap proach of their own doom, and without cherishing a desire, if possible, to avert it, by inviting the interposition of some power that shall humble the pride and prostrate the might of their oppressors, and prove milder in its rule over th e dominion it may snatch from us. Neither is it to be e xpected that those whom we have already cast down, and utterly spoiled both of their ancient preroga tives and ancestorial rights, can entertain any other than hostile feelings, however those feelings may be disguised, against those by whom they h ave b een su bj ugate d and bereft. Let those who measure with complacency and patriotic exultation the length and breadth of our / as t ern territory; and swell the number of the Queen's subjects by adding the hundred millions of India, look well to the elements of which this mighty mass is com posed. Prostrate they may be, and are • but, beneath the ruins of the empires we have ra ze d, there are smoul dering fires of inextinguishable hatred, which some unlucky wind may blow into a flame which may burn to our destruction. The present case will be found important----as exhibiting the true character of the home Government of India. It will take us to the coun cils of the India House and the Board of Control, and will show us to what extent those who have been wronged abroad are justified in expecting sympathy and redress from the authorities at home. And, finally, the case before us will prove the absolute necessity which exists for the people of this country becomin g better acquainted wi,`b the stltte of Indian affairs, with their own solemn and tremendous responsibilities, and with the power, which they may constitutionally exercise, to check the progress of ec'il government, and save, from ultimate ruin or alienation, the empire they have acquired. It may be proper here to premise, that exclusive of those portions of India which are considered and denominated British territory, there are upwards of thirty native States, the surviving fragments of fallen dynasties, which ha ve relinquished political relations with one another, Anti are connected with the British Government by treaties of various kinds.. Sattara, the state of which I - • am about to speak this evening, is in alliance with us by •• a treaty, which guarantees the protection of the British Government, and gives to that Government the right, within certain defined limits, of controlling the internal affairs of the principality. The territory of Sattara; at the "present time, extends over a surface of about 7,800 square runes, and yields a revenue of about 180,0001. sterling per annum. Sattara became the capital of the Mahratta empire in the year 1698, and has ever since remained the residence of the Mahratta Princes. The descendants of Sevajee, the founder of the empire, and a man of in feri or religious caste among the Hindoos, continued to exec rise sovereign sway until 1749, when the Brahmin minister obtained a deed, empowering him, as Peshwa, or Pr ime Minister, to exercise the sole power in the State. In this he was supported by the Mahratta Chiefs, on cond'ition that a suitable allowance was made for the descendavta of the Royal house ; and, from that period, the Peshwk‘s, in regular succession, were considered as 'the actual vilers, while the nominal Princes resided in the city of Sattara. These Princes, however, were accus . tome•d to receive the homage, respect, and reverence of all clAsses. They were called upon to confirm all suc cessions to great offices of State ; nor was any war ever engage. , l in without the sanction of the Raja. At th,' commencement of the Mahratta war in 1817, • the Raja Sattara, recently dethroned, was a state pri soner in th ci hands of Bajee Rao, the then Peshwa ; and, on the conquest of the Mahratta empire, which was completed on the 20th of February, 1818, the power of the Peshwa wa s entirely annihilated, and the British Government prot.‘.`'eded to carry into effect the terms of a previous procll.,,lation to the Mshratta people and chieftains, that the Raja, on being released, should be placed at the head an independent Sovereignty, of such an extent as my,h,t maintain him and his family in comfort and dignity. 6s . n the 20th of May the Raja made his public entry Sattara, escorted by the British troops and most of dn.' officers, and was formally placed upo n ;he gadi (or throb. e) in full durbar. The motive avowed by the Governo." - General of India in thus establishing the Raja on the ti-one of his ancestors, with a limited territory, was to a fford an honourable maintenance to the representative of the ancient Princes of the country, and to establish among the blahrattas a counterpoise to the remaining influence of the former Brahmin Go% ernment. On the 25th of September, 1819, a treaty a•-as concluded with the Raja' of Sattara, by which the British Government ceded to hia Highness, his heirs and suceea3ors, in perpetual sovereignty, certain districts specified in lti schedule annexed. This territory was to be held in subo, - clinate co-operation to the British Government, and the Raja to be guided in all matters by • the British political agoat or resident at his Highness% Court. Having now seen the li'aja placed on his throne--the throne secured to him by soleinv treaty, ratified, sealed, and deliVered—let us look back foe a moment to the still earlier history of this interesting :Prince. His father . had died in the year 1808, leaving two sons, himself, then four years old, and his brother, Appa Sahib, now biz successor, and then an infant in arms. 'Their mother Wrai a woman of high family, of great spirit, a ,ad of con siderable natural talent. • She was proud of her olevated ran.k, devoted to the interests of her children, a hater of the :3rahmins, who had usurped the power originallY wieln`ed by the Mahratta Princes, and was bent on giving her sons an education which should render them, in some respac,`.s, equal to cope with the monopolized learning of the p rs 'esthood. She, besides, carefully instilled into thei r m i n ds the dislike which she herself cherished to to the wh o . l e race ; a: - 4d, as will be seen in the sequel, the ex• R a i, was not slow to profit by her lessons. It . had been the' policy of the Brahmins to prevent the Sattara Prince. 4 from being taught to read and write, and to confine their , accomplishments chiefly to skill in horse ' manship and the ,iise of the bow. The Dowager, how ever, contrived to h aye her sons instructed in letters, after ' midnight, while thei. r attendants slept ; and the result was, that they were both .tolerably educated before they were released from the P e sh:lwa's power. The conduct of the Raja, when placed on his throne, evinced so much grati tude and fidelity to til'e ; so much talent and aptitude for public business ; eo much enlightened libe rality and zeal for the .interests of his people, that, in three years from the time of his i i :stallation, the entire ma nagement of the principality was placed in his hands, and the designation of PoLitical Agent,, to whose advice he had been required to yi ?.1d submission, was changed to that of Political Resident, whose advice was only to be enforced, when the Raja's conduct was likely to lead f to inconvenience or injustice, Or to a positive breach od the treaty. Left to himself, he ,dis p la y ed a laudable, n h , in India, extraordinary desire for the education of t e eople. He was most anxious to 5 t the Mahrattasfor business, that they might supply the places hitherto Oiled by the Brahmins. For his oWn connexions, and the sons of the great officer of his government, he set Mutat a suite of rooms, in his own palacna, as a college. On 0.-te occasion, when it was deemed necessary to ascer tain what was the state of education in Setara, a town containing 10,.000 souls, it was found that it contained no fewer :hanforty schools. He manifested :he deepest respect for the advice of those who had placed him on his tkrone, and superin!ended his early administration ; and I ; e igidly fulfilled the parting promise, which he ga ve to Captain Grant Duff, the Political Agent, on his quitting Sattara, for England, in 1823, that he would never depart i rom the laws established for him by that gentleman, and confirmed by the Hon. Mountstuart Elph;nstone. Such I',the testimony borne to the virtues and fidelity of this k s " l ee, beore the Court of Proprietors, on the 15th of s. _ t month, Sy Major-General Brig, who imm e diately tt`e_ceeded Caiatain Grant Duff, and was for four y L •airs me Political Resident at the Raja's Court. Nor was c.,!' o n . Pla the subject of education alone, that the Raja dis yed his zeal for the welfare and improvement of his People, and his fitness to rule over the portion of his an cestors, . . dominions confo'red upon him. He made Sat tare, eefrom__.. being a small a'td insignificant_ place, a hand populous town. He planned and. laid out bro a d '" a stveet • rater s in every direction. lie supplied the want hie s,a ,by an aqueduct, brought from the neighbouring ii " a wdetistance of two miles ; and with so much skill, ntexam.l•known civil engineer ir. as. perfectl workthis country, who saw Lnetiw tiled the declared that while in pre,aress, been disa, - . astonished at the As the - s cience which had knyoediin every part of its constrtiCtion, whether discovering a w a V,ge o ,f hydraulics, or the ingenuity in small streamsr of `eauing to the main trunk, ihe several and h e vearZ,alter which were conducted Into it ; cement which „. as with him the recipe for forming also laid out large sums the bridges, and set aside in in laying the pipes. The his revenues, forin th e formation of roads and thatether large sums, annually, out of „Cattara, as he appeared (.12urP"'. Such was the Raja of 4). )(Anted to watch his conduct, in the eyes of the men 1 -4 e. ;ved the lavish pr a i ses ut .' t • From year to year he and ties a t to year he the Bombay Government, a ut h orts ties at home upo was complimented by the the wisdom and beneficence of __— ~t territory, over wit.... ...... be rewarded are empowed, during their lives, to collect the revenue. These jagheers stand in the place of pen sions. The sovereignty over several such jagheers was secured to the Raja of Sattara, by the same treaty which placed him on the throne. If any power was competent to deprive him of these jagheers, the same power was competent to take from him his entire dominion. It be came a matter of the utmost importance, therefore, that the Raja should assert his right in this matter, and claim the fulfilment of the treaty. He did so, and was evaded. He offered to submit the point in dispute to Mr. Elphin stone, the framer of the treaty, then in England, and gave his word that he would abide by Mr. Elphinstone's decision, whatever it might be. This was never done. He prayed that the matter might be referred home for the opinion of the Court of Directors. This was promised, but never performed. The disagreement about the jagheers took pl ace i n 1832 an 1833. After the promise of the Bombay Government that the subject should be submitted to the Court of Directors, the Raja rested for some time contented ; but, at the end of three years, he discovered that he had been deceived —that no reference of his ease had_ been made to the home authorities. He was displeased—he lost his con fidence in the Bombay Government—he became dis quieted in his mind, and declared he could not take his food, so deeply had the conduct of the local authorities affected him. He announced his intention of sending agents to this country to represent his case, and to claim the fulfilment of the treaty. This openly avowed intention of appeal, the Bombay Government construed into an infraction of the treaty, and, still more, into an insult to themselves ; and they retaliated, by rejecting the Raja's customary annual present and letter,. thus breaking off all amicable relations with him. They also withheld the sword and the Directors' letter. Let me here observe, that these alleged infractions of the treaty on the part of the Company, in the matter of the jagheers, are now admitted. Mr. Elphinstone, who was always at hand to be appealed to, and whose word would have settled the point at once, has never been appealed to. Lord Clare, the Governor of Bombay at the time of the dispute, and who was at first inclined to sanction the resumption of the jagheers, has since confessed that he was wrong, and the Raja right. The treaty has again and again been produced in the presence of' the Directors; and the three successive Residents at the Rajah's Court, Generals Robertson. Briggs, and Lodwick, have all de clared their unqualified opinion in favour of the entire justice of the Raja's claims. His right to appeal to the home authorities, by means oC Vakeels or native agents, has never been disputed in'open Court. The right is undoubted ; but it suited the purpose of the wholesale violators of treaties in India, to pervert a re3pectful ap plication to the superior authorities in England, into a breach of treaty. The toss of the favour and good opinion of the Bombay Government was the signal for the rising of a host of enemies of the Raja, who found the local authorities but too willing to listen to every ac cusation they could invent. The first charge, gravely preferred against him, was that of seeking to corrupt two native officers in the service of the British Government. But, before I proceed, I must remind you of what I have already informed you. The Throne of the Raja, who is a Mahratta, had been raised upon the ruin of the Peshwa, who was a Brahmin. The Raja had been guided for years by a policy, which led him to adopt every legitimate means of destroying the influence of the Brahmins, and of raising the intellectual standard and political importance of the Mahrattas. He had, despite of all opposition and all denunciation, prose secuted the work of educating the mass of the people ; and he had filled up the measure of his offences, in the eyes of the Hindoo priests, by refusing to appoint to the office of Prime Minister a talented Brahmin, who, from the commencement of his reign, and before, had aspired to that high situation. He had, therefore, many power ful, malignant, and unscrupulous foes, who, though awed and held in fear during the period that the Raja was the favoured child of the Bombay Government, took immediate advantage of his quarrel with the British authorities, and determined to make it subserve the ends of their baffled ambition, their deep hatred, and their inextinguishabl revenge. Accordingly, Untagee (one of the most profligate of Brahmins) accused the Raja of tampering with the allegiance of two of the native offi cers, or soobadars. This charge was first gone into before a Commission sent up to Sattara, to try the Raja at his own capital, but behind his back. The Commis sion consisted of one of the Secretaries of the Bombay Government, a Colonel in the British army, and the Resident at the Raja's Court, General Lodwick. The last-named gentleman was appointed the president of the Commission, and I heard him the other day declare in open Court, that the originator of the plot avowed him self actuated by revenge, and to be unworthy of belief ; that while looking about for the means of revenging him self upon the Raja, heaven threw these soobadars in hi: way. He said, too, that one of these soobadars declared that, to promote the plot, he took an oath which he had no intention to keep ; and General Lodwick also openly stated that the Commissioners, with whom he was asso ciated, would not allow these criminators of the Raja to be cross-examined ; although their oral testimony was in many important particulars irreconcilable with their previous depositions. A second charge was brought forward—that of con spiring with Don Manoel de Portugal, the Viceroy of a petty, poverty-stricken, powerless Portuguese settle ment, on the southern confines of the Sattara terri tory, some 200 miles below Bombay ; a conspiracy to raise 30,000 troops in Europe, bring them to India, and, with this splendid army, to drive the English for ever out of Hindustan ! The witnesses brought forward to support this monstrous, wicked, and contemptibly ridi culous charge .were almost to a man Brahmins. Several among them were gang robbers, whom the Bombay Government pardoned. The precious evidence of a written character, consisted of a bundle of Mahratta and Portuguese letters, found in pawn with an obseure in habitant of tin obscure village in the Goa territory, and purporting to have belonged to two Brahmins, who had died tea months before, and are declared to have been the agents of the Raja of Sattara ; while it is ad mitted that thOe same persons had for years been in the service of it man who is regarded as the Pope of the Brahmins, !known by the name of the Swainee of Sunkeshwar, and a known - enemy of the Raja. These documents, which have been pronounced satisfactory evidence of the Raja's guilty intentions, and which, if genuine, might have made their possessors rich for ever, were purchased by the British Govern ment for the astounding sum of forty pounds sterling. The Portuguese papers thus found, and affirmed to be signed by Don Manoal, have been declared by that nobleman to be utter forgeries, and his alleged corres pondence with the Raja a gross fabrication and false hood. But you will naturally suppose that the British authorities, both in India and at home, took the earliest opportunity of calling upon our ancient ally, the Portu guese Government, to explain the conduct of the high functionary thus directly implicated in a charge of che rishing, through twelve years, the design of subverting the British power in India. How great will be your surprise when I tell you that, while pretending to hold the proof of the Viceroy's guilt under his own hand and seal, there has not been, that I am aware, down to this hour, the slightest referen ce ma d e to the subject in any correspon dence between the British Government and the Govern ment of Portugal. I am equally ignorant if there has ever been any correspondence on the subject between any person connected with the Exedutive of the East India Company and the Viceroy himself. But there has been between that ex-Viceroy and other parties. A friend of the Raja proceeded in April last to Lisbon, where Don Manoel now resides, and fills a high situation in the household of the reigning Queen. He took with him a letter from Mr. Hume, who had expressed his de termination to bring the matter before Parliament. Mr. Hume called upon the ex-Viceroy to give hill and explicit snswers to the questions which he put, relative to the crime said to have been by him committed. The high-minded Nobleman went before the British. Consul in Lisbon, and ,, madenavi a t g h the receivedfollowing a voluntary com m u n and at ion s , ol e m dated solemn declaration ,-- fthe British Parliament, re on the Bth instant, from the most illustrious Senhor Joseph I - lume, conspiracy syaidthtaot have the contrivedßaj ah of againstSatta r a , t h a e t and affirming that I was aware .gritish power in In atrhya,t,fodrutrhi during sake e and pirach)laion3 iparteisnegnttodetthherocilleds , d. of justice my of the said cons OP whatsoever, upon political sub had any correspOnde,,n7 f Sattara ; and that whatever jests, with the said r aja honour, to feel it t declare, necess o to it, must be considered whole of the time I governed Portuguese Asia, I never documents may entirely false. nand of the British What is to be thought of the co appear relating They Indian Government in this business? Prince, upon a charge de throned a virtuous and benignant preliminary which they never took the most important. have knowledge of from the Minister of the British Crown all . dl alliance step to substantiate, and at the same time havo concealed the alleged guilt of a Government in friendly the' 3,r Bitish with us, It is not possible to believe the • eness of the wined the most distant idea of the genuineness _ . Indian authorities, either at home or abroad, ever enter tained would authentici...y.,.t as correspondence which they took out of pawn.. .Anything approaching to a conviction Pi 4,5 \ have laid them under the most spy M 4 ren) onsi D ili Y' t e loyal subjects, to bring the whole matter. PAP h Queen's Ministers, that an immediate and rigl4 wiut9r . might have been made into the facts of the case. Be e no. The evidence that was considered abundantly suffi cient to warrant the dethronement of tbo RaPi was convicted, and condemned? Sir Robert Grant, one of the chief actors in this affair, having died, Sir James Rivet Carnac, at the time a Director, was appointed Go vernor of Bombay in his place. On reaching India, be drew out certain articles and a preamble, with which he proceeded to Sattara, with a view of winding up the case of the Raja, and as it has been stated by himself and his friends, with the benevolent design of saving the Prince from the consequences of his infatuation and guilty folly. The preamble to the memorandum, which the Raja was called upon to sign, contained an admission of his guilt. The articles required him to pass an act of oblivion with regard to his accusers—to yield a certain sum from his treasury for the benefit of his worst enemies—and to put away from him the persons in whose fidelity he could alone repose. What reply did this Indian Prince make to such a string of propositions, submitted - by a British functionary, with the assurance that, if he agreed to them, he should remain upon the throne, and be restored to the confidence of the Government? He made an answer worthy of the brightest hero of ancient or mo dern times ; an answer which places him at a sublime height above the petty persecutors to whose arts he has fallen a victim. His answer shall be given in the words of Sir James Carnac, who has reported at full length his interview with the Raja. Sir James, speaking of his ad dress to the Raja, an address intended to induce him to agree to the terms of the amnesty, as it has been called, says:— " When I had concluded, he (the Raja) stated, that he regarded me as his friend and well-wisher; asserted that the accusations against him originated in the intrigues of his enemies; that as long as the British Government en tertained the idea that he had cherished hostile designs lie could agree to nothing, but this idea being removed, he would agree to anything I proposed; that he would consent to anything, except to abandon his religion, or to acknowledge that lie had been our enemy." A second and third interview took place with similar results. The Raja persevered in his refusal to subscribe to his own guilt, and thus sign away his honour, and put it in the power of the British Government at any time to publish him to tho world a self-admitted traitor. He asked to be heard. He offered to lay aside whatever dig nity might stand in the way of an ordinary trial, and to place himself before any honest tribunal. He offered to relinquish his person, his government, his kingdom, into the hands of the British, if they would grant him a fair trial. A trial was sternly denied. He was already guilty in the determination of the Bombay authorities, and must submit to declare himself to be, what they had undertaken to m a ke hi m ou t t o b e , hether his con science accused him or not. But these functionaries had to deal with a man whom they were incapable alike of understanding or appreciating. Perhaps they reasoned that he would do what, in like circumstances, they would have been willing to do. They thought that, if they balanced his nice and fastidious ideas of honour and self respect against a throne, and the continued protection of the British Government, he would surely yield the for mer to secure the latter. But such views were far from the mind of this noble man. He said plainly, " Gentle men, you mistake me altogether. I can relinquish a throne, I can go into exile, I can see my kingdom given to another, or absorbed into your own territory ; but I cannot forfeit the testimony of my conscience ; I can sa crifice every thing but my honour!" What was to be done? It was secretly determined that the Raja should be forthwith deposed. He had already expressed his willingness to remove without a murmur at the bidding of the Governor. Nay, he bad said, when with the Go vernor at the resic'ence of the Political Resident at Poonah, " I will stay, if you please, here, in this bun galow, nor ever enter my capital again, till I have esta blished my innocence before an impartial tribunal." Neither force nor rudeness, therefore, were required. The Governor had but to say "depart," and the Raja had passed his word that he would quit his kingdom im mediately. But guilt is ever clandestine, timid, and stealthy. " This conscience doth make cowards of us all." At midnight, when the Raja was in his chamber asleep upon his couch—at midnight, to suit the better the time to the deed, and cover it with darkness, if possible, black as itself—at midnight, did two British officers, instructed by a British Governor, and led on by a traitorous bro ther of the noble Raja's, conduct a troop to Sattara, and surround the palace. The brother showed the way to the resting-place of the Prince. They seized him— thrust him hhlf-clothed into a palanquin—thrust into the same palanquin his faithful cousin Balla Sahib Senna puttee—placed the Raja and his family under the charge of a British Lieutenant and a company of soldiers, and ordered the escort to march to Benares, a distance of 800 miles. While pursuing their way with all the speed of guilty fear, the pangs of child-birth overtook the wife of Balla Sahib. The anxious husband implored a halt, which was denied. In a few days, Balla Sahib was brought to the point of death. A halt was again im plored. Again it was denied by this man of fleshless heart ; and, at the close of the d a y, th e d evote d cous i n of the Raja, " Faithful among the faithless found," lay a corpse in his palanquin. My friends, I see the paleness of a speechless horror, mingling with the crim son of a burning indignation, on your cheeks. Too deep your detestation cannot be at this recital of atrocities, perpetrated in your own name, by your own countrymen, upon the distant plains of India, in the eyes of a people whom we have robbed of their country. Give your in dignation words. Put it into action. Rouse up at the great call of nature and of justice, and check the deeds of those who are covering you with infamy, by the spo liations and tragedies they are enacting with the power you have placed in their hands. Let us leave the lifeless body of Balla Sahib in the jungle, and the Raja in his exile, and return to Sattara. The Raja, out of all his private wealth, carried with him only the jewels which the women of his household were able, in the burry of departure, to secure. Immediately upon the abduction of the Raja, his ruthless persecutors ' made themselves masters of all his papers. But I may here, once for all, observe, that there is not in the posses sien of the British Government a single document, or fragment of one, in the handwriting of the Raja ' afford ing the slightest evidence of i n fid e lity to the British. How triumphant is this fact I An intriguer for twenty years—a man accustomed to make the most regular mi nutes of all his transactions, even the most trivial—ac cused by a Government that had offered liberal rewards, personal indemnity, and honourable distinction, as the premiums for evidence against him—and yet not a soli tary atom of proof, under his own hand, of his ever hav ing cherished a thought at variance with his fidelity as a Prince, or his honour as a man. In a very few days after the expulsion of the Raja—while the sighs of a travailing mother, the cries of her new-born babe, and the groans of the expiring husband and father were disturbing the stillness of the jungle—Sattara was the scene of the in stallation and enthronement of a new Baja. And who is he ? Surely, some one snore worthy of the throne than the man who has been hurled at midnight from it, and chased into exile. The deposers of the ex-Raja have, surely, found some paragon of perfection, who, by the lustre of his virtues, shall mitigate the " deep damnation" of the deed that has been wrought. Who is he, that is escorted by thousands of British troops to the capital, attended by the Governor and his staff to the Palace, and placed, amidst the thundering of cannon, the clangour of trumpets, and the explosion of fireworks, upon the throne of Sevagee, and proclaimed RAJA or SATTARA— the ALLY and FRIEND of the British Government—the CHOSEN OBJECT of confidence and protection—in the place of the dethroned, despoiled, and desolated Purtub Sing ? It is APPA SAHlB—the abandoned profligate— the companion of courtezans—the corrupt judge—the man who twice plotted the participation of the princi pality—the Judas Iscariot who betrayed his master—the inhuman brother who led the way to the chamber of the sleeping Prince, and sold his mother's son into the hands of his enemies. He is the man, whom the Governor of Bombay deligliteth to honour. He is now the favourite of the East India Company, to whem, doubtless, the sword which has been withheld from the brother, will be speedily presented, with a new and amended edition of the Court's complimentary letter of 1835. Let me observe, also, that the Company have deprived the ex-Raja of all the private property he left behind him, consisting of money and jewels, and other valuables, the savings of the years that he had been upon the throne, amounting to at least 150,0001. sterling. All this has been appropriately handed over to the exem plary Prince who now sways the sceptre. But I pass over many deeply interesting features in this history, that I may describe the conduct of the home authorities. On the news of the Raja's dethronement arriving in this country, a few of the friends of justice, Proprietors of East India Stock, signed a requisition for a Special Court for the 12th February, 1840, " To take into consideration a recommendation to the Court of Directors and Board of Control, to withhold their sanction to the dethronement of his Highness the Raja of Sattara, by the Bombay Government, until a full and fair investigation of the charges preferred against hi m shall have been made, according to his Highness's earnest and repeated request." The Directors, who are, of course, Proprietors, and, in consequence of their extensive patronage, most ingu ential ones, came down, and, instead of following the dictates of delicacy, and leaving the Court to decide for itself, uninfluenced by their votes or dictation, themselves moye d, and carried by their own votes, an amendment, i § 41 . 01 y inexpedient, a n d t hi s C ourt accord i ngly F ec knas ttr) TateVfeß With its msponsible Executive, in the Affain of the la?a of Swam" No further movement took place until the 23d of June, when further papers were moved for, and after a sharp stro;glc iii tiu‘ Court oi' Propri-ior.;, a day was named 1-)r c; , rmicleration 01' their coutents. That day was ; the 14th of July. During a debate of five days which followed. the case was fully argued. It has been most truly said, in th e p a p er whiehl hold in my hand, that " the advocates of the Raja went at once into the merits of' the question. There was no special pleading—no tor turing of words—no twisting. of minutes—no mouthing .of high names—no begging of the case by quoting mere opinions —(opinions mostly of men deeply compromised); but there was an appeal to the evidence produced against the Raja, though not printed by the Court of Directors —that evidence was discussed, dissected, put to the test of probability, weighed with living testimony of unim peachable character ; and we fearlessly assert, that the verdict of any twelve honest men would be the verdict so emphatically pronounced by General Robertson—that upon such evidence he woun not hang a dog.' Yet, upon such evidence, has a Prince—an ornament to his kind — been hurled, unheard, from his throne. A more wicked, disgraceful spectacle of lawless power arrayed against helpless right, the world has never beheld." What was the result ? The gentlemen who opened the debate moved for the re - consideration of the Raja's case by the Court of Directors. Other gentlemen recommended 41*11hictop„,iaLfelt it m y d uty to g i ve no ti ce o f an amenctnien . -rpribLiteetcitors modestly proposed that the Court should pa ss a gain their resolution of the 12th of February, 1840. Th0'61 1 4411 aaninion was lost by a majprity of seventeen—the majority being all Directors. On the Motion of the Directors being put from the Chair, one experienced - Proprietor . , got his amendment before the Court, whi c h was, hOivever,. lost. The rest were jockeyed aside in the most shameless manner, and the Directors carried, by their own votes, their awn resolu tion, that there should be no interference with the "re sponsible Executive." I ventured to tell the Honourable the Court of Direc tors that they must not lay "the flattering unction to their souls," that they had placed the question of the Raja of Sattara at rest. I reminded them, that there were other and higher tribunals before which this cause could be tried. That there was a legitimate appeal to the Imperial Parliament, the source of their power, and that—to Parliament we would go. I reminded them that we had upon the throne a benignant Queen, who would listen to our petition in behalf of a prostrate In dian Prince, and that—to the footstool of that Monarch we would go. I reminded them, finally, that there was a bar, before which even they might be placed on their trial, and, peradventure, be found GUILTY: and I pro mised them, that no humble efforts should be wanting on my part, to bring them to that bar, if they should turn a deaf ear to the pleadings of disinterested compassion, and obstinately refuse the demands of outraged justice. They have fulfilled my worst fears. They have resisted evi dence, as clear, as cogent, as convincing, as authorita tive, as ever was submitted t o th e j u d gment and verdictof ie human mind. If, in hot haste, or blind ambition, or wounded pride, or partial or entire ignorance of the facts of the case, they drove the Raja from his throne, and chose a supple villain to supply his place ; time, ample time, has been given them, to grow cool and thoughtful—to review and retrace their steps, and though late, to do something to redeem themselves, and to save the British name from lasting infamy. If they ever had a doubt respecting the Raja's innocence, that doubt must have been a thousand times removed, by the accumulated proof which has been furnished, that the Prince they have trampled upon and exiled, has been, from first to last, the victim of one of the foulest conspiracies ever hatched by perjured caitiffs for the ruin of an honest and noble-minded man. From day to day, and from the de bate of one year to the debate of another, they have seen the most upright and distinguished of their own servants stand forth to declare, after years of the most intimate knowledge of their Raja, their firm and enlightened con viction of his entire innocence. They saw the other day the evidence,' which they had bought in every market where falsehood was exposed to sale, dissected, and de monstrated to be utterly unworthy of notice, where but the life of a dog might be concerned. It was proved, that themselves were the violators of the treaty with the Raja, when they cast upon the jagheers a look, like that which Ahab cast upon the vineyard of Naboth, the Jez reelite, and felt like him, when the possessor said, " I will not give thee the inheritance of my fathers." Yet have they decreed that there shall be no justice done. The man is proved to be innocent, but they abide by the award they made in the day they declared him to be guilty. It is upon record that the sentence under which the Raja lies, was not pronounced or inflicted because he was guilty, but for the act—the thrice noble, the. en nobling act, of declining to keep his throne at the ex pense of his honour. What then remains, but that the lovers of justice out of doors should espouse the cause of helpless innocence, now enduring the unjust sentence of unrelenting power. This, I believe, will be done. Let the work commence here. To you, as to a part of this great nation, I appeal. I call upon you to send this cause for trial to that assembly where your representatives sit, under the solemn obligationvio restrain the abuse of the power they have, by act of Parliament, delegated. I call upon you to demand, through them, an impartial investi gation of the merits of this case. We have witnesses at hand, who have not yet appeared, whose testimony will carry confusion into the camp of the adversaries of the Raja. Let the Raja have a fair trial, and I fear not the issue. I now submit the motion of which I last evening gave notice. I anticipate your vote with confidence, and, when it is passed, I shall accept it as the happy herald of a verdict which shall,- ere long, place the Baja of Sat tara on his throne ; vindicate the tarnished honour of the British name ; and prove to the world that, though the acts of the East India Company may be cruel, the heart of the British people is just. Learned Counsel for the respondents sa id, " Wh ere are these I pledges? Show us what authority you have for what you are asserting," and, unluckily for the other side, they could not pro ' duce them ; they could not show that any conqueror had este. blished the immolation of women, and therefore, of course, they took nothing by their motion; de non apparentibus et de non existentibus eadem est ratio. The same argument was used by Dr. Johnson with respect to the authenticity of the poems of Ossian. Johnson said where are the originals ? but his opponent had none to give, and there was an end of the controversy. In like manner he asked Lord Auckland to procure his authority. The first Charter of Elizabeth contained no saving clause in favour of idolatry-- subsequent Charters preserved the same silence. The Charter of William 111. not only did not promote it, but it bound the Company to use means to teach the native the Christian re ligion. The Company were, therefore, pledged to do this in stead of the other thing. He (the Hon Proprietor) had h. boured long to see whether anything could be made of the ar, gument of treaties, but he found nothing of the kind. He had examined the original treaty of Orissa, but it contained no stipulation wt.atever for the support of heathenism, nor could he find any such stipulation in any treaty from that one to the final partition treaty of 1804. If not supported by us, this abomi nable system of idolatry would drop of itself. Gentlemen knew that, but for our support, it would be all at an end. On ,this subject he was struck with a remark of Mr. Grai,t's, in his invaluable work, published by the House of Commons, with out reading which no Hon. Member should legislate for India. He asked " Are we bound for ever to preserve all the enormities of the Hindoo system ?—to be the guardians of every monstrous principle and practice it contains ? Are we pledged to support it for all generations, by allying the Government and the whole army with the miseries which ignorance has so long entailed on the whole human race? Is this the part a humane and enlightened people are engaged to act towards their subjeCts? Shall we become passive spectators of such wickedness?" " Yes" said Lord Auckland, "if they pay 6.0001. a -y ear f or it." If this were the case, they were doing themselves the greatest possible injustice. Of what use were their ecclesiastical and other religious establishments? His Lordship had been grossly deceived. Christianity permitted nothing but neutrality towards existing evils till the grace of God should institute a better state of things. If such doctrines could be established, from that moment they would depart from their own faith. Such powers were not only not conferred upon our rulers, but no one of them before had ever attempted to exercise it. The great nen whose statues were above their heads, were quite in capable of such things. His attention was first called to this subject by a sermon he heard delivered by Dr. Buchanan, then just returned from India. He narrated some of the atrocities of the system, and he said it was a question at Ca'cutta who was to blame. Some said the Court of Directors of the East India Company; but his answer was, that they were not to blame, they were the executive Government; it was the Court of Proprie tors who were to blame. He said the sin lay at their door, and they must settle it with their consciences, if they had any. He (the Hon. Proprietor) then said to himself, " Am I a Pro• prietor, and know nothing of this ?" And he thereupon went to Andrew Jackson, their great orator, and said to him, " Here is a statement of things given upon undoubted evidence." " Well," he said, " what then ?" He replied that he wanted some one who had the ear of the Court, and who was not only a great orator, but a shining character. (for he had bur stars) to broach the matter. Mr. Jackson said he should lose, and that he did not like to be beat. He would not, therefore, intro duce the matter, but would support it, and so he did. He tried other Hon. Proprietors with a better success, and he de termined at last to undertake the matter himself. He had ac cordingly came forth, like David, armed only with a sling and a stone, but he relied upon the blessing of Providence upon his endeavours, which he had no hesitation in saying he believed was the secret of all success. Perhaps he should apologhe to the Court for being so warm upon the matter. Allowances should he made on both sides. " Ultro veniam damus, petimusque vicissim." He could point to many and illustrious men who always warmed with this subject, and of this Mr. Pitt was a remarkable exam ple, who could never speak without violent gesture. The times were progressive, and the march of mind could not be stopped. The present Premier was forced to take office upon this princi ple. But he (Mr. P.) had no comfort from Lord Ellenbo rough's being made President of the Board of Control, after his declaration on the subject of India in the House of Lords. Lord Brougham, too, he was sorry to say, had adopted the same views as Lord Ellenborough, and even the late President of the Board of Control evinced little anxiety as to the state of religion in India. He had little to hope for from the Court itself, yet he was glad to acknowledge that he was received with more de corum on the present occasion than he had been on many former ones. However, nothing should prevent him from doing what he considered his duty. If lie was wrong he was open to correction, but he acted upon the information he posses•ed. Whether this impost had originated in 1793, or at an after period, he considered it to be void,ab inituf. He concluded by moving aresolution to the following effect :—" That the Hon. Court of Directors would take measures to abolish all remaining processions, ablutions, and other idolatrous practices in India, in compliance with a minute from the Court itself at the date of 1832, and also that it would investigate into the payment of 6,0001. a y ear , awar d e d to t h e Bengal Government, for the sup port of the Temple of Juggernaut, in 1805 (as we understood), and which had been confirmed by Lord Auckland, and the other circumstances connected with that annual payment." Mr. MARRIOTT seconded the motion, and said that while Christianity continued to be the religion of England, it ougot never to countenance idolatry in any of its dependencies. The CIIAIRMA N said that he would take on himself to say that the East. India Company never derived any pecuniary ad vantage from the procession to the Temple.—(Hear, hear.) And he could say with perfect confidence, that every fair step would be taken to abolish the practice of idolatry in India. 11 ith regard to the payment made for the support of the Tem ple, they were bound by the proclamations made upon their taking possession of the country, to support it They were obliged, by the faith of that proclamation, to support the Tem ple, when th e y came i nto possess i on of? the country in 1805. The Hon. Chairman then quoted from the proclamation in proof of that obligation. They were bound, by every prinei• ple of honour to support it, and he thought it would give great dissatisfaction in India if they did not do so. He should therefore meet the resolution with a direct negative. Mr. PC/TNT/Ea observed that the support and the actual en dowment were distinct things. Sir J. LUSHINGTON said they were bound to the endowment, as was proved by the documents between the Company and the Raja of Beran and the Raja of Carnac,but they did a great deal notwithstanding, to abolish idolatrous practices in India—a great deal more than he believed the Hon. and Learned Pro prietor himself expected.—( Hear, hear.) They abolished the pilgramages and other practices. A great deal of ignorance existed upon the subject in the public mind. The petition from Birmingham, alluded to two things, which were quite distinct, the granting of pensions to persons connected with religious ceremonies, which has been done away with, and the allowance to the temple. The latter Lord Auckland denlares, in a minute of the date of 1838, he will fulfil to the letter, because, if he did not, it would be a breach of faith. These allowances and rents were made by former sovereigns of the country. But he hoped the discussions of the Court would do away with the ignorance and exaggerations that prevailed upon this subject. He thought the motion was unnecessary, and he would there • fore vote against it. A short conversation ensued in which several Proprietors took part ; after 'which the motion was put from the Chair, and negatived by a large majority. Mr. WEEDING made a few observations relative to the library, of which lie thought a catalogue ought to be made out before now. Two or three years had elapsed since the subject was brought before the Court. What he complained of was the delay. EAST INDIA HOUSE. COURT OF PROPRIETORS. A Court of Proprietors of EaSt India Stock was held yes terday, at half-past 12 o'clock, at their House in Leadenhall street, pursuant to adjournment from the previous day. The minutes of the proceedings of the previous day having been read, Mr. POYNDER rose to call the attention of the Court to the petition which he had presented from Bridlington on the 2d of June last. Mr. MARRIOTT rose to order. The prayer of the petition only had been read ; he thought it would be better that the whole petition should be read. Mr. POYNDER had abstained from doing so for the purpose of saving the time of the tourt. As the subject would most likely lead to discussion, he had thought it better not to take up time unnecessarily, but if the Honourable Proprietor wished it, he would read it at length. Mr. MARRlOTT—Certainly not. Mr. POYNDER would at once, then, proceed to discuss the subject. The petition which was from Bridlington and its neighbourhood was signed by 209 persons, the most respectable of the clergy and laity of that neighbourhood, and was ad dressed to the Court of Proprietors. Notwithstanding the abolition of the pilgrim-tax, yet the Com pany still derived a considerable revenue from the taxes imposed on the vain rites and idolatrous worship. That was one of the facts alluded to in the petition, and the other was as to the specific money payment of 6,0001. a-year, which was still paid to th e T emple of Juggernaut. He con gratulated the Court in having effected the abolition of suttee, on the remission of the fines, on the offerings in the temples, on the abolition of the pilgrim-tax, and on that concession so wisely made of no longer requiring from their officers and ser vants the positive homage which they had at one time been obliged to pay to the Rajas and to the idols which they wor shipped, and which had caused no less a man than Sir Pere grine Maitland to relinquish all his offices rather than comply with such sinful requisitions. Such were the men who had been driven into exile and disgrace by the operation of those laws which were now happily abrogated ; but still they were only at the beginning of their progress in the career of im provement.—( Hear.) The pilgrim -tax had been abolished, yet stiil they derived a great revenue from offerings made to idols, and thus many Christian men and Christian women still (leaved a profit from these impure sources. The religious rites in the temples, the religious ablutions in the Ganges and elsewhere, every prostration, every genuflection, every salaam, performed with a religious intention, was the subject o f fiscal exaction. Now, the object of this motion was to effect a greater amendment than had yet been effected ; they had made a good beginning, but nothing more. Certainly, the pilgrim -tax had been the source of the greatest of all evils. It d• ew together multitudes of person', and famine, sickness, and cholera, were the consequence. A more horrible source of mischief had never been tolerated or encouraged. With regard to the second point, the money payment paid to Juggernaut, he was aware it had been defended by declarations that the Bengal Government were pledged to the payment of that money—that it had been guaranteed on the conquest of the province, and there was now no remedy for it. Such were the grounds on which this payment had been defended by Lord Auckland in his despatches in 1838. Now, he thought it necessary to examine his assertion, which, after all, was not so much the assertion of Lord Auckland as of certain Anglo- Indians by whom he was surrounded, and who upheld these and various other abominations. His 'Lordship began by assert ing that when the Temple of 'Juggernaut was founded, the appointment of three superior priests was provided for, and a money allowance • was made, independent of the endowment of the temple. In 1806, by treaty, yy—tah,l,leo w a n ce., , all the lands and money allowances made to the temple of Jug gernaut were absolutely guaranteed. Now, the fact was, this money payment had, as well as the pilgrim-lax, been origi nally set up by the Bengal Government, and he (Mr. Poyn der) wished to know what right the Bengal Government had to set up this money payment. He would not seek to meddle with any landed endowments of the temple. He was not touching upon that, but he was attacking the money payment of 6,0001. a year. A DIRECTOR—It is in commutation of a land endowment. Mr. POYNDER— EIie point was thata.,lliyAn 8 17 t 9 0 3 , th th e e m fi o rs n t ey moneypay payment had been made—then it was that the principle had been conceded. Now, lie contended thatim imposed s o ed ug f h o t r t.,neverep pur pose d gi ike to ask on what have been conceded at all. The money payment was certainly no endowment. The present payment had been established in 1806, when the pilgrim tax had been first imposed, and that tax mpees ne h te a bf d emi i n n ege a t l ig l nuga rt probability ahnisteme de,e ehbyee payment.esh should u r l i pos sible principle could such a pguarantee d thheairrewombeeenn. given, or on what principle cou l dTe itnowbe is sat upheld? pre.. He should like also to [know how the money was [expended, for they knew, from a certain apocryphal bock, that the offer ings of meat and drink, &c., made to a certain idol in former h Government pre sent te(s bound urhdnaddAt Auckland) e e mk e been aaka c ed o consumed this u is m money wentdo nebne It was true we wrested Orissa from the Hindoo Government; but had we given any guarantee for the support of Juggernaut? The strongest proof of the truth of what he said was, that for three years alter we obtained possession of the province by force of arms, we took no notice of Juggernaut whatever. It was only when we discovered that the money paid was desir able, that we discovered the obligation. Lord Auckla n d sa id a that the promises were distinct and unconditional, an d t h at he wouldsked where did the fulfil themtotheletste prenise letter. Again, appear? (the H on . Pro prietor) ear ? They must have the terms of the promise, or th e y could not fulfil th em . He contended that Lord Auckland had proceeded upon a false ee Queen wereeen none. Secondly. if Elizabeth why the g assumption—he had reasoned right upon false p re mi s e s . His despatches were a petitio prin ci p ii fr om beginning to end. He would meet the question in two ways ; first, ,uy asserting that no pledges of the nature Lord Auckland supposed could be found to exist. They were not produced, for the same re e as ns on we th re e nLeotrdfir A ed la_yo b r ee a a s there had been, they would have bee n invalid. If there had been any pl e d g es, let them be stated. It was st a t e d t h a t th e practice of bu r ning widows had been in like man ner guaran t e ed on. When Lord William Bentinck abolished that h orr id prae usisgentehder t prac tice, an appeal was made to her Majesty in Council against its abolition, qn the ground of these positive pledges. The M~ •~:,~ RAJA OF SATTARA'S CASE. Mr. LEWIS said that, in calling the attention of the Court to the case of the Rajah of Sattara, it was not his inter tion to enter at any great length upon the subject, in consequence of the knowledge upon it already possessed by the Court. He would content himself with proposing a motion which, from its nature, he was sure would meet with no opposi tion. He hoped, however, that when' he abstained from en tering upon the merits of the case, no person would suppose that his opinion of it was altered, or that the injustice of the deposal of the Raja of Sattara was, in the slightest degree, im paired or diminished—( Hear, hlar)—from that circumstance. If that opinion required confirmation, the documents on the case, exhibiting as they did the utterly deficient grounds on which the local Government proceeded, would afford abun dance of it.--(Hear, hear.) His opinion, then, remained un altered, and his confidence of the injustice done to the Raja of Sattara was very much increased. Since the question was last before them the whole of the Raja's case, with the argu ments on both sides, was laid before the public. Those argu mentshad been considered—.a deep interest had been excited in the public mind.—(Hear, hear.) Meetings had taken place on the subject in Scotland, in Ireland, and in the important provincial districts of England. The resolutions passed at those meetings expressed the utmost indignation at the course pursued in this case, and called on Government for immediate reparation of the injury. He was happy to see such noble and generous feelings, which would not permit a native Prince of India, in alliance with them, to be oppressed and crushed, be cause he had not himself the power of vindicating the injus tice.—( Hear, hear.) There were ether circumstances which gave him confidence. The administration of the affairs of the country had devolved upon other hands—he believed upon more efficient, more able, and more upright hands.--( Hear, hear.) He was happy to see the rule of ;experimentalists and jobbers at an end, and that the Government of India was to be conducted on better and more prudent policy— ( Hear )—ab ovc all that the unnecessary war now going on in Affghanistan would be put an end to—a war which was not only attended with loss of life and great expenditure of the country, hut with loss of credit to the British Government, and much fiscal embar rassment. With respect to India, they had a President of the Board of Control who would bring much antecedent know ledge to the subject on which he was going to legislate— (Rear, hear)—who, when out of office, appeared at all times in his place in Parliament when subjects concerning India were brought before it—who was reputed to be, and no doubt he was, the framer of the Report of the House of Lords, laid before it on the 14th of February, 1840, and which contained such enlightened views of the principles on which the future Government of India ought to be conducted. Let him briefly advert to that Report. After some important observations, it concludes thus, " It is the firm conviction of the Committee that our Colonial possessions in the four quarters of the globe can only be maintained in peaceful and willing obedience, by making strict justice and impartiality the sole guide of every proceeding by which they can be affected." Strict justice and impartiality ! If the Nobleman who drew up that Report would put in practice the principle he had here promulgated— and he had no reason to doubt that he would not—then in a few weeks the grievance of the Raja of Sattara must be re dressed.—(Cheera. ) Since the last discussion took place, cer tain articles appeared in the Times newspaper, pur porting to be " Observations on the case of the Raja. of Sattara." He did not allude to those observa tions, partial, ex parte, and incorrect as they were, for the purpose of refuting them. Were he to do that, he should have to enter upon a question already published, but he alluded to them for the purpose of repelling certain insinuations re garding himself personally—insinuations as mean and illiberal as they were false and unfounded. It was clear he was then the advocate of the Raja of Sattara, and that he thought this was the proper place to meet these insinuations.—( Hear, hear.) An anonymous writer in the 'Times—for he would not do that journal the injustice to suppose that it was the author of those charges—it would be a libel on its impartiality to make such a supposition—but an anonymous correspondent expressed him self in these words :—" The case of the Raja of Sattara is sup ported here by a barrister who has large connections in India, and by an officer in receipt of a salary from the Raja." The tint he had no doubt was himself; the officer, he supposed, was his Hon. Friend near him. It stated that they had re ceived iliree lacs and 63,000 rupees for their services. What was the first insinuation here ? That the case of the Raja of Sattara had been supported only by the humble indivi dual who was addressing them, and the Honourable Pro prietor near him. He would appeal to the Court whether such was the fact? Was not his case supported by Sir Charles Forbes ? Did he not call upon the Court not to proceed in the case till the proprietors had a fair opportunity to consider it? Did he not propose that it should undergo a full, fair, and impartial investigation ? Did not Mr. Poynder sty port that case? Did he not state when he came forward as the advocate of the Raja of Sattara, that, though unsuited to enter upon such subjects, yet so strongly did he feel the in justice of his case that he was compelled to do so? Did not Mr. Salomons support that case ? And to _person da re accuse , him of coming forward to resist the acts of Uilovernment. Was it not owing to that Hon. Proprietor, and the effective speech he made on the occasion, that the papers on the case were re luctantly produced in Court. Mr. MARRIOTT—Not reluctantly. Mr. Lams—Yes, reluctantly, b e w9vl,3 µ r eat, and witl great reluctance too.—(Hear, hear.) Was not, he would ask, the Raja's case supported by a large body of the Court of Directors ? Did not Sir George Tucker state that, as far as the guilt of that Prince was concerned, the onus probandi rested with the Court ? Had they not failed in establishing the charges agai ns t th e R a j a, and did not Sir George propose a certain resolu tion to the effect that they ought to give to him (the Raja) that redress which he (Air. Lewis) sought ? What, then, be came of the insinuation that the - Raja's case was only sup ported by him (Mr. Lewis) and his Hon. Friend (Mr. Thompson) ? The CHAIRMAN said there was no such insinuation made in that Court. Mr. LEWIS said, he alluded to the concluding remarks in the paragraph on this subject in the Times newspaper. He would venture to say that no case had appeared in that Court which was supported so strongly, efficiently, and independently hoth by Proprietors and Directors. Mr. Martel OTT rose. Mr. LEWIS protested against any interruption being given to him. It was due to himself, and much more to the case of the Raja, that he should act as he was now doing. It was in sinuated that he appeared in favour of the Raja influenced by a large connection of Isis (Mr. Lewis's) with India. If any person would take the trouble to inquire, he would find that his ( Mr. L.'s) connexion 'with India was very limited indeed. But there was a connexion—a strong, a binding, and an en dearing connexion, which he had with India—he was born there—( Hear, hear)—it was the place of his nativity. That was his connexion with India. Was it possible, he would ask, that the Court of Directors should profess to do justice to India, and yet deprive a native Prince in alliance with England of his throne, plunder him of his property, and consign him to a dungeon, upon charges which he never heard, and on evi dence of which he knew nothing? He (Mr. Lewis) had taken the trouble to look at the facts of the case, and he found that those facts confirmed him as to the existence of such a possibility. It was on that account that he came forward as the supporter of the cause of the Raja of Sattara, and he trusted he should ever be found at his post there and elsewhere in support of that case. What was the third insinuation ? The writer stated that a sum of money, amounting to three lacs and 63,000 rupees, was squandered by the Raja of .Sattara among his (the Raja's) agents here.—(Hear, hear.) What, he would ask, had that to do with the case, unless it was insinuated that he (Mr. Lewis) had received some of that money ? To such an insinuation he would say it was utterly false. Who the anonymous writer of that article was he neither knew nor cared. He supposed him to be some hireling scribbler, who was so accustomed to be paid for every thing he did, that he could not suppose a man would do any thing for which he did not receive pay. But those insinua tions, abounding in mis-statements and inaccuracies, came too late. The subject had been discussed in that Court, and the puhlic mind had been undeceived. The writing of the article in question was a low stratagem—a trick resorted to for the purpose of making an improper impression on the public mind. But it would not avail those who had recourse to it. It was as dishonourable to the author of it as it was discreditable to the case. Though, in themselves, they were too contemptible to notice, he yet thought it necessary to say thus much, lest it should affect the Raja's case. ( Hear, hear, hear.) Mr. Lewis then quoted the opinions of Sir James Car nac as to a lenient mode of treatment to be observed towards the Raja. The communication in which Sir James had given expression to those opinions was dated 19th June, 1839, and yet, how had he subsequently acted? Why, in the month of September following, three months after the date of that do cument, he deposed the Raja, and he (Mr. Lewis) asked, was there, in that time, any intervening necessity for such a pro ceeding ? Were any fresh plots discovered? None whatever. What then was the intervening cause? Why, simply, he would not submit to sign a document, in which he was called on to admit Isis own guilt. Was that sufficient to justify Sir James Carnac in dethroning the Rajd. He called on the Court of Directors to pause, and consider the facts of the case, the more so, as he was satisfied that they felt an injustice had been done. Even now he called on them to retrace their steps. The motion with which he meant to conclude was, that the I letter of General Lodwick, dated October 1, 1839, be laid before the Court of Proprietors. Captain COGAN seconded the motion, and took occasion to say that the statements of the Times were, as far as he was concerned, totally false. Mr. WEEDING observed, that the attacks which had been made on Sir Robert Grant would never have been uttered if he had been living. With respect to the Raja's case, he (Mr. Weeding) had endeavoured to make himself acquainted with its details, and he came to the conclusion that the Raja was guilty. He (Mr. Weeding) thought the treatment received by the Raja was the treatment due to a Prince. He saw no rea son to complain of it, when they were put to 1,2001. expense for his support. He would now move that the Court do adjourn. Mr. M. MARTIN said that in the observations made, either by himself or his friends who supported his views, either not mean to throw any imputation whatever on the character of Sir R. Grant. Mr. SALomoris could well understand the propriety of the Hon. Proprietor defending himself from the imputation of stooping to be the hired advocate of the Raja, but he (Mr. Salomon!) confessed that beyond that limit he could not go with his Hon. Friend. He alluded to the observations made by the Hon. Gentleman 03 the Government. They ought to avoid all party discussions in their deliberations on the affairs of India. He thought his Hon. Friend had adopted an ill judged mode of expression, in alluding to the conduct of the late Government. With .respect to Lord Auckland, in re viewing the whole of that Noble Lord's conduct, it must be admitted that the Government of India was very much improved during his administration. They might in his (Mr. Salomon's) opinion consider the case of the Raja of Sattara settled, unless some new facts were brought to their knowledge. He wished to ask the Chairman, if since the last discussion on that subject, any inquiry was opened in India respecting the Raja. The CHAIRMAN said there was no inquiry opened that he was aware of. The question of adjournment was then put from the Chair, and a short discussion, in which Mr. Thompson, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Weeding, and other Hon. Proprietors took part, arose. Mr. THoursoN called on the Court not to let the end of truth and justice be frustrated by any quibble or subterfuge. As for him self he spurned such artifices and would act in opposition to them as long as he had the honour of a seat in that Court. He had given public notice of his motion, on the fourth day of the debate during the last discussion of this subject—he had fur nished the Chairman with a copy of the motion, and now he asked why was not that motion put from the Chair, and an opportunity allowed him of entering on the question? The DXPUTY-CHAIRMAN here entered into a long expla nation of the rules and forms of the Court, for the purpose of showing to Mr. Thompson that as the motion of the Chair man to which his (Mr. Thompson's) motion was an amend ment, was carried, the latter was of course lost. He (the De puty-Chairman) then went on to say that it would be better not to enter into the case of the Raja of Sattara, as notice of a motion on the subject was given in the House of Commons, where its merits would be fully discussed. He therefore trusted that the motion of adjournment would be acceded to. TtiomrsoN complained that he was deprived of putting his motion by a point of form. When he was about to bring the question forward, the Court rose, and rose illegally, as no motion of adjournment had been made at the time. The im pression on his mind was, that he had been ill-used, and he could not let that opportunity pass without stating that the form or law which thus frustrated the ends of justice could not be too soon revised and altered. He asked, what would any Director think of a Proprietor making a motion like that of Mr. Weeding, of an adjournment, while another Hon. Director had a motion to make ? He (Mr. Thompson) asked only for a fair field. The Hon. Court of Directors, when even the name of the Raja of Sattara was men tioned, had nice regards, cherished for form sake. There was no charge against him ( Mr. Thompson) of being out of order, and yet his motion was not to be put. But though he was de feated there, he must pay his humble tribute of thanks to the Press, which had so ably assisted him.—(Hear, hear) He thought, although some Hon. Director had complained of his name being omitted in the Reports, the Directors themselves could not but be perfectly satisfied. He (Mr. Thompson) was, and the. public were deeply, indebted to that Press. He must particularly acknowledge the merits of the Asiatic Journal, whose endeavour in this cause had rendered him such valuable service. This case was out of their (the Directors') hands. Justice would yet be done, although they failed to do it.-- - (Cheers. ) The country was rising upon this subject. It was only that morning that he had received a letter from a gentle man in Ireland, who was well acquainted with the general feeling ; and he said that the universal conviction was that the Raja was innocent, and was the victim of a vile persecution on the part of the governmet.t in India. He (Mr. Thompson) had not met a solitary individual out of doors who was not of this opinion.—( Hear. hear.) His honest convic tion still was, that the Raja was innocent. He (Mr. Thomp son) came not into that Court to defend him as an honest man, but he would say that was his own conviction at that moment, and he would say as he had said to his friends, " Tell me not of what is to be said in his favour, tell me what there is against him." The press had taken up that question under the solemn con viction that the man was innocent, and in that solemn convic tion they continued still. He must then take his leave of the Raja, as far as that Court was concerned. On the question of order, before that Court rose, he wished to ask when he could make his motion, as he had prepared one grounded on the con duct of the parties behind the bar. He wished to know whe ther that was the proper time to make that motion. The Cita IRMAN—The question of adjournment is not yet discussed. Mr. TitomrsoN must take that opportunity, then, of inqui ring whether the notice he had had the honour to transmit to the Chairman was a legal notice, and whether it would be heard that day if the adjournment was not carried? The CHAIRMAN said that notice must be given in the event of the adjournment not being carried (as we understood). Mr. TitoatesoN said it was a motion regarding a man whom they had deposed. They said they had given him a pension. They only gave him a sorry pittance out of the soil of India, and they only gave him a part of what was his own. They said that he should be King, but that they should receive the re venue. If this was not appropriation he knew not what was. He was not in order, he understood, in putting the motion at that time ; but he would read it. That it is the duty of the Chairman of the Court of Directors, who is permitted to sit as Chairman of the Court of Proprietors, to observe strictly and impartially the acknowledged rules of public deb a t e , b y t h e obligation of which the Chairman i s required to put, in their order, from the Chair all amendments of which he has received due notice, and to call upon this several movers by name to sup; ort them. If that was not the form of the House of Lords, it at all events squared with the form of justice.—(Cheers.) Mr. SALOMANS said he thought it would be most proer that at all quarterly Courts all notices of motion should ha precedence of any other motion.—(Hear, hear.) He thought it would be consistent with the propriety of that Court, so far as Hon. Directors were concerned. Mr. WIGRAM said that which the Hon. Proprietor asked was the uniform practice of that Court.—(Hear, hear.) If the Hon. Proprietor made any complaint it must lie, not with the Court of Directors, but with the Hon. and Learned Gen tleman who had permitted that present motion to take pre cedence of his motion. • Mr. LEWIS made some observation which we were unable to catch. Mr. WIGRAM thought that the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lewis) could not complain of his motion not being put that day, although it had been advertised. But it had always been the practice in that Court to give precedence to notices of motion over other motions. But it was to be clearly understood that if there was any complaint on that occasion, it rested with the Proprietors themselves, and not with the Directors behind the bar. If the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Lewis) had not given th Hon. Gentleman precedence, they would then have been discussing his motion. Mr. LEwts said he was the first who gave notice of a mo tion, that the officer might make no mistake in p:acing his Hon. Friend before him (Mr. Lewis.) wasl% I put, h Mr. I AeubTei begged saided to t a h s a k t a question b e fore the of tquestionbe Hon. o e f Directors.ae tl r j a o l e adjournment t petition h a d ust been put into his hands from v influen tial adjournmentmerchants of w Laosnedaurirlied, whether ,an dh.beewisr he hedto ee k e n l o d s w g i ie f , th n e e m ti o ee tio o n i ? for that petition ? ea ;l ri h e e d CHAIRMAN ,nem etie e said e uld b i ef made equestion Proprietor f apdljeouure7heentcowual could Mr. WIGRAM said if the Hon. Isrtarkecoenivtehehiqsumesottiioonnotfhaednj.ournment,but the Secretary could Mr. MARTIN begged, then, to give notice, that it was his in tention at the next ensuing Quarterly Meeting of the Court of Proprietors to present a memorial to that Court, signed by . all the East India mei chants in London , praying that the L as t India Company should take such Steles as they might deem, lie. EVENING SUN •::/ cessary for obtaining:a redaction of the duties levied in Eng land on silks, cotton, and woollen m anu f actures, prepared by our ttllow-suljects in British India. Mr. TWININ G f e lt regret t h at the course of the debate shout be interrupted by an adjournment, and he thought it, j was a most unsat i sfactory way to terminate it. Mr. WEE DING sa i d he had moved the motion of an adjourn.. . / 1:0•1 ment in consequence of there being two motions on the same subject before the Court. Major OLIPHANT said he thought that the Court ought not to adjourn till every motion on the paper was disposed of. What matter was it whether there were two motions on the same , übject . or not? After a short explanatory conversation between Mr. Thomp son, Mr. Salomons, and Mr. Lewis, the motion for adjourn ment was put, and a show of hands taken, but the numbers being nearly equal, a division was called, and the Court di.. videzi, when there appeared— ' For the motion. •.. 15 Against it .............. 12 Majority for the motion The Court then adjourned. SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. (RECEIVED THIS DAY.) ABINGDON RACES—THURSDAY. The Foal Stakes of 50 sous. each, h ft. Mr. I. Day's Executrix walked over The Alarcharn Park Stakes of 25 sous. each, with 40 added; the second saves his stake. Two miles. Mr. I. Day's Tamburini, 5 yrs (W. Day) l Mr. Pusey na The Baron, 4 yrs The Berkshire Stakes of 10 soya. each, h ft, and 15 added ; the winner to he sold for 80, &c. Heats, Abingdon Course. Lord G. Bentinck's Australia, 3 yrs... ........ ...( West) 1 1 Capt. Pettat's Caliph, aged Mr. samwell's The Knight, 5 yrs 2 0 Mr. Pryse's bro to Conlusionee, 4 3rs ............ .... Mr. Lucas's' Traitress, 3 yrs The l'usey Horn Stakes bf 5 son. each, and 20 added The winner to be sold for 206/. Heats, two miles. Mr. Treen's Benecletta, 3 yrs (Lee) 1 Mr. J Day's fby Ni mro d , out o f Busk, 4 yrs Mr. Pryse's Fervid, 3 yrs Mr. J. Day's Viola, 3 yrs Mr. Galpin's Bl em ith, 4 yrs The Celerity Handicap of 5 sous. each, and 20 added, one, mile, was won in two heats by Mr. Treen's Benedetta, beating Jenny Jones, Adrian, and the Knight. BEDFORD RACES—THURSDAY. The Bedfordshire Stakes of 10 sons. each, h ft, and 50 added. Heats, two miles. Mr. Moth's Benjamin, 4 yrs Mr. Stirling's Pocket Aper, 3 yrs The first was a d e ad heat. BECCLES RACES.—WEDNESEAY. The Gentlemens' Purse of 501. Winner to be sold for 250/. Heats, two miles. Mr. A bel's 2Eolian, 3 yr 5....• Mr. smith's Daniel, aged Mr. Gould's Cavalho, aged 3 dr Handicap of 5 FOVS. each, and 15 added. Once round and a distance. Mr. Abel's JEolian, 3 yrs (Etherington) 1 2 1 Mr. Jolly's Vete-el, aged Mr. Cubite4 Ratcatcher's Daughter, 3 yrs 2 3 dr OSWESTRY RACES.—WEDNESDAY. The Oswestry Stakes of 5 sovs. each, with 30 added. Mile and half. Mr. Hornby's Champagne, 4 yrs.. Mr. Bowers's Lady Grove, 4 yrs The Gold Cup of 1001. Two miles and a quarter. Mr. Saunders' Kitty Cockle, aged (Cartwright) 1 Wr. Walters's King Cole, aged Mr. Barrow's Chztharina, aged, and Mr. Jones's Portrait, 3 yrs, were not placed. The Town Plate of 501. Mile and half, heats. Mr. Jones's Portrait, 3 yrs (Stagg) 0 1 1 Mr. Walters's Chantilly, 5 yrs 1 2 2 Mr. S nith's The Maid, 4 yrs Mr. Thompson's br f, by The Mole, 3 yrs 3 0 dr Frederick, 4 yrs, and Talebearer, aged, not placed. Hand cap of 5 sous. each, h ft, and 30 added. Mile and a half heats. Mr. Ifornby's Champagne, 4 yrs (Cartwright) 1 1 Sir C. Cockerill's Lady Liverpoul, 4 yrs Mr. Saunders' Kitty Cockle, aged The Yeomanry Cavalry Cup of 50 soya. and a sweepstakes of 2 sots each for the second, mile and a half heats, was won in two heats by Mr. T. Platt's Phenomenon, 5 yrs (owner) beat.. ing fcur others. BRECONSHIRE RACES.—TUESDAY. The Breconshire Stakes of I 0 sovs., h ft, and 3 only if declared, with 20 added. Two miles. Mr. Morris' Fat Jack, aged 1 Mr. Jones' Henley, 4 yrs Mr. \ r evers' Little Tommy, 5 yrs Mr. It. Davies' Merry Lass 4 The. Risk Stakes of 5 sovs. each, 2 ft, and 15 added. Heats, twice round and a dis. . Mr. Trotter's Nell, 3 yrs 1 1 • Mr. Gough' s Pil ot, age d Mr. \ r evers' Mazeppa, 4 yrs The Ladies' Plate of 501. Heats. Mr. Evans' Fat Jack, aged Mr. Vevers' Little Tommy, 5 yrs... Mr. uapel's cby Duport, 4 yrs .... I , ,,x's F or ty-t wo , 6 yrs Thu Pony Race was won by Mr. Jones' Rory O'More. WEDNESDAY. The Members' Plate of 50/. Two miles, heats. Mr. Jun es ' H en l ey, 4 yrs .. 1 1 Mr. Trotter's Nell, 5 y rs Mr. Brewer's J err y dis. The County Stakes, with a Cup added, were won by Mr. Jenkin's lionddu ; and the Hurdle Race, by Mr. Morgan's Tallman. 1 1 4 2 2 dr 3 dr LIVERPOOL RACES—THU RSDAY. The Orrnskirk Purse of 501., added to a Handicap of 10 sovs. each. One mile. Sir R. W. Bulkeley's Cerito, 3 yrs... (Stagg) 1 Mr. Vansittart's Galaor, 3 yrs • 2 Mr. WhitwOrth's Lady Mary, 3 yrs; Mr. Mostyn's Myrtle, 3 yrs; Mr. Goodman's Sister to Glencoe, 3 yrs; Lord Eglin ton's Assagai, 3 yrs ; and Mr. Thompson's b f by Musquito, 3 yrs. were not placed. The Wilton Stakes of 30 sovs. each, 20 ft, and 50 added. T. Y. C. Lord Eglinton's Aruspex, 2 yrs (Oates) 1 Mr. o,borne's Gipsy Queen, 2 yrs Mr. Jaques' Playfellow, 2 yrs. Lord st2nley's Lady of the Lune, 2 yrs Mr. Ogden's Brother to Harpurley, 3 yrs 5 The Steward's Cup, added to a Subscription of 20 sovs. each. Two miles and a half. Mr. Bell's Th e Squire, 3 yrs (Bunby) I Mr. Nl'reford' s 'Warden, 4 y rs Mr. M 2 ostyn's Princ e C ara d oc , 3 yrs Mr. Graydon' s R osc i us , 5 yrs Mr. Goodman' s O re li a . 5 yrs 4 Plate of 501. Heats, one round Mr. Graydon's Cl•nker, 5 yrs Mr. Heywood's Mr. Whippy, 3 yrs 5 1 2 Mr. Vansittart's Smollett, 6 yrs Lord Eglinton's Asmgai, 3 yrs 6 3 dr. Lord Stanley's Nightshade, 3 yrs 3 dr. Mr. Taylor's Margaret, 5 yrs LINCOLN RACES—Wznwasnay. The Brovrnlow Stakes of 5 sous. each, with 25 added; second saves his stake. Mile heats. Mr. Key's Image, 3 yrs (Frost) 1 1 Mr. Denham' s f. b y P anta l oon, out of Souvenir, 3 yrs. 0 2 Mr. Brookes' Moonbeam, 3 yrs The Blankney Stakes of 20 sovs. each, lOft. and 30 added. Half a mile. Mr. Brooks' Idolatry .... ....•••• (M arson ) 1 Mr. Owsley's Happy-g o -l uc k y Iler Majesty' s Pl a t e o f 100 gu i neas. Two •nlile beats. 2 Duke of Cleveland's Sampson, 5 yrs (Lye) 1 1 Mr. Heseltine's The Shadow, 5 yrs 2 dr Mr. Curtis' Progress, 3 yrs 3 dr The Hunters' Stakes of 5 soya. each, tw o m il es, were won, in two he a t s , by M r. Clarke's b mby Confederate, 4 yrs (M r . Swan), beating Sam W e xl er , A ggravator, and two others. LEDBURY RACES.—WEDNESDAY. The first race was won by Mr. Barnes' bg, the Hunters' Stake., by Mr. Williams b m, and the Hurdle Race, by Mr. Hooper's Postboy. ROWING MATCH. THE GREAT SCULLESS' WAGER BETWEEN COOMBES AND LETT.—This highly interesting wager, which has for some time engrossed the attention of aquatic patrons, yesterday ter minated in favour of Coombes, after 'one of the most deter mined struggles ever seen on the Thames. The combatants, although young, are both considered very scientific 'cullers, and were pitted against each other about six weeks ago, when alter a series of fouling, which lasted for miles ! Lett was declared the winner ; but it was a general opinion that had this been a wager without fouling that victory would have been on the other side. This feeling induced the backers of Coombe!, to give another challenge for what is termed a clear right-away wager ; but as an objection was set up to this by the of her party,. it was finally arranged that for the first mile there should be no fou:ing, but that for the next and remainder of the distance it should be in every respect a waterman's wager (one in whirl' fouling is allowed). Lett, who' hails at eambeth, was the favoui ite at 5 and 6 to 4; and on the part of Tam C mni r e ' who Iles at Vauxhall-bridge, there were plenty of takers. with distance was, as usual, from Westminster to Putney , w ee.. tide ; and at a quarter to four the men made their appearan ce.. They were scull and scull for a quarter of a mile,wben drew slightly ahead. PrOin the Penitentiary to the mill a n that the Rod Hou se i t was most dashing work. Lett triedeedTh. sp man could t o over h aul his opponent, but in vain.the v i ctor y. was tint rate, b u t superior power gave Coombe's bt lengths, He gr.tdually impro ve d his aclvantage,and won hyeivgrai o f the . amidst long an d l oud cheering. There were •e " :dub boats out. • MALTA. The Cyclops steam frigate, Captain H. T. Austin, GB., left Malta on the 13th, and arrived at Genoa on the 16th inst. By her we have received the following naval intelligence from Malta : , " MALTA, SEPT. 13.—" The Acheron steamer, Lieut. Ken nedy, Commander, arrived at the Dardanelles on the 2d from Malta, on her way to Constantinople, for the purpose o f conveN lug Lord and Lady Ponsonby to Trieste or Malta. The Carysi,.rt, Captain H. B. Martin, C. 8., having been still wind-bound at the Dardanelles at the above date, received A'Lniral Sir J. orders of recall, and she arrived here on the 10th instant. to the latter. and gill proceed to England this afternoon or to-nuirrow e t d h h e e l r l e t h v first., eserd i w n i l th 6 morning. The Britannia, 120, it is expet t ; , will sail fir England shortlyieo in e af l t l e: :,e, t c h a e n, a a ss r , ri b v udt i the Powerful from . r,oruei,,iiirl returned drhaehtnisefreerneharis: flag the S t sorr.boli. The Oriental, - ' via Afar eilles 31st, ult., arr . :: 11, A. M ., and awaits 'the mails coming br o i f na no Id A T ahat l e . y i e e ° srL i a, : i lic ie a o a l n i t ßli e i n igem e l e c r a ' i i leu :s t lt . t . of a c i h il i m ta . : l l :e i l , s ay at by the Prometheus, by the non-appearance of which it is , opposed the mPA o ls were not despatched from yesterday, the 6th; in that case she will arrive here to-morrowm Londo n t ill ~ No further intelligence from Turkey or Egypt morni ng . last French steamer, but to-morrow the nexto Egypt since th e c ant is duo." one from th e La- MYSTERIOUS MURDER.--information was yesterday received at the various police-station s of the metro polis, that on the morning of Tuesday a most horrid and mys terious murder was committed on the person of Mrs. Jane Robinson, the wife of Mr. George Robiuton, a farmer, re siding near the Tunnel Inn, about six r.oiles from Whitby, Yorkshire, and a short distance from ) . the Whitby and Pickering Railway. Na trace or clue 'has as yet been obtained tothe discovery of the murderer or murderers. The horrid deed is supposed to have been perpetrated between the hours of ten and twelve o'clock in the forenoon; and a reward of 1001. is offeTed to any person, not being the actual murderer, who uouvu on of the e offend will 4tve such iormation as may lead to th e a pp r ehension and At Baltimore, o unuay, the thermometer stood at 100 in the sh a d e . The hearts of several frigid old n. Sunday, bachelors, and an equal number of old maids, are said to have melted on the occasion, EVENING SUN ~~~ ~~~ ~`~/ ) } ~> }~ 1-1: - 1 \