The Sun. — London, England, 1842-08-29 00:00:00

any of his family, of attempting to seduce our sepoys from their allegiance ; and he is of opinion that what ever the Raja of Sattara may have further to state in reply to those charges, should be fairly taken into con sideration before any measures adverse to his Highness can be taken upon the proceedings already held. " 7. With regard to Dr. Milne, I am desired to state, that though it was intended that his personal statements should not be rejected, it was not designed to admit him as the partisan and advocate of the Raja, and that his intercourse with the Raja is expressly placed under the control of the Bombay Government. " 8. I am desired at the same time to state, with ref erence to the altered state of European society, and to the freedom of access to this country now granted, that the policy may be questionable of discouraging respect able individuals like Dr. Milne, from undertaking the defence of natives of rank, who would probably be driven by such discouragement to resort to the aid of adven turers, careless alike of the reputation of the accused, and of their own Government.—l have, &c., (Signed) " W. 11. MACNAGHTEN. "Secretary to the Government o; I n di a. " Port William, Oct. 16, 1837." " P.S.—Since the above was wriUen, your letters of the 27th and 28th ultimo, with chair respective enclo sures, have been received out lam desired to state, that the contents of those communications do not alter the views which the Governor-General in Council en tertains of the irapolicy of the collateral proceedings re cently held under the authority of the Right Honour able the Governor in Council ; and his Lordship in Conned still adheres to the wish already expressed, that the proceedings against the Raja shall be brought to a terizAnation as soon as possible. (Signed) " W. H. MACNAGHTEN." „ . It is remarkable that the course recommended in the former of these letters is very nearly that which Sir James Carnac, in 1839, determined in the first instance to adopt, and which there can be little doubt would have been by far the best wa ll y of disposing of this unfortunate and painful case. These letters, particularly that of the 2d of October, 1837, made a deep impression on the Bombay Government, and no one can be surprised. It felt itself on its trial as well as the Raja, and did not like being called upon to abandon an unpromising and unsatisfactory investigation, which it had deemed so im portant. These papess follow (Minute by lite Governor, Oct. 19, 1837.) " In consequence of the, to me, surprising letter of the Government of India, dated the 2d i ns t an t, on Sattara. affairs, I think we had better suspend sending any fur ther papers connected with these affairs to that Go vernment, till we can consider a little the position in which we are placed by the letter in question. This does not apply to letters which ought to have been sent before but were omitted by accident." _ (Vinute by the Governor, Oct. 30, 1837.) Subscribed to by Mr. James Fetish. _ _ " 1. I have perused, with eqgal surprise and reg re t, th e letter front the Government of India, dated the 2d inst. ; for I conceive that, if the course suggested in the con cluding paragraph be pursued, the credit of the British Government will.be seriously impaired." 4 . 5. I need not say that, in the earlier stages of the present investigation, our proceedings had the good for tune to meet with the entire approval of the Government of India. All the information, however, which we could then collect was derived from but a few sources, and was comparatively scanty, and the Government of India ex pressed a wish for further information. We exerted our selves to meet that wish ; and in entering on a more ex tended field of inquiry, we were acting, as we conceived, ituniediately by the directions of that Government, ad securely counted on their sanction and countenance. The various clues to discovery, therefore, which the first in quiry suggested, were followed out with diligence, and a vast mass of new evidence has been elicited ; but no great progress had been made in this work, when the Supreme Government was pleased to disapprove of the course we were pursuing, and to call on us to terminate it at the earliest possible moment. To close our proceedings abruptly would have been fatal to the reputation, not only of this Government, but, as I conscientiously be lieve, of the British power in general, for wisdom, firm ness, and justice. The responsibility, however, of going forwai-d, even to a limited extent, was heavy and painful. It is astonishing how quickly the opinion gained ground at Sattara, that the Bombay au thorities, in the active measures in which they still persisted, were seriously compromising their credit with the higher authorities to whom they were accountable. Animated by this belief, the parties, whose interests the inquiry threatened to affect adversely, made every attempt to thwart or elude it ; and, rich and unscrupulous, they had in no small degree the means of accomplishing their object. The public press of Bombay meanwhile rang with necessarily un contradicted declarations against our cruel, oppressive, and inquisitorial conduct. To attacks like these no powers of language that I possess can adequ a t e ly repre sent wy profuund indifference, so long as I both know them to be unjust, and feel myself sufficiently supported to be enabled to proceed with a firm step in that path which the public interests prescribe. But, unhappily, these invectives, in fact, emanated from well-known in.. triguers at Samuel, re-acted on the impression at that place, and aggravated the difficulti e s o f th e i nqu i ry i n which we were engaged. Thus situated ourselves, we yet felt it our duty to give no cold or vacillating support to the able and zealous officer immediately charged with those inquiries. Through good and evil report we have persevered ; have taken it on ourselves to protract, to the latest moment, that cessation of operations which had been enjoined; and though, even yet, some lines of in quiry remain unpursued, have at length acquired a suffi cient body of facts, to settle, as I believe, the question at issue. " 6. Under these circumstances, however, it canno"., be denied that the character of the Bombay Otover-ment is almost as deeply committed on the event of the present discussions as that cf the ruler of Sattara, We owe it to ourselve3 to show, that we have r icA acted lightly, or harshly, or credulously ; that fre,an 'first to last we have had no object but the disc9v,„..y of truth, and have taken no measures but such as ',nat object justified ; that there were good and ration ;; i grounds for the several inquiries instituted, and tb . ...t those inquiries have uniformly been prosecuted wit2A judgment, with prudence, with all prac ticable dds - eifeh, and with the utmost consideration for the feelngs and interests of individuals, which could be made, to consist with a supreme regard to the ends of jvstice. ‘4' 7. By what I have just observed I must not be un dastood to say, that I deem it essential to the credit of this Government to prove that the Raja of Sattara is guilty. All that I mean is this, that, whether he be guiltha not, we must prove th a t hi s ac t s h ave not b een sub:le - AC to a minuter or severer scrutiny than the inte rests of truth and of the British Government fully war ranted and .p.)sitively required. That we are strong at least to this extent, I have no hesitation in affirming ; and when this is made out, the vindication of the Bom be). authorities will, as I conceive, be complete." The Government accordingly proceeded as shown in the .preceding passages. The Resident at the same time was desired to complete his inquiries, and send up a state meta of the evidence to be communicated to the Raja, who was to be heard in his defence. It has been some times alleged that the Raja had been satisfactorily tried on the first charge, but tlis seems to be disproved by the fact thatin the statement.ofevidence transmitted to i Government by th e R es id en t n January, 1838, pre paratcry to tb o intended hearing of the Raja, appears the evidence of the first charge, as well as that of the others; and I may here add, that when subsequently another.statement u f the evidence was prepa re d b y th e Resident in November, 1838, for the same purpose, agreeably to the Governor-General's Minute of Sept. 23, 1838, that statement also was made to include the evi dence on the first charge, together with that on the other charges. The following extract from the public papers also conclusively prove that it was intended to give the Raja a hearing or trial upon all the charges which had been brought against him, and which were maintained. (Sir R. Grant's minute, 15th August, 1837, par. 12. S.P. i., 931.) " I am further strom,dy of opinion that before the case is conclusively disposra of, the Raja should be made ac quainted with the fresh evidence that has been elicited against him, and should be allowed the opportunity of offering defence or explanation." (Sir R. Grant's minute, 20th September, 1837, par. 13. . _ S.P. i., 104.) " I think also that Colonel Ovans should be instructed to prepare a complete statement of the case which has been established against the Raja, in order that when his inquiries aro concluded, it may be furnished to his _Highness for any such explanation or answer as he may choose to offer. If the Raja denies the statements, he should be confronted with the witnesses ; but in this case the acting Resident must adopt the most effective measures for their protection." k'Colouel Ovans. to Government, 15th Aug., 1838, par. 9.) " It is to be recollected also that, up to this time, the Baja has had no clear idea el the evidence which has transpired against him." (Mr. Anderson's Minute, 22d May, 1838, S. P., i. 207). " I de not know what is the course the Right Honour able die Governor proposes should be finally pursued ; but I think that it' a final decision or full report is made to the Honourable Court, that it will be just that the Raja should have an opportunity of affording an explana tion of what is considered to be established against his Highness. For this end, I think the various facts found, showing the Raja to have been implicated in intrigues and conspiracies, having for their end the subversion of the British authority, should be succinctly stated to his Hiehness, and that his Highness should bo informed that Coyernment is very willing to receive an explana tion of what is consideted to be established agattist his Highness." (Sir R. Grant, 31st May, 1838, S. P. i. 247). " 53. It will be asked. however, whether he (the Raja) is to be condemned without the opportunity of de fendin4 himself. The Raja has not been told of of the evidence taken by Lieutenant-Colonel Ovens, and undoubtedly has a right to be heard in his own vindica tion. 4. have never meant otherwise, although Ido not think that he will yin& cato himself successfully. In my minute of the 15th August. 1837, I observe, lam further strongly of „pinion, that before the case is con tlusivuly disposed of the Raja should be made acquainted with the fresh evidence which has been elicited against aral should be allowed the opportunity of offering defence or explanation.' I repeat that opinion, not meaning; that thero should be merely the formss farce of a trial, to be closed by a ready-made judgment, but that the defence should be fairly heard and impartially weighed. So far as this Government should be called to decide on that defence, it would be my honest endeavour to discharge my mind of all my previous opinions on the subject, and to judge the case as if I heard it for the first time. But if it be thought that the Bombay Go vernment is too strongly prepossessed of the guilt of the Baja to be placed in the chair of judgment over his Highness, let the Government of India constitute, in any manner which they think fittest, an impartial and com petent judicature for the oecasio ( Me. Farish's Minute, 4th June, IgBS, Page 4, S.P. i. 251.) "As regards the particular manner proposed of mak- 1 ing the Raja acquainted with the charges proved against him, and givinir him the opportunity of defence, although in the peculiar position of the case, it seems to me hardly necessary, yet, as exhibiting to the native Powers the equitable course we desire to adopt, as showing to him every lenient consideration, and awarding to him the fullest possible measure of justice, I do not hesitate to assent cordially to it ; but with this it will be indispen sably necessary that, for the protection of those who have given their evidence, and to prevent tampering with witnesses, and intimidating them, as Colonel Ovans has pointed out, he be suspended from all power as Raja while making his defence. The political effect of this course is also most important." t (Sir R. Grant, Sept. 23, 1835, June 8, S. P. i. 335.) " We are called upon, I feel, by very strong considera tions of propriety and expediency, to bring the guilt of the Raja to the just pr lest of a final proof by the best and most Teess which can be devised ; and then, if he should have been unable to exculpate himself, to remove him from a throne, of which he will have shown himself emi nently undeserving." The Resident's Reports upon the several charges being before Government, Sir Robert Grant recorded in the course of the month of May, 1838, minutes, amount ing in all to nearly 600 paragraphs, to prove theßaj a's guilt. Now, I will just ask any one whether there can be a treason worth thinking of, that requires 600 paragraphs to prove it ? I never heard of such a thing ! Nor can it, I think, be deemed any thing less than lamentable self delusion in Sir Robert Grant to have believed that he could calmly sit down to try impartially an alleged trea son which he had composed 600 paragraphs to prove. However, let that pass. This step which, I must say, I cannot consider free from objection, of recording his full conviction of the Raja's guilt on the three charges finally maintained against his Highness, was followed by the members of Council of Bombay, and the Governor-General having these vo luminous papers transmitted to him when Affghan poli tics were about to occupy so much of his attention, fol lowed the example of the Government of Bombay, under the express understanding that a fair hearing would be allowed to the Raja. It may be here mentioned that at a subsequent period the members of the Government of India recorded in like manner their opinion that the Raja was guilty. Two of them stated that they did not think it ne cessary to give him a hearing, and the third seems not to have alluded to that point. The decision of the Governor- General on the long debated point of the Raja's guilt, reached the Bombay Government in October, 1838. And now at last the time did appear to be coming when the Raja, who, from June, 1837, to October, 1838, had occu pied a position in his own capital from which the meanest of his subjects would have shrunk with dismay—that of a butt merely for accusations, concocted by the ingenuity and malevolence of an influential, numerous, and unscrupulous caste of natives, his known enemies, aided and supported by British credulity and British power—seemed at length likely to attain that which he had in vain been endeavouring to gain the whole time, viz., a full and impartial hearing. He was never far ther from the attainment of that object than he was at that moment. Now, as well as on the previous occasion, when the statement of evidence was submitted by the Resident, came on a perfect fever of apprehension of the Raja's " vast resources, boundless wealth, and despotic power," to allure alike and intimidate witnesses, coupled, too, with the Raja's unscrupulous application of them in all probability to those ends. " His vast resources and boundless wealth" were described by the Bombay Go vernment, in the despatch to the Secret Committee, of the 15th of September, 1836, par. 10 (S.P., i. 2), as fol lows:—" His revenues do not exceed fourteen lacs of rupees per annum, and his military resources are con temptible, and totally inadequate for the enterprise ho has undertaken. We must,therefore, believe that he is associated with other Powers anxiously desirinc , to shake off our rule, and we inf er th a t h e l oo k s t o his Highness the Nizam, Scindia, and other native Chiefs, to declare against us, when their plans have been brought to maturity." His " despotic power" is exemplified in Colonel Ovens' letter of the 25th Novembeie 1841, paragraphs 9 and 10, (S. P. iii. 24), wherein Colonel Ovens rules, and the Bombay Government say nothing against the interpreta- tion, that the Raja was guilty of an infraction of the treaty. for failing to be guided in any matter by the ad vice of the British Agent at his Highness's Court, even though such matter should be the right understanding of an article of the treaty itself, which conferred on the British Government that authority over the Raja, with which it was willing to be satisfied after the conquest. As breaker of the treaty he was of course liable to de thronement, and, with respect to the difficulty of de throning him, we have Sir J. Carnac's testimony corrobo rated by experience (Minute, June 19,1834 ; S. P. i. 290), that "he is altogether at our mercy, and the execution ofan order to dispossess him of his territories, would scarcely be a more difficult work than to sign such an order." So much for his resources, his wealth, and his power, if he presumed to use them against the British Government. As to his probable unscrupulousness in the use of them, I shall show subsequently that the Raja offered "not once, not twice, but repeatedly," to surrender his terri tories into the keeping of the British—a thing which most unquestionably, I, in his place, and no more guilty of treason than I am at tkis moment, would never have ventured to do—provided that a fair and impartial hearing were granted him. He seems, therefore, to have thought but little of the unrighteous appli cation of his vast resources, unbounded wealth, and des potic power. I shall show presently that these advan tages were used against him in other instances beside that remarkable one of Sukaram Bullal's deputation to Govind Row at Ahmednuggur, before noticed. Most of tie authorities agreed that his suspension was necessary during the trial ; but I am happy , to see that my most \ esteemed and valued friend, Mr. Anderson, records the fol lowing sentiments, though in opposition to the majority: (Minute, June 7, 1838.)—5.P. i. 253. " Par. 21. I should not, however, consider it 'a wise course to depose the Raja, whilst any inquiry was going on, be that inquiry of what nature it may. "22. It would be a shock to the feelings of the people whether high or low, to find a Sovereign so treated. They would scarcely (I should say certainly not) respect our motives. The degradation to the Prince would be thought of, not our sense of justice, and the cause would rather be attributed to our weakness than our strength. I do not think it either necessary. The same end can be gained without it, and the influence or power of the Raja to injure could for such a purpose be prevented by our guarantee and assurance of protection." Well, upon my word, I think so. However those who knew the probable value of the evidence against the Raja, in all likelihood, better than Mr. Anderson, were very averse to the Raja not being altogether suspended from power, while the trial was going on; and Sir Robert Grant, in his minute of June 8, 1838, pars. 4 and 5 (S. P., i. 254), enables us to see, that the objection to leaving the Raja, at this moment, in possession of power was felt principally by Colonel Ovens, " who so well understands the case," giving utterance doubtless, to the sentiment of Balajipunt Nattoo, who, I am quite sure, understood it much better. Sir R. Grant, in his Minute of Bth June, 1838, par 4,. says :—" I observe that Mr. Anderson is adverse to the deposal of the Raja whilst defending himself. I am quite willing to leave this point to the determination of the Governor-General, to whom it more properly apper • tains ; but I am still, I confess, impressed with the idea of the extreme difficulty, if not impracticability, of bringing this matter to a fair and just issue, if his High ness is to make his defence while in, possession of all those vast means of corrupting and falsifying the:caie, which we knew to be at his command, and which-he is likely to employ with so, little scruple. The per suasion also has become general - among his sub jects, that he is certain, or nearly so, of acquittal, though that consummation may be delayed by the intrigues of the Bombay Government—the moral effect of this persuasion, aided by the free use of the means atto've-mentioned, is sure to give him a large body of witnesses, ready to swear exactly as he may choose to dictate. As a counteractive to these mischiefs, Lieute nant-Colonel Ovens, WHO SO WELL UNDERSTANDS THE CASE, has again and again declared that a suspensio ad interim of the Raja (for, after all, it is only a suspen sion, not a deposal) is an absolutely essential measure.— Now, if any step short of his suspension could gain that object, let it by all means be adopted ; but, after all, I see, there is none other which will both afford efficient protection to true witnesses, and secure us against the inundation of false evidence."—This apprehension of subornation on the part of the Raja, is particularly indefensible and inapplicable, when it is recollected that Government had before it the proceedings of the Com mission of 1836, and that his Highness had not on that occasion been charged with having re sorted in the slightest degree to such practices. The Raja, I should mention from the time when his in tercourse with the Government of Bombay became so unsatisfactory, had sought out other means of communi cating with the British authorities, and for a long time corresponded with Dr. Milne, at least so it would appear. The Bombay Government intercepted this correspond ence, and Colonel Ovens on the Ist of October, 1837, much objected to any correspondence with the Raja, which was not entirely within the knowledge of Go vernment. The Governor- General, though he did not approve entirely of the correspondence which seemed to have been carried on, was yet inclined to let it continue till the Raja had been tried. Notwithstanding the in terception of the correspondence the Bombay Govern ment seemed to prefer that it should be put a stop to, and at length on the 30th January, 1839, this object was accomplished. We find too that at that period it was intended to prevent a deputation from the Raja being sent to England, if this could have legally been done, (S. P. vol. i., pp. 278 to 285.) In this state was this un fortunate Prince left. He was subjected, thus fettered, to a most searching inquisition, for many months carried on with all the influence of the British Government by the British Agent at his Court, who had not a doubt of his guilt, and directed by his most implacable and formidable native foe, a leading man in the most influential caste in India, a caste notoriously at variance with the Raja, unscrupulous, vindictive, and having religious spite to gratify ! Sir, I cannot imagine any man to be in a situation more helpless then was the Raja at this period, and yet I find him prevented from resorting to any for tuitous aid which he might have been fortunate to dis cover. I declare, though perfectly satisfied of the Raja's entire innocence, I am astonished at the weakness of the case against him; under these circumstances, let the same means be resorted to in any other Indian Court, and I am convinced that in one-third of the time an infinitely better sustained charge would be made out. This may be a fitting opportunity for placing before you what the Resident considered a fair way of trying the Raja at the beginning of 1838, and towards the end of that year : " 50. But I must beg to express my doubts whether furnishing the Raja with copies of the statements (pre pared statements of the evidence), above referred to, will do this—bring the inquiry to a final close. It is clear that time will be demanded to prepare the reply ; that it must be sent to Bombay to be commented upon there, and that no conclusive or satisfactory answer will be given. Instead of refuting the facts, it is much to be feared that the same course will be pursued now, as formerly, at the time of the Commission, viz., to defame , the character of the evidence ; and that a mass of irrele ant statements will be produced, which it will be diffi cult either to reject or to reeeive." " 55. That which I think holds out the best prospect of meeting the views of Government would be to read over all the evidence in the presence of the Raja, and any two or three of his native advisers whom he choses to select, to confront the witnesses with him at the same time, and then immediately take down any defence he has to offer, as well as to summon and examine any wit nesses on his own behalf, whom he may name. This, I think, would answer all the real and substantial ends of justice, and would, it is to be hoped, bring matters at once to a close. " 56. To render this proceeding more solemn, and satisfactory to all parties, and to remedy any future misrepresentation that might arise, I would also very respectfully beg to submit, that should it appear to be expedient to the Right Hon. the Governor in Council, a confidential officer of rank might be deputed here for a few days, for the special purpose of being present at their final proceedings, and of reporting the case for the information of Government. " 57. By the above proceeding, I conceive that this in vestigation could at once be brought to a close, and affairs here once more put on a satisfactory footing. But I must beg to repeat, that I conceive the suspension of the Raja's authority necessary to the success of these measures ; and that without this I see no end to present difficulties. It would, I think, in every point of view, be attended with advantage ; for, even supposing that his Highness should be able to exonerate himself from some of these charges, yet enough, I believe, will remain to subject him to any penalty Government may he pleased to inflict, and a temporary suspension of this nature would serve as a salutary warning to him for the future, as well as a lesson to the country at large, that such conduct will never be passed over with impunity. " 58. Indeed, it is very much to be feared, that with out some decided step of this nature, affairs here will not admit of any speedy or satisfactory adjustment, for, as I have before stated, concession will only aggravate the present evils. The more we show ourselves disposed to overlook what has occurred, the more extravagant will the Raja's demands become ; and by such a line of policy we will be involved in a labyrinth, from which it will perhaps be difficult to extricate ourselves. " 59. But if we now show our determination to act with firmness and vigour in punishing these intrigues, there can be little doubt that this mode of proceeing will be attended with the best effects, and that it will tend to restore our character and influence throughout the country, both of which hare materially•suffered by the extraordinary and unprecedented license so long as sumed by this Durbar, and which, if permitted to con tinue, can only end in its final ruin." (Extract of a Letter from Colonel ()vans to Government, 15th November, 1838.) "20. Whatever may be the Raja's reply, however, it appears evident from the Minute of the Right Honour able the Governor-General, that some ulterior and final proceeding is meditated; and, if such be the case, would it not be wiser that such proceeding should at once take place ? and thus prevent all the mischief and intrigue that will immediately be put in operation by the Raja, on the receipt of this Yad. " 21. The oils that it will produce are clear and evi dent, the good problematical ; nor will it, I fear, bring us at all nearer the close of these proceedings, which is the grand object to be obtained. It will, on the contrary, probably delay, nay, perhaps, in the er.d, entirely frus trate this desirable consummation ; inasmuch, as if the witnesses be tampered with, and the Raja be permitted to burden the PRESENT SIMPLE STATEMENT OF FACTS with loads of irrelevant evidence, supplied both by his own ingenuity and that of his Bombay advisers, any Commissioners hereafter appointed may be involved in a , labyrinth, from which it will be very difficult for them to escape." I come now to a consideration of the merits of the two latter charges against the Raja; and it must always be remembered that upon these no trial or hearing what ever has been granted him. I have perused repeatedly Sir R. Grant's minute of the 24th of May, 1838, on the Joudpoor case, and I have found it, I must say, weari some reading. In the name of common sense, are Princes in India to be deposed because vagabonds at enmity with them say that verbal messages were sent to a dethroned I rince, in the destitute situation of Appa Sahib of Nag poor, requesting him " to make preparations to join in a war against the English," and " to exert his interest with the Sooltan of Constantinople to let the Russians pass through Turkey to India," and because it is stated that a sword was authorised to be sent in a veena to such dethroned Prince, whom the Dewan requests to send 25 or 30 Lacs, to enable the Portuguese troops to capture Nagpoor ? Unworthy of serious thought as these charges are, I do not believe them. Elojee Mohitey, one of the leading witnesses, was an adherent of Appa Sahib of Nagpoor, and was denounced by the Raja to Captain Grant Duff as an intriguer; and, as for the story of his destroying the letter and the shoes (S.P. i., 209), he couples with this service an alleged promise by the Raja, to make his mother give up to him some disputed property. It would surely be natural for the Raja to pay useful service to himself, even at his own expense, and at any rate at the expense of others. Yet the mo ther of Elojee Mohitey was not, I believe, compelled by the Raja to make the surrender in question. What is the plain inference ? Why, that Elojee was dissatisfied with the Raja, and that his Highness did not mind about him. Abba Mhareek, an other leading witness, is connected by marriage with Elojee Mohitey. I cannot stop to say more upon this paltry charge of political communication hostile to the British Government with a fugitive and a beggar ; and one, moreover, who seemed to have taken up the idea of becoming a religious ascetic ; and we are called upon to believe that this silly, useless treason, had been going on for years As for the principal features and characters in the Goa case, let us suppose a gang of robbers taken up. They are found to be connected with a coining shop; the officers proceed to it, and find quantities of false money and tools for making it, and on asking for explanation, they are answered by the principal coiner, " Coin money--to be sure we do, and a very good thing we make of it ; I trust that we shall long do so; we have the Queen's authority." " Oh, very well," we may suppose the police-officer to answer, "I am happy to hear that we are with respectable people ; I find all is right here ; now you will, doubtless, be good enough to show me the Queen's authority." "Why, yes," the chief coiner will reply, "I certainly would have great pleasure in obliging you, as you are so polite, but the fact is, the Queen's authority was given verbally ; and it may be as well to mention—not to any of us, but to that highly venerated individual, the late head of our firm, who died about a year ago ; and you per ceive, Sir, we are all in mourning for him ; and we have, I assure you, Sir, a great many witnesses. to prove that that departed saint did really state that he had such authority Now, I ask, could such an ex planation be listened to gravely ? And yet I declare that it seems to me parallel to the position of Nago's company with reference to the Raja. There is nothing to show that Nago required any authority from the Raja for anything he did. Ile wrote treasonable letters in the Raja's name, and made and appended seals as he pleased ; and he carried on this for twelve years Can any one believe this ? And who was this man ? A Brahmin, as well as the rest of his party, who are also principally his relations; and the principal, Nago Dea rao, died on the 30th July, 1836. and he was a servant of the of Sunkeshwur, one of the . heads Or the religious feud between the Brahmins and other castes. But there are letters from Don Manoel, and the S'igna ture, if not genuine, is a far better imitation than would have been necessary to deceive the Raja ! These letters, and the extravagant treaty and notes of instructions, stated to have. been communicated by Don Manoel, are found only on Nago's party ; and as for the goodness of the signature, if forged, it would have been necessary to forge it well, if, as I be lieve, it was intended to deceive those who under stood Portuguese signatures better than the Raja did. The attempt to connect the Raja. with Nago, and his company is beyond measure weak. The particulars of Dr. Herculano's intercourse with the Raja, and of Nago's interviews, are meagre and unsatisfactory, and are incon clusively shown. The Doctor, though alive, has not given evidence, and the persons who do depose are Brahmins of most indifferent character, and members of that party of intriguers who, admitting themselves to be so implicated in transactions of this nature, and having upon them the evidence of their guilt, are under the necessity of impugning the Prince, whose name they have so unwarrantably used. Tejeram, the banker, committed, lam told, some years ago, a fraudulent bankruptcy, and came under the corrective operation of the Raja's Adawlut ; his books and evidence have been ably commented on by General Robertson, in his speech at the Court of Proprietors last July. Sir Robert Grant's minutes on this case, amidst the loads of matter which they contain, seem to me to exhibit scarcely an occurrence that can justly be said to affect the Raja ; and certainly none that, if his High ness had had the hearing which he solicited, he would not, in all probability, have entirely disproved. And what a host of improbabilities present themselves to prevent our crediting this charge ? I will enumerate a few :-Ist. The extravagance of the plot. Sir Robert Grant admits, in many passages of his writings, that it is almost too absurd to conceive ; and I would remark, that surely it is not very satisfactor'i to be forced to be lieve that which one cannot explain or conceive. 2d. The improbability that the Raja sbauld place such un bounded trust in Brahmins, whom it is well known he hated and distrusted, and by whom similar feelings were entertained against him. 3d. The improbability that for so many years those enemies, who perpetually showed a desire to ruin him, should not have betrayed him. Sir Robert Grant admits also that the knowledge of his intrigues was widely spread. 4th. The weak ness of the evidence, as admitted by Sir Robert Grant in several passages in his writings. sth. The enormous powers of Nago. 6th. The distress of Nato's followers after his death, when they had it in their power, if the intrigue would last, to extort what money they pleased from the Raja. 7th. The absence of proof that the Raja sent to secure Nago Dearao's papers after his death—the more especially as Sir R. Grant ac counts for Nago recovering the Raja's supposed papers, by saying, "To the ex-Viceroy discovery might be incon venient ; to the Raja it was ruin irremediable." Bth. Disreputable character of the principal witnesses. 9th. Intriguing character of the SwLmee of Sunkeshwur, who may therefore well be suspected to have lent himself to plots against the Raja, to whom he was notoriously inimical. 10th. The circumstance of Don Manoel's successor and political opponent, Senhor Peres da Silva, never having exposed Don Manoel's in trigues ; had they existed, he must have disco vered them, and would have denounced them. I consider the Goa plot more ci , arly than any other a Brahmin plot for the ruin of the Raja. Brahmins have been engaged in all qua: tens to furnish evidence, nor is there any room for surprise that the evidence taken at different places should correspond, if we suppose, as I do, that Balajipunt Kattoo at Sat tara directed the whole intrigue, and sugfested in each case where evidence was to be got, after ho bad taken OTHERS. Soobadar SeToolam Sing Havildar Chtadur Sing Cosia Maloo Abba Mhareic Abba Parusnes Elojee Mohitty Abba Mohite: THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, AUGUST 29, 1842. care that it should'De there. Row suspicious,' I might say how conclusivefr condemnatory, the vast number of Brahmin witnesses I have taken from Colonel Ovens' letter, of the 15th C November, 1838, which I consider the best authentic ocument for the purpose, the names of Brahmin and oCer native witnesses; and I find the number much beond that stated in Colonel Ovens' letter, of the 25th if November, 1841.—5. P., iii. 24, 25. The following is tb list:— FIRST, ORSEPOY SEDUCTION CASE. BRAHMINS. Soobadar Ga.* Missur Purushram, prfumer Kasee Punt limdrey Untajee (con fssion) Govind Row )ewan (do.) SECONE OR JOIJDPOOR CASE. BRAHMINS. Krustmajee thintamun Agassey Babjee Myputee Parsotum Arvind Rugho Punt Datsakul Kasee Punt jundrey—before named Govind Row Dewan—beforo named OTHERS. Elojee Malty—before named Appajee Jad)o Wittoo Bovnia Wittoo Pateykur Kedaree Mania Dhoondee E.atia Abba Mhareek—before named Abba Parumees--before named Dinkur Row Mohitey THIRD, OR GOA CASE. BRAHMINS. Wasdeo Shastree rt Dajeeba Waeed Balkoba Kelkur G- Moro Punt Josee I `; 4 ' Hurry Punt Fatuk Narain Bhut Chitty : 4 - gleir - Rowjee Kotnees Khundoo Venktesh Kasoo Bucherow Gopal Jayram Kolutkur Abbajee Narain Josee Moro Punt Putwardhun Nilo Abbajee Burkunkur Sunjeewun, Brahmin Pursotum Anunt Gosawee Vishnoo Kesoo Dewastkuly Ballajee Punt Nattoo Kasee Sewram Bundrey—before named Ramehundur Gungadhur Josee Dufturdar, or Dajeeba Josee Rajaram Bhut Moondlee Govind Row Dewan (confession) —before named Vishnoo Punt Funseekur Narain Bhut Sidhey Sewram Bhut Ladkur Ballajee Punt Jogleekur Harbhutbin Ramchundur Bhut Hulbia Ramchundur Sadasew Bhut Abhienkur Dhoondoo Vishnoo Aptey, Government vakeel al Sawunt Waree NAGO DEORAO'S SERVANTS. Augee bin Feerajee. Sukhojee bin Limbajee. Venkapa bin Pillajee. Hybutee bin Jotajee. Pattoo bin Sooltanjee.' 6 Khundoojee bin Tookajee 35 OTHERS. Tejecram, banker. Hissur Bhugwan. Balaram Chuprasee. Abba Parusnees—before named. Pandoorang Rao. Dinkur Row Mohitey (confession)—before named The numbers, therefore, are as follow : Brahmins. Other Natives. Ist, or Sepoy Seduction case 5 7 2,1, or Joudpore case 3d, or Goa case *3s 6 46 22 If those occurring in more cases than one, are numbered separately. And Sepoy Seduction case 5 7 Joudpore case 4 6 Goa case 42 17 If those occurring in more cases than one, are num bered only once. I must say that where so much depends upon the verbal evidence of the witnesses, I think it very fatal to the cre dibility of these eharges that the native witnesses against the Raja should be more than two to one Brahmins, whom he always :disliked, and was at no pains to conci liate, the more especially when, as in the Goa case, one is required to believe that he placed unbounded confi dence in those his known enemies—and enemies, too, of the most vindictive and unscrupulous character, inflamed by religious bigotry, and supported by religious zeal. I have adverted above to effects such as might have been expected from the steps taken to procure evidence by the officers of Government. In page 111 of the first volume of the Sattara Papers, paragraph 3, the case of Bkow Lely is referred to ; this person appears to have volun teered to furnish Lieutenant Durack, for a considerable reward, with papers which would prove the Raja's treason. Colonel Ovens mentioned the proposal being entertained, and when he failed to produce the papers at the time agreed upon. allowed him a longer period. He failed in the end, but it is suspected, not without grounds, that his intention was to get the required papers forged ! In pages (190 and 191) of the same volume will be found mention of three documents, said to be, one a letter from the Raja of Setters to the Viceroy of Goa, the two others, in the Mahratta language, but in Roman letters, from the Viceroy to the Raja. All these are disowned by the Nago Mundullee, or party (who have letters, con taining the same matter, but authenticated in a better way they imagine). Now, who • then forged these dis honoured letters ? Certainly not the Raja's friends. It must have been done by enemies of the Raja—aye ! and by enemies, too, who knew something of what was pro posed, or intended to be proposed by those enemies who produced the documents stated to be authentic, since they correspond in matter with those documents. After this disclosure, I confess it surprises me that the Government did not strongly suspect that forgery by the Raja's enemies was . abroad. •I come now to the consideration of the question of the probability of a Brahmin conspiracy against the Raja. Colonel Ovans, in his letter dated May 29, 1841, par. 12., S. P. iii., 24 and 25, considers it as a fiction, mentioning the number of Brahmin witnesses, as above represented, viz., 21 out of 44, while he observes, " If any conspiracy ex isted, it was on the part of the ex-Raja and his Chit navees, to trample on the Brahmins, and to elevate the rival caste of Purbhoos, to which the Chitnavees be longed." .Now it is undoubtedly true, that in this feud the Raja took the part of the Purbhoos, and surely that alone makes it likely that Brahmins would rather plot against the Raja than for him. What was it that, some short time back, filled us with grief ? What but the confederacy of the Affghans against us ? And why did they confederate against us ? Doubtless because they considered we had trampled upon them. It is against those whom they deem to trample upon them, that men usually do conspire. My excellent friend, Mr. Wil loughby, in his Memorandum of 31st Oct., 1841, S. P. iii. page 13, is not, I think, at all more successful upon this point, for what does he say ? Why, that it was not likely that the Brahmins should conspire to pull down a Hindoo Prince, whose territories would, under the cir cumstances, be likely to be transferred to the British Go vernment. To that I answer that the question is not whe ther the Brahmins would be likely so to conspire or to rest tranquilly under their fig-trees. It is an undoubted fact, admitted by all, that numbers of Brahmins did engage in intrigues for some object or another, and are we thought credulous because we believe that revenge being the strongest passion of the mind, or nearly so, the object of the conspiracy should have been to put down a Prince whom they disliked, and who disliked and provoked them ? aye I even though his territories might fall into the hands of the English ? Is it not, I would ask, infinitely more improbable that the Brahims should intrigue for the benefit of their enemy ?—to augment his power, so that from trampling upon them he might grind them to dust ?—and can anything be more un likely than that Brahmins should intrigue to restore to power, in India, by our ruin, the bigoted and cruel Portu guese, the most implacable enemies whom the nindoos and the Hindoo superstition have ever had, with the single ex ception of the Mahometans, and hardly that ? The con jecture I consider extravagant and unjust towards our Government—we are liked better than the Portuguese, whose tyranny and forced conversions, I imagine, are remembered better than Albuquerque's glory, and if our Government in India is to stand until Brahmins league with Portuguese to subvert it, depend upon it we have a long term of empire yet. It is to be remembered, too, that those who believe that the Brahmins' intrigue was against the Raja, and not for him, arid for Portuguese, do not, as the other side have done, require this to be taken as proved. They desire full and free inquiry only. They say, "Do not upon one sided evidence alone (inadequate to establish a story not in itself unlikely) declare that to be beyond a doubt which is glaringly improbable, and requires, before it should be credited, the strongest and most severely scrutinized evidence. In short the Goa case appears to me to be a mass of violent improbabilities, as an intrigue for the Raja's benefit, and on his behalf. And this case, it is admitted, is the strongest of all. For Sir Robert Grant in the 4th paragraph of his Mi nute of 24th May, 1838, (S. P. i., 208) ; and 7th para graph of his Minute of 31st May, 1838 (S. P. i., 236,) declares 6e Goa case to be much stronger than the Joudpoor case, wbile he admits in paragraVas 8 and 15 of his Minute of 30th Jan. 1837 (S. P. i., pp. 68 and 69 ), and in paragraph 3 of his Minute of 15th August, 1837 (S. P. i. , 92,) and in paragraph 3 of his Minute of 31st May, 1838 (S. P. i., 235), that the first, or * Including Bervints, not Brahmins, of Nago Do n% Sepoy seduction case, was a weak one. It is also to be remembered that neither on this case nor on the Joudpoor case has the Raja had any hearing whatever. To crown the incredibility of the Goa plot, a great authority, the Right Hon. Sir John Cam Hobhouse, Bart., the late President of the Board of Control, has ex pressed his total disbelief of this charge at least in the followin words taken from his speech in Parliament, delivered on the 23d June, 1842, as published by Ridg way, Piccadilly : " The Hon. Member has also accused me of believing that the Raja of Sattara was about to bring 30,000 Por tuguese from Goa to invade British India. Where the Hon. Member learned that, I know not. I have seen some trumpery statement in a newspaper to that effect, but there is not a word of truth in it. As President of the Board of Control, I know that those charges ware brought against the Raja of Sattara, but to say that I believed them is what the Hon. Gentleman has not the slightest foundation for saying." I can only say that I have always been simple enough to think that the charges were believed by those who sanctioned the dethronement of the Raja by Sir James Carnac, because he would not certify by his signature that he was guilty of them ! If the gentlemen behind the bar, would say that they do not believe them, it would spare me much trouble, and, under the circumstances, considering that there are, on this side of the bar, be lievers staunch, good, and true, in most of what the Court tell them, I - think that it would be but fair to state particularly what it is that is expected to be believed. It becomes now necessary to take a review of the con duct of the Raja, subsequently to the appointment of Colonel Ovans, as acting Resident. Colonel Ovans ar rived at Sattara on the 15th June, 1837, and had an in terview with the Raja on the 19th, which is reported in his letter of the 24th of June, 1837, from which the fol lowing is an extract : "4. ( Accompaniment 1 contains the substance of the conference.) "5. As regards this document I will only at present remark, with reference to the sixth paragraph, that I beg leave respectfully to call the attention of Govern ment to the fourth, fifth, and sixth paragraphs of my letter of the 23d instant, in which I have stated, that that Commission (of 1836) being a secret one, no copy of any part of its proceedings could be given, and that the two members alluded to avoided waiting on his Highness, in consequence of the situation in which he stood ; but that they had not the slightest reason to be lieve that he had anything further to communicate in regard to his case. " 6. In the interview above alluded to, the Raja showed an inclination to put himself into my hands, but as my communications with him at this crisis are necessarily reserved and distant, in accordance with my instructions, this feeling on his part must be expected to wear off. In reply to his frequent allusions and remarks on the subject of the Commission, I gave him distinctly to understand that the whole case had been referred for the consideration and instructions of the Government of India. " 7. I also informed his Highness that his yad o fifteen paragraphs would be forwarded to Govern ment, &c." The following is an extract from the report of the interview : " 5. That his first and only object was to preserve the favour of the Government ; that as to his raj, he would give that up and go to Benares, but he wished to clear himself from this stain in the eyes of Government and the world ; that as to the Doctor, or anything else of that kind, it was with the view of obtaining a hearing, and of making his case known ; that many things now occurred to him which had not at the time he came before the Commission ; and all he prayed for was, a thorough investigation, as without it he could not be satisfied. 'lt was better for him,' he said, to lose all, than to live in this sort of doubt.' " 6. He wished, therefore, now to have what he begged for at the time, a copy of the evidence against him, that he might consider and answer it. The Commission had gone without seeing him, and he had had no oppor tunity of entering into further explanation then, but he hoped now he should be permitted to do so, and then he would be content, whatever might be the decision. " 11. However, if the Governor would only write to him a few words, saying that he had the welfare of his Highness's Government at heart as much as his own, he would be satisfied, and would atone° unburden his mind, and conceal nothing—every thing else will be disclosed. 12. I begged that he would repeat this declaration to prevent mistake, and, as he laid so much stress upon it, that he would give it to me in writing ; and the ac companying is the original sent by his Highness to this effect. " 13. Throughout the interview, and in reply to his appeals to my own opinion, I told him that I was the servant of the Government, and, as such, I had only to carry the orders of Government into effect." His Highness's yad (Memorandum) to the effect re presented, stated that when the letter he solicited was received, he would tell all regarding the false accusation against him. It is probable that he could then have ventured to name Balajipunt Natoo as the originator of the conspiracy against him. The letter which he soli cited was one which, by a British and Superior Govern ment. might well have been given to a native and com paratively powerless Prince, of admirable character, if it had been desired to serve him ; except only, that whereas it contained the expression of a willingness to aid in effecting his Highness's designs, of course this should have been limited to "designs meeting the appro bation of the British Government." A letter much to the same effect was sent to the Raja by the Hon. Mount stuart Elphinstone, on the 12th September, 1826. Could anything, I would ask, be more proper than the Raja's conduct on this occasion, and anything more chil ling and repulsive, than that of the Acting Resident, agreeably to the orders which he had received ? The Raja's request, which he twice made, that he might have a copy of the evidence against him in the Sepoy seduc tion case, was not complied with, on the plea that the Commission being secret, no copy of any part of its pro ceedings could be given to any one, as if any one ever heard of a trial so secret, that the evidence against the person accused could not be had by him in writing. His offer to relinquish his territories, ,provided only he could obtain a hearing, was treated with neglect. The letter of favour which he begged, the Governor at once resolved to withhold, because, he said, the terms of it " might be construed to imply that Government had acted unjustly towards his Highness." Could Sir R. Grant have looked forward to September, 1839, he would have seen the unfortunate Raja dethroned for declining to sign an admission that he was a traitor ! He offered again on the 17th July to abandon his territories for a full and fair investigation, and how was this noticed ? The Governor in his minute of the 21st of July, 1837, concurred in by the Board, writes :—" Ido not think any notice should for the present be taken of this communication, which, I think, betrays the Raja's uneasiness, arising from a consciousness of guilt." Strange that the man who was conscious of guilt should act in this way. He boldly protested his inno cence, and offered to divest himself of any possible means of concealing guilt. If guilty he would, if timid, have confessed, and, if bold, would never have offered to resign his power. No one could act in this way but an innocent man. But other parties there were who, lam of opinion, undoubtedly did betray guilt some months before. I allude.to the Soobadars. from the 35th par. of the Governor's Minute of the 27th April, 1837 (S. P. i., 83), I feel convinced that they at that time felt all the tenor of approaching detection, from which the Governor's reception of them Must have proved a most welcome relief. The Raja again, on the 26th July, 1837, repeated his offer to abandon his throne for a full and fair inquiry, and on the 28th the Senaputt3' and Dinkur Row Mohitey waited on the part of the Raja upon the acting Resident, and begged humbly for his advice, which his instructions of course withheld him from granting. The tormenting inquiries, the political inquisition, it may well be called, went on without interruption—for a time the Raja was applied to by the acting Resident to procure the attendance of witnesses, which he seems never to have failed to do to the extent required, but after a period the acting Resident summoned and detained the Raja's subjects as he pleased. I cannot think, without pain, of the degradation to which this high-minded Prince was reduced at this un happy period, while his Brahmin enemy, by British aid too confidingly given, was stealthily, but surely, work ing his destruction. I cannot wonder that his Govern ment was disorganised ; I am almost surprised that he did not, in despair, leave his country, and search for a retreat in any quarter where he might have been per mitted to go. He was without a friend able to defend or aid him, and he was himself in the grasp of those who could annihilate him in an instant ; but he still continued firm in the belief that in the end justice would be done him ; and kept as he was at arm's length by the Resi dent, who, also, he was sensible, was occupied, with the assistance of Balajipunt Nattoo, in making out a case against him, he strove, by every channel or means, to open a communication with the British authorities. Moi e "intrigues," as they were called, were engaged in ; these were easily met—all his correspondence, I imagine, has been intercepted, and what does it show on his part but an earnest desire to be permitted to make his INNOCENCE CLEAR ? for as to the stories of his intended appeal to the Russians or the Pacha of Egypt, these are, I imagine, quite abandoned. I must say a word or two about this intercepted corres pondence—a good deal of it appears commented upon in the minute of the Governor of Bombay, of 24th August, 1838. It does not seem to contain much of moment, but is it therefore useless to the Raja ? It is anything but that : it would, indeed, have been of little use to him, had it been allowed to pass without examination —inter cepted it is high valuable. In searching out and scru tinizing the Raja supposed intrigues, the British autho rities,_ without a clue to guide them, might often be a . t fault—but, if the Raja's intrigues were real, he and . his confidants with whom he was corresponding., intimately acquainted with all the various plots, must have had their attention directed, with th e utmost anxiety, to the various sources from whence they would have f eare d detection. And can it be conceived, that in all this con siderable quantity of intercepted correspondence the re would not occur repeated allusions to this or that person, place, or thing, h a ppily screened from searc h ; f ears lest discoveries might be made here or there ; precautions taken to prevent these, and so forth ! There cannot be a doubt of it. I consider the Raja's intercepted correspon dence quite sufficient of itself to dem onstrate hi s per f ect in nocence against evidence far stronger than he has to en counter. The Court of Di rec t ors rece i v i ng reports of the protracted inquiries which th e B om b ay G overnment was c onducting, intimated to the Governor-General on the 13th June, 1838, and the Secret Committee on the 22d January, 1839, the latter, a f ter rece i v i ng t h e G overnor - General's minute of 23d September, 1838, stating his change of opinion—" that it would not only be a waste of time, but seriously detrimental to the character of our Government to carry on any further inquiry into the matter ;" and i n th e l e tt er t h e S ecret C omm i ttee desired that proceedings might be stayed until Sir James Carnac arrived. It is quite clear that the sentiments of the Court of Directors at this time, were favourable to the Baja, for Mr. Forbes, in his dissent of the Bth April, 1840, (S. P. i., 361) says—" The universal impression at the India House, confirmed by his own known opinions on the subject, was, that the new Governer was empowered not only to suppress all further inquiry, but to consign the entire question to complete oblivion. One vote, at least, in the Court of Directors was cordially given to the candidate for the vacant Government, one voice was raised in congratulation, that among many grounds of qualification Sir James Carnac felt for the wrongs of the Raja, and was resolved to stay his protracted persecu tion." And Mr. Lyall, the chairman, said in the Court of Proprietors on the 14th July, 1841 :—" He (Sir James Carnac) left this country determined, if possible, to save the Raja, but, when he got out to India, and became better informed of his conduct and his pro ceedings, he changed his opinion." Since then his opi nion was changed ; it follows that it was previously fa vourable. No information, however, as to the guilt of the Raja was acquired, which was not in England before Sir James Carnac left this country. Matters remained in the state to which we have traced them until Sir James Carnac's arrival in Bombay, nothing having taken place in consequence of the Governor-General having deter mined on first making another reference to the Court. The new Governor at first intended to address a letter of remonstrance, or rebuke to the Raja, and forgive him, and surely every one must deeply regret that this was not done. In truth, the Rajah scarcely deserved rebuke, and least of all, from the Bombay Government ; but this much respect to authority and the British name seemed indis pensable ; but when the letter which he intended to send was submitted to the Governor-General, his Lordship, in his letter of the 11th July, 1839, stated that he thought it too harsh, and especially as the ob ject was to preserve harmony ; and as, besides, if the Raja replied in a tone of offensive defiance, and refused to let the subject drop, the strong mea sure of his dethronement, if necessary, must be sanctioned. The Governor-General suggested that as amity was to depend upon the reception of this letter great care should be taken in the preparation of it. One would have thought that, considering the great importance of having this letter suitably worded, it would hardly have been a superfluous precaution to have sent the Governor- General a revised draft for approval. Not only was this not done, but the letter itself was swamped, at least so far as we see ; and, instead of its transmission, a measure was adopted which undoubtedly was exactly that which the enemies of peace and of the unfortunate Raja would hove desired: The Governor, after proceeding to Sattara, at an interview with the Raja placed before his Highness for his signature a memorandum, admitting his guilt on all the charges, far more offensive than the letter which the Governor-General thought too harsh, and beyond measure more degrading, as requiring to be signed by himself. It was presented, too, at an unfortunate moment, when the Raja became first aware that he whom he thought his friend, and from whom he expected to have the hearing which he had been so long denied, was about to treat him as others had done. And why was it, unless free and full pardon was granted, that the hearing was not given ? Objec tions as to the Raja's sovereignty, and as to the servants of Government composing a tribunal for the trial of a case in which the Government was in fact a party, occurred, and further, " that such a Commission as has been recommended would appear quite in expedient, unless we were quite certain of the result." The Raja in vain protested his innocence of all dis loyalty, and solicited to be heard, and again and again offered to abandon his territories for a time, until inves tigation was made, and the confidence of the British Government was restored. His conduct, I should say, showed not only that he was conscious of innocence—it showed that he felt it impossible that on fair inquiry any one could be found to condemn him. He was answered by the Governor that " had he (the Governor) come to Sattara to inflict the penalty incurred by these violations of the treaty of 1819, further inquiry might perhaps have been considered expedient, but as he had come to over look and not to punish, this was quite unnecessary." Compare this with what followed, and is it not wretched sophistry ? What right had the Governor, because what he thought was an advantage was declined by the Raja, to make the Raja's situation worse than it would have been, as he admits, had he come to punish and not to pardon ? Repeated efforts were made to induce the Raja to sign the memorandum, but in vain ; and he was therefore, on sth September, 1839, dethroned, in consequence, it was stated in the proclamation, of its hav ing been conclusively established to the conviction of the British Government, that "he had for a series of years held clandestine communications, contrary to the stipulations contained in the fifth article of the treaty," that " he had cherished ambitious designs, hostile to the British Government ;" that he had advanced claims and pretensions incompatible with the letter and spirit of the treaty ;" and that "he had conducted himself in a manner subversive of the alliance formed between the two States." It has been said that his Highness objected to additional articles to the existing treaty, which were, however, merely to the effect of those then in force. He cer tainly might very properly have done so; for how could he tell that he might not thus be called upon to sign a new engagement every year to abide by the treaty, and thus furnish at least a disagreable inference against him self; but, if the Government had desired to show that his objection did not arise from his being obliged to admit his guilt; and, if they were willing to waive so wanton an insult to his Highness, they might have ex punged all that was offensive in that way. As to the preamble, it was evidently most offensive, and "was cer tainly not drawn up in a spirit of friendship, but in that of conquest. Had it, been otherwise, the Baja's sup posed designs, which it must not be forgotten had never been proved, might have been alluded to as " unfortunate 'disagreements," or by seine similar term. Nor do I see that it was at all necessary to alluded to the conviction of the British Government that his Highness had been guilty of intriguing ; and considering how that conviction was produced, I cannot but think that the British Government would have been more a gainer than the Raja by all omission of it. Remarks have been made that without some special provision in the treaty, the persons who had given information against the Raja, and whom we were bound to defend, could not have been protected. Those who say so cannot surely bear in mind sufficiently the control over the Raja which the British Government had the means of exercising, through the advice article and our superior power ; for although I think Colonel Ovens' construction of that article is too comprehensive, still there can be no doubt that it war ranted every interference that could be thought in the least reasonable on the part of the British Government. It is merely requisite further to mention, that, when de throned, he received a pledge that his private property should be respected, provided he submitted peaceably ; that he did so submit, and that in breach of that pledge, a quantity of his property was made over to his brother, the present Raja, because "the distinction" between the private and public property of a Sovereign was " one not ordinarily recognised in native States," although it was recognised in his State, and with the knowledge, and by the advice of the British Government. The same reluctance is observable in this third act of the drama, to subject the evidence procured against the Raja to fair scrutiny, as in the two former ones. Is there any wonder at this ? We have seen what that evi dence is. Look at it in the Sepoy-tampering case, filled with !lied discrepancies on, the part of the only two or three witnesses wbo depose to anything of consequence. Look at it in the Joiidpoor case, .full of nothing at all, and yet that nothing told us by interested witnesses. .And look at it in the Goa case, a mass of absurdities sup ported by witnesses so unworthy of belief, and altogether so incredible ' and so little aft' , cting the Raja, that the Right Hon. the late President of the Board of Control will not submit to have it said that he believes it. And upon these charges the Raja has sot been heard in his defence, for it is impossible to call a hearing the process by which he was declared guilty of the first charge. The Court of Directors, in glaring inconsistency with the letter of the Secret Committee of 22d January, 1839, entirely approved all the proceedings of the Bom bay Government of September, 1839, and this without expressing a cause for their change of sentiment. Such cause, indeed, it would have been difficult to produce, because every feet and information relative to the Raja was in the East India House previously to the 22d of January, 1839, when the Committee stated it to be their opinion " that it would be not only a waste of time, but seriously detrimental to the character of our Govern ment, to carry on any further inquiry in the matter." We have heard it often observed that the Government must be the judge in political questions like the present. one. All will agree in this ; but surely it will not be contended that it is necessary for the Government to decide on one sided evidence only, as has been done in this instance. It has been said that the Raja's conduct evinced obliquity of intellect. Let us shortly review the proceedings of the authorities, and see what they display. The Govern ment sanctioning a conviction, when the person tried was not allowed to be present at the trial, until all the evidence against him had been taken. Sir Robert Grant and the Bombay Government expressing their full persuasion of the Raja's guilt, while expecting to try him, and the Governor recording minutes to that effect, amounting to nearly 600 paragraphs, and flattering himself that he would be likely to conduct such trial im partially ; the refusing to the Raja copies of the evidence against him, on the ground of secrecy, as if any evidence given on a trial could be secret from the person accused ; the procuring of evidence by deputing per- sons who had given evidence against the Raja, to their friends in gaol, expected to give similar evidence ; the evading, on every occasion, the grant of a fair hearing to the Raja, and'then at last, dethroning him, because he would not admit his guilt ! Where shall we find obliquity of intellect, if we are not to look for it here ? Then, the Governor-General, first discouraging further inquiry ; next, in imitation of the Bombay Government, recording his full persuasion of the Raja's guilt, while expecting to try him, and then approving the Raja's extraordinary deth r onement ? And, finally the Court of Directors, first strongly disapproving further inquiry, and then, without any new fact or in formation against the Raja, sanctioning that remarkable • . step, by which a Prince, who had borne for sixteen years the highest character, and was untried, and, with scarcely less certainty, innocent, was hurled from his throne, because he would not make him self unworthy of it, by falsely signing himself a traitor—where shall we find obliquity of intellect if we are not to look for it here ? The Raja's principal misfortune, at this moment, is the number and magni tude of the faults of his adversaries. Against this array of faults, what do we find the conduct of the Baja ? It is simple and consistent throughout, and totally incom patible with guilt. When accused, and throughout the inquisition to which he was subjected, he summoned and sent to the ' Residency persons accused with himself, and witnesses as required by the Resident. Far from shrinking from inquiry, he perpetually courted it, and repeatedly offered to surrender his territories temporarily into the hands of the British, provided 'only a full and fair inquiry into his alleged offences were made ; and, finally, when unable to obtain a hearing, this man, who had not shown the least desire to screen those supposed to be joint offenders with himself ; who ....-~~ ~~~ had answered with the most perfect readiness every call 'or facilitating investigation, becomes, at the proper re , moment, perfectly inflexible, and with powerful, induce- .. „ t it` ments to yield, refuses to do that which would ha•ve- .. 1 " , i branded him as a hypocrite and a traitor, by signing . a ^ i -I.' O A memorandum containing an ackn6wledginent of 1114 ~ .„,i, ". T guilt, which he knewa was inconsistent with truth, ' : . ; ; ; io !;, 0 even though such refusal cost him his throne and his. ,-„-,1,;,11 liberty, and banished him to a distant country. I t is : 1 my • belief that the Raja would not wish to .lq change his share in these transactions, with all : , ...:,a , its consequences, for ours ; and, for my part, if the - -r,'ll, conduct of the Raja betrays obliquity of intellect, I atn free to confess that my intellect is very oblique, and I_ . ,i. am, further, s 3 misguided as to wish that it may remain ~, ,r f so as long as I live. May my friends have their intellects : ~; .''., as aslant as they please ; and may I have for my oppo- , wnts those who deem it wise, sagacious, and reason- , e., ~,i able conduct to endeavour to persuade high-minded and ' ,;,I'; untried men to sign themselves villains as the condition ;, !,,1 on which they are to be treated with confidence and - ' favour, and who deem it to be no disgrace to sanction. , M' condemnation without a hearing. It may be usefu l, at . d . ' „' i , the close of this unfortunate history, to compare the first t . 0 ,-,;; professions and the final practice in the disposal of the '' . . 4 ,-. case of the Raja of Satara. The sentiments originally' . . . .. expressed by the Bombay Government were these :-- " We are not to assume for truth the circtunstanceS which were asserted* [by Govind Bow and] by 111° Brahmin emissary." " Of his Highness the Raja we ought to be very slow' to entertain such suspicions, and the facts stated by the two native officers of the 23d, whose depositions Colonel Lodwick transmits, are of the most equivocal kind so far as they affect that Prince." " The honour, indeed, of the British Government. and also its credit for consistency, are deeply concerned •( in not admitting, except on the most irresistible evidence, .",„i the errors of a Prince whom the Government raised from a prison to a throne, whom it has ever since fostered with friendly care, and from whom it has uniformly re; „ • ~; ceived all tge observances of attachment and confid ence. ;/; " No intention exists of whispering doubtful circuit). stances to his (the Raja's) disadvantage." " Subject to the question, whether by the least at tempt to seduce our native troops from their loyalty, , ought not to be considered an unpardonable offence, our case against the Raja was not at that time (on the ter - , mination of the Commission) a very strong one. The evidence, though satisfactory to us, was such as mighV be questioned without any obstinate incredulity." .- • iru e Let us see how far these sentiments have been acted up to. Is the evidence on the Sepoy seduction case nie,4%;,; 0 4 ° irresistible ? Do the enormities of Untajee , the calitkr,lrt demnatory discrepancies of the Soobadars, and their.. proved falsehood regarding the receipt of pan ( b e tel f a nut) at the Palace ; the perjuries of Cosia Macle o, the unwillingly yielded evidence of Abba Mohitey, - Wh ° lill l os would not admit that he had said that he had seen tbe.-'',0 , 1 : 0 1 Soobadars enter the Palace, until he found himself de'. ,;44 nounced by Elojee Mohitey, whom the Raja exposed am:--..fi,„al` Captain Grant Duff as an intriguer, and whom he refuse d ~,40 ; of to gratify by assigning to him property in h is mothers. _ possession? Do all these furnish us with no possi ble means. ,r3li of resisting the evidence on the Sepoy seduction case Is the evidence on the Joudpour case most irresistible Is it the extreme probability, amounting alm ost to cer7 tainty, that the Raja would send a messenger to a p?or, friendless, destitute Prince, more than half a religious mendicant, to suggest that he would " make preparations to join in a war against the English," to request that bec„ would use his good officers in persuading the Soolta n Constantinople to " let the Russians march throve. Turkey to India," and "to beg him to transmit 2 5 or 30 • • lacs of rupees to enable the Portuguese troops to capture • Nagpoor, and that the Raja would authorise, with aeli treasonable intent, the transmission to such retitle Prince, of an old sword ; is it., I say, the extreme probe bility and almost certainty of these occurrences, that forces us to believe them, when those who tel l us of °he: are almost all persons opposed to the Raj a, who 7 t ,b; . further, had no opportunity whatever of answering :0 , .. charge? Is the evidence on the Goa case m ost irreeL t tible ? Is it so very probable as to be almost certain F es Brahmins, well known to hate the Raja, as he 11 15 2 in. known to hate them, should carry on a treasons fir, trigue for the elevation of the Raja and on European POl4-,.„ ou the ruins of the British Indian Empire. the ,_,, t • t 'should serve the enemy and oppressor of their traw jDst such matchless fidelity, as to have protected him age detection for twelve years or more ; that such l in oo s e , power should be the Portuguese, abhorred by and Brahmins in particular,for their religious int°lera-tbat Is it so very probable as to be almost cert , " ° 4 in the Raja should place such enormous till ' a nd the most bigoted of Brahmins, oppos in g their irritating them, as he constantly did by resisting nit', retensions—that he should invest one of this ctiste,;onie full , ull powers to use his seal in traitorous c orernulate /I T, b, and to receive and keep for him treasonable letters ivP p e r, the Raja never saw, and write for him, in li ke Man., 0, treasonable answers, and seal and send them ? Is I "of very probable, as to be almost certain, that the party in negotiators, when the head of the embassy died, being f want of money, and having with them the portfolio the treasonable communications between the Raja and t Viceroy of Goa, and an affecting appeal on their behafta from their expiring Chief to the master whom he 13 served so long and so faithfully, should engage in t",, occupation of gang robbery, so dangero us, and, I ow e : say, so little creditable to the dip lomatic body, rather than solicit aid from the Raja, from whom, if necessary', . they could extort it by threats of discovery, whi ch to . him would, to use Sir Robert Grant's words, have been " ruin irremediable ?" Is it so very probable as .to be almost certain that the Raja, having these persons in li employ for so long a time, on this dangerous service , should have shown no uneasiness on the demise of the principal agent, and made no effort to secure the safe custody of his treasonable papers, which the thought- - _ less and needy members of his embassy were pawning for -Id ? Is it so very probable as to be almost c erteh l that the Viceroy of Goa should seriously e nter into-tlii! treasonable intrigue, and bind his Sovereign to sen a ' 30,000 troops with powder and shot to India, to s ub/el l the British power in that country, having previously, hY . deputing to Sattara a member of one of the liberal pre fessions as a special messenger to make the inquiry, ,sa tisfied himself that the request for this aid was duly real by the Raja's authority ? Are all these things, I weal' ask, so very probable—so almost certain—as to for e ! our belief in the reality of the so-stated malignant plo of long duration between the Raja and the ViceroYo notwithstanding that the Raja's connexion with Of part of the story is limited to one or two most incon elusive circumstances —notwithstanding that these er tirely depend, and the case itself -largely depelins_ on the oral evidence of the Raja's enemies, gang-robbers, a fraudulent bankr n u a collector of obscene songs l—notvvithstandieg that the 'Raja's intercepted confidential coririe spondence is totally silent on the subject ; and, fili„l n Y„' notwithstanding the avowed disbelief of the Bight the late President of the Board of Control ? And furthe'; is the belief thus irresistibly , forced upon us so Per fec to and so satisfactory, as to make it entirely „perfluous_e allow his Highness an opportunity of answering the allow charge Sir, I. for my part, entertain a total disbelief pot t , or s o n e c T i all the three charges, and declare myself, therefore' against the motion for adjournment. ecl * Sir Robert Grant's Minute, July 23, 1836, as quot be S. P. id. p. 11. I think that the words in brackets ID° a mistake, but I have not ascertained this.. On Saturday, at the Insolvent:, Debtors' Co , his Lord George Loftus (son of the Marquis of Ely) file" schedule, previous to obtaining a hearing for Deceethe_ next. In his affidavit he stated that his father refused "I; pay his debts. His Lordship has been in the Fleet Pri s° , since February last, and has had an allowance darl &e that time of 61. per week from his father, the seine e ll° 7; ance which has been paid him a great many years: h 'r reji debts, in the aggregate, are set forth at 15,2541, or w" ho ' 9,1511. are without consideration. In the year 183 8 9 "„ t Marquis of Ely paid debts for the insolvent to the el% of 3.0001. The insolvent stated that many of his new arose from having become party to various bills of 0" change for Captain the Hon. F. W. Byng, for whieh.bri never received any consideration, and on three of 0 41 , 1 e n, he was in custody. The insolvent was formerly en P i a sign in the Grenadier Guards, which commission he t ° , O some time ago. Amongst the items in the schedule,nnt are extracted, as extending from 1836 to the pre se ii „, year. Paid for admission to places of amusement,,,_ braries, &c., 1,2001." " Lost by play and betting doll: this time, but of which I can give no particul ar et e°,lllo about 10,0001." There does not appear in the sellea° any property for the creditors, who are principally eee ll . 7. • posed of persons who figure in " bill transactions.„o, .i NA::: which N , uT forREND Al utilityE V T I ah C ne E ds N e l ip A nt G teem A r e t s l et x r) E N, periodical, f i n I c L u a I I R T , toner , is, as usual, full of important papers on Naval a nd r ,!tlie tary subjects, and stirring narratives of adventure tu• be ., general reader. Among other attractive articles are following_:—The Last of the Pandoras—Not es Army, Nos. 3 and 4—Russian Cavalry Colonies-7 [e*: sonal Adventures and Excursions in Georgia Circassi°of and Russia, by Lieut.-Colonel Cameron—Confe ssions a Spy, edited by an Officer of the Navy-0n the Zrrere and Faults in our Military System, by Colonel Fif,T, brace—Tom Plunkat—Military History of Jamaica, a Glance at St. Domingo, by Lieut.-Colonel Wilkie-"' :Actuirndslll)l;o4ithis Notes on Syria, by Lieut.-Colonel Napier—An Irish surgent of the Last Century—Reminiscence s of a Ly w Dragoon—A Tale of the French Revolu tion —The Commander-in-Chief—The War in Affghanistan—T"e late Lieut.-Colonel Procter—The Coast-guard Service', The Military Income-tax — Reward s for services at Servo Jalabad—Reliefs for Regiments in India — Distri bution!. Army of the and Navy, with all the professiona l news 01 the month, &e. title O i f CAPTAIN MARRTAT'S NEW NOVEL.—The Captain Marryat's forthcoming new novel, " Percet Keene," clearly indicates that it is intended as a golde,' to the most successful of all his writings, " Peter Simple; a design that will at once secure for i t an unusual deqee of attraction. To trace the career of a naturally "simple youth through the dangerous an d thorny paths oft sailor's lire was a happy idea, and the admirab le exec tion of the conception is proved in the unrivalled popu larity of the work. We are now, it appears, to have the companion picture of a nat urall y been wit, made preter' naturally so by the same sharpening process. The design is full of promise; and a s we understand that the write.r has in this novel returne d to his f orte of delineating the humours of a sea-life, we may look for a work in which amusement and practical wisdom will vie with each other for the reader's favour. The inexhaustible invention of Captain Marryat has never, we are assured, exercise" itself more successfully than in these adventures of a clever scapegrace. AMSTERDAM, AUG. 25.—The Minister of Financt issued a notice on the 23d, stating that the average price s of corn, during the period from the 20th of July to 19th August, 1842, both inclusive, were as follow :—Whee t ' 9f. 69c. per muddle (a muddle is about four bushels); rye, 6f. 37e. ditto ; buck wheat, 6f. Sic. ditto ; 4f. 35c. ditto ; oats 2f, 94c. ditto. . ,41s taitsfD HIS t ling A U'l t RIBUTIO net they "Y be obiai lrt Selling GEN ULU P !rions d tiVlng any 4.ARs , v OCT OBER t NExT 443 • 1 10 1 111 . B ELEcT ULy S E L ECT Rm. ws T 1 gnk-3 ,SEI Opnta a TRIBt ,11 ExT rHE The ,e X ei )4 4 WAT Dou 4 - 1 E 14, 4 • Lae ) l irl i e,;h 04 0p b e y , ITt e e ' s hoxe, 44 ip Price (4i4 . 1 7 0 1 4, ,at r e t t 4, 1;1 '40W Bo 1 HEAT Ita,..be_ iv;*tenij, 4jib:thich ywra s;1 fol kUcit 044,onclui N o tate ti, \l!eas) I)Av hiriver Cep te r d e l * air 4 ltr e te r an, Pr he' •s,'l ,141,,e# t ;4'