The Sun. — London, England, 1806-05-29 00:00:00

That the Principality of Oude, before the spoliations of the'Nlarquis'Wellestey, abounded in valuable corn • modifies and iLianufa&ures, ancl:yielded a very large revenue. That the 'taxes there were collected after the Indian rnarmer, the Nabob employing some of the_higkest Officers of his Court, who employed the Zemidars, who collected the tax from the ryots or peasants, who bad nothing that could properly be called property, and to whom only the means of subsistence were left. The charge then pro ceeded to state the various Treaties that had been concluded with the Nabob of Oude. By the Treaties of 1768 and 1773, three distri&s had been ceded to the 'Nabob, on the condition that he . should,' at stated periods, pay a certain number of lacks of rupees, and the expence of such troops as might be necessary to defend his dominions, which were to be sent him by the East Indiatompany, in case there should be occasion for them. Another Treaty was concluded in 1775, while Mr. Hastings was Governor, by which was stipulated that, it he should require any farther assistance than was stated in former Treaties; he should pay an equivalent. -The.Company, .on the other hand, bound them selves to adhere stri&ly to the terms of the Treaty. In 1781, another Treaty was entered into with the NabOb by Mr: Hastings ; ,by which the . Nabob agreed to pay the expences of the additional troops; • .hut this he :found so . oppressive,, that upon his re presentations, Mr. Hastings was induced to abate.' something of the charges. 'ln 1787, another Treaty was concluded with the Sovereign of Oude, while Marquis Cornwallis was Governor, by which the Nabob , stipulated to pay to the Company . 600,0001. annually, unless he should find occa sion for a greater number of the Company's Troops than was there stated,' in which case he' was to pay the additional expence. In conformity to this Treaty, orders had been given by the Gover nor, not to interfere in the smallest degree with:the internal Government of Oude. In 1789 the Court of Dire&ors had declared their high approbation of this Treaty, which they hoped -.would secure the connexion with the Nabob of Oude on a safe, and permanent basis. Affairs continued in this state for ten years ; .but in 1797 a new Treaty was concluded between the Nabob and Sir John Shore, by which it was stipulated, that on account of the increased expence , of the Company in defending his territories, the Nabob should pay the annual sum of 9.50,0091..; that for this he should have a certain number of ' troops, and pay over and above for any additional number that be might want. The terms were highly advantangeous to the Company, and the Dire&ors had 'expressed their satisfa&ion at this Treaty. Such was the auspicious aspe& of this affair when Marquis Wel lesley became Governor-General in India. The Charge 'Alien went on to state, that iiil7B4 an A& had been • passed, asserting the impolicy of further Conquests, with a view to extend our Dominions in India, and forbidding any 'future Governor to,engage in any hos ' tilities with the Native Printes, except upon'an attack, car evident preparations for an attack, on their part ; with Out the knowledge , and authority of the Coun cil and the Dire6forse or to guarantee the territo ries of any Prince, except he assisted: in repelling ' an attack, as above mentioned; and commanding that the earliest poible information should be given to the Dire&ors and India Board, of any hostilities which might unavoidably be commenced. That the Ad of 1773 provided, ,that the Council of Fort, • William, in Bengal,. shoUld .be consulted, and its suo - crestione attended to, in the - political transac7 tions of India. That, nevertheless, Marquis Wel lesley did conceive the idea of encroaching upon the, power of the Nabob of Onde ; of under mining his authority and destroying his Government, and, under'foul and false pretences, of extorting from him his hereditary dominions; and he had a6ted upon this' idea both without the knowledge of the • Council, and-without any communication with"the ,GOVernment at home. That the means .which the, Marquis Wellesley employed' to accomplish his ob jed were unfounded complaints respe&iug the failure ;of the Nabob in the payment of the instalments,; ap plications 'to him to disband his troops ; and vari - ' otis expedients to render the subjeas of the said,Na bob diSgestel with his Government, and 'to en , courage , them to opposition and revolt, pour , ing troops into his territories,' and thus causing . an enormous espence, heaping demand upon de mand, till the Revelme of the Principality was no longer adequate to satisfy them, and then forcing the Nabob to give up one-half of his territories—trans , • p6tions- so foul .and wicked, that they brought dis grace upon the British Name.' And that for the' purpose of carrying these schemes into execution, he bad removed-the former Resident at the Court of Lucknow, and appointed Mr. Scott in his stead, 'who appeared more fit- for his designs; That with respeel to the payment of the instalMents, the sum which the 'Nabob had to pay had been augment ' .ed' from 305,0001. to, 950,0001: ; that notwith standing 'the difficulties to which he had been thus reduced, tlie . Nabob did 'nevertheless punctually pay his instalments, and adhere to the stipulations of the Treaty. ' And that the pretences of the Mar - - quis Wellesley. were false and unfounded, and only . brought forward With a view to seize upon the terri tories of the said Nabob, in.defiance ofjustice and of the law Which Marquis Wellesley ought to have Obeyed. As 16 ilisbanding the Troops, that the Na bob had, by Treaty, the full authority over his own ,troops, his household, and Government. That - thiragh, in consequence of the difficulties of his situation, be was in arrears to the Company, yet the Secret Committee were satisfied that he was fully disposed to pay, and that all causes of complaint would be removed; yet that the said Marquis Wel lesley did, by means of the said Wm. Scott, inter: fere in the household and internal concerns of the Nabob, and propose such erms of reduction as would leave him no troops to cpmmand—no authority to exercise. That he sent large bodies of the Compa . :ny's _troops into the territories of the Nabob, which were kept there at the expence of the Nabob ; and that in Novembet, 1799, Marquis Wellesley made a proposition to the Nabdb, whu - was then almost a Prisoner in his own Capital, to resign his authority,. - . give' up the whole Administration 'and Revenee of °Ude, thus to disinherit his sons and his family for ever, and reside in the "place which the Governor :General might appoint. That the Nabob, astonished at such an arrogant and unjust proposition,' strenu- Ously refused to accede to it. The Charge then -pro ceeded with the meths which Marquis Wellesley had used, with the assistance of Mr. Scott, to render Nabob and his Government odious to his . sub- jeer, by,,sur . reptitiously seizing ,upon propositions which the distress of his situation bad compelled the Nabob to make,' and publishing them to the principal persons-at Lucknow. It stated that frau dulent estimates bad been giVen • in of the expence Of the Troops, and,- that when , the demand was made for payment, the Nabob said, in the bitterness of his heart, that they depri-ved hint of the means of colleCting his revenue, and then demanded pay ment of money. That in consequence of this failure, • Marquis Wellesley, with the assistance of his bro ther, Henry Wellesley, seized upon the one half of the Nabob's' Territories, and employed everykind of menace to force him to give up the whole. That the Nabob, after every, means had been exhausted against .him, and even his life put in danger, still refused the cession. That the Marquis Wellesley augmented the revenue of .the half which he had Seized to double.what it was, before, and had de-. prived the hushandineu even of'the means of exist ence, so that the ryots- rebelled, and thus what was begun ,in injustice and oppression was finished in violence and murder. That the MarqUis Wellesley, in order to cut off all, hopes of redress, always as serted, that in this conduet he was sanCtioned by the British Government; and thus he, had brought dis grace anddishonour upon the British name." 'The Charge having been read; Mr. PAULL moved that it be printed. - • • -Sir ARTHUR WELLESLEY slid not oppose the printing of the Charge ; but wished to know at what time the Honourable Gentleman intended to proceed upon it. • -Mr. WHITSHED KEENE was glad that an • opportunity would be afforded of examining into 'the merits of proceedings which he looked upon as es sential to the security of the British Possessions' its India: The system of the Oovernments of 'lndia was not like that of the Princes of Europe, recog nized and guaranteed by Treaties with the . other Powers. Their authority was not like that of the King of Sardinia, the King of Naples, the Grand Duke of Tuscany, for whom public right, and the guarantee of all nations interposed, when they, 'were ejected or oppressed by lawless violence.- In India no pUblic law was known but the law of the sword, and strong measures' were necessary to guard' against the enterprizes that may be made under that law. . Mr. FRANCIS could not suffer it to go abroad uncontradiCted, that no public law was known in India but the law of the sword. He was the more solicitous on this point, as the British sword was cer-• • Wilily the most powerful sword in that Country. It .was certain that most of the Indian Princes held by titles more modern thah the Mogul Empire, and hi niany instances founded on the destruCtion of that Empire. But they were recognized by us, and be ing sanetioned by Treaty, we were not to inquire `whether their, titles were.originally just or not. The violation of their rights at present,would be equally a breach of faith in us, and an injustice in itself. The Nabob of the Caniatic wad recognized in 'the 'Treaty- of Paris, in 1764.. Mr, Secretary FOX was sure, that, if any, there must be but a very small -number indeed in the House, Who thought the question of right between us and the Princes of India stood ona different footing from the question of right between us.and the Princes of Europe, particularly when they were acknowledg ed -by Treaty. It was true, that in the case of So vereigns. of great' antiquity, compassion was more alive to the diminution of poWer,and authority..-But there was no distinction as to the criminality of the invader. -He confessed,. if there was any case in which the exertion of the right of the sword was less pardonable in his'eyes, it when the British sword had superior sway. If a breach, of Treaty by : the sword was in any case justifiable, it was ou,the side of a weaker Power seizing a favourable moment to get rid of hard conditions, imposed in adverse cir cutnstances, and submitted to from hard necessity. But the law of the sword was a law which he would never acknowledge where our own sword was all powerful. • Mr. BANKS maintained, that it was not fit that these Charges . should be'entertained by the House, when there was a particular judicature appointed for Indian subjects. The more extensive and compli-, cated the nature of the charge, the more proper it was to refer it to the Tribunal particularly appointed. —The •Cbarge was ordered to•be printed. Mr. PAULL, in answer to the question put by the HOn. Baronet, said he would I?roceed iu the Charge in three 'weeks at the farthest. He would, move on Friday for certain Papers relative to the expulsion of the Rajah of Shasnee. - Sir ARTHUR WELLESLEY thought the delay of three,weeks too. much, after so many Papers had been Moved for,. and a general notice given twelve months since. He took this opportunity of stating, that he knew no dtstinaion of right with respect to the' Princes of India and the Princes of Europe. In his defence of Lord Wellesley, far from assuming such a distinaion, he would chew that Lord Wel lesley had neither invaded, a , right nor violated a. Treaty. • Mr. IPHITSHED KEENE, in explanation, stated,- that the distinction he had made arose tnere. : ..,, ly out of the promptitude of the Native Powers violate Treaties, when there was any appearance that a prompt exertion of farce would be successful; and the propriety of guarding against such enterprizes by early vigilance and timely restraint. • Mr. R. THORNTO N thought the Papers relating to.the Rajah of Shasnee.important. They had not come over in the regular form, or the Court of, Di redors would have recommended them to considera tion before. • ' • After some further conversation between Sir Art 7 THUR WELLESLEY, Mr. PAULL, and Mr. WELLES LEY POLE; as to' the time on which the • Charge would be proceeded upon; . Mr. PAULL said, lie would fix' definitively on Fri day or Monday next; . th:it it would be' prbbably this day three weeks, or an earlier day, if possible. On the Motion of Sir JOHN' NEWPORT, the Irish Militia Volunteering Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be comMitted on Friday. . • Mr. ALEXANDER brought up . the 'Report of the Cotnmittee on- the Irish Iron Duty and Drawback B:11 ; which was agreed to, 'and the Bill ordered to be read a third time Gn Friday,- - On the Motion of tie SECRETARY at WAR, the Mutiny Bill was _read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Friday. , After a short conversation between Mr. PERCI VALI.t4e SECRETARY atWAR, Mr: SecretarylVnip- HAM, and Lord CASTLEREAGH, relative to the par `ticular estimate of the Chelsea Allowance, Mr. FOSTER gave notice, that on Friday he would move for certain accounts relative to the ,Drawbacks on the Exportation of Foreign Linen from Ireland. Mr. ALEXANDER brought up the Report of the Committee on the Irish Additional Force Act Repeal Bill; which was agreed to, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time on Friday. PROPERTY DUTY BILL. The Order of the Day for the third reading of the Property Duty Bill having been read, Lord H. PETTY moved, that the Bill be now read a third time: Mr. FRANCIS was proceeding to,state his objec tions to an important part of the Bill, when, at the suggestion of the SPEAKER, as he 'did not oppose the principle of the Bill, he deferred his remarks to the subsequent stage. The Bill was then read a third time. Mr. VANSITTART introduced three clauses, which were added to the Bill by way of riders. The first was for exempting the Commissioners under the MI from Parish Offices, and frum`serving on Juries. The second was for enacting, that assessments under his Aet should not be suspended, because former assessments were not complete. ' The third.was for facilitating the .making of as sessments for former years. An insertion was also made with respect to the payment of the duty on the interest of certain bonds of the East India Company. Mr. FRANCIS then rose to make his promised Motion, with regard to the exemptions granted by this Bill to the property of Foreigners in the British Funds. He lamented that he had to contend on this subje& with such ability as that, possessed by his Right Honourable Friend ; but he trusted that his Right-Honourable Friend, imitating the exam ple of a late Right Honourable Gentleman, would candidly supply any defeCts which might exist in his 'own. statement.—He divided the subject into three distin& branches. The first, the policy of the meas. sure—the second'the inconveniencies and abuses that would attend it—and the third. the essential justice or injustice of it. With. respect to the policy, he would ask, whether Ministers were aware of the amount of the property which they were desirous to release from the operation of the had been %calculated six ,months - ago that there ,was.a , foreign capital in the Funds, the produetive income of Which. was between 40 and .50,6001. a year; and this corn putation was made at a time when the accounts were not complete. He firmly believed "that it would be eventually found an income of not less than 100,0061, would be given up by this It had been said, that. if the duty were irnposed on foreign pro perty it would induce foreigners to sell out. He be lieved that would not be the case. It was for their own Convenience that Foreigners vested their pro perty in the English Funds ; it was because they here found a security which was not to be met with else , where. - They , sent it for, speculation, and ought to be considered in the same light as any other jobbers. Besides, where was the interest of this property spent ?—ingrance, in Holland, on the Continent. It went to support the Government of Bonaparte. Did that entitle it to the proposed exemption ? Now, with regard to the second point, namely, the inconvenien 'cies and abuses that would attend this exemption, he would first ask, how it would be possible in a great many instances to distinguiSh real from fictitious fo reign property? Great quantities would be placed in the English, Funds in the names of Foreigners, for the purpose of claiming the exemption. A consider able part of the funded property apparently foreign, was, at this moment, of a description which ought to be doubly and trebly taxed, for he was, well assured that great sums were sent from France during the Re volution, to English Agents, to be invested in the English Funds ; that they were so invested, and, for the , purpoSe of secrecy, in filse names; and that when the real ,owners came to claim their property, these flagitious Agents, availing themselves of the absence of evidence, withheld it from the lawful owners. Now, with regard to the third point, the justice of the exemption, he was aware that if this could be established, all other considerations ought to have no Weight. 'He would inquire into the justice of the exemption on particular and , on gene ral grounds. First, on particular : with respect to the contra& entered into with the national credi-. tors. Were Foreigners:the original subscribers to this.contra& ? What were the terms of the contra& ? Were they not expressly that the sums lent to Go vernment should be free from all taxes whatever ? If this contra& were violated with natives he, could' not see why, it should be preserved with foreigners. Now, on the principles of general justice he would ask—For what purpose taxes were imposed at all ? For 'the support of Government. Why is Govern ment entitled' to support ?' Because Government gives proteEtion: - to persons and properly.. Why, therefore, a distin&ion should.be made between fo reign and domestic property he could not conceive. Foreigners were, - in his opinion, boUnd by every principle ofjustice td pay for the security which their property received. If a foreigner resided for any time" in England he would - be liable to the Tax ; and,. therefore surely the property of a fo-. reigner, not a resident, should not be exempt, when it was considered that it went to the support of hostility against the Country. It had been. insisted that foreigners ought not to he taxed,. because they were pot-represented in Pai liameat. If it were once admitted, that no man should be taxed who. was not represented, how :many WoUld be free from all taxation whatever'! In the case of a foreigner re siding in England, he would not be a whit More represented in Parliament than if he lived in France, and yet he would be directly taxed. This was therethre an abstra& principle not acted upon. He quoted the opinion of Mr. Grenville on k he right Of Great Britain .to tax America, and appealed to his descendants to support that opinion ; and alluded to ,the declarations formerly made by many Of those, now high in office—silt:li as the Lord Chancellor, the, First Lord - of the Admiralty, the Attorney-General, the Paymaster of the Navy, &c. of the inadequacy of the Representation in s Parliament in this Country; and yet it was never contended by those ;Who as. serted the most strongly the ina:leqwcy of that Re= presentation, that the individuals unrepresented were not bound to obey the Legislature, or were not fit subjects for. taxation - ; On the whole he submitted it to the serious con4ideration of His Majesty's, Mi nisters, whether, at' a time when the Country was ~h in suci, • state 1 hat the vet 7 First. Tax proposed by the l'i , ble Lon' opposite was obliged to be relin quished, and 'ivLon the merest necessaries- of life were subjected 1 o tamtion, it was Idvisable to take hivmite fron :l the wretch in the cottage, and to, remit to thosewho:p*ossessed thousands that which-was due from them in return for the secu- thy' which they ,e.njoyed. The People of England were almost in despair ;\ he trusted that they would not be driven to absolute madness. He concluded aye out that part, of the Bill which grant leodving to exemptions to the .funded property of fo- reigners... Mr. Secreary FOX declared that it was utterly impossible any one could suspeEt His Majesty's Ministevs -4 - any peculiar tenderness for foreigners, or suppose that they were not desirous of availing themselves 4 every fair, and honourable source of Revenue. lie replied to the arguments that had been 'adducid by the Hon. Gentleman, in order', first, as to :he policy of the exemption : he certainly. , should thnk it extremely , impolitic 'to discourage foreigners from purchasing in our FundS, or, drive those out who had already property in them. .4.- 4:the speculation of foreigners in the _Funds, h e knew of none that were not allowable by the Law, ; for if all ,the speculations in the Funds were pre vented, a great number, both of English and of fo reio'ners, would be discouraged from making any purchases in them. As to the obserVation that foreigners would continue to vest their property in the English Funds, because there .was no se curity elsewhere : if this. were the fiia he Would ask—Was it worthy of 'a great Nation thus to take advantage of a temporary superiority ? Now, as to the frauds that might he pradtsed,he did not think it possible they could be very extensive. If money were placed in the funds in the name of a foreigner which was not his property, what would be the consequence of the,death of 'that foreigner ? Why; that it would go to his heirs., And that by the Law of France, of Holland, or of Flanders, and, not by, the' LaW of Great Britain. And did the Hon. Gentleman really believe that .many people would be found willing to incur this risk- for the CoMparatiVely trifling saving that it would,produce ? Now with regard to the main point, the justice of the exeMption, be was firmly. of opinion that it . would be highlytinjust not to allow it. With re-‘ gard to what the Hon. Gentleman had said of the violation of the or i g inal _ contraet, he . - could - oot but allow, that in the Property Tax, the Income Tax„ and even the Assessed Taxes, there was a principle Which by no very violent straining - might be repre sented as a Tax upon the Funds.. It had, however, always been called by another name, and no Tax on Funded Property had ever been distin6.lly im- • poSed, although, he must Confess; that the distinc tion was much nicer than he could wish it to be; but if the Tax were laid on Foreigners, as suggested by the HOD. Gentleman, it would, at once be adireat Tax on the Funds, and on the Funds alone, for no one would pretend to tax other Foreign Property. As to the assistance which the income derived by Foreigners from property in the English Funds gave to the Enemies of Great Britain, he wished to know, whether the effe& would. not be infinitely more injurious were Foreigners induced to with draw that property, and place it in the funds of our immediate Enemies ? The Foreigner lent his money to this Country on the faith of its being secure; and yet the Hon. Gentleman would have it taxed be- . cause it was secure. As to what the Hon. Gentle man had said about the representation of Foreigners, he was one of those who thought this Country not adequately and fully repreiented in Parliament, and who yet thought that the -House of Commons had an undoubted right to legislate for the Country, be cause the individuals who were really represented, and the individuals who were not really represented, had a community of interests. But what commu• nity of interests was there between the English and Foreigners ? The Bill professed to ,give and grant. - Whose property Surely only our own. .We had no right to give and grant the property of the Sub jects of other Countries resident in those Countries. No one was more disposed than he to reli eve , if pos. sible, the lower classes; but he was not desirous to do so on such terms., Let not the English Stock holder imagine, that because the funded property df the Foreigner escaped in this Country, it would con sequently go: scot tree: Eery shilling' of it would be sufficiently taxed on the Continent. With all. his deference for the opinion of hiS Hon. Friend, he must express his total dissent from him on this; subjea. The SPEAKER submitted to the House, before the Debate should be entered into, whether the Motion of the Hon. Gentleman could be.entertained. The object of the Motion was to take away Exemp tions, and, in so much to increase the amount of the Tax. The proper stage for such a prnCeeding would have been in the Committee on the Bill. But as it had not been proposed in that stage, and the Bill had then been read a third time, be appre hended, that it must appear to the House, that they could- not entertain the Motion in this stage, wi.a out departing from their usual, regular, and recog nised pra6tice on all Bills for imposing Taxes. Mr. FUANCIS and Mr. 13,,,xins expressed their re-, gret that the forms of the House precluded the dis cussion of the question,* and lamented that whilst they felt so sensibly -on the subjeat, they were thus left without a remedy. • Lord HENRY PETTY suggested' to the Hon. Gentlemen, that if they were so anxious for the discussion of the question,' it might be brought be fore the House, in virtue of the Clause for the , AmendMent or Repeal of the Bill, by aMotion in the Committee of Ways and Means for a new Tax, namely, 'upon the Profits of Stock the property of Foreigners. OD the Motion of Mr. VANSITTART, Amend ments were made to exempt Stock or Dividends, the property of His Majesty, in whatever name they may stand e and also .Stock the property of ,accre dited Ministers from-Foreign States, when properly authenticated. ' On the Question that the Bill do pass, Sir ROBERT BUXTON could not suffer the fill to receive the final sanatioti`of the House, with- Out entering hiS protest against it, as imposing an unequal 'l'ax on the Country, and particularly on , Landed Property, which would, be taxed 13 per cent. Underit. The Hon. Gentleman opposite[Mr. Van sittart) had argue* the - measure as if it was a Land Tax; if so, he should have liked to have the Bill made annual, as the . Land Tax.always is.