The Express.
London, England, 1849-08-01 00:00:00

THE RAJAH OF SATTARA.

Mr. HUME (after presenting two petitions from certain
proprietor. of Indian stock, stating that ttere were abund-
ant twirl to the late Rajah, and praying for ir.quiry into the
circumstances under which that family were disposwaved of
the territory of flatters, and also for redress), moved the fol-
lowing resolution :
That it appear. from the papers laid before this house that, by the
len end Image of India, as reengnbed by the &blab government, and
distinctly expressed In a minute of Sir Charles Metcalfe, lieutenant-
s( Ute north-western provinces of India, and dated the
''sfelaptOineleir. ISM, that Itinior primers in failure of Mein male of
their body, Welt right to adopt, to the exelmtion of collateral heir',
and of any supposed reversionary right xf the paramount power ; and
that the Britt.* ipmernment is bound to aekeowlolge the adoption.
provided that It he regshw, end not In violation of Ilindoo law. That
the Beat I. Meengem by • treaty candaded dept. 21, lel% ceded
tho leathery of Ilatforg to the Rajah of del era, Ids kin and encore.
mu, he leseepetall sovereletath which treaty was aciallnald on the 41 h
day el lead.. IMO. when his heather sad easseemor wee raised to the
throne. 'that both the rajahs died, leaving Wes by adoption., heirs
by blood, and collateral heirs. That the East ladle Company never-
theless (without giving an opportunity to any ailments of Meting
their claims) have ad amide the Mindoro law of snetnesion, sad have
ordered the Santini terrihwy to be annexed to the British donalano,
on the plea that it has lewd by failure of heirs. That each a pro-
' carding being le violation of national hits and fig ,istat the reeog.
allied rights of all the sovereign princes of India, it is the opinion of
tine how* that the trders hr annexing the fluttere territory should
be suspended until these member,. of the Madly who have the right to
deist to be heirs to the throne have been heard and task sight& de-
Inendsed.

The question was cis intimately oosegus• etars, religious
tensity. tie he moved for these papers on the B.it of
Much, but had only received them wh. n he could not fairly
bring forward the qu-stion; when he could neither hale an
audience to listen, nor the mear s of explaining properly the
grounds of his appeal. Her Majesty's President of tee
Board of Control had given a pledge, that whatever might
become of the Principality of Sattara, due attention should
be paid to the heirs of the R jab, but the India Company,
he leered, were becoming the sgenta of the spoliation and
robbery which would be the result, if the proceedings which
bad been sanctioned by them were allowed to take place,
and an attempt 'tads to refuses to the Rajah's family
those rights which they were justly entitled tn.
They never could be induced to take the opinion of Mr. El.
phinstone, who, under the direction of Lord Hastings, con-
cluded the treaty ie reference to those rights. Looking to
the lamentable smalt that followed their interference with
the Buddhists in Ceylon, be deprecated most strougly all
such interference midi Hinduism in India. At for burr,
there were plenty, both collateral and direct, and the govern-
ment, by the 21st Or,. 111., were bound to have regard to
their right.. But according to a minute of Lord Dalhousie,
it appeared that the conduct of the government towards the
Rajah's family was a grew violitiin of that act, and
abo a great act of injustice and spoliation. He pro-
tested Limit that proveding, and would bring it
forward again next session, an the hope of shaming
those spoliator,. (Ironical cheesy.) Yes, and he sew
some of them rpptrite (Sir J. Hogg)—(a laugh)—those
destroyers of religious freedom for the paltry !ululation of
property to the amount of 120,0001. to the property of •
company worth 20,000,0001. a year. He bad done his duty,
unfortunately too late, as he was speaking to empty benches'
and he had only now to leave the question in toe hands of
the house.
The question having been put from the chair,
Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE said the net complained of, the
order for annuning the territory of Setters, left England on
the 24th January—no doubt with the knowledge of the hon.
gentleman and his Iriende, who, had they wished to prevent
this roes injustice, as the hon. member styled it, ought im-
mediately to have called the attention of parliament to the
subject. (Hear, hear.) He (Sir J. C. Hobhoure) had been
all along in his place, and ready to meet any charge that
might be made. He would now notice one or two assertions
which were unfounded in fact. The hon. member bad
talked of religious lioerty being infringed, by which he meant
the right of a Hindoo to make an adopted son his suecessar.
A avenge notion appeared to have got 'bros. that thee- was
no such thing as a paramount state in India—that Great
Britain bad not succeeded to the authority she had
crenhcd, and that consequently the petty princes might
appoint their successors. (Hear, hear.) This was quite &novel
view: even the hon. gentleman emelt he net advaaNd it
last year. The resolution psi meal net aseensplish the
hon. member's object ; no short of an sat of parliament
would do it. He (Sir John) repeatedly urged the pay-
ment of the money to the widow ; this payment was only
delayed became she refused to sign a receipt, she grounding
her refusal on the circumstance of her son's adoption not
Wag recognised. But there we. no doubt that the money
would be paid at an early period.

Sir E. 60LEBROOKI referred to the recent discusrion
in the India Howe, and observed that the principle of re-
fusing the right of adoption to the Indian princes, without
Vie unction of the supreme government, struck at the
authority of those princes. The British government had no
rights with regard to those princes, except such r were
derived from treaties sleds on equal terms; their rights of
succession were full and unimpaired ; and be therefore pro-
test/a MTV gly ageing the principle enunciated by the right
hen. baronet. This question had been repeatedly raised and
derided. Sir Charles Metcalfe clearly recognised the right
of the Indian princes to adopt sucessor. Ss important lid
he redder that question, that he should submit a motion,
rely :next moron, declerior the rights of the native
=wholly irrespective of this Satan ease. The right
or was strictly define d by treaty, the words of which
rind the fullest right of ti nitory. and which could n
be ruined to the heirs of the body of the sovereign, as eon-
tended by the Court of Directors. Whether parliament
mitt to interfere in this ease it would be for the house to
deride when the question came fully before it.
Sir I. C. HOBHOUSE explained. What he had said
was, that the doctrine that the British authority was not the
supreme sorority in matters of thie kind was a perfect.'
novel doctrine. In proof of this, he cited the opinion of Sir
Charles Metcalfe.
Mr. ELLIOT said that the whole of the religious rite. bad
been performed in this ease, and the adopted son got the
property under these religious rites.
An hon. Manion then moved that the house be counted;
and there being only 38 member. preseat, the house adjourned
shortly after 4 o'clock to this day, at &quarter past two.

CLERK/ OF COUNTY COURTS.—An Order in Council
published ia lan sight's Gasate his the salaries of Clerks
of County Comae (who ars sot to be paid by fees after the
Ist October), at 6001. per anima, salon it caa be shown by
say of then that their avatar aasccuit of fees has exceeded
that sow, ia which ease the aisesat of the salary is to be
axed in accordance with each average.