The Express.
London, England, 1848-04-07 00:00:00

that justice should be done. He asked for the committee,
then, in the name of the people of India—in the name of all
thole diatinguiahed men whose characters were implicated---
end in the name of British justice, to which no injured man
aver was known to appeal in vain. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. J. WILLIAMS seconded the motion, observing that
very great dimagisfaction would be felt out of doors if the
government refused their consent to this appeal.
The question having been put,
Mr. BROTHERTON said it would be impossible to pro-
ceed with the discussion at that late hour. (Oh.) He
would move the adjournment of the house.
Mr. G. C. LEWIS, however, rote and proceeded to speak.
He said, the difficulty he might otherwise experience in
treating this question was very much mitigated by the fern
of the motion placed before them. When a similar motion
had been submitted by the hon. member for Montrose the
Rajah of Satter' was living, and might have been restored
to his rights. The rajah, however, was now dead, and the
motion of the hon. member became of comparatively little
importance, and wee of a very shadowy and intangible na
titre. There was another remon which diminished his diffi-
culty in meeting this question. If ever there was a ease
where previous decisions ought to have weight, this was the
very ease. Ever since 1d39 this question had been mooted
in a great variety of ways. On every occasion, however, the
result hed been the acme. In India, in the court of
directors, and in parliament the decision had uniformly
been against the rajah, and it was not to be expected that at
this period they should reopen questions so long adjusted,
and the decisions open which had never yet been success-
fully questioned. The hon. member, however, had made
serious imputatione on ielluential persons, both living and
lead, and it was nee wary that he (Mr. Lewis) should ad-
dress himself to some of those particulars. There were, the
house would °Mem, three persons particularly interested,
Sir Robert Grant, Sir James Carnal, and the Rsjah of Sat
tara himself. Now who was the rajah? He was a mere
dependent of the British government. lie was a prince of
our own creation. He never at any time had any power in-
dependent of our political agency. He could make no treaty,
declare no war, except with British consent, and the decree
which created him • sovereign concluded by de-
cluing that asy infraction of the conditions should
be sufficient to deprive him of his p wee. He
claimed a portion of the British territory, and that claim
was rejected by the Bombay government. The question was
then referred to the rourt of directors, and they confirmed
that decision. The hon. gentleman then proceeded to rebut
the accusations which had been made by the hon. mover
against Sir It. Grant, which he said he had heard with the
deepest pain, which he declared to be unfounded as they
were undeserved, and the result altogether of mistake, sur-
mise, or suspicion. He resumed the direct pies.
tion by pointing to the special commission issued
by the Bombay government; who had come
to the unarimous conclusion that the rajah had tampered
with some of the British officers, and had engaged in in-
trigues against the British government, which were calcu-
lated to h came subversive of British power, and were
totally inconsistent with his situation as a subordinate
prince holding his sovereignty by the grant of that govern-
ment. Lord Auckland was disposed to take a more severe
view of the case than Sir R. Grant had done. Colonel
Ovens, who succeeded Colonel Loilwick as resident at the
Court of Samara, in that capacity, investigated two
charges, one of which was of very alight gravity, It appeared
however from the remit of the inquiries, that the ra;ah was
a weak and igno-ant man, and was misled ham a M lief that,
by the aid of the Portuguese government, he might be placed
at the head of the Mahratta conlederacy. Some i'l-paid
functionaries at Goa did certainly succeed in extracting
large *urns from the rajah on this score. The charges made
by the hon. member against Colonel Grans bad been more
than once brought forward, and without entering into their
detail* he would state that he held in his hand complete
answers to those charges, and he was prepared to lay them
on the table of the house, and to move at some future day
that they be printed for the complete information of hon.
members. (Hear, hear.) lie therefore requested the house
to regard those charges altogether without prejudice until
they had an opportunity of examining into the facts. It
had been asserted that the East I edi Cump iny had
expressed no opinion en the subject of Col. Ovens'
conduct, but he would refer to a letter addressed, by order
of the directors, to that officer, wherein they state that the
charges made by the hon. member left no stain upon his
public or private character at the tame time they stated
that they would not be parties to any prosecution instituted
against the hon. member for having uttered the language
he Ind done against Col. Ovans. It was proposed to
issue a commission of inquiry into the conduct of the
rajah at his capital, but Lord Auckland thought this course
might be attended with inconvenience, and re leered the
matter home. Sir James Came afterwards assumed the
governorship of Bombay. and as he was aware of the dispersi-
tion of the court of 'directors relative to the rajah, •
nrot,osal was made by him to overlook the con-
duct of the prince, on condition that he promised not
again to enter into fresh intrigues. A treaty, embodying the
conditions which the home government thought it advisable
to insist on, was proposed, by which the rajah engaged not
again to enter into any secret arrangements or intrigues with
other Indian states; and this treaty was laid before him for
his signature. But he positively refused to do so. The
rajah alleged, es his meson, that the preamble contained an
admission of his guilt, which he never would make. But he
must meet that objection by stating that the preamble did
not contain any such admission, but merely stated the belief
of the English government that ouch intrigues had existed as
had been alleged. But even had this objection been made—
which it never was—Sir James Caruac was ready to cancel
the preamble, as, according to the statement of the hon.
member for Thetford, it was not necessary for the purposes
of the treaty. The arrangement which the British govern-
ment made on the deposition of the rajah brought no advan•
tags to them. They r, quired nothing of him except that
he should enter into a treaty confirming a former treaty and
settling the disputedquestion of the J aghirs. The government
would have been justified in annexing the whole of his
dominions to the British territory, but they wished their
conduct to be above all suspicion, and, therefore, they
contented themselves with transferring the government
from one brother to the other. There could be no
doubt but that reasonable ground existed for sus-
pecting treasonable conduct on the part of the rajah ,•
on teat ground Sir James Carom had acted, and
hence the rajah's deposition. This was the view which
he (Mr. Lewis) took of the case, and if the house concurred
with him, they would consider that granting a committee of
inquiry would be a measure of no possible utility. Such a
committee could lead to no result ; for even if they made a
report unfavourable to the Indian government, members of
that house would rely more on the opinions of men
acquainted with India than on the report of a c mamitme
unacquainted with Indian character, Indian language,
or Indian documents. He denied that the rajah's
family had been left in a state of destitution. They
had en allowacce which, although not sufficient to maintain
the regal state which the late rajah had affected at Bemires,
was what might be considered a full competence in India.
For these reasons be must oppose the motion of the hon.
member for the Tower Hamlets.
Mr. HUME move:: the adjournment of the debate.
Sir J. HOGG speaking to the question of adjournment,
vindicated the character of CoL Ovens from the charges
which had been brought forward that evening. A tong ca-
talogue of the most atrocious charges had been put forward,
but nut one tittle of evidence had been advanced in their
support. He should be inclined to vote for the committee
were it not that granting a committee was generally con-
sidered to intimate that a prinui facie case had been
made out.
Mr. ANSTEY said that the hon. baronet was the person
to who testimony the house should pay strict attention om
this question. II a committee were granted, the charactme
not only of Indian subordinates, but of the India Company,
would be subjects of inquiry, and of that company the hon.
baronet was an influential member. (Hear.)
Mr. G. TIiOMPSON pledged himself to establish all bin
charges before the committee by official documents.
The debate was then adjourned to Thursday next.
NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.
Mr. STAFFORD moved to nominate the kitchen accom-
modation and eating-rooms committee :—Mr. Stafford, Sir
G. Clerk, the Earl of Arundel and Surrey, Mr. Hume, Lord
Marcus Hill, Mr. It J. Baillie, Sir R. H. Inglis, the Earl of
Musgrave, the Earl of March, Mr. Alderman Humehery,
Lord C. Wellesley, Lord Ernest Bruce, Mr. Sheridan, Mr.
Damon, and the Earl of Shelburne.—Agreed to.
THE OFFICE OF SERJEANT.AT-ARMS.
Mr. HUME, in reference to his motion for a select com-
mittee to inquire into the duties of the sericant-alarms at-
tending on this house, and the salary, emoluments, and pa-
trouage of the office, with a view to the regulation of the
same before the occupation of the new houses of parliament,
and previous to filling up the vacant office, stated that he
regretted to fled the office had been already filled up, as he
thought it ought to have been given to Mr. Clementson, the
depute. serjeant. He thought the appointment should riot
rest with the Lord Chamberlain, hut with the house.
Mr. STAFFORD called attention to the fact that Mr.
Clementson, the deputy:serjeant, had filled that office for
44 years, and bad on various occasions performed the office
of serjeant, and during three months on one occasion re-
ceived the emoluments. It was only due to Mr. Clementson
to state the respect in which the house held him, and he
hoped that Laid C. Russell, the new serjemt, would follow
his example.
The house adjourned at • quarter to two o'clock.

ELECTION COMMITTEE.—YESTERDAT.
BODMIN.—After the examination of one or two
witnesses, Serjeant Wraisgham summed up for Mr. Lacy,
and Mr. Wordsworth replied to petitioner's case it con-
cerned Mr. Wyld. The committee adjourned to thaiss day.

GENERAL COMMTT TEE OF ELECTIONS.
The committee met yesterday, but in consequence
of the delay in passing the Election Recognisance' Bill they
postponed all further ballots until May 8.

---
THE NORTHAMPTON CHARTISTS.—Sir,—Seeing in
the Express of this morning the statement of a "Mr.
Ashton," in reference to Nor hampton, I beg leave to state,
in answer to it, that although the trade of the town is un-
precedenteclly bad, tbe greatest order and good feeling prevail
among the unemployed—indeed, their conduct in this
respect is . exemplary. As regards the obtaining the
"charter" by force, or " dying in the attempt,- I have
heard of no such language having been used. Indeed,
several chartists, among whom I purposely mad:. inquiries
this morning, deprecate the idea of physical force; iu -hort,
sir, the whole statement is utterly false.
cancnot
town in the
tell who '
this Ashton is, that pretends to represent
"National Convention." None of the parties with whom I
conversed this morning have any knowledge of the man, or
even recognise the name. Believing this to be a specimen
of the language and the truthfulnessif the
ese anarattached tochists ,hem
and
hoping that no more importance will b
than they deserve, I.
remain, Ac., 01101(08 Ilooaz.—
Northampton, P 6.