The Sun.
London, England, 1855-08-14 00:00:00

SIR JAMES BROOKS AND THE ISLAND

OF BORNEO.

A largo blue-hook, published on Friday, contains the
reports of the two commissioners, the Hon. IL B.
Devereux and Mr. C. R. Prinsep, appointed to inquire
into certain matters connected, with the position of Sir
James Brooke in Borneo. The statements of Sir James
himself, the evidence adduced, and a variety of corres-
pondence and miscellaneous matter occupy a large por-
tion of the document. Into these it is impossible
to enter ; we therefore state the result of the
inquiry. The Hon. Mr. Devereux, after giving an
account of the proceedings of the commission, records
his judgment seriatim on the four points submitted for
inquiry. The first was whether the position of Sir
James Brooke at Sarawak, either as holding that pos-
session of the Sultan of Borneo, or as an independent
popular rajah, be compatible with his duties as British
Consul-General and Commissioner for Trade, and his
character as a British subject. The general result arrived
at by Mr. Devereux is that, without a knowledge of the
terms of the document in which Sarawak was ceded by
the Sultan of Borneo, it is impossible to pronounce a con-
fident opinion in regard to the exact nature of Sir James
Brooke's tenure of that place. The question of incom-
patibility of position as ruler of Sarawak and British
subject is set at rest by Sir J. Brooke's declared inten-
tion to relinquish hisposition at Sarawak in case of need,
Sir James having, moreover, expressed an opinion that
the office of commissioner is, from its duties, unbefitting
his position at Sarawak.
The second point was whether SirJ. Brooke's interest as
a holder of territory and a trader in its produce be compa-
tible with his duties as Consul to promote and foster the
trade ofother British subjects. This question loses its
interest in the event of other reasons prevailing to
sever the position of her Majesty's Commissioner and
Consul-general from that of ruler of Sarawak, but Mr.
Devereux does not consider that the two sources of
revenue enumerated are in their nature incompatible
with the functions named. Under the third head of
inquiry, whether Sir James Brooke had sought to
injure the interests of other British subjects in order
to promote his own, no charges were investigated, and
the only complaint—one made by the agents of the -
Eastern Archipelago Company—Mr. Devereux refused
to entertain, for reasons assigned.
The fourth was to inquire into the relations of Sir
James Brooke to the native tribes, and their bearings
on the piracy question.
Whether it is necessary that Sir J. Brooke should be
intrusted with a discretion to determine what tribes are
piratical, and to call in her Majesty's naval forces to
punish them, must depend, says Mr. Devereux, on Sir
J. Brooke's position (if any) in her Majesty's service.
He deems it most desirable that there should be some
authority empowered to call for the aid of our naval forces
for the suppression of piraoy, to which Great Britain is
pledged by the treaty of Borneo, as far as the north-
west of the island is concerned.

Mr. Prinsep, after informing the Government that Sir
James Brooke had admitted the incompatibility of his
position as holding territory from the Sultan of Borneo
with his character of British Consul and Commis.
sioner for Trade, and that he had, since his last return to
Sarawak, abstained from exercising the latter functions,
proceeds, under the fourth head of inquiry, to report
that the relation of Sir James with and towards the na-
tive tribes on the north-west of Borneo is such in every
suspect that it is neither (in Mr. Prinsep's opinion) "ne-
cessary nor prudent that he should beintrusted with any
discretion to determine which of these tribes are pirati-
cal," or be armed with any power to call for naval aid
to punish or coerce them. Mr. Prinsep considers that
Sir James's position is that of a mere vassal of the
Sultan of Borneo, and hence in the existing relations
between the Sultan and Great Britain—contracted by
Sir James himself—his position is a very anomalous
one.

Some difference appears to exist between the two com-
missioners with respect to the attacks on the piratical
tribes by Captains Keppel and Farquhar. Mr. Prinsep
thinks that they were prompted rather by a considera-
tion of the injuries sustained by the settlers at Sarawak
than by any injuries or complaints of such sustained by
English subjects, and he deplores the great sacrifice of
life entailed by Captain Farquhar's operations in con-
cert with "savage allies." The charge of " wrongful
and causeless attack and massacre," however, has wholly
failed of proof, and been negatived by evidence to the
contrary. Mr. Devereux so far differs from his colleague
as to disbelieve that there was excessive loss of life, or
that atrocities, in the ordinary sense of the term, were
committed in 1849 in the expedition against the Serebas
and Sakarran Dyaks.

The Cardiff Guardian states that the case of Mrs.
Saunders, the poor woman who lately gave birth to four
children, having come to the knowledge of the Queen.
she immediately sent four sovereigns—one for each of
the 'children. As we have before stated, one of the
children died on Monday, but the remaining trio are
progressing