The Sun.
London, England, 1853-08-13 00:00:00

EAST INDIA HOUSE.

Yesterday a special general Court of Directors and
Proprietors of the East India Company was held at the
company's house, Leadenhall-street, for the purpose of
further considering the bill recently introduced into Par-
liament for the future government of India. Russell
Ellice, Esq., Chairman of the Court of Directors, pre-
sided.
The CHAIRMAN informed the Court that they were
called together to consider the amendments that had
been introduced into the bill in the Rouse of Lords. He
regretted that their petition had been attended with so
little success, but congratulated them that the clause in-
troduced by Sir John Pakington in the House of Com-
mons with regard to the salt duty, had been rejected by.
the House of Lords. There was one amendment re-
cently introduced which be thought they ought to direct
particular attention to—namely, the alteration that had
been made with regard to the signatures to dispatches,
and which gave the power to the Board of Control, or
their secretary, to sign the dispatches and forward them.
To that the Court of Directors
_strongly protested, and

he thought it would be advisable to real to the Court
the correspondence that had taken place between the
Preident of the Board of Control and the directors on
the subject.

Mr. -LEWIN, before the correspondence was read,
begged to call to the attention of the Court to the fact
that there were only seven proprietors present. The
notice calling the court had evidently been seen by very
few, and under the circumstances he did not think they
could properly discuss this question at present, and sug-
gested that-the court should be adjourned till a future
day.

The CHAIRMAN observed that there would be no use
in calling together a court after the bill had been read a
third time and passed.

The SECRETARY read the correspondence between the
Court of Directors and Sir Charles Wood. The first
letter called attention to the 44th clause, which materi-
ally interfered with the due administration of the affairs
of India, the tax which had been so tampered with being
one of the principal sources of their revenue in that em-
pire. They felt strongly and forcibly that this was an
interference effectually calculated to impair their respon-
sibility, and trusted the matter would be taken into con
sideration by her Majesty's Ministers, so that it.might
be withdrawn from the bill.
The CHAIRMAN—That clause, I have the satisfaction
of informing the court, has been expunged by the House
of Lords.
The next letter, dated the 10th instant, was then read
by the secretary, and referred to the note which pro-
hibited any dispatch being forwarded until it had re-
ceived the signature of the directors, and which had
been abrogated by a proviso in the bill empowering the
Commissioners of the Board of Control or their secretary
to,sign and forward dispatches. He earnestly protested
against any enactment which would interfere with the
government of India by the East India Company, and
which would be the effect of the proviso alluded to, if re-
tained in the bill.
The CHAIRMAN said the bill would be read a third
time in the House of Lords that night, and the only
further proceeding to-morrow (this day), when the House
of Lords would be called in to take into consideration
the law amendments, and the bill would in all proba-
.)ility become the law of the land the following day.
There was therefore no time to be lost, and any adjourn-
ment would be worse than useless, and only make them
the laughing-stock of the public. The bill still upheld
the principle of the double government, and although
the Court of Proprietors had lost something of its privi-
leges and power, he trusted they would be induced to
accept the bill ; and he should now, with the sanction of
the Court of Directors, move a resolution to that effect.
The hon. gentleman concluded by moving the resolu-
tion, which set forth that, whilst regretting that the pe-
tition that had been presented to the House of Lords
had not been attended with the desired success, the
court concurred m the views and opinions of the court
as stated on the 29th ult., regarding the bill for the fu-
ture government of India.
Mr. LEWIN rose to propose an adjournment. He
thought.it was disrespectful to the Court of Proprietors
that uo sufficient notice had been given to them of what
was about to take place that day. As to signifying their
compliance with the bill, that was all mere moonshine,
And he regretted the subject of responsibility had not
been referred to, as the present bill went to perpetuate
the non-responsibility of all concerned in the govern-
ment of India, and could not give his assent to a bill
which, while attaching a great moral responsibility to
them, operated with the greatest injustice towards the
natives of India. He had told the people of India to
agitate, and to endeavour to obtain their right. He
thought the statements made to Parliament on the sub-
ject were most scandalous. The petitions were said to
be got up by influential parties, but they were, he had
the best authority for stating, the real sentiments of the
people. He could tell them that there was an agitation
going on in India which would shake that empire to its
centre, and he hoped they would hold possession of
India no longer than they did justice to the natives.
He strongly objected to the transaction of any business
of so much importance in so small a court, and there-
fore moved that the court do now adjourn.
Capt. DOVETON seconded the motion for .adjournment.
He highly approved of the clause introduced by Sir John
Pakington for doing away with the salt monopoly, whick
would immortalise his name India as much as that of
in
' Sir Robt. Peel was immortalised in this country. He re-
gretted the East India Company themselves had not
proposed doing away with this most vexatious impost.
The people of India were becoming every day more en-
lightened and intelligent, and would not much longer
submit to be treated with so much injustice. He recom-
mended the court to pay more attention to the finances
of India, and to endeavour to govern it for the benefit
of the natives of that country. He considered the in-
fusion of new blood into the Court of Directors—he
meant the nominee members—as an intervening body
between the directors and the government, which would
correct the evils of both. The hon. proprietor then re-
ferred to various details in the management of the affairs
of India, but was repeatedly called to order 11Y the
chairman and other proprietors.
Mr. WEEDING said the proprietors oughtoteoadhvaevre.
looked out for meetings of this sort, and seen
negligence
tisement. It was rather hard that their
u
adjournments upon
should entail frequent meetings and
resolution of the
the court. He cordially supportedatdhadoejr:oesdo
directors, and hoped it would b
attendanceofwopurlod
Mr. TWINING regretted theh,stme:
n 1 1
adjournment
prietors, but did not think
Seeing all that had
place them in any better position.
erent or the East India Com-
been effected by thel
pany during the last twenty years, he regretted to find
been so slightly estimated, and
that their exertionsas had
had lead to no better result. Nothing, in his opinion,
of more importance than
that the government of the
East India Company
was and its independence should be
maintained ;
veryimportant changes had taken place ;
but he trusted that the sanguine anticipations of some
hon, proprietors with regard to the harmonious and effec-
tive working of the new system would be realised.
"Under the circumstances in which they were placed, he
did not think they could do otherwise than accept the
proposition of the Court of Directors.
The motion for adjournment was then put and nega-
tived, and on the original resolution being then put,
Mr. LEWIN rose to move another amendment to the
effect that the bill being adverse to India, and not doing
justice to the people of that country, they do refuse their
assent to it. The measure was not yet passed into law,
and they were justified in refusing their assent to it
until that had been done.
Captain DOVETON seconded the amendment, which
was then put and negatived.
The original resolution proposed by the Court of Di-
rectors was then put and agreed to, and the court ad-
journed.