The Sun.
London, England, 1849-04-30 00:00:00

What did the Governor-General say ? Why simply •
this—
" The old and respectable families connected with the
Durbar will lament the extinction of the dynasty of
Serojee, and feel the loss of influence, and of employ-
ment, and the sudden cessation of the expenditure oc-
casioned by the presence of a native Court will affect the
industrious classes in the city and its neighbourhood.
These are among the immediate evils attendant upon all
great changes, and however much to be regretted, can-
not be avoided.
Ile was aomewhat astonished at the confidence, nay,
be would venture to say the presumption be-
trayed in this language of a Governor-General, who
Rae scarcely warm in his seat, and whose attention
during the short time he had been in office had been
limited to one object, namely the Punjaub. Was
not this too bad to see a man pronouncing so confi-
dent an opinion upon the political system of India ?
What was it but a proclamation to the people of India
that the policy of the East India Company vas to
annex territories, and to take advantage of every oppor-
tunity that might offer to extinguish every principality
and annihilate the aristocracy of India ? Really he
could not understand why such language should be
allowed
to be published. Did they think the Princes
and aristocracy of India took no notice of
all this ? If they did they were much mis-
taken, for it could not possibly have any other
effect but to alienate their feelings from the
British Power.—(Hear, hear.) The Princes and
chiefs of India were but men—they felt like men,
and did they suppose if they tickled them they would
not laugh, or if they injured them they would not
revenge the injuries ? Nor could they hear their
death-knell sounded without feelings of the most
rigorous hostility towards their oppressors.—(Hear,
hear.) And what were their motives for entering
upon this course of spoliation ? The reasons as-
signed were the military advantages held out by
Messrs. Reid and Willoughby, the military agents
of Bombay, who declared that this policy
would result in a great acquisition of their
military strength ; but then, on the other
band, they had th testimony of Sir J. Littler,
who told them that this was all flummery. The
political advantages held out by the policy advised
by Sir George Clerk were of one character, and those
of Lord Dalhousie and Lord Falkland of another ;
but no doubt Lord Dalhousie and Lord Falkland had
spent all their time in India studying the political
system of that country, and they felt that the exis-
tence of suchonative states as Sattara was
positively a source of weakness, while Sir
George Clerk, who no doubt had passed all
his time in St. James's-street, thought the existence
of Sattara was a positive source of strength.
—(Hear and laughter.) It was very proper that
the Court of Directors should act upon the opinion of
those most competent to give one, and therefore in
matters military let them listen to the representa-
tions of Sir John Malcolm, and in matters political
to the views of Lord Dalhousie and Lord Falkland.
—(Lear, hear.) But these reasons were all pre-
tences, as the real motive avowed for this policy was
the getting possession of the country of Sattara.
They had already attained that object by extinguish-
ing the political existence of the Raja, but they
bad not yet succeeded in extinguishing the Mahratta
people, who still lived impatient to repress the inju-
ries they were suffering, and deeply attached to, and
ready to take the pare of their native Princes. It
would, therefore, cost theta ten or twelve years' re-
venue to put down an insurrection in Setters, and he
would rather have them listen to the inspirations of
Sir John Malcolm than" the preaching of either
Lord Dalhousie or Lord Falkland. Let them remem-
ber that Sir John Malcolm had written this :
" I cannot conceive it possible for any one to dispute
the policy of taking advantage of every just opportunity
which presents itself for consolidating the territories
that already belong to us, by taking possession of states
which may lapse in the midst of them; for thus getting
rid of these petty intervening principalities, which may
be made a means of annoyance, but which can never, I
venture to think, be a source of strength." * *
If they wanted money let them get it honestly; but
if they were determined to have money, then let
them follow the practice of the Mogul Emperors.
But could the Satarra state afford to pay them,
seeing that the greatest amount of misery and distress
would arise from their annexation ? They could not
pretend to say that they meant to give Sattara a
better government, for its good government had
been the perpetual theme of their laudation from its
very commencement down to the time of its extinction.
The question was what the people thought, and the
people had answered that question in the most em•
phatic and unmistakeable manner. They said they
preferred to live under the most despotic of those
Governments, rather than under our rule. They went
from our territory, and very often in flocks ; but come
into our territory they never did. If the Company
was to have no increase of military strength, who was
to benefit by that annexation? The Bombay civil
service would gain a little additional patronage, and
the Best India Company would get a few lass of
rupees ; but, per contra, at the irreparable loss of their
character, and in losing their -character let them re-
member they lost their strength. They could not
disaffect the native populati )n without sooner or
later prejudicing their disposition of that people. In
that aggression on Sattara, for once under that happy
system of government under which the responsibility
was al ways between two stools, they had the opportunity
of fixing the responsibility on the Court of Directors.
That was their own peculiar bantum, their own act.
They had been left to deal with the question in an
evil hour, and they had damaged their reputation. In
the face of a solemn treaty, without allowing those
who had claims on that treaty to have a hearing, they
had passed judgment, and absolutely rejected the very
evidence which would have enabled them to pass a
fair judgment, namely, on the evidence of the gentle-
man who made that treaty.—(Hear, hear) Did
they think those things could be done with impunity?
Ile would venture to tell them that was only the
beginning of the matter. There were al ways two parties
to transactions like those—the injured and those who
inflicted the injury—and in the breasts of those
who were injured revengeful feelings always rankled.
Ile could show, if time permitted, that they had fla-
grantly broken their treaties with many of the native
Princes. He was too much exhausted to go into the
documents he had with him, to show the feelings
they had against the Company when the Seikh inva-
sion took place. What was it that had led to the
excited feelings of the peasantry of the Punjaub
against the Company ? It was that the Company
introduced into that country what he (Mr. Sullivan)
said advisedly was the accursed system of questioning
the rights of the people to their own lands, a mea-
sure by which they had swept three millions into
their treasury, tied made three times three mil-
lions of people their bitterest enemies. He
would tide them, in conclusion, why they,
who could not touch a hair of the head or decree '
the property of the meanest of their own subjects
but by a strictly legal process, had stripped Princes
of their territories by their mere sic cold He would
say heavy indeed was their responsibility on that ac-
count; for by every one of those instances of what he
might call the reckless and wanton extinction of a
native state, they were undermining their own power,
and taking a wide stride towards the subversion of
that mighty empire which had been entrusted to
their charge.—(Applause.) The Hon. Proprietor
concluded by moving the following resolution

" That this Court is of opinion -that the treaty con-
cluded by the British Government, in 1819, with Per-
taub Singh, Raja of Sattara, and subsequently renewed
with his brother and successor, the late Appa Sahib, con-
ferred upon and guaranteed to those Princes the heri-
ditary so►ereignty in the principality of Sattara; and
this Court being farther of opinion that the heirs and
successors to those Princes, whether by adoption or in
right of blood, are entitled to the inheritance under the
tenure and conditions of the said treaty, this Court
consider it to be right and necessary to record its opinion
that no case has been made out to justify the annexation
of the said principality of Sattara to the British terri-
tory."

General BRIGGS rose to second the motion. In
doing so he feared he should be unable to add much
to the luminous arguments adduced by his Hon. Friend
in favour of the motion. He had, he thought,
grappled with all the reasoning of his opponents in
England ; and he (the Gallant General) felt he should
not be wrong in follovving his example, and taking
up those of the parties in India. Among those Mr.
Willoughby, the member of Council in Bombay,
stood most conspicuous, and from his long standing,
his talents, and zeal, it could not be surprising that
hisi views were adopted event by the Governor-
General himself, He had little doubt that those indi-
viduals who had taken different views from those which
he entertained on that subject had been influenced by
the same motives which actuated himself, and by the
intention of acting rightly ; but he did thik that ae
vast deal of ignorance prevailed respecting
the right of adoption and the right of appropriating
the territory of the independent Princes India.h
He should have been happy if the gentleman to
om
he had alluded (Mr. Willoughby) had confinedw
his
observations to the subject then before the Court, but
he was sorry to observe by the minute of the 14th May,
1848, that he had rather gone out of his way to attack
an unfortunate individual now no more. Not only
had he done this, but he had thought proper to attack
the motives and intentions of those who had supported
the cause of the late Raj!i. of Sattara, and among
others he had mentioned him (General Briggs) indi-
vidually, with respect to which he was anxious to
set himself right with ,the Court. It would have
been better, he thought, if Mr. Willoughby
had on such a theme conflued himself to the strict
truth, and had observed the maxim De mortis's nil nisi
bonum.—(Cheers.) Why he should have dragged
forward this unfortunate individual he was utterly
at a loss to understand. Surely enough had been
said with respect to him. The Gallant Officer
then proceeded to clear himself from the as-
persions cast upon him by Mr. Willoughby,
an I to say that be never predicted that the
Raja would ever engage in hostility ;with the