The Sun.
London, England, 1825-02-21 00:00:00

:quite at a loss to know why the Marquis of Hastings opposed
it ; but, on looking at page 226 of-the printed papers, it would
be seen that the Noble Marquis was still eager to grant this
licence, and still opposed to any other mode- being adopted to
raise the loan. There then only remained one other mode which
appeared to Mr. Stuart at all feasible—which was •to raise this
money without a guarantee. The Marquis of Ilastings said
that he should not object to this, provided it was understood
that the subscribers were not to look to the Government for sup-
port in case the Nizarn should fail to discharge the loan. Now
he (Mr. Carruthers) would ask why should these British mer-
chants be precluded from seeking from Government that pro-
tection which was granted to others ? Every man must be at
a loss to understand why the Marquis _of Hastings should
still persevere injefusing the same protection and Vie same
privileges to the British merchaats in India ache has granted to
the House of Palmer and Co. His Lordship went on to say
that " there must be no speculation that Government would
grant this protection:" .Now ( Mr. Carruthers), as a Bri-
tish merchant—(" Hear, hear from Mr. D. -Kinnaird and
Hume)—yes, he would sas'feeling as a British merchant,
and he was proud of thename, he could not understand why
he was to be deprived of the same, protection from the Gover-
nor-General of India.which was extended to the house of Palmer
and Co., or any other commercial house in that eountry. At
last he had arrived at page 733, 'and he there fOund a letter
from the Marquis of Hastings to Sir William Rumbold, dated
the 4th January, 1815 ; now he could not help remarking upon
this letter, although he had been told that it was a private letter
—(" No, no !" from the 'opposite beches.)—This letter, it
would be remembered, was dated' in 1815, and the-licence
granted to the house of Palmer and Co. bore date in 1816. His
Lordship said to Sir William in this letter, that the partners
speculated that he (Sir William) being one of the firm, could,
do much to promote their interests ; and his Lordship went on
to say, " that this was a fair and honest speculation." It was
certainly remarkable that the Noble Marquis should, on every
occasion when speaking of the house of Palmer and Co. evince
such an anxious concern for their welfere. Air. Carruthers)
could not bet observe that this fact was very remarkable. But
he now came to that part of the letter which bad had very great
influence on his mind. His Lordship proceeded to say. " Per-
haps a more distinct benefit would attend the- firm - by the' dis-
couragement of all competition with it by any other British
merchants." Now, after reading this, would any man say
that his Lordship did not contemplate, when he was writing
this letter, that it was possible that other men would come for-
ward, and seek the same favour and guarantee which was then
about to be given to the house of Palmer and Co. ? His Lord-
ship then added, " The same sanction would not be granted to
any other person."—Why not be granted ?
Mr. D. KINTN AIBD—The 'next line will tell you.

31r. CARItUTHERS claimed the right of reading the letter,
and making his comments on it in the manner which appeared
most conversant to him. • lie legged' the lion. Gentleman
would not interrnpt him. True.- the letter did go on to add,
that " it was on the groUnd of the :services of the Nizam, and
at the request of the British Resident, that he (the Marquis)
had -granted the licence which .traS granted in 14116.• But he
would noW look to the fact. In page 2, the letter of the Resi-
dent appeared, which said, that the. cstablishment of a house of
business, conducted by' EngliOt merchants, at Hydrabad,
Would do benefit; but did the Resident -Say,- give Messrs.
Palmer and Co. that privilege? did he say, that if other per-
sons were to come front England and commence business, that
they were not to meet with encouragement? No such thing
was said or intended. He now came.- to the most fatal para-
graph of all—it was the last. His Lordship observed, that
" No new establishment would have such a plea as that of
Palmer and Co." But why would not any other. person who
came and said, " I come to ofli:r a fair and open competition
with the house of Palmer and Co." be entitled to the same pro-
tection and privileges which that house received ? Ile had now
gone through the papers; as far as related to the licence ; and
he thought heir/trisect) ennneh in`tia docuMents •to - justify
him in saying, that his Lordship was most unfortunate in his
preference to the honse of Palmer. and Co. If he (Mr. C.)
thought that he had fallen. short to justify the verdict which he
should give, he could allude to other evidence. The Hon.
Proprietor then commented upon his Lordship's conduct re-
specting the voluntary affidavit which had been made by Sir
Wm. Rumbold and Mr. Palmer, and said that he felt ashamed
at seeing such high rank and character concerned in such trans-
actions. • With regard to the letter which had been read at the
request of an Hon. Director, he coasidered that it did not Vouch
upon the question now before the Gaul. The Hon. Proprie-
tor, after alluding to the arguments of Mr. flume, and espe-
cially to his remarks upon the conduct of Mr. Adam, which he
(Mr. Carruthers) very strongly condemned, concluded by in-
treating the Court to do justice to the Court of Directors, and
not,. by an unqualified vote, cast by implication, an un-
merited censure, upon those who had so ably and so faitfully
served them.

Sir Jolts DOLE and Mr. RussEnn (the Company's late 1
Resident at Hydrabad) rose at the same time, but Sir John in-
stantly gave way, observing, that as he understood the Gentle-
man appeared to vindicate his character, he would not for a mo-
ment be the cause of his not being immediately heard.
Mr. RUSSELL then said, that at the time the last meeting
tcok place, he was not a member of the Court, and that if it
had not been for certain_ observations made at that meeting,
which reflected discredit on his character, he should not now have
troubled them. His complaint lay in certain mattersintro-
duced in the opinion of the Attorney-General, which opinion
was read as part of the speech of the Hon. Chairman. • The
facts in that opinion were•either assumed to have existed, or
they were stated hypothetically, to show what would be the law
if they did exist. It they were asserted to exist, the assertions
were made without any proof ; there was not a particle of evi-
dence to support them. Haley were hypothetically put, they
were then entitled to no more credit than any other hypothe.:
tical subject, which was none at all. He took the opinion of
Counsel to be taken upon certain statements laid before him,
which statements may either be founded in fact or otherwise,
and upon which he gives his opinion, but not a judgment ;
an opinion to direct future proceedings if thought advisable. But
when Counsel has said that you cannot go into Court, that there
are no legal measures capable of being instituted against the
party tewhom those statements refer, were such opinions, then,'
to be made the vehicle of libel ?_(Hear !)—Were they to be
made the instruments of the basest and foulest calumnies ? Ile
was satisfied that if the ground he stood upon was English
ground, he need do no more than state this conduct, to en-
title it to tin yersal abhorrence. The opinion of Counsel was
not to stand in the place of accusation, proof, conviction, and
punishment. If it were, once permitted him to act upon that
principle, and to be allowed to state his case to Counsel, and to
apply the opinion which should be given upon it as he liked, he
would undertake to say that he would usurp the estate of any
Nobleman in England, and prostrate the character of any man,
however high he might stand, in the dirt: The papers which
had been referred to in that opinion, had been ordered to be
published, anti had it been permitted to him as an act of jus-
tice, and even from a consideration of an old servant—( Hear,
hear !)—he should have submitted to the Court of Directors
what would have tendered much that he had now done unne-
cessary, and he should have been spared the detail which he
now felt compelled to enter into. He had read the papers
bet ere the Court with great care and diligence, and he hoped
he should not be accused of vanity when he stated that he
was prepared to vindicate all the transactions which had been
represented in those papers. lie was not disposed to arraign
the opinions of the Counsel because the Counsel reasoned from'
a partial view of the subject. If he were not satisfied with the
fairness of those transactions, his voice should be the first and
the loudest in their execration. lie should now proceed to give
the Court an explanation of the facts mentioned in the papers
of - Highness the Nizam.—
before the Proprietors. The first was as to the loan of 60 lacs
and made up out of un-
from die Niann.—
He would not only assert, but prove, that when that loan was
icrsut irooenaeensd la'sla'ansPes aeusi!lindi eeidire tatoombPi eCa
nci tetiro.t3.a(h-intiltssf
proposed, there did not stand on the books of Palmer and Co.
one single rupee of unsanc.ti.oned.balance. He should occa-
sionally refer to the letter of Sir umbold to the Court
of Directors ; hut in doing so he did not mean to take one single
fact upon the credit of the writer, but he stated them upon his
own declaration. It had been objected, that, Palauer and Co.
had three open accounts.
against the Nizatn. But this was
agreeable to the custom of the country, and indeed necessary._
The first was the Berar Suwar account ; the second, the Aurun-
gabad account; and the third, the Hydrabad account. The
advances made for die
s.tauting the refOrmed
ph
'evil under all the
Boaeyrrsmaerei :mut owefarral
native troops, that they wanted pay to their pockets, and
re...00A c
Icotoutwraotsf
_tfciooeongoi prieli
l.:oistrestael;:(liicecorn),g
food to fill their bellies. These men having been regularly paid
by the assistance of 11 .
lessts. Painter and Co, were made most
excellent soldiers, and would stand and-tall ae gallantly, though
their faces were black, as the officers, who led them, whose faeee

were white.—(hear, hear !) He did not kriow whether there
was any Gentleman then in the Court, who had served in India
with these cavalry, but if there was, he would appeal to him
whether he ever served with braver or more faithful men.
Colonel FrrzeLARENC 11 said, he had served with them, and
would testify to their being most faithful and useful allies.
• Mr. RUSSELL resumed. With respect to the Aurungahad
Account, it comprised the advances made for the payment of
the Nizam's regular and reformed troops at Aurungabad. Ife
had already stated in his letter to the Court of Directors, that
unless the armywere paid well, they would not fight well. Mr.
Painter offered to advance this money, not, he said for his own
benefit, but by doing it he should be rendering service to the
English Government, by which he hoped he should be entitled
to their future favour.—(Hear, hear!)—There then remained
the Hydrabad Account, in which were entered all advances and
payments of every description made by Palmer and Co., on ac-
count of the Minister at Hydrabad ; and which was, in fact, a
miscellaneous account. He hoped he had now explained what
the nature of these three accounts were. At the period of the
loan, the balances due were—
At Hydrabad - 03179 2
Aurungabad -•- - 13,13.689 - 8
Berar Suwar - 20,57,219 7

38,39,863 1
Deduct Assignments given in 1819, and
realised in 1820 - 10,56,711 f;

Rupees - - 28,83,156 11 0
Palmer and Co. knowing what discussions were gidng on at
Calcutta respecting these balances, wished to submit to Govern-
ment the whole of their books. He was so satisfied with the
propriety of their conduct, and that it had benefited the Govern-
ment, that he was anxious to have the fullest investigation.
The Hon. Proprietor then entered into a very minute detail of
accounts explanatory of the manner by which the loan was
paid to the Nizam, in controversion of the charge aria it was a
fictitious loan. He represented the statements of Sir Charles
Metcalfe to be quite erroneous, and argued that if such errors
were committed as he had shown, the Court ought to be very
cautious in giving credit to such a person's objections. In ex-
planation of the item of jewels stated in Palmer and Co.'s ac-
count, he begged to state that jewels in that country were
bought for public purposes; and that the number of presents
made by the Nizam, to those who presented to him, marked the
consequence of the individuals. In Eagland it was said that
such an one was presented to his Majesty, and was most gra-
ciously received in India; it was observed that such an one had
been introduced, and had so many presents made to him. The
lion. Proprietor then entered into a full explanation respecting
the charges made for interest, and contended, that at the time the
rate of 24'per cent. was taken by Palmer & Co. money could not
be procured by' the Nizam at a less rate of interest, that even.
Palmer and Co. were themselves obliged to pay at that rate
for part of the money borrowed by them of the Soucars, or native
bankers, in order to help to pay this very loan ; and that as to
whether it was legal or illegal to take more than 12 per cent. was •
then, and still was, a moot point in India; for although some
very eminent Counsel in this country had said that it was illegal,
yet the highest authorities in India were of a contrary opinion.
—And even Mr. Canning, at the time he was about to be ap-
pointed to the Governor-Generalship of India, considered this
point so unsettled, that in his place in the House of Commons
he expressed a .wish that the Right Hon. the President of the
Board of Controul would bring in a full declaratory of the law
upon that very subject. Under these circumstances, then, it
was too much to say that Messrs. Palmer and Co. were acting
illegally in taking openly, and under the sanction of the Coon.,
fail, the usual rate of 24 per cent. The Honourable Proprietor
then adverted to the charge rustle against Palmer and Co. for
taking a bonus of 8 Ines upon 52 Lacs ; and vindicated it upon
the ground that it was a part of the interest. But, in fact, not
a farthing of this bonus had yet been received. The Hon. •
Proprietor-observed, that as to theqUestion before the COurt; he
had not the honour to be known to the Marquis of Hastings,
nor had ever seen him. Al! his communications with that
Nobleman were in his (Mr. :(ussell's) public, character as Re-
sident ; and whether the Court should deem it proper or not
to remunerate that Noble Lord in a pecuniary way for the
brilliant services he had rendered them, he could not decide,
but, as far as regarded the honour and integrity of that great
man's character, his (Mr. RUssell's) voice should never 'be
silent while it was necessary to raise it in support anti vindi-
cation of both against any attack or insinuation that might be
Made upon them, let them proceed from what quarter soever
they might. The Hon. Proprietor sat down amidst loud
cheers from all parts of the Court:
Sir. Fittatir Han said, that impossible as it was net to
have heard with extraordinary interest the Honourable Pro-
prietor's vindication of himself, still the Court might have been
spared much of the last part of his speech. By the papers be
fore the Court it appeared that 32 lass of rupees have been ad-
vanced by Messrs. Palmer and Co. to the Nizam, between Fe-
bruary and July 1820. Early in this year the subject of the 60
lac -loan was contemplated ; and the Hon. Gentleman (Mr.
Russell) was requested to apply to the,Calcutta Government for
their sanction. But so well was he satisfied that thin sanction
would not be granted, that he declined making the application.
Vet early in May of the same year, we find the Nizair's _Mini-
ster stipulating with the Resident for arranging the loan' with
the house in question. Now it appeared to him very evident,
that at that moment ':Messrs. Palmer and' Co. were making
large advances to the Hydrabad Government, without any au-
thority or sanction. The Honourable, Proprietor had said, in
talking of the precarious state of the country at that time, that
if be had . held up his finger, the Nizam would have turned
against us.—(Hear !)—lf this was the case, were we not
strengthening a power that might turn the troops which we
paid by this very loan against ourselves ? If, again; an officer
I of the -Resident's rank had such extraordinary power, did it
not give a fearful picture of- the precarious - tenure by which
we occupied India ? If so much depends on the rectitude •
of a Resident, what must not depend on a Governor-Ge-
neral ?—( Hear, heat !)—Hon. Gentlemen when on the sub-
ject of interest, said that it was relative. .The Honourable
Member for Aberdeen had informed them that the
high rate of interest arose from the difficulty of recovering
from a native Power a loan when due. He likewise accused
an Honourable Member who had spoken on a former occasion
(Mr. Poynder), in no very measured terms, of entire igno-
rance of India. Should not 'the Honourable Gentleman who
so freely found fault with the ignorance of others, have en-
lightened the Court by his own knowledge of the subject ? As
to the security, and means of repayment, he could not agree
that they were such as to require so large a rate of interest. It
was true there was no appeal in such a case to a court of law ;
but there was an appeal to the Minister, and what could be
better security, he would ask, than an appeal to such a man as
the present Minister was represented to be ?—a Minister en-
tirely irithe interest of the British, and who held his office en-
tirely through British influence. Palmer and Co. themselves
appear to have been satisfied with the nature of this security,
as appears by a letter of theirs to the Marquis of Hastings,
in which they say that they would not have entered into this
loan, did they not consider that, as British subjects, they
would have means of recovering payment. He therefore could
see no reason for charging a higher rate than the legal interest.
(Hear, hear!)—The attack of an Hon. Proprietor (Mr Hume)
on Mr. Adam he considered unfair, unjust, not to say unmanly,
he not being present to answer for himself. (Hear !) He had
even talked of impeaching that valuable servant of the Company,
but this even that Hon. Gentleman could not mean. As it
was possible that he might be heard by persons who were not
aware of the meaning attached to certain terms by the ilon.
Member for Aberdeen, he begged to say that he appeared to him
to indulge frequently in such expressions without any meaning
( hear, hear !)—lle (Mr. Freshfield) could not agree with that
part of the motion which cleared the public and private charac-
ter of the Marquis of Hastings front any imputation. How
was it possible, with the papers before them, to say that, Or any
thing like that ? Can honourable men acquit the Marquis of
Hastings of blame—a man of his high and elevated rank—for
having given extraordinary advantages, to serve a favourite, to
the house of Palmer and Co. which had not been given to any
other house ? flow can they say that no taint can attach to such
conduct as this? In the papers'before the Court there'was the
clearest evidence that an unfortunate partiality for Sir• William
Rumbold caused the Governor-General to hold communication
with private individuals, derogatory to the authority of the Re-
sident. • In a letter to Sir William Rumbold, the Noble Mar-
quis expresses his surprise that the Resident had not for Warded
the application of the house relative to the loan, and blames him
ifi'con.wneagnly uectinogvetrontolo °-- T
-Gna
private house of business, except thrOugh his Council.
The Marquis of Hastings, on• the contrary, however, becomes
himself' the medium of communication between the house
and his Council—(near, hear !)—as may be inferred from his
delivering the affidavit p. 109 of these papers, and his letters,
seeralilear'hear !)-11e could not conceive
could hold communication with