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

by a gross breach of our treaty with that Prince.
We took advantage of a lapse in the succes-
sion to rob the Sovereign of his right to adopt.
xßut then it was said that collateral heirs could
n_t succeed to the territories, but the treaty
did
de
noth i7sYc could d succeed Again
, it
uNte
tsh
eurged a
treaty
adtidnone t
sbauyt
so. The territory of Sattara was ceded to the Raja,
his heirs and successors. Whoever was Elijah of
Sattara %las heir under the treaty. Moreover, this
denial of the right of collateral heirs was in the face
of the dictum of Sir James Carnac, who acknow-
ledged that if he was to maiwain the treaty of 1819
in its integrity, he had no choice but to place the
next collateral heir upon the throne, namely, the
brother of the la'e ex-Raja. Now if that
privilege had lapsed to the Government the
treaty was void. The treaty of 1819 might have
been adhered to in one sense, but if the trtaty
of 1819 were taken in all its integrity, they were
obliged to take the heirs of the former Raja's brother
and place him on the throne, because he was the next
collateral heir and admitted to be such. But the
East India Company said more but the
lineal heirs were to succeed, and if they carried out
that policy did they think the Princes would ever want
natural heirs ? No; so far from their wanting them,
spurious heirs would spring up like mushrooms. For
so long as they allowed the practice of adoption and
collateral heirs to succeed, the collateral heirs took
good care to check the practice of adoption ; but the
moment they denied the practiee of adoption, the
collateral heirs would join with others to cheat them,
and he sincerely hoped they would cheat them every
time they had an opportunity of doing so.—(Hear,
and laughter) He bad now, to the best of his re-
collection, examined all the arguments contained in
these dispatches. It would seem to him that the
reasons advanced in favour of the present course of
the East India Company simply begged the whole
question. The question as to whether the Baja had any
right to adopt, or whether the collateral heirs had any
right to succeed, was begged altogether, and certainly
it was a very easy way of getting over all the
difficulties ; but the law ought to tell them that they had
no right to deal with the matter in that way. It must
be decided by the international law, and he for one
must insist in the first instance that upon no principle
of law or justice ought they to undertake to deprive this
man'of his territory. They had, undeEtaken the task
of passing judgment in this one casbut he would
take leave to ask whether in a regular civilized coun-
try that was a lair or honest mode of settling their
treaties ? In settling our treaties with the United
States of America did we not refer them to an, um-
pire ? did we not appoint commissioners, before which
both parties were heard, and all the claims were set
forth and fully inquired into ? But, in the present
instance, they were departing from all jus-
tice and precedent, all law and' equity,
because in this case they were the lions and the Raja
was the lamb. Now, be felt satisfied they would -
blacken the character and reputation of the East
India Company in the eyes of the native Princes and
people of India if they refused to constitute any other
tribunals but themselves, before whom the claims of
all parties could be practically inquired into, and if
just, established. Unless they followed the advice of
Sir G. Clerk and others in that respect, their charac-
ter for political faith would be irretreivably blasted,
and all their treaties with the native Princes of India
would be treated as mere mockeries.—(Cheers.) Pass-
ing from the morale of this question, he would just
take a glance at the policy of it.—(Hear, hear.)
But this was far too important a subject to be pro-
perly discussed at the fag end of a long speech.
Nevertheless there were some
,prominent points
which he would just 'notice. Let the Court consult
their records, and they would find it to be the opinion
of every one whose opinion was worth having, that in
the present state of our territorial dominions in India
the wanton extinction of a native state is the greatest
political bluntler . that we can commit:. Hear the
emphatic words of Sir John AlalColm.- He says :--
" Considering, as I do, from all my experience, that it
is our policy to maintain as long as we possibly can, all
native states now existing, and through them and by
other means to support and maintain Leave obiefs and
an aristocracy throughout the empire of India. I do
think that every means should be used to avert what I
should censider as one of the greatest calamities, in a
political point of view, that could arise to our empire;
the whole of India becoming subject to our direct rule.
I am decidedly of opinion that the tranquillity, not to
say the security, of our vast Oriental possessions is in-
volved in the preservation of the native principalities
which are dependent upon us for protection. Besides
the other and great benefits which we derive from those

alliances, their— co-existence with eur rule is of itself is

source of political strength, the value of which will never
be Lnown until it is lost. I am convinced that though
our revcnut, may increase, the Permanence of our power
will be htizirded in proportion as the territories of native
princes and chiefs fall under our direct rule."

Now he begged their attention to the opinion of an-
other equally eminent, man. What did Mr. Elphin-
stone say on this part of the subject :
`• It appears to me (bald Mr. Elphinstone) to be our
interest es well as our duty to we every means to pre-
serve tie allied Governments, it is also our interest to
keep up the number of independent powere; their terri-
tories afford a refuge to all these whose habits of war,
intrigue, or depredation, make them incapable of re-
maining quiet in ours (and the contrast of our Govern-
ment has a favourable effect on our own subjects, who,
while they fel the evils they are actually exposed to, are
apt to forget the greater ones from which they have
b.en delivered). If the existence of independent powers
give occasional employment to our armies, it is far from
being a di3advantage."
And in the life of Sir T. Munro, speaking of the
effect of this policy upon Indian warfare, he says—

" The eff.ct of this state of things is observable in all
the British provinces, whose inhabitants aro certainly
the most altject race in India. (No elevation of charac-
ter can be exptcted among men who in the military line
cannot attain to any rank above that of Subhadar, wbere
they are as much below an ensign, as an ensign is below
the commander-in-chief, and who in the civil line can
hope for nothing beyond some petty judicial or revenue
office, in which they may by corrupt means make up for
their slender salary.) The consequence, therefore, of
the conquest of India by the British arms would be in
place of raising, to debase the whole people. (There
perhaps, no example of any conquest in which the na-
tives have been so completely excluded from all share:in
the government of their country as Pritiala India.
Among all the &borders of the native a,tatea the field is
op'n f 'I- every man to raise himself, and hence there is
among them a spirit of etuu'ation, of restless

el:tut-I:die ot inuepeodcnce fir preftraule to the ail.-
vility of eur Indian subj:cte. The existence ot inde-

pendent native states is 'eke useful in drawing eff
wbul•nt an.l disatf:eted atn .tre; our ns'ive troops."
But what did the Duke of Wellington say in writing
fifty years ago to this Court. Why, he said—
ihroflvuee eded
ede st
ob etehne guru beatheerr t haahndoudre
sme
re
japtit
iso.
" my opinion, the extension of our territory and
we
n oßfesoiuderse,
ne-
ruins by depriving of employment those who heretofore
found it in the service of Tippoo and of the Nizsm.
"Wherever we spread ourselves, particularly if we
aggranellz ourselves at the expense of the Mehrattas,
we increase this evil, and throw out of employment and
means of subsistence all who have hitherto managed the
revenue, commanded or served in the armies, or have
plundered the country. These people become additional
enemies at the same time that, by the extension of our
territory, cur means of supporting our Government and
of dt fending ourselves are proportionally decreased."
There with his usual penetration the Gallant Duke
pointed out the evils that were likely to result from
the extinctions of these native states, namely, the
beggary of the natives, and their consequent
hostility—extinctions that were brought about
simply for the sake of procuring employment
for Europeans at the expense of the natives.
It was such a policy that had brought about the
revolution they had recently witnessed in many
parts of India, for in many of our Indian provinces
labour, which was formerly distributed amongst 20
and 40 natives, at salaries varying from 100 to 300
rupees, was now monopolised by two Europeans at an
expense of between 2,000 and 3,000 rupees. And of
what nature was the distress which this system en-
genderedf in India ? Why, by an extract from one
ofo
the dispatches of Mr. Frere, a sad feature was givre
the distress resulting from their conquests rrnpove t
to Europeans. Mr. Frere said—
"informthe Government that
g all classes as to the
iug the natives for the sake of affording employment
It is right I should
n
fi but that I hear
it has
been interpreted in various ways,
future,
eg,re
andat annnxai enttyi
favourable or unfa-
vourable to the continuance of the State, according to
sexsiosttsriarg
the hopes or fears of the party. Government will
not be surprised at this when it is consi•
clered that the bread of almost every one in or
about the city depends, more or ltss, on the decision.
Besides, the holders of Jagheers, Enema, &c., who
may feel more or less secure, according to the tenure on
which they hold their possessions,
there are at least
10,000 individuals directly supported by salaries from
the Court, and most of them have probably many persons
dependent upon them for subsistence. On the expendi-
ture of such Government servants mainly depends the
trade of the city; and there are few of the cultivating
classes, even throughout the territory, to whom the ex-
tiection of the dynasty of Serojee would be matter of
indifference."
And how was this national distress treated in the
minutes of a member of a Supreme Court of India?—
" We are not to regard the advantages which a few
courtiers and shopkeepers would lose by the dispropor-
tionate local expenditure."
And how was it treated by Mr. Mallet,
another member of the Supreme Court?
And now, Sir, after all, what would the Court of
Proprietors say to the cold-blooded logic, which first
of all created the evil and then complained that it wee
Indian
empire ? Did not the security of the
Certainly it did;ral he warned the
Remndpiv‘r.eitdheapef!lodrnuiepronGthoveseerntorera.Gtieesr:
East India Company not to extinguish native states
in this way for the sake of plunder.—(Hear, hear.)
They had Leard the voices of the political giants
warning them of the danger of the policy they were
pursuing, and he would now direct their attention to the
comparison which was presented to those accounts in
the BtAtemeuts of teas whom be wild call pigmies.