The Sun.
London, England, 1825-03-11 00:00:00

would expose their house to great danger from their creditors,
and prayed for his protection (p. 431, 432.)
In answer to this the resident, informed them, 20th February,
that he was authorized (p. 432) to aid them in case of extreme
exigency to a limited amount, in compliance with his instruc-
tion of 15th January, 1823 (p. 354.) On the 3d of April, ac-
cordingly, the resident did advance four lees to the house
(p. 494.)
The Aurungabad accounts having been delivered and adopt-
ed, without adverting to the objectionable parts, for the sake
of closing the transaction the sum of 7,82,180 was paid by
the resident to Messrs. Palmer, on the 9th May, 1823, which,
with the sum of four lacs previously advanced, discharged the
balances of that account, 11,80,160 (p. 550.)
On the 18th June, 1823, Sir C. Metcalfe had made a report
to the government of gratuities and pensions paid to British
inibject.s by the Nizam, exceeding one lac of rupees per annum,,
of—which more than half were paid to Mr. Palmer's family,
and he stated that others, not acknowledged by the Minister,
had been since discovered (p. 347, 348.). These allowances had
been the subject of the consideration of Government for many
months, and Lord Hastings, on 19th November, 1822, had
stated that they could not be recognised or discharged by the
British Government, and Mr. Adam, on January, 1823, had
stated them to be of the most doubtful nature; though he sus-
pended his decision as to allowing them in the account till fur-
ther explanation (p. 360).
On the 13th June, however, the British Government came to
a determination that the grants themselves (p. 549) ought to be
revoked at once, leaving the question of arrears until the gene-
ral settlement. This was accordingly communicated to the
Resident, and by him to the Minister, who upon that furnished
the Resident with a list of allowances theretofore paid by the
Nizam to various persons, consisting principally of the family,
servants, and dependants of Mr. Palmer and his house. Among
others, the former moonshees of Mr. Wm. Palmer (p. 575,
576,) and his brother, who received 700 rupees per month, and
when they went to Mecca received 91,000 rupees from the
Nizam's Government, to bear their expences.
These allowances were ordered to be discontinued, with the
exception of such as were paid for pensions to disabled soldiers
(p. 577); the decision of the arrears being still suspended until
the final arrangement.
Upon an inspection of the Hydrabad accounts, it was sug-
gested by the resident (p. 551), that the bulk of the debt due to
Palmer's house should be paid' off' at once, reserving for the
final orders of the Governor-general, in Council, such sums as
might be necessary to cover any deduction on account of objec-
tionable charges ; but he suggested that if any rejections were
made, they should be conclusive, as their continuance with
heavy interest would be more injurious than a present payment
in full. To this proposition the Governor-General (p. 552), in
Council, assented, seeing the little probability there was of ob-
taining any satisfactory explanation of the doubtful items ; and
in counsequence of the evasions practised by Palmer and C 0..,
for the purpose of protracting the final settlement, and which
had delayed it for five months, the Governor in Council was
of opinion that the firm had forfeited every claim to the consi-
deration formerly contemplated of a postponed payment suited
to their convenience, to guard against any injury arising from
the difficulty of disposing of so large a sum thrown suddenly on
their hands. Unless, therefore, any promise to that effect had
been given to the house, the payment of whatever, sum should
be determined on, in concert with the Minister, was directed to
be tendered at once, and all interest to cease from the date of
that tender, 13th'June, 1823 (p. 552.)
Previously, however, to this determination, namely on the
sth June, ten lacs of rupees had been paid to them by the resi-
dent at their own desire, (p. 562,) and previous to the commu-
nication of these orders, a further sum of ten lees had been paid,
(p. 579,) for the same reason.

On the 14th June, 1823, Sir C. Metcalfe reported to the Go-
vernment that the examination of the detailed accounts delivered
by Messrs. Palmers shoved that the loan was entirely a fiction ;
(p. 554,) and that no loan whatever, of any given sum, had been
made at that period. On the 26th Jtily, the Bengal Govern-
ment expressed their conviction, founded on the matter before
them, and their confidence in the accuracy of the resident, that
such was the case, though they had • not yet received the ac
counts themselves ; and stated that there could be no doubt that
the grossest deception had been practised on the Government,
in all that regarded the affairs of Palmer's house, and that the
Minister, whether wdlingly or not, had assisted in the deception
(p. 563.)
In their instructions to the resident, of the 22d July, they
observed that supposing the statement to be confirmed by the
accounts, no question could remain with regard to the disallow-
ing the bonus, as well as the allowances to the partners, and
their dependents, with the amount of the accumulating_arrears
at 25 per cent. (p. 573.)
Subsequent to the dispatch of the Governor-General's letter
of 26th July, the detailed accounts of Palmer's house with the
Nizam reached Calcutta. Abd on 31st July; (p. 589,) the
Government declared that, in their opinion, the fact of the ficti-
tious nature of the loan was conclusively established.
Mr. Adam stated in his minute of 30th July, that though the
accounts were too voluminous (p. 701,) to enable him to
judge correctly of all their details, there were certain prominent
parts which appeared quite distinct; and that he was not aware
that any practical object could. be attained by a more minute
investigation, as the resident had commenced, and perhaps
completed, payments to the amount of seventy-five lacs, reserv-
ing for charges that might be eventually disallowed about twenty
lacs : there appeared, therefore, no reason to delay coming to
a conclusion upon the main questions arising out of these ac-
counts. With regard to the disposal of the sum reserved of
twenty lacs, it was necessary to determine whether any and what
items -should be disallowed (p. 703.)
He stated that it was only to those prominently extravagant
and disgraceful, that their attention need be directed ; that the
bonus, with interest, amounted to 13,50,000 rupees ; and that
the arrears of allowances to the Palmers might be taken roundly
at 5,000,000, making a total of 18,50,000, which would be
more than covered by the sums reserved by the resident.
It would only be necessary to declare to the house and the
minister the decision of the government, that these items origi-
nated in no public motive, but in views at variance with the in-
terest of the Nizani and his people, could not be recognised as
forming a part of the debt, which the British Government had
undertaken to discharge, and that it would not interest itself in
the liquidation of the demand, on account of which no further
payments were to be made (p. 703.)
With regard to the members of the house, he declared his
opinion that the worst suspicions of their conduct had not sur-
passed the actual and proved facts of the case, and that
they had forfeited every claim to indulgence or consideration.
Sir Wm. Rumbold having embarked for England, no steps
could be taken with regard to him,' but that Mr. Lamb
toe remaining European partner ought to be immediately or-
dered to quit Hydrabad, and repair to England ; independ-
ently of his concern in the house, he had been twice ordered
home, by the orders of the Directors, though the orders had
not been enforced.

That Messrs. Palmers', not being Europeans, the same course
could not be pursued towards them ; but they ought to be in-
formed that they were no longer to consider themselves under
the protection of the British Government, (p. 703,) or entitled
to its countenance, in the most remote degree.
Mr. Feudal' (p. 704) and Mr. " Harrington (p. 765), having
concurred in these opinions in the fullest manner, the resi-
dent is instructed accordingly, on the 31st July, and further
directed to make a written communication to the minister in
writing, that Messrs. Palmer had by the general course of
their conduct, and more especially in the fraudulent transac-
tions of the sixty lacs' loan, forfeited every claim to the favour
and support of the British Government, which has accordingly
withdrawn from all interests in their concerns, and they are no
longer in any degree under its protection (p 706).
The Resident was informed, that Mr. Lamb must be per-
emptorily required to quit Hydrabad and proceed to Europe,
but there was no objection to his being allowed a reasonable
time for the adjustment of his affairs.
Lord Amherst took upon himself the Government on the
Ist of August, and Mr. Adam sailed for Bombay, in a state
of extreme ill health early in September, as appears from the
Calcutta newspapers, and had not returned to Calcutta when
the last advices left India.
The Government has been accused of, severity, in ordering
Mr. Lamb to leave Hydrabad within six weeks. It appears
from the above statement that five months elapsed between the
date of Mr. Adam's order and Mr. Lamb's removal from Hy-
drabad, and that he had known that the Court had ordered him
home for above two years. It is plain there was no severity,
therefore, in the case.

On the 27th August (p. 752) Mr. Lamb applied to Lord
Amherst for leave to extend his stay at Hydrabad until the close
of the business year of the house, in June, 1824, as Mr. Adam
had allowed him a reasonable time for the adjustment of his
affairs ; but Lord Amherst determined by an order of 17th
October, that as Mr. Lamb had been apprized of the order of
the Court for his return to England, ever since December,
1821, that he could not comply with his desire, and he was in-
formed that the period of his stay was limited to the month of
December next, at the expiration of which month he was per-
emptorily required to return to Europe.

The orders of the Government for the withdrawing their
countenance from the house of Palmer, and declining to recog-
nize the bonus and allowances as part of the debt to be dis-
charged by the British Government, were communicated to the
house on the 25th of August, 1823 (p. 797-)
On the 9th September, (p. 806) the house addressed the re-
sident on the subject of the first part of that communication,
from which they apprehended the very worst consequences;
for being deprived of the protection (If British Government,
,
and restricted by the letter of the 10th 'February (p. 431), from
all intercourse with the • Nizam's
.Government, they were li-
terally placed,. they 4edged,. in the situation of outlaws

out the right of appeal to any known tribunal. It would de-
prive them of the means of realising their claims, which em-
braced even then a capital of more than sixty lacs, and involved
numerous interests.
They stated, that there was no court of justice under the
Nizam's Government, and their only appeal could be to the
minister ; they desire, therefore, to know whether the restric-
tion alluded to was to be considered as rescinded,. as if not,
they should be placed•in the situation of existing commercially
in a community, without the right of appeal, in any form, to
its only known tribunal of justice. Sir C. Illetcalfe informed
them, that the restriction was not withdrawn ; but this pecu-
liarity of their predicament, in a country where there is no tri.
bunal of justice, if deprived of intercourse with the minister,
and also of the intervention of the British resident, had been
reported for the consideration and orders of government
(p. 807.)

Sir C. Metcalfe had, upon the receipt of his instructions,
31st July, stated to the British Government that the firm was
precluded from communication with the Nizam's Government,
otherwise than through the resident ; and was also excluded
from the support of the British Government ; that there was
no Court of Justice in the Nizam's territories. They had hi-
therto been all powerful against debtors, but it was difficult to
say how, under the present circumstances, their just demands
were to be prosecuted. If a debtor should refuse payment of
a debt and an appeal to the Nizani and to the resident, be
alike prohibited, to what quarter could they appeal. The re-
sident thought the restriction ought not to be withdrawn on
their intercourse with the minister, but that an appeal to the
resident ought to be left open to them (p. 799.) In answer to
this application, the resident was instructed, that although it
was desirable, with reference to the orders of the Court of the
24th May, 1820 (p. 7,) that all concern with Palmer's. affairs
should be avoided ; yet, so long as the direct intercourse with
the house and the minister was restrained, it could be no in-
fringement of that order to permit the Resident to be the channel
of written communication between the parties, in cases where
a higher rate of interest than twelve per cent. was not to be
demanded from the parties against whom their claims were
to be preferred; and the Resident was therefore authorized
17th of October, 1823, to transmit appeals from the house to
the Government of the Nizam, in cases where not more than
twelve per cent. was demanded, and the house had applied
for redress in the first instance to the courts of the country
(p._750, 5.1.) - -

In answer to Messrs. Pahners' letter of the 9th September,
Lord Amherst (p.. 807) declared, that he could not discern in
Messrs. Palmers' explanation any ground for the revision 9f
the order complained of; while much had since appeared to ..
confirm its justice, and propriety. As the Government was
precluded by the order of the Court, from interfering for the •
furtherance of the demands of the house, and was bound •
to prevent, in duty to their ally, any abuse of power on
the part of his Minister, no course was open on the disco-
very of such abuse and fraud, but to adhere to the measure
complained of. Lordship observed, that the house could
not with justice complain of the restriction on its direct inter- '
course with the Government, while it was free to present,
through the Resident, any appeal for redress; and was thus
placed on the same footing with all other British subjects in
the Nizturt's dominioni. Neither was. it warranted in their
assertion, that the orders complained of made them outlaw,
since the same channel was open to them that was. free to all
other British subjects. Till they could shew that any legal
demand had been rejected, they were not justified in asserting
that redress was closed against them (p. 808).
A moment's consideration wili shew the total .Want of fourfr
dation of the complaint of Messrs. Palmer, that they were de-
nied the means of redress for any legal &Mind by the law
as it stood. Until a special exemption was made in their fa-
vour, they were prohibited from any pecuniary transactions
with the Nizam's Government, and their communication with
his Minister could only have been through the medium of. the
British Resident. Lord Hastings in_ Council, by his license
of. July, 1816, had relaxed the law in favour of Messrs Palmer.
upon the allegation that their transactions were open and public,
and free from the taint of usury and extortion.

In the couse of the inquiries which have been detailed above,
it had been proved that the house had entrapped the British.
Government into the sanction of a loan, to secure old out-
standing balances, the existence of which had been care-
fully, concealed, and had reserved to themselves, unknowp to
the Government, a bonus of eight lacs out of sixty, which had
raised the interest to an enormous extent, and totally 'defeated
the alleged objects for which that loan was raised.
It had also appeared, that a direct system of collusion had
subsisted between the house and the minister of the Nizam.
Conduct such as this had, beyond all question, deprived the
house of any claim to the protection of the British Governmkt,
and made it impossible to permit the continuance of a direct
intercourse between the house and the minister. The Gover-
nor-general had accordingly prohibited all intercourse with Of
minister, except through . the resident ; but that channel 0'
communication, was in express terms reserved to the house,
which was put on the same footing with other British subjects+
who had not received any exemption from the general law.
it is tree, that by the order of the Court of May, 11320, (P. •
70 the influence or authority of the'British GovernmentfOr the
furtherance of their demands was not to be exerted ; but there
was no restriction upon the ordinary communication through
the resident, for all legal purposes, imposed upon 41,e house.
The intimation to the minister, that the house had-forfeited
their claim to the British favour and support, only put there.
in the situation in which others stood, and in which they would .
have continued, but for the interposition of the British Govern-
ment in their favour, and the countenance, communicated to ,
the Nizam's Government by Lord 'Hastings' dispatch, 17th of
July, 1822 (p. 164,) after a. termination had been put to the.
AurUngabad contract. It was, therefore, evidently untrue to
state that they were debarred from • all intercourse with the
Nizam, and a perversion of terms to compare themselves to
outlaws. - • •

Lord Amherst, therefore, was quite correct in stating in his
dispatch,pf, 17th October, 1823, (p. 808,) that the government
had imposed no shackles on the house, in the licit exercise of
their commercial pursuits, but had interdicted them only from
dealing with the Government, and direct intercourse, with the
minister of the Nizam, over whom they exercised so baneful' an
influence.

The limitation kut by the Governor-General upon the inter-
ference of the resident in favour of the house as to demands of''
sums, the interest upon which did not exceed twelve per cent.,
was not satisfactory to Messrs. Palmers, who, in two severs
instances, in the case of Umeen 00l 3loolk, (p. 747,) and 3100- '
neer 00l Molk, (p. 752, 7960 applied for the interposition of the
government to recover demands bearing interest at a higher
denomination. Upon being informed that the British Govern-
ment were not at liberty to forward claims of that description,
(p. 832,) Messrs. Palmers intimated to the resident, that that
permission of the government was rendered nugatory by the
condition it imposed; and they accordingly declined to urge
their claim at the reduced rate of interest prescribed by the-
British Government (p. 843.)
It appears to have been made a subject of complaint, that the •
resident declined to forward any demands bearing more than
twelve per cent. to the Nizam's Government; but when it is
recollected, that the most distinct opinion had been given 11
the Attorney and aolicitor-General, and the law officers of the
Compaßy, that not more than twelve per cent. could be taken
under any circumstances for loans, made either to Princes or in°
dividuals in any part of India, without violation of Acts of Par
liament ; to which opinion the government were directed strictly
to conform, and which had been intimated to the public in the
Government Gazette; (p. 104) it must be obvious to every one?.
that the government were precluded from being the channel
communication or assisting, in any respect whatever, for the,
purpose of recovering sums, upon which a larger rate of interest
had been reserved.

On a review, therefore, of these transactions, it will be seep/
that three successive governments, of Lord Hastings,
Adam, and Lord Amherst, concurredin thinking the reserve=
tion of the bonus, and the concealment of it from the govern;.
ment, as reprehensible in the. highest degree, as admitting
no excuse or palliation, and justifying the inference of culpable'
collusion (p. 187) ; and they all equally agreed in the cessa;
tion of all transactions between the Nizam's Government'au"'
the house (p. 189.)
Lord Hastings, it would appear, had afterwards changed
opinion, 19th of December, 1822 (p. 315) ; but the decision
Mr. Adam upon these points, as well as upon the fictitious
nature of the loan, was confirmed by Sir Edward Paget, lily'
Fendall, Air. Harrington, and Mr. Bailey, who formed the st"
preme council in succession, and was sanctioned by Lord
herst, who declared that subsequent discoveries had continue",
the justice and propriety of the resolution that had bee°
come to.
Under these circumstances, it is difficult to conceive, that to
have put the house upon the same footing with other lititisv
subjects in the dominion of the Nizam, should form the subject
of complaint.
To Lord Amherst, whose opinion was unbiassed by forme
discussions, and who must have been dispassionate, the Tres-.
sure appeared reasonable, and was, besides, in strict confer,'
mity with the orders of the Court. That innocent partie;
should have sustained any injury, is matter of great regret'
but it is evident that the course pursued by the house could 1?°,
be permitted to continue ; and that to have afforded immuu;t.,
to those who had sought to obtain extraordinary gain, by u`
positing their money with the house, for the sake of procurinfi.
a larger rate of interest, would have sapped the foundation •
that high sense of honour and purity which has for so 01.11131
years distinguished the British character in India.

Printed and Published for the PROPRIETORS, at the SOI4
• OFFICE) No. 112, Strand, by J. B. CARSTAIRS.