The Sun.
London, England, 1825-03-09 00:00:00

INDIA.

HYDRABAD LOAN.

(Continued from our Paper of Monday.)

4
Thet that Messrs. Palmer and Go. had re-
_
tained a bonus of eight lacs, which was not mentioned in the
correspondence 'submitted to Government, or known to Mr.
Russell, came to-the knowledge of Mr. C. Metcalfe in April,
1821 (p. 196), and was observed on in strong terms of disap-
probation by Mr. Adam (p. 202) and Mr. Fendal (p. 204) in
their minutes of May,—lg2l ; but which minutes were riot
acted on, having been withheld by Lord Hastings till Sept.
1822, from being recorded (p. 190), with a view to more deli-
berate consideration. , -
In September, 1822, Lord'Hastings Council censured the
retention of the bonus, and the concealmrnt, of it from Go-
vernment, in the strongest terms ; and stated that the conceal-
ment of the real conditions of the loan, while they were seeking
the sanction of Government, and professing to 'Or them
in possession of the details, admitted of no palliation eftex
cuse, and justified the inference of culpable collusion betweelit
Chundoo Loll and Messrs. Palmer? house (p. 187, § 3,6, 7) ;
lirtd lie called on Messrs. Palmer and the Minister to explain.
'=The Minister Chundoo stated (p. 270), that Messrs. Palmer
informed hititi gn.,his• application for the loan, that they had not
the tringey, and could not get it for three or four months,. but
if there Was a pressing neceitity, and Government would sub-
mit to the' loss of eight lacs, tlidy 'wpuld borrow the money
and lend it-to:Government.
And that as he'thought the troops might mutiny (jl:1.9370)„ or
he should be obliged' to retain them in pay till that time,'Pfell
consented from neceisit3i.).
Messrs. Palmer stated in 'the explanation (p. 275), that they
could not raise the money on better terms : that if it had been
raised by bills the loss of the exchanges would be as much.
That they could not borrow at the presidencies at fourteen
•
per cent.
That they were forced upon the Hydrabad market, and- the
monied men raised their charges from 9 and 12 per cent. to 16
and 24.
That there was no wilful concealment, as the fact was stated
in their books.
There seems no foundation for this explanation by Messrs.
Palmer or the Minister.
AcCording to the Minister's (p. 270) statement, he paid but
11 lacs of arrears -'how, then could it be necessary to borrow 60
at such a price P iNo such emergency existed.
The house state that the expence of raising 60 lacs, by bills,
would have amounted to as much ; but it will he seen that
they did not raise 60 lace.
For, at all events, whether the loan was a fictitious or real
transaction, they transferred to the Hydrabad account, from
that of

Berar (p• 274,554,625)
And for the bonus

20,57,219
3

28,57,219
so that at the utmost about 31 and a half lacs was all they had
to raise.
Indeed, Mr. Harrington, who was no party to any of the for-
mer discussions, not being then in Council, in his minute, Jan.
1823, states, that not more than 23 lacs at the utmost was ad-
vanced, and that it was doubtful if it exceeded 11 (p. 368, §2B).
Mr. Harrington (ibid) states, that he thinks, with the same
security that Palmers had, the amount advanced might have
been raised at. 12 per cent. ; a fact which is the more probable,
as Palmers themselves state that they had money from .atives
at from 9 and 12 per cent. to 16 and 24 (p. 275): and Sir
Charles Metcalfe states-(0:822) that it was notorious, that in
consequence of the British Government having sanctioned the
loan, British subjects lent them money at 12 per cent., which
is confirmed by Messrs. Palmers' own statement, that the bulk
of the money employed by them was invested by European
capital, at 12 per cent. (p. 839.)
There seems, therefore, no foundation for the ,bonus. But
if there was, still to have concealed it from the GOVernment,
which was evidently acting on the faith that sixteen per cent.
was the whole amount of profit, was a palpable fraud and
deception, and justly forfeited all claim to the further protec-
tion and countenance of the Government, which was originally
granted on the allegation that the proceedings of the house were
open and public (p. 4.)
In truth, however, there was no advance in cash at all up-
on this pretended loan of sixty lacs.
The whole amount was composed of a transfer of balances
due from the Nizam to the house, at the time the loan received
the santion of the British Government in July, 1820 (p. 554,
625, 701, 704, 821.)
The state of the balances, as detailed in Sir C. Metcalfe's
dispatches, 4th June, 1823, (p. 554), and adapted by the Ben-
gal Government in 1821, (p. 701), were as follovq :
On Hydrabad, Account - 26 82 402
On Aurungabad, Account - - 13 18 669
On Berar, Account - - 20 57 219

See also p. 821. 60 58 291
The first of these sums was the balance due on the general
account between the Nizam and the house at the time the loan
was sanctioned, as appears by the account (p. 625).
The other two which were due on old accounts, were brought
into the general accounts at the same time that the Nizam had
credit for the sixty lacs advanced by way of loan (p. 625).
There is no sum in these accounts at the time of, or subse-
quent to the loan, that is at all equal in amount to sixty lacs,
without including the balances, that it was stated by Chun-
(too Loll, that the pressing necessity for the advance made

him consent to allow bonus.
It is contended, indeed, by Messrs. Palmer, (p. 744,) that
this is not a correct account of the transaction ; for that all
the advances that follow the balance of 4,63,979, (p. 620,) were
payments in cash or otherwise : and that they were made in
anticipation of the loan, and were debited against the Minister
in his account to the end of the year, when the new loan ac-
count was distinguished.
How any payments made before the sanction of the Ben-
gal Government was obtained, can be put to the accountof
the loan it is not easy to understand ; still less is it intelligible,
that sums advanced before any application was made to the Go-
vernment, and after the resident's rolusal to apply for its sanction
can be so charged; notwithstanding the facts stated by Mr.
Russell, that a private application had been made to Lord
Hastings without his previous knowledge.
Surely, after the rejection of the proposal for the loan by the
accredited resident at the Nizam's Court, it is impossible to be-
lieve that advances were made on the reliance that a private
application to the Governor-General would be effectual ; for
should that be believed, this inference must follow, that the
members of the house must have felt so confident of their in-
fluence with the Governor-General, that they risked their pro-
perty to the amount of many Lacs of rupees, not% ithstanding
the expressed opinion of the Governor-General's public repre-
sentative against the proposition.
But it will be seen by the accounts, that there is no differ-
ence in the manner in which the advances said to be in antici-
pation of the loan are stated, and those in the account before the
loan was thoughkof, and after it was concluded.
The Palmers were making advances during the whole pe-
riod just in the same way ' • and it seems absolutely impossible
that these items could be advanced as part payment of theloan,
as they are included in an account bearing interest at 25 per
cent.; whereas the loan was to be, at all events, at an interest
of ony 18 per cent., and was effected for the very purpose
of reducing the amount of interest previously paid by the

Nizam.
It is alleged by Messrs. Palmer, (p. 741, and Sir William
Rumbold's letter, p. 26), that all the payments in the accounts
from February to August, 1820, inclusive, were advanced on
account of the loan. Amongst these will be found, Aug. 11,
a payment to Noor 00l Omrali of 4,23,579, (see p. 624), and
which they contended is to be put to the credit of the loan ; but
upon referring to the account rendered by the Minister in July
1822, (p. 180, 183), anti which distinguishes between the loan
account and the other accounts of the house with the Nizarn,
this very sum is stated as forming an item of the old debt of the
house incurred before the loan had an existence.
On a subsequent occasion, the Minister engaged to send in
a statement of the sums actually received from Palmers on ac-
count of the loan ; but Sir C. Metcalfe, states, that though
since applied to, he had not redeemed his pledge; but defend-
, ed himself by stating, that payment of old demands of the
house was one of the principal objects of that transaction, (13th
September, 1823, p. 808.) The refusal to furnish such an ac-
count, which must have been in his power, affords the strongest
inftrence that no such advances had been made.
It would seem, from sonic parts of M essrs.P aim ers'statements,
that they were disposed to treat the Berar account as a branch
of the Aurungabad, and that it was to be dealt with on the san e
footing ; but Sir William Rumbold's statement, that the house
had three separate accounts with the Nizabri, (Sir William's
letter, p. 24,) puts that out of the question.
Indeed it is inconsistent with Messrs. Painters' own state-
ment. .In
180. they state
Chundoo Loll, in the month of July, 1822, P. y
P. 275, in reference to the accounts rendered b
that there was a balance due to them for Aurungabad payments
of 13,18,669 rupees, which, they say, is brought forward by the
Rajah In those accunts, as the foundation of a separate account
amounting to 14,70,191 ; and they account for thFdifferem e
between the thirteen and fourteen lacs by some additional pay-
ments.
It will be observed, that this balance is said to have hen
made the foundation of a separate account. Messrs. Palmers
go on to say, that the minister, M his accounts,, gives the
amount of another debt due to them, which was transferred into
the loan; this old debt is the Berar Suwar account. Referring

to the minister's accounts so rendered, it will be seen, that the
item of 14,70,191, is she foundation of 'the account called the
old debt. IVhile the Berar Suwar account, which Messrs.
Palmers state was transferred into the loan, forms the second
item of the loan, or new 'debt, under the description of " rev
ceived at Aurun ' ii." -e-
,
Sir William , bold has, ,in his letter to the Directors
a
(p. 24) stated, Palmer's' house had no unsanctioned ba,
lances to transfer, and refers teethe accounts to prove it.
He states that the house bed, at the time the loan was con-
tracted for, three accounts with the- Nizam-
1. The Aurungabad.
2. The Berar.
• • 3.- The Hydrabad. • .
The Hydrabad account, he states, Was no further sanctioned
by the British Government,- than that the payments in it were
under the general license (p. 24.). For this, therefore, there is
his own admission, that the British Government was not a
guarantee, and, consequently, that it was unsanctioned.
The Aurungabad account is stated, by Sir William- Rum-
bold, to have been sanctioned by the British Government, and
he refers for his authority to the political letter of the Bengal
Government, 21st Oct. 1820, (p. 8.) but a reference to that do-
-catment will skew, that so far from any guarantee having been
afforded which could entitle the house to call upon the British
Govereiment for repayment, Ts ment, it was eressly stated by the house
to the retlidebti-(p. 14.) " hat wxpe never understood that a
guarantee of-any,suet was afforded to us by the British Govern-
ment, or any pecuniary liability whatever on the part of the
Hon. Company, was involveil,either in the encouragement you
gave to the arrangement, or in thelsapport which we expected
from you, for our security in the conductor dt ; but we must
observe, that in a country where there are no etitife)- courts of
judicature, we never could have established an extensive mer-
cifitile'tefseerrre without the conviction that we should receive,
from the Resident:VlM trititpktrr.yehich is essential to the trans-
actions of any British merchantVrthis'iotiiiiree.'„' 'And in, the
very dispatch to which Sir Win. Rumbold has referraf,,' turd'
Hastings declares that the house bad distinctly stated their un-
derstanding to be, that the Resident, or the British Govern-
meat, were in no degree pledged to support them, further than
-by the general countenance afforded to their establishment.
which was, in.fact, indispenSable for the very existence of an
extensive mercantin concern; ha a country where there are no
regular courts of judicature.
It is obvious, therefore, that although the British Govern-
ment had permitted or sanctioned this transaction, to the extent
of the exempting them from the penalties of the Act of Parlia-
ment: there was nothing like a sanction to the extent of giving
the house a claim upon the British Government for repayment;
and consequently they had the most distinct interest in trans-
ferring this unsanctioned end unsecured balance to an account
for which the British Government was pledged.
' The remaining balance is the Berar Suwar account, as to
which Wm. Paltrier and C 0.,. on the 24th October, 1822, (page
274), states, in a letter to the Resident,. that the payments had
been made without their having received any security that the
Minister was under engagements to give them orders, and that
they knew that lie felt himself bound to lend all his influence
to effect it ; that arrangements were in progress for paying this
arrear when the loan transaction commenced ; and upon that
ground they justified themselves in considering the transfer of
that balance to the loan account as equivalent to a cash payment.
To put beyond all doubt that the Berar account • had not re-
ceived the sanction of the British Government, so as to make
that Government liable to the house for its repayment, in any
respect, it will be sufficient to refer to Lord Hastings' letter,
Oct. 20, 1822, (p. 111,) in which it is stated, that there are four
transactions of the house which had come under the notice of
Government-first, the establishment of the house-second, the
application for the licence in 1816-third, the Aurungabad ar-
rangement of 1818-and lastly, the 60 lac loan. Now, as the
Berar account commenced, according to Sir W. Rumbold's state-
ment, in N0v.1816, (p. 24, his letter), it is plain that it is neither
of these refered to by Lord Hastings; so that his Lordship,
in giving an account of the transactions of his government
with the house, does not even allude to a demand which Sir
William Rumbold now says had received its section, to the
extent of a guarantee for the repayment of it.
The first intimation of any arrear due to the house on this
account, which the Bengal Government received, was conveyed
in a letter of Sir C. Meicalfe's, 20th June, 1822, (p. 168,) in
which it was stated that there was a further debt to the house,
hearing interest at 24 per cent.; and so little were the Govern-
ment apprized of its nature, that they. seemed uncertain whe-
ther it was not a personal aeeoilnt of the Minister's with the
house as his bankers (p. 164,) and , desired information which
was furnished by the resident 29th July, 11122, (p. 180,) who
stated that it was a public concern distinct from the-16(014*nm"
the Aurungabad arrangements, and that he would send the in-
formation a, soon as he received some explanation. The ac-
counts he afterwards sent, spew,that the Berar balance formed
' part of this account (p. 183.)
It is unnecessary to say more to prove that the Berar account
could form no demand against the British Government, until
it was incorporated with the loan.
lint it must never be forgotten, that at the time when the
Berar and the Aurungabad arrangements were entered into,
Mr. Sotheby, one of the Company's servants, high in office at
the residency at Hydrabad, was a member of the firm of Wm.
Palmer and Co., without the knowledge of the Beng Govern-
ment. ' Messrs. Palmers must have known that that circum-
stance would, in the eyes of the British Goverment, have ab-
solved it from all resposibility ; and that if it had given its
sanction to these arrangements, it would have.been entitled to
consider them as void ; the fact of one of its own servants hav-
ing been engaged in advancing money to a native Prince; to
whose court he Was aCC,;:dited, having been. concealed from his
knowledge. It was, therefore, most important for their inte-
rest to procure the insertion of these balances into an account to
which the Government should giVe its sanction after the time
that Mr. Sotheby-bad quitted the firm.
The adVances to the cultivator of the soil, as stated by Chun-
"tloo Loll (p. 271), were 2,35,000. Whether they were-really.
made or not, depends upon his statements; and the:amount is
too small to make it worth observing on. - '
That the interest taken•upon the loan was more than sixteen
per cent. is universally admitted ; and Messrs. Palmers justify
the amount of it, on the ground that they could not afford to
led for less, and that no other person would lend for so little.
That they could not afford to lend for less, is by no Means
proved.
They state that they had money from native capitalists at
nine and twelve per cent. before the loan, Though at the plea-
sure of their creditor, who subsequently raised it to sixteen and
twenty-four (p. 275.)
This statement rests on no proof, and they allow that the bulk
of the money they employed was European capital borrowed at
twelve "per cent. (p. 839.) .
- But although the house of Palmer, which was by no means
possessed of much capital, could not afford to advance at a lower
rate, it .is very far from clear that other capitalists could not
and would not, had they had the security of the British Govern-
ment.
Mr. Russell asserts that no others would do it so low, and
Lord Hastings adopts his opinion. But in effect he refused to
try the experiment, for when he offered to allow it to be tried,
he insisted that it should be explained in his own presence to
any proposed lenders, that in no possible case would the govern-
ment employ even their good offices for the creditors, (p. 2060
although it is quite plain that the sanction afforded to Messrs.
Palmer was a real guarantee, (p. 75,81, 194, 198,) as has been
proved by the arrangementanatle by Lord Hastings's govern-
ment to repay the the money they had advanced, (p. 198,) and
although Lord Hastings had told Sir William Rumbold, that
Palmers' House should not be exposed to British competition
(p. 734.)
Mr. Stuart, (p. 47,) Mr. Adam, (p. 48,) Mr. Fendall, (p. 49.)
the Court of Directers, (p. 80, § 61,) Mr. Harrington, (p. 368,
and § 28,) and Mr. illeteidfe, ail concur in. thinking that with
the same countenance, the loan might have been procured on ,
-easier terms.
The Guicowar ep. 48) did raise money at nine and a half per
cent. with British guarantee.*
Thus it would appear, that not one of the great objects pro.
posed by' the loan had been obtained ; not one of the. terms on
which the British sanction had been given had been complied
with ; but their confidence had been betrayed, and the Nizam's
affairs had become still more embarrassed (p. 168, 228.)
The fact that the Messrs. Palmers had retained a bonus of
-eight lacs, was communicated to thee government in April,
18'21; but Lord Hastings thought it expedient not to re-_
cord the minutes which referred to it, (p. 1900 and no
further notice appears' to have been taken of it till in June,
1822, when the resident having reported a proposal from the
Minister, that the British Government should advance money
to pay off Messrs. Palmers' debt, and mentioned, as a part of
that debt, a separate account (p. 168, sec. 21), bearing interest
at 25 per cent., distinct from the Aurungabad contract and the
loan, the Government, 17th July, 1822, desired to be informed
respecting such debt.--(P. 164, sec. 4.)
In answer to this command, the Resident procured from the
Minister certain accounts, from which it appeared that eighteen
perper cent, was clhBal7edlB4u.)pon.t.he loan, as well as (p. 180), a bonus
of eight lacs for compensation (p. 180, 182.) 25
' That there was an old debt of 26 lacs, bearing interest at
It also appeared that large annual sums, amounting to 5,400
rupees per month (p. 182), were paid by the Nizam to 111 .
Palmer, his brother, and children ; and that Doctor Currie, the
Thisuse information. drew down the Al
Surgeon at the Residency, had been a partner in Palmer's
ho
ost severe reprobation

* It was objected that the loan to the Guicowar led to inter-
ference with his internal government ; but that would not have
followed with the Nizam- who was to give up districts equal to-
the advance in security.

from Lord Hastings and his Government, with respect to the
bonus, and the concealment practised as to it (p. 187.)
Lord Hastings, in Council, observed, that Palmers had
stated, 15th Januarr, 1821, that they had no transactions with
the Nizam, except t ie Aurungabad arrangement and the loan,
and some others then mentioned, for which they considered him
as a guarantee.
The allowances to Palmers' family were censured, and it was
stated, that if they had been known, his Lordship would have
hesitated in sanctioning the Joan (p. 188.)
And the Resident was called on to state the grounds on
which he alleged Dr. Currie to have been a partner in the house,
as Mr. William Palmer and Sir W. Rumbold had made an
affidavit to remove suspicions understood to be afloat, of a con-
nexion between the house and the members of the former Re-
sidency, the tenor of which did not accord with the fact of Dr.
Currie being a partner.
His Lordship in Council would not, notwithstanding his
great displeasure at the conduct of the Minister and the house,
withdraw from the arrangement proposed, to enable the Go-
vernment to pay off the debts incurred under British sanction,
provided security was given that the money should be faithfully
applied, and that all transactions of any kind, direct and indi-
rect, should cease between the rouse and the Minister (p. 189.)
That, though he had no claim on the British Government to
pay the old debt, yet they would to complete the arrangement
of. the Nizam's affairs, pay such part as bona fide, appeared to
be of a public nature.
IBut for the remainder,.the house must be. left to its own
Means, and to the justice of the minister, there being no ob-
ligation, express or implied, on the government to interfere,
(p. 189:) • '
From this it is Cluite
.plain, that Lord Hastings concurred
with the rest of the government in the opinion, that fraudulent
tniretalment,bad been practised on the government by the house:
that nothingsbleuldhe_paid that was not bone fide a public debt,
and that all transactions ots,ev.4res.kind _between the house and
;the minister 'nest cease._ ••
About this time, Chundoo Loll sent
.a yrivate representittion;
through the means of Messrs. Palmers"house, complaining of
Sir Charles Metcalfe's want of support, and excessive interfer-
-1 ence in the details of government (p. 173.)
On the other hand, Air Charles Metcalfe alleged, that there
had long-existed a plot-between the house and the minister, to
undermine his authority, through the influence which Sir
Wil-
liam Rumbold and the house had with Lord Hastings (p. 221.)
Sir C. Metcalfe had about this time written (p. 213,) to
Lord Hastings, explaining the nature of his management in the
Nizam's dominions.
This led to a dispatch from Lord Hastings, 25th of October,
censuring the course pursued, and disapproving the feeling ex-
pressed towards the minister (p. 224, 227.)
From this dispatch the rest of the council dissented, and it
led to much discussion in minutes, both as to the extent of the
interference to be sanctioned with the Nizam's government, Sir
Charles Metcalfe's own conduct, and the existence of any com-
bination between the house and the minister against his influ-
ence as resident (p. 292, 317.4
Lord Hastings was of opinion, that there was no ground for
Sir C. Metcalfe's opinion, that the house exercised any undue
influence over the minister, or that there was any combination
between them (p. 313, 315.)
He thought the minister's indisposition to Sir C. Metcalfe
arose from his interference in his concerns (p. 312.)
Mr. Adam, (p. 292,) illr. Fendal, (p. 303,) and Mr. Bai-
ley, (p. 306), expressed their opinions, that the combination
was established ; but they did not propose to take any step
upon that occasion. All they did was to decline to con-
cur in Lord Hastings' dispatch, censuring Sir Charles Met-
calfe, and, as their reasons, they stated these opinions.
The grounds. upon which Sir C. Metcalfe and the Council
formed their opinion, that the house exercised an unbounded
influence over the Minister, are detailed in various dispatches.
That there was the means of exciting this impression on the
mind of Chundoo is plain. He knew that Lord Hastings felt
the strongest desire to promote the interest of the house against
all competition ; and that he was willing to exert his influence
to do so, his letter to Sir W. Rumbold proves, (p. 734); for
this letter had doubtless been communicated to Chundoo Loll.
Chundoo Loll also knew, that though Mr. Russell refused to
recommend the loan, yet, on private application to Lord Hast-
ings, the nroposal had been approved of.
It was the belief of the natives that Sir W. Rumbold was
related by marriage to Lord Hastings.
It was believed that Sir W. Rumbold was Lord Hastings'
vakeel, or agent, (p. 245, 494, § 81.)
Sir William had stated, that the house would come to an
issue with the Resident, (p. 246, § 89.)
By the common -people the house and the British Govern-
inent -Were identified-, (p. 245, § 84.) _-
Sir C. Metcalfe says, 'it is.impos.sibla,to timvey by represen-
tation the various ways in which the existence of such an in-'
fluence by the house was shewn ; but to prove that it did exist,
he states, by way of instance, (p. 243), that Sir W. Rumbold
established a bazaar, at which the duties collected by the Nizam
were lower than those charged at the bazaar of the residency,
(p. 262.)
Sir W. Rumbold and Mr. Palmer always travelled with an
escort of the Nizam's troops, (p. 501.)
Mr. Palmer and his friends and servants had the use of the
Nizam's state-elephants, which were constantly in waiting near
Mr. Palmer's gateway (p. 501.)
• Messrs. Palmer's assignments were paid, when other credis
tors, and even the Nizam's privy purse, were not (p. 179.)
They Sent their own chuprasees through the country with as
much effect as the Government, and levied debts assigned to
them' which the real creditors could not raise (p. 244.)
They fieiked the 'estate or a Noble for a debt to them, and
retained it (p. 244.)
They put one of their cliupraseei about a Noble, to protect
him from paying any debts but their own (p. 244.)
Chundoo Loll stated to Sir Chai Metcalfe the pro-
' priety of not communicating the Ander to .put. an end to.
the. Aurungabad contract to Messrs. Palmer' lest they shoUld
prevent its being executed, and referred to a former in-
stance, in which they had succeeded in a similar object; (p.
243) ; and he also stated, that neither the loan nor the Aurun-
gabad contract had had his cordial consent (p. 243.) The eir.
cumstance of the. complaint against the resident being forwarded
through Wm. Palmer, or Sir Wm. Itumbold, tends to spew
their concert, if not their power.
And although Lord Hastings (p. 260) thought it premature
to form an opinion on the matter till the house should have been
heard, yet in the Government Dispatch to Sir Charles Metcalfe,
be states that the facts and circumstances, combined with the
Minister's expressions, excite much presumption that he was
worked upon by secret agents to dispatch his complaint throueh
Mr. Win. Palmer ; and that circumstances strongly support the
conclusion that the Minister was instigated to make his com-
plaint by Palmer's house (p. 260.)
Since this dispatch, no one fact has occurred, except the po-
sitive denial (p. 341) of the parties charged, to alter the state-
ment on which this conclusion was formed (p. 338). To all
which should be added, that there is no appearance of any com-
plaint on the part of the Minister, until the resident had inter-
fered with the transactions of the house with the Nizam.
Lord Hastings, in the same dispatch, 13th Nov. 1822, inti-
mated that direct communication between the Minister and the
house must cease, and the resident become the channel of com-
munication (p. 261.)
( To be continued.)

• The question of interference is not essential to be dis-
cussed. But it is fit to state, that the Council only justified
it under the peculiar situation of the Nizam's government,
and did not argue it as applying to any other government
whatever.

Ma. 0 wEN.—We have just learned from good
authority, that this gentleman has finally resolved to remove
to the New World. His friends at New Lanark have received
intelligence that he purchased the settlement of Harmony, in
Indiana, on the Ist of Jan. He has left his son William, and
Captain M‘Donald, to take charge of the American establish.
meta in the mean time, and by the latest accounts had reached
Philadelphia, on his way back to New Lanark, where he is
expected in June. The whole of the Flower family, at pre-
sent settled in Mr. Birkbeck's neighbourhood, mean to join
him at Harmony. The letters teemed state, that Mr. Owen's
statements have excited an extraordinary zeal for the mutual
co-operative system in the United States. yin Pittsburgh, he
assembled the great mass of the people the Presbyte-
rian Meeting-house, and having developed his plans to
them, a number of persons immediately declared their inten-
tion of founding a community on his system, and such was
the sensation his arrival there produced, that the Court of
Justice suspended its sittings while the meeting was held.
Mr. Owen, on his way westward, visited the spinning mills of
Mr. Skink on the Hudson, which are celebrated for the high
perfection of the machinery, and the remarkable neatness of the
establishment. The settlement of Harmony is on the banks of
the Wabash, about 30 miles below Mr. Birkbeck's property, and
the occupants are a colony chiefly of Germans, who are united
by some singular religious tenets, and hold their property in
, common.—( The Scotsman.)

WILFUL MUDRER.—Monday evening an In-
quest was held at the sign of the Barley Mow, Mount-street,
Berkeley-square, before T. lime's, Esq. Coroner, on the body
of a female infant, unknown, who was found in the Serpentine
River, Hyde Park, having been thrown in after being inhu-
manly murdered and shockingly man; led. The Jury returned
a verdict of—" Wilful Murder against some person or per.
sons unknown."