The Sun.
London, England, 1841-07-21 00:00:00

-r"
THE SUN, LONDON; WEDNESDAY, JULY 21, 1841.

much as it would make them the more watchful in their
proceedings, because on the good government of India
their own prosperity would depend.—(Cheers.) Those
were the words of Mr. Charles Grant, when laying down
in his celebrated letter the arrangements for the future
government of India.--(Cheers.) The Board of Direc-
tors called themselves a responsible Executive. Now to
whom were they responsible ? Not to the Board of
Control he hoped—(Hear, hear)—they had thrown oif
their responsibility to the Court of Proprietors. To
whom, then; were they responsible ? He supposed they
were responsible to God, being bound by their oaths to
administer justice. But the' Proprietors had also a re-
sponsibility. They had never shown any desire to wrong
the Court of Directors, or weaken their authority either
in this country or in India ; and he would say that their
interference in this great question was more likely to add
to the permanence of our power in India than any other
course which could have been adopted, because it would
show the natives of that country that-whenever questions
arose in which they might conceive that they were
wronged, that there was a power in this country
which would interfere to . remedy those wrongs, and
make the public aware of' heir case.—(Cheers.) This
ought to 'be done in a kindly spirit, and he would refer to
the whole course of the present debate to show that it
had been done in a kindly spirit in the present instance.
There had not been a single reflection cast on any one
individual behind the bar—(Hear, hear)—and never
had a debate been conducted with less of personality.
—(Hear, hear.) Not a single reference had been
made to the Indian Government calculated to create a
prejudice against it ; on the contrary, full credit had
been given them for having kept strictly to what they
thought their duty. But here was a matter requiring
correction. Here was .a native Prince who had been
many years the object of our care. He had not been
heard in his defence--he ought to have been heard.
They should endeavour, so far as possible, to retrace
their steps, and place him in that situation 'which he
would be entitled had he been the meanest subject in-
stead of a sovereign Prince.—(Hear, hear.) Should the
original motion be negatived he hoped the of-
fensive amendment would not be persisted in.
He- should, in the event of such an occurrence, propose
an amendment, which he would read as part of his

speech
" That, after an attentive perusal and careful
eexamiina-
tion of the papers laid before this Court, in the case. of
the late Raja of Sattara, this Court doffs notf
that justice has • been done in the deposal of the late
Raja, and in the confiscation of _his. private property ;
and also in the elevation of his,brother Appa Sahib to
the throne.
" That this opinion is. confirmed by the fact, that at
the last hour the Governor of Bombay tendered the ex-
Raja a general amnesty for his past conduct, from which
fact it is clearly to be inferred that the political offences
of the ex-Raja; (if any) were not of a grave or dan-
gerous character, such as to call for so heavy .a penalty
as his deposition and the forfeiture of his private pro-
perty.
" That this Court therefore recommends to the Court
of Directors to take again this case into their serious
and deliberate consideration."—(Cheers.)
Mr. LEWIS then rose and said that after the long dis-
cussion which had taken place on this case he would en-
deavour to make his reply as brief as possible.—(Hear,
hear.) He rejoiced to hear the admission which had
been, somewhat tardily and reluctantly, made, that a
communication had been made to both Chairs from the
Board of Control on the subject of this case.—
(Cheers.) He had been told, indeed, that that commu-
nication was confidential, but he could not understand
how any communication relating to such a subject could
be made matter of confidential communication.—
(Cheers.) He was, however, glad to hear that that
communication had been made.—(Hear, hear.) He
looked upon it as a good omen.—(Cheers.) He was sa-
tisfied from that communication having been made, that
the President of the Board of Control had a conviction,
or, at all events, a suspicion, that justice had not been
done in the case.—(Cheers.) It afforded the Directors
an opportunity of receding from their opinion, of re-
tracing the steps which they had taken, and of giving to
the injured party that reparation which was due at their
hands.—(Hear, hear.) He could have wished that every
statement of the Court of Directors had been equally
gratifying. • It had given him great pain to hear the
Chairman assert that the Court of Proprietors had not
the power to alter any measure which had received the
sanction of the Board of Control and the Court of Di-
rectors. What reason could there be for the assertion
which had been made that the present motion was trench-
ing upon proviiions of the Act of Parliament? He denied
that the motion trenched at all upon the provisions of
the Act of Parliament —(Cheers.) He asserted that the
Court of Proprietors had a right to discuss any measure
which the Court of Directors might think fit to adopt,
and to recommend to the Court of Directors what course
they chose. It was afterwards for the Court of Directors
either to adopt or to reject the recommendation, but the
Proprietors had certainly the right of pointing out what
they might consider to be errors in the conduct of the.
Court of Directors. The Court of Proprietors had cer-
tainly the power of offering the recommendation to the
Court of Directors—whether the Directors would accept
it or not it was of course for themselves to decide. On
that subject he would refer to the authority. of Mr.
Auber, who expressly stated that the authority of the
Company was delegated to, not absorbed by the Court
of Directors.—(Cheers.) Mr. Salomons had referred to
the opinion of Lord Glenelg, which showed most clearly
that the intention of the Legislature was that the Court
of ProprietOrs should be clearly identified with the
affairs of India.—(Cheers.) 'He was still more sorry to
hear the threat which had been held out of an Act of
Parliament to restrain them.—(Cheers.) He was sorry
that none of the mitigating or qualifying circumstances
which hid been alluded to by the Hon. Director, Mr.
Shepherd, as having accompanied that menace had met
his ear.—(Hear.) He would give the Deputy Chairman
the credit of admitting that he had afterwards qualified
his speech by his subsequent explanations.---(Hear, hear.)
So far from thinking that the conduct. they were then
pursuing would be such as
,to induce the Legislature to
interfere with their privileges, he was satisfied that
if any application were made to the Legislature
to curtail those privileges which had only been
used to ask that justice might be done,
that the Legislature
eNhvoeeurlds.)indlignntahnetloyperneijnegct any such
he had said that the question was whether the
application.—(Loud oa
act
the h
ofe
these
Bombay Government in deposing the Raja was or was
not justified by the evidence.—(Cheers.) The Govern-
ment had rested the
*justification of their conduct on
three grounds—first, that he had been temporising with
the fidelity of the Sepoys of the 23d Regiment ; second,
that he had entered into treasonable communications
with the ex-Raja of Nagpore ; and third, that he had
entered into treasonable communications with the Go-
vernor of Goa. He would call their attention in the
first place to the first charge, viz. that of tampering with
the fidelity of the Sepoys. That depended upon the
evidence of the Soubadars, and all that they stated was
that they had had two interviews with the Raja and the
Dewar. In the first interview nothing particular had
passed, and in the second interview certain enigmatical
expressions, which had been much commented on, had
been made use of. That was the whole statement of
the Soubadars, and they stated that a Brahmin had in-
troduced them to the Rayt, and their statements all went
to implicate the Raja. That Brahmin had prevaricated
in his evidence, and throughout the whole proceeding
there was nothing to show that either the
Raja or the Dewan had authorised the Brahmin.—
(Cheers.) That was the whole history of .the transac-
tion as connected with the Brahmin. The Raja had not
had the opportunity of knowing the evidence which had
been given against him. True, the testimony of the
Soubadars had been read over to him, but he had not'
had an opportunity of reading the documentary evi-
dence ; he had not had an opportunity of having the
oral testimony, and the Judges had prevented any cross-
examination of the witnesses. These facts he had not
known at the time he had brought forward his motion; they
had since been borne testimony to by General Lodwick ;
neither had he known that the Court had been preparing
its report during the whole time it was at Sattara; and from
a review of the proceedings of that Company, he would say
that the conduct of the majority of the Court was not
the conduct of judges. He could not consider that as
such, and their whole proceedings were utterly worth-
less.—(Cheers.) The second charge was also unsupported
by evidence. It was said that treasonable comniunica-
tions had taken place between the Raja of Sattara and
the ex-Raja of IsTw‘pore. Now, it appeared from the
evidence that these communications were merely such as
usually took place between privite individuals, and were
confined entirely to matters of a domestic nature. These
communications were entirely of a complimentary nature,
and indeed the position of the ex-Raja of Najpore made
it evident that any application from the Baja of Sattara,
to him for a supply of troops must be most ridiculous.—
(Loud
cheers.) Those communications were perfectly
harmless, and it was evident to them the ex-Raja of
Najpore had no means whatever of affording any support
to any treasonable designs of the Raja of Sattara. Thelast
charge related to the alleged intrigues with the Governor
of Goa. Now no connection whatever had been established
between Najo and the Raja. Najo had gone to Goa to es-
tablish the influence of the Swammee. During the whole
twelve years he had only had three interviews with
the Raja of Sattara, and there was no evidence whatever
to show that he was the agent either of the Raja or the
Dewan. Then with regard to the seal attached to those
papers, it was proved that it differed considerably from
the seal of the Raja ; and if they considered the posi-
tion of the Governor of Goa, and the absolute impossi-
bility of his furnishing any troops, they must come to
the conclusion that it was impossible that the Raja, ex-
cept be was a madman, could have made such
an application. On these grounds, he had con-
tended. that the Raja was not guilty. Now, how
had those arguments been met on the other side? No
one who had addressed the Court had attempted to
grapple with them, hilt they had all gone off into colla-
teral topics. They had spoken of the character of the
Raja, of the high opinion which he entertained of 'his
own rank and importance, of the ambitious nature of his
character. That was the alpha 'and the omega of the case.
and they had not deigned to make one passing observa-
tion on the evidence.—(Cheers.) They had debated on
various topics, which he could not help considering as
'e,,l subterfuges to take up the time of the Court, and
• their attention from the
,only point really
-;(lence of the case. The Deputy
• ambitions character of the
• which hadbeen pur-
--s approbation
—I been

put.,_
to withdrair, .
before them, the t,_
Chairman had alluded to Dz..
Raja, and had stated that the courbt. .
sued towards him had met with the unaniim„....
of all the Governments of India. In that he
followed by Mr. Weeding and Mr. Fielden, the latter oL
whom had thought it necessary to vindicate the charac-
ters of all those implicated in the transaction. Why
the Hon. Proprietor had pursued such a course, he was
at a loss to imagine. The Hon. Gentleman had stated
that the Governor-General and Mr. Elphinstone had been
charged With wilful and corrupt perjury-
- Mr. WEEDING-7—AS encouraging perjury.
Mr. tEwis had made no such charge. He should
have been sorry to have made any such ridiculous charge
—(Hear)—which owed its origin entirely to the prolific