The Sun.
London, England, 1841-07-20 00:00:00

EVENING SUN.

therefore, liberally considered, does not require his
destruction. On the other hand, it cannot be pretended
that our own safety requires it ; and on no other
iround can more policy be allowed to dictate so severe
a sentence.

" The consideration, that his Highness owes his eleva-
tion to British favour, should, in some views at least,
prevent us from proceeding against him too vigorously.
However we may have erred in setting up this dependent
power, it is not desirable, without absolute necessity, to
expose that error to others. Consistency requires that
we should adhere, if possible, to an arrangement adopted
on much consideration ; and if we court the praise of
generosity, the very fact that his Highness is the crea-
ture of our breath, and the spoiled child of our patron-
age, should plead, to some extent, in his favour.
" Farther, it is an argument on the same side of the
question, that the Raja has governed the dominions
which he received from us tolerably well. The history
of the British connection with India records the names
of many chiefs and princes whom we began with ad-
vancing to honour, or at least supporting with our pro-
tection, and ended with deposing, destroying, depriving
of a great part of their territories, or reducing to politi-
oal annihilation. In almost all these cases, however, the
parties so treated were charged, and justly charged, with
gross misgovernment ; and however severely it might
be felt by themselves, it was an undoubted boon to the
great body of their subjects. The administration of the
Raja of Sattara, on the other hand, although, like every
thing else about him, it has been overpraised, has, to say
the least, been respectable, and in some views, even me-
ritorious.

" I do not mean that he is not occasionally guilty of
oppression, or that he dispenses justice with impar-
tiality, for he is a native and a .llthratta ; but he at-
tends to business. His revenue management is efficient.
If he quarrels with all his Jagheerdars, yet the lower
classes of his subjects are content ; and, at Sattara,
where his revenues are spent freely, he is popular. I
should be sorry, therefore, if we destroyed one of the
very few among our native allies whose administration
'our alliance has not rendered a curse to his people.
" I am aware that it is the probable course, or, if I
may so speak, the natural history, of such an empire as
ours in India, that it gradually absorbs all the petty and
dependent States attached to it ; nor is there any reason
to suppose that Sattara will not at length share tho com-
mon late. But Ido not conceive that such a growth of
Jour rule and dominions is to be regarded as an unmixed
good, or that means should be used to accelerate its rate
of advancement. On the contrary, I deem it our sacred
duty to keep down the expansion within the slowly pro-
mressive boundary prescribed by actual and irresistible
necessity. We ought not to snatch with eagerness at
occasions of aggrandizing our power or extending our
territory, still less to seek or create them, as we shall
almost unavoidably be hurried into acts of injustice and
cruelty."
Now, under these circumstances, he could not admit
that any injustice had been done him. He thought the
motion was called for, and he hoped the meeting would
concur in the amendment that had been proposed by the
Deputy Chairman.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. INIoNToomEnT MARTIN could see nothing in their
Act of Incorporation which was contradictory of the
motion, which was merely a recommendation to the Court
of Directors to take the case of the Raja into their con-
sideration. Having disposed of that point, and shown
that they were not infringing on the power of the Mree-
tore, he thought they must admit further, that they had
in some respects authorized the present investigation by
having submitted, on two several occasions, to the Court,

all the documents which would enable them to come to

a full and fair investigation of the case.—(Hear, hear.)
It was much to be regretted that in February, 1840,
when intelligence of the deposition of the Raja reached
that country, and where a special Court had been called
to take the case into its consideration, that it hail not
taken the case into its consideration previously to any
-final decision of the question. In the course of the pre-
sent debate, which was unexampled for its duration, he
was gratified at the highly honourable and manly senti-
ments that had been displayed by many of the speakers.
He w& therefore the more reluctant to allude to tile
personality that had been introduced into the debate.
The question was one, not of persons, but of principles.
—(Cheers.) He had looked into the case, not with re-
ference to the Raja of Sattara or the persons connected
with the Government, but as it regarded the great and
immutable principles of justice—(Cheers)—and in
coming to the conclusion he had, ho had done so with
the strongest feelings of respect and esteem for many of
those who were connected with the question, and solely
with reference to the great and important interests involved
In it. In February it was said that that Court was not in a
-position to entertain the question. It was admitted that
the question was a grave and an important one, and re-
quired much thought and deliberation before coming to
a final decision ; and the more he saw of it the more he
regretted it had ever been brought under the considera-
tion of the present tribunal.—(Hear, hear.) But having
been brought before them, they were bound, as stewards
and trustee of good government in India, to entertain
end discuss it with impartiality and calinneee. He wes
proud, there;:bee,
Dto hear the manly aed honourable sen-
timents of their Deputy-Chainean, who leel etated that
full and free and impartial discueeien was important to
the government of India.—(llenr, hear.) What
were flee facts of the case ? Not that the Raja had been
raised from a prison to a throne by the British Govern-
Treent, and that he had forfeited its good opinion, as had
been stated by one Hon. Gentleman.—(Hear, hear.) The
• Deputy-Chairman had characterized the war against
Bajee llow as a just one, and he believed justly. But
when he said they had raised him to the throne from
motives of pure generosity, he begged to deny the state-
ment, and he would refer them to the third volume 'Of
,fr. Grant Duff's " History of the Mahrattas," page 439,
in which the object of the elevation of the Baja was fully
detailed. He contended that they had no right to state
that they had raised him to the throne from pure gene-
rosity, unmixed with any considerations of personal ad-
vantage. If there was any doubt in that part he would
refer to the evidence of Mr. Mountstewart Elphinstone.
—(Hear, hear.) In 1822 the Raja had conducted himself
so well that he was considered able to stand alone, and
was invested with all the functions of sovereignty. He
could not but allude here to the free and honourable
feeling evinced by- the British Government in supporting
that Prince, and 'ne regretted it had not been met in a
corresponding api..rit by the Bombay Government. After
he had been seven years exercising that sovereignty they
had recorded their deliberate opinion of the manner in
which lie had conducted himself. That opinion would
be foulid recorded in the despatch dated 19th August,
1829. He did not think the Court of Directors would have
deliberately put: their names to any document without
having been cc nvinced of its truth. Sir It Grant
in a similar mat tiler, although with some degree of cau-
tion, stated his good opinion of the Raja; and,
although his 'testimony. was guardedly given, it
was very striking and important. He regretted that
Sir Robert Grant had so, far forgotten the dignity of a
Governor as to descend to the pettifogging of an attor-
ney. Why it No uld be almost better for them to have a
strong-minded alai wicked Governor than a weak and
vacillating man, who did not know his own mind,
although his inter itions might be the most upright and
honourable.—(Hear.) What did Sir James Carnac, a
man who went to India with the best and purest inten-
tions, say of the Raja ?
" Without intending to offer any apology for the con-
uct of the Raja, i t is but just to observe, that he appears
o have been reg :arded by that numerous class of men
who are continua ply watching for an opportunity to en-
rich themselves :at the expense of others, as one whose
position offered a -very favourable opportunity for their
experiments. Ele has manifested great weakness and
no inconsiderable portion of ingratitude ; but it would
not accord with the magnanimity of the British Govern-
ment to visit those offences on a Prince, situated as is
the Raja, with tcee great severity. He is altogether at,
our mercy, and the execution of an order to dispossess
him of his tern tories would scarcely be a more diffieasat
work than to n such an order. He is the repres-4,nta_
tive of a house er.sdnguished in the history of and
associated in thee minds of the people with muc'A of in-
terest. We lime° nothing to fear, and we can afford to
act with geners ISity.
" Under thee circumstances, I must admit that, with
eaves as for the
the highest resTeet as well for the ter
arguments of those who have taken
decidedly prefer the milder course of a different view, I
proceeding, of the
three which I have pointed out as before us.
" I propose, therefore, either ;net the Resident be in-
structed to assure the Raja, of the desire of the British
Government to xnairitAin the relations of friendship with
him, to point out the necessity of restraining his ser-
vants from entariu g into any measures which may sub-
ject his Highness to the imputation of disregarding his
engagements, a di from. retaining in his Highness's name,
or otherwise, i./se political services of any persons beyond
the limits of 'his dominion ; or that I should, in person,
communicat e with the Raja ; which latter, I am inclined
to think, r eould be a preferable course."
Now G enteral Robinson, than whom no man under-
stood thee question better, said the whole of this matter
orlginaxed in the jagheers, and he hoped that would be
a leesssin to the succeeding Government in India. He
t.reatael with ridicule the paltry attempt to charge the
Raj& with attempting to seduce the ?00,000 British troops
s)f India by his communication with two Sepoys.--,-(Hear,
'lean) He regeetted that Sir Robert:Grant had allowed
limself to be led away by all the absurd rumours that
'had been communicated to him. It was said that
the Goa conspiracy had been clearly established, but
Don Manoel De Castro, a high-minded and honour-
able Nobleman, had extreessed his readiness to go
to England and testify eci the entire innocence of the
Raja.—(Loud cries of " Hear.") Now, was it to be said
that Don Manoel lead asserted what was false, and that
the most absurd zaed improbable stories must be credited ?
lie remembered a case in Bengal of a forgery on the
Bengal Bank, and so well had all the names of the Di-
rectors of tl-At Bank been forged, that after an investi-
gation, wieich lasted several days, and in which the
Govertv.nent lent also their assistance or its power, and
notw'ahstanding all the exertions of the Bank, it was
in":possible to determine which names had been forged
'MCI which had not; and yet here the Government of
Bombay took upon itself to declare that the paper im-
puted to Don Manoel was genuine because it was very
much like his signature. He would refer the Court
to 138th paragraph of Sir Robert Grant's Minute of ,
the sth of May, p. 148 :
" With regard to the letters purporting to have been
addressed by the Raja to Don Manoel, it is proved in
evidence that these were not invariably submitted for
his Highness's approval, but that Nago prepared su:h
drafts as ho thought proper, sealed them, and delivered
them as proceeding from his master. There was not a
single instance proved of any letter having actually been
written at Sattara with the cocenizance of the Raja, and
we are left to conjecture what was the nature of the
powers delegated to 'Nago ; were it not, therefore, for
the abundant evidence obtained of the connection which
exist d between the Baja and Nago, and for the fact,
Mane' - alluding that the Raja received letters from Jut:
.oprocetoletterrs which the latter had received,
purporting
name
(e)tri from the Baja, I should say the t
gaga with Don Manoel would

be doubtful, and that we might infer that the letters
written in his name might not have been authorised on
his part.
Would the most paltry Court in this kingdom have re-
ceived suca testimony ? The case was utterly unten-
able. How could the Raja be found guilty on such evi-
dence ? What had the Commission, who sat to inves-
tigate the charges, and of which General Lodwick had
been a member, reported as to the witnesses ?
Why, it had reported that the first witness
examined was a cheat and a thief.—(Hear.)
The Commission declared that he had pre-
varicated throughout his evidence, and had con-
cluded by declaring himself • the sole author of the
plot—that all that he had declared respecting the native
officers was false, and that all that he had stated respect-
ing the Raja, and all that he had stated respecting the
Dewan was also false.—(Hear, hear.) It also appeared
that the other witnesses were perjured. Would the
Hon. Court sanction such proceedings ? He had
a firm belief in the high-mindeiness and purity of the
motives actuating the Court of Directors—(" Oh, oh")—
and he hoped they would not do so.—(Hear, hear.)
Another of these witnesses was Ballajee Punt. He be-
gan by selling his master. He began his career of ini-
quity by betraying the Peishwa. Why, they knew
that Ballajee Punt had some time before falsely accused
his master of treason, and he had becn plotttng treason
against him ever since that time.—(Hear, hear.) He
would not detain them further on that point. He could
not but repeat that the Bengal Government had taken
such a step totally in opposition to the wishes of the
General Government. That was proved by the minutes of
the Governor-General. The General Government plainly
told the Bombay Government, it was their duty to put a
stop to these proceedings. This was proved by the
letter of Sir W. M‘Naughten, and while Sir W.
APNaughten remained with Lord Auckland the Govern-
ment seemed to maintain that opinion, but when Sir W.
M‘Naughten left for Affghanistan then a change took
place in the opinions of the General Government. The
Court of Directors also concurred in the opinion that a
stop ought to be put to these proceedings against the
Raja of Sattara. This appeared from the letter dated
June 13, No. 31, p. 58 :
"In a letter dated 6th January (No. 1) 1838, the Go-
vernor-General informs us, that he has witnessed with
considerable pain the protracted and extended investi-
gations into which the Government of Bombay has
thought it necessary to enter, in connection with the
original charges against the Raja of Sattara, and that he
has required that the proceedings be terminated, and
brought under the review of the Supreme Government at
the earliest possible period.'
"It is our particular desire to receive, as soon as pos-
sible, your review of these proceedings ; and, in the
confidence that it will be transmitted without any avoid-
able delay,, we shall suspend our own review of the case
till we are in possession of yours. At the same time, we
have no hesitation in giving it as our decided opinion,
that it would be not only a waste of time, but seriously
detrimental to the character of our Government, to carry
on any further inquiry in the matter.
" We are, &c.,
(Sinned) "J. L. LUSHINGTON,
" R. JENKINS,
" W. ASTELL,
" W. S. CLARKE,
" J. LOCH,
" W. B. BAY LEY,
J. R. CARNAC,
" P. VANS AGNEW,
" F. WARDEN,
" J. P. MUSPRATT,
" H. SHANK,
" J. THORNHILL,
" H. ALEXANDER,
" J. MASTERMAN."
"London, 13th June, 1838." _ _ _

Now, to that despatch he found attached the name
of the Gallant Officer who was now the Deputy Chairman,
Sir James. Law Lushington.—(Cheers.) This was fur-
ther confirmed by the letter, of 22d Jan., 1839, p. 59 :
" As Sir James Carnac, the Governor of Bombay, has
been in communication with us on the subject of your
proceedings regarding the Raja of Sattara, we are par-
ticularly desirous that you should suspend any final deci-
sion on the case until you have had an opportunity of
taking into your consideration such observations and
suggestions as may be made to you by Sir James Car-
nac on a review of those proceedings.
"In the meantime, it may be as well for us to state to
you, that we see no reason to dissent from the opinion
expressed by the Court of Directors in their letter of the
13th June (No. 39), 1838.
"A copy of this letter will be communicated to the
Governor in Council at Bombay, with a request that he
will suspend the transmission of any decision to the Raja
of Sattara until you shall have, had an opportunity of
issuing such further direction as you may think proper,
in reference to this despatch.
" We are, &c.
(Signed) " J. L. LUSHINGTON.
" R. JENKINS,'
" W. ASTELL.

" East India House, 22d Jan., 1839."
Nothing had occurred since which should alter their
opinion. No fresh evidence had been given. They
were acquainted with nothing now with which they
had not been acquainted then, and he should
like to know the reason of such inconsistency. It was
due to' the Proprietors and the public that they should
be made acquainted with the grounds of this change of
opinion. The despatch to Sir James Carnac did not
give any reason for this change of opinion.—(Hear, hear.)
It merely negatived their former deliberate and re-
corded opinion.—(Hear, hear.) It was a duty they owed
to themselves, that a statement should be made to the

Court of the reasons which had induced the Court of
Directors to alter their opinions in this manner.—(Hear.)

The Hon. Baronet had said that the Government of India
were on their trial, so, if he thought so, he was right to
go on, but he (Mr. Montgomery Martin) did not say so.
The Government of Bombay were on their trial, but
they brought no charge against the Government of India.
He knew nothing, of the Raja of Sattara. He had taken
taken this up solely as a question of justice. He made
no charge. He simply said that the Raja of Sattara
had been unjustly charged, and had not had
a fair trial. The Governor, Sir Robert Grant, in
his minute of the 25th of October, page 65, said:—
" The proposition of Colonel Lodwick turns on views
which I consider as totally inapplicable to the case.

"In ordinary trials fbi- crimes, the question
being whether a positive law has been violated, the deci-
sion may turn on nice points of legal construction, or on
an accurate examination of precedents. If the case on
either side is, either by accident or design, imperfectly
represented, the Judge, knowing nothing of it but
what appears at the trial, has very limited means of sup-
plying the defect. Professional aid is, therefore, neces-
sary on both sides ; and, indeed, it must be evident that,
if allowed to the accuser, it cannot be denied to the
accused.

" The present case is wholly different. The question
is not one of law, nor admits of any legal refinements. It
is an inquiry, not set on foot by a prosecutor, but con-
ducted by the Government itself, which has rAo bias
against the Raja, but, on the contrary, the sine ;rest wish
to see his innocence established. The hono..a- indeed., of
the British Government, and also its 'aedit for con-
sistency, are deeply concerned in not arl.initting, except on
the most irresistible evidence, ther.alt of a Prince whom
the Government raised from a pr
.i.Son to a throne, whom
it has ever since fostered wi. --'l,it friendly care, and from
whom it has uniformly rece-.ved all the observances of at-
tachment and confidence

" The investimatior. is immediately conducted by three
British °dicers of. character, who know that the sole
object of Government is the discovery of truth, who
cannot poss;:,l3, have any feeling of interest adverse to
the Raja. and who, being unembarrassed by legal forms
and te'.lnnicalities, have the fullest means and facilities of
see'Aing out all the information attainable.
" Were the Raja to be attended by his counsel, it
ought, on similar principles, to be held that Government
must appear on the occasion by the Advocate-General.
But I see not the slightest reason for adopting, in the
present case, a course utterly unknown, and, indeed, so
palpably inapplicable to proceedings of this nature. The
Raja may be attended by one of his own ministers or
confidential friends. No intention exists of warping
doubtful circumstances to his disadvantage ; and, if he
be innocent, my conviction is, that his cause will find a
surer support in the intelligence and consciences of the
Commissioners, than it could derive from the dexterous
tactics and ingenious pleading of the ablest advocate
whom he could hire for his defence.

the"P With regard to the manner of communicating with
That
as
wilja, I have thought it right, as the most effectual,
lettere 1 as the most conciliatory proceeding, to address a
from myself to his Highness, in which I stated—
great imprtathnece
Go-
vernment having rendered it necessary for Go-
the ent to appoint a Secret Commission at Sattara, fo
purpose of inquiring into certain circumstances' of
great
to the country, this Commission, as
representino•
some °ll3
Government, would be entitled to every
consideration f his Highness ; that during the in-
quiry,
could not meet ir. lilies";
questions Highness
had arisen which involved the in-
terests of his
of publicity which t and that, as the Commission
palace without occasioning a dis-
playwith my own hand, to invite him hit
n desirableto visit t o avoid,the wroteolmm is .
" In the concluding instruction sioners at the Residency, when
.all should be made plain.
Lieon to the Commission, I
as
the . delivered to the Raja by
desired that this letter shoulde
the Political Secretary,
to introduced by- the
vernment, who would, of course,inlieediate organ of Go-
attend at the re-
Resident : that if the Raja declined
thor point out any other
Highnesseo and the
ofmpromising
re-
sidency, he should be requested
mode, by which a meeting between
Commissioners could be effected, without
the dignity of one party, or the dutyother.
Should the Raja refuse to do so, or should his the
p
be deemed inadmissible, I instructed Mr. Willoughby to
inform his Highness of the charges against him, anil
of
the evidence on which they rested, aad to point
clearly and forcibly, the bad impression the Government
out,
must entertain by his declining to meet these accusa-
tions.
" Even should this appeal be unavailing, I represented
to the Commissioners that I did not think they should
close their proceedings, without giving the Raja the op-
tion of either delivering it written statement of his con-
duct, or of answering, in writing, whatever interrogato-
ries the Commission might consider it advisable to
propose.
" It; is of so great imp&tance that the Commission
should close their proceedings, to allow Mr. Willoughby
and Colonel Ovans to return to their duties, that I trust
the Board will approve of my having answered the refe-
rence, without previously submitting it to Bombay. We
shall now shortly be called upon to deliberate on the
mode of treating this delicate case, should the Raja of
Sattara have really proved faithless to his engagements
with the British Government ; and I request that my
colleagues will give the subject their most serious atten-
tion, as it will probably be the first on which we shall
have to consult when we meet at the Presidency.
" 25th October, 1836. (Signed) `;R. GRANT."
With respect to the mode of 'trial, although opinions
might differ, yet Sit B. Grant, hingelt, wiraitte4 theta°