The Sun.
London, England, 1841-07-23 00:00:00

THE RAJA OF SATTARA.

In our report of the second day's debate at the India
House we were unable to give the concluding remarks of
Mr. Thompson. As we feel persuaded the case we have
been the almost exclusive means of bringing so fully be-
fore the public, will, at no distant day, assume a feature
of national importance, we insert the conclusion of Mr.
Thompson's speech, and a corrected version of Captain
Cogan's : •
Mr. THOMPSON, in continuation, said—l must 1101
omit to notice the compliment paid by the Honour-
able Proprietor behind me (Mr. Belden), to the perfect
disinterestedness of the Government, in the part they
have taken against the Raja. " They had nothing to
gain by the deposal of the Raja—nothing. Though they
deposed the Raja, they took neither his silver, his gold,
nor his jewels ; least of all, did they aim at the eaten-
:lion of territory ; for it is his brother, Appa Sahib,
whom they have placed on the throne. What object,
then, beyond that of just retribution, had they to pro-
mote ?" All this sounds mighty well ; but, what is the
fact ? In the minute of Sir James Carnac, dated Sep.
tember 4th, 1839, there are these remarkable and signify
cant words, distinctly holding out the acquisition of
Sattara, as the certain reward of his deposal. Sir James,
expecting that his conduct, in not immediately annexing
the Sattara state, will be objected to by certain members
of the Government, says that if he has erred, in at once
resuming the dominion of Sattara, " the course of events
will, in a few years, afford a fair opportunity of rectifying
what may be deemed erroneous." "Neither," says he,
" the Raja about to be deposed, nor his brother who is to
be substituted in his place, have any children, and at their
period of life it is not very likely that they will hereafter
have any ; and I know of no other party who can claim
the succession by hereditary right. It follows, therefore,
that on the demise of the new Raja, the Sattara State
would lapse to the British Government---(Cheers)—un-
less, indeed, it shall be judged expedient to allow this
line of Princes to be continued, by the Hindoo custom of
adoption, a question which should be left entirely open
for consideration when the event on which it depends
'shall actually occur."—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) And
in the same minute he states his apprehension that, by a
pressure of circumstances, entirely beyond our control
(doubtless as these have been), the whole of the native
States of India are, perhaps, destined ultimately to fall
within the vortex of our rule.—(Hear, hear.) Here,
then, it is on record, that the acquisition of the Sat-
tara State was one of the governing influences which de-
termined the deposal of the Raja. He was childless, it
is true ; but he had the indisputable right to adopt.
His brother was also childless, with the certainty that
no child would be born to him; to him the right of adop-
tion is denied, and upon his death (likely to be speedy
from his excesses) his territories lapse to the dominions ,
of these just, magnanimous, and, as they tell you, disin-
terested lords paramount of India—uhless the fiat of
these master judges of expediency shall then decree
otherwise.' What hope there is that they will so decree,
may be extracted from the fact that the acts of Sir James
Carnac received their " warm commendation." But the 1
fate of Sattara is not intended to be singular. The doom
of every other native state within the grasp of these lords
paramount, is already shadowed forth while they
tell you that this will be brought about by events
beyond their control. Here behold the history of
all the past annihilated Princes of India.—(Cheering.)
Sir, I must say a word on the subject of the amnesty
offered the Raja, inasmuch as it has been held up in this
Court as an act of superlative generosity, calculated to
extort the admiration of all the members of this Court.
Let us look at that amnesty. Its preamble contains an
implication of the guilt of the Raja ; it sets forth that
he had been misled by evil advisers—had committed
a breach of the treaty—and had entered into communi-
cations hostile to the British Government ; and had there-
fore exposed himself to the sacrifice of the British alliance
and protection. Nevertheless, he was offered an act of
oblivion, and restoration to the confidence of the Govern-
ment, if would sign certain articles with such a pre-
amble. Now, Sir, what is the result of this attempt at
negotiation on the part of Sir James Carnac ? The
Raja declared his innocence, and expressed his determi-
nation never to sign any document which called in ques-
tion his grateful and loyal attachment to the British
Government. He nobly said to the Government, " You
present to me the alternative of subscribing my own guilt,
or giving up my throne and kingdom. I can sacrifice my
kingdom, but I will preserve my honour."—(Cheers.) Re
had shown that these were no idle or vaunting words.
Ile had gone into exile, and I believe took with him a
pure, loyal, and honourable mind ; and I wish those who
have sent him there may realise as strong a conviction
of the uprightness of their conduct, as that which I be-
lieve consoles the Raja in his obscurity. But, Sir, sup-
pose the Raja had been the ungrateful, profligate, and
treasonous intriguer that he has been represented to be,
would he not have signed this memorandum, and, if ne-
cessary, five hundred more, and been a traitor still ? If
he had been for years before carrying on hostile machi-
nations against the Government, would he not have
readily, greedily have subscribed such conditions, with
such a preamble ? I assert it, in my eyes there is some-
thing of moral sublimity in the conduct of this Hindoo
Prince. There is a love of truth, a regard for honour, a
determination to cherish, under all threatened evils, the
testimony of an unaccusing conscience, which commands
my profound admiration, and makes me wish that the
example of this Indian might find many imita- '
tors among Isis Christian rulers. But again,
Sir, if Sir James Rivet Carnac believed him guilty
of acts that deserved deposal, what right had he
to compound with treason, and to offer this act of obli-
vion ? He either was innocent or guilty. If innocent,
he was entitled to sit upon the throne unimpeached ; if
guilty, or supposed to be guilty, he ought to have
been tried, and then, upon conviction, he would have
been displaced without sympathy, and the character
of the British Government would have been without sus-
picion and without disgrace. But it was not so ; he
was deposed, not because he was guilty, but because he
asseverated his entire innocence, and demanded—what
English law grants to the meanest wretch accused of
crime—a full, an open, and an impartial trial. As to
the alleged treasonable intercourse with Goa, why,
henceforth if any Hon. Member desire to raise a smile at
the expense of the Government of India, he need but refer
to the supremely ridiculous story, that the Raja of Sattara
was engaged in a plot with the Portuguese Viceroy at Goa,
to annihilate the British power in India. That Viceroy
is now at home. He fills a high office at the Court of
Lisbon, and is said to be related by blood to the reigning
Queen. A special mission was despatched to Lisbon to
investigate the charge in a personal interview with Don
Manoel de Castro, and I call upon a Gallant Friend pre-
sent to tell us during this debate what reception he met
with—to tell us whether the ex-Viceroy did not spurn the
imputation with indignant warmth, and declare the whole
a false and foul imputation for wicked purposes. But, Sir
this matter is not to be so dismisssed. I ask if, when
it came to the knowledge of the Indian Government
that this alleged correspondence had been carrying on
for years, and they professed to believe it, they took
measures to call the Viceroy to account, and, as in duty
bound, gave information to the British Government that
our Foreign Minister might take the steps demanded,
to demand explanation of the Portuguese Government, a
power in strict and friendly alliance ? Sir, I require to
know if down to this hour any step of the kind has
been taken ? And yet the Raja has been hurled like a
traitor from his throne, on the ground that he has, in
breach of treaty, and with the design of an enemy to the
British Government, conducted a correspondence with
Goa. Now, Sir, I place you, and those around you, in
this dilemma. Either you believed this, or you did not.
If you did not, you cruelly, and without just cause, de-
posed the Rajah. If you did believe it, show us the
proof of your having seriously, or at all, represented the
case to the proper parties in this country ; or escape
from the charge of having concealed meditated treason
from your Queen and her Ministers. Sir, if I know of
treason, and do not disclose it, I myself become a trai-
tor, by the compromise I make with the enemies of
my Sovereign and my country.--(Hear, and cheers.)
We have now reached the sad and fatal sequel of this
story. The Raja is dethroned. He is now in exile at
Benares, 700 or 800 miles from his throne and people—
disgraced—plundered—expatriated ; taken at midnight
from his palace, and hurried with such guilty precipi-
tancy away, that in the flight no halt is permitted to a
mother in the agonies of child-birth—none to the fa-
ther, even when the pangs and sweat of death are
upon him. Conspiracy, perjury, spoliation, and
death are the stages of this melancholy his-
tory. Sir, I shall presently sit down to make
way for others who may easily evince more ability
than I possess, to do justice to the cause of this injured
Prince, but cannot feel more zeal or a more intense
anxiety that the decisions of this Court may be such as
will do credit to the profession which it makes of attach-
ment to the welfare of the natives of India. But ere I retire
I shall venture to make one or two general observations,
suggested by the case before us. Sir, we have, in the
course of this debate, heard much of expediency, and it
would appear that in that one word lay the entire phi-
losophy of your Government. I verily believe it to be
so. From the moment that Lord Clive drew the sword
for you at Madras, and conquered at Plassey, until now,
you have regulated your proceedings at home and abroad by
the principle of expediency. You have not laid righteous-
ness to the line, nor judgment to the plummet. You
have not asked what is right, but what is politic. You
have too frequently turned a deaf ear to the demands of
eternal justice, and squared your conduct according to
that principle which has been, from the beginning, the
bane and curse of the world—the principle of political
expediency. Above you is the marble statue of the
greatest (I wish I could add the best) man that ever
swayed the destiny of India. That transcendent man bent
the energies of his almost superhuman mind—not to the
observance of the strict rules of justice, but to the accom-
plishment of the plans of a splendid ambition upon princi-
ples of political expediency. As your rule in India com-
menced so has it continued, even down to the deposal of
the Raja of Sattara, and the amendment of the Chair,
which asserts that it is not expedient to reverse the deci-
sion which has been come to. Sir, if India is to be saved
to this country, it must be henceforth ruled—not by the
imitators of Lord Clive or Warren Hastings; but by men
who will do justly, and love mercy, and carry the princi-
ples of private honour into public life. Sir, I speak here
to-day less as a mere holder of India stock than as a citi-
zen in common with yourself of this empire, as one jealous
for the honour of the British name and the integrity of
the dependencies of the Crown. •We have, I will not say
by what means, got possession of a vast country. It is
populous, it is rich, it is capable of improvement to au in
definite extent. How, I ask, is the honour of which we are
so proud to be preserved unsullied ? How are our
distant possessions to be retained and transmitted ?
Why, by one way, and by one, way only. By acting
upon principles of unbending honour ; by conciliating
and attaching the natives of our territories ; and by
redressing_ every injury which is brought to your know-
ledge. You may say we are the only tenants at will ;at
all events we occupy under a very short lease, the re-
newal of .which is uncertain, and though things may not
be altogether what they ought to be, they will last our