The Sun.
London, England, 1841-07-16 00:00:00

'been most disreipectfal in the Raja to omit sending,
were returned. And when a large estate lapsed by the
death of the Jagheerdar, who held it of the 11:pja on feu-
rini tenure, the British Government took possession of
itinformally. and in direct breach of the orders of
your Honourable Court, which had admitted , that
Oil lapses must fall to the Raja, by the terms of
tie treaty. Such then were the measures which it was
my fate to witness, and in which I was.called on to take
part ; and I must confess that I shall ever consider it
IT honour to have been found wanting in the tact and
vigour, and dexterity,' that would have made me an
efficient instrument for the execution of purposes for
which history may, it is to be feared, affix a stigma on
the British name." Again :—" I reported to Govern-
ment that, after the departure of the two other Commis-
sioners, his Highness returned to the usual mode of
transacting business, by consulting the Resident on all
occasions ; and with his usual spirit had again com-
mcmced upon his public works, for the mutual benefit of
the States ; and on the eve of my departure, I informed
Government, that in all affairs unconnected with the
commission, the advice of the Resident had been attended
to, and business transacted as heretofore."

So much for the truth and sincerity of the Governor's
litter. Another question I would propound is this. Have
not the Government violated the pledge which they gave
the. Raja, that if he would peaceably submit to dethrone-
ment, the whole of his private property should be se-
cured to him ? Have they not spoiled him of his cash,
his jewels, his carriages, his flocks, and even a part of
his wardrobe ? What says an Hon. Director, in his mi-
nute of dissent (Mr. Shepherd)?—
" The Raja did submit peaceably ; and confiding in
the assurances conveyed to him through the Resident,
he left in the palace the whole of his treasure, and other
property, with the exception of the jewels belonging to
his two ranees, estimated at the value of two lacs, which
they were permitted to take with them, and which the
Court state that they were very properly allowed to retain.
" The melancholy result of the Government's profes-
sions, and the Raja's confidence, has been the confiscation
and transfer of the whole of his property to his successor.
" The Court takes no notice of any of these details,
the despatch, as it now stands, simply approves of the
rejection of the ex-Raja's claim, as being one not ordi-
narily recognised in Native States,' and that, therefore,
the property has been rightly adjudged to the present
Raja. - -

I am not prepafed from personal knowledge to con-
trovert what is here alleged to be the ordinary usage in
-Is.Tative States, but the result of my inquiries of gentle-
men who have filled high and responsible situations in
India under the Company, justifies me in questioning it;
certain I am, however, that no such usage can be esta-
blished without resolving itself into an act of oppression
and spoliation—the simple principles of justice cannot
be destroyed by any precedent whatever. The Raja was
to lit treated as an object of sympathy, not of punish-
ment.' He received also the pledge of the Governor,
that his private property should not be interfered with ;
can any usage or precedent justify the breach of this
promise ?
" Bat to return to the ground assumed by the Bombay
Government, that the whole of the property was State
property. Had, then, the Raja no private property what-
ever ? _ _ _

" I have quoted the Advocate-General's opinion on
that point, and I would now request particular attention
to the _Resident of Sattara's letter dated the 28th Sept.
1839, which states there were about seven lacs of rupees
in hard cash, and about seven or eight lacs' worth of
jewels and other valuables in the palace. In the eleventh
paragraph of his letter he says, ' the whole of this pro-
-way t is claimed by the ex-Raja, but Appa Sahib Mahe-
re; (his successor) maintains, that about five or six lacs
th 3 money is State property, and private property be-
longing to him, and also about two lacs' worth of jewels,
and that the remainder only belongs to the ex-.Raja and the
Jadie.
" '9"ere we have the express admission of the validity
of the ex-Raja's claims from the party most interested
He who was to be the possessor of
in opposing ths.'ll-.
all the property tha:.! could be designated State property,
reluctantly admits the" the remainder,' amounting to
about two lacs of hard cash, azd six lacs' worth of jewels,
belonged to the ex-Raja, and the of his family."
Thus we find that by one act of spolii!ion the Raja
wa..e. deprived of about 80,000/.'s worth of e`4 private
propety, according to the testimony of Appa J`lllh-
When the dethroned Prince was on his way into exile,
eels not his earnest request for a few days' halt, during
the accoachement of his cousin and companion's wife,
denied him ? Was not Balla Sahib, Senaputteee suf-
fered to die in his palankeen, and were not all the Royal
entreaties fur a halt and assistance sternly refused ?
Mr. Thempson here Quoted a. political despatch of
the Court ,:,sf Directors, page 388, and said, " We
have now, Sir reached the sad and fatal sequel of
our story. I sla:.!. now retire to make way for others,
who may easily evince more ability than I have done in
the conduct of this case, !eta cannot feel more zeal, or a
more intense anxiety, that :.1-1e decision of this Court
may be such as will do credit to ;he profession which it
makes of attachment to the welfare of the natives of
India. I will put it to Honourable Directors whether,
after the signal exposure of the worthlessue'.ss of every
part of the evidence upon which the charges agaast the
Raja are founded, they can still believe him guilty, rat-
less they have evidence behind of which we know nothing.
If, in their consciences, they believe him not guilty,
then I implore them to do him justice, and to do him
justice speedily. Should justice be denied here, it will
assuredly be brought elsewhere. It will be brought in
that Assembly which has clothed this Court with power,
and arc bound to see that it is not abused." The Hon.
Proprietor concluded with a fervent appeal to the Court,
and took his seat amidst loud cheering.
mi.. HENRY ST. GEORGE TUCKER, a Director, said he
had already had an opportunity of recording his delibe-
rate opinion upon the question,. at a time when he had
came fresh from the examination of the papers relating
to it; and anything he might now say could give little
additional weight or force to what he had then done.
But on the present occasion he was called upon to vote,
and he wished to state his reasons for the vote he was
about to give. His dissent had been alluded to by seve-
ral Hon. Gentlemen, and one in particular had done him
the honour of spending a good deal of time in comment-
ing upon it. It was, however, now upon record, and let
it be taken, valeat quantum. He wished to offer his
sentiments upon the subject now as briefly as might be,
in order to bring the Court to a calm and dispassionate
consideration of the question before them.—(Hear, hear.)
He feared the Court had been led away in some degree
by the impassioned eloquence of the Hon. Gentleman
who had just sat down.—(Hear, hear.) He regretted
that that Hon. Gentleman had brought so much of that
fervid eloquence which belonged to him to the present
question, because when they were acting in their judicial
capacity they should act with calmness. His opinion of
a judicial functionary was, that he should render him-
self almost a living automaton, moved by no compassion,
no feelings,. and no prejudices.—(Cheers.) He would
not now go into the merits of the case, which had been
most fully discussed in that Court for the last two days ;
but he should place the whole merits of the question,
and everything connected with it, upon the amnesty that
had been tendered upon the last hour by the late Gover-
nor of Bombay to the ex-Raja of Sattara. Had the
Governor been under the impression that the Raja was
guilty of these crimes, it would have been his duty to
withold any such amnesty. The terms were, " If
you acknowledge yourself guilty, we shall treat
you as an innocent man ; but if you persist
in asserting your innocence we shall visit you With the
severest punishment of guilt." Now, lie believed that
the refusal of the Raja to subscribe to these terms was
the strongest proof of his innocence.—(Cheers.) The
ordniens of Lord Auckland had been quoted, but he
(Mr. Tucker) could quote his opinion in 1837, where he
treats the accusation as a petty and obscure intrigue.
lie would now, however, come to the simple question
before the Court. The motion of the Hon. Gentleman
might be divided into two parts. In the first place, there
was an averment of certain facts, and in these he should
.concur, although not perhaps in the same language.
'The second division of his motion went to propose the
anointment of a Commission. Now he would read a
few propositions which he had put down in order that he
might be precise, and it would show how far he would
go if it were thought advisable to modify. the motion. His
.first resolution was, that the Court, after a careful review
of all the proceedings in the case of the ex-Raja of
crime or political
Sattara, was of opinion that no.
offence justly involving, the position ofd he Prince, or
the confiscation of his private property., ad. been e, t a
his-
blished.--(Loud cries of Hear, hear. ') That .
decided conscientious conviction as a public functionary.
lie had carefully reviewed all the papers, and that was
Isis deliberate conclusion. His second proposition was
that that opinion was confirmed by the fact that at the
last hour the Government of Bombay tendered to his
Highness the ex-Raja of Sattara a general amnesty for
his past conduct, from which it might clearly be inferred
that it was not of a very dangerous character, and not
such as would call for the penalty of deposition, or the
confiscation of his personal property.—(Hear, hear.)
His third proposition was, that that Court considered all
the private property held by natives of India to be under
the protection of the law, and that they could not be
deprived of it otherwise than by the judgment of a
Court of competent jurisdiction.—Cheers.) The Raja
was in possession of that property, and he contended that
they had no right to deprive him of it. He would re-
mind the Court that Lord Cornwallis established Courts
of Justice in India to maintain the rights of native sub-
jects and the rights of personal property in every in-
stance whatsoever. With that part of the question, there-
fore, he had no hesitation in dealing. But with regard
to the latter part it appeared to him to be surrounded
with a great deal of difficulty. The appointment for a
Commission was proposed. A Commission had been ap-
pointed, and what had been the result ? Ex-parte evi-
dence had been received, but there had been nothing to
satisfy his (Mr. Tucker's) mind of the Raja's guilt.—
(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Now lie contended that
it was for those who accused the Raja to make out his
guilt ; and that, in his opinion, had not been done. He
was not called upon to prove a negative.—(Hear, hear.)
in his opinion the appointment of a Crlmmission would
be nugatory ; it would be, in fact, a Commission to try
the judgment of that; Court.—(Hear, hear.) That
was a situation in which they could not place the
Company or the Beard, of Control. There may have
been errors on the other side, or he (Mr. Tucker)
might have erred ; but he regretted that the Hon. Gen-
tleman who had last spoken should have fancied that
there was orf that side of the bar any want of proper and
honourable fealing•—(Cheers.) There was too much of
interest—painful and romantic interest—around the
whole case, and it should not have been enhanced by
the Hon. Gentleraao, who could not forget that the
Directorsac were the sworn instruments of justice, and had
decided to the best of their abilities.—(Hear,
hear.) The former Commission had failed, and there-
fore the would have been nugatory. It
would end. in nothing, and would merely excite fallacious
hopes in the mindsof
Sir James
esTher
of the Baja and his friends. were some very sensible observati
Car-
nac's,ona tending to show
the !mac •
practical &faculties in the

way of forming such a Commission, which would be
I found in page 289 :
" The difficulties in the way of the course firstTelerrea
to appear to me very great. There is no ordinary tribunal
to which the Raja could be -made amenable, and a special
one must be organised, for the purpose of investigating
the charges against him, if they are to be investigated.
" A Commission has been proposed, and the expe-
diency has been suggested, of selecting its members from
the other Presidencies, excluding altogether persons
serving under this Government. I think that, proceed-
ing to subject the Raja to trial by a Commission would
be a course very much open to suspicion and misrepre-
sentation, however that Commission might be constituted.
I know that, from the civil and military services of
India, there would be no difficulty whatever in selecting
Commissioners who would perform their duty without
regard to anything but justice ; but I need not add, that
in the conduct of States, as of individuals, it is most im-
portant not only to avoid wrong, but to make this avoid-
ance apparent, and to place the character of the State
for integrity and good faith beyond the possibility of
question.
" For this reason I should desire, if practicable, to
avoid the trial of an issue, in which the British Govern-
ment is a party, before a tribunal which must, of neces-
sity, be composed of its own servants."
Now he did not know what authority they had to try
an acknowledged Prince. He saw great 'difficulties there-
fore, in the way of any such proceeding, for all difficulties,
had
been done had been done according to law. The Act
was final, and could not be revised by that Court. He
trusted, therefore, the Gentleman who had brought for-
ward the motion would consider how far it might be
judicious to persevere in it, because it was obviously im-
practicable, and could do no good to the cause of the
Raja, whose case had excited so much interest.—(Hear,
hear.) his proposition, although not free from objection,
would be this, and he made it the more reluctantly, be-
cause he felt it would be attended with some public in-
convenience. That the Court strongly recommended to
the Directors that steps be immediately taken to restore
to the ex-Raja of Sattara the jewels, family treasure,
and property arising out of his income, which on his de-
position was unadvisedly made over to his brother, the
present Raja.—(Hear, hear.) Wheu the proposition for
making over that property was brought forward, he (Mr.
S.) had not the honour of a seat in the Council, or he
should have concurred most cordially in the protest of
his Hon. Friend. His last proposition was, that the
Court being of opinion that the ex-Raja had been deprived
of his property on insufficient grounds, would earnestly
recommend to the Court of Directors to take into its
favourable consideration the propriety of restoring him
to his rights and dignities,"should any suitable occasion
arise either by the death of the present Raja or other-
wise, and, in the event of want of heirs the succession
might be secured to the ex-Raja as the elder branch of
the family and his lawful heirs.—(Hear, hear.) Some-
thing of that kind was held out by Sir James Carnac in
his minute, which would be found in page 309:
" Finally, I have been supported in the view I have
taken of tliis case, by the consideration thatif it is deemed
erroneous by the superior authorities who will have to
judge of it, the course of events will, in all human pro-
bability, afford a fair opportunity, in a few years, of rec-
tifying what may be deemed erroneous. Neither the
Raja about to be deposed, nor his brother who is to 'be
substituted in his place, have any children, and, at their
advanced 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 Govern-
ment ; unless, indeed, it shall be then judged
expedient to allow this line of Princes to be continued
by the Hindoo custom of adoption."
He regretted that Sir James Carnac did not leave the
question of succession open, that instead of elevating to
it the brother of the ex-Raja, lie did not leave it to the
public authorities of that country, who, his treason being
decided upon, would have named his successor. Had
that been done, the authorities in that House and the
Commissioners for the affairs of India would have had it
in their power either to replace the Raja if he were
found innocent, or make some other arrangement, but
unfortunately the door had been shut by the elevation of
the brother of the Raja. He considered the elevation of
the present Raja as a most unfortunate step, and one
which constituted the great difficulty of the case, as in
consequence of that step almost any remedial measure
vehich the Court might adopt would subject them to the
charge of inconsistency. His opinion was well known,
he had exgessed it before, and it was that the Raja
was deposed on insufficient grounds. On the-Mode of
remedying that evil, he did not profess himself compe-
tent to decide. He had merely thrown out these pro-
positions as suggestions which had occurred to him as
the least objectionable mode of remedying those incon-
veniences, of setting the honour of the Raja right in
the eyes of his countrymen, and of doing justice to them-
selves.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. WEEDING was not surprised at the opinion ex-
pressed by the Hon. Director, because, if he recollected
right, similar opinions had been expressed by that Hon.
Gentleman in 1840. Hon. Gentlemen had called out for
justice to the Raja. He begged of them to do justice to
those who differed in opinion with them, and to do jus-
tice to the dead.—(Hear, hear.) He called upon them
to do justice to the connection of that great empire with
"tl'ngland, and to do justice to the beneficial results of
that connection, the civilization and happiness of man-
kind. The Hon. Gentleman who had spoken last but
one had taunted the Deputy-Chairman with attacking
Court, because he reminded the Court
thetha rights htthseocf
ot.'tt o:
Directors and the Board of Control
had decided on any subj:.'et the discussion of that subject
afterwards in that Court co,.w lead to no practical re-
sult, and that as the decision in poilitical affairs was not
vested in that Court, the agitation of sus7.4 subjects un-
advisedly might lead to an interference with V2e.ir privi-
liges by the Senate of England ; but what did the 5":
Gentleman himself say shortly afterwards ? Had he
not attacked the rights of the Court ? Did he not sal
that if he could not get justice there he would go elie-
where ? Was not that telling them that their councils',
were of no avail ? It was saying that if the majority,'
however largo, did not come to the conclusion' in which"
the minority, however small, might concur, that minority
would go elsewhere to seek to attain its ends.—(Hear,
hear.) He thought that that was an act of presumption,
which ought to be condemned by the Court. He was
astonished to hear the taunts of the Hon. Gentleman to
the Deputy-Chairman. The Hon. Gentleman had brought
accusations against every one who differed in opinion
with him. The authorities at home, the Governor-Ge-
neral of India, Lord Auckland, Mr. Wilberforce Bird;
and the Government of Bombay, were all accused of in-
justice by the Hon. Gentleman ; and all he did to sup-
port these accusations was to refer to authorities, which
authorities he (Mr. Weeding) took the liberty of gain-
saying. The Hon. Gentleman mainly relied on Mr.
Shakespear, Mr. John Forbes, and General Lodwick.
He was sorry to say that General Lodwick, whose' letter
had been read to the Court, and who had been at one
time the Resident at Sattara, had acted in a way which
lie hoped no public officer in India would imitate ; and
he trusted that General Lodwick would not act in such a
way again. The Hon. Gentleman referred to the opinion
of Mr. Shakespear, with respect to the communica-
tions with Goa, to those with the Raja of Nagpore,
and to the Soubadars. Had the. Honourable Gen-
tleman read the statement of 'Mr. Shakespear's-
opinion on the question of the Soubadars ? Mr:
Shakspear suggested to Lord Auckland the pro-
priety of further inquiry- on the subject. If papers were
produced they were objected to, and if the evidence of
accomplices was given, then it was said they were pri-
soners, and gave their evidence to recover their liberty,
so that they would allow no evidence whatever, but
would asperse all the witnesses who came forward against
the Raja. Why should they doubt the evidence of the
Soubadar. He was an unwilling witness, and there
could be no reason to suppose he intended to deceive. On
the subject of the guilt of the Raja, he would refer to
Sir Robert Grant's minute of the sth of' May—a minute
drawn up with the greatest statesmanlike pains and
care by Sir Robert Grant, and after reading which, it
was impossible to resist the conviction of the guilt of
the Raja,if the subject was approached without prejudice.
Gentlemen had mixed up a great variety of topics with
this question, but the proper question on which to ask
the judgment of the Court. was, if the Raja were
guilty or not guilty. Two questions had been mixed up
with this, first, if the Commission of Inquiry, ought to
have been issued, or were properly constituted , and,
Secondly,
Butode if the amnesty ought to have been offered by
Sir
James Canine. That offer of an amnesty had
a
been assumed ! proof of the Raja's innocence.
heof (llr. irseeding) thought that a most perverse
m
they reasoning.were
Carnac. ItLet them see what an unjust judg-
ment
. e
is eforming of the conduct of Sir James
ttfaet, stating that while Sir James
Carnac declared
Carnac guilty of such conduct, coHiVeuccotul,
Raja of 'attara to be innocent he
proclaimed him guilt
danndo believetthe
offer
oSir t
hJea mes
am-
nesty originated in a
said, why, if he believed
much
hhigher motive. , It had been
re-
instate him in power ?
offer of the amnesty was wrong.-.r. Weeding) thought the
Heunr\f'uiV, did he offer to
ought to have been immediate He thought the Raja
deposed. But it was
evident that Sir James CarnacY proposed the amnesty,
because he compassionated the
poswimerbtecilfity. Sir
James Carnac said we have it in ourl
preserve our own safety, by putting the Raja° • eneean
lead-
ing•strings, so that he shall have no chance resum-
inglufto
his criminal intrigues, and then mercy mai)), be
ex-
tended to him. Some gentlemen considered that the at-
tempts of the Raja, even if proved, were of so puerile
nature as to be totally undeserving of notice. But at-
tempts of this nature, puerile as they might seem, in
India especially were to be feared ; and on this subject
he would read them a short passage from the minute of
Sir Robert Grant, page 246 of the printed papers :
" The Raja of Sattara is feeble as a statesman, and
his talents for intrigue may be contemptible; yet a con-
jecture is possible, in which his power to injure us would
be great. Let us suppose, for example, that one of his
criminal speculations were realized, and that an army of
continental Europeans were on our northern frontier. It
might, in that case, make the most serious difference,
whether the compact territory of Sattara, occupying as it
does the heart of the Deccan, and traversed by some of
the principal lines of communication between' different
portions of our territories, was in our own hands, or in
those of a secret but determined enemy. I pause not to
consider for what good purpose such an arrangement of
things is to be maintained, or to what extent the object
originally aimed at by the creation of this subordinate
power, which was that of conciliating the Mahratta race,
is likely to be answered, when the very instrument of
conciliation is our bitter foe; but I may be allowed to
ask, whether, as rulers of India, our means are so great,
our expenses so light, and our task so easy, that we can
afford gratuitously to add to our difficulties, by entrust-
ing a considerable portion of the resources, on which we
ought to be able to rely, to the keeping of confessed trai-
tors, and to comfort ourselves with the reflection that
their treachery is neutralized by their imbecility ?"
There could be no doubt but that the affair of the
amnesty could not be considered as having been made in
consequence of any doubt as to the Raja's guilt, but

solely ont of compassion to the imbecility of .his Ininck
"If he were if Sir James Carnac used goodpolicy
in proposing the amnesty; ho should say: that he had
net ; that it was a mistake, and that no amnesty ought
to have been offered. In his-opinion, the territory of
Sattara ought to have been resumed at once. He agreed
with Mr. iSiorrisson on that head; that such a course of
proceeding would have been less injurious to the people
of Sattara, and better for our own Government: But
that was not then the question. It had been offered, but
it had been offered from motives of clemency merely. It
had, however, been rejected, and the Raja had been re 4
moved, and in removing the ex-Raja of Sattara he conH
sidered that they had only done that justice to India
which it was their duty to do. It would be a sad thing
to have another war spring up in the centre of India,
deplorable not only on account of the loss of our own
subjects which it would naturally entail, but on account
of the interruption it would give. to the civilization of
the East. He would ask the Hon. Gentleman who spoke
last but one, do the papers contain sufficient evidence
of the Raja's guilt ? To that question he (Mr. Weeding)
would say " Yes, upon my honour." The Hon. Gentle-
man had said that Burke had appealed elsewhere for
that justice which had been denied him by that Court.
Mr. Burke had accused Warren Hastings before the
highest Court in the kingdom, and the result of that ac-
cusation had been that Warren Hastings had been de-
clared not guilty. Perhaps the Hon. Gentleman would
wish to have another seven years' prosecution against
those who had deposed the Raja of kattara, and which,
if instituted, he had no doubt would terminate in the
same manner. The minute of the Governor of the sth of
May proved the attempt of the Raja to intrigue with the
Government of Goa. "Oh, but," said the Hon. Gentleman,
" that had been discovered seven years ago. Colonel
Briggs had spoken of it."
Mr. GEORGE THOMPSON had not referred to Colonel
Briggs.
Mr. WrEDlNc,—Then the Hon. Gentleman referred to
some other of the residents at the Raja's Court on
the subject. Sir James Carnac's remarks on the cor-
respondence with Goa, set that question at rest; and they
had the uniform consent of witnesses, fifty-one in num-
ber, with regard to the attempt to correspond with the
Governor of Goa. It might be a silly attempt, but it had
been proved, and had been adverted to by Colonel
Lowrey, to whom he had meant to allude when he men-
' tioned the name of Colonel Briggs. With regard to
the second charge of carrying on a correspondence with
the ex-Raja of Nagpoor, Sir Robert Grant's minute of
the 24th May proved that charge to demonstration, It
stood upon record that the ex-Raja had attempted to
corrupt the fidelity of the native troops. Now, why
should he (Mr. Weeding) take the opinion of the Hon.
mover of the present question, in preference to the con-
viction of the Hon. Court of Directors, of Lord Auck-
land, of Mr. Robertson of Mr. Wilberforce Bird, of Col.
Morrison, of Sir J. Carnac, of Sir R.G rant, of the members
of the Bombay Government, and against the absolutely
recorded signature of Col. Lodwick ; fbr Col. Lodwick
had, by his signature to the Report of the Commission-
ers, testified his belief in the guilt of the Raja, and be-
cati.Se now, three years afterwards, he came forward and
said:that that was one act of his life which he was sorry
he had committed, were they to say they would not
take his evidence ? He lamented to see the pamphlet
which that officer had recently published. The publication
of those papers was a breach of his duty.—(Hear, hear.)
All his Sattara correspondence was confidential, and he
had no right to publish it.—(Hear, hear.) If he had
been, wronged, that Court was the tribunal to which he
should have appealed.--(Hear, hear.) Had he done so
he would have been heard impartially. He had no right
to commit his employers and himself by the publication
of that correspondence. It was the first instance of the
sort, and he hoped it would be the last on record. But
they were not content with accusing the authorities of
injustice in deposing the ex-Raja, but they endeavoured
to make it appear, that the Government had ap-
pointed as his successor a man not fit to govern.
Let them read what Colonel Ovans said on that subject
—(Hear, hear)—and he considered him as good an au-
thority as any person in that Court.—(Hear, hear.) The
press had been at work. The Bombay Gazette had en-
deavoured to keep alive these proceedings, and large sums
of money had been expended by the ex-Raja to give ef-
fect to these endeavours. As a proof of this he would
refer to page 45 of the papers, section 7 :
" In a letter dated the 23d ultimo, the Resident called
our attention to a gross libel published in the Bombay
Gazette of the 20th ultimo, against the present Raja of
Sattara, to the effect that, on the day of his installation,
he was so drunk as to require being carried on a board
to his Palace by four men. We solicit the attention of
your Hon. Committee to this communication, and to the
remarks of Lieut.-Col. Ovans on this calumnious state-
ment, for which there is not the slightest foundation."
Here was a proof of the length to which persons would
go who had a bad cause to sustain. He was
sorry that a gentleman who usually took their eccle-
siastical affairs under his cognizance was not present,
to express his opinion as to the conduct of the Raja in
the particular to which he was about to allude. He (Mr.
Weeding) had been the coadjutor of that gentleman in
his endeavours to induce that Court to put an end to the
practice of suttee. They had been all anxious for it,
and at length it had been accomplished, and the Board
had come to the conclusion that it would tend to sustain
the morality of the British subjects—lndia was not likely
to shake their allegiance. For testimony to the humane
character of the present Raja, he would refer to page 45,
section 12, of the printed papers
" The abolition of suttee within the limits of the Sat-
tarn State, in which heretofore it has been so painfully
prevalent, will be hailed with satisfaction by your Iron.
Committee and by every friend of humanity. We en-
tertain no doubt that the Raja resolved on this measure,
from the knowledge which he possesses of the abhorrence
with which the inhuman rite of suttee is held by the
British Government ; but it will be as satisfactory to
your Honourable Committee as it has been to us, to be
informed that the act was entirely spontaneous .on the
Raja's part, and consequently reflects the greater credit
on him. On this subject the Resident reports as fol-
loWs In justice to the Raja, I deem it incumbent on
Me toistate• that the abolition of the rite of suttee was
'entirely voluntary on the part of his Highness. After
stating to me personally, that he was aware of the light
in which this rite was viewed by the British Govern-
ment, and the fruitless attempts hitherto made to sup-
press it here, he declared it to be his intention to follow
the example of the British Government in suppressing
it, and this declaration he has now fulfilled by public
proclamation. After witnessing the harrowing scenes
which I have done here, and seeing with my own eyes
these miserable victims led down to Mahowlee to be
sacrificed, and passing the gates of the British Resi-
dency without the power of interfering, I may, I trust,
be permitted to express my heartfelt gratification at this
complete abolition of this horrible rite throughout the
whole of this country.' "
Well, if that were the act of a drunkard, he should
have no objection to see more of the native Princes of
India indulging in a few glasses of wine. Instead of the
guilty wretch he had been represented to be here, he was
exhibiting the milk of human kindness itself. Now
without any disparagement to other persons, he considered
the testimony of Colonel Ovans on this point to be con-
clusive, and as one example was worth more than all the
speeches in the world, he considered that the present
Raja of Sattara had done more to abolish the suttee,
than the most eloquent orator that had ever addressed
that Court, and he for one honoured Appa Sahib for
what he had done. He would take that opportunity of
alluding to those who had called him drunkard. He
believed young men might be found in society who might
sometimes have exceeded the bounds of temperance. but
they were not therefore called drunkards. On the whole,
therefore, he considered that the offence of the ex-Raja
of Sattara amounted to sedition in the first instance, and to
treason in the next, and that Sir J. Carnac had acted wisely
in removing him from his government, as an example to
all who might attempt to revolutionize the country. Let
them consider the great misery which must result from
any attempts of that nature : how of necessity it must
put an end to those merciful institutions which would
ultimately raise India to a state of European civilization,
and to the introduction of that religion which would put
an end to idolatry. For these reasons he fully concurred
in all the proceedings which had led to the deposition of
the Raja of Sattara.
Mr. SALOMONS suggested the expediency of adjeurn-
ing the debate, but was met with loud cries of " No." •
General Lonwicx would not have addreSsed the Court
on the subject when the qUeStionjiad been so ably treated
by others, had-he po( felt it was in his power to offer
them some information, more particularly on one portion
of the subject. When he came to this country he came
with a grievance. He had written a memorial to the
Court on the,subjeet before he. left India, and he had
given that memorial to'Sir Robert Grant before lke saiked,
in ord4r that-he might detain him in India ithe7tbidiiPit
Proper:— (Hear, hear.) -On' his voyage home Ile dad
written another memorial on the subject. ',l'hoseAe-
morialg had' been presented to the Chairman and the
Deputv-Chairman,• but they had never taken notice .of
them until long afterWards,.and he had been treated with
contempt by.all. He had called on the Chairman :and
Deputy-Chairman, and had told them that he could de-
pose to important circumstances in reference to the Com-
mission. He came to tell the truth. The Deputy-Chair-
man had treated him occasionally with civility, and oc-
casionally not even with common courtesy. His life had
been one of hardships and trials. The Hon. Gentleman
who had last spoken had thought proper to impeach his
conduct. He cared not for those imputations, and, he
would refer to forty years' service as an answer to them.
—(Hear, hear.) With regard to the publication of the
correspondence, he wished to know whether every paper,
secret or not, on the subject, had not been laid on the
table of the Court ? What had been done then to sub-
ject him to censure in publishing those papers ?
If this case were to be tried on the principles of justice
the truth ought to be told. Now with respect to this
Commission : when the Commission was assembled he
said it was illegal to send such a Commission into an
independent Prince's territory. Besides, the Raja had
been treated with the greatest disrespect. The members
of that Commission were actuated by the feelings of the
Bengal Government, and entertained the strongest pre-
judices against the Raja, He would appeal to those
present if it had not been the , custom for the' Residents
to treat the Raja with the greateSt respect. . But' this
custom was now deviated from, and why ? Because the
Raja was considered as already guilty. With respect to
this Commission they met and called officers before
There were numerous discrepannins in theirtee-
timony, them who deposed to facts which seemed to be impos-
sible.tes-
timony,
and he (General Lodwick) insisted on their
being submitted to cross-examination. After some
difficulty he obtained permission that they should
be cross-examined on the last day, and -these
were the facts attending the cross-examination. The
Hs e
en io Sb
(Gene
enotorar ro dww a c broughtk;
.1
t a
qi sttoo od
him
before:just
at hes
he
should have put before a Court-martial. He bad gg..4:41'
many Courts-martial, and knew what were proper ques, • •
tions to. be put, as well as his colleagues. Both of them,
however, started up and declared that he was bullying
the evidence. The Soobadar looked confused, and his
countenance sank, but.both of the other members of the