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

THE SUN, LONDON, FRTDAY, JULY 16, 1841:

THE RAJA OF SATTARA.

INDIA HOUSE.—THURSDAY.
The Adjourned Meeting of the Proprietors of East
India Stock was held yeskrday.
G. Lyall, Esq., M,P., took the chair at twelve o'clock.
The motion ad amendment having been read by the
Secretary,
Mr. G. THOMPSON then rose and said—Sir, as no Hon.
Proprietor seems disposed to offer himself at - this mo-
ment to the attention of the Court, I shall take advan-
tage of the opportunity afforded me of placing my sen-
timents before you. As one who has recently qualified
himself for aaeat in this body, I should not have pre-
sumed to take a prominent part in your discussions, had
the queStion had reference to any domestic occurrence
affecting parties present, or men who might appear on
their own behalf ; but the case before us concerns a dis-
tant and helpless native of India, who is lying under the
infliction of your tremendous power, and who makes his
appeal to that sense of justice, which he has been led to
believe.resides in British bosoms, and cannot be appealed
to in vain, when a case of injury is submitted. I will
candidly confess that it is the present case which has
brought me amongst you ; and that I have been
led to take my place in this Court, by a de-
Sire to 'raise my feeble voice in behalf of one whom I
firmly believe to be innocent of the charges brought
against him, and on the strength of which he is now an
exile from his kingdom and his throne,—lying under the
stigma of treason, and living upon the pension which is
doled out to him from the revenues of the kingdom over
which he was the hereditary Sovereign. Such and such
only being the motives by which I am actuated, I ask
'permission to speak, and to speak freely. For all that, I
shall say I am' myself and alone answerable. If the ad-
vocate of the Rka, I am his unknown and unbought ad-
vocate. My name, if uttered in his ears, would be an
unmeaning sound: I hope for nothing from his grati-
tude, as 1 'fear nothing from the opposition or displea-
sure of those from whom I differ. I stand here to ask,
in the language of ungarbled truth, for even-handed jus-
tice, convinced that, however slow it may be in its ap-
proach, justice will be done at last.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir, in now proceeding to bring before you still fur-
ther the contents of the papers you have placed in the
hands of Proprietors, I shall, as far as possible, avoid
travelling over the ground which has been trodden by
my predecessors in this debate. I shall . not seek to
augment the force of my case by using any. of the evi-
dence already laid before you, but rather strive to select
those points which have either. escaped the observation
of former speakers, or which they have found, them-
selves unable to embrace, or which they have deemed
unnecessary for the.purpose of sustaining their several
positions. But before Ido so, I must, however painful
to my own feelings, and however presumptuous it may
appear in the eyes of any here, express my great sur-
prise at, and my deep and decided dissatisfaction with,
the course which the Hon. the Deputy-Chairman, Sir
James Law Lushington, thought proper to adopt yes-
terday, for the purpose, as it seemed to me, of checking
the progress of free discussion in this Court, by telling
us that the privilege we were then enjoying, if not most
temperately used, we might—
Here Mr. WEEDING rose, and expressed his wish to
know if the Court would tolerate the Hon. Proprietor in I
the reading of a speech.—(Cries of " Order, order," and
" Go on.")
Mr. THOMPSON resumed. When the Hon Gentleman
who has just interrupted me shall be better acquainted-
with my usual practice as a public speaker, and with the
use which I generally make of such interpositions
as his, he will not again call me to order for
reading my speech. Will the Honourable Gentle-
man permit me to ask him if he ever called an
Honourable Director to
.order for reading his speech,
or any part of it? I will undertake to say he never did.
In a volume by my side I have printed copies of my
speeches read to this Court, none of which were ever
broken in upon, that lam aware. Sir, lam bringing
a charge against a high authority in this Court, and I
have preferred to prepare it elsewhere in writing, that I
may not exaggerate it in the heat of debate. I repeat
it, then. We were threatened that if we did not be-
have ourselves there would be a speedy enactment to si-
lence us for ever.

Sir J. L. LUSHINGTON rose to correct the Hon.
Member. The words " speedy," never fell from his lips.
Mr. TuonpsoN—Most cheerfully do I retract the
word, but must repeat, that the forfeiture of the power
to discuss the political affairs of India was held in ter-
rorem over us, to put an end, as it seemed, to our discus-
sion altogether. Well, Sir, if it must be so, I for one am
disposed to make an honest use of -the power while it
remains, and when this Court is closed against inquiry—
when the fallen and the helpless may no longer make
their grievances known here, I will still hope that else-
where an asylum for justice will be found where the
friends of humanity-may meet, and find a more willing
audience.—(Hear, hear.) And, is it come to this, that
this once popular and 'powerful Court is a nonentity ?
that the members of it must be the mute and -grateful
recipients of half-yearly dividends, or speak only to
praise ?—must this body be tamed down into a soulless
thing of speechless acquiescence—must quietly float like
a lump of dead matter in the wake of directorial
opinion ? or, venturing to speak out its thoughts,
be threatened with a gag-law ?.—(Hear.) Be
it so. On the day that such a law shall pass the death-
warrant of this Company will be drawn out, and soon
after that law comes into operation the sentence will be
signed, sealed, and delivered. Be assured, Sir, of one
thing, in the hour that you proscribe discussion you an-
nihilate yourselves.—(Hear, hear.) I must here bestow
a word of remark upon the speech of the Hon. Propri-
etor who closed the debate of yesterday, after occupy-
ing us for more than two'hours. His object seemed to
be truly a most generous one—to take under his espe-
cial patronage all the Indian authorities, from Mr. El-
phinstone's downwards. He bestowed on each and all
the benefit of his rich and prodigal encomiums. Surely,
Sir, Lord Auckland, yourself, and all the other great
men who were made to adorn the long and brilliant ca-
talogue of Mr. Fielden,--will feel that there is cause to
be profoundly, unspeakably, and everlastingly grateful
to the Hon. Member for the unqualified praise and com-
mendation, the adulation, and almost adoration of the
gentleman, who sometimes appeared to be run out of
breath in his search after terms of eulogy.—(Heal,
hear.) He said he wanted thereby to secure
a good night's rest ; and, indeed, 11 must have been ne-
cessary after his energetic and most laborious exertion to
do justice to the intellect, the virtue, the patriotism, and
the pure disinterestedness of the Company at home, and
their servants abroad. But, Sir, did this gentleman un-
dertake to reply to my Learned Friend who this
debate ? Oh, no. He had other work to do. He had
to build up the reputation of the Noble and Right Hon.
and powerful opponents of the Raja, and to justify the
rein of that Prince, not out of the contents of these papers
so much as by raking into the history of the Raja from
the year 1818. The Raja's prosecutors were mirrors of
perfection, but as for the poor Raja, why, the Hon.
Gentleman told us of the errors of his youth, of the
sins of his riper years, and of all the tenderness of his
Mahratta, constitution. The firmness of - the Raja was
called obstinacy—the jealousy he had shown in defence
of his honour, and his repeated protestations of inno-
cence, all this was a mere hypocritical denial of guilt,
similar to the professions of a man at the gallows. His
talent was cunning, his pretended loyalty covert treason;
and, to sum up all, and justify every act committed
against him, we were told he was ambitious. Yes—
" Brutus says he was ambitious ;
And Brutus is an honourable man :
So are they all—all honourable men."
But the Hon. Gentleman secured a good night's rest, and
I suppose I must be latisfied. It has turned out as I
anticipated. The question has been made to turn upon
the personal character of the European actors in this
drama. The Raja must be guilty, for Mr. Elphinstone
is wise and prudent,;Lord Auckland is firm and saga-
cious—Sir James Carnac kind and generous, and the
Directors upright • and honourable. Granted that they
are all this, the less had they to fear from inquiry—the
more ought they. to have sought the light of day—the
more ready to give the Raja all he ever asked—a fair,
an open, and an impartial trial.—(Cheers.) Let me
now congratulate the Learned Mover upon the com-
plexion and course of this debate. Up to this moment
his luminous, temperate, and able speech, remains unan-
swered. Not a tittle of all that he has said has been
disturbed—not an argument controverted—not a fact
disproved—not an assertion contradicted. The Ho-
nourable the Deputy-Chairman's speech consisted
principally of a number of authorities drawn from
these books, against, the Raja. • Why, Sir, we knew
that he had been pronounced guilty by these eminent men.
What we wanted to know was, upon what evidence- they
had so pronounced him guilty, for all that we have here
deserves no better names than those which it has re-
ceived from gentleman I shall preSently quote. But what
was the conclusion of the speech ?No evasion—no con-
sideration. Oh; Sir, I could not help thinking, while
the Director stood before us, and while he was arguing.
so strongly and so ablY, too, against the exrediency of re-
consideration, that he might have borrowed from his
own history (he will understand me) a splendid argu-
ment in favour of the course for which we-are pleading.
I thought upon the career—the honourable and brave
career of the Deputy-Chairman ; and it seemed to me
that his gallant actions in the well-fought field, which
have won for him distinguishing honours from his Sove-
vereign, and his present exalted and influential station,
might be quoted as furnishing striking, memorable, and
irrefragable proofs of the wisdom and justice, too, of re-
consideration, revision, and reversal. The Hon. Direc-
tor may never again stand in need of the benefit of
such a process, or I would venture to remind him of the
couplet of the poet—
" That mercy I to others show
Such mercy show to me."
—(Chens.) Much stress has been laid upon the pre-
tended unanimity of the authorities at home and abroad
in the condemnation of the Raja. , I must endeavour to
dispel this delusion. There -has been anything but una-
nimity on this subject. There is anything but agreement
in this Court at this moment. Let us go back to the commis-
sion which sat at &Mara. The evidence taken before
that Commission was sent to Calcutta ; and was there
unanimity in the Council of the Supreme .Government ?
No Sir. The first minute of dissent. I shall quote is
that of Mr. Shakespear, a man who all his life
was accustomed to judicial investigation, and
who possessed, in an eminent degree, an acute
and cautious. mind: And respecting 'minutes ---of
dissent, let me say that they are in my eyes most im-
portant documents. The writer places . his opinion on
record, after deep and laborious examination, after much
anxiety, respecting the result of a disagreement with his
colleagues upon an important matter, in a state of
almost trembling reluctance. But he is urged to record
his difference of opinion by a Strong and overwhelming
sense of honour and justice. These minutes, therefore,
wear an aspect of solemn importance. They are not the
production of secretaries, but the fruit of most anxious
personal investigation and deliberation. Let us now
turn to Mr. Shakespear's minute, Blue Book, page 331.
—" When we reflect on the utter want of basis (as far

as we yet know), on Ivhich the plot could have been
founded, the improbable manner in which the Brahmin
(Untajec) commenced ' his seduction of the Soobadars,
the total unworthiness of his evidence, the discrepancies
between the stories first told by the Soobadars and their
subsequent depositions, before the Commissioners, and
the absurd terms in which the Raja is said to have an-
nounced to the Soobadars the signs of coming events, I
confess I look 4n vain for anything tangible or solid, in
the shape of proof, for my, mind to rest upon. . ' .
" I do.not understand on what principlethe Commis-
sion.ns, as stated in 'the ninth paragraph of their report,
abstained froM cross-questioning the native officers, as
to the discrepancies in their original. depositions com-
pared with those given before them. In all judicial in-.
quii ies much weight.. is justly attached to such conapari-
sons, it being supposed that a witness is more likely to
speak' correctly-When first examined, while particulars are
fresh in his memory, than after the lapse of time.
A word upon this affair of cross-examination. General
Lodwick, the Chairman-of the Commission, is, I believe,
in COUrt, I know not hiS person, and therefore cannot
say ; bi:t if he is, .I thus publicly ask him if one of the per-
jured witnesses before that Commission did not wear the
aspect; of a most guilty.man, refuse to be cross-ques-
tioned, and whether_thc,Commission did- not decide there-
upon that it4a's inexpedient p-cross-examine the Soo-
badars ?—(Hear, hear.) Let us now look at the unani-
mity of the Commissioners themselves. General Lod-
wick, I have said, was one. Let us hear his opinion:-
"I am free to confess that my opinion of the evi-
dence adduced differed so widely from that of my col-
leagues that I- had resolved upon giving a separate opi-
nion : but the proposal on their part to modify their sen-
ments so as to meet mine to a certain extent, and a con-
sirieration of the dilemma in which Government would
be placed by any thing short of an unanimous opinion,
overruled that first intention ; but so numerous and
marked were the discrepancies in the evidence, much of
which was but the evidence of accomplices still under re-
straint, and which could, therefore, only be taken as con-
fessions affecting those by whom they were respectively
made, and so gross was the prevarication of Untajee, the
chief of the plot, as well as chief informant, that I ex-
pressed, at the time, my conviction that for any purpose
of dethroning the Raja the proceedings of the. Commis-
sion would be found by Government 'Unavailing. But
for my only act of sacrificing judgment to political ex-
pediency, these proceedings would have been quite in-
operative." ..
Would, Sir, that the Gallant General had not sacrificed
principle to expediency. But for his error he had made
a noble atonement."' Here, upon the floor of this Court,
he has declared, with his hand upon his heart, that he
reviews his conduct with deep self-reproach; and regards
his acquiecence in the decision of his colleagues as the
only act of his public life, the remembrance of which gives
him pain. Oh that all the opponents of the Raja would
do likewise. Let us now see what unanimity reigned at
home when the whole of the affairs were taken into con-
sideration after the dethronement of the Raja. Four-
teen out of the twenty-four Directors—no more—signed
the minute approving the deed. Four •of the rest
dissented, Messrs. Tucker, Cotton, Shepherd, and one
whose name I cannot mention till I have relieved my
heart. Sir, you had amongst you the other day a man
whom I never saw, but whose nobility and worth have
come to my knowledge through the papers I hold in my
hand. He was the worthy son of a worthy sire. The sire
still lives, and, die when he will, he will live for ever
deep in the affections of the people of India, whose friend
and benefactor he is. Had his son survived, he would
have caught the mantle.of his father, and perpetuated all.,
his virtues. He is gone—but being dead, yet speaketh
in the pages of thiS book, which contains a public .docu-
ment which will be his best monument; which, fbr the
justice of its sentiments, the benevolence of its spirit, and
its statesmanlike views, will rank with any. record which
this house contains. So much I have deemed it right to
say respecting the. Director you have lost in the person
of the late Mr. John Forbes.—(Cheers.) He is one. of
the dissentients. He shall characterize the proceedings
against the Raja :
" In the interval of Sir James Carnac's departure from
this country and his arrival at Bombay, no evidence that
could fairly be called trustworthy had been obtained.
Exposed, as the Raja was, to the schemes of persons at
once vindictive, interested, and ambitious—deprived of
the support and assistance of his own servants, but more
particularly the favour of the Government having been
withdrawn from him, it was no marvel that stories were
coined as rapidly as they could be put into circulation.
This, indeed, is the quality of all the evidence, from
first
.to last, against the Raja ; and, unhappily, the Go-
vernment of India, and the authorities at home; have
been the dupes, whilst the Raja has been the victim, of
such testimony." Again :—" No fiction was too gross
to obtain the implicit belief, and enjoy the elaborate vin-
dication of the Indian Governments, whilst the most

unwearying ingenuity wove a web of intrigue, which
caught in its capacious folds, and converted into accom-
plices, the great States of Europe, the Pacha of Egypt,
the venerable but insidious relic f Portuguese greatness
at Goa, the deposed .and dependent Princes of India,
the tribes of Arbusthan, the Raja of Nepaul, forsooth,
and lastly, the maritime power of the Hubshee "
Again :—" So far from leniency
.and moderation, the
terms submitted to the Raja were most harsh and op-
pressive. They could have been accepted only by con-
scious guilt or a debaSed spirit ; but. to a man who felt
aggrieved, first by wrongs of which he had complained
for years without redress, then by unjust charges ;
and lastly, by the refusal of a fair trial, or '
any trial at all, it was a gross aggravation of
the injuries inflicted upon him, to assume that
he was guilty of ingratitude and treachery. The Raja's
prompt and steady rejection of all terms, unless full op-
portunity had been given for the -vindication of his cha-
racter, even though that rejection involved the Tbrfeitiire
of his' throne, is the strongest moral proof of-. the -Raja's
innocence, worthy of his high and ancient lineage, and
of universal respect and admiration." Finally—" A
mass of fiction, as I verily believe, consisting of letters
not proved to be authentic, of seals and ciphers forged, of
oral evidence obtained under every suspicion of undue
influence, of partnerships contracted with bankers and
false entries made in their books—every artifice, in short,
that the great cunning, great ability, deep personal inte-
rest, and inveterate hatred of Ballajee Punt Natoo, and
his ignoble instrument, Appa Sahib, could employ, has
been directed against the devoted Prince ; and these, on
the other hand, have been assisted in their
fatal effects
by the weak credulity of every member of the two Go-
vernments abroad."
We have now arrived at the dethronement and banish-
ment of the Raja, and here I wish for a moment to fix
your attention upon the recorded evidence to the -charac-
ter of the man who has been elevated to his throne, as
the reward of having assisted the British Government in
the ruin of his own brother. If there was nothing else
to make him detestable, his admitted treason and his
betrayal of his brother would be enough. The vakeels
of the Raja,—the ex-Raja, writing to the Court of Direc-
tors, thus describe the man who had displaced- their
Sovereign :
" But independently of his Highness's sufferings,- we
respectfully submit there are other grounds upon which
the character of the British nation demands in-
quiry, with the view of ascertaining the principle of mo-
rality or justice by which it has elevated the present
ruler of Sattara to a throne. The character of Appa
Sahib has been long known to your Honourable Court ;
it has been commented upon by your Governor-General,
particularly exposed by Major Sutherland in his sketches,
and equally described by General Lodwick, previously to
those misunderstandings ; and lastly, he (Appa Sahib),
acknowledged himself a conspirator, (against British
power), to the same Colonel Ovans, who, as Sir James
Carnac's informant, expressed a high opinion of this con-
fessed delinquent ; and notwithstanding General Lod-
wick's letters just referred to (which must stand amongst
the Sattara papers), Colonel Ovans declares that, after a
diligent search of these records, he finds nothing against
Appa Sahib's character ;—inconsistencies only equalled
by the fact, that the secret agencies which ruled the
destinies of these two brothers, who were held' equally
culpable in their alleged conspiracies against British
power, had the effect of consigning the one from the
throne of his ancestors to a prison, and of elevating the
other from disreputable obscurity to a throne."
We have better evidence still, however, in the shape
of a letter from General Lodwick, to the Bombay Go-
vernment, in April, 1835.
The following is an extract :
" I have to observe, that Appa Sahib has long been
separated from his wife, who is a most respectable per-
son. This lady does not even reside under her husband's
roof, but in 'the palace of his Highness'the Baja. Appa
Sahib has taken in her place a common prostitute, well
known to Poonah, upon whom he lavished immense sums
of money. The Raja, on the late marriage of his own
daughter, endeavoured to persuade Appa Sahib to send
this woman to Poonah, and advanced 3,000 rupees to sa-
tisfy her cupidity ; but when it came to the point, the
attempt failed, and his Highneis very properly cancelled
the order for the whole sum of money.
" Since this transaction it has come to my knowledge,
that Appa Saphib was suspected orreceiving bribes to a
heavy amount, as Judge of the Adawlutt in which he
presides. This I made known to his Highness, at a pri-
vate interview in December last, who replied that he
had heard of the suspicion, and had endeavoured to as-
certain the proof, but without success. His Highness
was unwilling to act decidedly without certain proof, out
of regard to his brother, ' to whom he is warmly at-
tached, and whom he invariably mentions as his heir,
though this is quite optional, as in default of a son to
succeed, there is no bar to adoption.
" With respect to the presumptuous claim to equal
authority with his Highness the as sent forth in
the third, fourth, and fifth paragraphs of Appa Sahib's
memorandum, I can attribute it to nothing short of
mental derangement, as his relative situation to the
Raja has been fully explained to him, and the gratitude
he owes to his brother for invariable kindness has been
frequently pointed out.
" In concluding, I request to be allowed to make his
Highness the Raja acquainted with Appa Sahib's me-
morandum, in order to his meeting that punishment
which is justly his due. I feel satisfied, frOm my
knowledge of his Highness's character, that the punish-
ment will not bear a just proportion to the offence ; but
should I be consulted on the occasion, documentalids.td_thlieb,l
nnd
in question proved to come from Appa
be prepared to recommend Appa. Sahib's removal froM
the Adawlutt, and the appropriation of a portion of his
annual alloWance to the liquidation of his just debts—
addmitted by his own statement to exceed the large sum
of 175,900 rupees, and rapidly increasing."
But we have General Lodwick's maturer opinion, after
four years' additional experience. What said he in this
house, during the former debate upon the Raja's case.—
[Here Mr. Thompson quoted, from a printed report of
ot strong gc
crimes,]
es,3
ex-
press
Lodaichk could
iseen nottetnp fit nedf termseisluaraffi,:lit%eiellerlohtolsyf the Raja, who
youe
the debate- of 1840. The -extract stated that General
character you
addressed to
w
you have
hadyet
ts
hh ne
ehni
tmi
ns en e
dl f ciAaipra. brrl eh
eonfi
ptsheen es r
the
man
yseelnercsteedlvetsodfiesellrithhee, pinlatcheeolfetltiienri
him in,1835,' on the 29th'of December -
" Your Ilighness,—We have been highly gratified by

,the ilifornadticn from time to time transmitted to us by
,our novernment, on the'subject of your Highness'sexem-
plary fulfilment of the duties of that elevated situation in
.which it has pleased Providence to place you.
" A course of conduct so suitable to your Highness's
exalted station, and so well calculated to promote the
prosperity of your dominions and the happiness of your
people, as that which you have wisely and uniformly
pursued, while it reflects the highest honour on your
character,' has-imparted .to-our minds the feelings of un-.
qualified satisfatition and pleasure. The liberality, also,
which you hive' diiplaYed, 'in executing at your own cost
various public works of great utility, and which has so
justly raised your reputation in the eyes of the princes
and people of India, gives you aft additional claim to our
approbation, respect, and applause.
" Impressed with. these sentiments, 'the Court of Di-
rectors 11
of the Etist India Company have unanimously re-
solved
to transmit to you a sword, which will be pre-
sented to you through the Government of Bombay, and.
which we trust you will receive with satisfaction, as a
token of their high esteem and regard.
" With sincere wishes for your health and prosperity,
we subscribe ourselves, in the name of the Court,
" Your Highness's most faithful friends,
- • (Signed) "W. S. CLARKE, Chairman."
Sir, may I not fitly say, " Look on this picture,and on
this." But you say the Biqa has subsequently proved
himself a traitor. I ask—Where is the evidence, and

where the trial? In regard to trial, there has been none.
He has been denied that which is granted to the most
petty offender in this country. We have heard much
of the Raja's guilt. We have the counts in his indict-
ment before us. We have what professes to be the evi-
dence of his guilt in our hands. We look at the charges.
We admit their gravity. We do not ask that favour or
clemency should be shown the accused. We only ask
that the evidence shall be sufficient to sustain them ;
and that the accused shall receive copies of the deposi-
tions against him—be confronted with his accusers—be
permitted to cross-examine them, and be heard in expla-
nation and defence. How stands the matter with regard
to the meanest delinquent in this country ? Take a case
of assault and battery, or petty larceny? There is the exa-
mination before an independent and impartial Magistrate.
Counsel is employed. Every witness is brought full into
view—the evidence • is sifted—the deponents are cross-
examined—the defence is heard. Copies of all deposi-
tions arc furnished—the alleged offender is sent to take
his trial. Then there is the Grand Jury, who may ig-
nore the bill—then the Petty Jury, who may be chal-
lenged—then a Judge, independent even of the Crown—
then the eloquence of the pleader—then the exposition
of the law—then the verdict of the Jury, and the pri-
soner has the benefit of the doubt. Thus are your own
liberties guarded here. Has the Raja been so treated ?
You are forced to answer, No. To this hour he has
had no trial. He has been condemned unheard.

Let me now put a few queries to those who have given
their sanction to the dethronement of the unfortunate

Raja ; and let me, at the same time, state the grounds
on which I put these questions. Did not the British
Government first violate the stipulations of the treaty of
September 25, 1819, by depriving the Raja of his right
of sovereignty over certain Jagheers ? To prove that
they did, I would, were the power with me, summon
in_o Court the truly-illustrious framer of that treaty—
that first of living Indian statesmen—the Hon. Mount-
stuart Elphinstone. I would also put into the witness-
box the four successive Residents at the Raja's Court, all
of them at this moment in England, and three of them
in this Court,—Colonel Grant Duff, Major-General
Briggs, General Robertson, and General Lodwick.
Again, let me ask, if General Robertson did not, as
early as the 31st of December, 1831, address a letter to
the Bombay Government, informing them that the
Raja had to contend with many enemies, particularly
Bramins, in consequence of religious feuds, and the loss,
or. the part of these Hindoo priests, of their pol itical power?
On the commencement of proceedings against the Raja and
his Minister, did not the Bombay Government prevent
the Raja, then accused of attempts to weaken the alle-
giance of the native soldiers, from being assisted by
counsel, or by his Vakeels, before the Commission then
sitting--:-4 Commission composed altogether of British
functionaries ? I shall here trouble the Court with an

extract from the letter of Major-General Lodwick to the
Court of Directors, commencing at the bottom of

page 24 :
" Early in the proceedings it became an important
question how far the Raja should be made acquainted
with the nature of the Commission. My colleagues
urged me, as Resident, to request, or in other words,
command his attendance in person, for by treaty he is
bound to attend to the advice of the Resident on all oc-
casions. . . .

" I objected, and proposed that the Commission, in a
body, should wait upon his Highness ; and on this
amendment being rejected, I entered a protest to the
effect—` That as attending personally would tend to
lower his dignity in the eyes of his subjects, I declined
giving this advice to the Raja, in the character of Resi-
dent ; but that I would willingly attQnd him as one of
the Commission, and offer him the option of attending
personally, or by Vakeel or Counsel ;' adding that so
long as his Highness was only under accusation, he
could not be treated with too much attention or respect.'

The point was referred for the decision of the Governor,
who at once objected to his being assisted by Counsel."
When the Supreme Government of India had granted
permission to Dr. Milne to assist the Raja, did not the
Bombay Government secretly intercept their communi-
cations ? See the minute of the Governor of Bombay,
subscribed by the Board, on page 277 of the first Blue
Book, at the bottom ; also the grounds on which the.
Baja was altogether deprived of the benefit of Dr.
Milne's advice :—.
" I am desired to state, with reference to the altered
'state of European, society, and to the freedom of access
to this country now granted, that the policy may be ques-
tionable of discouraging respectable individuals like Dr.
Milne, from undertaking the defence of natives of rank,
who would probably be driven by such discouragement
to resort to the,aid of adventurers, careless alike of the
reputation of the accused, and of their own government."
This is the Supreme Government. Now for the Bom-
bay authorities :
" I have some doubts (says the Governor) of the expe-
diency of making this communication to Dr. Milne, since
it will lead to his calling for the intercepted correspond-
ence, of which it would be highly undesirable he should
at the 'present time be aware."
A few days after the following minute is entered :
"Dr. Milne may be informed that, under the instruc-
tions of the Governor General, and as a pensioner of the
Honourable Company, he is to refrain from holding any
communication, direct or indirect, with the Baja of Sat-
tara or with his agents."
At this stage of the business letme be permitted to no-
tice the manner in which the Commission appointed to
investigate the charge against the Raja of tampering
with the Sepoys, set about their duty, and the manner
in which they constituted themselves a Court of In-
quiry, and let me ask in this Commission whether such
rules and maxims were observed as seemed to be required
by the usages of the country and the laws which regu-
late intercourse between independent States. I go
again to General Lodwick's letter, page 23.—(Here fol-
lowed the extract.) The Members of this Court will re-
collect the reference made by Mr. Lewis, during the de-
bate on the 23d, to the avowal of the Brahmin, that he
was the author of the plot against the Raja, and that he.
declared that, when casting about for the means of
wreaking his vengeance on the Raja for not attending to
a claim of 20/., heaven threw the Soobadars in his way.
Now, I wish to inquire whether one of these Soobadars
did not confess that he perjured himself in order to as-
sist in the plot, and whether, notwithstanding, he was
not rewarded with rank and emolument ?—(Mr. Thomp-
son here quoted from Sir Robert Grant's mi-
nute of the 27th of April, 1837, and proceeded.)
The next questions I have to propose have a slight re-
ference in one particular to a matter referred to yester-
day; but I shall make it for the purpose of exhibiting in
one view several acts of a similar character. Ist, then,
Did not the Bombay Government in their failure to con-
vict the Raja by the Commission, offer liberal pecuniary
inducements to any persons who could supply evidence
to establish his guilt ? 2dly. Did not the same Govern-
ment try to ensnare his Highness through the instru-
mentality of the Resident ? And 3dly, Did not the same
Government purchase the principal evidence in the Goa
case for 46/.7 Let us see. Minute of Sir R. Grant, 30th
March, 1837, p. 76. General Lodwick's Letter, p. 19.
Sir R. G.'s Minute, p. 163, par. 209, 210. (Mr. Thomp-
son cited General Lodwick's Letter, page 19, and Sir
Robert Grant's Minute of 30th March, 1837. He then
resumed.) Here I must revive the recollection of the
Court to the facts proved yesterday; that, at the request
of Col. Ovans, the Bombay Government placed the Raja's
Minister in confinethent, without indictment and without
trial, for a period of three years, in order to wring from
his aged mother some statement prejudicial to the Raja,
that she might thereby procure the release of her son.
Here I refer to the unprinted letter of Colonel Ovans
to the Bombay Government under date of June
the 24th, 1837, and also to Colonel Lodwick. Did
not the Government at Bombay remove Colonel Lod-
wick, the unwilling and repentant instrument in con-
demning the Raja, upon the plea of his having lost his
influence over the Prince ; that the Raja was acting to-
tally independent. of treaty and of all control ? Did
not the Government, in the same letter, express their
desire to appoint one who should gain back the affections
of the Prince ? And did they not then appoint Colonel
Ovens the very man who had declared the Raja guilty ?
Mr. Thompson quoted Sir Robert Grant's letter at full
length, and then the explanation of General Lodwick as
follows :
" When the season of exchanging honorary dresses
between the Governor and the Raja came round, and
the latter sent his usual present to Sir Robert Grant, in
compliance with the advice I had given him, on its being
asked, lest his omitting to do so should be added to the
catalogue of his other crimes—the opportunity of at
once insulting. him and degrading me was eagerly seised
upon.; and the letter and present, which it would have
been most disrespectful 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 Raja on feu-
, dal tenure, the 'British Government took possession of
it informally.- and in direct breach of the orders of
your Honourable Court, which had admitted that
such lapses must fall to the Raja, by the terms of
the 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
an honour to have been found wanting in the s tact and
vigour, and dexterity, that would 'have made me an
efficient instrument for the execution of purposes for
which histofy
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 ialpilo of
transacting business, by consult}}tiw Bekident on nll
pcpasignS i 11)1d witli lus ilium spirit had again coin-
meneed'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 hdretefoTt-.1,t,, . -
So much for the truth and sincerity of the Governor's