The Sun.
London, England, 1848-12-22 00:00:00

4 . ...
AI'S
-- .I',l \i :I'l4- + ',1h2,---',; ..,
~.
NN,- - -•:-.0 c 1 - 711-fr- '' 1-;;„..7.c",
Nx.,'W. , '4, . ' ' ..• 4?4, '.-:..54;.'11,,•°1C*.0. ,:'17::"..)-f.'„,e,tit. 4„,,,,,,,,_____

: r'qr

~

"
4 'T "
_ -
-
- —_
.d 4 41
L

Ae,f,/P
ve added 4
`t'';,,mt A/2 mies, . de'
`
A '..; Ar.r!ef i , r fr,urid it i,
• :7;

/bAr -Nt

to the number and—detiiiiption of our ezei,
ppriving of employment those who heretofore
e the scrvien of Tipp,o nod of the Ninm

graneize ourselves at the expeeee of the Mahrattas, we
increase this evil. M e throw out of employment
and of means of existence, all who have hitherto ma-
naged the revenue, commanded or served in the armies,
or have plundered the country. These people become
additional enemies at the same time that by the exten-
sion of our torritcry our means of supporting our go-
vernment and of defending ourselves are proportionably
decreased. Upon all gee:tier-es of increase of territory
these ceesldcrations have much weight with me, and I am
in general inclined to decide that we have enough; as
much, at least, if not more than we can defend."
I qucte the above from Mr. Gleig's life of Sir T. Munro.
To these I would add the authority of Mr. Edmun- -
stone, a distinguished servant of the Company, whose
opinion upon one branch of this ease the majority of
the Court of Directors has implicitly followed, and,
therefore, I conclude his views will have great weight
with them. Mr. Edmunstone says—" Our dealings
w;th native states has a tendency to create a wcessiey
for that gradual aggrandizement to which the annals
of the world refer the downfal of every mighty em-
pire." Sir, there is one more authority which appears
to me a very appropriate one to those I have adduced.
Lord Minto, in speaking on the subject of taking pos-
session of Travancore, which was then in contemplation,
says—" I feel at the same time a strong repugnance,
upon grounds more general than those alreadystated, to
assume the government of Travancore either as a tem-
porary or a permanent measure, so radical a change
in the nature of our relation to that country, and so
total a revolution in its own political state and con-
stitution, must be deemed by that people, and by
every other native Government, equivalent to a con-
quest, as it would in truth be. It would be classed
amongst those events which have created, and still
justify the jealousy so prevalent in Asia, of the views
with which we form our alliances, and would
be especially regarded as a new example cf
the consequences to be apprehended from a
subsidiary engagement with the British Government."
Sir, these, I conceive, are great and important au-
thorities, which certainly ought to have considerable
influence upon the Court in coming to a decision in
this case—authorities, I will venture to sav, which
ought to hare much greater influence on the Court
than those anonymous letters which we see published
from time to time in the public newspapers—those
editorial articles, " leading articles" as they are called,
which issue from time to time—(Hear, hear)—and
the arrogance, flippancy, and -assumption of which
clearly show from what tainted source they proceed,
and with what views they are written.
Mr. FIELDER— Which of those do you mean ?
Mr. LEWIS Sir, you may affix it to whom you
please. Why, sir, should the grasping and aggran-
(tieing policy be any longer pursued ? The sound-
ness of the opinions to which I have adverted,
and which are opposed to such a policy,
has been verified by the experience of the
last few years. It was in contravention of
that policy that we invaded Affaghanistan, and
what were the fruits of our invasion ? Defeat, dis-
aster, and unexampled suffering.—(Hear, hear.) The
Chairman may smile, but I think he will not deny
that was the melancholy result. It was in contra-
vention of that policy that we marched our armies in
Sinde, took its capital, expelled its Princes, and
desolated its country. What are the fruits of that
invasion ? I believe, sir, I speak the truth when I
say nothing but our finances loaded with debt—ea
debt constantly increasing—an unceasing drain upon
our revenue, and, as far as we know, likely to continue
for years to come. And what has been the further
result of acting in contravention of that policy ? This
last invasion of Sinde has led, as might have been
expected, to other evils. It has brought us in
collision with the Seikh nation. It is true, that
they were the aggressors in this case, but
it is equally true that your taking posses-
sion of Sinde, your assuming the attitude you did
there, necessarily led them to be apprehensive and
put them on their own defence. These are the fruits
of that aggressive and selfish policy which would
occupy every piece of ground in India, and rest satis-
fied with nothing short of universal dominion. Why
should this policy,' I repeat, be any longer persevered
in ? Why should it be applied in the case of Sattara,
a peaceful state in alliance with us at this moment?
What is there with reference to the Sattara state that
can justify the application of that policy ? There is
not a single circumstance to justify its alienation.
You can'adduce none. As far as the treaty is con-
cerned that establishes the right of the heirs general
to succeed. There can be no question on that
head. As far as ,this is a question of right
there is nothing which can justify the
invasion or occupation of the territories of Sattara.
Can it be said that the inhabitants of that country-
have apyeared- in arms against us, or assumed an aril-
etade of"annoyance and defied our authority? Cer-
lainly not; they have not the power to do so. Is it
that the country is misgoverned, and that anarchy
and misrule prevail there, and you are afraid that the
contagion will spread to your own provinces and taint
them ? Certainly not. From the commencement
the administration of Pertaub Sheen has been the
subject of universal commendation by the East India
Company and the British Government ; the adminis-
tration also of Appa Sahib has met with the same
commendation. From time to time we have had his
praises sounded in this Court by my friends Mr.
Fielder and Mr. Weeding. We have been told,
and no doubt it is true, and of course
I join in the commendation, that the in-
human practice of Suttees was put dowr,
that the transit duties were abolished, that commerce
was left free and unfettered, that bridges were made,
roads constructed, schools and asylums introduced,
and every other improvement which civilization can
boast of. There is nothing, therefitre, on the ground
of the misgovernment of the country that can justify
your invasion of those territories. What is it then ?
Do the people themselves wish any change ? hare
they petitioned you to introduce your rule there ?
No, they are attached to their native institutions ;
they are attached to their country ; they are attached
to their laws and to their Sovereign. All they ask is,
that you should leave them alone in the enjoyment of
the blessings they now possess under their own sys•
tern. They do not wish to be interfered with in any
way. I ask, then, what pretext is there—what shadow
of a shade of a pretext is there, that you should
interfere in the concerns of the Sattara
state, or threaten to take possession of its
territories ? Sir, this course of conduct appears to me
to be one wholly unworthy the British Government
and of a Christian nation. They are weak, they
are, comparatively speaking, defenceless ; we are, on
the other hand, powerful, I had almost said we are
omnipotent. What is the conduct we should pursue
towards our weaker allies ? What should that weak-
ness beget in us ? A spirit of moderation, kindness,
and regard. If they err, we should forgive them.
If any questions of dispute arise between us depend-
ing on the doubtful constructions of treaties, we can
afford that the construction shall be given in their
favour. We should seek to do them good, watch
every opportunity to do them good, and endeavour to
introduce into their respective countries all those
advantages which we derive from a higher and
more enlightened state of civilization. Sir,
there is only one mode by which you will
attach the natives of India to your Government, and
that is, by pursuing a policy which is calculated to
conciliate their affections. lam quite satisfied that it
is upon this foundation alone that the stability of our
empire in India must depend. It is upon these
grounds that I shall move the resolution which is now
before the Court for its adoption.—(Hear, hear.)
The lion. Maaconat LEWIN, in seconding the re-
solution, said,—Sr, 1 rise to second the resolution,
and in doing so it is net my intention to detain the
Court for more than a minute. The chief object I
have in rising is to complain of this court being made
special, as it would appear to me, for the purpose of
overwhelming all other business. In the case which
the Honourable Gentleman has brought forward there
are three points with regard to the terms of the treaty,
with regard to which it is impossible that any one
can entertain a doubt. With regard to the words
" heirs general," it is impossible to doubt that it ap-
plies to the person who now claims. With regard to
the adoption, it is impossible to doubt that by the
treaty the late Raja had the right of adoption, and
that he has adopted a son who, by the llindoo law, is
required to be a near relation. If this state is annexed
to the British Governuent, of course to say that any-
thing like justice is done by its annexation, is to
assert that which no man in his senses will dare to say.
The CHAIRMAN then said—lt is not my intention
to reply to the statements and arguments advanced
as regards this case ; when the proper time arrives I
shall be ready to express my opinion in regard to the
appropriation of the Satara territory ; but, in fact, I
aims not prepared for it now, and therefore shall not
say a word in answer to the lion. Proprietor. I may
state that the general question is sub judice. All
the documents are before the directors, who will duly
consider them, I am sure, with every attenti n to
what is right and proper. I know they will act in
consistency with the expressed opinion of this Court,
that it is better to leave the matter at present in the
hands of the executive whom the proprietors have no-
minated. All, therefore, I have to say is, that it will
be in the recollection of the Court of Proprietors that,
no longer ago than two or three months, a motion was
made in substance precisely the same as this now be-
fore the Court of Proprietors. Under these circum-
stances, I am quite sure that I shall have the support
of the Court in adopting the same course which was
then teken—moving the adjournment of the Court.
That is the course which was pursued on that occa
sien, and certainly should again be followed, now the
matter is under the consideration of the Court of
Directors. I therefore move that this Court do now
adjourn.