The Sun.
London, England, 1851-03-22 00:00:00

MARCH 22, 1851.

restored to his family, I have framed two motions, one
upon the hypothesis that it has been restored, the
other upon the supposition that it has not
" Ist. Thu; the Court of Directors be requested to take
such steps as they may consider necessary to restore to
the family of the deceased Raja of Sattara, Pertaub
Sing, that was bond fide his private property, when he
was deposed, in redemption of the pledge which was
given to that Sovereign on the 28th September, 1839,
by the then Governor of Bombay, Sir James Cana;
on behalf of the East India Company.
2d. And that the Court of Directors bo further
directed to take such steps as may be necessary to re-
store to the family of the deceased Raja of Sattara, Appa
Sahib, the private property of which that Sovereign
died possessed, according to the schedules furnished to
the Bombay Government by their Commissioners, on
the 7th November, 1849, the validity of the adoption of
a son by Appa Sahib, having been formally recognised
' irs respect to the private property of the Raja."
Mr. LEVIIN had great pleasure in seconding the
motion of his Hon. Friend, agreeing as he did with
all that had fallen from him. Having read all the
papera he was perfectly satisfied that this was a
care of great injustice, but there was a
distinction between this case and the one which he

had the honour to bring before the Court. In that
ease there ha I been no inquiry whatever, whareas
in this case the fullest inquiry had taken place.
was another observation he wished to make,
which was that this case referred to private property.
Now, had the R.ija, without any compromise of his
po.ver, filed a suit in the court nailer whose
jurisdiction it now falls, it might have been
met on its merits, or objected to on the
ground of jurisdiction, which would have given the
Raja an instant right of appeal to the Privy Council.
Had that course been followed, all these lengthy pro-
ceedings attendant upon the inquiry might have
been avoided, while, at this moment the ex-
Raja or his family might now have been
receiving justice at the hands of the
Privy Council. He, however, allowed that the coun-
try had instituted the fullest inquiry into this case,
but what he complained of was the injustice which
characterized the results of that inquiry. A promise
had been solemnly made to the Raja and wilfully
broken ; and he believed six or seven of the best di-
rectors concurred with him in thinking that great in-
justice had been done to the ex-Rajah and his family.
The CHAIRMAN said it was not his intention to
follow his Hon. Friend through the statement he had
made, because be entertained a great hope that before
he sat down he should be able to convince the Court,
and he trusted his Hon. Friend himself, that it was
injudicious and quite unnecessary to re-agitate this
question again.—(Hear, hear.) His Hon. Friend had
gone over the same ground which he introduced on
former occasions with reference to that branch of the
question which related to Sir James Carnac, and he
should therefore dismiss this part of his Hon. Friend's
speech in a few words.—(Hear, hear.) No doubt
Sir James Carnac did promise in the manner his
Honourable Friend had stated, but when the ques-
tion came to be considered in Council it was thought
to be impolitic to adopt the plan of Sir
James Carnac. It was considered better to fix the
annual allowance of the ex-Raja of Sattara, and not to
establish a precedent for drawing a distinction between
public and private property of native princes. Under
these circumstances an allowance of 10,000 rupees a
month was made to the ex-Raja, which he (the Chair-
man) could not bring himself to think with his Hon.
Friend was at all insufficient, more especially as at
the time that allowance was arranged Government
still considered the unfortunate Raja had placed him-
self in a position that ought to have deprived him of all
claim upon their liberality. He was accordingly
allowed 12,0001. a year. He admitted that
there was an apparent inconsistency about
the matter, but it was considered politic,
and it was distinctly understood at the time that the
Sattara district should be resumed by the East India
Company. It then became nothing but a mere ques-
tion of pounds, shillings, and pence, and of course in
disposing of it Government adhered to the strict letter
of the law with respect to public and private property,
as they had done on former occasions, and though, in
the unfortunate circumstances in which the ex-Raja
was placed, it would not have been wise to entrust
him with a large sum of money, it was yet impossible
for the Government to have adopted a more liberal
course than they did, and therefore if there was any in-
consistency it was to be attributed to the liberality of the
Government.—(Hear, hear.) And independently of
all this the Court should remember that subsequently
to that arrangement the Government increased the
allowance to the Ranee of the ex-Raja from SOO
rupees per month to 2,500. His Honourable Friend,
however, said that was not a great deal, but he really
could not agree with him there, but, moreover than
that, the Government had agreed to pay her all the
arrears accruing since the death of her husband,
amounting to nearly a lac of rupees, or 10,0001.
( Hear, hear.) The Ranee herself had expressed
extreme satisfaction at this arrangement, and had
thrown herself completely on the consideration of the
Governor-General. She had written to say
that it was her intention to recall her agent from this
country, and that if any re-agitation of this question
were opened it would be entirely without her con-
sent.—(Hear, hear.) He pledged his honour for the
truth of this, and with that fact before them he would
ask his Hon. Friend, whether it was decent or at all
proper in him to continue agitating this question
merely for the purpose, as it were, of keeping up an
angry feeling between the family of the ex-Raja and
the Court of Directors. He was, under the circum-
stances he had stated, surprised to see that no later
than last night a Member of the House of Commons
again brought this question before the Legislature,
but fortunately that motion met with little encourage-
tnent, and it fell to the ground. He thought it was
a fortunate thing for this lady that she at last made
up her mind to follow the advice of prudent counsel,
instead of those who wished probably to keep the
question alive under the pretence of being the friends
of the ex-Rajah. (Hear, hear.) lie was of
opinion that the worst of friends native
princes could have were those parties in this
country who were constantly striving to
sow the seeds of distrust and discord between them
and the Government of India.—(Hear.) The Court
of Directors could have but one object in view in
this case, and that was that justice should be done
to all parties, including of course the family of the
ex-Raja, and he hoped after what he had stated to-
day, and after the expressed wish of the Ranee her-
self, that her cause should be left in the hands of the
Governor-General, he did hope an end would be put
to this agitation, and, therefore, he trusted
the Court would not support the motion of his Hon.
Friend.—(Hear, hear.)
General BRIGGS said it was only yesterday that he
heard this motion was to be brought forward to-day,
and having been resident agent at Sattara, with
some knowledge of the real state of the case, and the
facts bearing upon it, he felt it his duty to offer a
few observations to the Court on the present occasion.
•—(Hear, hear.) The grant or allowance which had
been made to the ex-Raja in its extent or liberality
he apprehended was not the question before the
Court.—(Hear, hear.) What they had to con-
sider was the abstract question whether there
was any private property left by the ex-Raja when
is Sattara when he was removed, and whether it was

promised that that property should be restored ?
(Hear, hear.) Now, he would describe what was
the nature of that private property. Colonel Ovans
had stated that in the time of Captain Grant that
3 lacs 12,000 rupees were annually set aside for the
private purse of the Raja, and when he (the Gallant
General) succeeded Captain Grant as the resident

agent at Sattara it was arranged that the amount
should be increased to four lees for the Raja's private
purse, and one lac for contingencies ; and up to the
year 1839, the date of the ex-Raja's removal, the
private treasury was so kept.—(Hear.) In the
year 1823 there was a dearth, and the revenues
of the Raja fell short to the extant of about
a lac and a half. The Raja was desirous of
meeting the deficit by a reduction of expenses,
and a general reduction of the salaries received
by all the public officers. He (the Gallant Ge-
neral), however, urged upon him the expediency
of drawing upon his private treasure for a loan
instead, and repaying it out of future revenues,
but the ex-Raja would not listen to this proposal.
He said, ." No, I will not; it has been granted to
me by the Government for my private expenses for
that purpose, and I am bound to keep it. A certain
sum is set aside every year for contingencies, and
as it is impossible to tell what may be our future
' fate (I trust it will not happen in my time) but
something may happen to my posterity, and there-
fore I keep this as a private fund to secure my family
against the contingencies of the future." That was
what the Raja then thought and said, and in deducting
10 per cent. from the salary of every public servant,
he also caused the same to be deducted from the
privy purse. It was clear, therefore, that this private
purse was a distinct thing from the revenue of the
State; the ex-Raja, it was also clear, considered
it to be his private property, and it was stated that
at the time he was removed the private pro-
perty amounted to 26 lass of rupees (260,0000. Now,
had these 26 lace of rupees been invested in the Com-
pany's funds, it would have been necessary for the
East India Company to have instituted a case in a
court of justice before the treasure could have been
taken out.—(Hear, hear.) It had been stated by
the lion. Chairman that the 120,000 rupees allowed
to the Raja in his exile was made with reference
to the private property; but he found that on the
30th of August, 1839, Sir James Carnac pro-
mised that it should be restored, and he also pro-
mised that a certain sum should be awarded to the
ex-Raja out of the revenues of the Sattara state.
Now, it was necessary to consider what that revenne
was when Sir James Carnac made that promise and
recommendation. Well, then, Sir James Carnac,
writ-
ing to the Governor-General, on the 12th of Sept.,
' recommended that a sum equal to one lac, or 125,000
nipees, per amain; should be, wade, available out of

the revenue of the Sattara state for the support of
the ex-Raja's family, and his private property
restored to him.—(hear, hear.) The Court would
see that the actually allotted sum of a lac and 20,000
rupees to the Raja was 5,000 rupees less than Sir
James Carnac had previously proposed, exclusive of
his private property.—(Plear.) It appeared to him,
therefore, perfectly clear that on every principle of
common justice and good faith this private property,
whatever it might amount to, belonged exclusively
to the ex-Raja, and as the Raja had legally adopted a
son, that son succeeded to the private property, and to
withhold it from him would be a violation of a sacred
agreement.—(Bear, hear.) It had nothing to do
with what was ultimately granted, which was evi-
dently intended by Sir James Carnac to be granted
independent of the private property, and the Govern-
ment had, therefore, no right to detain it.—(Hear.)
Mr. LEwite said the Chairman's speech had given
this case a new complexion, and he claimed to speak
again upon the question.
Th s CHAIRMAN said this could not be permitted.
Mr. LEWIN said the allowance to the Ranee was
quite a new subject, and lie ought to be heard.
Mr. WEEDON wished to say a word or two on this
subject. lie thought the proceedings of to•day showed
the inconvenience of making motions without previous
notice, because he apprehended that had it been known
that this matter would be discussed, there would cer-
tainly have been a larger attendance of proprietors.—
(Hear, hear.) With regard to the question itself he
had always believed in the guilt of the ex-Raja, and,
under those circumstances, he thought his family
had been treated with the utmost liberality.—(Hear,
hear.) With respect to the agreement of Sir James
Carnac, he begged to remind the Hon. Mover of this
proposition that the Governor-General's opinion was
the one upon which they should act. Now it was
the opinion of the Governor-General that the ex-Raja
was not entitled to the private property, and he should
therefore concur with the Chairman in.voting against
the motion.

Mr.SuLLIvAN reminded the Honourable Proprietor
who last addressed the Court that he had no oppor-
tunity of giving a notice of motion, because it was
only within the last few days that the fact had come
to his knowledge that the family of the ex-Raja were
actually at this moment without a single rupee.
That was his reason for bringing forward this
question to-day. No allowance had been made
to the Ranee or her son since the death

of the ex-Raja. Up to this moment the Gover-
nor-General had done absolutely nothing for the ex-
Raja's family. He had promised to give the :Ranee
an increase in her allowance, but it was so insignifi-
cant that it was hardly worth having. She was
already entitled to 800 rupees a month, and now it
was to be increased to 1,200, if the Ranee would re-
nounce her rights or those of her son ; but, as far as
his information went, the Governor-General had not,
up to this moment, paid the family a single shilling.
He, however, could readily make allowance for the
Hon. Chairman, and he would separate him in his
official capacity from what he was when he formerly
spoke upon this subject as simply Mr. Sheppard, the
director. Then the Hon. Gentleman was a warm
and uncompromising supporter of the claims of the
ex-Raja, and, for the information of the Court, he
would read the opinion which he expressed some
time ago with regard to this very case :
‘. The Raja was to be treated as an object of sympathy,
not of punishment. He received also the pledge of the
Governor that his private property should not be inter-
fered with; can any usage or precedent justify the breach
of this promise?
" I would now request particular attention to the Re-
sident of Sattara's letter of the 28th September, 1839,
which states that there were about seven lacs of rupees
(70,0001) in hard cash, and about seven or eight lacs
worth of jewels (70,0001. or 80,0001.), and other valu-
ables in the palace. In the 11th par. of this letter he
says, " The whole of this property is claimed by the
ex-Raja, but Appa Sahib Maharaj (his successor)
maintains that about five or six lace of the money
(50,0001. or 60,0001.) is State property, and private
property belonging to him, and also about two lace
(20,0000 worth of jewels, and that the remainder only
belongs to the ex-Raja and the ladies of his family.'
" Here we have the express admission of the validity
of the Ex-Raja's claims, from the party most interested
in opposing them. He who was to be the possessor of
all the property that could be designated State property,
reluctantly admits that the remainder, amounting to
about two lace of hard cash, and six lace worth of jewels
belong to the ex-Raja and the ladies of his family.
There can be no question, indeed, but that the treasure
and jewels found in the palace were the fruits of the
economical management of the Raja's resources. Unlike
the generality of the native princes, ho had governed his
people with prudence and moderation, and restrained his
own expenses within the limits of his income. Stripped
of his Raj and his property, he is now the degraded
pensioner of that brother, who assisted in his overthrow.
Such is likely to be the climax of the unhappy Raja's
fate: a prince who had been for many years, and up
to a very late period, the deserving object of the
Court's and the Government's highest favour and ad-
miration. His refusal to acknowledge himself guilty
of treachery, and to sign the conditions prescribed by
the Government, could not possibly justify the confis-
cation of his property. To me it appears that the con-
fiscation and transfer of his property to the present
Raja is an additional penalty inflicted on this unfortu-
nate prince, not warranted by any considerations whatever.
If I lamented the extreme measure of his deposal, more
deeply do I lament this aggravated severity. Since I
have had the honour of a seat in the direction, it has
been the nsual practice of the Court to exhibit their
power principally by acts of clemency and kindness to
the natives of India. Would that this feeling had pre-
dominated in the case of the helpless and unfortunate
Raja of Setters! His degradation, however, seems to
be now consummated; and connected as I am with the
Court, there is left to me but one consolatory reflexion,
viz., that of beinir able to disavow any share in its pre-
sent proceeding."
Now those were the opinions of the Hon. Chairman
when he was a simply a director. In the speech which
that Hon. Gentleman had just made not a single fact
which had been brought forward in support of the
motion was disputed, or a single argument contro-
verted. It merely announced that the Government
of India had come to a particular conclusion in the
matter, bat not a scrap of paper to show how
Sir James Carnac thought fit, in November, t•
change the opinion which he had expressed in the
previous August, when he made the promise to the
ex-Raja. It was only stated that so-and-so was done
upon the dictum of Sir James Carnac, and there
the matter was to rest, without the statement
being supported by a single tittle of docu-
mentary, or, indeed, any other evidence.
The chairman had announced to the Court that in his
opinion the final allowance made to the ex-Raja was
amply sufficient to provide for his own wants and
those of his Ranee and family, but it was not denied
that the Government had confiscated property be-
longing to the ex-Raja, valued at 26 lacks, and yet
they had only given the family, what? Why no more
than one lac and 20,000 rupees ! And this was what
was called a liberal allowance ! This was what they
called justice! They allowed the right of the ex-
Raja to adoption, but they refused to let his adopted
son inherit his private property ! What a monstrous
act of injustice! Nor had the chairman attempted
to prove that the facts he had brought
before the Court were at all unfounded, though he
certainly did say something about the Ranee ; but,
nevertheless, he repeated that the woman was in a
state of starvation and distress, and he pledged him-
self for the truth of the statement, that the Governor.
General refused in the first instance to make the
slightest addition to her allowance until she had sur-
rendered the rights of her son. Up to this moment
the Governor-General had paid her nothing, and
what she might have done while suffering from the
pangs of her distress, he could not possibly say.
Her destitution and her desire to preserve her
own life might have induced her to make
almost any sacrifice. The Hon. Chairman had lec-
tured them as to their past and present conduct. He
said it would be much better to leave the matter
alone, to let it remain untouched ; but the chairman
should have remembered, when he gave that advice,
that he had been the first to begin this agitation. It
began long before he (Mr. Sullivan) returned from
India. Ten years ago he felt with the chairman
that injustice had been done in this case, and the only
difference between him and the chairman was this,
that the chairman had abandoned the good cause—no
doubt having excellent reasons for doing so—while he
had clung to it. The injustice or the right in this
case was not denied, but it was thought
inexpedient inexpedient to admit the latter; but i
the chairman thought when the Ranee's agent re-
turned to India there would be an end to these dis-
cussions, he was mistaken, for he took up this ques-
tion as one of principle, and he should stick to it.
The Court of Directors had unlawfully confiscated
private property in the face of :all law, equity, and
justice, though they bad admitted that they had made
some sort of arrangement or other, but thath would
not do for him. He wanted to know what had be-
come of the 14 lacs of rupees which was the private
property of Appa Sahib, and which they had deprived
him of. They said they had made .
the Ranee an al-
lowance instead of it, but for his part he thought
they were bound in justice to make a restitution of
the property.—(Hear.)
The CHAIRMAN said he felt called upon to add a
few words after what had fallen from the Honourable
Proprietor in reply. Lie quite admitted that his
opinion had been favourable to the claim of the Raja,
but he had no right to continue to maintain opinions
when they had been repeatedly overruled by the ma-
jority of the proprietors and directors. Had he fol-
lowed a different course, and continued on every dif-
ferent occasion that presented itself to force his opi-
Dion upon the Court, he would, have gone beyond
his
duty. He had a perfect right to adhere to his own
fixed opinions, but he had no right to s i
pe rs-t in ad-
vocating them, against the wish of the majority,
the end of his life ; but the honourable Proprietor
seems to entertain a different notion, and if they were
to act according to his rule, why there would be no
end to this agitation. He freely acknowledged that
he regretted much that Sir James Carnac'e.promise

was not fulfilled to the very letter, but he was bound
to couple that admission with the tact that the opinion
of Sir James Carnets was overruled in Council, as
well as by the Governor-General of India, and
that this allowance of one lac and 20,000 rupees was
made with a due reference to the private property.
Notwithstanding what had fallen from General
Briggs there could be no question about it, that after
Sir James Carnac wrote the letter, which the Gallant
General referred to, Sir J. Carnac must have altered
his opinion when he came to consider the matter in
Council. Still he conceded.to his Hon. Friend who
had made this motion, and who appeared to have made
a deep impression upon the Court by his speech, that
it was still to be regretted that what was at first pro-
mised was not fulfilled, but he did not feel himself on
that account bound to put himself in opposition to -all
parties long after the questio❑ was supposed to have
been completely set at rest, because it was utterly
impossible to attain the end he might have in view
by pursuing such an improper mode of proceeding..
Now, with regard to the statement of the Honourable
Gentleman that the Ranee was in a state of destitution,
how could that be possible when his Honourable
Friend had himself admitted that elle Lad
eight hundred rupees a month pin money,
v, filch, at the death of the ex-Rsja,
was increased ? His Hon. Friend therefore was nut
justified in saying she had been left to starve, seeing
that there were ample funds at her disposal if she
had only thought proper to avail herself of them.
The agitation of the Sattara question had acted most
prejudicially upon the native Princes of India, be-
cause it had led them to look upon the authority of
the Government with suspicion, and to question its
honour. He did not wish to re-open the question,
but he felt bound to state that one portion of the let-
ter of the Ranee represented that she had been ad-
vised by parties in England, some of whom were
highly influential, to re-agitate the question,
but if she listened to that advice she might
be assured that it would not succeed, and if it
really were true that parties in this country did
write letters to mislead these unhappy people, he
hoped they would consider well the course they were
adopting, and how far it might prejudice the interest
of those whom they were anxious to befriend.
A PROPRIETOR suggested that the letter of the
Ranee had better be read.

The CHAIRMAN said the letter he had been quoting
was from Colonel Stuart, at Benares, who stated, in
conclusion, " I wish to add that the Ranee continues
her anxiety in wishing to obey the ordinance of
the Government. She has placed in my possession
all the correspondence she bad received from her ad-
visers in England. Some of these letters are from
influential parties, who promise her accommodation
and every success, if she will only continue to agitate."
In one of her letters the Ranee says, " I have issued
the necessary orders to withdraw my agent in Lon-
don, and I have begged of my friends not to continue
any further agitation in my behalf. If they continue
to agitate after this it will not be with my autho-
rity." After that expression of opinion on the part
of the Ranee he need say no more, but simply leave
it for the Court to negative the proposition.
Mr. SULLIVAN, before that was done, wished to
ask the Chairman if, as a member of this
Court, when the Governor-General made to the
Ranee a proposal in the highest degree unjust, he
was bound to take no notice of it, or to be precluded
from giving that advice to the party about to be injured
if he thought fit to do so ? He was now doing nothing
more than following in the footsteps of the Hon.
Chairman himself. His opinions remained unchanged,
they were what they always had been, namely, that
the directors had acted in defiance of all equity and
justice, and why should he surrender them now, at
the moment of all when the injured parties were
sunk in the deepest distress ? This case of
cruelty and injustice could be explained in a very few
words. The Government had taken nearly fifteen
lacs of rupees from these parties, and given them in
lieu thereof 25,000 rupees.
The motion was then put and negatived.
Mr. LEWIN moved a resolution to the effect that
the native sepoys should be entitled to the same pri-
vileges as the European soldiers in India—namely,
that they should have a copy of the record and pro-
ceedings before courts-martial.
The motion not having been seconded, fell to the
ground.
The Court then adjourned.

HER MAJESTY'S THEATRE.
To-night Music re-asserts her high place among the graces
and splendours of a London season. Her sceptre is placed,
for the first time, in the fair hand of Mdlle. Caroline Dupree,
the promise of whose young fame, if but half fulfilled, en-
sures a career worthy of the name which she inherits, and
to the noble art to which she has devoted her surprising
talents. We would not indulge in anticipatory criticism;
but, from what we have witnessed of Mdlle. Duprez's powers,
we dare assure tt e expectant world, that in this ease rumour
has not said a word too much.

Of the new ballet, in which Amelia Ferraris is to bring
back her marvels of grace and power, we find the following
elegant and fascinating description issued, we presume, by
authority. We know not if we are trespassing on copy-
right, but we a^e sure our readers will thank us for the risk
we run in producing the argument in extenso:—
" The Isle of the Loves' is to be found in a charming
region, of which no one is quite ignorant, and v. hich few
natures are so severe as not to delight in—whether they own
it or not. It is that land of delicious impossibility which the
de icate and airy spirit of Watteau loved to inhabit in
dreams, and which his fertile pencil filled in waking ;momenta
with rich colour and graceful forms.
" It is the land where the primitive sweetness of pastoral
coquetry is married to the refined brilliancy of the gayest of
courts; and where, from under the trellised blushes of the
rose, or through the cool leaves which shadow the purple
promise of the vine, the archest and most mischievous of
cupids peer out on every side and laugh at the fantastic
beauty of the combination.

" In such a scene is it that our true history undertakes to
record the issue of one chapter more in the eternal strife be-
tween Authority, which rashly undertakes to put down Love,
and Love, which yields to no authority.
" A governor of this isle, more absolute than wise; and more
ardent than successful, stung by his own disappointment,
resolved that no vassal should be happier than his lord. So he
condemned the land to be for ever deprived of love, and enacted
a separate life for its youths and maidens. But love re-
belling against the despot, soon won back his subjects, sub-
dued the isle, and triumphed over the absurd attempt to
crush his power.

" TABLEAU I.

LA Los IMPOSSIBLE.—FIeurette, the Star of the Isle,
though but the daughter of a simple fisherman, has
"'The gift which nature keeps for maids
Who boast no other dowers,
To be as beautiful as aught
Within this world of ours.'
Loved by many, she has loved but one, Colin, who lingers
beneath her casement. Poor Blaise, the ancient bean of the
village—the most ambitious of her unsuccessful adorers—.
also awaits her appearance, full of pretension, finery, and
failure. At last the toilette, with the assistance of cousin
Angoletta, is completed. The bride comes forth. Friends
and neighbours pour in, headed by old Gregoire, the bride's
father. The plighted pair receive the paternal blessing; all
is going well ; but over the sky which Love had made so
bright, a sudden cloud is brought by authority. There is a
noisy and imposing entrance on the scene, a train of official
high Mightinesses heralds the approach of that High Mightl-
ness the Governor.

" Unhappily this great potentate is in his exalted place as
subject to the real ruling power of the land as Fleurette
and her chosen one in their humble sphere. Colin has little
patience with the warm attentions of the gevernor to the
bride, by which this fact is betrayed. The governor has
still less with the rough demonstrations of his vassel's jea-
lousy. He abates his wrath in consideration of Colin and
Fleurette's admirable dancing, as proved in the charming
Pas (Le Jeu de Is Rose); but the touching grace of Flan-
rette only increases the princely passion. The courtiers are
commanded to carry off the bride to the castle. The vil-
lagers resist this outrage, put the High Mightinesses to
flight, and, triumphant fir the moment, return with the spoils
of the conquered ; among which the hat of the Grand Master
of the Ceremonies, and the cane of the Lord ILigh Perfumer
are conspicuous. The triumph is short, Authority soon re-
turns with added strength and new terrors. This terrible
edict is announced, by proclamation, that there shall be no
more love in the island ; that men and women shall dwell in
opposite quarters—north and south; that the least infrac-
tion of this law shall be a hanging matter.
" And these tyrannical enactments the guards forthwith
remorselessly carry out by a repeal of all matrimonial unions,
and the enforcement of a general act of separation.
" TABLEAU LA PAYSANNE A LA COWS,' OU
JAMS ET AUJOUEDUUL'
" Here we find artless beauty and native grace in centraat
with all that is most elaborate and studied in its finery. The
gay palace and its courtesies, however, have little charm for
Fleurette. Her melancholy demeanour gives evidence:of one
continued offence against the law forbidding her to love ; end
when at last, tired of witnessing the stiff performances of the
court, she dashes out into all her own wild brilliancy Of dance
the conquered Governor confesses the power of beauty eed
the weakness of legislation—kneels to the fair enemy of hi,
peace, but kneels in vain, and is with difficulty raised ---
by his
attendants from a position, which, with a rasbze,s in elutedto his age and dignity, he had taken up without duly eonsi-
deriog how he was to get out of it again.
"TABLEAU ILL 7-`,LES AMOURS VESGItu"
" This beautiful scene is Love's favourite haunt, that tem-
ple his chosen shrine. The sweet sounds which fill the air
herald his approach—and see where the Irresistible glidee
like a meteor to the earth Fleurette,
potent spell, does not long resist his drawn hither by some
ble One
her companions find her reclining s fascinations. nor, when
partner, are they slow to own the influence power, which.
like her, they cannot defy. T
in the arms of her strange
his command a barque he deity is benevolent, and at
freight with loves
for all. Like a swarna
glides to shore,
among the village of golden bees, the cupids glitter
maidens and
and cluster round the group.
Full of joy, and love, they dance wildly to..
gether ; but jealous and angry eyes are on the scene, Blaine,
and m
the rejected, bold though not successful, invades the favoured
court. Repulsed by Love's arrows, he returns with the vil-
lagers in force, and the mortals strive once mom to win back
the prize so strangely snatched away; but love, fettered by
mortal clay, kas slight chance against its free ethers.' essence,
and the maidens are borne triumphantly off.
" TABLEAU Iv. - LB FIEGE ET LA CHASSE AUX AMOUIL'
" Here love, with his forces, has reached the very centre
and stronghold of his realm. In this delicious garden, rich
with bright fruits and gay with sunny flowers, everything
owns his spell and aids his power.
" In every direction bright colours tempt the eye, soft in-
fluences sway the heart, and gentle sports invite the (frac..
ful idleness of beauty. The village maidens fiza it tbe;true
elysiuru. Yet even here jealousy does not fear to °Dialling
its attack on love. The mortal lovers penetrate the garden
—the maidens escape— but they may be won back. The
great object with the jealous adorers is to catch and secure
their airy rivals. The astuter rustics laugh at the awkward
efforts of Blaise, who think that loves, like little birds, may
be caught by chaff. Some among them have been bleated
with wit enough, to; construct from boughs and flowers a
more effectual snare, and soon the poor loves, intent ors
their village charmers, flutter is a sad captivity. The
captors disappear, bent on bringing 411 the world to be