The Sun.
London, England, 1858-04-08 00:00:00

EXST INDIA COMPANY.

j.t. portion of the following appe:: ed in our late eclitioa
of last evening
A. special general meeting of proprietors of East
India Stock was held this ofters 1, at the India-house,
f.,eadenhall-street,Mr. D. R. Mangles, M.P., Governor,
the chair, for the purl ie of granting a pension to the
scent Sir H. Lawrence ; and also for the purpose of
ing before the proprietors two bills before Parliament
the better goverment of India, by transferring the
rnment o that country from the East India Com-
to her Majesty the Queen.
PENSION TO SIR H. LAWRENCE.
CHAIRMAN then laid before the Court the unani-

:esolution of tke Board of Directors granting a
~31 of 1,0001. a year to the present. ir If. Lawrence,
,ersion to his younger brother in the event of
..' til
.. without issue, remarking that it was nnneces-
7, ps `aould trouble the Court with the late Sir H.
's:,,rekkees brilliant career and the great service ho had
rende.'" the proprietors and the country in India, all
of
whic.b..had been so recently laid before the public and
had bee. .tvippreciated by them.
Sir F. tuanin seconded the motion.
Mr. Lt. VIM expressed his regret that the pension
was not ear Vor awarded, and that it had originated from
the Board of control instead of from that Court. The
Court of Direc tors would never have taken up this pen
sion had they n v:- been stimulated by an article in the

The CHAIRMAN monied that the directors had been
stimulated by an arNci.e in the Times to grant this pen-
sion, or that it originated with the
of Board of
minds
own Control.
It was granted from the .convictions theird
that it was a proper course toptirsue, and he assure
the Court that the propoaiticas originated with the Ostia
Lof Directors, and not with the Board of Control.
(,Near, hear.)
Xi; JONES objected to the
notchvo on the ground that
Coart of Proprietors had ad sufficient evidence
the
befog them by the Couit of Directors on which to
laid
foiled this vote "as an administrator or statesman" re-
Squired by the bye-laws. The pension was proposed
saerely for his defence of Lucknow, which he (Mr.
Jones) characterised as a failure. He allowed the
rebels, or rather the patriots—(laughter)—to use the
cover of the adjoining houses and temples of worship to
;terribly annoy the garrison, so that the soldiers were not
;safe in any room in the garrison from the bullets of the
enemy. Brigadier loglis was the man who ought to
ve the money. It was all very well for the Queen to
grasst baronetoiee, but he (Mr. Jones) would not
accept one if her Majesty would give it him. (Laughter.)
They cost nothing.and were worthless, but 10001 a-year
was so slouch nsoney out of the pockets of the people of
India. From a mistaken respect for the religious feel-
ings of the people of India the temples and mosques
were saved which gav-ss go mach shelter to the rebels and
enabled them so long to hold Lucknow. He moved an
amendment that the pension should not be granted on
the evidence before the court.
Mr. Serjeant GASELEE seconded the amendment.
Mr. STEWART supported the motion for the pension.
The CHAIRMAN said that the late Sir H. Lawrence
had proved himself an able statesman. His abilities as
such were now matters of history, and were imperishably
connected with the government of India of late years,
and more especially for his marvellous good government
of the new territory—the Punjaub. The late Sir H.
Lawrence deserved the thanks of the civilised world, for
his conduct in India, both before and on the breaking
out of the mutiny.
Mr. LEWIN urged on Mr. Jones to withdraw his
amendment.
Mr. Sergeant GAMER said he seconded the amend-
ment merely from a belief that the Court of Directors
had not given the Court of Proprietors the information
they were entitled to for granting the pension. He
concurred it was desirable these pensions should be
granted unanimoudy, bat the course pursued by the
directors were likely to attain that object. Referring t
the anticipated change in the future government of
India, be expressed his opinion that this Court had
worn out its purpose, that it had served its time,
was believed the march of intellect, and ought to be
abolished, but so long as it existed it was the duty of
the. Court of Directors to give the proprietors all the
information they (the directors) possessed. He called
upon Mr. Jones to withdraw his amendment
After some remarks from Mr. Helps the amendment
was withdrawn, and the original motion was carried
unanimously.
In answer to a question from Mr. Sergeant Gazelee,
The CHAIRMAN said that all the officers engaged in
the defence and relief of Lucknow would have double
batta.