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

-----EAST IA 'DIA COMPANY.

[A portion of the followi .tg aPpea ed in our late edition
of last evening :]—
A special general meetini 7 of the proprietors of East
India Stock was held this af, ternoon, at the India-house,
Leadenhall-street, Mr. D. R Mangles, M.P., Governor,
in the chair, for the purpose of 'wanting a pension to the
present Sir H. Lawrence ; anu' also for the purpose of
laying before the proprietors two bills before Parliament
for the better government of India, by transferring the
India Com-
e
government of that country from :the East
paoy to her Majesty the Queen.
PENSION TO SIB n. LANIVICNCIE.
The CakIBMAN then laid before the Court the unani•
mous resolution of the Board of Directors granting a
pension of 1,0001. a year to the present Sir H. Lawrence,
with reversion to his younger brother in the event of
his dying without issue, remarking that it was unneces-
sary he should trouble the Court with the late Sir H.
Lawrence's brilliant career and the great service he had
rendered the proprietors and the conntry in India, all
of which had been so recently laid before the public and
had been appreciated by them.
Sir F. CURRIE seconded the motion.
Mr. LEwIN expressed his regret that the pension
was not earlier awarded, and that it had originated from
the Board of Control instead of from that Comt. The
Court of Directors would never have taken up this pen-
sion had they not been stimulated by an article in the

Mass.
Tee CHAIRMAN denied that the directors had been
stimulated by an article in the Times to grant this pen-
sion, or that it originated with the Board of Control.
It was granted from the convictions of their own minds
that it was a proper course to pursue, and he assured
the Court that the proposition originated with the Court
of Directors, and not with the Board of Control.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. Smug objected to the vote, on the ground that
the Court of Proprietors had not had sufficient evidence
laid before them by the Court of Directors on which to
found this vote "as an administrator or statesman" re-
quired by the bye-laws. The pension was proposed
merely 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 Inglis was the man who ought to
have the money. It was all very well for the Queen to
grant baronetoies, 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 much money 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 gave so much 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 GAHM 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 GARELEE 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 unanimously, bat the course pursued by the
directors were likely to attain that object. Referring to
the anticipated change in the future government of
India, he expressed his opinion that this Court had
worn oat its purpose, that it had served its time,
was believed the maich 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 Gazalee,
The CHAIRMAN said that all the officers engaged in
the defence and relief of Lucknow would have double
batta.