The Sun.
London, England, 1850-04-19 00:00:00

him (the Chairman) to follow him through that part of
, Ihis speech. The other half of his speech had been a
discussion upon the affairs of the Raja of Sattara; he
had taken this opportunity, and he (the Chairman)
thought very unwisely, of renewing the question of the
resumption of Setters. He thought the Court would
agree with him in saying that ho thought this by no
means a fit opportunity for renewing the discussion
upon that subject. The question WAS one which had
been over and over again discussed in that Court, and
which had been finally settled and decided upon by
ballot, and he did not see that there was the slightest
occasion to renew it. He should feel it his duty to oppose
the resolutions which had been moved, and he did so
upon plain and simple grounds. The Hon. Gentleman
came forward with certain four abstract propositions,
but did not those propositions imply an undeserved cen-
sure upon the Government cf India ?—(Cheers from
Mr. Sullivan's supporters.) The Hon. Gentleman asked
them not merely to signify their opinion upon these
questions, but to pass a censure upon the proceedings of
the Government in India. The Hon. Gentleman's sup-
porters cheered this ; there could be little doubt, then,
what there object really was. Why, then, did they not
come prepared with some straightforward motion upon
the subject, and not attempt a vote of censure by a kind
of side-wind.—(Cheers.)
Mr. SULLIVAN—Though I have not the slightest hesi-
tation in saying that I disapprove of the proceedings of
the Government, my object is not to pass a vote of cen-
sure upon them, but to prevent the recurrence of any
such transactions for the future.
The CHAIRMAN said that was no answer. If they
wished to censure the Indian Government, why do it by
a side-wind in this manner ?—(Cheers.) That would
be a straightforward way of conducting the business.
The Hon. Gentleman bad gone at some length into the
Mande►ee, Colaba, and Sattara cases, and he had main-
tained that there were distinct breaches in the law and
custom of our Indian empire.
Mr. SULLIVAN—I scarcely said three words on the
subject of Sattara.
The CHAIRMAN appealed to the Coutt whether a
great part of the Hon. Gentleman's address had not been
on the subject of Sattara. But he would not enter into
the discussion of these cases; the Hon. Gentleman
knew very well that there were peculiarities con-
nected with all the cases, and particularly with the Sat-
tara case; that he must know from his great experience
in Indian affairs. But those peculiarities were very dif-
ferent from any which the HOD. Gentleman had com-
municated from his collection of papers. Some which
he had stated were such that he demanded to have a'
tribunal to settle the case, and to decide what should be
done. He proposed in his four resolutions that a com-
mission, or some other tribunal, should be constituted to
investigate the facts of the case. Now, he imagined
they had already a tribunal in India which was quite
sufficient to satisfy any one. Where could they desire
to find a more experienced and independent tribunal
than the Council, every member of which was chosen
for his independence and knowledge of affairs, and bound
by his oath to give a fair and impartial vote upon every
subject which came before him ? Where could they de-
sire a more proper tribunal than this? What occasion
or what need was there for a special tribunal, than, to
decide on these cases, when they had this respectable body
already in existence? The directors, too, acted upon the
responsibility of their offices, and the proprietors had an
opportunity, which they not seldom took advantage of,
to express their opinions upon various points. But the
Hon. Gentleman would not be satisfied with the decision
of any tribunal. With regard to the question of Sat-
tara, the Hon. Gentleman was aware that he (the Chair-
man) in some of his opinions agreed with him; but
there was this difference between them, that he (the
Chairman) was not so presumptuous as to think that he
was infallible, or to persevere in his endeavours because
he thought he was right and everybody else was wrong.
With regard to these resolutions, the Hon. Gentleman
talked of our iniquity in assuming to ourselves the para-
mount power. he was surprised to hear a gentleman
who had filled such prominent situations coming out
with such sentiments. The Hon. Gentleman was per-
fectly aware that the people in India regarded us as the
paramount power, and looked up to us fur protection
and patronage. In the case of Holkar everything that
was done by the East India Company was done by the
desire and express request of the natives, who had ap-
pealed to the Company as to their protectors, and the
Hon. Gentleman knew that. Again, what did he mean
by saying that Martund Row was set aside by the East
India Company alone for their own private ends?
Mr. SULLIVAN—I never said so, or. at least I never
meant to say so. If I did, I withdraw the expression.
The CHAIRMAN had heard the Hon. Gent'eman say
that Martund Row was a serpent in the Governor-Gene-
ral's path.
Mr. SULLIVAN—Ah, certainly, I did say that.
The CHAIRMAN—The Hon. Gentleman knew that the i
parties came forward to ask for our assistance in the
selection to put some one in his place; but the Hon. Gen-
tleman said that this was a most unjustifiable proceeding
on the part of the East India Company. With regard
to the treaties, he (the Chairman) said that the East
India Company were bound to exercise the power which
had been deposited in their bands. The Honourable
Gentleman knew very well that the Company
was regarded in India as the protectors of the
native states, and he knew also that if they bad
stood aloof, and not interfered with native affairs, that
at this moment there would not have been one native
state remaining between the Ganges and the Indus. The
Hon. Gentleman knew very well that all the residents
were placed by the Government with a view to affording
a ivico and assistance to the native princes—to inculcate
upon them moderation in the treament of their subjects.
If the Company had not strictly adhered to that line of
policy, and did not continue to adhere to it, the country
itself would speedily lapse into a state of anarchy, and
they would be obliged to take military possession of it. He
did not think it was necessary or important to follow his
Hon. Friend into the Mysore case. The great object of
the list India Company was to treat all these cases
with the consideration which they deserved. He
trusted he had said enough, at all events, to show
the Court that his Honourable Friend's object,
though he did not avow it, was to censure their govern-
ment of India and to express a decided want of confi-
dence in them. He would ask the Court if they were
prepared to adopt such a course on this occasion? Were 1
they prepared by that indirect mangier to show a want
of confidence in their Government ?—(Hear, hear.) He I
hoped his Hon. Friend would not press his resolution to
a division. If he did, he (the Chairman) would feel
himself called upon to move the previous question.
Mr. M. LEwIN said it appeared to him that it was by
no means a straightforward thing on the part of his
Hon. Friend (Mr. Sullivan) to endeavour to censure the
Court by implication, instead of doing it directly. If his
Hon. Friend wished to do anything practicable to benefit
the Reja of Sattara let him take some pracfcal step
in that direction. They did not know who the Raja of
Sattara was ; no one knew who he was. How much
bitter fir his Hon. Friend would it have been to have
brought before the Court the case of Mysore.—(Ques-
tion.) That was as much the question as was the matter
of the Raja of Sattara.
A PROPRIETOR—Are you not one of the requisi-
tionists, Mr. Lewin ?

Mr. LEWIW said he was one of the requisitionists.—
(Llughter.) Ile thought if his Hon. Friend brcught
before the Court any case of substantial injustice it
would receive from the Court the consideration it
deserved.

Mr. PETER GoRDoN expressed his obligation to his
Hoe. Friend (Mr. Sullivan), who was one of the
oldest and most experienced servants of the Com-
pany, far the trouble and ability he had
displayed in bringing this matter before the Court.
The real question was, should they continue to trust en-
tirely to their wealth and military power, or should they
act with justice towards the native princes? Every
family be England had its own legal successore, every
man had a descendant—(Laughter)—and adoption was
the ordinary course of events in India, amoeg the rich
as well as the poor. Whenever the case of the native
princes of India had been brought forward it bad been
the practice to represent them as having a great number
of wives and concubines. But be would remind the
Company.that almost all men who n ent to India from
this country into the Company's service went out single;
and it was notorious that when these young English
bachelors returned home, the most of them left families
behind them in India.—(Laughter and Question.)
The CHAIRMAN hoped the Hon. Proprietor would not
diverge into questions which were not before the Court.
Mr. GORDON contended that adoption was the
question. —(Laughter.) Td hboesneamgennuttlermenetunrsofufwthheomEnhset
negnitailirely cast off their Indian females.
There
'se was, in this matter cf
mi.uth, unspotted as it others.'-:
There was even a taint on the character cf Lord Teign
adoption.
Mr. FIELDER rose to order. This was not a court of
libel.
nerMerr.llsGi:allper the
askedriifavep
the East India Company had
Mr. FIELDER (with great warmth)—l am sorry to ssyou are a blackguard.—(" Chair," " Order," andgreat
ex-
citement, in the midst of which Mr. Gordon resumed his
seat.)
Major-General BRIGGS said he thought the Chairman
had unfairly assumed that the:propositions of his Hon.
Friend (Mr. Sullivan) were brought forward with the
view of attacking the Court of Directors. It was not
his (Major-General Driggs's) intention to dilate upon
the case of the Raja of Setters. That case had been
settled, but it had been settled without the evidence
that was necessary to have been before the Court. Ex-
cept the case of Holkar, there was not one case in which
the Governor-General had ever asserted his right to in-
terfere with the succession of the native princes. The
British Government had always recognised the officers
of the Mogul Government as sovereign princes. In
uthnetil
samewhen
, waY they recognised the Pashawich
the Pasha, who held rule over
the great officers of the Mahratta Government,
was driven from the throne, and fled to
Bombay. The British Government then made a treaty
with the Pasha, by which he relinquished all power and
influence over his officers. On that occasion he recog-
nised, as sovereigns, all the officers of the Pasha's Go-
vernment. In a word, we made certain treaties with
them, and it was proposed by the resolutions before the
Court to adhere to those treaties.—(Cheers.) The
practice of adoption in India was a religious ceremony.
It had been said Lo and his friends made a difference ,
between adoption and the case of lineal descent. There
was neither in practice nor in law aoy difference what-
ever. The directors themselves had stated that there
was no difference. He contended that if they departed
from the principle of adoption the zocial condition of the
; should
people of India would undergo demoralization. All
the ladies in the harem would have children
a lady in the family-way produce a fereale there. would.
of morality
which would thus neglect those principles
be a boy brought forward, to ho substituted r adoption.
which they should ever maintain, by their departure ,
from a practice which generally obtained in the country.
He would cheerfully support the resolutions of his. Hon.
Rxiond.