The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-23 00:00:00

the matter, for it affected not only the character of that per-
sonage, but al!o involved that of an officer in their service. He

did not apprehend that the whole discussion would occupy a
long time. It wts very true that there had been documents
laid upon the table, but they were so very voluminous that he
feared few Members would have read them. He should first
refer to the petition laid before that House in July, 1842,
when it was stated, that a Sovereign deprived of his property,
refused justice or inquiry, by the Councils of Bombay and
Bengal, was compelled to come to that House as a
last resort, in order to obtain the justice which
was refused him in every other quarter.—( Hear.)
By the treaty of 1819 his sovereignty and revenues were se-
cured to him. For twenty years he remained at the head of
his government, in alliance with the British Government.
After that long term of rule, the Directors of the East India
Company expressed their approbation of his conduct by a vote
of thanks, and the presentation of a sword. The letter
carrying the vote of thanks stated the high satisfaction of the
Court at the signal wisdom and moderation with which he had
discharged the important duties of the station in which Provi-
dence had placed him. The testimony of the several residents,
Generals Duff, Robiwon, and Lodwick, up to 1836, was equally
in favour of his integrity of character and his good govern-
ment.—('i he Hon. 'Member then read extracts from the cor-
respondence of those gentlemen, in which they declared that
they could not believe him guilty of the silly crimes with which
he had been charred.) Ile bore a character for moderation
in his treatment of his jageerdars, and in the raising of his
revenues, as well as for morality and fidelity, such as had never
been possessed by any Indian ally of our Government. The
first subject of difference between him and the Government
was that he claimed his right to govern the jageerdars without
the interposition of the Bombay Presidency. The con-
duct of that Preiseency was especially blameable in
this, that at the first commencement of the dif-
ferences it withheld the sword and the vote of thanks.
The next step was to send out hints to the resident—Colonel
Ovens, of which the tenor was, that he was to get up a charge
again-t the Raja. In 1836,
,the Bombay Government sent a
secret commission to Sattara, who behaved with indignity to
the resident, General Lodwick, and to the Raja himself.
Summoning the Raja to appear before them in person—an
insult, such as never before was offered to an Indian prince.
The commission was unable to substantiate any charge against
the Raja, and was dissolved. Colonel 'Ovens was appointed
resident, and he (Mr. Hume) regretted that that gentleman
was capable of conduct so unworthy a British officer, as that of
getting up evidence against the Raja by unfair means. The
result of ail the efforts was to get up three charges against the
Raja—one of them, for which Colonel Ovens gave 400 rupees,
was that of conspiring with the Portuguese at Goa to expel the
British from India Now, this Government was on the most
friendly terms with Portugal at the time, and was Don
Manuel, the Governor of Goa, ever asked if such a conspiracy
had been attempted? The second charge was that the Raja
had entered into a traitorous correspondence with the
Raja of Nagpore. The third was that he had at-
tempted to corrupt the subadars of the native
regiments. The evidence before the secret commission
was absurd. But the Commissioners offered to leave the
Raja in his proper position if he would sign a document
acknowledging his guilt. This he properly refused to do, and
he was taken out of his palace and carried off in exile to
Benares, where he had remained ever since. The Hon. Gen-
tleman then went through a detail of the proceedings con-
nected with the inquiry, and exposed the absurdity of the state-
ments on which the charges against the Raja were
grounded, and the corruption practised to obtain witnesses
against that unfortunate Prince. The Hon. Gentleman also
read, at considerable length, extracts from the correspondence
between the Raja's fiends on the one hand, and his persecutors
on the other, the particulars of which have already appeared
fully in the columns of The Sun. He would not tire the
House by going into the details of this subject, but he could not
conclude without saying that he was lost in surprise at the
manner in which the question had been dealt with
by the Government, particularly when he recollected
the petitions that had been presented to them, praying only for
an inquiry. He had intended to move for a Cemtnittee in the
earl) part of the session upon the subject, but having been pre-
vented in that, be had now nothing to do but to pray her Ma-
jesty to institute an inquiry, with a view tohaving the party who
was really guilty brought to punishment, for he did not seek
to shield even the Baja if he were guilty. He (Mr. Hume)
did not mean to attribute motives to any party, but he did
think the Government were in error, and should have pursued
a different course. Now he would wish to know what the Go-
vernment inti nied to do in this case? Surely it was one
wh ch demand: d being as sternly dealt with as Captain Boldero,
who he believed to be as honest a man as any in that House.
If, then, the Government did not mean to allow this to be
cl' aked up, he hoped the Government would direct an in-
quiry to be made into the conduct of Colonel Ovens and
the Raja. The Hon. Member concluded by moving the
adoption of the motion of which he had given notice.
Dr. BOWRINei seconied she motion, and, in doing so,
said he cou d not but express his concurrence in many of the
obse,vations of his Hon. Friend, but he should not enter into
any details, as the present state of the House did not afford
afford him much encouragement for doing so; yet, let him
ask, should this unfortunate man make an appeal in vain to
that House ? He hoped not.
Mr. E. TENNENT said that the charges against the Raja
of Sattara had been fully investigate,l by a compe-
tent tribunal, and the decision of that tribunal
had been confirmed by the Governor of Bombay, and
by the Court of Directors, and approved by three suc-
cessive Governor-Generals, and by three successive Boards
of Coritroul. It must be recollected that in the deposition of
the Raja of Sattara no dynasty had been overthrown, as the
throne of Sattara had been established originally by the Bri-
tish Government. The Raja of Sattara broke his allegiance
to the British Crown, and having entered into a conspiracy
against the British authority in India, he was deposed and con-
fined. The Hon. Member for Montrose had said that no
copies of the evidence were supplied to the Raja. That was
not so.
Mr. HUME—Where is the evidence ? _

111 r. E. TENNENT—Copies were not supplied in every
instance, but the substance of the evidence was supplied, and
the reason that some of the names of the witnesses were with-
held was that the persons who,e names were so withheld were
the subjects of the Baja, and, of course, would have been
under his controul.

Mr. WILLIAMS said, that notwithstanding the great
ability with which he had advocated the conduct of the Govern-
ment, he had totally failed in defending them. He had totally
failed in his facts. He hoped that Colonel Ovans was a high-
minded man, but as no inquiry had been made into the charge
of conspiracy aga nst the Baja of Sattara, he thought
that the Honourable Geutleman, even had he possessed more
eloquence than he did, would fail to clear the Government of
Lime. The Haja presented a petition to the House, stating
that he was the victim of fraud and malevolence, and praying
the House to institute an inquiry upon the subject. He hoped,
therefore, they would request her Majesty to institute this in=
quiry, and thus he in a better position to come to a proper con-
clusion on the merits of the case.

Mr. HOGG sail that when such charges were made against
a high.minited and an Hon. Gentleman he theueht that he was
in duty bound, in justice to that individual, to make a few ob-
servations, and if the House would allow him ten minutes, he
would not tax their indulgence further.—( Hear.) The Raja
was a most suspicious man, he had been born in captivity, and
so had his father and grandfathers. There was every difference
between interference with independent Princes and the Raja
of Sattara, with whom they had a distinct right to interfere the
moment he broke the covenant. The Raja was trying to with-
draw from the allegiance of the British Government the
svoys. That was no light offence, but it was
further certain that he was increasing the army
within his dominions, and a commiss'on was
sent to iequira into the truth of these charges. The commis-
sion wept to Sattara, examined witnesses, and came to the
cenclusion that the Raja had attempted to corrupt the sepoys,
and withdraw them from t'leir allegiance. Sir Robert Grant
did not like to do anything harsh—the Governor-General re-
garded the Rsja with great apprehension, and at length
all came to the opinion that the Raja could not Le
fu:ther trusted. It was quite clear that he was connected
with other ex -Rajas for disloyal purposes. The evidenc'e be-
fore the commission consisted of the examination of forty indi-
vidua!s, and went to show that an attack on the treasury was
meditated. Abundant documentary evidence was exhibited to
prove that the Raja was guilty. The Raja had no right to hold
communication with the Portuguese Governor by the compact,
but s et he did o The letters which this Raja addressed to other
Rajas were produced, and he would give no other answer
than that anybody might write letters in his name, and
cared for his answers to these letters. What course could
be pursued, the Raja's guilt having been established ? No
other than that which the Indian Government had pursued—
to remove the Raja from his Government. There was every
disposition to treat the Raja kindly, and the Court of Directors
gave directions to Sir James Carnac to do so. Sir James
Carnac came to a conclusion, upon examining the facts in India,
that the Itaja was guilty, but determined upon waiting upon
the Raja, personalty, and entering into a communication with
rim. The correspond nee on this head, on the part of Sir
James Carnac, recited that circumstances had come to the
knowledge of the British Government that the Raja had en-
ter, d communication with persons hostile to the British
Government, and those facts having been proved, the British
Government required him to enter into a renewal of the treaty
by which he herd his Raj. The Raja refused to sign this
treaty, though Sir James Carnac did all in his power to induce
him to sign it. Hie bad advisers still guided him, although
he avowed repeatedly that his ruin was impending. Had he
signed that document he would be now in possession of his
Raj and of his power. Reference to the papers would
show that of all curses that could be inflicted on India,
the greatest was that of Europeans, and others,
worming themselves into the confidence of these
Princes, and then advising them to their own destruction.
The Raja, he repeated, was treated in the kindest manner,
and everything was done that could be done to elicit the
truth. The Raja refused to take any part in the investiga-
tion, saying it was inconsistent with his high position to be
confronted with witnesses. But it was not true that he had
taken no part in the examination. He suggested several ques-
tions, and wished to bring in a member of the Supreme Court
to defend him, which request VI a, of course, refused. This
petition had never been out of Colentl Oven's possession.
There was a s'emonstrative proof that he wrote it for the pur-
pose of setting his son at liberty. Now what was the state_
mi n' of the floe. Gentleman ? That he was confined in a
the gaun at Doottali. Why what did Mr. Butt say? Why
that he had hired a house for the use of the pri-
sorter. The man who wrote the petition had stated
that he was to receive 1.350 rupees for writing it.
This was the secret of the attack. Flu had written
a firs!, a second, and a third petition, till at last the Govern-
ment got tired of this proceeding, and at last resolved that they
would receive no more petit ion,from this m to. He then tried
another movement, and getting the papers into his hands,
went on to sue the Baja for the money. This man had
afterwards confessed that the whole was a lie from beginning to
end, and the proper c,urse, if this were true, was to prosecute
Colonel Grans. But the fact was, that every body connected
with these affairs had been traduced, from Sir Robert Grant
and Mount Stuart E!pl-tin,toce. down to Colonel Ovens. They
were all in the same beat. The Governors of Bombay, the
three last Presidents of the Board of Controul, and nearly all
the Directors were in company with Ovens. The Directors
were
easeful in nmplosing their servants, paid
them well, and
reproved them sever ly if any defalcationof duty were proved.
But in this instance the Court had
Colonelnot thought it necessary to
subject so useful a servant asinquiry,
but he would read a letter r tiefin before the t'
lasto a ny
Board from
that officer in which he 'expressedthuastrgeadhiness to meet the
charge, and he was only surprised such motion should
ever he brought before the British House. Commons. With
these obtervations he would leave the case, with the utmost
confidence, to the H cute,.
Sir E. COLEBitOOKE said that this was en er" p rte state-
ment, and it was in evidence that the whole inquiry was
sleeted on the same principle, an' altogether a violation
conoi
natural justice. He read a minute of Lord Auckland to show
that the evidence on which the condemnation of the Baja had
been arrived at. The object of the minute wad to show that
against a helpless neighbour esery care shotule
d be taken that no
injustice should be cons.sdnitted Would Government say
that Sir James Careac di not ea on t eßaja
Raja before or a confession
hear.) He called the him,
of his guile?—(Hear,
and made a great parade as to to kindness which he had shown
to him on various occasions, and endear/cured to induce him to
sign the treaty containing a confession of his guilt, which, how-
, cen he refused to do. The Raja hail other reasons than a
couteseon of his guilt to iedure hint not to sign the treaty.
He would not acknowledge that he had done injury to the Bri-
tish Government, or that he had been guilty of impropriety—
for the simplest of all reasons, that he was innocent of both.
He was then deposed, because he would net comply with so

odious a request. He should, however, leave he question to
the House to decide whether the conduct wh ch had been
Pursued towards tt.e Raja was in accordance with fairness or
justice.
Mr. WAKLEY considered that the Hon. Memb r would
gain nothing by leaving the question to the decision of the
House, for he was sure on a division that he would be placed in
a minority, as was too frequently the case in that House with
respect to measures which deserved a better fate. It would be
better to leave it in the hands of the Government. He consi-
dered the Raja of Sattara a most injured individual, and it
would be a blot on the character of that House if they refused
to inquire into the circumstances of the case. The Right Hon.
Gentleman at the head of the Board of Control had stated that
the witnesses examined with respect to the subject were
unworthy of belief. If this were true, he could not under-
stand why the Raja was dethroned upon such testimony. He
asked those who would not blindly follow the Government, if
they considered, after what they had heard that night, that the
Raja of Sattara was any thing else than an innocent and an in-
jured man? Sir James Carn.c went out to India with a
favourable impression on his mind towards the Raja, and every
thing that had occurred went to show that he considered the
Raja an innocent man, and that he was not acting with a man
who had shown himself a traitor.

Mr. B. BARING said the offence imputed to the Raja of
Sattara was, that he had committed an infraction of a treaty,
that he had committed murder and other serious offences,
rendering him amenable to the laws of the country. They had
the authority of many persons who had filled high offices
in India, for saying that at the time when the
circumstances before the House occurred, that
part of India was in a more serious ferment than
it had been for many years before. Sir James Carnac was
sent out to endeavour to conciliate the country, but he was
directed not to effect this at the sacrifice of the honour of this
country, or of its interests in that part of the world. He would
refer the House to the minutes of the Indian Board, in which
they approved of the deposition of the Raja. But they had
stronger evidence than that, namely, the evidence of the Raja
of Sattara himself. He thought if these proofs did not
satisfy the Hon. Member for Montrose that the Raja was
punished, not for refusing to sign this document, but for re-
fusing to acknowledge the articles of the treaty entered into
by himself, nothing would do so.
Mr. H U3IE replied. He acknowledged that he had never
heard so extraordinary an answer as he had heard that night.
An Hon. Member had characterised the witnesses in India as
reckless in the extreme. He declared honestly that, in his
opinion, that the assestions of Hon. Members in that House
were equally reckless.—(Laughter.) The Hon. Member for
Beverley had allowed that the inquiry was conducted
in private, and that not a friend of his was allowed
to appear before that tribunal, and when the inquiry was ended
the Raja was called in and informed that the evidence would be
read to him. The Raja indignantly refused. The Raja thought
himself the injured party because the Company had inter-
fered with him. He did not think that the Right Honourable
Baronet would lend himself as an instrument of oppression
against an innocent man. In the history of injustice no act
would appear of a darker dye than the conduct of the Indian
Government to the unfortunate and innocent Raja of Sattara.
He was quite surprised at the two letters that had been read.
The letters of Colonel Ovens showed great sensibility as to the
charges made against him. Why did he not adopt the modes
of prosecution which were open to him? He need not go
to India for the purpose. The simple facts were these, that
the Raja of Sattara was accused of crimes of which he was
not guilty. He was called upon by Sir J. Carnac to acknow-
ledge himself guilty. He refused to do so, and he preferred,
like an honourable man, to give up his possessions rather than
declare that he was culpable when he was innocent. In this
case, he (Mr. Hume) was doing his duty. If the Raja was
proved to be guilty, let him endure the suffering to which he
was :condemned, He had no desire to lessen our power in
India. On the contrary, let it be known in India that there
was a place to appeal to for justice. On these grounds, he
would not press for a division.—( Hear, hear, and a laugh. )
Gentlemen opposite would do him the justice to acknowledge
that he had never interrupted the course of the Government
and the Court of Directors.—( Hear, hear.) When he first
read the statements against the Raja, he thought the Prince
was guilty. But when he read all the documents, he changed
his mind.—( Laughter. )
After a few words from Mr. HOGG,
The question was put and negatived without a division.
DANISH CLAIMS.

Mr. HAWES said, that in consequence of representations
made to him by Members of the House, he would put off his
motion respecting the Danish claims to the early part of next

session.