The Sun.
London, England, 1842-08-01 00:00:00

money rotes, and that the Executive and Legislative
Councils should be separate. And so far from that-
being at variance with the opinion of Sir J. Harvey, as
stated by the Right Hon. Gentleman, it was exactly in
correspondence with a dispatch whichlolLord Stanley)
received from him, dated the 21st--cif September. The
Noble Lord then rend the dispitch of Sir J. Harvey
and the instructions of Lord Ripon, which the Right
Hon. Gentleman had so much praised, to show that his
proposal was not at variance with those documents.
He did not mean his proposal to be a punishment of the
Legislative Assembly, but to enable them to legislate
without coming into collision with the other House, as
had been the case heretofore. The.Riiht Hon. Gentle •
man said that the two Houses were 'made into one for
the purpose of swamping the' Legislative Assembly.
But he should like to know how 10 could swamp 15,
this being the proportion in which the new Legislature
was to be composed. He did not deny that the present
constitution had worked well, and that many internal
improvements had been effected under it.—(Hear, hear.)
The Right Hon. Gentleman had said that the present
Bill was intended to give one interest an advantage over
another. It was true that there were two interests grow-
ing up in the colony, but the preient Bill would
not give any advantage to one class over another,
but would equally benefit all classes.-L-(Hear, hear.)
The Hon. Gentleman had stated, and stated correctly,
that the returns to the House of Asseziibly, up to the
year 1836, were of a very respectable character, and that
the Member; returned had in general carried on the
public business with great satisfaction-to the inhabitants.
But it appeared, upon unquestionable authority; that
under the present qualification, Members were returned
who were disqualified from duly discharging - the&
duties, by the violence of their party feelings,
and by their want of education and. respectability. The
Assembly was now principally composttl of parties un-,
known in th 7 upper classes of sotaietSc. The members
were each allowed 421. a-year; and it appeared among
other strange facts, that a servant was permitted by his
master to take his place among the representatives of
the people in the Legislative Assembly, while he and
his master divided the 42/. between them.
Mr. HUMElasked in whose evidence that appeared.
Lord STANLEY said that he --made the statement on
the authority of Mr. Brooking, one of the leading gen-
tlemen of Newfoundland.
Mr. O'CONNELL said that the firm of Mr. Brooking
had got that very person returned.
Lord STANLEY only mentioned the fact for the pur-
pose of showing the abuses to which the present system
of representation in the colony gave rise. To remedy
the evil of having such parties returned to the house of
Assembly, he proposed that no person should be elected
a Member who did not possess an income of at least 100/.,
and he did not think that that amount was unreasonably
high. Why did he propose to unite the Legislative
Council, and tha House of Assembly ? it was because,
from the conduct of both bodies, Such had been the dif-
ficulties and dissensions arising between them, that legis-
lation had been put a stop to, and the most important
measures, including the Revenue Bill, .were actually
at this moment in a state of abeyance.—(Hear, hear.)
Ile contended that the House of Assenibly had sent up
such Bills that it was impossible fel. the Governor to
sanction them ; and were they prepared to continue
the existing system, which permitted the legislative body
and the council to be at continual variance, and allowed
the bare majority to suspend the business of the colony ?
But the Hon. and Learned Member said great ilnprove-
ments had taken place, that the revenue was good, and
that trade had increased. Undoubtedly it was so, but
the injury which arose from the stoppage of the supplies
did not fall on the merchants 'and traders, but on the
resident inhabitants of the colony. He -would state dis-
tinctly that raising the franchise to a moderate extent
would not affect the agricultural and Roman Catholic in-
terest exclusively, but would strike off that small
portion of the constituency absolutely subjected to
their employers, whether Catholic or Protestant.
The Hon. Gentleman said that a 40s. freehold would
deprive many of the inhabitants of the franchise. He
(Lord Stanley) admitted the fact. But what he wanted
was, that no person should possess the franchise who had
not been in the occupation of had for one year. What
he wanted was to insure the franchise to persons who
had a permanent interest in the soil. The Hon. Gentle-
man asked hint to postpone that Bill. Now the present
state of the colony was this, that upon the itnpor-
tation of goods the parties were compelled to give
a bond, binding themselves to submit to any duties
to be imposed by a Bill to be passed of a retrospective
nature. That was the condition'ofthe colony at present.
He (Lord Stanley) had received a letter that morning,
stating that the colony was placed in great difficulty from
want of this Bill, and yet the Hon.-Gentleman asked
him to postpone it.. His (Lord Stanley's) object in
proposing the Bill was, that on: party should act as a
check upon the other ; and it was with this view that he
confidently trusted the House of Com Mons would assent
to the proposal of going into Committee, for the purpose
of remedying the evils he had p6inted out.
Mr. HUME said he was instructed to say, in reply
to the statement of the Noble Lord that the population
consisted of about half Protestants and half Catholics,
that the populatitin consisted in reality of 70,000 Ca-
tholic residents and 30,000 resident Protestants. Out of
this population there were only two Catholic Stipendiary
Magistrates, whilst there were fifteen Protestant Sti-
pendiary Magistrates ; the whole of the clerks in the
employ of the Government were Protestants ; and yet
this was a colony where the Noble Lord said party
spirit did not exist, and there was no right
to complain that party
.feelings at all in-
fluenced the Government appointments.—(Hear.)
His complaint was, that the parties- whose privileges and
liberties were about to be interfered with, had not been
heard in their own behalf. Canada and Jamaica had
been heard by counsel before the Legislature, previous
to their cases being decided upon, and why should not the
same justice be extended to the natives of Igewfoundland?
They would not disfranchise the borough of Sudbury,
which had only 7,000 or 8,000 inhabitants, without
first hearing an advocate on their behalf. The case of
Sudbury was put off for that purpose to the next session,
and how could they reconcile it to justice to legislate on
the case of Newfoundland which possessed a population
of 100,000, without hearing what they had to
say on their own cause? Why not put off the
consideration of the measure - to the next set:
sion, when the Newfoundlanders would have
time to lay their case fairly before Parliament?
The object was to take the representation from the inha
bitants of Newfoundland and to transfer it to the meta
chants of London, Liverpool, Bristol, and Dartmouth.
With regard to menial servants being elected he denied
that. such was the case, unless a- clerk in a merchant's
counting-house could be deemed a menial servant.
There was not a charge brought forward but what
could be proved untrue if an investigation were granted.
The great prosperity of the colony from 1832 to 1836,
proved that the constitution had Worked well. The
Noble Lord, by sending out Mr. Bolton. as Judge, had been
the cause of the mischief. Lotd Ripon had removed
Mr. Bolton from Canada, as a fire-brand, and the Noble
Lord (Stanley) sent him out .to Newfoundland.
From the moment Mr. Bolton arrived in Newfoundland,
he began to interfere with - the rights of Juries.
The Government supported Mr.-Bolton, yet on an appeal
to the Privy Council, Judge Bolton was removed.
Lord STANLEY.—No. .

Mr. HUME.—He was not sent back, and that showed
the colonists were right. He Was the firebrand. He had
caused this disturbance in the colony. He appealed to
the Right Hon. Baronet in this case, for the Noble
Lord from the first had taken up a prejudice against
the colony. One of the great charges against the
Assembly was that the Members' were paid a salary of
421. a-year. There was an Act in this country for pay-
ment of Members, and he thought it would be a good
thing if they had paid Members in this House. It would
be better that Members should have a salary than that
they should be paid in places, honours, and preferments,
which Ministers had to give: Menabers ought to be
paid—gratuitous service was bad service. He was called
stingy, because he had wished to get rid of sinecures cud
unnecessary offices, but he alWays desired that those
should be paid who did the work. The Noble Lord's
Bill had been brought forward for the purpose of dis-
gracing the best of men, in. order to further
the cause of the monopolists. His Right
Honourable and Learned Friend's motion was
intended to remedy such an abuSe, and ho would, there-
fore, give it his most cordial support. The present ques-
tion was not one of party, but of justice. All that was
asked Vw as that the business of Newfoundland might not
stand still, but that the representatives of that eountry
might exercise their constitutional tight in a legal and
constitutional manner, He should therefore support the
that the debate Amid be
mooAtli
r.n
po f hAliistiNt iGghTtolNion
m. Friend.oi
ed
adjourned.
Mr. O'CONNELL secondel the motion.

The debate wag then adjourned.
LICENSED LUNATIC ASYLUMS BILL—LORDO
AMENDMENTS.

Lord G. SOMERSET moved ftv the appointment of
a Committee to confer With 'their Lordships, to explain
why the MAW Po4ldnot agree to their Lordships' amend-.
meats, Agreed to.
IPSWICH ELECTION,
Mr. P. M. STEWART braght up the Report of
the Ipswich ComMittee• The *Mt stated that Lord
lesart anti 711041 S Gladsteue, Esq„ were not duly
elected at the last election far the borough of Ipswich,
and that they had by their agents been guilty of bribery
and treating, at the last election for that borough,
The HON. GENTLEMAN moved that the evidence be
printed, and that the issuinge
House.
of the writ be suspended
till the evidence was Ware th
Mr, RSPOTT gave notice.that he would move for the
issuing of a new writ for the borough of Ipswich, on
Monday. _ _

The liou3e adjourned at a qqartin% to Vice o'Clock.

4uvir- 24.-4 ftwther list of contributions
for the relief of the sufferers by the sre at Hamburgh has been
published. The total amount of the sums remitted to Ham.
burg is 100,000 marks balm.

The requisition, which has been already published in
this journal, was hen read,
The CHAIRMAN said, it would be in the recollection of
the Court, that this subject had been repeatedly before
the Court of Proprietors. It had undergone by them a
most lengthened, laborious, and patient discussion, and,
after that discussion the Court had decided that they
ought not to interfere in the business. Now, he con-
fessed that, out of respect to the opinion thus deliberately
expressed, and consistently with that opinion believing
that no possible utility could arise from the further dis-
cussion of this question and perceiving that that very
night Mr, Hume would present a petition to the House
of Commons on the subject of the Raja of Sattara, it ap•
peered to him that they ought not to proceed with the .
motion named in the requisition; and, therefore, he should
move " That this Court do now adjourn."—(Hear.)
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Mr. J. Cotton) said be
heartily seconded the motion. In his opinion the pro-
posed discussion could tend to no useful purpose whatever.
Mr. MARRIOTT said, he must protest against the
mode which was adapted for prodncing some of the
papers then laid before the Court. The motion was
made at seven o'clock in the evening, without any pre-
vious notice that he knew ot; and when there were very
few Proprietors present. And what end did they
answer ? Was it intended that they should judge the
judges—that they should decide on the conduct of the
Commission who sat in judgment on this case ? Here
were parties criminating each other, and it was clearly
impossible for that Court to decide on their difference.
The CHAIRMAN said it was no fault of his that the
papers alluded to had been granted. It appeared to
him that the parties to whom they referred were crimi-
nating and recriminating ; and that, therefore, it was a
case In. which that Court could not interfere. He had
so expressed his opinion when the motion for the papers
was made. He was sorry the Hon. Proprietor (Mr.
Marriott) had not remained in his place on that occa-
sion, since, as there were so very few Members present,
the motion possibly might have been defeated.
General Loowitcit said, he had given notice, by a letter
to the Court of Directors, that he meant to move for the
document alluded to.

The CHAIRMAN said, the lion. and Gallant Officer
had no right to give notice in that way. In point of
fact, there was no regular notice whatsoever.
Mr. LEWIS said, he wished to know if it was the prac-
tice of that Court, when the Court was specially sum-
moned to discuss it motion, to move an adjournment of
the Court ?

The CHAIRMAN—It is competent for any Proprietor
at any time to move the question of adjournment.
Mr. Ltwis—l look upon this as a most disgraceful
combination between gentlemen behind the bar and a
few gentlemen near me to prevent the discussion of this
most important question.—(Cries of " Order.)
The CHAIRMAN—The lion. Proprietor has made
use cf the words " most disgraceful combination be-
tween `gentlemen behind the bar and certain Proprietors
before it." Now, I believe that not one single Pro-
prietor before the bar was aware of the motion for ad-
journment—(Hear, hear)—and very few of the Court
of Directors knew that any such motion would be made.
—(Hear, hear.) I hope the Hon. Proprietor will not
suppose that the Chairman of this .Company would
so far forget his duty as to enter into a combination to
prevent discussion —(Hear.)
Mr. FIELDER (with great warmth)—l deny the asser-
tion, and Icall on the Iron. Proprietor, as an honourable
man and a gentleman, to retract it.
Mr. LEWIS said he would retract when he saw proper
reason fur retracting. The Hon. Chairman said there
was no combination between gentlemen behind the bar
and some of those who were before it. That, however.
would not cause him to retract the expression he had
made use of, that there was a disgraceful combination.
lie must say that a combination appeared to exist within
the bar, or such a step would not have been taken to
prevent discussion.
Sir R. CAMPBELL said the Hon. Proprietor spoke of a
combination behind the bar. There was no such thing.
He (Sir R. Campbell) was prepared to state that he was
not aware of the intended motion five minutes ago.
Mr. LEWIS—Is there any other member within the
bar who disclaims the charge?
This appeal was followed by a general burst Of " All !
all!" from behind the bar.

An HON. DIRECTOR—The attack is most ungenerous
and illiberal.

The CitAtrimAN—l again say, that only five minutes
before the Court met I stated my intention to move the
adjournment. I did it on my own responsibility—(Hear,
hear)—because I think it the wisest and the most
prudent course that could, under the circumstances, be
adopted.--(Hear.)
Mr. NORRIS—.The most discreditable course that could
be adopted.

General ROBERTSON denied that there had been any
combination behind the bar. Every man had a right to
adopt that course which he thought proper. When he
heard of the proposed adjournment he stated that he
would oppose it, and he adhered to that determination.
Colonel SYKES said, that everything he had read, and
every thing he had heard, since the question of the ex,-
Raja of Sattara was discussed, confirmed the deliberate
conviction of his mind, that he had been unjustly con-
demned.—(Hear, hear.) But, as he looked on the futher
discussion of the subject to be utterly useless, mischievous
and impolitic, he fully concurred in the propriety of the
motion, that the Court do now adjourn.—(Hear j,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY scud, they were svelally sum•
moned that day, to discuss a motion relative to the case
of the Raja of Sattara, and he came to the Court with the
full determination of expressing his opinion on that case;
but, fully agreeing with the course taken by the Hon.
Chairman, founded on the total uselessness of such a dis-
cussion, he should abstain from uttoring a single word on
the question.—(Hear, hear.) Uut, when an Hon. Gen-
tleman said that there had been a disgraceful combina-
tion between parties before and behind the bar to pre-
vent discussion, ho was surely bound to prove on what I
foundation his assertion rested.—(Hear.) Before
made so g:rave, so serious, so ungracious a chrite, he
ought to be well assured of the gro.unds or, which he
brought it forward.—(liear.) Ile therefo"ee called on the
lion. Proprietor to state the grottufh on which he had
made the accusation,--(119ar.)
Mr. 14gwIs said the COnrt had only met for a few mi-
nutes, and the requiSition haki been read, when the Hon.
Chairman immediately rNie,up and proposed the adjourn-
ment ; and the Pl4ll4er in which that motion seemed
to be receives IPy 41 the gentlemen within the bar,
certainly weyeil to his mind the impression that
there Os oombination to prevent the discussion
of thin question. Such was his explanation of
the expression that he had used, and he confined
his retractation to that explanation. He thought the
only opinioaA that could be entertained in the public
nunti when that short discussion went forth was, that
Ole Court of Directors were afraid of discussing this
question. Yes ; they were perfectly aware that most
atrocious wrong had- been done in this case.—(Cries of
" No, nos") Let the Hon. Chairman withdraw the
motion for adjournment, and he would prove his state-
ment to the satisfaction of the Court. And let him as-
sure the Court of Directors, that, notwithstanding the
opposition whieh he now experienced, it was his fixed
determination to bring forward this subject for discus-
sion in that Court.

After some conversation, as to the proper mode of pro-
ceeding,
Mr. WMINC put it to the good sense, to the cour-
teous feeling, and the kindness of disposition of the Hon.
Miprietor, not to press the matter further, but to ac-
quiesce in the adjournment.
The CHAIRM9.I•I said, he wished to recal to the recol-
lection of the Court a very short speech made by an
Wm. Proprietor (Mr. D. Salomons) when an Hon. Pro-
prietor (Mr. Fielder) moved for certain papers relative
to Colonel Ovans and Mr. Willoughby, with reference to
their conduct in the ex-Rajah of Sattara's case. The
lion. Proprietor (Mr. D, Salomons) then said, " lie
hoped his Hon. Friend was not going to disinter the
Raja of Sattaxa ; he trusted that that question was 11059
settled, for ever. Now, he (the Chairman) did think
that the question was settled so far that there could be
no utility whatsoever in still further discussing it in
that Court. They had no power, as he had formerly
said, to set aside a proceeding which had been sane-
ticillocl by the Government of India, by the Board of
Control, and by the Court of Directors. The question,
it should also be observed, was now about to be brought
before. another and a higher tribunal. •A motion was
that very evening to be submitted to the House of Com-
mons, on the presentation of a petition from 'the ex-
Raja of Sattara. Even those who were most favour.
able to the ex-Raja would, he thought, best consult his
interests by not bringing the question again before that
Court, where they could not expect a majority, after the

Mr. WIGRAM said, if the Court of Proprietors chop
uselessly and unnecessarily to discuss questions of this
nature, after they had been solemnly decided, They
would find, should they be on any occasion called; on to
assist the Court of Directors in resisting any atOick on
their privilege, that their opinion would not tarry so
much weight with it as it they.adopted a different course.
Mr. Norms contended that the case of the Paja of
Sattara, had not yet been properly discussed. Until the,
present time the papers produced had been defective.
They had now before them the commission, and the evis
deuee on which the Raja was dethroned. These the.-3,
were not previously in possession of ; and, in their ab-
sence,it was 'impossible to decide fairly on the se.
Tliere ea
Therefore, it was proper that the discussion should be:
renewed. • As to the majority which, on a former oe-•
Casion, decided the, question against the Raja, he set tso
value on it, beeause it was composed of Directors.
Mr. WEEDING did not conceive that the Hon. Pro-.
.prietor, who had last spoken, 'had shown good judg-
ment in speaking of the opinion of the gentlemen
behind the bar as good for nothing. For his own
part, he thought that the opinion of those whose time
was passed in providing for the good government:
of India ought not to be so lightly spoken of.
He had before declared his conviction, and he still ad-
hered to it, that the condemnation of the ex-Raja was
just. The only fault he found with those who had re-
moved him was that they had treated him too well. They
had allowed him to carry off 50,000/.; and given him
12,000/. a year, which would enable him, by his intrigues,
to keep the country in a state of alarm.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY was proceeding to descant (JA
certain attacks which had formerly been made in trade
Court on Mr. Willoughby, when
The CHAIRMAN interfered. They could not- aeeide
on matters of criwination and recrimination, of; v, bleb,
in fact. they knew nothing. The Voila of Dirleeors'amt
the Court of Proprietors, had no right to do -more than
had been done. A statement had been made on one
side, and an answer had been given to it. It'was now for.
the public and the parties to settle the matt!..—(Hear.l
Mr. G. TH`n‘IPSON said, he was exceeelingly surpri-git
at the course that bad been taken. A series of paper had
been laid before them preparatory to discussion, and, tiler
were immediately met by a motion ;Or adjournment.
The documents which had been last prothr..ed were
but even the papers. that were for-
ertl
essential!y necessary to the right - undexstanding
of
3 laid before
he ca se
them, garbled al, they were, furnished
to his mind sufficient proof, that, an innocent man
had been deposed, and that an individual had been sent
into exile who at that moment "oup,:tit to be seatedl
m
on the throne of Sattara. They had now obtained tear,
evidence laid before the commission, and the reporti, of
the Sattara commissioners founded on that evidence), and
he would say, that being possession of these docu-
ments, the Court was emphatically called on to recon-
sider the case. This was one reason for not. V.,journing•
the Court without discussing this quest:inn. Another
reason was, thathe had looked into the parers connected
with the Raja's case, that had been le:id before the House
of Commons, and he believed that as surely as the house
in which they were then sitting had an existence, so
surely did those papers afford tin unanswerable refute-
tion of every charge that had been brought against
the Raja. But not only had he procured documents
from the Journal-office of the House of Commons, but
he had procured other documents of a most importaxtt
nature. He was prepared to state what they were, what
was their history, what was their nature, and what was
the conclusion to which they. must inevitably lead. That
conclusion was, that the Raja had been dethroned by.
the foulest machinations that were ever practised against
any human being. He would give them a sample of the
evidence, even on the question of adjournment, to Ivore
that they were bound to go on with this discussion, The
evidence which he. held in his hand would convince every
impartial man that the Raja was unjustly dethroned,
and consequently that the discussion should proceed.
As a reason for opposing the adjournment. of this debate,
he should proceed to show that the 11113 P. had been the
victim of a guilty conspiracy, proceWing even to this
eMent of forging the handwriting of the Raja's Mi-
nister, and procuring by lay4e bribes the use of the
Raja's seals, The first doxiiment. be would refer to was
a letter from the Raja, to this agent, in London, dated
Renares, April 3, 1842 ; and having named the Vakiell
of the Raja then sitting near him, he would say that,
never had a more upright, laborious, self-denying'br
devoted man appeared on behalf of' a fallen sove.re ign.
lie was a pattern to all placed in similar eircuir.st'lnces.
The Raja, with the letter referred to, sent cloe'innents,
copies of which hail been given to Sir &tries (`arnatt
when at Sattara. The first was the deptoliVon of Bapuji
Anund Rao. "In the course of last yearrlB37), after the
Secret, Commission had set at Satrnra, Haibat
Atmaram Luksamtui, and Vish,wa,:,ath Rao, the last
being the head of the Itaja's„iamdarkana, or household
treasury, and myself, formed, it conspiracy jig* the papaw
of larnYing down the wrath/and power of the Bombay Go-
'vernment on his Highness the Raja If Sattara. To effect
this, we resorted to the fabrication of papers and letters,.
by means of which we had no doubt that we should be
able to accomplish our purpose. Our proceedings, however,
having been prematurely discovered, I deemed it prudent
to wait on the Raja Bhosley Sennaput tee, Commander
Chief of his Highness's forces, and make an open confession
of all we had done, soliciting at the same time corgive-
ness for the past.---41Amit ANUNIJ RAO." IThelsecond
was the deposition of Haibat Row, a persoutinployed iu
the Raja's Household Treasury ; taken atSattara on the,
IGth November 1838:—" Some time in 1837, Balajipunt,
Natoo, and Balajikasi Kibey (the Resident's head
Live, and Natoo's intimate friend), sent for Attuaram
Luksuman and myself, and taking us to a private
apartment, asked if'we were willing to forge some papers
in the name of his Highness the Raja, of Sattara, promising
us ajageer of ten thousand rupees (1,0000, besides a
lac of rupees ready money (10,000/.) We agreed, and
shortly after we forged and took the papers to them.
Balajikasi Kibey took a copy of them. These papers
were letters we wrote in the name of the Raja,
and only required his Highness' seals to be affixed,
(to make them appear genuine.) Balajipunt Sato°
and Balajikasi Kibey then directed us to get the letters
sealed ; but before this was done, they took us to the
Resident, Colonel Orlin& The Resident addressed us
and said, that if we would consent to the terms proposed
by Balajipuot Natoo and Balajikasi Kibey, he would be
responsible for the
payment oft' the money.
On this as-
surance being made by the British Resident, we returned
and got the seals impressed upon these documents by
Janoo Bandaree, the jamdar (or keeper of -the Raja's
seals, called Sikkah and Mortub).—HaiaaT RAO."
The CHAIRMAN—May I ask you, are those papers
before the Court ?
Mr. FIELDER—Not a syllable Of them.

INlr. G. TtiostrsoN—Let the requisition be read.
The requisition was then read, which referred to " the
papers recently laid before the Court of Proprietors,'
relating to the case of thc, Raja of Sattara, in connexion
with those previously laid before the Court.' "
The CHAIRMAN Wished to know whether the papers
now referred to by the lion. Proprietor were before the:
Court ?
Mr. TuomPsoN would not answer the question at that
moment. lle would now show cause why the Court
should not adjourn, lie had these papers and documents of a most important kind, and he would state them. By
voting for the amendment of the chairman it was saying
to the public that they were afraid to go into the papers.
The deep conviction upon his mind was, that the Raja
wasinnocent ; that he was utterly guiltless of the charges
attributed to him, and which were made the grnu
of his deposal ; and he firmly believed that if be
had had those means of vindicating himself, which
were within the reach of persons in these more fa-
voured realms, he would have come forth with unspotted
reputation.—(lrear.) He had devoted no small portion