Star.
London, England, 1808-06-14 00:00:00

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY,

hir. DIINDAS moved, That the House do go
him a Conlon:we of Supply, to whom should be re- I
ferred the Report of t 1: Comnii.tee of the East India
ipnr.y."
pc.n this tuctir,n twiny put from the Chair,
.ord FOLKESTONE rose, and objected to the
,k,n- leaving the Chair, as he thought the Report
.ded to was perfectly unsatisfactory, and contained ;
ittle information, that it would he quite improper
lie House to so into its consideration. On a for- ;
occasi,,a, an objection had been stated to tbo •
finer in which that Committee had been formed,
be still looked ripcn that objection as being justi-
by the Report now upon the table. There were,
is cpinion, various facts, of which the House I
ht to be in possession, before they proceeded to
any great sum of money to the East India!
::pan.
Ir. IiUNDAS answered by observing, that if the
)le Lord had waited till he had hoard his motion
rive to that Company, his objection would most
.•nahly have been rendered unnecessary.
Mr. CREEVEY supported *objection of Lord
lkestone.
'.Tpon the question being put, the House went into
. Committee.
Mr. DU NpAs then stated, that it would be untie-
sary for him to say :nuch, as the Report contained
,st of the facts that were necessary to be detailed.
nue misunderstanding had arisen between the Ike-
Intents of the Company and the Public, which
r.ferred to the Committee appointed upon East
lia. Affairs, who had thought it necessary to adhere
the principles laid down by the former Committee.
i-rst article charged upon the Company was the
pence of prisoners Of war conveyed by his Majesty's
ips i 9 immediately upon capture? which ne-

cessarily became chargeable upon. the public ; and
the next was the expence of remitting to India such
sums of money as had been paid by the Company to
the public in liquidation of the balance owing to
them. A question had been stated, as to whether the
public should be bound to pay in India the money so
burrowed, or to the Company in this cottntry, and
disputes had arisen as to the rate of interest to be al-
lowed. It had been, however, settled, by the Report
of the Committee, that not only the expence of the
remittance of bullion to India, but the usual interest
of that place where it was originally borrowed, should
be paid. Upon these grounds he did not feel himself
justified in calling upon Parliament to make any loan
to the Company farther than tha; which had been
formerly stated to be actually ascertained to be due.
Mr. Dundas then concluded with moving—
nut it is the opinion of this Committee, that a mm not ex-
ceeding 1,500,000. be granted to big Majesty, to enable him to
pay the East India Company the caramel; incurred by them for
the public service."
Lord FOLKESTONE still persisted in his former
objection, that there was not sufficient information
before the House, to enable it to judge of the pro-
priety of such a grant. He accordingly moved, as
an amendment to the motion—
" That instead of the sum mentioned in the, motion, the sum
of :A. be inserted."
Mr. CREEVEY objected to the motion, upon the
ground of the charges made out by the Company
against the public not being properly ascertained.—
In none of their
.formn statements had they ever
made out a charge for the transmission of bullion to
India

Mr. TIERNEY spoke in favour of the Resolution.
Although the Committee appointed to inquire into
their affairs were not vested with the authority of ar-
bitrators, yet they had been appointed to ascertain
the amount of the debt due upon either side. The
result of their inquiry was, that R 2,300,000 were
found due by the Public to the Company, part of
which having already been paid, this vote was only
fcr an acknowledged balance, joined to some fur-
ther subsequent claims. The point at isst'e, there.
fore, between him and the Noble Lord, was relative
to the rate (..f interest and the mode of transmitting
payment of the debt due by the public to India. As
to this, he had no doubt of the charge made by the
Company being perfectly fair and reasonable, and
that if their accounts had been submitted to a Master
in Chancery, the amount of their claim upon the pub-
lic would have been nearly four millions, instead of
the sum at which it had been charged in the Report.
He could not really see any just grounds for objecting
to the liquidation of the debt as now charged, as it
was strictly due to the public. If the Noble Lord was
determined to persist in objecting to any part of that
debt, he should at least allow, even in his amendment,
that which he might look upon as unobjectionable.
Lord FOLKSTONE stated, that the principle
upon which he had proposed a grant of five pounds,
was merely for form sake, as he objected to the voting
-of any sum whatever upon the Report in its present
imperfect state. He did not object to the payiug of
Indian interest so much as he did to the expense which
was charged for carrying out bullion to India. If
m•-ney -were borrowed in Scotland, or any other
place whatever, by a person resident in this country,
the trouble and expense of carrying it back was never
charged.
SirdOHNANSTRUTHER said, he most heartily
concurred in the resolution which had been submitted
to the Committee, as it appeared to him it was fair
and reasonable the Company should receive payment
of the money in the same place and in the same man-
ner in which it had been borrowed. The public must
be paying interest for that money, until such time as
it was sent out to India, and therefore he thought
there could be no question as to who should bear the
loss. It was undoubtedly the public who had been
benefited by the advances which had been made, and
he could not help thinking the Conipany would have
done better, had they sought their payment by bills
drawn upon India at the usual rate of exchange ;
for it was undoubtedly the cheapest way for the pub-
lic to send out the bullion. By the report of the Com-
mittee, 'it appeared that there were additional claims
of 4470,000 against the public, the p4ment of which
had been suspended, on account of the objections
against them, every one el which was substantiated
by docuMents coming from the Advocate General's
Office, shewing they were still unaudited.
Mr. WILVERFORCE and Lord MORPETH
severally stated their sentiments in favour of the origi-
nal resolution, and Lord Folkestone's amendment
was negatived without a division; as also were se-
veral other limitations df the original sum, which
he afterwards proposed in the shape of amendments.
The orginal Resolution was then put and agreed to.