The Sun.
London, England, 1842-08-29 00:00:00

No. 1.5,603

- •
__,......_:_. 1-=-
..
(/- , •Ip .1 n,;,11 ...., ,
( , j
4, 7 . 1 , Zt,
. 1 , . \-5-',l
; ASZ.&,,, A.„,
.h. 1
~.., ~..
-........_

e.:79/2„..e_:_n_.14•3. I/
.., r .
""/"......-----. /./41
4 t4l .. ' 1.........." . . .
'..-.... •
1 • i • '.llt:
,_
CAI*
g . C.
-- '')
ikkiii.. • il: ,••••'
' viie' ,
-•k4U-
~- -
4 _..• arvi,
„,- .... ‘, c,-,_:.F z.. 2., 40 • , , ...,
~,,,,...
' ...
\ ,
-C- • - "N-."-- ' ) -- (------sikt., ;n• 4
.:IA .2 .4,.....„ezit0iT: , .4,--. ,po . •

LONDON, MONDAY el 4
,
ATING

SUN!

A,UGUST 29, 1842.

PRICE sd.

TIM SUN is Published EVERY MORNING at FIVE O'CLOCK, in Time for the EARLY TRAINS and TOWN DELI-ERY ; a SECOND EDITION (Evening Sun) is Published in Time for the AFTERNOON TRAINS
and a THIRD EDITION at SEVEN O'CLOCK, for POST, containing PARLIAIIENTARY and all other NEWS in LONDON up to that Hour.

. .
ADVERTISEMENTS INSERTED in ALL THE THREE PAPERS, Morning, Noon, and Night therby insuring a
:TOWN and COUNTRY CIRCVLATION, at ONE CHARGE.

oh their interview at the palace! I shotd not think
that much faith can be reposed safely in:7cpia Maloo.
I now proceed to lay before the Court sucharguments
occur to me, arising from a general relic,. of the fea-
tures of this ease—why the motion for adjournment
should not be carried, and why a full debae on the case
should be allowed. The deposed Raja of Sattara was
raised to the throne by the British Goverri2ent in 1819,
and from that time, to the. year 1832, concocted himself
so admirably, that ho was-the theme of consant applause
to the four successive Residents at his Court, to the
Bombay Government. and to the Court of Directors, as
an able and benignant ruler ; while his kielity as an
ally was so undoubted, that the Governmeniof Bombay,
in the time of Sir John Malcolm, voluntaril' relaxed the.
provision of the non-intercourse article in hittreaty, so as
to admit of his corresponding with- the Odin:tins in his
neighbourhood. His administration was just liberal, and
enlightened, but he had enemies, not from faults of his
own, but in some measure in con-sequenced his very
excellencies. The
,first of these was Appe Sahib, his
unworthy brother. That this person was the laja's bitter
enemy no one can doubt. Their disaereeaent was a
matter of public notoriety, though the Raja never failed
to treat Appa Sahib with kindness and attention. This
ungrateful man, early in 1835, and once previously in
the time of Sir John Malcolm, made an attempt to in-
duce the British Government to confer on him half of
his brother's raj, and we find him, by Balajiptmt Nattoo's
evidence before the Commission, (S. P. lit. 113) giving
information six months previously, or
_about April,
•
1835, which no one can credit, that " His Pighness had
written t.. his agent in Bombay, that if he #ils to obtain
redress in England, (whither he was --sending an
embassy)—he would go over to the Russians ; tell them
that his kingdom is one of fifty-six crores of rupees ; that
they must bring an army and reinstate him in his raj,
and that he will ultimately repay their expenses by in-
stalments." Balajipunt Nattoo, his confidant, says, " The
Raja has seduced his brother's wife, and therefore they
they are on had terms." I can only say, if this were
true Appa :.•7fthib would be in my eyes an infinitely
greater wretch than I have believed to be. Ile
lived in the palace, and he lived in the employment, and
on the revenues of his brother ; and what should We
think of the enormous hypocrisy which he must have
practised while so living, if suffering under this cruel
wrong ? I must say, however, that I disbelieve the as-
sertion of Balajipunt Nattoo. Appa Sahib's elder wife,
who fled to the Raja, it was said, in consequence of Appa
Sahib's misconduct, is stated by the Residents to . have
always borne an irreproachable character, and if she had
been treated by the Rain otherwise than it became him
to treat his brother's wife, I cannot imagine that either
through complaint from Appa Sahib, or dissension
in the Raja's family, the thing should not have become
known to the Resident, who would scarcely have failed
to urge his Highness to terminate so disgraceful a con-
nexion. Is •it to be credited that this person who so un-
generously strove on two occasions to deprive the Raja
of half his territories, would not have contrived that a.
fact should come to the knowledge of our Government,
which could not fail to lower the Raja in its estimation ?
I think badly of Appa Sahib, on. the ground of in-
formation placed on record when there could be
no ; object in misrepresenting. him, but I do
not think so badly of him as I should if I believed the
evidence of his confidant Balajipunt Natoo. The
second of the Raja's enemies was Balajipunt Natoo.
This person, a leading and bigoted Brahmin, of great
talent and art, cunning, ambitious, and worldly-minded,
was possessed of considerable influence with all the
British authorities in the Deccan. That he was the
Raja's enemy is sufficiently apparent from his evidence
before the Commission, wherein he states that six months.
previously he had reported to Mr. John Warden, that
the Raja contemplated, if he had not committed, a
breach of his engagements with the British Government:.
The same evidence shows him also to be Appa Sahib's
confidant, and the willing hearer, if not utterer, of his
slanders against his brother. We find, too, from General
Lodwick's letter to the Court of Directors, dated Oct. 9,
1840, that this artful enemy, in Noy., 1835, observed
" that there were some rumours. of a. plot .formed by the
neighbouring feudal chiefs subordinate to the British
Government, and particularly by the Chief of Sanglee
and the Raja of Colapore, and that the Raja of Sattara
might be talked over to join in it ; but that he would
be enabled to establish the truth or falsehood of his
report of the Raja's being about to. join in such eon-
!
spiracy by his Big/mess intimating
.to. me his intention to
join a hunting party on the borders of those states,. or his
visiting those chiefs in his annual tour during the next four
months." "I ascertained," continues Gen. Loth% ick, " that
this information came from the. Raja's brother, and I at-
tached proportionately less credit to it." But what an
artful intimation was this ? Balajipunt had but to in-
duce the Raja to make one of'the harmless excursions
above-mentioned, and then he .1%.5 once entangled in
a conspiracy ! His Ilm" fi-"ess,M-ow-tver; forum...ay
varier of them, and the Resident, in muse-

that one of these gentlemen is present to hear the re-
marks which I have felt, and may feel myself, bound to
make. And here, I must observe, there is a fundamen-
tal objection to the proceedings of the Commissioners,
as being a trial, or hearing, of the Raja. Sir, this was
no trial, for one of the requisites of trial was wanting,
inasmuch as the person accused was not allowed to he
present from the commencement. I have seen many judi-
cial trials. I have heard of many military trials. I have
been acquainted also with miscellaneous trials by Com-
mission ; but I never yet heard of one of any kind what-
ever, in which the person accused Was not allowed to be
present from the commencement; or, if he were a person
of rank who could not with propriety himself attend, to
depute some competent person to be present on his behalf
from the commencement. There may, of course, be secret
Commissions for investigating supposed occurrences,
and ascertaining to whom, they are probably at-
tributable ; and at this stage such matters may be
known to the Commissioners alone ; but when the
trial, or hearing, of a certain individual for a certain
act is undertaken, I cannot but conceive that that indi-
vidual has a right to be present from the commencement.
Now such liberty was not given to the Raja. I find
that on the second day of the proceedings, General Lod-
wick proposed that the Raja should be allowed to ap-
point a vakeel, or advocate, to conduct his defence, as he
would probably not desire to attend himself. This pro-
position was overruled by the other members of the
Commission, " as being premature, and inconsistent with
the instructions under which they act, and calculated to
defeat the object for which the Commission is. as-
sembled ;" and them the matter was allowed to rest for

the time, the General not requiring, I suppose, the im-
mediate transmission to Government of the paper con-
taining his proposal ; and the Commission continued
their labours without making any communication to the
Raja, until the ninth day, when it was resolved by all the
three members, that the Raja must be communicated
with, and the reasons for that not having been done pre-
viously are stated to be, first that it would have been pre.
mature to make any communication to his Highness the
Raja of Sattara, until sufficient evidence had been ob-
tained to criminate - his Highness, and to render it ne-
cessary that the Commission should call upon his
Highness for . a defence ; and, secondly because the
effect of acting on General Lodwick's
.suggestions
would have been to give immediate publicity to the Com-
mission's proceedings, and to have defeated the object
for which it was constituted by Government. I must
frankly say, that these reasons do not appear to me by
ally means conclusive. In truth, I cannot conceive any
reasons satisfactory for not allowing a person on trial to
be present at the trial from the commencement. The
Commission certainly had, on the very first day of its
assenthling, sufficient evidenCe to criminate his High-
ness, if it could be depended upon. They had before
them the whole of the papers contained in Appendix
A to their proceedings, which contain three statements,
by the Soobadar Sewgoolam Sing, and as many by
the Soobadar Gooljar Missur, to the general effect of
their evidence before the Commission. Surely, here
was evidence sufficient if true to criminate his Highness.
If lam answered that these statements were not on
oath (of which point I am not sure, for though the word
" depose " is used in five statements out of the six, yet
there is no further intimation that the party was sworn),
and that it was requisite that they should first be so
taken, then I would say, the appointment. of
the Commission to try the Raja was premature.
The depositions should have first been duly
taken, and then the trial have commenced be-
fore the Commission, the Raja having the privilege of
attending or sending a substitute from the beginning—
for no reason of this kind should have arisen to deprive
the person accused of so essential a right. The second
reason alleged, viz., the desire of keeping their proceed-
ings secret appears to me, I must say, in like manner,
quite inadequate to justify the departure from an obvious
principle of justice; nor am I at all clear that the secrecy
if suggested to the Raja would not have been maintained
—for, I think, that he would have lost far more than he
gained by the publication of the fact that he was under
trial for treason to the British Government. I must
clearly express that I do not consider. the Commissioners
to blame, as regards the Government, by whom their pro-
ceedings were entirely approved ; but it is clear that the
Raja's rights, such as they were at this crisis, could not
be justly affected either by the Commissioners or by the
Government; and I consider that they were most seriously,
infringed by his not being allowed to be present per-
sonally or by substitute during the whole of the
proceedings of the Commission fur trying him.
In principle he was deeply injured, as I conceive, by
this proceeding, and in fact so deeply, that I am inclined
to attribute to this circumstance alone, the condemna-

tion which the Commission • passed upon him. His
Highness attended, when first permitted to do so. on the
13th day; a difference of opinion, which required a refer-
ence to -Government. having prevented until then the
communication which it inns rezvived on the 9th day_ to
make 'to his Highness. How momentous to him were
these twelve days. During this period the examination
of the whole of the witnesses against him, with the ex-
ception of four queStions put to the Soobadar Gooljar
Missur, and further. examination of the worthless wretch
Untajee, had taken place, and all the discrepancies, inco•
herencies, and improbabilities of the evidence of the
principal witnesses had been disposed of, got over, well
or ill, and certainly without being subjected to such
scrutiny as would have been applied by a bold and
talented advocate of the Raja, British or Native. I
firmly believe that if his Highness bad had the advantage
of the attendance of such an advocate during this period,
thexesult-ayoUld have been" the detection of the collusion
which I believe existed, and'the perjury of the Soobadars.
I now return to the few remarks which I have to make
on the evidence of the witnesses, On the 10th day of
the proceedings Sewgoolam Sing is cross-examined as
follows :

"Q. Did Gooljar Missur keep a journal of the events
you have referred to?—A; I do not know whether he
did or not. He never told me that he did.—(The wit-
ness corrects himself, and states, Gooljar did deep a me-
morandum, and that he has himself seen it.)
" Q. Did you after each interview compare notes with
Gooljar Soobadar, and arrange beforehand what was to
be written down ?—A. We met together after the first
interview with the De:van, and wrote down what had oc-
curred. We frequently conversed together on the sub-
ject. lam nut certain, bat I think we wrote down what
had occurred at the interviews With the Raja." -
On the same day Gooljar Missur is cross-examined
as follows :

quence, set down the information as false. The .follow-
ing are proofs of the enmity existing between both
Chintamun Row and the Colapore Baja on the one hand,
and the Raja of Sattara on the other, and that enmity
must have been known to Balajipunt Nattoo :—Extract
of a letter from Mr. Dunlop, dated 12th April, 1837,
par. 6 :—" With regard to Chintamun Row's friendly
intercourse between him and the Sattara Raja, it seems
to be highly improbable for several reasons. He is a
zealous, I may say, bigotted Brahmin, and feels extreme
enmity at the Raja for his encouragement of the Furbhoo
caste in the performance of Brahminical ceremonies,
which,hedlas taken up and written against in the spirit
of a poietnic. The Sungleekur's long-established high
character should also protect him from suspicion, except
on strong grounds, neither do I think he would trust the
Raja if all their other motives were wanting." 'With
respect to the Calapore Raja the Cbittavees is reported
when in confinement to have stated, "I believe that the
fact is upon record that, such was that Raja's feelings
against the Raja of Sattara, that he declined to receive
a visit which the latter wished-to pay him, and that this
was in consequence abandoned." I observe that my ex-
cellent friend, Mr. Willoughby, states that neither him.-
self nor Colonel Ovens knew Balajipunt Nattoo r a-
viously to the assembling of the Sattara Commission.
I consider this much to be deplored, for I caqnot but
think that if they had known him they could not have
considered him the Raja's friend, even though he should
have appeared such. The evidence given above, together
with his own evidence, seems to show that he was not
so, nor do I observe that he even states that he endea-
voured to reclaim the IZaja from the dangerous course which
he represents that he was. pursuing. So much towards
showing that he was the Raja's enemy. The following are
reasons why it. might be expected that he should be so.
Ist. Because the. Raja had rejected him as his Dewan,
place which he was desirous of tilling, and which he now
occupies under Appa Sahib. 2d. Because he was a leading
Brahmin, and belonged to a caste which was never at
peace with the Raja, and because he was a connexion,
the son of the one being married to the daughter of the
other of Nilkunt Shastree of Poona, who, with
the Swamec of Sunkeshwur and Chintamun•Row,
of Sanglee, was at the head of the Brahmin
league against the Furbhoo and other castes on
a question of religion, in which dispute, whether
rightly or the reverse, -the Raja opposed the pretensions
of the Brahmins. The Raja's feelings towards Balaji-
punt Natoo I. should imagine partook largely of fear ;
bat if he thought him his friend. 1 should consider the
fact merely a proof how egregiously his Highness was
deceived by his artful enemy. -The third party hostile
to the Raja were the Brahmins generally. The Raja
himself did not disguise his dislike anti distrust of the
members of this caste, and instituted schools avowedly
with the design of instructing Mahrattas, and by this
means destroying the predominant influence of the Br2h-
mins ; and the violent religious dispute which arose be-
tween the Brahmins on the one hand, and the Furbhoos

" Q. Did you and Sewgoolam Sing compare notes :o-
gether after each interview ?—A. 'We have conversed
with each other on the subject, in order that we might
recollect whatever occurred, but we never met for the pur-
pose qf writing it down together."
On the 14th day the same person is further cross-exa-
mined as follows :

valued, addressed letters, in 1833, to the Honourabh
Mountstewart Elphinstone and Captain Grant Duff, ane
General Robertson,.two of the Residents at his Court, re-
questing that they would state their sentiments upon the
point. These he transmitted to the Bombay Government,
and that Government forwarded them to the Court of
Direct Ors. The Court, in September. 18:4, returned
these letters, with an intimation that they did not de-
sire to be the medium of the Ilaja's correspondence with
gentlemen in England, though there was no objection to
such ; they, at the same time, applied themselves to a
consideration of the matter in dispute, and passed a de-
cision which might be interpreted in his Highness's favour.
though it was not so precise as to make it certain that
the Court had seized the material points of the cam,.
This decision was made known to the Raja. in April,
1835, and the Resident, General Lodwick, received
orders to furnish Government with a list of the jagheers
to which this decision of the Court applied ; this Nva
done in July, 1835. Nothing followed upon this. The
Raja did not receive an acknowledgement of what he
thought were his rights, nor knew why he was kept Out
of them. In the spring of 1836 his Highness had a meeting
with the Governor, Sir Robert Grant, and immediately
questioned him earnestly upon this subject, which he
had most deeply at heart. It is certain that the Go-
vernor informed his Highness that the matter had been
referred home, and it is equally certain that this was a
mistake, as this very question; and the Resident's letter
of July, 1835, had not been brought to the Court's notice,
though the Governor thought it had; but a reference had, it
seems, been made regarding a jagheer in Khandesh, held
by a jagheerdar subject to his Highness as his liege para-
mount, which case might very well be imagicia..to differ
materially from that of the jagheer of the Punt SucfieliT
It is positively stated, by the Raja Vakeel, and I think
that I heard the thing stated in India long • beforQ the
unfortunate occurrences of 1835 and succeeding years,
that Balajipunt Nattoo had advanced considerable
sums of money to the Punt Suchew, the recovery of
which would, of course, be much facilitated, by the trans
fer of a portion of the Suchew's jagheer to the British
jurisdiction--should this be so, a pecuniary interest
would be superadded to the feelings of disappointed am-
bition, wounded vanity, and irritated sectarianism, to in-
duce him to use his best endeavours to effect that which
could not but deeply mortify the Raja. . The Raja
discovered or was persuaded, that the question had not
again been referred home, and felt deeply. mortified. He
found himself curtailed in rights which he much
' valued, and after a decision in his favour by the same
authorities, he found even this apparently disregarded to
his disadvantage, and no intention shown to submit the
matter again to those authorities. If he knew his ene-
mies, and most men do, though fear or policy may often
prevent this being shown, he would not fail to attribute
his mortification to their machinations; but he fairly in-
timated to the Resident, that his confidence in the Bom-
bay Government was much impaired, and the Resident
himself fell under' his displeasure, from an idea, doubt-
less, that the neglect which he experienced was, at least,
in part attributable to that officer. Finding, therefore,
that he could not recover from the equity of the Bombay
Government, the right of which he had, he conceived,
been unjustly deprived for four years, he resolved on
sending an Embassy to the Court of Director;, a step
neither necessary nor wise; but certainly not indicative
of any treasonable intents; and I should say quite incon-
sistent with the idea that the Raja's mindeould be occu-
pied with any such schemes. Treasonable plots, when
entertained, usually occupy a man's mind pretty com-
pletely. I should not expect to see an extensive political
intriguer engage in a Chancery suit. 'lt was at this
period, when the Raja's mind was agitated by a feeling
that he had been neglected and wronged, when
he was dissatisfied with the Government and the
Resident, and when the Governor felt displeased
with his Hig-hness for saying that the Governor had not
informed him that another reference had been made to
the Court regarding the jagheers, that the charge was
brought against the Raja of his having attempted to se-
duce the Soobadars of the 23d Native Infantry from
their allegiance. It is not my intention to dwell at length
upon that case. I have stated that I- think the Commis-
sion's proceedings cannot be considered as a hearing to
the Raja, and, indepettdently of this objection, the evi-
dence against his Highness seems to be weak in the ex-
treme. The result was, as we know, that his Highness
was declared to be proved guilty, though .the transaction
altogether was not deemed of so much importance as had
at first been thought to attach to it. "The attempt. to
tamper with our native troops," says Sir 1L Grant, in his
minute, 30th May, 1839, par. 3 (S. P. i., 235), " viewed
as an isolated act, . appeared so monstrously wild
and extravagant, as to induce this Government
to think that unless some more distinct and intelligible
act of impropriety could be brought home loth:
Raja, it would not he expedient to adopt extreme
measures against his Highness." However, While the
Tsr matt.,

sideration a petition to Government, dated the 13th of
December, 1836, was received in Bombay, by post. on
the 6th of March, 1837, purporting to have come from
Girjabaee, the mother of the titular Dewan Goyim'
Row, then in confinement, as a State prisoner, at Poona,
imputing various plots and conspiracies of a treasonable
nature to the Raja, and confessing to the guilt of her son,
as an agent under compulsion. A (lark chapter follows:
—General Lodwick was removed from the Residency in
a manner certainly betraying great di3ingennousness. He
was told that he had not the Raja's confidence, and that
" a new person was required to ascertain whether he
might not succeed, by the reciprocities, Of a free and
friendly intercourse, in winning front
,his *Highness that
confidence which he had, however unreasonably or tm-
gratefully, withdrawn from" the, General; and then. it
appears, that in the first instructions 'to the new Re-
sident, he is directed "to be distant and reserved in
all his communications with the Raja." The reason given
for the General's removal was not the real one. Others
appear in the Governor's minutes of the time, and' in Sir
R. Grant's minutes of the 18th June, 1837, paragraph 4
(S. P. i. 84, paragraph 4) it is stated that tho delay
which had taken place in instituting an inquiry into the
matter of the petition of Girjabaee " originated in our
conviction that this inquiry coup not with safety be
entrusted to the late Resident." These reasons inti-
mated that the General had fallen under the displeasure
of Government, and the conclnding par.graph of Sir R.
Grant's minute of the 27th April, 1837 (S. i. 183),
wherein he states that he considers two only, out of
the three Commissioner:, entitled to an acknowledgment
"that Government are in the highest degree satisfied
with the zeal, judgment, ability, and activity which they
evinced in the prosecution of the highly important and
equally delicate investigation entrusted to their charge,"
confirms that impression. Whatever were the causes, I
cannot but consider the removal of General Lodwiek,
who was undoubtedly inclined to take a more
favourable view of the Raja's case than either of
the other Commissioners, at the moment whe;,
further inquiries into the Raja's alleged treasons were
to be instituted, as untbrtunate. And who was ap-
pointed to succeed him ? Colonel ()vans, who had
taken decided views of his Highness's guilt. I confess, I
cannot but think this astrong measure. And who was placed
in that officer's full confidence, with the view of assistity;
him in unravelling the supposed intrigues ?
punt Nattoo, whom for so many reasons I believe to have
been his Highness's implacable enemy ; who, by his own
evidence before the Commission,. was shown to have
been the ready bearer of every. slander against the
Raja the confidant of Appa Sahib, the intriguer
against his brother, and who betrayed, by that evidence,
au evident desire to injure • the Raja.- I am bound to
say, that I do not think that this step can be defended.
I am not surprised at what tellowed, and which appears
to me much to be regretted. A system of espionage—
or, more properly speaking, a political inquisition—was
established in Sattara. Liberal rewards and indemnities
for evidence touching the Raja's supposed intrigue:, haul
been olThred on the receipt of. Girjabaee's. supposed p.ti-
riot). (Page 76, par. 9. Sattara Papers, Vol. 1.) This
systmit el ill till IICa to he acted upon ; evidence was
pro('nrcd 111 Various ways some gave it at once ; others
more unwillin;ly. N' would any person, from Ivhat
occurrod, fail to draw the inference, that to Ins a witness
aqainst the llnja was; to have a title to the favour of the
U.,”11,1r iov.-rnmont. P,.tention, !,, it%
i.:1,;('!, where p.triie, rc1e..0.1 g (,64101ice hik.ll 11
St!ppolsvd i•v •11, dnWI after

tan information as to the writer of that letter, as also on
other points connected with that affair.
" 12. In order, however, to dispel the illusion as to
Go,ind Row's release, which threatens to throw such
seriou; obstacles in the way of this important inquiry, I
beg most respectfully to propose that tha Dewan be sent
immediately, under guard, Ahmednuggur, and placed
in strict confinement there: that lie only be attended by
his own servant, and that all ocher intercourse with him
be for the present prohibited.
" 13. It is to be hoped that this measure, if adopted,
may serve to show that the rumours of Goyim! Row's
return are without foundation ; and, this being felt; his
mother and his other friends may be induced to come
14rward and disclose all they know, as the only means.
of assisting him. But whatever may be the result,' the
mieet of this step should certainly he tried without loss
of time."

" Q. Describe how your journal was kept.—A. I wrote
it by order of the Adjutant. 'The account of the first
interview with the Dewan was written the morning after
it occurred. The secoud interview, and the meeting of
the Raja was also written on the following morning. I
wrote it when quite ohne."

Govind Ras was accordingly removed on the sth of
July, 1837, from Poona, to be transferred to the gaol at
Ahmednuggur. On the 7th July the Resident repOrted
that he had visited by the Bare and two persons
in her confidence, and that having read to them the
papers purporting to have been sent by -Girjabaec, 'they
all agreed that the contents were true, though none of
them knew the writer. On the 21st July the Resident
sent up a statement of Sukaram Bullal, uncle of Govind
Row (one of the two friends of Girjabaee above alluded
to) in which he declared that he had caused the petition
to be written by the hand of Mandoo Fugree, who Col.
Ovans stated was " a Brahmin living in their own
house," viz., that of Govind Row. Sukaram Bullul, how-
ever, in an additional paragraph to his statement, says
that he haUome asia visitor, and that then he went off
m
'lmediately to a-itistariee: .:11adfiewlee-Gungadhnr, the •
base's other confidant. on the 25th July, made a deelara-
tion to the same effect. On the 30th July, Sukaram
Bullal being pressed to produce the person who wrote
the petition, said that he was an Oomedwar (candidate
for employment), and that when he left the house he
said that he was going to llindostan (the northern part
of India), and that it was on this Recount that he was
employed to write the petition for fear of the Itlaharaj.
On the 24th July, the Government, at the recommen-
dation of the Resident, that the Judge of Ahmednue..,gur,
he instructed to admit Sukaram Bullal to Govind Row,
who Balajipunt Nattoo, in his evidence before the
Commission, says," is not a very wise man, and will do
as he is bid," directs the Judge to admit accordingly any
agent whom the Resident may depute. And on the 4th
August, Colonel Ovans reports that &harm Bullal left
Sattara the day before to visit his nephew, Govind Row.
The Resident at the same time states that he has re-
ceived a petition from Girjabaee, requesting that her
son, Govind Row, may be released from the gaol of Ah-
mednuggur, and • allowed to occupy quarters in the
town ; and he suggests that this step ",should not
be taken until the arrival' of Sukaram Bullul
at Ahmednuggur, and that he should. he con-
sulted as to the proper time for granting this
indulgence," and corresponding instructions were ac-
cordingly issued to the Judge of Ahmednuggur on the
16th August. Now, surely here was a great mistake, if
we allow that the Bombay Government could desire
true evidence only—if we allow that the Resident could
desire true evidence only—if we allow, and it would be
more than I think could reasonably -be asked; that
Balajipunt Nattoo could desire true evidence only, there
can be no doubt about the situation of Sukaram
He had declared that Govind Row had admitted the
existence of the Raja's intrigues; therefore, when he is
sent to confer with Govind Row, what is this but to
strive to constrain Govind Row to confirm the statement
of Sukaram Bullal, whether it were true or false? for it
cannot be supposed that that individual would consent to
Govind Row's making any statement which conflicted
with his. And when we find as above that Govind Row's
liberation or continuance in a strict imprisonment was
-Made to depend, upon Sukaram Bullal's pleasure, the
case becomes worse still. • Surely no value can be placed
on: evidence so got, nor on any procured in an inquiry
upon which such things are done ; for the effect of this
step could not b.‘ limited ,to Govind Row, it Would
spread all over the country, and there would
not be wanting agents without orders to take
care that it did so. I beg explicitly to state, that I have
no desire to cast' any imputation upon Colonel Ovens,
beyond that a error in judgment, in suggesting the steps
above mentioned, which, it will have been seen were
fully approved by the Government ; but an error I think
it was, and one that could not but shake far better evi-
dence than has been produced against the Baja. The
next papers in this history, are the following letter from
the Acting Session judge of Ahmednuggur, dated the
24th August, 1837, and an inclosure

The discrepancy between the statements of the two
witnesses is obvious. The witness then continues—" Sew-
goolarn Sing was at his own house. I have frequently
conversed with Sewgoolam on the subject, but I never
read it to him. I used to show it to the Adjutant, and
he told me to write in English, in order not to excite
suspicion, and this gave me great trouble."
Q. Why did you, on a former occasion, state that
you had merely noted- down the dates, and not the- par-
ticulars of the interview ?--A. I did not understand the

THE ACTING SESSION JUDGE OF AIIMEDNUGGUR, TO W.
H. WATHEN, ESQ., CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT.
•' AhMeddilllgglit Adawlot, Aug. 24, 1837.
that, S
hi
els
ihraer
oe
thhee honour
Acting
idzita,ityie,s,:sl,joh(tiliindielotsfura•tltat,ectsdeganpteeterati}siso:: retserociiioiaprst.,
ult.; and to inform You
in yB
charge,si,icilleastot.o(r;mov:ii3(l,
nephew ; and that I have also, at Snkaram's solicitation,
permitted his, Govind Row's (younger) brother, to ac-
company him in their visits. Their object has been to
induce hint to disrbse what he knew regarding- the hte
proceedings of the Sattara Court, in which they have
been successful.

" 2. I had an interview this morning with Govind Row,
at which, after explaining the circumstances under which,
he was, as he describes it, reluctantly led to take part in
them, he presented me with the enclosed, written, as he
assures me, with his own hand, and which I had previ-
ously given him the means of preparing.
3. The interview the Raja and himself herein
described as having had with the Soobadars, took place,
lie says. in Shrwun Vud, between 27th August and
11th September, 1836, but the exact date he does not
remember. ' .

" 4. Every attention has been paid to. Govincl Row's
comfort since he came here. He now seems willing to
communicate to me all he knows, and I have no doubt qf
being able to obtain from him ANY INFORMATION THE Go-
VERMENT MAY DESIRE.

" 5. A copy of the enclosed confession will be for-
warded to the Resident, together with a note that has
been intercepted between the attendants of Sukaram and
Govind Row. but to which I sec no reason to attach any
importance.—l have the honour, &c.
" B. Hurt', Acting Session Judge.
" (INCLOSURE IN THE ABOVE.)
" Translation of a Tad (statement) from. Govind Row
Wittul, as delivered to the Acting SeSsion. Judge of
Ahmednuggur ; dated 24th August, 1824.
" I make the following representation, that the cir-
cumstances (therein contained) may become known to
the (British) Government, that Untr,jee Wagh (lid bring
the two Soobadars of the Pultun (Native Regithent) to
me. They were once taken to Alaharaj (the Raja of
Sattara), and the Maharaj taking them privately aside,
did speak to the Soobadars :llama (forming) friendship,
and other matters. These communicatiens they (the
Soobadars) have also already revealed to the Sahib (the
Resident or the Commission). The reason for my not
at first representing_ those proceedings to (the British)
Government was, that it was my wish to preserve the
friendship between the Maharaj's Government (Raja of
Sattara) and the Company's Government inviolate, and
no obstruction should happen
.to it ; for this reason, I
did not make any intimation. When I may have a meet-
ing with the Resident, Orans Sahib (Lieut.-Colonel
Ovans), then 1 will make a detailed statement of the
whole of these matters. I am (was) a servant, and it is
(was) necessary to act according to orders. It now rests
with the Company's Government in every way kindly
to save me (meaning to protect him from the Raja's
engeance)."
Now, did Sukaram Bullal, whom we have seen
vested thus with pow,r to make Govind Row confirm
his evidence, make himself a true deposition ? Sir, he
did not. When he went to Ahinednuggur, to constrain
Goyim' Row to give evidence similar to his, he went with
lies, important. lies in his mouth and in his evidence ; at
least he himself so declares, for on the 12th May, 1838, he
admits that. instead of his getting the petition written
in Govind llow's house, by Maltdoo Fugeee, or a candi-
date for employment, that petition was written Itv
Sada-ee• Prf, hn,,n f,f•
!!. big•,)ti•v I
file ill,ii4111)!I I,i.
it 41; .-I,rt.llut lid, Hit pOSt. :i1 I.o,ll‘tt, uc it' 11,1
MI I ! .11111. Hi t
Sl,l,t.,ttit',l% 1.1 tit itlo.l*
,V:1114 Ibt.l 11. 111, ti, "41 OH I,
tis Led -.hid-Vali; him. (;), tl,,
of WiLtill Punt Anna, and that when people were ap-
prehended, in consequence of the petition being. sent to
Government., he was to receive 1,000 rnpecs, thongh
he insisted on having 1,200.. Ile dot's not mention the
name of Sukara is in his statement. These papers
were transmitted' by Colont,l (lvans to Government
on the 16th of August, 1838. So much for Allis
affair. Such • measures_ produced the fruits that
might have been expected, and inf., a-in:ilium of vari•
ons
,plots, including a multitude of small States, was
received, hut of these none. were considered apparently
wertit pursuing. except alleged intrigues with A into Sahib,
ex-Bala of' Nagpore, then a prisoner at Jotulpoor, and
witli the-Viceroy of Goa. The discoveries were reperte(l
from time to time to the Government, of India, from
which a letter of rather a di:emit-aging tendency
was received, bearing date the 7th Aug., 153;. After
alluding to the Raja's desire to employ .1)1.. Milne in pre-
paring a statement of his case to be laid before.Govern-
uncut, which the Governor-General was inclined to sanc-
tion, the letter proceeds thus : •
, Par. 6. " In conclusion I ant directed to state the
anxious wish of his Lordship in Council to learn at the
earliest moment possible, what prospect there may be,
under present circumstances, of throwing now light upon
this subject by further investigation ; and, it' the Go-
vecnment shouhl be in danger of becoming involved in an
indefinite mid inconclusive Inquire, in what mode it may
best be advisable to terminate the proceeding's, rather
than continue them under the inconvenience which the
lapse of time, political intrigue, ,and the uncertainty of
Indian evidence, combined with the obscurity of the case,
in regard to its extent and importance, must give to
them."
Notwithstanding' this caution, the Bombay Govern-

question. I thought I was asked whether I had described
;ersons ; in fact, I mistook the word tilfice/' for

`ilsweer.•

Now, turning back to the tenth day (S. P. iii., p. 116),
we find Gooljar Missur cross-examined as follows
Q. How are you able so particularly to recollect the
dates of the several interviews deposed to in your examina-
tion ?—A. I impressed it on my memory, knowing that it
was a business in which the Government were con-
cerned. I wrote down the dates of the interviews, but no
particulars. My memorandum is at my house ;it is
written in Hindostanee."

and other castes on the other, and in which the Raja was
considered to wrong the Brahmins, engendered a feeling
of hostility on the part of the Brahmins towards the
Raja, the strength of which it is difficult to conceive.
The three heads of this league of religionists were the
Swamee of Stinke6hwur, Chin mum n l:ow of saterlee, and
Nilkunt Shastree of Poona. These were all notoriously
hostile to the Ihuja on religion, r 0.66.1.,.
tll inrefrrate Mr. puid.ip.
and proved 1116:1`4. I,r th,
Gnieowsr in his ; and iii .it'
and polenties. tiTo:
alw,y, been t,, hi, llittor"• 44 •1110,10,s
find it eroflitpd that 111,. .1;,,"1,t in in-
tri4twb with the Swaine,,, 11at
in possession ot:evidence likely to be deeply detrimen-
tal to his llighness, evaded furnis,hing it to GovernMent.
though it is admitted that stick was his hostility to,the
Raja, that he tried, by. means of information which he
had, or pretended to have, to frighten his I li!;lanoss into
his views in the religious fend betwenn the lirahinins
and the other castes, nrbielt Ire did succeed in th,ing.
These are the enemies, Appa',.Sahib, Bah,;;
ti 141,
and the Brahmins, whose .arts and unwearied malignity,
aided by tie too ready belief of the British authorities,
in charges against tho7depoged 14+ja. and their refusal to
give him a hearing, have occasioned the mulenthation
and dethronement of that much-injured Prince. It:has
been stated that up to the year 1832 the utmost har-
mony, cordiality, and confidence prevailed between the
Bombay Government and that of Ids Highness. In that
year the Raja's jurisdiction over a portion of the jagheers
of the Punt Suchew, one of his Ilighness's jagheerdars,
was questioned on the ground that such portion lay be-
yond the boundary line of the Sattara territory_ I be-
lieve that I ant right in saying that from 1819 to 1832
his Ilighne3s'sjurtsdiction over this tract had always
been exercised without dispute ; the claim to the jnris-
diction on the part of the Company was' howeVer, now
advanced' by the deputy agent for Sirdar, in the Dec-
can, who iii noticing it observes, " I am supported in all
I have said by the opinion of Balajipunt Natoo, who,
as Mr. Elphinstone's confidential native agent, superin-
tended at Sattara the preparation of the treaty and
schedule, on' which the Raja founds his pretension."
The Bombaf,Government decided the question against
the Baja, who, therefore, like an hottest straightforward
man, deprived, as he considered, without just cause, of
that to which he was entitled, and -which he- highly

It is evident that the 11:)1 hate thought
(hot he ,Alts asked whether he had (leseriliA luzweer
(perm's), or whether he bud written pprijeti-
tarS). }l3 W'S asktA.,imply. how he came. toretnember
40c.. Ile answer., the question very intelligibly, and,
if be mide a mistake in, 6uying that he did not wri:e
particulars, when he meiint to sty that lie did net de-
scribe persons, the mistake is his own, and is rather sur-
prising in a person speaking a language with which he is
familiar. However, the journal will be found not to be
deficient in descriptions of persons. The evidence of
the Seobadar, in regard to the two interviews ut the
Dewan's house, is stated by the Cmninission to be cor-
roborated almost in a providential manner by Cosia
natio, the Dewan's slipper-bearer. I must say that I
think this person requires himself to be corroborated by.
Providence, which has not yet interposed in his favour.
His evidence before the Commission is nothing to boast
of, but, such us ic is, he has subsequently entirely de-
stroyed it. In his evidence before the Commission (S.P.
iii., 105), ho says, after relating the second interview ut
the I)ewan's house—

Oki :mil •
1; 'l.ll‘ ill tilt'
ert vitt, i I
I •4 1,0 • .I,V

When I Ifft the house (of the Dewan) to return home,
THEY WERE STILL IN THE SLEEPING-ROOM, and MY
HOUSE IS A CONSIDERABLE DISTANCE FROM TILE DE-
WAN'S lIOUSE,"

1 4.1'11.14`Hi

And in a deposition made by him on the 22d of Sep-
tember, 1837, and transmitted to Government by Col.
Ovans On the 24th of November, 1837, we find him
stating, in direct contradiction to the foregoing—
" Afterwards (after he.had, as he said, admitted Abba
Mhareek at the second interview at the l)ewan's) the
Rao Sahib went into the IVara (Raja's palace); after him,
haring called the Gharia (Bramin Untajee) and the
Soobadars, I took thew into the Willa."
And then follows a detail of what he saw at the palace.
lie had doubtless discovered, subsequently to the sitting
of the Commission, that he had limited his evidence very
foolishly ; and it is far from improbable that, by this
time, he has remembered that he was a witness to the
whole of what pus.sed LOA:vett
.the Baja and the Spolnalars

the o .•
touching the intrigues Ldtraitors ? I would answer that.
considerable risk must attend the measure when a Go-
vernment, so vastly superior as.the British, ha; recourse
to these steps to procure infiinriation as to the supposed
treason of a Prince so weal: and poWerless in comparison
as the Raja rfif Sattara. Peo,ile will forkui the opinion.
and in India in or:- remlUy than in Most places, that the
matter under inclitirr is one in which Government is a
party, foul that its interests. are on the, slay of the com
vietion or the aceused, and
:Will expget to •be benefitcd
or
_injured according to the evidoneo Which they furnish.
But, in regard to Se tiara at the time then in question, there
could be no mystery in the matter in the mind of any
native. That lialajipunt Xatoo was the enemy of the
Raja, and the confidant of Apps Sahib could not be nu -
kaown.; awl if it were, BalajTunt would have himself
promulgated it, and all who had any hatred to gratify or
who wished to procure the favour of the British Govern-
ment, would enlist theniselves as witnesses against the
Raja. I have said that this-would be the case, however
carefully the Government and the Resident might guar.'
against procuring any but true evidence.- But even tliis
does not always appear to have been done.. (hi the 24th
of .1 one, -1837, Colonel Ovans recommended the remova
of Govind Row to Ahmednuggur in the following terms:
11. Asir was no doubt under the impression that
the release, of her seta could. only be accomplished by
making the disclosures alluded to, that the letter ((iirja-
lace's petition), if `it be genuine, was written, it follows
that if his release by any other means appears possible,
this statement wit'. not be acknowledged. Considering,
tlierefcre, that the impression of Govind Row's release is so
generally and &illy credited here, I haye refrained at
present from havirg any direct communication with his
j but I all/doing all in my power quietly to ub-