Star.
London, England, 1821-12-20 00:00:00

EAST INDIA HOUSE.

Yesterday a Quarterly General Court of Proprietors
was held at the East India House, for the purpose of
declaring a Dividend from Michaelmas to Christmas,
and for the dispatch of other public business.
The minutes of the proceedings at the last Court
having been read,
The CHAIRMAN moved, that the Dividend on the
Capital Stock of the Company, for the half-year
commencing July 5, and ending January 5, 1822,
be 51 per Cent.
Mr.R roBY said,he was aware that the present motion
was usually considered as a mere motion of course,
and that since the Act of Parliament. declaring that
a Dividend of £lo.los. should be divided amongst
the Proprietors of East India Stock, it was deemed
to be scarcely a matter for the consideration of that
Court, whether there should be any or what amtnint
of Dividend. He contended, however, that a deep
responsibility lay upon the Proprietors, and thit it
was their bounden duty, before coming to a vote of
this nature, to investigate the commercial concerns of
the Company, and see whether their profits would'
warrant the Dividend assigned to them by the Act
of Parliament. He should move that an account of
the net profits of the commercial establishment of the
Company be immediately laid before the Court.
The CHAIRMAN, after a short pause, observed, that
the motion of the Hon. Proprietor did not appear to
be seconded ; and that it was irregular to call for the
production of accounts without notice.
Mr. S.-DixoN doubted whether it was competent
to any Member to bring forward a question of such
importance without notice.
Mr. Hume took it for granted, that all the com-
mercial accounts of the Company had been laid before
the Court of Directors before the dividend had been
declared. He admitted, however, that it would be
extremely inconvenient to enter into any examination
of them at the present moment.
After a few words from Mr. RIGBY and Mr. R.
JACKSON, the motion was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN then moved, that this Court do ap-
prove a Resolution of the Court of Directors, grant-
ing to Dr. John Bortbwick Gilchrist, as Lecturer in
the Hindoostanee language, the sum of £2OO per
annum for a further term of three years, together with
an allowance of £3OO per annum, to enable him to
provide a suitable Lecture-room.
Mr. R. JACKSON expressed his participation in the
feelings of gratitude entertained by the Company for
the long and successful labours of the distinguished
individual to whom the present grant was appropri-
ated. Ile could have wished, however, that in the
description of that learned person, words of a more
complimentary character had been introduced; and
he should propose, as an Amendment, the addition
of the words, " late Oriental Professor in the College
of Fort William; and now Professor and Lecturer in
the Hindoostanee Language in London." There was
another point to which he wished to call the atten•
tion of the Court, he meant the-limitation of the grant
to a period of three years. He could not but think
it a little ungracious, that a •Gentleman, to whose
labours the Company was so much indebted, and
who had contributed so much towards facilitating a
knowledge of the Oriental languages, should be put,
as it were, upon his good behaviour for a term of
three years. One of the necessary effects of this li-
mitation would be to preclude Dr. Gilchrist from any
benefit he might hereafter derive from the Superan-
nuation Act, and he was sure that nothing could be
further from the intention of the Company than that
the grant should have such an operation. He should
move, therefore, that the words " for the term of
three years," be omitted.
The CHAIRMAN thought the latter part of the Hon.
Proprietor's Amendment objectionable, since it would
operate as an extension of the Company's grant. It
could only be introduced as a substantive motion to
be determined upon by two Courts. The Hon. Pro-
prietor was mistaken in supposing' that the terms of
the grant would have the effect of depriving Dr.
I Gilchrist of the benefit of the Superannuation Act,
for the three years would become a part of the
per iod which would entitle him to receive the benefit
of that Act.
Mr. R. JACKSON contended that the Amendment
would rather diminish than enlarge the operation of
the grant. As the terms of the grant at present stood,
Dr.
Gilchrist was to serve for three years, soute qui
coute, whereas, if he were to serve only quaindiu se
bent gesserit, he stood upon his good behaviour, and
might be discarded and sent out to starve at the ex-
piration of six months. The effect of his Amendment
would be, therefore, to diminish the grant, since it
lowered that which was positive to that which was
only conditional.
• Mr. TWINING asked whether the other alteration
►proposed by the Hon. Proprietor, as to the designa-
tion of Dr. Gilchrist, could be made without being
previously agreed to by two Courts?
The CllAlßmas said, that this was merely a verbal
alteration, and did not affect the money grant.
Mr. Hume said, that the alteration was desired by
Dr. Gilchrist rather as a point of honour, than from
any other motive.
The CHAIRMAN observed, that the appointment of
Oriental Professor had been made by the Marquis.
Wellesley, and subsequently disapproved of by that
Court. It would be for the Court, therefore, to con-
sider whether it would not be somewhat inconvenient
to give a title to Dr. Gilchrist, which bad not been
recognized by the Company..
Mr. flume remarked, that the title was vox et pm-
terea uileil. Ile could not help thinking that Dr.
Gilchrist had been hardly treated. It was usual for
the Company not to consider the retired allowance of
their servants as part of their allowance for present
services ; but that practice had been departed from in
the case of Dr. Gilchrist. Other Professors (Professor
Stuart, fur example) received a salary of £5OO per
annu_m independent of his salary. Dr. Gilchrist re-
cci:ed iL:I62 retired pay as a surgeon, a. pension of