Lord Ossulstonrose to make his promised motion with respect to the Debt of the East-India company. After some preliminary observations, his lordship stated, that in the year 1793, it appeared that the debt of the East-India company bearing interest, was about 7 million, which it was proposed to reduce to 2 million; that in order to do this, a power was given, by the act of 1793, to the different presidencies in India to grant bills in favour of the creditors of the company on the court of directors to the amount of 500,000l. annually, and no more, for the purpose of transferring or, in other words, liquidating this debt; that is to say, it being determined to be a matter of policy and expedience, that the debt should be reduced, in order to carry this into effect in the manner the most beneficial to the company, instead of applying to this pur- 406 pose so much of the surplus revenue in the first instance, the whole of that surplus was allowed to be laid out in an investment, out of the profits arising from the sale of which, the court of directors were to set apart the sum of 500,000l. annually to answer such bills as should be drawn by the government in India to the amount and for the purpose specified in the act.—That since this year 1793, it appeared that bills had been-drawn to the amount of not less than 8 millions. Whether they had been granted to the creditors of the company, and had therefore gone in liquidation of the debt, he could not say; if so, the only difference would be that, in that case, the amount of debt contracted would be by so much the larger than would otherwise appear to be the fact; but so it was, that so far from the debt having been actually reduced, it had swollen from 7 to nearly 30 millions; and of this 30 millions he was further informed, (to ascertain which, was the object of his motion,) that a considerable part, he was afraid to say how much, had been contracted upon terms which entitled the holder of the loan to go to the treasury at Calcutta,and receive,on demand, bills upon the court of directors payable 12 months after date according to the mode in which bills are usually drawn from India. —That this was the case, his lordship said he had no manner of doubt. He had heard it front authority which he could not question, and it had been admitted by every one with whom he had conversed on the subject. He was moreover confirmed by a publication which he held in his hand, the Calcutta Monthly Journal for the month of May, 1805, in which, as well as many others of different dates, he found a regular Government Notification of a loan in which this condition is distinctly stated. After saying that "the public are hereby informed that the sub-treasurer at the presidency, &c. have been authorized to receive any sums of money," &c. it goes on to say, "the principal of the promissory notes shall be payable either in Bengal under the rules established for the payment of the register debt now existing, or by bills to be drawn by the governor-general in council, on the hon. court of directors; which bills shall be granted at any time on the application of the proprietor of the notes, either when the principal shall have become payable in Bengal, or at any earlier period."—Taking for granted, then, that this has seen the mode of proceeding, the next question 407 was, whether it has been with or without the authority of the court of directors?—If without their authority, it was as far as he could understand, though it was not the question of law, but the matter of fact which he wished to establish, directly in the face of the 110th clause of the act of 1793, which provides, "that nothing in this act shall extend to authorize any of the governments in India to grant bills for the purpose of transferring or remitting the said debts from India to Great Britain, to become due and payable within any one year, exceeding in amount the sum of 500,000l. unless by the special order and authority of the court of directors of the said company, for that purpose first had and Obtained."—To issue, therefore, promissory notes exchangeable at the pleasure of the holder for bills on the court of directors, provided the amount of such promissory notes exceeded the sum of 500,000l. in any one year, he contended to be against the express provisions and meaning of this act. Without, therefore, the authority of the court of directors, this proceeding was illegal; if it was with their authority, which it was impossible to believe, he should be at loss how to reconcile it with the duty they owed to their constituents the court of proprietors, and to the faithful discharge of the important trusts committed to their hands.—In what manner this accumulation of debt had taken place, formed no part of his present purpose. Whether it had arisen from war, which could hardly be the case, because since the year 1793, with the exception of the Marhatta war, there had been but one war in India, that against Tippoo, which lasted a few .months and which paid its own expences; or whether, which was more credible, it had arisen from the expence of civil and military establishments constantly exceeding the revenue derived from that accession of territory which had rendered these additional establishments necessary, however this might be, as to the origin of the debt, if the amount and nature of it was such as he had described, if only a small portion of the amount stated to him, had been contracted upon the terms he imagined, and that the East-India company were liable to be drawn upon any day to an amount infinitely beyond all imagination of their means to pay, it was unnecessary to put to the house what was the situation of the East-India company, and what was the extent of mischief which might possibly arise.—It was with a view 408 to ascertain this fact, as well as to afford an opportunity for interposing timely measures of prevention, if any such could be found, that he should move, "that there be laid before this house, a return of the debts of the East-India company in India from January 1794, up to the latest period; specifying the terms and dates of the several loans, together with the rate of interest, and when and where the principal and interest of the said loans are payable."
Lord Morpethexpressed a wish that his noble friend would withdraw his motion, assuring him that it was the intention of ministers to lay before the house the fullest possible information with respect to the affairs of India. In conformity with this intention the noble lord stated, that he would, in a very few days, submit a motion for a return of all the debts of the India company, the loans contracted by the several presidencies, and the terms upon which they were made, distinguishing such loans as bore interest, from those which did not, with the terms of interest, when and where payable, &c. up to the latest period. Such an account he believed, would answer better than that moved for, the object his noble friend professed to have in view. There was an additional reason for acceding to a short delay, and it was this, that it would enable those concerned in the immediate superintendance of Indian affairs to collect more accurate information which they would be most probably enabled to do by farther arrivals.
§ Mr. Francis rose,not to take any part in the discussion of this subject, but merely to say, that there was one question connected with the finances of India, to which, notwithstanding his general resolution, as the house had heard, he felt himself bound, and that was the loan made by the government of Bombay to Gwicowar. Upon this loan, however, he should reserve his sentiments, until all the promised documents should be laid before the house, and until the India budget should be brought forward for discussion.
Lord Folkestonewas glad that the attention of the house had been called to the important interests of India, and thought many good effects would be likely to arise from this circumstance. He hoped that the documents promised by the noble member of the board of controul, would be speedily brought forward,and prove fully satisfactory.
Lord Temple ,referring to the notice which had been postponed by Mr. Paull, took occasion to state, that the hon. member was now called upon in candour and fairness to lord Wellesley, to state the nature of the charge, which it was his intention to bring forward on Friday, pursuant to his notice.—Mr. Paull said he should decline giving the noble lord any answer on the subject. Lord Ossulston's motion was then, with the leave of the house, withdrawn.