HC Deb 08 July 1807 vol 9 cc743-4
Mr. Grant

presented a petition from the Directors of the East India Company, praying for leave to bring in a bill to raise an additional sum on bonds, until the increase of their capital authorised by parliament took place. On his moving that the petition be referred to a committee of the whole house,

Mr. Creevey

rose and declared, that this was the first instance in which any public body had made such a request to parliament, without the production of the necessary documents on which it was founded. In 1772, an attempt was made by the ministry of the day to bring in a similar bill, but this attempt was defeated by general Burgoyne, who contended that an explicit account of the reasons which called for such a measure, ought first to be laid before the house. He trusted that the house would pursue a similar mode of conduct in the present instance, and that a complete disclosure of the state of the company's affairs would now take place; especially when it was recollected, that there were two India budgets in arrear.

Mr. R. Dundas

observed, that the hon. gent. was under a mistake in this business, and that the precedent of 1772, adduced by him, was not in point. The East India Company only wanted to raise by bond what they had been already authorised to raise in capital. With respect to the state of their affairs, that might be discussed in the committee of the whole house, to which his hon. friend had moved that the petition should be referred. As to the budget, it was his intention to-morrow to move for the papers which ought long ago to have been on the table of the house, and which it was not his fault were not so.

Mr. Peter Moore

observed, that the company were precluded, under two acts of parliament, from extending their debt beyond a certain sum. An act, of 1793, bound them to extend it no farther than 1,500,000l: but an act of the very next year allowed them to increase it to 3,000,000l. That debt remained to this hour undiminished; and the act of parliament was as imperative against their extending their debt now, by the issue of bonds, as by any other mode. It was for the house to consider how far it was wise to extend the existing limitation; but certainly it ought not to be done without a full investigation of the company's affairs.—The petition was then referred to a committee of the whole house.