HC Deb 18 June 1811 vol 20 cc694-7
Mr. Peter Moore

presented a Petition from James Oliver, esq. late a colonel in the service of the East India Company, under the presidency of Fort St. George, setting forth:

"That the petitioner entered into the service of the East India Company in the year 1769, and continued in the Madras army until the year 1800, at which last-mentioned date he gradually obtained the rank of colonel; that, during the long period of his service, an interval of thirty-six years, he had been in constant employment, and had been engaged in fourteen general actions, thirty cannonades, and was at the reduction of twenty-six forts, many of which were taken by assault; and that he was appointed to and employed from January 1802 to July 1803 in the civil and military government of the Molucca Islands in the eastern seas, captured from the Dutch; and in the year 1805, he returned to England for the benefit of his health; and that complaints against him were put forth, in a letter from the court of directors to the Madras government, bearing date the 15th of February 1804, charging principally, that, while in the civil government and military command of the Moluccas, the petitioner had been concerned in the purchase of a certain quantity of spices with an European inhabitant of the island; next, that he had an interest in a cargo of European goods sent there for sale, which had given rise to an alledged arbitrary act, on his part, preventive of the fair sale of other European articles composing the investment of the officers belonging to two of the Company's ships, and consequently prejudicial to those officers; and, lastly, that he had prematurely delivered up to the Dutch the islands entrusted to his government; and that a Committee being appointed for the purpose of investigating these matters, the said Committee assembled on the 4th day of August 1804, and proceeded to examine witnesses in support of the matters submitted to them, and continued their sittings for the space of a month and upwards, when at this latter period, and under circumstances to which considerable suspicion attaches, and notwithstanding the instruction under which they were bound to act, that the I accused should be acquainted, in limine, with the nature and full extent of the exceptions taken at his conduct in the premises, the government of Fort St. George sent fresh articles of accusation against the petitioner, and required the Committee to proceed thereon; and that the new criminatory matters depended solely on the assertion of an individual of the name of William Betty, and were submitted in the form of a letter forwarded to the government of Fort St. George after the writer of the said letter had been dismissed from the Company's service by the sentence of a court martial, and after he had already embarked and was on his passage; and that the Committee was detained for several weeks until the 18th day of February 1805, when the petitioner was allowed to urge certain matters in his own behalf; and about the end of the same month, the Committee made their Report to the government of Fort St. George; and that the petitioner not being suspended at the time of making such report, or being made acquainted with any proceedings intended to be instituted against him there-upon, although he had reason to apprehend that, from the direction of the court of directors in the event of such report being unfavourable, he should be suspended the service; he had consequently every reason to conclude the report was not unfavourable in its general tendency; and that a copy of the said report was respectfully, but in vain, requested by the petitioner within a reasonable time, and he being then in a state of great debility, obtained permission (after being obliged to execute certain securities), to embark for England; and that having arrived here early in September 1806, he reported his arrival to the court of directors; and having on the 1st of October following, received a notice that the said court was about to proceed to the consideration of his case, the petitioner, the better to enable himself to make his defence, made repeated applications for a copy of the aforesaid report, but without effect; and, on the 27th of November following, the said court of directors made communication in form to the petitioner, that they had dismissed him their military service; and that the determination of the court of directors has been since published to the King's and their-own army in India, stating that the petitioner was dismissed from the service of the Company for gross violation of trust reposed in him whilst commanding officer of the Molucca Islands: and that such dismissal does not appear to have originated from any breach of military duty, but for an offence alledged to have been committed by the petitioner in a civil capacity, as a ministerial officer of the Company, in which capacity the petitioner can clearly prove that he made a saving to his honouurable employers of 303,404l. sterling, in the short space of eighteen months; and the measure was not sanctioned by the proceedings of a court martial: this power is submitted to the House as usurped by the East India Company, not only in direct opposition to the articles of war, but also to the subsequent statute, expressly reserving to the King the right of making rules for the government of the East India Company's armies; and that the petitioner, having been denied all access to the proceedings of the Committee of Enquiry at Madras, and to their ultimate report, and finding, from the best legal information he could obtain, that there was no process to compel the said court of directors to deliver to him the copies of the said proceedings, or the report upon which they had been founded, he addressed a memorial to the commissioners for the affairs of India, commonly denominated the Board of Controul, but was informed, through the secretary of that Board, that the commissioners had not any controul over the subject matter of his memorial; and that the petitioner therefore humbly reasserts that the court of directors of the East India Company, of the year 1806–7, have acted in contravention to the act of parliament made and provided for the better government of the Company's army in India, by dismissing him there from without a legal trial by a competent court; and that they have hereby assumed inordinate power, and deprived him of the honours and comforts to which he was justly entitled, from his many and great exertions; and praying the House to take his case into consideration, and to grant such further relief in the premises as to them shall seem fit.

Mr. Wallace

said the court of directors had certainly a right to dismiss their servants; this gentleman was charged with having been engaged in commercial transactions while he was governor of the Molucca Islands, contrary to the rules and regulations of the Company. He had also before been dismissed for lending money to the native princes at the usurious interest of 36 per cent.

Mr. Astell

said the petitioner had been repeatedly accused and convicted of offences against the rules and regulations of the Company.

Mr. P. Moore

said he understood that during the 14 months the petitioner was governor of the Moluccas, he had reduced the Company's expences 1,140,000 dollars, and he was now in a starving state.—The Petition was ordered to lie on the table.