§ SR E. COLEBROOKEsaid, he wished to bring under the notice of the House the 1219 Motion of which he had given notice, for a Select Committee to inquire into the rights of succession of the allied and dependent princes of India. The hon. Baronet addressed the House in such a low and indistinct tone as to be nearly inaudible. He was understood to say, that the question out of which this subject arose was considered one of the greatest importance in India, namely, as to the right of a native ruling prince to adopt an heir to succeed him, in default of his having children. The denial of this right on the part of the East India Company would limit the succession to the family of a ruler of a country. It might be necessary to state in the first place, that this question had arisen in connexion with a State, the administration of the affairs of which had repeatedly been before the House—he alluded to Sattara. It was the policy of the Government at the end of the war in 1818, to place a portion of the States of the deposed head of the Mahrattas, under the rule of the descendant of the original founder of the Mahratta dynasty. The House was fully aware of the circumstances which led to the deposition of the successor of that prince, who, at his death, having no direct descendants, adopted a youth as his successor. As to the feelings with which these adopted heirs were regarded, he would refer the House to the report of Mr. Frere, whose duty it was to communicate to the family of the deposed Rajah of Sattara the course which the East India Company intended to take with regard to the succession. [The hon. Baronet proceeded to read from this report, but he became so unwell, that he was unable to proceed, and was obliged to resume his seat.]
§ J. C. HOBHOUSEwould suggest to his hon. Friend the propriety of adjourning the debate, as it was clear that he was then too ill to do justice to himself or to the subject on the present occasion.
§ MR E. COLEBROOKEhaving assented, the Motion was, by leave, withdrawn.