Sitting of 7 July 1806

AFFAIRS OF INDIA
Mr. Paullbrought forward a Supplementary Charge against the marquis Wellesley with respect to his treatment of the Zemindar of Sassnee, and some other Zemindars and Rajahs therein named.—The title of the charge being read, and the question being put on the motion for its being printed,
Sir A. Wellesleystated, that he had no objection to the charge being printed, but he should take the opportunity to request the hon. gent. would inform him and the house, whether it was his intention to bring forward any motion in the course of the present session, upon the charge now before the house? He had conceived it necessary for him to attend regularly in expectation of such a motion, but as he had also professional duties to perform, he should be very glad to know, whether it was necessary for him to continue this constant attendance?
Mr. Paullsaid, it was his most anxious wish to come to a decision on the Oude Charge, if possible, in the present session. There were still, however, very important accounts which he had moved for, and which were not furnished. He had called at the India-house on Saturday last, to facilitate them, but found that it would be near two months before they could be produced. He could not, therefore, in the present state of the session, and when the attendance was so small, give any pledge, that he should make a motion this session: but if that was impossible, he should pledge himself to do so at the commencement of

939
the next session. A charge of a most serious nature, and much connected with the present, had been expected to have been brought forward by a right hon. gent. (Mr. Sheridan), but he appeared to have abandoned it. The transactions in the Carnatic were so much connected with the administration of the noble marquis, that if that right hon. gent. chose to abandon the charge of which he had given notice, he should feel it his duty to take it up, in order to throw light upon the general system of the administration of the noble marquis.
Mr. W. Polethought it would not be proper for the friends of the noble marquis to press for any hasty decision of the house, after those circumstances had been stated. Their object was not to gain a premature decision, but to obtain the solemn decision of a full house, after a minute and deliberate examination of all the documents and evidence which the hon. member could bring forward to support his case. If they ever appeared to wish to press a speedy decision, it was merely when they supposed that the hon. gent. had produced all his documents, and that the house had had sufficient time to consider them, and form their judgment upon them. It never was the intention of his noble friend (lord Temple) to take, in any degree, the management of the business from the hands of the hon. gent. nor did the friends of the noble marquis wish to press the decision at all sooner than was necessary for the examination of all the documents. They had conceived, however, that all the documents moved for had been before the house, except one military account, and in that case they had offered, in order to save time, to admit every fact or inference which the hon. gent. could draw from, it. He did not object to this supplemental charge being printed, but wished to know whether the hon. gent. had now moved for all the documents that he thought necessary?
Mr. Sheridanbegged leave to trouble the house with a few words in consequence his having been accused by the hon. gent. with having abandoned the subject of Carnatic, and hinted that this had been done since he had come into administration. The fact was, and he thought the hon. gent. might have known it very well, that he had abandoned that subject when lord Powis was appointed, or understood to have been appointed, lord lieutenant of Ireland. But he had not abandoned his
940
opinion respecting those transactions, and when the hon, gent. brought the affair forward, the should have his support. But his charge was against lord Powis, and not against marquis Wellesley, and he must say that it was somewhat singular that the hon. gent. who must have known this at the beginning of the session, had not come forward with this charge when be had the materials prepared to his hands.
Mr. Paullpledged himself, that if the right hon. gent. did not bring the business forward, he should do so, in the next session.—After some further explanations, the motion for printing the charge was agreed to.

DEBTS OF THE NABOBS OF ARCOT.
Mr. Hobhousemoved, " That the bill for enabling the commissioners acting in execution of an agreement, made between the East India company and the private creditors of the nabobs of the Carnatic, the better to carry the same into effect," be read a second time.
Mr. Francisimmediately addressed himself to the house in a speech, which we are sorry we cannot state more in detail for want of sufficient memoranda on such a multiplicity of topics and arguments, as his knowledge of the subject enabled him to bring forward; the general tenor of it was to the following effect: That he could not do perfect justice to the question without entering into many particulars, which, however necessary, were not likely to attract the attention of the house. Yet the subject was of great public importance, though the bill, now introduced, professed to be nothing more than a private bill for the purpose of giving effect and validity to a settlement of an account between parties, in which the public interest was not concerned. These parties were the supposed creditors of the late nabobs of the Carnatic on one side, and the Directors of the East India company on the other; as if, when once they were agreed, the house of commons had nothing to do but to ratify and enforce their agreement. On the 20th of May, when this debate was adjourned, it was formally asserted and' maintained by lord Castlereagh, "that the Directors had a full and unquestionable legal right to enter into those articles of agreement, which were now to be acknowledged; that all the effect of rejecting the present bill would he to deprive the commissioners of a useful and necessary power, viz. to examine on oath, but that it could not stop their proceedings,

941
and that it would require an act of parliament to dissolve this commission or even to stay its operation. Mr. Francis then said.—" I can by no means accede to this opinion. I do not think the directors of the India Company were competent to make this agreement; and, even if they were so, I still think it was their duty to have resorted to parliament in the first instance, and not to have come to any conclusion with the creditors, without a parliamentary sanction. All I desire is, that the house will look at the transaction and weigh the consequences before they determine that the public have no interest in it, nor any right to be considered as a party concerned in the adjustment of it. If they have such an interest and such a right, then I say that it cannot be safely trusted to a private compromise between the Company and the claimants, and that it can only be protected by the careful interposition of parliament. In this view, the amount of these claims is the first thing to be considered, I find them stated, first and last, at 9,289,250l.;—of which it appears that .3,658, 432l. have been paid since the year 1784. The remaining demand of a capital debt of 5,630,838l. is now to be adjusted by these commissioners, and, as far as it can be established to their satisfaction, it must some way or other be satisfied out of the territorial revenue of the Carnatic; and yet it is contended that this is not a public question; and that it may legally be settled without the authority or even the knowledge of parliament! I advise his majesty's ministers to consider what they are doing. They know the situation of the India Company. The present services and interest of debts abroad far exceed the revenues, If the funds in India are wasted or diverted to private purposes, the deficiency must be provided for out of other sources; that is, by this country; I know of no other. The enormous amount of these supposed claims would lead one to conclude that all the wealthy natives of Change-alley and Lombard-street had gone to India, for the benevolent purpose of lending their money to the princes of that country. I doubt it. I do not believe that a single shilling of real English money was ever lent to a nabob of the Carnatic. If any thing was lent to them, it was out of their own property. When you see what these credits are, and what they amount to, I think you will have but one question to ask, 'Where did the creditors get the money?' By, an act passed
942
in 1784, and quoted in the preamble to the agreement, it was enacted, "That the court of directors should take into consideration the origin and justice of these demands, and, in concert with the nabob, establish a fund for the discharge of those debts, which should appear to be justly due," &c. By this clause, the investigation and the settlement are explessly committed to the court of directors. The trust was confined to them specially. They were delegates, and could not delegate. Against their opinion, however, and against their remonstrance, and without any investigation whatever, above three millions a half sterling were paid by the direct interposition and authority of the board of controul. Since that period, a new, or an old debt of five millions six hundred thousand pounds has started up; and this is the debt which. is to be examined and liquidated by the present commissioners. Now, I think, sir, that on the principle, and in the spirit of the act of 1784, the directors themselves were bound to perform this duty; or, if they were unequal to the task, which considering the difficulty and their other avocations, might be true, they ought to have resorted to parliament, and stated the case. Instead of doing so, they have entered into a covenant with the creditors and provided a fund for the liquidation of their debts, to be adjusted under the arbitration of commissioners. This agreement in itself was not supposed to want the sanction, and never would have come within the cognizance of this house, if the parties had not discovered that the object of their agreement could not be of effectuated without the assistance of parliament. They come to us now, not for our sanction of the plan, but for powers to carry it into execution. That is, if they could have acted without the powers, we should never have heard a word of the agreement. A claim of five or six millions on the revenues of India ought not to be disposed of in this manner. But it seems the capital of this debt, or of the amount that may be proved, is to be gradually discharged by means of a reserved find of about 140,000l. a year, on which sum the company are to pay interest at six per cent. as long as it remains in their hands. This seems to me nothing but on indirect and perplexed way of funding the debt. For as to their really having such a surplus, or any surplus, after defraying all charges, I hold it to be very doubtful, if not impossible. Let us look a little now to the na-

943
ture of these debts, as far as it can be collected from the quality of the creditors. The noble lord on the other side (lord Castlereagh) has declared his belief, that a considerable portion of the whole is unquestionably fraudulent. An hon. director (Mr. Grant) has stated his conviction that three-fourths of them are good for nothing, and that, if the remainder were admitted, it would be a large allowance. I am not at all disposed to canvass personal merits, or bring mere names into view; but where names are connected with station, and station alone will account for the demand, it cannot be avoided. The services of sir John Macpherson to the nabob (Wallajah) have been recited at large by the hon. member who opened this debate (Mr. W. Keene.) He was for a short time a member of the council and governor of Bengal. His claim, with interest, amounts to 101,700l. The late James Macpherson, esq. had a claim for 29,500l. Mr. Hollond, some time governor of Madras, has a claim for 55,000l. You have heard of this gentlemen, and of the vain attempts, which have been made to bring him to justice before the Indian judicature: 292,000l, stands in the name of Samuel Johnson, esq. who, I believe, was in council many years at Madras. If you wish to have an insight into these transactions, look at the printed evidence contained in the letters of Mr. Charles Darke*which were presented to the house so long ago as the 9th of Feb. 1803. I will not go any farther into this invidious detail, but there is one of these pretended debts, so singular and suspicious, and apparently so connected with the influence of station, that I must state it; and with that I shall conclude. Laurence Sullivan, esq. during many years was chairman of the Court of Directors, or high in the direction of the India Company's affairs; but he never was in India. To this gentleman, or to his estate, the old nabob is said to be indebted,
*This gentleman appears to have been employed and trusted by the nabob, and finally, as he says, ruined in his service. His letters discover many curious anecdotes. In one of them, addressed to the nabob himself, he says (p. 153), "I will not, for the present, mention the bribes given by your highness on account of the unhappy business of the arrest of lord Picot; but the amount of them make a great part of your highness's new consolidated debt" In short, he lays open a scene of bribery, fraud, and extortion, which fully account for the enormous sum of nine millions sterling paid to, or still claimed by these creditors.
944
on a bond, for 32,355l. The bond was granted in Feb. 1785, to John Stuart, in trust for Mr. Sullivan, and deposited with Mr. Fordyce; the claim was referred for examination to the committee at Madras, and in 1788, was reported by them to be just† I do not believe that English money, lent to the nabobs, constitute any material part of these claims; but I do not deny that some of them, on account of payment due for services or for goods furnished, may be well founded. The fact is, that the good debts are overwhelmed and strangled by the bad ones, which throw a general discredit over the whole. Among these I should be inclined to admit the principle on which a debt due to the late sir Paul Joddrell is founded, because it appears to be for services of several years, acknowledged but not paid. I mention this instance, because it has been much insisted on, and not that I know any thing of the parties. The danger is, that, under cover of a few rights of this kind, many wrongs will be protected. Such is the general character of a pretended debt of 5,600,000l. for the liquidation of which the Court of Directors have covenanted with the creditors to provide a fund. Then comes the mode of adjustment, viz. under the arbitration of three commissioners. In the first instance, two hon. members of this house, were appointed by the Court of Directors, to whom personally there can be no possible objection. One of them (Mr. Ryder) has since resigned. The other (Mr. Hobhouse) in point of character and talents is perfectly qualified for this or any other place of trust. Still, sir, I should think that, when the connection of the India Company with government, through the medium of the board of controul, is considered, the house would demur at this way of appointing members of parliament to offices of emolument, by which their seats are not vacated. The three commissioners may not agree in admitting a debt; and then the act of any two of them shall prevail and bind the parties. In cases of debt or damages before a court of justice we expect a jury of 12 to be unanimous; but this, it seems, is too much to be exacted from only 3 commissioners. Now, I should think that, in a transaction so suspicious as the present, the objection of one opinion out of three, ought to be sufficient to extinguish the claim, or at least to suspend it. The general evidence and security, on which these cre-
†Vide Carnatic Papers, 2. 131.

945
ditors profess to rely, are bonds voluntarily given by the nabobs of the Carnatic, and which they say ought to be made good out of the territorial revenue, because the nabobs were the sovereigns of the country, and had a right to mortgage it to their creditors. On the 14th of April, the hon. member who introduced the bill, declared that, "whatever might be the differences of opinion respecting the propriety of the Company's seizing the revenues of the Carnatic, all must allow that they, who had them, ought to be answerable for the debts upon them, as long as those revenues were equal to the just demands upon them." But what is the evidence of a, just demand?—The bonds of a nabob given to a supposed private creditor. In the year 1784, a principle of the same sort was set up and maintained; and, if it had prevailed, would soon have absorbed all the public revenue, and left nothing to pay the civil or military establishment. Mr. Burke's answer to it will satisfy any man, who knows any thing of the matter. "The gentlemen on the other side of the house, know as well as I do, that the nabob of Arcot and his creditors are not adversaries, but collusive parties, and that the whole transaction is under a false colour and false names. He is always ready to deliver up his territory and his subjects (even while they were his) to these pretended creditors."The Directors tell us, that the private creditors of the nabobs could have no lien upon the territory, nor any claim on the company as possessors of the Carnatic; and that this was the opinion of the Company's counsel. It is proper the house should know that these Indian princes have two treasuries, one private and peculiar, the other public, which, ever since they have fallen under British protection, they have carefully endeavoured to keep distinct. They never pay any thing out of their private purse, but in extreme necessity; but they care very little how they load the public revenue. Between a private loan and a public debt, they pocket all that they can borrow, and they pay nothing. By giving bonds, they get rid of importunity, or they gain friends, or they unite their creditors in a common cause with them; and, when the management of the 'territorial revenue is taken out of their hands, for these very abuses among the rest, these debts are brought forward as a just demand on that revenue. The chairman and deputy chairman of the Court of Directors, in their report of the
946
26th of Sept. 1804, observe, "that scarcely any other state ever furnished an example of the systematic extravagance of the nabob in coming under engagements, compared with his means of fulfilment."I say, it was his system, and not his extravagance. I believe, sir, I have said enough to shew that this is a public question, and that a public interest is invoked in it. If so, the house of commons is bound to keep a watchful eye over the whole transaction. If once you let it out of your sight, I do not say that you may not safely rely on the integrity of the present commissioners, but the trust may devolve to others, whom you know nothing of, and who may easily take care that you shall know nothing of their proceedings. As soon as these claims, or any material portion of them shall be established, or as soon as it is known in India that parliament has given its countenance to them by passing the present bill, you will hear of other debtors, and of other creditors of the same quality. There are claims against the rajah of Tanjore and the nabob of Oude, and perhaps many other Indian princes, which only wait for the decision of this day to come forward on the same ground, and to demand satisfaction on the same principle. If you think the case deserves investigation, it ought to be done by a parliamentary commission, which should be bound to report the result of its proceedings, from time to time, to the house of commons; and all their proceedings should be as public us possible.
Mr. Sullivanexplained the nature of the connection of his relation of the same name with the nabob of Arcot, as originating with colonel M'Lean, who died in the service of that Eastern prince.
Lord H. Pettywas desirous that the bill should be read a 2nd time, principally for two reasons; first, because the unjust claims would be more easily detected than at a later time; and next, because the just demands would be more easily ascertained. If the bill went into a committee, and no other person should suggest the amendments that appeared to him necessary, he pledged himself to bring them forward; they principally respected the mode of examination, the nomination of a parliamentary commissioner, and the periodical reports to be made on the progress of the business.
Mr. Grantconsidered the existing agreement between the India Company and the creditors under discussion, perfectly legal

947
and binding unless superseded by a superior power. with regard to the nature of the claims alluded to, his opinion was, that although they amounted to 5,600,000l. they would be, upon investigation, reduced to one-fourth of that sum. The clauses pro-posed by the noble lord, he did not think material.
Sir A. Wellesleyapproved of the authority given to commissioners under the bill to discharge these claims; and took the opportunity of signifying his approbation of the late treaty with Holkar, under the auspices of sir G.Barlow.
Mr. R. Thorntonsaid, the directors highly approved of treaty, and he had no doubt, on Wednesday, a vote of approbation would be passed in compliment to the governor general.
Dr. Laurencecommented upon what he had no hesitation in terming the scandalous mode in which the debts to which the bill referred were originated; and particularly upon claim of Mr. Sullivan, which, as it appeared from an explanation of this evening, arose out of the desire of this Mr. Sullivan to create an undue influence at the India House. It was an insult to the. under-standing of the people of England, or of the India Company, to call on them to pay such a claim. What had they to do with it? And yet the hon. gent. who gave the explanation, seemed to feel quite satisfied of its equity. The agreement alluded to by the hon. director (Mr. Grant) was not, he was certain, at all such as that hon. exdirector described. In fact, it was not legally binding unless sanctioned by parliament.
Mr.H. Martinstated, that the public had a direct interest in the revenue of the East India Co. to the amount of 500,000l. annually. Neither the board of controul, nor the Court of Directors therefore, could have any legal authority to interfere with a measure which might naturally affect the interests of the public.
Mr. Hobhousein explanation declared, that the commissioners only desired more powers with a view to exclude all frauqulent claims which might be preferred, to enable them to hunt out iniquity through all its mazes, and to render ample justice to the legal and equitable creditor.—After some further conversation, the gallery was cleared for a division, but the bill was read a second time by the general assent of the members present.