Page images
PDF
EPUB

Freight to London (March 9) -£3. to £4. 10s. verpool. - 19. Ann, from Cape. - 21. Oglethorpe, per ton.

from China.-28. Lady East, from Singapore.

Freight to London (April 5)--£4. 15s. per ton. BIRTHS, MARRIAGE, AND DEATHS.

DEATHS.

Dec. 7. At Bencoolen, James Grant, Esq., of BIRTHS.

that place. Feb. 2. At Bombay, the wife of Mr. A. B. Bos

Jan. 12, 1834. At Batavia, of cholera, Alexwell, of a daughter (since dead).

ander Hare, Esq., junior. 6. At Bycullah, the lady of the Rev. W. Mit- March 9. At Tengaragong, in Java, David chell, church missionary, of a son.

Alexander Fraser, Esq., aged 47. 13. At Bombay, the lady of Sir John Wither Awdry, of a son.

24. At Bhewndy, the lady of Lieut. and Adj. Thatcher, of a daughter.

China.
MARRIAGE.

SHIPPING. Feb. 18. At Bombay, A. Dixon, Esq., commander of the ship Severn, to Mary Charlotte, Arrivals.-Feb. 2. Canada, from Manilla. - 3. only daughter of the late Lieut. Col. Fallon, of Pleades, from Batavia. - 5. Orwell, from N. S. the Hon. Company's service.

Wales.--7. Skimmer, from Singapore.-8. Austen

and Carron, both from Batavia. - 12. Governor DEATHS.

Stirling, from Batavia. - 13. Frances Charlotte,

from Singapore.-18. Washington, from Batavia Jan. 26. At Bombay, Mr. John Morin, aged 26.

Maria, from Manilla; and Georgiana, from SaFeb. 8. At Kirkee, Lieut. Edward Ellis, of H.M.

marang.-20. Amanda, from London.-21. Alert, 4th Light Drags., third son of R. Ellis, Esq., of

from London; Philip the First, from Liverpool; Torrington Square, London.

and Thetis, from Batavia.-25. Camden, from Ba16. At the Mahableshwar Hills, Ens. Anthony

tavia.--March 8. Pyramus, from Batavia. John Hodgson, 4th regt. N.I., aged 19, eldest son of Col. Christopher Hodgson, Bombay army.

Departures.- March 16. Elizabeth, for Canada. --23. Moira and William Money, both for ditto.

Freight to London direct (March 11)-Silk, £8.

per ton of 60 cubic feet; other goods, £7. per do. Ceylon.

SHIPPING.
Arrivals at Colombo.-Feb. 21. Fame, Richard- New South Wales.
son, from Mauritius.-24. Euphrates, Buckham,
from London and Cape.

BIRTHS.
BIRTH.

Aug. 27, 1833. At Brush Farm, the lady of Thos.

Foster, Esq., of a son. Jan. 13. At Trincomallee, the lady of Geo. Rum

Sept. 20. Mrs. George Morris, of a daughter. ley, Esq., M.D., assist. surg. Ceylon Rifles, of a

28. At Sydney, the lady of James Norton, Esq , daughter.

solicitor, of a son.

Oct. 10. The lady of Edye Manning, Esq., of a MARRIAGE.

daughter. Feb. 1. At Colombo, J. A. Shaw, Esq., H.M.

- At Sydney, the lady of Sydney Stephen, Esq., 6lst regt., to Mary Harriet, daughter of the late

of a daughter (since dead). John Tranchell, Esq., and niece of Maj. George

12. The lady of Capt. Church, of a daughter. Stewart, Ceylon Rifle Regt.

19. At Auburn Cottage, Surrey Hills, the wife of the Rev. D. Cargill, of a daughter.

21. At Port Stephens, the lady of Sir Edward

Parry, of a son.
Penang, &c.

Nov.6. At Amandale, the lady of Lieut. Johnston, R.N., of a son and heir.

9. At Belle-Ombre, Cook's River, Mrs. Prout, of SHIPPING

a daughter, still-born. Arrivals at Singapore.—March 1. Columbia, from 22. At Sydney, Mrs. John Malcolm, of a son. Liverpool.-5. Sarah, from Batavia.-10. Trough- 28. At Kirkham, the lady of W. H. Dutton, ton, from London.

Esq., of a daughter.

Dec. 4. Mrs. Bloomfield, of Dagworth, of a son. BIRTHS.

15. The lady of John Lamb, Esq., of a son, Jan. 6. At Malacca, Mrs. A. E. Harris, of a

17. Mrs. Wm. E. Riley, of Raby, of a son..

19. Mrs. Wm. Wilson, of a daughter. daughter. 22. At Penang, Mrs. A. A. Anthony, of a daugh

21. At Spring Hill, Illawarra, the lady of Charles ter.-28. At ditto, the lady of J. Padday, Esq., of

Waldron, Esq., J. P., of a son, being her 15th child. a son.--30. At Penang, Mrs. Harcourt, of a daugh

28. The lady of George Weller, Esq., of a son.

Jan. 2, 1834. At Sydney, the lady of John ter. Feb. 16. At Singapore, the wife of Mr. J. J.

Lord, Esq., of a daughter.

14. Mrs. John Buckland, of a son. Woodford, of a son. 26. On board the Hannah, at Singapore, the

17. At Annandale Cottage, the lady of Thomas lady of Capt. Jackson, of a son.

Collins, Esq.,, of a daughter.

18. The lady of Capt. Brown, of a daughter.

21. At Point Piper, the lady of Thos. Icely, DEATHS.

Esq., of a son. Dec. 19. At Penang, at the Roman Catholic

28. At Sydney, the wife of the Rev. George church at Teluk, the Rev. Carolus L'Oliveiro,

Erskine, of a son. provicaire apostolique, aged 70.

The lady of Dr. C. Smith, of a son. Feb. 4. At Singapore, Mrs. J. A. Minass, aged 51.

30. Mrs. Geo. Allen, of Toxteth Park, of a son. 8. At Campong Glam, Hester Sophia, wife of

31. At Sydney, the lady of James B. Bettington, Capt. H. Prior, 23d Madras N.I., commanding the

Esq., of a daughter. troops at Singapore.

Feb. 4. At Sydney, Mrs. Henderson, of a son. 15. At Malacca, Miss Kraal, aged 26.

6. At Sydney, the lady of J. E. Turner, Esq., of H.M. Customs, of a son.

9. The lady of Dr. Jeannerett, of a son.

15. At Sydney, the lady of Frederick Parbury, Netherlands Judia.

Esq., of a son.

18. At Oakhampton Park, the lady of Robert

Lethbridge, Esq., of a daughter.
SHIPPING.

22. At the Glebe, the lady of Skeine Craig, Arrivals at Batavia.-March 13. Ina, from Li- Esq., of a son (since dead).

MARRIAGES.

27. At his seat, Waddon, near Parramatta,

in his 74th year, John Palmer, Esq., assistant Sept. 10, 1833. At Sydney, Mr. G. T. Graham,

commissary-general. of Kinross, Hunter's River, to Miss Janet Thom

Oct. 16. At Denham Court, Richard Brooks, son Carmichael, sister of the Rev. H. Carmi.

Esq., in his 68th year. chael, A.N., of the Australian College.

Nov. 22. At Sydney, Mr. Thomas Brett. 18. At Government House, Parramatta, Edward

Dec. 13. Mrs. Mary Reynolds, aged 43. Deas Thomson, Esq., F.L S., clerk of the Exe

21. At Clairville, John Stephen, Esq., late cutive and Legislative Councils, to Anna Maria,

puisne judge of the Supreme Court. second daughter of His Exc. Maj. Gen. Bourke, 28. At Spring Hill, Ilawarra, Charles Waldron, C.B., Governor-in-chief of N. S. Wales, &c. &c.

Esq., J. P. The death of this gentleman was acOct. 1. At Windsor, Archibald Bell, Esq., of

celerated by the violence used towards him by his Corinda, Hunter's River, to Frances Ann, eldest

servants. daughter of Samuel North, Esq., J. P., police

29. At Parramatta, Mr. Wm. Batman, aged 69. magistrate, Windsor.

Jan. 9, 1834. At Sydney, George Bunn, Esq., 7. At Sydney, Richard Morgan, Esq., of Con- J. P., brother of the lessee of Drury Lane and cord, to Miss Margaret Murphy.

Covent Garden Theatres. He was for many years 29. At Sydney, Wm. Hebblewhite, Esq., to one of the first merchants in Sydney. Miss Sarah Ann Wayling.

10. At Sydney, aged 66, Mr. Thomas Callicott. 30. At Liverpool, Kinnear Robertson, Esq., to

Feb. 4. John Horsley, Esq., coroner for the disCatherine, youngest daughter of John Throsby, trict of Liverpool. Esq., of Leicester.

10. At Sydney, aged 66, Mrs. Eliz. Hassall. Nov. 25. At Sydney, Lieut. Arthur Corbett, 25. At Sydney, Lieut. Hewson, of H.M. 4th R.N., to Anna Jane, widow of the late Mr. W.

regt. of Foot. Rogers, under-sheriff of the colony.

Lately. At Sydney, Mrs. John Folkard. Dec. 4. At Sydney, the Rev. Henry Carmichael, professor, Australian College, to Mrs. McLymont, late of Hunter's River.

20. At Sydney, Edward Webster, Esq., surgeon, to Catherine, eldest daughter of Mr. G. McDo

Van Diemen's Land. nald, Parramatta. 21. At Richmond, Lieut. H. Reynolds, 2d or

SHIPPING. Queen's Royals, to Ann, eldest daughter of Wm. Arrivals at Launceston.-Feb. 6. Duke of Kent, Cox, Esq., of Hobart Ville, Richmond.

from Mauritius. - 13. Norval, from London. 24. At Sydney, William Henry, third son of 19. Lavinia, from London.- March 5. Mars, from Geo. Suttor, Esq., of Balkham Hills, to Charlotte London. Augusta, youngest daughter of Mr. H. Francis,

Arrivals at Hobart Town. - Feb. 18. Othello, of Sydney:

from Liverpool. - 20. Mavis, from Calcutta.27. At Sydney, Wm. H. Clark, Esq., captain March 3. Cornwallis, from Cape.-8. Eldon, from 4th or King's Own Regt., to Miss H. J. Manning, Leith. eldest daughter of J. E. Manning, Esq., of Ustimo House. ; 28. At Sydney, Robert Towns, Esq., commander of the ship Brothers, to Sophia,

second daugh- Cape of Good Hope. ter of the late D'Arcy Wentworth, Esq., of Homebush Farm.

MARRIAGES. Jan. 11, 1834. At Sydney, R. S. Webb, Esq., of H.M. Customs, to Ann, second daughter of Capt. April 8. At Cape Town, J. H. Jackson, Esq., Fisher, of Sydney.

Bombay civil service, to Catherine Johanna, 27. At Sydney, Willoughby James Dowling, second daughter of John Rabe, Esq. Esq., to Miss Dickson, of Sydney.

14. At Cape Town, Mr. Louis Petrus Cauvin to 28. At Parramatta, Wm. Brooks, Esq., of Dal- Charlotte Jane, daughter of the late R. Woodziel, Hunter's River, to Miss Elizabeth Evans, of cock, Esq. Castle Pill, near Milford, county of Pembroke. 19. At Rondebosch, K. B. Mamilton, Esq.,

Feb. 17. At Sydney, Ambrose Wm. Wilson, clerk of the Council, Cape of Good Hope, to EmEsq., to Miss Josephs, of Sydney.

ma Matilda, only daughter of Charles Blair, Esq. 18. At Windsor, Alfred Kennerley, Esq., to - At Cape Town, J. M. Ross, Esq., captain Jane, second daughter of Richard Rouse, Esq., 5th regt. Madras N.l., to Miss Emma Amalia of Rouse Hill.

Siegruhn.

25. At Drooge Valley, Lieut. John Hill, Madras DEATHS.

army, to Jane, second daughter of William Proc

tor, Esq. Aug. 6, 1833.-At Sydney, Mrs. J. Laurie, aged 42.--20. At ditto, Mr. W. Anderson.-26. At ditto, Mrs. Ann Brady, aged 25.

DEATHS 28. At Ashfield Park, near Sydney, suddenly, April 2. Richard Wrankmore, Esq., aged 68. Joseph Underwood, Esq.

14. At the Cape, Ann, widow of the late Lieut. Sept. 2. Mr. Newsam.

Col. Smith, St. Helena artillery, aged 65. 6. Maria, eldest daughter of John Larnack, Esq. 24. At Cape Town, Ileury Sargent, Esq., of the 12. At Sydney, Mrs. Bond, aged 87.

Bengal Civil service, aged 15.

Postscript to Asiatic Intelligence. A few Madras Gazettes have been re- force is 6,000 men, under Col. Lindesay. ceived of a later date than those cited in The commander-in-chief has left the prethe preceding pages : they contain little sidency to be present in the field, additional intelligence,

Advices from Aleppo state that Ibrahim A deficiency to the amount of 20,000 Pasha has chastised the Koram and Zara Rs. has been discovered in the cash chest Arabs of the desert, who plunder the caof the Sudder Adawlut. Amongst the ravans. Of the latter, 3,000 familles have persons taken up was Woodiaghery Audee- been cut to pieces. Mehemet Ali, it is narrain Braminy (who kept one of the added, has abolished the internal monokeys), a native of high character for poly established by him in Syria and honour and integrity, filling a responsible Egypt. office in the court. He was liberated on paying 7,000 rupees.

Since writing the above, files of Calcutta The campaign against the Coorg Raja and Madras papers have reached us, on was expected to be a severe one, owing to the eve of publication : their contents will the difficult nature of the country. The be given in a supplement.

DEBATE AT THE EAST-INDIA HOUSE.

East-India House, July 9. A Special General Court of Proprietors, of East-India Stock was this day held, at the Company's House in Leadenhallstreet.

[ocr errors]

ALLOWANCES TO MARITIME SERVANTS.

The minutes of the last court having been read

The Chairman (H. St. George Tucker, Esq.) said : “I have now the honour to inform you, that this court is specially summoned, for the purpose of there being laid before the proprietors the case submitted to the Company's standing counsel, in pursuance of the General Court's resolution of the 18th ult., together with his opinion thereon, respecting the grant of compensations under the provisions of the Act 3d and 4th William IV., cap. 85, seç. 7. I now propose that the question and the answer be read."

Mr. Lush suggested whether it would not be desirous that the whole case should be read, and not the opinion alone, which had been seen by many of the proprietors.

Mr. Fielder said, the whole case consisted merely of references to certain Acts of Parliament, and to the By-laws.

The Chairman said, the case which had been submitted to counsel should be read, but no other papers.

The case was then read at length. It recited certain enactments, from the 10th of William III., passed in 1698, on which the Company's charter was founded-also from the 33d, 53d, and the 55th of Geo. III., from the By-laws of the Company, and from the 3d and 4th of William IV. On these extracts, which related to the powers of the Court of Directors and Proprietors, with a reference to the right of granting salaries exceeding £200, and compensations exceeding £600, was raised the following

Question. " Whether the present compensation under the Act of 3d and 4th of William IV., cap. 85, sec. 7, can be made by the Court of Directors, without being previously submitted to and sanctioned by the Court of Proprietors, if the sum exceeded £600?"

Answer. « I'am of opinion that the grant of compensa. tion, &c. under sec. 7 of the new Act, may be made by the Court of Directors, with the approbation and confirmation of the India Board, without such grants being previously submitted to and sanctioned by the General Court of Proprietors, though the same may exceed £600.

" The Court of Directors are authorized in the most ample manner to act in all matters

whatever for the Company, where their powers are not expressly restrained, and where specific functions are not to be exercised by the Court of Proprietors. The Court of Directors, with the sanction

of the Court of Proprietors, and the Court of Proprietors separately, are restrained in certain cases from making additions to salaries, and giving gratuities, without the approbation and confirmation of the India Board. The enactments of the Legislature on this subject ar followed up by bylaws to the same effect, applicable to the proceedings of the Court of Directors, on proposing such measures previously to their being laid before the India Board.

" I am of opinion, however, that the compensations, superannuations, and allowances contemplated in sec. 7, are not gratuities,' or, as expressed in the by-laws, 'given by way of gratuities,' within the meaning of the Acts of Parliament, or of the By-laws. They are compensations founded on just moral considerations, though not amounting to legal claims, to be awarded to persons whose reasonable expectations of permanent employment and provision in life, are disappointed by the abolition of the Company's trade, and the altered footing on which its establishments are placed. The 'gratuities' to any officers, civil or military, or any other person, meant by the Act, and intended to be restrained, were grants of money for some extraordinary service, the occasions for which might, from their indefinite character, have led to abuse. The grants under the 7th section appear to be wholly of a different nature, and being authorized by the Legislature under new circumstances, are not liable to the same suspicion. I believe this construction has been put upon the word gratuity,' in circumstances much more questionable than those arising under the new Act. As there is no provision in the Charters, Acts of Parliament, or By-laws, requiring the previous sanction of the Court of Proprietors to what the Court of Directors do on the part of the Company under sect. 7, I am of opinion, as above stated, that the grants in question may be lawfully and effectually made by the Court of Directors without such previous sanction.

Perhaps I may be permitted to say further, although not strictly required by the terms of the question, that I am of opinion, notwithstanding the Court of Directors, or the legal organs of the Company, have the power to settle and adjust any scheme of compensation, under section 7, which, on receiving the approbation and confirmation of the India Board, will become fixed, the General Court of Proprietors still retain ali the authorities which are compatible with the established system of control, in this as in many other cases.

“ The General Court of Proprietors are not excluded from bringing the subject before them in the regular and usual form for discussion, and adopting such resolutions as they may see fit, in the progress of the measures rendered necessary by sec. 7; but I do not think the previous sanction of the Court of Proprietors required to the validity of the compensations proposed by the Court of Directors, and approved by the India Board. In fact, the compensations to be made are to be taken out of the funds ceded to the Crown, in aid of the sources out of which the dividend is secured, and are incumbrances upon it. Indeed, the object and circumstances of these grants hardly fall under the scope of the restraining acts with respect to grants of money, which all profess to have in view, the protection of the Company's funds from undue charges or gratui. ties."

Mr. Weeding then proceeded to address the court.

He assured the court that he felt sincere regret at being liged to bring before them a question deeply involving the privileges of the proprietors, at one of the first courts, held under the new state of things. It had, however, appeared to him to be necessary to introduce the subject at the last general

a' course,

court, and he repeated, that he greatly opinion of the learned counsel, he was regretted being compelled to take such sorry it had fallen to his lot, unprofes

But the object was of great sional as he was, to offer his judgment importance. It concerned others, many in opposition to it. But no personal of their valued servants, whose interests feeling ought to prevent him, or any other were deeply at stake, and it more imme- proprietor, from doing his duty, however diately concerned the vindication of the painful it might be to him. He trusted: privileges of the General Court from an he should not be accused of presumption, error in practice of the Court of Direc- if, looking at the opinion of the learned tors. When he said an error of practice, counsel, he felt himself called on to say, he could assure the Court of Directors that it appeared to be at variance with the that he had no wish to impute to them facts of the case which had been suban error of intention; it was not, of mitted to him. The learned counsel's course, his object to impute any improper reasoning was directly opposed to the motive to those gentlemen; he was cer- judgment he had given, and his argument tain that they were impressed with a was inconclusive. Having said this, it strong desire to promote the interests of would be necessary for him to show that the East-India Company generally, and such was the case, and he thought that that they harboured no wish intentionally he should be able to do so. The learned to do wrong

He believed that the mind counsel set out with stating, “s that comof his hon. friend who now occupied the pensation, under sec. 7 of the Act of the chair of that court, was too well inclined 3d and 4th William IV. may be made by to the interests of the East India Com- the Court of Directors, with the appropany to wish to destroy its priviliges; that bation and confirmation of the Board of he was too sensible of the good, which Control, without previously being submitthe General Court had accomplished ted to the Court of Proprietors, though in times past, to abate a jot of the power the amount exceeded £600.” Now they which might enable it to do good in time were directed in the case to look to the to come. He hoped, therefore, that the Company's charter, from which an extract hon. Chairman would concur with the was made. ' And what then did the chargentlemen on that side of the bar, and ter say? It set forth, “that the Court of that he would endeavour, with his col. Directors should have the power to maleagues, to correct the error that had been nage generally the affairs of the Company, committed. It was an error of so grave except where they were restrained by the a nature, it aimed so deathlike a blow by-laws, orders, and resolutions of the at the power and privileges of the East- General Court.” Now, was such the fact India Company, that all who wished well in the present case? Certainly it was to the interests of the Company must de: so ; and if they looked to the by-law, sire to see it rectified. (Hear, hear!) sect. 19, cap. 6, they would find it conThe hon. Chairman had proposed, at the tained å very decided restriction. That last court, that the opinion of the Com. by-law ordained, "that every resolution pany's standing counsel should be taken of the Court of Directors for granting & on this subject. That opinion had now new pension, or an increase of pension been read: and he was sorry to say that it exceeding in the 'whole £200 per annum, was not in the least degree satisfactory to should be laid before and approved of by him. It was, in fact, anything but con- two general courts, specially summoned vincing (Hear, hear !) He regretted, for that purpose ; and again it was oralso, that the case out of which that dained by sect. 20, cap. 6, of the byopinion arose, was imperfect. He gave laws, " that every resolution of the Court every credit to their ingenious solicitor of Directors for granting to any person, by for the manner in which it was drawn up. way of gratuity; any sum of money 'exHe had, however, omitted one thing ceeding in the whole £600, shall be laid which he certainly ought to have stated. before and approved by two general courts, What he alluded to was the practice of specially summoned for that purpose. the court, with reference to reasons being He would ask, were these by-laws intensubmitted to it in the form of a report, ded for the regulation of the proceedings when pensions or grants of money, be- of the court in making grants of money, yond a certain amount, were proposed by or were they not ? Here they found the the Court of Directors. Had their soli- by-laws clearly restricting the power of citor touched upon that point, the case the Court of Directors. Now if that would then have been complete, and he were so, and he had proved that it was, should have had no fault to find with it. he thought that they must come to the That deficiency he, however, should en- conclusion that the decision of the learned deavour to supply, and then the proprie- counsel was incorrect. With respect to tors would have the whole of the facts the practice of the court, the opinion of fairly before them, and they would then the learned counsel, as well as the probe enabled to decide for themselves. ceeding which gave rise to this discussion, With respect to the case itself and to the was decidedly erroneous. He could point

serva

out several instances where grants in the then was that condition which had been nature of compensations were laid before, agreed to after seven days' debate, and the Court of Proprietors. Indeed, he which was finally carried by a ballot, when could quote a multitude of cases of that a majority of nine to one appeared in its kind, but as he did not wish to take up favour? What was the condition, he the time of the court unnecessarily, one asked, in consequence of which they gave or two would be sufficient. In 1820, a up their commereial assets, in consegrant was made to Mr. Robert Markland quence of which they surrendered those Barnard, who was assistant warehouse. means, by which they were enabled to keeper in the Coast and Surat depart- employ, and to reward, those meritorious ment. They gave him an , annui of

who now complained that their £1,000, and before that grant was ratified claims were treated lightly? He should the directors laid the case, in the form of read that condition, and if its terms were a report, before the proprietors, in which not complied with, then he would ask, they stated the ground on which they re- was not their bond unsealed, and was it commended this claim. And what was not their duty to inquire why a part of the ground? Why, it was the very same the obligation only, and not the whole of that the Company's commercial officers it, had been fulfilled ? Some gentlemen, now put forward, namely, “the want of especially those who did not like the any suitable employment for Mr. Barnard arrangement at all, might be tempted to in the Company's service, and the severe inquire whether they were not again at disappointment to his hope of succeeding liberty to embark in trade; whether, the to a more lucrative post, which has been contract being in part vitiated, the rest of cut off by the arrangements recently, it should remain in force. The fourth adopted.” These arrangements were the proposition moved by the late Sir John abolition of his office, in consequence of Malcolm was, “ that a sufficient power the trade in Surat and Coast piece-goods be retained over the commercial assets, to having fallen off ; they had, therefore, no enable the Court of Directors to propose occasion for him in that department of to the Company, (let gentlemen mark the the Company's service, and they recom- words) to propose to the Company, mended to the Court of Proprietors that (surely not to the Directors themselves) a certain compensation should be made

to propose to the Company, and ultito him. The same course was taken in mately to the Board, for their confirma1823, when an alteration was made in the tion, a plan for making suitable provisions pensions of the judges in India. On that for outstanding obligations, and for such occasion the directors came to the Court of the commercial officers and servants of of Proprietors for their sanction. Also, the Company as may be affected by the for an allowance to the Bishop of Cal proposed arrangements.” Now could it cutta, for visitation and residence. This be pretended that the act of parliament had been done from time immemorial did not embrace the whole of this condiwhere the pension exceeded £200, or the tion? It could only be denied by those gratuity was above £600. He believed who felt it convenient to read acts of parthat scarcely a case could be pointed out liament in that way which best suited in which that course had not been adopt their own views; but this would not do ed. Here they had the statute-law, and for men of sense, who looked to the reathe by-laws, and the ground of prescrip- son and propriety of things. The Comtion, in favour of bringing these grants pany had given up every thing they posbefore the Court of Proprietors. That sessed except this control over a part of doctrine was fully borne out by the quo- their commercial assets. That was to be tations which he had made; and he saw kept in petto~it was theirs-it was held no reason why, under these circumstances, by them to fulfil their engagements with they were to be bound by the opinion of such of their officers and servants the learned counsel. He now came to a might be affected by the new measure. most important resolution—the resolution The words expressly were,

“ to enable agreed to on the 3d of May 1833—the the Court of Directors to propose to the sound of which was still in their ears. Company,” &c. Did that mean the In calling the notice of the Court to that Court of Directors ? It could mean no. resolution,

thing if it meant not the general body of « Could honour's voice provoke the silent dust,” proprietors. He knew that it was for he should endeavour to bring back the the Court of Directors, at any time, to shade of their departed colleague, to de- originate such measures, either of a pemand the fulfilment of the condition on cuniary or of any other nature, that they which their present charter stood. А might think proper.

To that no man charter which was intended to promote would object, as it tended greatly to the the prosperity of India, that prosperity convenience of business. But it would which he hoped India would continue to not be argued, that the approbation of enjoy; not merely for twenty years, but the proprietor's night be dispensed with. long after their charter had expired. What What said the seventh section of the new

as

« PreviousContinue »