lifhed at Chipauk, his place of refidence, to fixty lacks of pagodas, independent of the old debt, on which debt of fixty lacks of pagodas, the nabob did agree to pay an intereft of twelve per cent. per annum.-Being asked, Whether this debt was approved of by the court of directors? he faid, He does not know it was.-Being asked, Whether the old debt was recognised by the court of directors? he faid, Yes, it has been; and the court of directors have sent out repeated orders to the prefident and council of Madras, to enforce its recovery and payment.-Being asked, If the intereft upon the new debt is punctually paid? he said, It was not during his refidence at Madras, from 1777 to 1779, in which period he thinks no more than five per cent. intereft was paid, in different dividends of two and one per cent.-Being asked, What is the ufual course taken by the nabob, concerning the arrears of intereft? he said, Not having ever lent him monies himself, he cannot fully an-. fwer as to the mode of fettling the intereft with him.

Being asked, Whether he has reason to believe the fixty lacks of pagodas was all principal money really and truly advanced to the nabob of Arcot, or a fictitious capital, made up of obligations given by him, where no money or goods were received, or which was increased by the uniting into it a greater interest than the 12 per cent. expreffed to

be

be due on the capital? he faid, He has no reafon to believe that the fum of fixty lacks of pagodas was lent in money or goods to the nabob, because that fum he thinks is of more value than all the money, goods, and chattels in the settlement; but he does not know in what mode or manner this debt of the nabob's was incurred or accumulated. Being asked, Whether it was not a general and well-grounded opinion at Madras, that a great part of this fum was accumulated by obligations, and was for fervices performed or to be performed for the nabob? he said, He has heard that a part of this debt was given for the purposes mentioned in the above question, but he does not know that it was fo.-Being asked, Whether it was the general opinion of the fettlement? he faid, He cannot fay that it was the general opinion, but it was the opinion of a confiderable part of the fettlement. Being asked, Whether it was the declared opinion of those that were concerned in the debt, or those that were not? he faid, It was the opinion of both parties, at least such of them as he converfed with.-Being asked, Whether he has reason to believe that the intereft really paid by the nabob, upon obligations given, or money lent, did not frequently exceed 12 per cent.?—he faid, Prior to the first of August 1774, he had had reason to believe, that a higher intereft than 12 per cent. was paid by the nabob on monies lent to him; X 4

but

but from and after that period, when the laft act of parliament took place in India, he does not know that more than 12 per cent. had been paid by the nabob, or received from him.-Being asked, Whether it is not his opinion, that the nabob has paid more than 12 per cent. for money due fince the ift of Auguft 1774? he faid, He has heard that he has, but he does not know it.-Being afked, Whether he has been told fo by any confiderable and weighty authority, that was like to know? he faid, He has been fo informed by perfons who he believes had a very good opportunity of knowing it.-Being afked, Whether he was ever told fo by the nabob of Arcot himself? he faid, He does not recollect that the nabob of Arcot directly told him fo, but from what he said, he did infer that he paid a higher intereft than 12 per cent.

Mr. Smith being asked, Whether, in the course of trade, he ever fold any thing to the nabob of Arcot? he said, In the year 1775 he did fell to the nabob of Arcot pearls to the amount of 32,500 pagodas, for which the nabob gave him an order or tankah on the country of Tanjore, payable in fix months, without intereft.-Being asked, Whether, at the time he asked the nabob his price for the pearls, the nabob beat down that price, as dealers commonly do? he faid, No; fo far from it, he offered him more than he asked by 1,000

pagodas,

pagodas, and which he rejected. Being asked, Whether in fettling a tranfaction of discount with the nabob's agent, he was not offered a greater discount than 121. per cent. he faid, In discounting a foucar's bill for 1,80,000 pagodas, the nabob's agent did offer him a discount of 24 per cent. per annum, faying, that it was the ufual rate of dif count paid by the nabob; but which he would not accept of, thinking himself confined by the act of parliament limiting the interest of monies to 12 per cent. and accordingly he discounted the bill at 12 per cent. per annum only.-Being asked, Whether he does not think thofe offers were made him, because the nabob thought he was a perfon of fome confequence in the fettlement? he faid, Being only a private merchant, he apprehends that the offer was made to him more from its being a general practice, than from any opinion of his importance.

APPENDIX,

APPENDIX, No. 3.

Referred to from p. 228.

A BILL for the better government of the territorial poffeffions and dependencies in India.

[One of Mr. Fox's India bills.]

AND be it further enacted by the authority aforefaid, that the nabob of Arcot, the rajah of Tanjore, or any other native protected prince in India, shall not affign, mortgage, or pledge any territory or land whatsoever, or the produce or revenue thereof, to any British subject whatsoever; neither shall it be lawful to and for any British subject whatsoever to take or receive any such assignment, mortgage, or pledge; and the fame are hereby declared to be null and void; and all payments or deliveries of produce or revenue, under any fuch affignment, shall and may be recovered back by fuch native prince paying or delivering the fame, from the perfon or perfons receiving the fame, or his or their reprefentatives.

APPENDIX,