tain of the foresight, judgment, decision, and courage evinced by you throughout the whole period of your command at Candahar, and during your brilliant and successful march from thence by Ghuzni to Cabul, which so greatly contributed to the honour of the British nation and to the maintenance of its reputation, an annuity of one thousand pounds (1,000l.) be granted to you, commencing from the day on which you left India. "I have the gratification of adding, that the unanimous resolution of the Court of Directors, now communicated to you, has been approved with the same unanimity by the General Court of Proprietors, and that the Right Hon. the Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India have expressed much satisfaction in confirming the grant by their sanction.-I have, &c. 66 (Signed) "JAMES C. MELVILL, Sec. Major-General Sir William Nott, G.C.B., &c." To which the major-general replied as follows: - "Carmarthen, Oct. 5, 1844. "Sir, I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 3rd instant, communicating to me the gratifying information that the Hon. the Court of Directors of the EastIndia Company had been pleased to grant me an annuity of one thousand pounds (1,000l.) from the day on which I quitted India, and that the same had been approved by the General Court of Proprietors, which mark of favour had been sanctioned by the Right Hon. the Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India. "I have to beg you will lay before the chairman, for the information of the Hon. Court, my high sense of gratitude for this handsome mark of their favour.-I am, Sir, your most obedient servant, "W. NOTT, Major-General. (Signed) "James C. Melvill, Esq.' The Chairman laid before the Court, in pursuance of the Byelaw, chap. 9, sec. 3, an account of superannuations granted by the Court of Directors since the last General Court, to servants of the East-India Company in England, under the powers vested in them by the Act of the 53 Geo. 3, cap. 155, sec. 93. The Chairman acquainted the Court that the warrants for the payment of the half-yearly dividend upon the Company's Stock, due under the 11th section of the Act of the 3 & 4 Wm. 4, cap. 85, will be ready for delivery on the 6th January next. SUPPORT OF THE TEMPLE OF JUGGERNAUT. The following motion, which has been postponed by Mr Poynder from time to time, stood first for discussion: "That the despatch of Lord Auckland, of the 17th of November, 1838, by which his Lordship rejected the proposed plan of the Bengal Government, and recommended the annual money payment of 6,000l. to the Temple of Juggernaut (to which recommendation the directors assented by their despatch of the 2nd of June, 1840), be considered by the Court of Proprietors, on motion for abrogating such money payment, upon the ground of no original pledge or engagement having ever been given for the same by or on behalf of this Company, as erroneously alleged by Lord Auckland in his despatch." The Chairman said he had received a letter that morning from the hon. proprietor (Mr. Poynder), wherein he expressed his regret that he was unable from indisposition to attend the Court, and that he was, therefore, desirous of postponing his motion. He (the Chairman), however, was happy to state to the Court that the necessary documents having been received from India, the Court of Directors had taken the subject into their consideration; and, although he was not in a position at present to lay before the Court the despatch which they had come to the determination of sending out to India, yet he felt himself justified in informing the Court that their decision was such as would, he hoped, complete the severance of the management of the temples from the Government of India altogether. (Hear! hear!) Mr. Strachan expressed his satisfaction at the statement of the hon. Chairman, and his hope that the British Government would cease to contribute in any way to the support of the temple. TREATMENT OF THE KING OF DELHI. Mr. G. Thompson then rose to call the attention of the Court to the treatment which the King of Delhi had received from the Governments of India and Great Britain. He said he could not anywhere find a more appropriate motto than in a pamphlet entitled "India and Lord Ellenborough," which was now attracting much attention. Possibly he might speak in the hearing of the author. The passage to which he desired to refer commenced on page 114, and ran thus: "When that great man, whose glory will be to future ages the landmark of our timewhen the Duke of Wellington, then Sir Arthur Wellesley, was revoking a grant which he considered to be an undue exercise of an article of a treaty which he had concluded with Scindia, he said, "I would sacrifice Gwalior and every other frontier of India ten times over in order to preserve our credit for scrupulous good faith." Shortly afterwards he asks, "What brought me through many difficulties in the war and the negotiations for peace? The British good faith, and nothing else!" All that was now asked for the King of Delhi was, that good faith should be observed that engagements entered into should be strictly performed. In the line of succession the kings of Delhi had sat upon the throne of that part of India 318 years. The hon. proprietor quoted the history of the kings of Delhi, and the grounds of complaint the king has against the Indian Government, the latter of which are thus set forth in a pamphlet frequently cited by Mr. Thompson during his speech : "Firstly,-The British Government has hitherto granted to him and his predecessors only a portion of the allowance which, forty years ago, was solemnly guaranteed for the maintenance in affluence, dignity, and honourable repose of the king and royal family of Delhi; and that, in consequence, the faith of the British Government has been broken, and the sovereigns of Delhi and the royal household subjected to mortification, inconvenience, and suffering. "Secondly, That the British Government (in addition to departing from its own voluntary, deliberate, and public engagement, to supply the means necessary for the support of the king and royal family in a manner corresponding to their rank and dignity) has, without just cause, deprived his majesty of the privileges and prerogatives which have from time immemorial been exercised by the Kings of Delhi, and the continued and perpetual enjoyment of which, together with a nominal sovereignty, were expressly promised at the time that the Emperor Shah Allum placed himself under British protection." On the same authority it is stated, "The present circumstances of the royal family of Delhi may be briefly explained. The total amount received from the British Government, monthly, is one lac and two hundred and eighty rupees. The king's allowance out of this, including the amount paid in lieu of nuzzers at festivals, and the addition by Lord Minto in 1809, is 79,300 rupees. The rest is allotted to other members of the royal family. His majesty can exercise no kingly prerogative beyond the circle of his own household, and is prohibited from receiving any token of sovereignty from any one under the control of the East-India Company, or from any other person not in the immediate service of his majesty. "In these circumstances, the king deems himself aggrieved, both in regard to the amount of money given for the support of himself and the royal family, and the annihilation of his privilege as a sovereign. He alleges that the British Government did in 1803, and again in 1805, come under a voluntary and perpetual engagement to appropriate the revenue of a certain specified portion of territory to the support of the royal house of Delhi. That the revenues of the said territory were to be collected in the name of the King of Delhi, and devoted exclusively to his advantage. That a correct account was to be, from time to time, rendered to the king of the proceeds of the assigned territory, that his majesty might be satisfied that no part was misappropriated. That this engagement has been broken, and the king and royal family thereby deprived of the benefits secured to them. "He alleges further, that, though he has done nothing worthy of degradation, the British Government has gratuitously, and in violation of good faith, abolished customs and privileges which have been enjoyed for centuries by the kings of Delhi, and the exercise of which was in no way incompatible with the rank, dignity, or power of the British Government. Such is the case of the king. "The British Government denies the fact of the alleged engagement, and contends that the allowance to be paid to the royal family, as well as the rank and privileges they shall be permitted to enjoy, are matters to be regulated solely by the views the Government entertain of what is expedient and proper. "The king and the Government, therefore, are fairly at issue. Let us see, then, if there be any means of ascertaining on what side truth, justice, and equity stand, in this interesting contro versy. "It is precisely 445 years ago since Tamerlane crossed the Indus, and, with the united hordes of Tartary, invaded the dominions of Mahmood Toghlak, then King of Hindostan. Delhi surrendered, and Tamerlane was proclaimed Emperor of India. After a stay of little more than a fortnight, the sanguinary con. queror turned his back on Delhi, carrying with him the treasure and captives he had obtained, and after penetrating as far as Hurdwar, retraced his steps, and departed to his own country. A hundred and twenty-eight years afterwards, or 317 years ago, his descendant in the sixth degree undertook to recover the conquests of his ancestor, and appeared upon the plains of Paniput with 12,000 men, where he engaged Ibrahim Lodi, and an army estimated at 100,000-obtained a complete victory, and in May, 1526, was in possession of Delhi and Agra, and the proclaimed Emperor of India. This was the renowned Baber, one of the greatest of conquerors and of kings, and a founder of a long line of princes, some of whom have been amongst the most illustrious the world has seen. It was towards the latter end of the reign of Baber's grandson, the great Akber, that Queen Elizabeth formed the design of opening a direct trade with the East Indies; and the merchants of London, calculating with reason upon the queen's countenance being bestowed upon any attempt to fulfil her wishes, formed themselves into a company, and ap plied for a charter. Their request was granted, and in December, 1600, the merchant adventurers were incorporated under the title of The Governor and Company of Merchants of Lon. don trading to the East Indies.' Elizabeth, at the same time, addressed a friendly letter to the Emperor Akber, soliciting for her subjects permission to trade within the limits of his dominions. "In the year 1615, Sir Thomas Roe was despatched from England, as the ambassador of King James the First, to the court of the Emperor Jehangeer. He was received in a manner worthy of the sovereign he represented, and the office which he filled, and was entertained with every mark of respect for upwards of two years. "In the year 1670, during the reign of Aurungzebe, the honourable Company obtained from Prince Azeem, the son of the emperor, and the viceroy of Bengal, a grant of a zemeendary, comprising the present site and immediate suburbs of Calcutta, with permission also to strengthen Fort William. To this settlement the agents of the Company removed, from Moorshedabad, in 1706. The "In the year 1713, the honourable Company sent an embassy from Calcutta to Delhi, to solicit from the reigning emperor certain grants and privileges regarded by the Company as indispensable to their prosperity. This mission was successful. grants bestowed by Prince Azeem were confirmed; the English goods of the Company were exempted from the payment of custom dues, and permission was given to purchase three villages in the neighbourhood of Madras, and thirty-seven in the vicinity of Calcutta. "In the year 1759, the honourable Company obtained from the Emperor Shah Jehan, or Alumgeer the Second, an assignment of territory for the support of what was called the 'imperial fleet,' of which the Company's agent at Surat was appointed admiral. "In the year 1765 (August 12) Lord Clive obtained from his Majesty Shah Alum, then holding his court at Allahabad,1. An imperial firmaun, granting to the honourable Company the dewanee in perpetuity (the right of collecting the revenue for ever) of the provinces of Bengal, Behar, and Orissa. 2. A firmaun, confirming to the honourable Company the possession of Burdwan, Midnapoor, Chittagong, and the 24-Pergunnahs. 3. A firmaun, confirming to the Company their possessions in the Carnatic. 4. A firmaun, confirming to the Company the possession of the five Northern Circars in the Deccan. I need not, in an Indian newspaper, attempt to describe the extent, the value, or the importance of these immense possessions, thus bestowed by the grandfather of the present King of Delhi upon the honourable East-India Company and the British nation. "In the year 1803, the Emperor Shah Alum, after experiencing a series of the most distressing vicissitude, was shut up in his own palace, at Delhi, under the custody of M. Perron, the French general of Madnajee Sindiah, and the Mahratta flag waved over almost every part of Hindostan and the Deccan. The king's name was a tower of strength; and, though possessed of no real power or authority, it was of immense importance to the Mahrattas to be able to attach the imperial seal to their acts. The French government, too, were at the same time watching with intense eagerness for an opportunity of laying the foundation of an empire in India, by obtaining possession of the king, and by acting for a time under the shelter of his pretended authority and on his behalf. What is now to follow demands special attention. "At the period I have above referred to (1803), the commander-in-chief of the British army, General (afterwards Lord) Lake, was on his way to the upper provinces, at the head of a large force, destined to encounter the army of M. Perron, and, if possible, obtain possession of Delhi. The Governor-General at the time was the Marquess Wellesley. "Lord Wellesley secretly addressed a letter to the Emperor Shah Alum, dated July 27, 1803, in which he sympatized, with every appearance of sincerity, in the sufferings and privations to which his majesty had been subjected, and invited him, should the opportunity occur, to place himself under the protection of the British Government, assuring him of the loyalty and attachment of that Government to the royal house. 'Should, your majesty be disposed to accept this offer (says his lordship) you may be assured that every demonstration of respect, and every degree of attention which can contribute to the ease and comfort of your majesty and the royal family, will be manifested on the part of the British Government, and that adequate provision will be made for the support of your majesty and of your family and household.' Here there is a distinct and solemn pledge in the name of the British Government. 6 "The genuineness of the sentiments contained in the above letter is amply demonstrated by the contents of another, bearing the same date (July 27, 1803), and addressed to his Excellency Lord Lake, with regard to the conduct to be observed by the British Government towards his majesty and the royal family of Delhi, if their persons should be brought under our protection.' And how does his lordship proceed to describe this conduct? Thus : "The arrangement to be finally concluded with respect to his majesty involves a question of great political and national importance, which will form the subject of future deliberation. For the present, it is my intention merely to secure to his majesty the protection of the British Government, and to assign to him and to his family a provision for their immediate support. The extent of that provision must be regulated by future events and circumstances. I entertain no doubt that his majesty will be cordially disposed to place himself under the British protection, without any previous stipulation. "When that event shall have taken place, it is my anxious desire that his majesty and the royal family should immediately experience the benefit of the change, by receiving from your Excellency, and from all persons acting under your authority, every demonstration of reverence, respect, and attention, and every degree of regard to the comfort and convenience of his majesty and the royal family, consistent with the security of their persons. It will be proper that your Excellency should immediately appoint a civil or military officer, who may be duly qualified to attend his majesty, in the capacity of agent or representative of the British Government, furnishing such officer with proper instructions for the regulation of his conduct towards his majesty and the royal family, founded on the actual circumstances of their situation, and on the spirit of these suggestions. "Your Excellency will be pleased to transmit to me, as soon as may be practicable, a statement of the names and degrees of the persons for whom it may be necessary to assign a provision, together with such suggestions as your Excellency may deem advisable, to enable me to determine the extent of such provision.' "Such were the sentiments and such the instructions conveyed by Lord Wellesley to Lord Lake. The arrangement to be concluded respecting the king and royal family was 'a question of great political and national importance.' The provision to be made for them, in the first instance, was merely for their 'immediate support.' They were to be treated by his Excellency, and all persons acting under his authority, with every demonstration of reverence, respect, and attention,' and the names were to be furnished of all persons for whom it might be necessary to make a provision." The decisive battle of Delhi was fought on the 11th September, 1803. The Mahrattas were defeated, and the emperor, reposing implicit faith in the honour and assurances of the British Government, joyfully hailed the victors, placed himself and his family ander the shelter of the English flag, and afforded every assistance to the Commander-in-chief in the removal of his troops from the left to the right bank of the Jumna. "On the 16th of September, 1803, Lord Lake was visited at his camp by the heir-apparent, Akber Shah, and by him conducted to the palace. "On coming into the presence of the venerable monarch, the victorious general presented nuzzeers in the name of the British Government, together with sundry costly presents. 'His majesty (says Lord Lake) received me seated on his throne, and his majesty and the whole court were unanimous in testifying their joy at the change which had taked place in their fortunes.' Writing to his Royal Highness the Duke of York, he says, 'in testimony of the sentiments his majesty entertained on this occasion, he conferred on me a title, the second in the empire in rank and importance, and would have conferred the first, had it not been previously bestowed on Dowlut Rao Sindiah. "On my part I paid every deference, respect, and honour to the royal dignity, and encouraged every hope of future comfort and independence, from the generous conduct and acknowledged liberality of the British Government.' "On the 5th of October, his majesty addressed a letter to Lord Wellesley, the contents of which Lord Lake did not hesitate entirely to approve.' The following is an authenticated copy, bearing the attestation of W. B. Bayley, the assistant Persian secretary : : "Be this great victory and splendid success happy and prosperous to us, and to all the servants of our illustrious court, especially to your lordship. "As the designs of our faithful servants have happily succeeded, the time has arrived for your lordship, in conformity to the distinct and obligatory engagement described to us by your lordship in the letter which you lately transmitted, to secure to yourself happiness, temporal and eternal, and permanent reputa tion, by fulfilling that engagement, and by carrying into effect that which may provide for the interests and welfare of the servants of this imperial court (meaning his majesty and family), and for the happiness of the people of God, through the aid and services of the officers of the Company's Government.' Here his majesty reminds Lord Wellesley of the distinct and obligatory engagement' under which the British Government had been brought by the letter addressed by the latter to the king, and calls upon him to secure for himself unfading reputation by fulfilling that engagement. "The noble marquis does not appear to have stood in need of any such call as was made upon his honour and good faith in the foregoing letter, for we find the following letter from his lordship to his majesty Shah Alum, under date the 8th of October. No language can be more emphatic, or more intelligible, or more honourable, than the language of this letter, and I cannot too earnestly entreat the attention of your readers to it. Let the words I have distinguished by italics and small capitals be deliberately weighed. "My attention (says his lordship) is now directed with great solicitude to the formation of a PERMANENT ARRANGEMENT, calculated to provide durable security for the happiness, dignity, and tranquillity of your majesty and royal family, conformable to the intimation contained in my former address to your majesty 66 6 "I trust that the testimony of my early attention to your majesty's service may be acceptable to your majesty, until his Excellency General Lake, under my orders, can be enabled to offer to your majesty's consideration the plan of a permanent settlement of your affairs, secured by the power of the British Go vernment. "I request your highness to consider his Excellency General Lake to be fully authorized by me to conduct all affairs in Hindostan, and to possess my entire confidence and highest respect. "Your majesty will, therefore, be pleased to signify your commands on all occasions to General Lake, with the same confidence by which you have honoured me; and your majesty will also be pleased to accept all communications from General Lake, as proceeding immediately from my authority.' "This letter, also, is attested by the signature of W. B. Bayley. "Lord Lake, it has been seen, was fully authorized to treat with his majesty, who was told to accept all communications from him as though they proceeded immediately from the Governor-General. At the expiration of two months, Lord Lake, in virtue of the authority above described, forwarded under his own hand the promised plan of a permanent settlement' of the royal affairs; and as this document, which may be properly called a treaty, was, with certain modifications, formally and finally submitted to his majesty, and accepted by him in 1805, then bearing the signatures of Sir David Ochterlony, the British resident at Delhi, and of H. Colebrooke, Esq., I think it right to place them in juxta-position." The hon. proprietor dilated at considerable length upon the main points related in the authority cited, and also to the contents of the Wellesley despatches, and then read the terms of the treaty of Lord Lake, of the 2nd October, 1803, which were these: 66 Treaty submitted by Lord Lake, Oct. 2, 1803. "Art. 1. All the mehals (districts) situate on the right bank of the river Jumna, and north-west of the Mowza Khaboolpoor, are fixed as the crown lands of his majesty. "2. The collection of the revenues of the aforesaid mehals shall continue, as heretofore, under the direction of the British resident at the court of Delhi. "3. The mootsuddies, or officers of the royal treasury, shall attend at the kutchary, or office of the collector of revenues, of the said crown lands, and keep an account of the in-comings and out-goings of the said crown lands, in order that satisfaction and tranquillity may be afforded to his majesty. "4. The sum of ten thousand rupees (as nuzzurs) shall be presented by the British resident to his majesty at each of the seven great annual festivals. "5. Two cazees and a mooftee shall be appointed from among the most learned of the inhabitants of Delhi for the administration of justice. "6. In every instance where the punishment of death is awarded by the criminal courts of Delhi, previous to such punishment being carried into effect, it shall be submitted to his majesty for sanction or otherwise. "7. Coin struck in his majesty's name shall be current in the city of Delhi, and in the crown lands of his majesty. "8. Should there be an increase in the collections from the above mehals (districts), in consequence of extended cultivation and the improved condition of the ryots (cultivators), an augmentation to that amount will take place in the king's peshkush (tribute). "9. The resident will present 10,000 rupees on the occasion of each of the seven festivals held annually, viz., two Eeds, the anniversary of the accession, the Now Roze (new year'sday), the Holy Rumzan, the Hooly, and Bussunt. "10. The jagheers (estates) of the heir apparent and Mirzalı Aizedbukhsh, situated in the Doab, shall be made over to the officers of the Honourable Company. "11. The expense of the troops, police corps, &c., employed in the Khalsah (or crown lands), shall be defrayed by the Honourable Company." He (Mr. Thompson) contended that the Government of India, in its negotiations and arrangements, had taken the lion's share, and proceeded to quote numerous authorities to prove that the treatment of the Government of India to the King of Delhi had been most arbitrary and unjust. The engagement, or ikra-namah, sent by Lord Lake to the King of Delhi, by the express authority of the then Governor-General (the Marquess of Wellesley), had not been kept. The Chairman.-When was that delivered? Mr. Thompson said he did not know exactly, but that point might be dismissed, as he had plenty of evidence for his case. What was promised by Lord Wellesley (hear! from the Chairman) was not performed. Many additional references were made upon this point from printed documents. It was quite clear that certain lands were to be assigned to the King of Delhi, in order to enable him to keep up a proper degree of dignity, and that it was the intention of the Governor-General that he should have an ample allowance for that purpose. The amount of thirty lacs of rupees, which was proposed by the Marquess of Wellseley, was not the maximum of the proposed grant; on the contrary, it was evident from his lordship's despatches, that he intended to go further, if on subsequent inquiries the exigencies of the case rendered it necessary. Part of the lands then proposed to be assigned to the King of Delhi were now yielding an excess of thirty-five lacs a year. With reference to the grant proposed, the Governor-General said : "It is not, however, the intention of the Governor-General to fix the amount without further information which may enable his Excellency to judge of the exigencies of the royal household, and of the extent of the additional resources which the British Government has acquired in the Doab and in Hindostan, by the cessions of the peace with Dowlut Rao Scindiah." "In the fourteenth paragraph the Governor-General expressly says, that the income arising both from the assigned territories and the money payments from the British treasury is to be exclusively at the disposal of his Majesty."" In a subsequent part of the despatch it was stated, that the Governor-General did not deem it advisable to enter into any written agreement with the King of Delhi. (Hear!) The Chairman.-How do you reconcile that with the statement you have made as to ikra-namah? Mr. Thompson said, he had never contended that the document was an absolute treaty entered into by both parties. All he had said was, that it was signed by one party, and submitted to the other for approbation, the party so submitting it of course being willing to abide by it, provided the other party consented, and which, therefore, gave it, as far the party proposing it was concerned, all the effect of an agreement. The hon. proprietor here read extracts from a variety of documents and dispatches, and said the question for the consideration of the proprietors on the present occasion was, what was the nature of the engagement which Lord Wellesley, on the part of the British Government, had entered into with the King of Delhi? The document on that subject which he had already referred to was the one to which he again begged to call their particular attention. In conclusion, the hon. proprietor said, that, after looking to the many favours which the King of Delhi had bestowed upon the East-India Company-the assurances that had been given by Lord Lake-the present condition of the royal family of Delhi-a family that had shewn as little hostility to British power as any royal family with which the East-India Com pany had ever had any thing to do-and, looking at the professions which had been made by the Court of Directors of their desire at all times to promote the welfare of the native princes of India, as far as was consistent with the safety of their own government, he trusted that the Court of Proprietors would come to the conclusion, that the whole question ought to be taken into consideration by the Court of Directors. He concluded by moving for the production of certain despatches and papers with reference to the case of the King of Delhi. The motion having been seconded, we The Chairman rose and spoke as follows-" The hon. proprietor who has introduced this subject has not only spoken at great length, but has so highly coloured the representations which he has made that it will be necessary that I also should occupy more time than I could have desired; and, further, I must enter upon some statements which, I fear, may have the appearance of being harsh and ungenerous towards a fallen family. If, however, such should be the case, I trust it will go forth to the world that I have not sought the occasion; that in making such statements I have not acted willingly or voluntarily, but that the course which it will be my duty to take is forced upon me by the gentleman whom the King of Delhi has thought fit to select as his agent. The hon. proprietor has claimed the gratitude of the East-India Company for the house of Delhi. I will not deny that the Company have derived advantage from princes of that house, but I will say that the conduct of the Emperor Shah Alum went far to cancel any obligations that might previously have existed. That prince joined the Mahrattas in opposition to the British Government in India, and he abetted the designs of the French and other enemies of Great Britain. These facts the hon. proprietor, in his speech this day, has attempted to gloss over. This conduct, however, it was that reduced him to the state of misery and destitution described in the despatches of the Marquis Wellesley, and in this situation, of which his own folly had been the cause, he That sought the protection of the British Government. protection he was as anxious to obtain as were to afford it. The advantage was mutual. With reference to the settlement which the Marquis Wellesley proposed to make for the future provision of the king and his family, the whole question turns upon the construction of the letter of the noble marquis on the subject. The honourable proprietor has referred to a document which he calls an ikra-namah; but the Court will be surprised to hear that no such document is to be found among the records either of the Home Government or the Supreme Government of India. Indeed it is almost demonstrable that no such document could have been recognised by the Marquis Wellesley-for that nobleman, in a dispatch dated 23rd May, 1805, had most explicitly directed that no written engagement should be entered into with the King of Delhi; and yet the honourable proprietor says, and persists in saying, that the British Government entered into a treaty with the king. might have been some memorandum on the subject made by one of the parties, but it is clear that there could have been nothing worthy to bear the name of a treaty, or that could in any degree have the effect of one. And what is produced to-day?-not the alleged treaty itself-not even a copy of it, but only a translation, As to the assignment of lands, it was obviously merely nominal and formal. It was intended as a resource to provide funds for the payments to be made to the king and his family. Indeed a great part of the lands thus charged had been previously alienated. On this point I may refer to the testimony of Lord Minto and Sir Charles Metcalf." The Chairman here read the following extract from a minute of Lord Minto, dated 6th June, 1809:- There Government, however, certainly was not bound to consider any specific territories as assigned for the maintenance of the king and royal family. The obligation which it imposed upon itself was that of providing for them the means of comfortable subsistence and of reasonable state and dignity; and although Government thought proper to assign certain territories as a resource for that expenditure, the amount was declared not to depend upon the produce, although the former was to be augmented, if at a future 'period the latter should afford sufficient funds for that purpose. This promise, of course, pre-supposed our acceptation of all the lands included in the description of assigned territories; but, in fact, juggeersaud jaidads had at times been granted, out of those territories, to the annual value of about 6,40,000 rupees, a circumstance which must have been overlooked. 'Upon the whole, it may be observed that no argument, either in favour of the king's claim or against it, can be deduced from the produce of the assigned territories, and a reference to the conditional intimation regarding the increase of the stipends cited by the Resident of Delhi is of no other use than to shew the extent of the increase which it was in the contemplation of Governmen to bestow, when its funds should be adequate to that purpose.' The Chairman continued-" I shall now read an extract from a letter written by Sir Charles Metcalfe, when Resident at Delhi, dated the 26th June, 1827: At the very time when those instructions were penned, a large portion of those territories, i. e. the whole of Hurreeanu, had been alienated to Bamboo Khan; or if the permanent character of the alienation to Bamboo Khan, of which I speak from memory, be doubtful, there can be no doubt of the completion of the alienation which was made in a few months after on the resignation of Bamboo Khan, in the first instance to Uhmed Buksh Khan, and, secondly, to Ubdoo Samund Khan. The alienation was not confined to Hurreeanu, other districts of the territory which was to have been assigned were also disposed of, in the end of 1805 and beginning of 1806, to Nizabut Allee Khan, Buckshee Bhowanee Shunkeer, Ushruf Beg Khan, the Meendul Khans, the Khoonjpoora Nawants, and others. In fact, the British Government directed at that period that the whole of the territory west of the Jumna, acquired by conquest from the Mahrattas, should be given away in sovereignty to independent chieftains, and placed beyond the pale of our protection, with the exception of a slip extending twenty miles inland from the river. That order was in a great measure executed, and whatever modifications of it subsequently took place were without reference to any supposed engagement to the King of Delhi."" The Chairman continued -"The Court of Directors have always been most anxious to treat native princes with liberality. What says Lord Minto on the subject in his Minute, dated 6th June, 1809?-and on what grounds did he put the allowance made to the King-on those of justice or of generosity? His lordship says: 'Our whole demeanour towards his majesty has been modelled on the same liberal and becoming principle, and it is in a spirit of anxious solicitude to fill up this plan of national benevolence in its amplest extent, and to leave nothing wanting to its fullest accomplishment, that I seize this earliest period of relief from the pressure of war and of improvement in the public resources, to propose an augmentation of the royal stipend adequate, in my judgment, to satisfy every reasonable demand on the part of his majesty, and every suggestion of well-regulated generosity on ours.' The Chairman resumed "As a proof that the allowance made to the future King of Delhi was not a niggardly one, I may mention, that when Shah Alum died, it was found that he had accumulated between five and six lacs of rupees, the savings made from an income now represented to have been altogether inadequate. The sum professedly allowed to the king by the Mahrattas has been alluded to. It sounds well, but the hon. proprietor has not told us, as he ought to have done, that the Mahrattas never paid it. I come now to speak of Akbar Khan, son of Shah Alum. He engaged in intrigues against the British Government, and in consequence incurred its displeasure. But it was not against the British Government only that he intrigued. He endeavoured to set aside the claim of his son to the succession. This was opposed by that very Government which was accused of acting towards the house of Delhi in an unfriendly and unjust manner; but it is to the support of the government thus aspersed, and to nothing else, that the present king owes the position which he occupies. The truth is, that the kings of Delhi have been constantly misadvised and misled. When it was proposed to make an additional allowance to be applied to the decent maintenance of the royal family, the king was advised by his agents not to accept it. Now, on the situation of those who were the proposed objects of the Court's bounty I need not give the honourable mover any information. He knows who they were, namely, the numerous members of the family and dependents of his Majesty, designated Sulateem,' on whom I should have expected the hon. proprietor would have bestowed a portion of his philanthropy. He cannot dispute that they were sunk into almost the lowest possible state of physical and moral degradation and destitution. The Court wished to relieve them. By whom were their benevolent intentions thwarted? By the former and the present king, and those on whose advice the princes of Delhi have been constantly led to rely, in preference to trusting those who have ever been their warm and faithful friends. His present Majesty refused to accept the boon proposed by the Court of Directors and the Government with the intention of ameliorating the condition of those unhappy persons, although, when heir-apparent, he complained bitterly of his father's conduct in not accepting it, and attributed his refusal to the evil advice of intriguers and self-interested men, who, he said, dic tated to the king. No sooner, however, did he succeed to the dignity of king, than he adopted the same course-that very course which he had, in addressing the British resident, Sir Charles Metcalf, on the subject in March, 1837, alleged that designing persons, working on the infirmity of his Majesty, have made him do what his better reason could not dictate; and (he continued) that owing to the increase made in my favour, and that of my dependents, and that the mode adopted by Government, in the distribution, keeps those about his Majesty from appropriating any portion of the increase to themselves as they had antici pated, I must now apprize your honour that they have dissuaded his Majesty from accepting the increase, so what you have done on my account has not been carried into effect; and now that my sons have arrived at that age of maturity, when a proper maintenance ought to be made for them, and settled in life by getting them married, and the bare allowance I now have will not allow of my completing my wishes.' There is yet one point, on which I must offer a few words in vindication of the Court of Directors. I mean the discontinuance of nuzzurs to the King of Delhi. I have to state that the directors did not coincide in the views of Lord Ellenborough on this point, and his lordship was in due course apprized of the difference. I think then that the interests of the King of Delhi may safely be left with that body, who have hitherto so carefully watched over them; and I trust that such will be the view of the proprietors, more especially when I add that a despatch has recently been forwarded to India, which I trust will afford full satisfaction both to the king and his family." He says, Mr. Sullivan said, he could hardly find words to express the astonishment which he felt at what had just fallen from his hon. friend, the Chairman; for a more ingenious piece of casuistry was never devised. The garb of special pleading sat with an ill grace upon his honest shoulders. This Delbi case was a perfect novelty to him; he had never thought of it, or considered it, or heard it, but from the lips of the hon. proprietor. A more able, and temperate, and lucid statement of a case, he (Mr. Sullivan) never heard, or one that was more completely supported by authority; and having listened with attention to the answer (the best defence he supposed that could be made), he declared, that if he was upon his oath at this moment, as a juryman, as an arbitrator, or as a judge in equity, he would cast the Company in full damages; that is, he would sentence them to pay the whole proceeds of the assigned lands, with the arrears: nay, he would go further; he would insist upon their making compensa. tion for the lands which had been-he must not say, fraudu. lently, but-improperly alienated from the Moghul. What was the Chairman's answer to the hon. proprietor's case? that the ikra-namah, or agreement, given by Lord Lake to Shah Allum, is not upon the Company's records; that they have no knowledge of it. What is that to the purpose? the question was, is such a document in existence? did Lord Lake, the representative of the Governor-General, and armed with plenary power from him, give such a document to the emperor? If the present emperor can produce this agreement, and prove that it was so given to his grandfather, what will the Chairman say? Was it the fault of Shah Allum that this document was not upon record? But his hon. friend laid great stress upon the declaration of Lord Wellesley-that he did not intend to enter into a written agreement with Shah Allum, and says, how preposterous it is, in the face of this declaration, to rest the emperor's case upon written agreements! His hon. friend had, however, overlooked the fact, that the letter, to which this declaration was made, is dated November, 1804, and that there is upon record an agreement signed by Colonel Ochterlony, the then Resident, and Mr. Colebrooke, and dated in July, 1805. This agreement, or pledge, was founded on the noble lord's letter of 1804. Did his hon. friend deny the authenticity of this letter? If he did, he (Mr. Sullivan) would ask him upon what authority he is now paying a stipend to the emperor? Has the emperor a right to our stipend, or is it a spontaneous act of benevolence on the part of the Company? If the answer be, as it must be, that the payment is matter of right, then it follows, that the right is founded on that very agreement, and if, under that agreement, we are bound to pay any sum, we are bound to pay the whole. The case must be determined by what was in the mind of Lord Wellesley, and what that was might be clearly seen in his despatches. There it distinctly appears that he contemplated an expenditure of thirty lacs of rupees for the support of the imperial family, and he assigned lands, the value of which was not exactly known, as a fund for the purpose, giving, in the interim, a stipend limited indeed by the existing exigencies of the Company's finances, but accompanied by a promise that it should increase, as the revenue from the assigned lands increased. How could this pledge be retracted? If solemn engagements can be thus set aside, who in India can feel secure of any thing? The Court would remember that, on a former occasion, he (Mr. Sullivan) had quoted those words of the Duke of Wellington with which the hon. mover had commenced his speech. He believed, with the illustrious duke, that our empire in India rests upon the observance of good faith; and that every departure from good faith tends to endanger the security of that empire. In his judgment, a gross breach of faith had been committed in the case of the Moghul, and he could not aid by his vote in sustaining it, Mr. G. Thompson replied briefly, after which a short desultory conversation took place. The question was then put from the chair, and the motion lost by a large majority, only four hands being held up in its favour. The Court then adjourned. EAST-INDIA COLLEGE, HAILEYBURY. On Friday, the 13th December, being the closing day of the Term, the usual distribution of prizes took place, in presence of the Chairman (John Shepherd, Esq.), Deputy-Chairman (Sir Henry Willock), and several Directors of the East-India Company. The report of the Principal, the Rev. Henry Melvill, B.D., was of a very gratifying character in regard both to the general good conduct of the students during the term, and their attention to their respective studies. On proceeding to the hall, the following statement of the prizes and distinctions obtained by the students was read by Mr. Hooper, of the college department, East-India House : Students leaving College.-Collett, highly distinguished; with medal in mathematics, medal in law, prize in Sanscrit, and medal in Teloogoo. Glover, highly distingushed; with essay prize, prize in classics, prize in Persian, and prize in Hindustani. Ballard, highly distinguished; with medal in political economy. Belli, highly distinguished; with essay prize, and medal in classics. Heywood, Master, Campbell, Cunliffe, Grant, Hudleston, and Madocks, highly distinguished. passed with great credit. Toogood, Students remaining in College. Third Term. · Ainslie, highly distinguished; with prize in mathematics, prize in Persian, prize in Sanscrit, and prize in Hindustani. Harrison, highly distinguished; with prize in Teloogoo. Tucker, highly distinguished; with prize in law. Shaw, highly distinguished; with prize in political economy. Denison, highly distinguished; with prize in classics. Rogers, L. Reid, Sandeman, Nesbitt, Foster, and Hammond, highly distinguished. Russell, Lord W. Hay, Messrs. Lushington, Best, Henderson, and Ogilvie, passed with great credit.-Second Term.-Simson, highly distinguished; with prize in mathematics, and prize in law. H. S. Reid, highly distinguished; with prize in classics. P. S. Melvill, highly distinguished; with prize in Sanscrit and prize in Persian. Couper, highly distinguished; with prize in political economy. Pepper, Inverarity, and Paxton; highly distinguished. Pauncefote, Mayne, M. Ricketts, Jackson, and Thompson, passed with great credit.-First Term.-Temple, highly distinguished; with prize in classics, and prize in English composition. Pratt, highly distinguished; with prize in English composition. Gibbs, highly distinguished; with prize in Sanscrit. Thornhill, highly distinguished. Abercrombie and Keene, passed with great credit. Rank of Students finally quitting College, December, 1844. First Class.-Glover, Belli, Campbell, and Heywood. First Class.-Grant. Bombay. Madras. First Class. Collett, Ballard, Master, Hudleston, and Cunliffe. Mr. Glover read his Prize Essay (English)" on the Causes of the Decline of the Ottoman Empire.' Mr. Collett then read the "Vision of Meerza," from the Spectator, translated by himself into Teloogoo,-giving the original and the translation, in alternate paragraphs. The Chairman then distributed the prizes awarded to the successful students, and afterwards addressed them in the following terms:-"Gentlemen Students, I have much pleasure in congratulating you, and the reverend and learned principal, dean, and professors of this College, upon the favourable report which has been presented to my honourable colleagues and myself, in reference not only to your general conduct, but to the great progress which has been made in your respective studies. happy to say that many of you have highly distinguished yourselves, and that the great majority of you have passed your terms with credit. I need not tell you that these results are highly I am |