East-India House, 20th August, 1845. HE COURT of DIRECTORS of the EAST-INDIA COMPANY do hereby give notice,

THE

That the Finance and Home Committee will be ready, on or before Wednesday, the 3rd of September, to receive Proposals in writing, sealed up, from such persons as may be willing to supply the Company with BRITISH IRON, CORDAGE; also, PORT WINE-and that the conditions of the said Contracts (three in number) may be had, on application at the Secretary's Office, where the proposals are to be left any time before 11 o'clock in the forenoon of the said 3rd day of September, after which hour no Tender will be received. JAMES C. MELVILL, Secretary.

That the Finance and Home Committee will be ready on Wednesday, the 27th instant, before 11 o'clock in the forenoon, to receive Tenders for the Freight of STORES from England to Bombay, in ships of the burthen of 400 tons register and upwards, O.M., or 500 tons register and upwards, N.M. The Tenders to be made according to a form which may be had at the Marine Branch of the Secretary's Office, at this House, with conditions annexed. The Freight to be payable thus, viz. One-third part in England, and the remaining two-thirds in India on the delivery of the Stores at Bombay, after the rate or exchange of 1s. 104d. per Company's rupee.

N.B. No Tender will be received unless made and filled in according to the form prescribed.

The Stores consist of about 252 tons of Dead Weight (Coals).
JAMES C. MELVILL, Secretary.

That the Finance and Home Committee will be ready, on Wednesday, the 27th instant, before 11 o'clock in the forenoon, to receive Tenders for the Freight of STORES from England to the city of Calcutta, in ships of the burthen of 400 tons register and upwards, O.M., or 500 tons register and upwards, N.M. The Tenders to be made according to a form which may be had at the Marine 'Branch of the Secretary's Office, at this House, with conditions annexed. The Freight to be payable thus, viz. One-third part in England, and the remaining two-thirds in India on the delivery of the Stores at Calcutta, after the rate or exchange of 1s. 10d. per Company's rupee.

N.B. No Tender will be received unless made and filled in according to the form prescribed.

The Stores consist of about 145 tons of Dead Weight, and 125 tons of Measurable Goods.

That a Special General Court of the said Company will be held at their house, in Leadenhall Street, on Friday, the 22nd instant, at 11 o'clock in the forenoon, at the desire of eleven Proprietors of East-India Stock, as expressed in the following letter, viz.

"To the Hon. the Chairman and the Directors of the East-India.
Company.

"HON. SIRS,-We, the undersigned Proprietors of Stock, duly qualified according to law, request that you will convene a Special General Court of East-India Proprietors at the earliest period, to take into consideration the papers relating to the case of the Rajah of Sattara, ordered by the House of Commons to be printed, 4th July, 1845, No. 449.

"We are, Hon. Sirs, your obedient servants,

"Charles Grant,

Arthur James Lewis,-

"Rungo Bapejee, J. Sullivan,

S. Gazelee,

Charles Forbes,

Harford Jones Brydges,

James Stewart Forbes," Geo, Thompson,

John Briggs, Joseph Hume.

PARCELS OVERLAND TO ADEN, INDIA, CEYLON, SINGAPORE,.. CHINA, &c.

MESSRS, WAGs to and from India, &c. by the OVERLAND

ESSRS. WAGHORN and Co. forward Parcels,

ROUTE, with regularity. Charges may be had at their Offices, 34, Cornhill, and Chaplin's, Regent Circus, London.

Waghorn & Co., having been appointed Agents for the Austrian Lloyd's Steamers between Trieste and Alexandria, are enabled to furnish the fullest information to PASSENGERS by that as well as the Marseilles Route. Their Overland Guide is sent, postage free, for 25.-For Plans, Rates of Passage, and to secure Berths, apply at 34, Cornhill,

THE following superior SHIPS, belonging to Messrs.

the INDIA TRADE, will leave Gravesend punctually at the undermentioned dates, and embark Passengers at Portsmouth a week after.

Last Shipping Day in the East-India Docks Three Days previously.

For Freight or Passage, apply to Capt. JAMES BARBER, 17, St. Mary Axe; or to Capt. WILLIAM FULCHER, at T. & W. SMITH'S, 78, Cornhill.

GRINDLAY AND CO.,

16, CORNHILL, AND 8, ST. MARTIN'S PLACE, CHARING CROSS, EAST-INDIA ARMY AGENTS,

AND

AGENTS FOR PASSENGERS TO INDIA.

CADETS and ASSISTANT-SURGEONS -Messrs, GRINDLAY & Co. have prepared the most complete and detailed scales of equipment for Cadets and Assistant-Surgeons, combining efficiency with the utmost economy, and shewing at one view the total expense of an equipment for India, including the passage, and every other expense.

CALCUTTA, MADRAS, BOMBAY, and CHINA.-Plans and particulars of all desirable Ships proceeding to the above places may be seen, and Passages negotiated free of expense, on application at either office. Baggage collected, shipped, and insured.

Messrs. GRINDLAY and Co. continue to receive and forward packages by the Overland Mails. Passengers to India, through the Continent, supplied with circular letters of credit, and all necessary information.

Northumberland... 900

Carnatic

Madras & Calcutta

Aug. 20.

Calcutta direct

Aug. 26.

1000

J. Drew

600 J. Furnell

Calcutta direct Calcutta

Sept. 5.

Sept. 26.

For Plans and Terms of Passage, apply to Messrs. GRINDLAY and Co., 16, Cornhill, or 8, St. Martin's Place, Charing Cross; or to F. GREEN and Co., 64, Cornhill.

PARCE

ARCELS OVERLAND to all parts of INDIA, CHINA, &c.-J. Hartley & Co. and J. Barber & Co., in connection with the Peninsular and Oriental Company, receive and forward parcels, as above, twice a month.-For CALCUTTA, MADRAS, CEYLON, and CHINA, parcels received till the 18th of each month, and for BOMBAY till the last day BUT ONE of each month.-Contents and value should be described on outside cover of each parcel.-Insurances effected.-Offices, 137, Leadenhall Street; 33, Regent Circus; and 17, St. Mary Axe.

STO

TOVES, GRATES, KITCHEN RANGES, FENDERS, FIRE-IRONS, GENERAL FURNISHING IRONMONGERY, JAPANNED TEA-TRAYS, TEA-URNS, BEST SHEFFIELD PLATE, WIRE TRELLIS-WORK, VERANDAHS, &c. &c.

Those gentlemen who are about to settle in life, or to furnish themselves with the above articles, will find here the largest assortment in the kingdom. Each article is priced in plain figures for cash, and every article warranted of the best manufacture.

PANKLIBANON IRON-WORKS, 58, Baker-street, Portman-square, London.

No. 36.]

The Hon. Company's steamer Semiramis, which left Bombay July 20, arrived at Aden August 5, with the mails; the mails were put on board the Hon. Company's steamer Neferia, and there conveyed to Suez, where they arrived August 13, and at Alexandria the following day.

The Peninsular and Oriental Company's steamer Iberia left Alexandria with the mails August 20, and arrived at Malta on the 24th, whence the portion to be conveyed through France was forwarded to Marseilles.

The Tagus steamer was daily expected at Malta from Constantinople to convey the remaining portion to Southampton.

DEPARTURE OF MAILS.

A mail for Bombay will depart from Southampton to-morrow. Letters must be posted in London, this day (Sept. 2), or, if marked ria Marseilles, on the evening of the 8th.

The next mail for Ceylon, Madras, and Calcutta will depart from Southampton on the 20th. Letters must be posted in London on the previous evening, or, if marked via Marseilles, on the evening of the 24th. By this mail letters will be forwarded direct to the Straits and China.

The Acbar (steamer) was to leave Bombay August 26, for Suez, with a mail for Europe.

The Hindostan (steamer), Moresby, left Suez, August 10, for Point de Galle, Madras, and Calcutta, with the London mail of July 24.

The Company's steamer Sesostris, from Suez with the London mail of June 7, reached Bombay July 9.

PRICE, with Supplement} 18.

plush. If he be yet alive, he will certainly admit a third object of wonder and unaccountability,-why the Indian Mails are so managed that one arrives within a few days of its predecessor. We can understand why, at particular seasons of the year, it should be thought expedient to despatch the mails a little sooner than usual, for the purpose of ensuring their arrival at the accustomed time; but we cannot understand why they should be despatched so early as to cause them to arrive some time before the usual period. On the present occasion the expresses of the daily papers were received on Saturday last, two days before the termination of the month of August, and the mail itself comes with the commencement of partridge-shooting on the 1st of September. We recollect nothing equal to this, except the contest between the publishers of the rival annuals in Little Pedlington, as recounted by Mr. JOHN POOLE, in which the struggle for priority was carried to such an extent that one of the contending booksellers at length brought out bis volume for a particular year in the month of July in the preceding year. If the Indian mails are to run a similar race, we shall have a communication three or four times a month instead of twice-an arrangement to which we offer no objection, except as to the want of notice. If, on the other hand, we are to have, in nautical phrase, a long leg and a short one-an interval of three weeks at one part of the month, and of only one at another-the advantage proposed from the bimonthly communication will in a great measure fail to be realized.

Certain it is, that the arrival which now calls us again to hold intercourse with our readers is singularly deficient, not only in stirring matter, but in matter of the most commonplace description. The truth is, that there has not been time for events to accumulate; the Bombay mail has followed that from Calcutta almost as closely as the dickey follows the stage coach-or used to follow it when stage coaches were. We are thus reduced to the necessity either of repeating that which the public already know, or of saying less than is accordant with our usual custom. We conclude the latter course the less evil, and are quite sure our readers will concur in this view, and therefore we shall be brief.

In Lahore, the ravages of pestilence have in some degree subsided, though it continues to make great havoc in other parts of the Punjaub. But the partial cessation that has taken place in the capital seems to have been but the prelude to the re-commencement of the turmoils and crimes of which that country seems destined long to be the scene,

unless it shall be relieved in the way suggested by Sir CHARLES NAPIER. PESHOORA SINGH surprised a party conveying government treasure, amounting to six lacs (60,000l.), and made himself master of it, after a short conflict. He subsequently wrote a letter to the Khalsa, alleging that poverty compelled him to this step. This excuse will not accord either with European or Sikh notions of morality. According to the former, poverty will not excuse plunder; according to the latter, no excuse is necessary, as every man may take all that he can get. The prince further hinted at a provision to be made for him, and expressed a hope that he might rely upon the troops. They, as a proof of their confidence, invited him to their camp, but the invitation was not accepted.

A-negotiation was subsequently opened for the return of the money, but PESHOORA SINGH closed his hand tightly upon it, and prepared for defence. Preparations were thereupon made for an attack upon Seealkote, where he had fortified himself; but the Prince sallied out and put his enemies to the route with considerable loss, though not without loss on his own part. And now followed one of those startling events common nowhere but in the Punjaub, though not unfrequent there, at least not without precedent. Negotiations were re-commenced, and PESHOORA SINGH agreed to restore the money. It will be recollected that something like this occurred not long since in the proceedings of GHOLAB SINGH.

The troops in Lahore are in the same state of insubordination that has long prevailed. JOWHAIR SINGH the wuzeer, is said to be exceedingly unpopular, and GHOLAB SINGH is waiting to see what card will next turn up, in order to benefit by it.

In Scinde disturbances have been renewed, and a wing of the 18th Bombay Native Infantry, under Major CORSELLIS, has been ordered to proceed to suppress them. Cholera appears to be lamentably prevalent in certain parts of the country.

From Calcutta there is "a plentiful lack" of intelligence. There are various speculations, as before, on the object of Sir HENRY HARDINGE's anticipated visit to the NorthWest, but as they are still only speculations, and as our business is to record facts,-we pass them by.

Madras is as quiet as Calcutta, and Bombay is only enlivened by a dispute between the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the Advocate-General. The spirit raging in the Supreme Courts of India seems generally warlike. At Madras the Master of the Court is summarily dismissed; at Bombay the Advocate-General is denounced. There wants only a skirmish in the Supreme Court of Calcutta to render all uniform.

The battles of the wigs may, perhaps, furnish a subject for an amusing episode in the History of India.

In Ceylon they seem to be assiduously engaged in planting, exporting, and in every way improving the resources of the country. The civil servants are to enjoy a little longer respite than was at first allowed before parting with their estates.

From Singapore there is no news beyond that given in another part of our paper, and China is almost a blank.

BENGAL.

SUPREME COURT.

TUESDAY, JULY 1, 1845.

(Before a full Bench.)

CHARLES WILLIAM DUFFIN v. WM. ROBERT HERRIES.

The plaintiff sought to recover damages for a certain libel, which the defendant was charged with having, on the 15th November, 1843, composed and published, containing, amongst other libellous matter, the following:

For public information.-Understanding that Lieutenant Duffin, 26th N.I. has exhibited in the public rooms at Simla a letter of Mrs. Duffin's, the publication of which was calculated to injure that lady's character; I now make known that on the 11th January last, Lieutenant Duffin did give a solemn assurance, through Captain Thomas, 66th N.I. as his friend, that the whole correspondence, of which the above letter forms a part, had been destroyed.

That he did on two subsequent occasions pledge himself, and allow two other officers to pledge themselves, that the subject should never be revived, nor any reference made to the circumstances connected with that letter.

And that on the 11th January, having made every possible inquiry, and having examined, among others, the above letter of Mrs. Duffin, Lieutenant Duffin declared himself satisfied, and stated that his suspicions had been unfounded.

Lieutenant Duffin has invited the attention of the public, and I have been called upon to afford them the means of forming a correct estimate of his conduct.

That the defendant also on the date aforesaid did compose and publish another libellous letter as follows:

Dear Sir, I have just heard by a letter from Simla, that Lieut. Duffin has posted in the public rooms at that place a letter from Mis. Duffin to myself.

I will not enter into any remarks upon his object in so doing, or the probable consequences; but I must take an early opportunity of declaring in an equally public manner, that this act of Mr. Duf. fin is in the highest degree dishonourable; that he has broken bis word of honour and violated his pledge that the subject should never be renewed.

I am further compelled to call upon you to state in writing, whether or not Mr. Duffin, in January 1842, at Ferozepore, had given his word that every one of Mrs. Duffin's letters to me had been destroyed by him. You were the guarantee for the destruction of these letters, and the appearance of one of them necessarily involves your name.

I am very far from thinking that you were aware of the existence of such a letter; but Duffin has practised a deceit upon you, and you became the guarantee for the performance of his promise.

I was assured in the most solemn manner that every letter was destroyed, and I have no right to doubt it, backed as it was by your pledge.

I now expect that you will not hesitate to furnish me with such proofs as you may be able to give, to enable me to hand to condign disgrace the character of this man.

I have an assurance in writing by Colonel Stuart, on the part of Lieutenant Duffin, that the matter should never be revived; and yet it is now brought before the public in the most notorious manner. How is this? he seems to deal as lightly with the honour of his friends as his own.

It is time he should learn that such acts must inevitably bring him to shame and contempt. I trust to receive an early reply from you, and remain, Yours very faithfully, W. R. HERRIES.

I have written to Captain Crawley on the same subject. Mr. MORTON and Mr. RITCHIE appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. LEITH and Mr. SANDES for the defendant. Mr. RITCHIE opened the pleadings.

Mr. MORTON stated the case. He said that the charge contained two counts, each containing a distinct libel, both having been published in November, 1843. The plaintiff is in the Company's service, a lieutenant of the 26th regiment N.I. The defendant is an officer in her Majesty's army, and holds the appointment of aide-de-camp to the Governor-General; and was, at the time of the publication of the libel, aide-de-camp to the late Governor-General, Lord Ellenborough. Pleas of justification have been filed in this case. We have examined a witness de bene esse, and gone at once into the question of justification. It will be necessary for me to advert to that examination, and also to go back to an earlier period of the transaction, for the purpose of explanation. The main question is whether the plaintiff was justified in preserving a certain intercepted letter written by Mrs. Duffin to the defendant. The latter charged the plaintiff with deceit and dishonourable conduct with regard to this letter. It appears to have been written in January, 1843, and was intercepted by the plaintiff at the Ferozepore Post Office, under circumstances which it is needless to detail. Up to that period, however, the plaintiff and his wife had lived in terms of mutual

affection, and in the confidence of each other. The plaintiff, on receiving the letter, went in a state of great agitation to his friend, Captain Thomas, who has been examined de bene esse. What took place will appear in detail from his examination. An interview then took place between the parties, and after something of a fracas, a kind of compromise was proposed and adopted. It ought to be mentioned, that the plaintiff at first insisted on receiving and retaining all the letters of Mrs. Duffin which were in the possession of the defendant, who, however, resisted this proposal; but was willing that the plaintiff should see and read them, though he required they should be returned to himself. In justice to the defendant, it must be admitted that he does not appear to have been actuated by any fear of consequences to himself; but throughout the negotiation he seemed to have been anxious to save the lady's reputation, and to convince the plaintiff that nothing of a positively criminal nature had taken place. The letters were accordingly given up, and numbered by Captain Thomas from one to twenty-two or twenty-three. The lastnamed gentleman declares clearly and positively that the numbering did not include the intercepted letter, which, therefore, could not have been comprehended in the agreement. Defendant at first wished that it should be so included, but to this both the plaintiff and Captain Thomas gave their peremptory refusal. The account of the negotiation which Captain Thomas gives, is so much in detail, that it is impossible he could be mistaken. At this stage of the affair, Captain Crawley, a Madras officer, and at the time an aide-de-camp to the Commander-in-chief, Sir Jasper Nichols, was called in on the part of the defendant. He has been examined under commission to the Madras Presidency on the part of the defendant. The part he took, however, lasted only a portion of one day, and was confined to the destruction of the letters, as all the arrangements had been agreed upon before his being called in. According to what had been unanimously determined upon, the letters were consigned to the flames, Captain Thomas and Captain Crawley being both witnesses of the destruction. But this burning included Only the letters that had been numbered, and at the time reference was made to the numbers. A qualified pledge seems to have been given, also, at the time by Captain Thoinas, that no farther mention of the matter would be made, and with that the quarrel apparently terminated. For some time the plaintiff and his wife lived on terms of cordiality, dissensions between them having ceased. Fresh misunderstandings, however, soon arose, and Mrs. Duffin in the month of October following, quitted her husband's roof. This separation between him and his wife, as the plaintiff supposed, led the Simla community to suspect him of cruel or harsh conduct towards her. Under this impression, and with a view to self-vindication to clear his character, he circulated publicly a sort of manifesto in justification of himself from the charges of harsh treatment to Mrs. Duffin, which he believed to have been made against him. This is alleged as the occasion for the libels. One of these is contained in a letter from the defendant to the address of Captain Thomas, dated the 11th Nov. 1843. The learned counsel especially referred to the letter, which he said in the commencement refers to some information, that the defendant who was then in Calcutta, had obtained from Simla. Why did he not at least wait to ascertain the correctness of that information? The Court would, perhaps, see the alleged placard. [That is a statement of Lieut. Duffin, embodying the intercepted letter from Mrs. Duffin, beginning with the words "My darling Willie," both which have bodily been published in this journal on the occasion of a former trial.] Whatever might have been the contents of that placard, I deny (the learned counsel said) that any mention was made of the defendant's name in it; though, even if it had, I deny that any pledge would thereby be broken. The letter containing one of the libels embraces two distinct charges. In the first place, the plaintiff is charged with violation of his pledge, and dishonourable conduct in giving publicity to what had passed, and he had engaged to keep as a secret. On this head the defendant must prove two things in justification. He must prove that the pledge was given, and then that, being thus given, it was wilfully broken. In the next place, the libel accuses the plaintiff that he was guilty of deceit in having retained the intercepted letter at all, when a solemn assurance had been given that it was destroyed. This is by far the gravest part of the libel. It is, however, singular that the alleged deceit is said to have been practised by the plaintiff on his own friend, Captain Thomas ! The plea for the defence, however, contains nothing in justification of this, though, if it did, Captain Thomas's evidence would directly negative it. But on this point the defendant was evidently misled altogether, and probably had also forgotten the arrangement entered into between him and the plaintiff. If, therefore, the matter had been based on this letter alone, a letter that seemed to be

founded in some degree on misinformation derived from Simla, and partly on his own mistake or imperfect recollection of the arrangement; and if afterwards he had expressed his regret in having written that letter, under such circumstances, the Court, in all likelihood, would never have heard of this case. But the Court will see that the libellous letter was persisted in after time had been given for consideration, and after Capt. Thomas had shewn that, at least, part of his impression was erroneous. The second libel is contained in a sort of a circular addressed to the Simla community. It does not contain any of the scurrilous epithets of the other libel embodied in the letter to Capt. Thomas, but it too plainly implies that the plaintiff had taken on himself certain solemn pledges which he had violated afterwards. The publication of these documents had been admitted under a certain consent order of the Court. Capt. Thomas, however, proves the receipt of one of them, and he further proves that upon its receipt he wrote to the defendant a long letter in which he reminds him that the intercepted letter was numbered and not comprehended in the category of those destroyed; that in fact the plaintiff not being obligated in any way to the defendant for the possession of that letter, the latter lal no right to make terms for its preservation or destruction. This ought to have convinced the defendant of his error, but he replies, still persisting in the charge; and, moreover, addresses another letter to the plaintiff himself, in which he declines to retract. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff had no other course but to appeal to the Court, in vindication of his character. The original intention of the plaintiff was to refer the matter for decision by a court-martial; but the Commander-in-Chief would not give his consent to this, as he regarded the affair in the light of a private quarrel, and not of a nature to authorize a court-martial sitting upon it. The plaint was accordingly filed in this court in August last; the subsequent delay has arisen from the issuing of the commission to Madras and other causes. The defendant has persisted in the charge to the last has entered a plea of justification, and has instructed his counsel to support those pleas this day. The learned counsel concluded by enumerating the proofs he would put in support of his case, and the principal of which was the de bene esse examination of Captain Thomas and some documents; the latter need not be published, nor the evidence of Captain Thomas, as, we believe, both have already appeared in the public prints.

Mr. LEITH was heard at very great length in defence. The address included a variety of arguments on different parts of the case; but as they were stated with great amplifications, it would be as well to give consecutively the chief arguments of the learned counsel in defence of his client. He opened by observing that his friend on the other side had stated that both parties were military officers, one of them being in the Queen's and the other in the Company's service. It was on the consideration, Mr. Leith said, that his client held that rank and station, that he felt the responsibility of his situation, and he was anxious that every thing connected with the matter should be laid bare before the Court, without his attempting to take advantage of any technical grounds; with a view that his client's character should not be compromised in the eyes of the world; but to satisfy the Court, on the contrary, that his conduct in the transaction was both becoming and necessary-becoming his character as an officer and a gentleman, and rendered necessary by the circumstances of the case. With this view it would, in the first place, be necessary to inquire to whom the letter containing the alleged libel was addressed. It was written to Captain Thomas, the agent of the plaintiff, employed and recognized by him, and who, by the authority delegated to him by his principal, had entered into a pledge of never again reviving the painful business, which so seriously affected the defendant's reputation. If in the legal sense it was not a confidential communication, it certainly approached very near it; while it was written in a fitting manner, on a fitting occasion-an occasion when, after a pledge had been mutually given and received that the disagreeable matter should be buried in oblivion, which involved the character of a lady and seriously affected the defendant, and, in fact, in which all parties we enterested that pledge had been disregarded and violated. The occasion being a fitting one, no malice cou'd be inferred from the language contained in the letter, and which only went to shew that the defendant wrote it under a feeling of irritation, and to one who was the constituted agent of the plaintiff.

Sir L. PEEL asked if the letter could be characterized as a privileged communication, when the defendant threatens to consign the character of the plaintiff to condign disgrace?

Mr. LEITH said that even if the defendant might be wrong to some extent in having expressed himself in that manner, y twla: he stated was only the consequence of, and the lawful course open to him, if the pledge had been broken, as it certainly was. So