stood, his sole reason for suggesting the delay, was founded on his wish, that the motion should not be decided until every member should have an opportunity of putting himself in possession of all the facts contained in the papers.

Mr. R. Jackson said he now regretted that he had not at the commencement of the discussion arisen to the question of order, because he felt that a proposition of this importance ought not to have been introduced without due notice. The hon. Chairman himself had from time to time. when motions originated at that side of the house adverted to the inconvenience of introducing important questions without the usual intimation that it was intended. Why had he (Mr. Jackson) found it necessary this day to give notice of the simple motion for the production of papers, but because he felt that the principle of giving notice ought not to be departed from, even on ordinary occasions. He declined at present going into the merits of the papers before them, for though he gave more time to his desk than most men, he had found it physically impossible to go through them, from the time they had been laid before the Court up to the present. He was told that they had been before the Court in manuscript; but why print them at all, if not with the intention of giving every member. of the Court an opportunity of putting himself in possession of the whole merits of the case. He admitted that much was due to the Court of Directors for what they had done, and if he was disposed to applaud any one act of the Direction more than another, it would be the fair, manly. and decisive step which they took on this occasion. Perfectly satisfied with what they had already done in the affair, he was disposed to leave the result also to their discretion, but the hon. Bart. in the present motion called upon the Court to take away that discretion, to assent to a motion which would have the effect of controlling their authority; this in fact was avowed by his hon. friend near him.

He

would contend that the Court of Proprietors were not warranted in taking this step, until they were put in possession, not merely of all that was contained in the papers, but until they had ascertained whether any, and what steps had been taken by the Directors since those papers had been ordered to be printed. He wished to ask did the papers before them contain the whole of the proceedings ? Was it not understood that something had occurred with respect to this question since those papers were printed? If it was true that something had been done by the Directors, or if there was an understanding that something was to be done, would not the course proposed by the hon. Bart. have the effect of coercing the Directors, and would be an exercise of an un

necessary control upon their proceedings. After the course which the Directors had taken, the proprietors ought not to desert them, nor agree to any motion that would have the effect of controlling their further proceedings in this case. He would meet this motion by stating that he would give this subject the best consideration in his power. At present he would say that he fully believed Capt. Prescott's innocence. He believed that he had never touched the polluted bribe, that he was wholly free from any guilty participation in the transaction, but beyond this he could not go, for he could not acquit Capt. Prescott of blame, at least of great weakness. This he thought was evident from one of his own letters; but, while he thus fully acquitted him of all guilt, but not of blame (and he would blame him as gently as he could), he did not think it right that the court should be betrayed thus suddenly into this wholesale vote of acquittal, as well as of control over the acts of the Directors. (No! no!) Then this intention was disavowed. He certainly had so understood it, and that it was supported because it took the question from the responsibility of the Directors. He was sure that the hon. proprietor was too manly and straightforward to wish for support on one ground when he meant another. But leaving that out of the question he objected to this motion, because it transgressed the usual order of their proceedings, and if the hon. chairman allowed it to go on, he would not hereafter stop any gentleman at that side of the house who might feel it necessary to bring forward a question at a quarterly court without any previous notice.

The Hon. D. Kinnaird begged to deny in the most positive manner the ingenious misinterpretation of the hon. and learned gentleman who had just sat down. He (Mr. D. Kinnaird) had stated openly that the Directors being asked whether it was intended by them to bring this question before the proprietors, and it having been replied that the hon. director (Capt. Prescott) was not then in the discharge of his duties and an intimation being given that his patronage had been suspended until the result of the trial was known; finding this, and that it was not intended by the Directors to submit any further measure on the subject to the court, he had wished that the proprietors should take the affair on themselves. This he did from a feeling of delicacy to the Directors themselves, who might perhaps, very naturally, have wished that a matter of this kind, touching one of their own body, should have originated with the proprietors. There might be some anomaly in this course, but he contended that the Directors not having taken this matter up, that the proprietors were bound to do it. But he asked, was there anything in this

course

course like forcing or controlling the Directors? So far was he from thinking that it was any undue interference with the exercise of their discretion, that if he at the present moment had a seat within the bar, there was nothing he should so much wish as to have the subject taken up by the Court of Proprietors.

The Chairman said he was very willing to reply to the question which had been put by an hon. proprietor as to the regularity of the proceeding. This was a Quarterly Court; and it was certainly open to a proprietor to bring forward any subject for discussion. Undoubtedly, however, it was for the general convenience of the court, that notice of all important motions should be given. (Hear!) And it was only yesterday that he received from two hon. gentlemen (Mr. Poynder and Mr. Jackson) an intimation of their intention to submit the motion which had just been disposed of regarding suttees. He (the Chairman) felt the convenience cf giving notice on all occasions of important questions, and if he had not interfered at the opening of the present discussion, it was because this was the delicate case of a colleague, and he felt that any objection on the ground of want of notice ought not to come from him. It was unnecessary for him to make any remark at that moment on the motion before the court, but he would reserve himself to a further period of the discussion, should any thing arise to call for observation from him.

Gen. Thornton said that the hon. chairman had anticipated much of his intended remarks. He was about to rise when the chairman addressed the court, for the purpose of protesting against the doctrines laid down by the hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. R. Jackson), as to the right of introducing motions without notice. He thought there was no right more clearly established than that every member might at a Quarterly Court, bring forward any question he pleased without notice. If on the present occasion it was found inconvenient to continue the discussion of this question, the hon. Bart. might postpone it to a future day, but there could be no doubt as to his right of bringing it forward. It was quite an error in the hon. and learned gentleman to suppose the contrary, and he was quite surprised how he could have fallen into it, for he was sure that no other member of the court could have fallen into the error but himself. As to the motion itself he entirely concurred in the remark that after the jury had acquitted Capt. Prescott, they were bound to consider him as entirely innocent. He had served in India with considerable distinction, and had always borne the character of a kind-hearted and honourable man. They had been told that they should wait to read the

papers before the court. He did not want to read them. They all knew (in fact every one acquainted with the proceedings of courts of justice must know) that the credit due to much of the evidence given in a case, would depend in a great degree on the manner of the party giving it. But nothing of that kind could be known from the papers printed by order of the court. Those papers, no doubt, contained a great deal, but they did not contain anything of the manner in which the evidence was given, and on which, as he had before observed, much would depend. The jury had seen all that and had judged of it, and had pronounced Capt. Prescott not guilty, and he thought that under all the circumstances, that court were bound to come to the same conclusion.

Mr. Stuart said he thought the court were bound not to permit this motion to be withdrawn, but to come to a conclusion on the subject on that day. The papers before the court were open to the inspection of proprietors, and they were not so voluminous as that any proprietor might not in an hour or two become sufficiently master of all the facts of the case, so as to come to a decision upon them. As the feeling of the court seemed to be that Capt. Prescott had not acted from improper motives (and the motion before the court did not acquit him of imprudence) should they after that refuse to declare their conviction of his innocence? certainly not. They would not, he contended, be justified in any farther delay, but were bound to decide on the case which he now considered sufficiently before them. The conduct of the Court of Directors in bringing the case to a trial in a court of law, was most manly and proper. They had done their duty, and it was now the business of the Court of Proprietors to do theirs, in giving a final judgment on the question, by passing the resolution, that the hon. director should resume the functions of his office as if nothing had happened.(Hear, hear!)

Mr. Gahagan said, that the chairman would do him the honour to recollect, that when the minute of the proceedings had been brought forward by the Court of Directors, he had asked whether it was intended that they should be printed; or whether they had been laid before the court for mere form. A formal answer had been given by the late chairman to this question, but he (Mr. G.) knew that

the matter would not be allowed to rest there, for it was pregnant with consequence the most important. Some irritation was created by some turbulent lawyers, and the result was, that the papers were ordered to be printed. they were before the court, he thought the hon. Bart. would best consult the object which he had in view by acceding to the opinions of a few, but certainly very influential

As

influential members, and delay the further discussion of the question for the present: no man against whom a serious charge was made, would wish to be acquitted per saltum, but after due consideration of all the facts of this case. The jury had acquitted Capt. Prescott, but that gentletleman, with a manly feeling which did him great credit, had said to the proprietors: Gentlemen, besides the verdict of the jury I must be acquitted by you, or I shall not consent to stand where you have placed me. He thought, therefore, that they should delay the present proceeding. If it were necessary to the character of Capt. Prescott to come to an immediate conclusion, he would be the first to do so; but he considered that a regard for the character of their own proceedings, and a respect for that of Capt. Prescott, required that the fullest consideration should be given to the case before they came to a final decision, and on that ground he thought that due notice should be given of the motion.

Mr. Freshfield said, that if any one had reason to complain of delay, it was he, who knew the whole of the proceedings. He did not consider that the hon. Bart. had taken them by surprise, for if he had, he would have overlooked him (Mr. Freshfield) who knew the inside and the outside of the question. At the same time, he for one hoped for some delay in this motion, he had got up from reading the papers and was aware of all the facts, and he would state that he would rather be in the situation of Capt. Prescott than of those who had advised his prosecution. He said he was favourable to delay, because he thought that proceeding with the discussion at present, might beget a warmth which perhaps it would be better to avoid, and as any one desired that the proceedings should be delayed, he was anxious to accede to it out of respect to the character of Capt. Prescott.

Mr. Paterson said, that he did not often trouble that court, but he could not consent to be silent on the present occasion. He felt that in coming to a decision he was bound to do justice, and in this feeling he conceived it his duty now to move that the court do adjourn to this day fortnight.

Mr. Poynder seconded this motion. A Proprietor suggested to adjourn the question sine die.

Sir C. Forbes, hoped that the Court would not dispose of the motion in that way.

Mr. Paterson said that that was not his object, and with leave of the Court he would alter his amendment, and moved that the further consideration of this question be adjourned to this day fortnight.

Sir C. Forbes observed that, seeing the opinion of the Court, or rather of a great

many members, he could not say the great majority, but seeing that the opinion of many respectable proprietors, and some of those favorably disposed to the motion, were for an adjournment of the question, he would not object to the proposed delay, the more especially as Captain Prescott himself was most anxious that the fullest inquiry should be gone into. He could not but express his surprise at the remarks which had been made by the hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. R. Jackson) as to the point of order. He could not conceive why the learned gentleman himself, if he considered him out of order, had not stopped him in the first instance. That would have been a much more consistent course than the one which he had adopted. To say that this question ought not to have been brought forward without notice, on the supposition that the Court were ignorant of its merits, was somewhat strange when not only they, but the public in every part of the united kingdom were acquainted with the fact that Capt. Prescott was, nearly three months ago, brought to trial and acquitted by a special jury. Surely after this no man had a right to call his innocence in question, and he was surprised that any person should make such an objection as had been urged by the learned and hon. gentleman. Let it be recollected that it was the wish of Captain Prescott to call for the strictest investigation into his case. It was not,

as he learned, so much the wish of the Court of Directors, as of Capt. Prescott himself. How, after this, it should be said that the Court was taken by surprise by his motion, he was at a loss to know. However, as several of his honourable friends had expressed a wish that further time should be given, he had no objection to consent that the motion should be postponed to this day fortnight, which would be the next general court day.

The Hon. D. Kinnard said that as the question was now about to be adjourned, he felt it necessary to make one or two remarks. In the first place he must protest against what had been said by some hon. members, as to the grounds on which the delay ought to be granted. In coming again to the discussion he considered that they were not to come for the purpose of deciding shades of opinion, between guilt and imprudence. The position in which he found himself with respect to this question was this: one of their Directors had been brought by his brother Directors before a public tribunal -was tried and acquitted. Now after this he conceived the duty they had to perform was, taking a liberal and politic view of the question, to express their belief in that innocence, which had been legally and clearly established. They were bound to take this course from a feeling

of

of delicacy to the body of the Directors themselves. Let them, then, restore the hon. director to the same station which he had before occupied, leaving the moral effects of the case to remain. He repeated again, that they should not come there to scrutinize shades and degrees of guilt, but to come at once and pronounce their approval of that acquittal which had been so satisfactorily established. They must fully approve of the course which the

Directors had taken, and they ought to release them from that delicate situation in which they would be placed, by originating a motion of this kind, with respect to one of their own body. If he were a director, it would be his wish that such a course should be taken by the proprie

tors.

The motion for adjourning the discussion was then put and carried, and the Court adjourned.

Lord Amherst.-The subscribers to the entertainment proposed to have been given to the Earl and Countess Amherst, and for which preparations on a splendid and magnificent scale suited to the occasion were in a state of the greatest forwardness, will hear with much regret, that his lordship has been compelled to decline this mark of respect and regard from the society of Calcutta, owing to the dangerous illness of his lordship's daughter, Lady Sarah Amherst. A meeting of the committee of management and of the subscribers has been called on Monday morning the 25th instant, at half-past ten, when his lordship's letter to the committee will be laid before them.-Cal. John Bull, Feb. 23.

His lordship and family will, it is said, embark for Europe on the 1st of March, and the Herald will be taken down the Bay by the Enterprize steam-vessel, probably to the southward of the line.-İbid. Feb. 25.

The Commander-in-Chief.-His Excellency Lord Combermere and suite left Bhurtpore on the 16th of January :—bis lordship marches by Allyghur and Delhi, and means to proceed to Kurnaul, and as far as Simla. On his arrival at Bhurtpore, his lordship breakfasted and dined with the resident, and on the following day he was entertained by the young Raja. The state tents were fitted up for the occasion, and the elegance which was displayed, surprised and delighted the whole party. The tents were pitched in an open space, and the whole ground was illuminated. From forty-five to fifty sat down to a sumptuous and well prepared entertainment. The Raja sat on his lordship's left hand, with the resident as his interpreter next to him-opposite were Major Macan and the ministers of his highness. The party was entertained by nautching, singing, and the recitation of Persian lines by the Kalawunts, to the great delight of the whole party.-Cal. John Bull.

Feb. 5. At Chinsurah, W. V. Helsdinger, Esq., to Miss E. C. Michel, second daughter of Capt. P. Michel. Also, at same place, E. V. Helsdinger, Esq., to Miss A. T. Michel, third daughter of Capt. P. Michel.

15. At Berhampore, S. St. L. Lightfoot, Esq., assist.surg. H.M.'s 47th Foot, to Louisa Harriet, second daughter of C. Corfield, Esq., Knowle Lodge, Taunton.

18. At Calcutta, Robert Swinhoe, Esq., to Caroline, third daughter of the late Maj. Anderson, H.M.'s 19th Foot.

DEATHS.

Jan. 30. At Khapgunge, Alan Gardner, Esq., eldest son of Colonel Gardner, of Gardner's Horse, aged 29.

Feb. 8. Between Futtighur and Cawnpore, on board his boat, Brigadier Vanrenen, aged 63.

11. At Calcutta, David, son of the late Mr. David Maddock, aged 18.

12. At Calcutta, Mrs. M. J. Oakley, aged 17. At Bhagilpore, Mr. P. Caster, indigo planter of that place.

16. At Calcutta, Mrs. Manuk, relict of the late Malcolm Manuk, Esq., merchant, aged 34.

Calcutta, Feb. 21, 1828.

Government Securities. Buy.] Rs. As. Rs. As. [Sell. Prem. 260 Remittable Loan 6 per ct. 25 0 Prem. Disc. 03 Five per ct. Loan. 08 Disc. Prem. 0 0 New 5 per cent. Loan.... 0 4 Disc. Rates of Exchange.

On London, 6 months' sight,-to buy 1s. 10d. to 1s. 11d.-to sell 1s. 11 d. to 2s. 04d. per Sicca Rupee.

On Madras, 30 days' ditto, 91 to 92 Sicca Rupees per 100 Madras Rupees.

On Bombay, ditto, 98 Sicca Rupees per 100 Bombay Rupees.

Bank Shares.--Prem.-to buy 5,150-to sell 5,100.

Madras, Feb. 20, 1828.

Government Securities.

Singapore, Dec. 22, 1827.
Exchange.

Gov. Bills on Bengal, 207 Sa. Rs. to 100 Sp. Ds.
Private Bills on ditto-none.

Private Bills on London, per Sp. Dr. 46. 2d.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS.-June 16.

Calcutta Stamp Tax.-The Marquis of Lansdowne presented a petition from the merchants, and others, of Calcutta. The petitioners complained that the local governments of India had imposed a stamp duty upon all goods and merchandize imported into that city, and of being denied the opportunity of meeting publicly to express their opinions upon such proceedings; and further, that the imposition of the duty in question was secretly determined upon in India, secretly communicated to this country to procure the order of the Court of Directors, and secretly sent back again to India.

The petition was ordered to be laid on the table.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, June 4. India Stamp Acts.-Mr. Hume moved for a variety of papers respecting the Stamp Acts in India, which embraced the return of duties collected there during the years 1823, 1824, 1825, and 1826; together with the Memorial from the London Merchants to the Court of Directors in February last, respecting the Calcutta Stamp Tax, and the answer thereupon.-Motion agreed to.

Criminal Laws in India.-Mr. C. Wynn moved for leave to bring in a bill to extend to India the improvements which had been made in the criminal laws of this country. The hon. member proposed to introduce into the administration of justice there the provisions of the acts lately introduced into parliament reAsiatic Journ. Vol. 25. No. 151.

specting the criminal administration of justice in England.-Leave was given to bring in the bill.

'Insolvents in India.-Mr. Wynn then moved for leave to bring in a bill for the relief of Insolvent Debtors in India. The

only relief they at present experienced was from the provisions of the Lords' Act.

The consequence has been, that whatever property they possessed was consumed, they not being able to obtain their liberty; their creditors were therefore obliged to abandon their hopes of obtaining their just demands. His object was to attach the property of the debtor, in case of his absconding, and make the produce available for the benefit of the creditors. He thought that the extension of the provisions of the act in force in this country, with certain amendments, suitable for that part of the world, would be highly beneficial.-Leave was given to bring in the bill.

June 16.

East-India Trade.-Mr. Huskisson said he had a petition to present, which, though it did not pray for any particular object, was well worthy the attention of the house, as coming from so respectable a body as the whole of the British merchants in Calcutta; and it was the more deserving of attention, as the petitioners were not represented in that house by any organ who was to speak their sentiments. The petitioners, in adverting to the regulations of trade, admitted the principles of free trade, and looked upon restriction as the exception. Their extensive dealings made them competent S