East India Company.

The Asiatic journal and monthly miscellany online

. (page 79 of 123)
Online LibraryEast India CompanyThe Asiatic journal and monthly miscellany → online text (page 79 of 123)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

conferred on him by his majesty; a pen-
sion of j^l500 per annum be granted to
him, t« c«>mmence from the date of his
letter, and to be 'paid out of the territorial
revenue of India."

Pension ia Sir 6. Batim. [Oct.

Mr. PifttUon thought it was hia difty
to state, that the documents on which the
report was founded were confined to Sir
G. Barlow's letter. The remaining grouod
on which this case rested consisted io the
notoriety of Sir G. Barlow's history, ^e
did not sign that paper, nor did he deem
it necessary to enter into the quet^tion of
Sir G. Barlow's services; but he conoeiyed
it right to state, that the letter which liad
just been read was the only document thai
had been laid before the court of directors.
That letter was addressed to the preceding
chairman, Mr. Bebb. He was bound to'
declare so much, and to state his opinion
that, under these circumstances^ tlie by-^
law had been fully complied with, as the
ground of the resolution and report was
laid before the proprietors.

Mr. Hume asked, from that document
did the amount of Sir Geo. Barlow's for-
tune appear to the court ? If a former
chairman was apprised, by letter^ of the
amount of his property, that letter ought
to be submitted to the proprietors. There*
fore, the hon. direcfor's own shewing
his proposition that the by-law was com-
plied with, would not hold. But let the
court look to the resolution. ^They would
find that the pension was not proposed oa
the mere ground of the sniallness of. Sir
Geo. Barlow's fortune : two other reasons
were given for it, but no document wat
adduced to prove their validity.

Mr. li. Jatkson said, nothing was more
simple than the proposition of law which
it bad been endeavoured to argue, namely,
that this not being a new re8olution, it
was competent for the court to proceed
with it. The short answer was, that thjp
by-law was law at that moment, but the-
pension was not law,.and could not be so
until it had passed through two succeeding
court^. He admired and applauded the
conduct of the hon. director (Mr. Grant)
on this occasion. His feelings on the
subject of the resolution were sufficiently
known ; but favourable as he was to ir»
he wished it to be postponed till the
period bhould arrive when no sudi •bjec
tlon could legally he advauccd against
the proceeding. To say that the by-
law could not operate because the resolu-
tion had already been before the court,
was to maintain an untenable proposition.
In this opinion he was borne out by
his learned friend, who had most clearly
expounded the law. Would they then
act on a forced ronstrqction . of the
law, in order to prevent a delay of a few
days ? surely it would be most indiscreei,
most improper to do so. He had imend-
ed to make some observations on the
career of Sir G. Barlow ; he would have
offered them with all those feelings of
generous sympathy which his case was
calculated to inspire ; but. In the same
spirit, and with ths same feelings, he



1819.] Debaie at BJM^ SepK ^2,^Pemion to Sir G. Barlow. 405

cottW not help deprecating a forced con-
st/octioti of the lavir, whlcb^ Wewed as a
|)reeedeiit, would produce the most baueful
effects. Was it long since they had ad-
journed the gratit to the Marquis of Has-
tings, on account of an in formal iry. ? In
that case the directors had not set forth,
in the form of a report, the grounds on
which they recommetided the grant. They
were now: asked to do something more
than merely to set forth the grounds ;
they were to supply the proprietors with
the grounds and witli the documents from
which those grounds were selected. What
was! subasitted- to them in this instance ?
No documents, but a catalogue of absent
docuiuentii ; a list of documents, not one
of which had been seen by them, and
without which he did not thinly they could
proceed. Indeed he felt that it would be
miiicbievous to Sir G. Barlow if they did
proceed under such circumstauces, for it
would, and not unfairly, elicit observa-
tions that it would be much better to
avoid. He would now call the attention
of the court to Sir G. Barlow'a letter,
which, however, he would not quote from
the Asiatic Jottrml*, Sir G. Barlow
adverted to « the high situations which
he had held in the service of the Com-
•pany ; the important transactions, con-
nected with its best interests, in which he
had been engaged ; and the resolutions of
the court of directors expressive of their
appfobation of his coudoct." Now (de-
manded Mr. Jackson) where are these
resolutions? Has one of tliem been laid
before the court ? Why were they with^
held? Would it he no glory, would it be
no gratification to Sir 6. Barlow to have
those memorials of his honourable ser-
I'ices publiished to the Couipany and to
the world ? It would, assuredly, be most
satisfactory to him, aa it mu-nt be to
every honest mind, to haj'e these acknow-
ledgments of his praiseworthy services
generally known and disseiutnated. No-
thing could be more honourable to him,
he could not desire a prouder tiophy than
those resolutions. If the court of direc-

* Tq this part of his speech the learned gen-
tleman made some severe observations nri the
manner ill which the debates afe reported in this
publication* which we are uncousclous of having
merited. TUo^e who areaw'are of the difliculty of
tepoTtitvg a pro»racted debate, wh«fre no facilities
Sfe-afibrded for the purpose, and wher«v for the
mnst party the back of the speaker is turned to-
wards the reporter, cannot be surprised if errors
s^'tneitmes occur. Where they do happen, how-
ever, ihcy arc wholly imintenttonal, and when
pointed out vc have most readily and chevrfuUy
corrected them. We nevi'r ha-ve wllfullv miMjuoi-
ed a document, or misrepresented any gcnile-
pian's argameot- With respect to documents,
it may be, necessary to observe, that we have not
arcrss to those which are read behind the
bar. They are read with great rapidity j the coiv
sequence is, that frequently we can only com-
tntmicaif their mbsiance*, but when this is faiily
df>np, we conceive that we have performed oi«

tors now proposed to give a pension to
Sir G. Barlow, founded on certain reso-
lutions which he declared they had pass-
ed in commendation of his conduct, let
the proprietors be put in possession of
ihem. This was one of the propositions
which he had a right to maintain. He
wished those resolutions to be fairly set
forth, as they were documents distinctly
alluded- to in Sir G. Barlow's letter. la
addition to the grounds for remuneration
which he (Mr« JacksouJ had already
quoted from the letter. Sir G. Barlow
further «ays *'and the expectations which
have, at different times, been holdout to
me, by your honourable court and his ma-
jesty's government, of the most distin-
guisited honours and rewaixls." \yith
respectto the proceediu>;8 of bis majesty's
governraenc towards Sir G. Barlow, that
court had not lung to do with them ;
neither could they, in all probability,
command those documents to which Sir
G. Bai low alluded, when he spoke-of the
ex.p?ciations raised by the court of direc-
tors ; but cerrainly they could call for^an
accotint of those general measures^ which
raised hopes and expectations of this kind.
The executive body might say, in. answer
to their request, that certain letters did
convey this or that dewee of approbation^
and that, in consequencci these expecta-
tions were cherished by Sir G. Barjow^
By this ujiode of proceeding the -court of
directors would satisfy tbe proprietors
that they had more than the statement
contained in Sir G. Barlow's letter, as
evidence of the facts mentioned in the
report. " Of all these circumstances,*'
continued Sir G. Barlow, " your honour-
able court is fully apprised.'* If so, he
callcfl on the executive body in their turn
to apprise the proprietors of those facts,
since a law had passed, within that hour,
which rendered it absolutely necessary.
He most decidedly !igree<l with the hou..
director (Mr. Grant) that the foir inter-
pretation of the by law which had been
confirmed that morning, called for more
information than had beeu given to the
proprietors. What did the Deputy Chuir^
man say? Conscious that there was a de-
ficiency of documents, he observed, " that
when the resolution originated this by-
law had not passed." He never \vould
hare offered such an argument, but from
a consciousness that something more wa.s
wanted. The law which the court had
recently confirmed was one of the utmost
moment. Tneie ought to be something
like a check Kiven to that too geuerous
disposition which would grant peusiouft
without a proper investigation. The law
in question provided that check. What
was it ? A direct command that the court
oi' directors should nvt only lay before the
proprietors the grounds on which they re-
commended a pension,, but^ these uolr



406 Debate at KLH., Sept. 22,

licing thought sufficieut, ttiat they should
also supply the documents. Let the courts
then, in the first iostance of carryiug into
eflfect this most protective law^ see that
it was properly hi tended to, and that uo
forced const riictiou vvas put upon it. Sir
G. Barlow would lose nothing by the de-
lay; on tlie contrary, he thought his
cause would acquire iustead of losing
»lrength, when his friends bowed to the
provisions of this lavv.

The Deputy Chairman said, when be
before offered his opinion to the court, he
had done so wiih respect and deference,
and merely stated bis sentiments as an in-
dividual. Since that lime he had heard
authorities which inclined him to de-
part fi'om his original op.«iion« He felt
that tjie by-law haviug bevn passed before
the resolution for granting the pension
was confirmed, it was not strictly in
order to proceed with the discussion pf
the subject : under these circumstances
he would give his concurrence to a post-
p<inement of the business to a future day.
He wished^ however, to know whether
this proceeding was to abrogate and annul
the first steps that had been taken with
respect tD the resolution? He should be
glad to learn whether the business was
to be begun de novo, or whether the con-
firmation of the grant was aloue affected
by tlie present law? He requested the
learned counsel to state his opinion*

Mr. Sergeant Boaanquet said, with res-
pect to the nature of the documents on
wlueh the resolution proceeded, that was
a question which roust rest entirely wifh
with those by whom the resolution Wfts
originated. The question, whether this
letter was the only document on which
the directors proceeded, could aloue be
learned from them. If that paper, or
any other, was produced, as the document
on ivhich the proceeding rested, it was
^r the general court to form an opinion
whether it was a sufficient ground for
«uch a resolution. But, whether it was
br was not, the only document must in
tlie first instance depend on the declara*
tion of the directors. The by-law said,
that before a grant of pension was suh-
aiiited to the commissioners for the affairs
of India it must be approved and con-
firmed by two special general courts, and
the documents on which the resolution
was founded, as well as the resolution
itself, should be open to the inspection of
the proprietors for a certain time. If this
letter be the ouly document in the present
case, and was laid before the court wlten
notice was given of the grant, then the
law had been complied with, but if there
were other documents that had not been
open for inspection from the day of the
proposed grant, then, in his opinion, the
bjr.law applied to th« foraer as well as to
^k present court.

.^Pension to Sir G. Barhyau " [Oct.

Mr. S, Dixon said, in a matter where
considei-able doubts rested aud pressed en
the miud, whether the business should
be determined at the next court, or at
a subsequent one, could not be of so
much importance to Sir George Barlow
as to have the proceeding properly con-
ducted. Therefore, to prevent the pos-
sibility of any informality in their pro*
cecdlngs, he hoped they would be hf^no
de novo*

Mr. Lowndei hoped the bon. propri6i>
tor, who had just sat down, would never
call hfm to order agaiu. He bad spokes
twice on this subject, which was contrary
to the rules of all deliberative bodies. So
mucli for preachers that did not practice :
for his own part, he admired the mas
who practised what was right and made
no boast about it. With respect to the
question before them, it was clear' that
they had acted erroneously, and baviog
taken a wrong step, they surely could
not think of going on, and building on a
bad foundation. If they found it bad^
they ought to select a firmer ground^ in-
stead of persisting, and beinii; nf timately
obliged to annul their proceedings. The
documents, it was demonstrated, ought to
have been submitted to the proprietors,
and that circumstance having beennegirctw
ed, any further proceeding would be infor-
mal, it was very true they might be anxioos
to extend as much indulgence as possible
to Sir G. Barlow ; they might wish, ia
consequence of his services in India^ fo
hasten his reward ; but it would be a Very ^
dangerous precedent if they tolerfttea
any irregularity, since there wereiftanjf
persons who, if you gave them an inch,
would take an ell. The reaton why be
changed his opinion at the last cpbrt, was,
because he was led to believe that $ir €*.
Barlow had resigned, instead of 'bciu|
removed from His situation. He sisked
for no documents, because Sir G.' Bar-
low's conduct bad been made the subject
of much conversation in that co\irt, abd
those who ran might read. Still, how-
ever, he conceived the by-law sfe'ouWte
complied with. Some oppo.sitlnu was of-
fered to the grant, perhaps, on acrbunt of
Sir G. Barlow's politics. Now he (Mr,
Lowndes) was a whig, and a true one {
but must he therefore oppose Sir 6. Bar-
low because he was a friend to governf
meut? {Order, order.) No, so long its be
did service to the Company, he wCuM
support him, without looking to' his polir
tical principles. — {Order, order,) '

Mr. Hotoorth, to order. He begged of
the hon. proprietor, whom he always
heard witli pleasure, to confine himself
to the subject under consideration. Thcf
were not debating on the merits of Sirti,
Barlow, but deciding on the nature of
a by-law. — {Hear, hear,)
Mr. Lowndes continued. His roasdu fer


ized by Google

1819.] Debate atE.LH. SeptSL'i.^RigU Hon, W.Hastings, 407

mukiug these observations was, tbat the
case of Sir G. Uaiiow had been so much
discussed in that place and elsewhere, as
to render documents less necessary, in
this iusiance, than in almost any other.
Still, however, he did not want to depart
from the wholesome rule laid down in the
by-law ; be wished the proceedings to be
taJieii up (le novo, on another day.

The Chair man— ^' I also think that
the best and Safest mode will be to post-
ppn^Mie question, and begin de novo.**
^ livi}fume said, Sir G. Barlow, in his
le.tter,'. rested bis claims on the Company
on the repeated promise of the court of
directors. He (Mr. Hume) hoped, that
amongst the documents which would be
laid before the proprietors, these pro-
mises would not be forgotten.

An bon. Proprietor saiil. Sir George
Barlow a)so founded his claims ou the
resoii^ions of the court of direct(»rs,
which the hon. gentleman forgot to men-

Mr. Tfume said, l^ir George Barlo\y
spoke of the rcj^dlutious of the court of
directors, and also of promises made to
him, both of which he hoped would be
attended to when the documents were

. V\e .Chairman acquainted the court,
that the court of directors had, in conse-
quence of the long aud meritorious ser-
yicfs oflhe late Right Hon. Warren Hast*
iQgs, come to the resolution of placing
his statue in their council room, at the
Company's expense. — C^ear ! hear f)
. " At a court of directors, held on
Wednesday, the 7th of July 1819,

*' It was resolved, tliat, 'd^ the last
testimony of approbation of the long,
i^ealous, and honourable services of the
hight Hun. Warren lUstings, in main-
taining the possessions of the East India
Company^ against the machinations of
Europeans, Slahrattas, and Hindoos, the
statue of that eiuinent person be placed in
their. council ropra.*' — {Hear ! hear !)

^kChairman, ** It is uiy intention to
propose, at the next general court, for
the approbation of the proprietors, that
the statue of the Right Hon. Warren
Hastings he erected in the council room,
4s a (nark, of their respect for his me«

Mr. /i. itackion suggested the pro-
liriety of brtngini; the business forward at
some period of the year when there would
be a numerous attendance of propriL>(ors.
The next quarterly general court would,
he conceited, be a very proper time.

ITic Chairman, "'fhen 1 shall propose
the resolution at the next quarterly ge-
neral court."
An hon. Proprietor observed, that the

proposition would reflect the highest
honour on the sentiments and feeKngs of
the court of directors ; and would, he
was convinced, be met outside of the'bnr
with sentiments and feelings i>erfectly in
unison with those from which it ema-

Mr. Lowndes said, his feeUngs were
by no means in unison with the propo*
sitiou ; not that be felt any hostility to
the indii^iduai whom they were going thus
to honour, but because he did not like to
see partiality manifested towards one
person, while others of equ.d merit were

The Chairman. " The hon. proprietor
will recollect that this is only a notice."

Mv. Lowndes said, there was a pair of
noble brcithers to whom the Company
owed a great deal ; and he could not con*
ceive why the Marquis of Hastings should
have a statue— (7tfw^A/«>>— while no such
honour was paid to the Marquis Wel-

Icsley, or the Duke of Wellington


ft was here intimated, that it was the
statue of /f^(rr«» f/tf*ff//5^*, and not of
the Marquis of Hastings \ a tribute in
honour of the dead, not of the livinp,
that was to he erected. With this ex-
planation, the right hoti. proprietor sat
down perfectly satisfied.


The Chairman, "I have now to ac-
quaint the court, that it is farther made
special for the purpose of laying before
the proprietors, for their approbation, a
resolution of the conrt of directors of the
I4th of July last, granting to Mr. James
Wilkinson, under the circumstances there-
in stated, the sum of 75,000 sicca rupees,
at 2s. the current rupee, with interest
thereon, at six per cent, per annum, from
the Uth Oct. 1816 to the day when pay-
ment shall be made."

Report of the 18th of August, 1819 —
** The court of directors of the united
Company of Merchants trading to the
East Indies, in pursuance of the by-law
of the said Con-pany, cap. 6, sec. 20, in-
form the general court, that they have
passed a resolution, in the words, or to
the effect following :—

" Having, on the 14th of July last,
taken into consideration a letter from
Mr. Janues Wilkinson, dated the 5th of
July, in which he expresses his readiness
to bow to the decision of the court, and
requests that his case may be reconsi-
dered :

*' Resolved, that, though this court
thinks no ground exists for a reconsi-
deration of his claims, which have already
been fully investigated and decided on,
nevertheless the court, taking an indul-
gent and liberal view of his lase, recotn-.
kuend that there be giaated to hini, for


ized by Google

408 Debate at E.LH„ Sept. 22.-.JIfr. WUBm&tCs Claim. £Obr;

xht reasons stated in the r.'port of the
contmittee M buymg and warehouses, as
a full compensation for the injury said to
bai'e been received by Itim, t)ie snn) of
75,000 hicf a rupees, payable ont of the
commercial funds of the Company, at the
rate of 2s. the current rupee, with in-
tervst thereon, at %\x per cent, per ann.
from the llth of Oct. 1816 to the day
when payment shnll be ma:le ; subject to
the approbation and confirmation of the
court of pn»prietors, and the approbation
of tlie bnard of commissioners for the
ailfHirsof tmlia; and that the ground on
which the said sum is granted, is the
injHi'y laliegcd to have been snstamed by
him, in con^sequence of the regulation of
the Bengal government of 1812, renewing
the mouo^KiIy of t1»e saltpetre trade."

The Chairinan, ** This subject has been
so often before tlie court, and has beeti:
so ably argued, that it is unnecessary for
me to enter into a detail of it. 1 shall,
therefore, merely propose, " That thi*
court approve oi the resolntion of the
court of directors of the 14th of July

Mr. Lowndes hoped that, for once, the
court of directors would give him leave
to praise tiiem for their honourable con-
duct and great liberality on this occasion.
They desen-ed tlie thanks of the court of
proprietors for this act. — {Bear ! hear I)
Mr. Wilkinson, by exemplifying the fable
of the dog and the sha({o\v, and snapping
at a large object witen he might have
secured a smaller one, had lost all claim
on the Company, 'i'hat gentleman waa
■ot present, tlierefore he would say no
more ou the subject; bat, on behalf of
Mr. Wilkinson, he thanked the court of
directors for tlieir kind and considerate
conduct. He was always happy to %\y^
them tlianks when their proceedings de»
served that mark of re.*«pecr.

Mr. /?. Jackson said be could not sit
comfortably in his seat, without ncknow-
ledging the vei7 handsome way in which
the court of directors bad acted in tliia
bu.<!inc«s. He knew that, as the fricndi
of Mr. Wilkinson haii opposed the smaller
sum, aa<i called for (»ne of mnch greater
amount, the court of directors would have
been justified in timt port of re^i^tance to
the claim, which a refusal of their original
proposition might be fuppoSed to create.
They had, however, acted on a principle
of liberality that could not be too much
applauded or admired ; and, he was sure,
<hey never could touch the tnie strings of
affectionate feeling so well; they never
could procure sa imicXk unfeigned respect
and esteem, as wlvfcn they set themselves
above little coufUderations of every kind,
and acted on theg^eat priodplesof Impar*
tiul justice, wholly unconnected with per*
fcoi'al ftjeling?. {l^eaVy hear),

Mr. Pttitiwn said be perfectly agreed

in what the two faou. proprietors had ob-:
served with respect to the conduct of the
court of directors. He considered them
to have acted in a most dignrfied, hononr-
able, and liberal manner. They onguially
proposed the grant of a certaia sum to
Mr. Wilkinson ; an attempt was made to
increase it ; that attempt entnrcly failed^
but still the court of directors, over-
looking the opi>osition tlfey had i-ecefved,
adhered to then* first proposition. It waa
unnecessary to dwell t>D tbeir condact ii|
this proceeding ;. tlje act spoke for itself,
and proved that they were not influenced
by any perst^ial feeling or private cousin
deration. But he hoped that those who
opposed the principle on which the grant
was founded, might, without offence, be
allowed to retain tbeir opinion, since the
attempt to procure a larger sum of moaey
offered no argument in support of tbe-
principle on which Mr.WilkinsoB ground-*
ed his claim. He (Mr. Pattison) and other
gentlemen opposed the proposition en*
tirely on principle, because they viewed
the grant as a gratuitous waste of the
public money. To that opinion he re-
mained firm ; for, in his mind, the efibrf
that was made to increase the sum did
not strengthen, but rather weakened the
force of the claim. He would not enter
into the merits of this matter at all: to
use an old adage,' ** it woukl be as tire-
some as a t\vice-told tale ;** but he would'
do that which he recollected Sir Roger
de Coverly, in The Spectamr, directed
hiis chnplctin to do. Instead of preaching
his own sermons, he told him to select
discourses from Tillotson, or some other
great mnn of that day, and to preach them
to his Hock. What he (Mr. Pattison) had
to say on this subject had been so well
expressed by Mr. Dowdeswell, one of the
Compaity's servants in Bengal, that bt
begged leave to request that that gentle-
man's minute should be read, as his lasl
words on this qnesiion.

Mr. R. Jackson was sure his bon. friend
would give him leave to sayj that after he
had declared he rose without any lutentioik
of discussing the subject, the course he

Online LibraryEast India CompanyThe Asiatic journal and monthly miscellany → online text (page 79 of 123)