You have stated that Mr. Cherry had been removed from his employment because he interfered in urging the nabob to appoint certain persons as his ministers; did you ever hear of sir John Shore, the present lord Teignmouth, having gone to Lucknow, and obliged the nabob to appoint those very persons for his ministers?-Undoubtedly those ministers were afterwards appointed, but I conceive that there was a great difference in the manner in which the business was conducted. I believe the dissatisfaction entertained as to what Mr. Cherry did was more as to the manner than the proposition which he made.

You have stated that you consider that a sovereign without troops was a sovereign with but a very small degree of power; supposing that you had received a report which I am going now to read from the commander in chief of the army-" I "know not what to say with respect to "the troops, I would be content that they "should be useless, but I dread their ** being dangerous; unless some steps ❝ are taken with respect to them, I should "be almost as unwilling to leave them "behind me as to leave the fortress to "the enemy."-If you had received that report of the state of those troops both as to efficiency and as to their attachment to the cause of their sovereign, would you have considered that the sovereign incurred any loss of power from disbanding those troops?-From the experience that I have of the light in which the irregular troops formed after the Asiatic mode are viewed by all officers at the head of troops formed after the regular European mode, I should have received any report from any officer with a great degree of caution; and in respect of that prince who was to be deprived of those troops, I should consider that in being deprived of those troops, he did suffer a very material loss; for although they might be of that irregular kind as not to be competent for purposes connected with European wariare, yet in respect of him, they were of very material importance, and at any rate the circumstances of his being deprived of them by means of a foreign interference was in itself a circumstance that did tend very materially to abstract from his power and from his consequence.

those troops ?-I am of opinion that whatever sentiments may have been delivered occasionally concerning the vizier's troops whenever the vizier was deprived of his troops, and particularly if he was compelled to substitute in their place troops belonging to another's power over which he had no control, he did suffer a loss of consequence: simply being deprived of troops, however irregular, and however occasionally guilty of bad conduct, I consider to have involved a very essential loss of his consequence.

You have stated that the troops employed in the collection of the revenues, received the pay of four or five rupees a month; do you not know that the Sibundy troops had besides their pay, certain portions of land allotted to them ?—I am not aware of any such fact; I believe that occasionally what is called Jaedad may be given to them, but I believe they have not land in the way referred to.

In your opinion, be a prince dependent or independent, ought not compacts and conventions with him to be kept with good faith ?-The house will judge of that.

You have mentioned that in case the monthly kists were not paid, you conceive the company would have a right to enter into possession of the territory, to levy the amount in arrear; after that arrear was paid, what do you think lord Cornwallis would have done, would he not have restored the country to the lawful possessor?

It would be great presumption in me to state what would have been the conduct of lord Cornwallis on any subject whatever; but as it was the principle of lord Cornwallis to avoid. by every means whatever, to increase the territorial possession of the company, nothing but the most indespensable necessity would have induced him to have increased that territory; and if he had been compelled for a time so to increase it, he would have taken every possible means to rid himself of it.

And of restoring it to the nabob ?—I should conceive so.

Looking to the practice of lord Cor wailis in the case of the nabob Arcot, I conceive that even in case of a failure of payinent

in

in money, lord Cornwallis would have been disposed. before he took into the possession of the company any of the ter ritory belonging to the princes of India, to have examined whether they were capable of paying the money, and if he had found then incapable of paying the money, he would would have abated the payment, that was the course he adopted with the nabob of Arcot in 1792.

You have said that in 1792 and 1793, you made a statement to lord Cornwallis of the revenue of the nabob at that time, and that that was obtained from private information; had you obtained accurate information of the sources of that revenue, or of the amount of it at the time you made that statement ?—In India there is but one source of revenue, which is the soil itself; it scarcely constitutes an exception to that rule, that there may be some very small collection in the way of what is called customs, but they are, in general, of so little comparative amount of the revenue, derived from the spoil itself; for instance, in the country of Oude, I do not believe out of what was collected by the vizier's government on the whole extent of his country, yielding two crore and twenty lacs of rupees, that any more than ten lacs was collected by way of customs or fair, which is a toll for the purpose of protection more than any thing else. As to the accuracy of the statement, I do not venture to desire the house to place the least reliance upon it: it was private information I collected; as far as I was able to judge, I believe it to be tolerably accurate; and I have heard nothing since which was induced me to think myself considerably in error.

Did you ever hear lord Cornwallis specificially declare what he would or would not have done under those circumstances?-Certainly not.

From the earliest period of your being acquainted with the province of Oude, did you not always look on the recom mendation through the resident of the British court to be equal almost to an order?-With respect to all relating to foreign affairs I beneve it was so; and, with respect to internal affans, during the time I was at Lucknow, the British government abstained from any interference in internal affairs: in general I believe that any recommendation of the British goverment was regarded by the government of Oude as something very near approaching a command, and was never resisted but where it involved some

interest of their own, or some interfe rence with their own power.

At the time sir Robert Abercrombie took the field against the Rohillas, you state you do not believe any demand was made on the vizier for the expenses of that campaign; were any additional troops marched with sir Robert Abercrombie on that expedition than those at the time stationed in the vizier's country? -No other troops were employed than those actually stationed in the vizier's country; the expense arose in the diffe rence between troops in the field and troops in cantons.

Do you not know that the expense incurred by the vizier for keeping up his troops was very considerable; and what do you conceive that expense to have been?-I think it is stated in the paper to have been something about seventy-six lacs of rupees, or about eight hundred and eighty thousand pounds.

Do you conceive from your knowledge of those troops they could have been employed in the defence of the country in case of the long threatened invasion from Zemaun Shaw, or a large army under De Borgne ?-It is very difficult to combine operations between troops so perfectly regular as troops formed on the European system and troops formed in any degree after the Asiatic system; my opinion is, that those troops were as perfect as any Asiatic_troops in the management of which Europeans were not concerned.

Have you heard of the use made by what you call the undisciplined troops in a late war in the armies commanded by general Lake and sir Arthur Wellesley? -If there was any very material difference, I should be disposed to impute it to the presiding influence and the talents of those two persons.

Do you not know that there were frequently mutinies amongst those troops, which endangered the very existence of the government; and have you not heard that 10 1775, a very serious mutiny amongst the troops took place, which with great difficulty was quelled?-I believe no disposition to mutiny more strongly to have prevailed among those troops than in all the native armies in the peninsula of India; it is a notorious fact the troops seldom or never receive then pay till they go to their chief in that sort of state which, speaking after European phrase, is denominated mutiny. It is a common practice for Scindia's best troops, the Mahrattas, on whom he most relies, to go

and

and sit at his palace gate, and there wait without eating themselves, and of consequence without his eating till they have received a part of their pay; that is the usual way in which all the Asiatic troops are maintained. An allusion has been made to the mutiny which took place in 1775; I believe that to have proceeded from an understanding that the vizier's officers, at the head of troops, were to be dismissed from their employment, and their battalions were to be committed to the charge of Europeans, which I believe actually happened.

Do not you know that on the good government and defence of the province of Oude depends, in a great measure, the security of all the company's possessions in that part of India, and Bengal particularly? I apprehend that if we were to be defeated in Oude, in the extreme part of our possessions, we should be scarcely able to maintain ourselves in other parts; but the distance is very great from the province of Oude, to which, on any attack, our troops would advance; but generally speaking, I assent to the honourable gentleman's proposition.

From what other quarter are our provinces likely to be invaded, except through the province of Oude? Whenever Bengal has been invaded it has not been invaded by that quarter; when Bengal was under the dominion of Aliverdy Khan, it was invaded by Midnapore and by Babar.

Was not Bengal in a very different situation, as well as the Mahratta Sta.es, from what they are now; and whether the great danger of our provinces has not been from the north-west frontier (the province of Oude and the penjab) from whence the great invader who was expected to come was expected ?-The last hostile force drawn out with a view to the invasion of the company's possessions was in the year 1780, and then it was a Mahratta army which threatened to invade by the way of Midnapore.

During the whole time you resided at Lucknow, in consequence of the monthly reliefs which took place, were not you almost in the habit of monthly intercourse with the officers of the Bengal army ?—I was, and derived pleasure from the intercourse

Dia they not reside partly in your house?-I was in the habits of friendly intercourse with some of them, and derived great tisfaction from it.

>

troops stationed in Oude, if we had no connection with Oude, any considerable diminution could take place of the Bengal army for the defence of Bengal, Orissa, and the province of Benares, it we had no communication with Oude?-Undoubtedly, I conceive a very great diminution of our force might take place.

Do you conceive that by the possession of Allahabad, Cawnpore, Futty Ghur, and Anapshire, with thirteen thousand of the company's troops stationed in Oude, and with the facilities given on all occasions by the nabob's family for marching additional troops through the nabob's dominions when occasion required, that the Briush it fluence was sufficiently maintained in Oude, and they had every opportunity necessary for the defence of the dominions of Oude, or for quelling internal commotions? Looking to fact, and seeing that from the Year 1775, to the present day, no attack has ever been made upon our possessions, and that no internal commotions of a tormidable nature have been formed, I am undoubtedly of opinion the means which were used were sufficient.

Was not that the opinion of the military men you were in the habit of conversing with -I cannot take upon myself to inform the committee of the opinions of others; I should apprehend the error in India is too confident an opinion of our own strength.

Have you been at Cawnpore, Fuity Ghur, and Anapshire ?-At Cawnpore and Futty Ghur.

Is Cawnpore fortified ?-No.
It is an open cantonment ?—Yes.
Is Fatty Ghur fortified?--Certainly

not.

I stated

I stated that I was incompetent to form an opinion, not being a military man; but seeing that no attack had been made for thirty years, during which time we had been in possession of those places, I was bound to regard them as sufficient for defence; I rest myself entirely on no attack having been made.

Do you think the nabob could incur any danger of personal risk from the disbanding his army, whether he would incur any contempt in the eyes of his subjects from seeing that army set at liberty without his consent?-I do not apprehend he was placed in circumstances of danger of any sort; because I apprehend that such was the awe inspired by the company's troops introduced into his dominions in consequence of the disbandment of his own, that none of his subjects could with safety to themselves have entertained any design mischievous to the nabob's safety; but the mischievous consequence he incurred, I think, was, that the disbandment of his troops was carried so far as to preclude him from the means of collecting his revenues.

Would he, according to the opinions of those eastern countries, have suffered any degradation in the eyes of his nobility, and those residing near his person, in consequence of seeing the army disbanded without his consent, and reforms introduced in which he appeared to have nothing to do, and done in despite of him? -No doubt by such an interference in the internal state of his affairs, he would be regarded with a less degree of respect by his subjects than he would otherwise; and I think the probable consequence that would ensue would be that a great number of his subjects would direct their attention more to the British resident and the British power.

You have already stated that you had a good deal of intercourse with the officers of the Bengal army, had you the happiness of knowing the late colonel Scott, and was he not only in your contemplation, but in that of every officer you conversed with, an officer of the first character, and much esteemed and respected ?-I had not the good fortune to know colonel Scott very intimately, but every thing I have heard of him leads me to concur entirely in the opinion which has been stated; I am disposed to believe he was a man of very high honour and very high integrity; I believe, also, he was a man, in his intercourse with Euro

peans, of extremely good temper; in his conduct towards the natives, I have heard, that, from not having, at an early period, mixed very much with them, there was a sort of harshness in his manners; and I have seen, in some instances, particularly when I was with sir Robert Abercrombie, that there was not that sort of courtesy which was usual amongst themselves; at the same time I do not mean to cast the least reflection upon him; I entertain the highest opinion of colonel Scott, and I believe, when he came to have more intercourse with the natives, his just apprehension would very soon correct that quickness which I observed when I saw him.

Do you not know the higher rank of Mussulmen in those countries, are peculiarly persons of gravity of manners, of civility, and of gentleness?-Undoubtedly they are; I wish to add also, that if I had been to choose a person for the office of resident at Lucknow, I do not know any person I should have preferred to colonel Scott from what I have heard of him.

Do you know anything of the actual conconduct of colonel Scott in the residency?

Certainly not beyond what is to be found in the papers; though I have always looked towards the people of that country with the sincerest attachment, I have not had communication of any sort or kind with any one since I left it."

Therefore you cannot speak of his conduct during the whole period of his residency?-Certainly not.

Do you not know that in 1794, when colonel Scott attended sir Robert Abercrombie, colonel Scott was accused of having turned an embassador from the Rohillas, sent to obtain peace, out of the tent, and to have led by it to the unfortunate issue of the battle of B—?— There was some story of the kind, but I never could trace it to such a source as induced me to believe it was fact; I believe there was a kind of misapprehension in respect of a messenger the Rohillas had sent into sir Robert Abercrombie's camp.

Have you not heard frequently, at Lucknow, that violence was used by coonel Scott to the person of that messenger sent in by the Rohillas ?-I have heard it mentioned.

Have you that personal knowledge of those transactions yourself, which will enable you to speak with any degree of certainty about them ?-Certainly not.

Sir

Sir Alured Clarke was called in and

examined.

In the year 1797, where not you commander in chief of the king's and company's forces in Bengal, and senior member of the Bengal council? Yes, I

was.

Who was then the governor general? My lord Teignmouth, then sir John Shore.

Did you accompany sir John Shore to Lucknow, towards the close of the year 1797, some short time after the death of Asoph ul Dowlah ?-I went up nearly the same time he did, we did not go together, but we were there at the same

time.

Were you at the consultation held at Lucknow in December 1797, and the beginning of the year 1798, at Bebypore, which ended in the deposing of vizier Ali, and placing on the throne Saadut Ali, the present vizier of the empire ?—I am not quite sure what may be meant by consultations; if you mean in the usual acceptation at meetings of the councils I was not, for I was not in that situation at Lucknow.

At the time sir John Shore was considering of the steps he was to pursue at Lucknow, were not you generally consulted? I had frequent conversations with sir John Shore, he communicated to me most of his proceedings, if not all; I believe I may venture to say all.

You were consulted by the governorgeneral on the terms of the treaty proposed to be entered into between the company and the nabob vizier, Saadut Ali? I do not recollect that I was consulted particularly upon it; it was communicated to me-the intentis about it.

Was your opinion asked upon the terms?--I cannot say that I recollect it was; it is possible that may be the case, my situation was not there as a member of the council; any communication was in another capacity.

Was not your opinion asked as a friend generally, on all the measures adopted by sir John Shore ?—I have every reason to believe sir John Shore communicated with me on almost every occurrence which took place there.

Do you remember making any observation particularly at Bebypore in the presence of colonel Collins, Mr. Edmonstone, colonel Scott, and Mr. Lumsden, by which you conceived that the increase from fifty-five and a half lacs of rupees to seventy-six was too great an increase at

once, considering, the resources of the vizier?-I cannot say I have the least re collection of it; it is possible I may have been in company with those gentlemen, bnt I have not the smallest recollection of an observation to that effect.

Comparing the sum of fifty-five lacs of rupees to seventy-six, would it not have struck your excellency that the sum was excessive?- Upon my word I have not any recollection that it had such an effect upon my mind at the time, not the smallest; I do not know what effect it might have.

You saw the treaty before it was presented to the nabob?—At this distance of time I cannot positively say, but I think it is probable I did.

Was it not clearly understood by you, without adverting to whether you saw it before or after, when you looked at the treaty, and by all those consulted in framing the treaty, that if the nabob paid his kists or instalments, and performed the different stipulations of the treaty, that no interference, on the part of the company, was to be exercised in the internal management of the country, or in regard to his civil and military establishment?-I really cannot charge my recollection sufficiently to that question, but I should think the treaty itself will explain that thoroughly.

answer

Did you not believe that, after the conclusion of the treaty, the nabob was to be the entire master of his country, uncontrolled manager thereof, and to possess, in reality, full authority over his dominions, his household affairs, his troops, and his subjects, as specified in the treaty-The treaty went no further than his paying those kists; I do not recollect any stipulations there were further; I take for granted there was no intention then of interfering with him further than might be necessary from political considerations.

From the general impression upon your mind now, do not you believe that the nabob was to have the entire and uncontrolled management of the country, and control over his troops and his subjects?-Certainly; I have no reason to believe otherwise.

Previous to Sir John Shore leaving Calcutta, in March, 1798, was your excellency at Calcutta, or on your way there?-When he left Calcutta I was on my way to the presidency.

Did not you, and the other gentlemen of the council, highly approve of every

part