Were you not assistant at Lucknow? -No, I was not; it was my brother.

The disturbances mentioned in Midnapore were on the borders, and the woody parts?-Yes, they were.

Do you know that the vizier's provinces, previous to the cession, were in a greater state of disorder than the adjoining provinces in the possession of the Mahrattas, particularly the Doab, and the country across the Jungles?-I believe they were, but I only speak from what I heard; I did not see the country at that time.

Are you disposed to think that the vizier's troops were different in any material degree from the other Native troops, and troops in the service of the Mahrattas, those that were not governed by Europeans?-I know nothing about the vizier's troops; I was not in Oude till some time after the country was ceded,

[Withdrew.

[JOHN STRACHEY, Esq. was called in, and no questions being proposed, he was directed to withdraw.]

Captain JAMES SALMON called in, and examined.

Where you employed in 1801 to calculate the amount of the charges incurred on account of additional troops serving in Oude, from the month of November 1798 to the month of November 1799, in order that the demand might be made on the nabob for those expenses ?-I was.

State from whom, or in what manner, you were furnished with the documents and materials on which your calculations are made ?- The documents were contained in the military auditor general's office.

Can you state from what official channel those documents came to you?—The documents are regular accounts kept in the office, to which any body can refer on occasion. I could have no documents from which I could draw those estimates,except the usual reports of the office, in which all the military expenses were calculated, and from which they were checked.

Can you state on what principle you proceeded in making up those estimates? I perceive in the printed paper there is a letter from myself, in which I have endeavoured to explain the principles on

which those estimates were calculated. It would have been a very troublesome and tedious business to have stated the actual expense which had been incurred forevery particular man who had served in Oude during that period; to obviate that, an estimate was made of what the expense might have amounted to on the one side, and credit was given to the nabob for more troops than he was entitled to on the other side; the nabob was debited with corps as being complete; which in some instances were not so; but he was allowed above the allowance of above thirteen thousand men, with which he might be charged as far as I can recollect, on colonel Scott's mode of estimation. It is also stated that no notice was taken of the European commissioned officers, who amounted to three hundred men, and the charge for whom would have been considerable, neither was a charge made for interest, which might be charged, for the money was advanced by the company at a time when they were obliged to borrow money at the rate of ten per cent. some parts of the charge were necessarily by estimate, as the wear and tear of arms and accoutre ments; they could not admit of an accurate calculation, and therefore the whole was was rather a matter of estimate than a matter of charge.

Whether those estimates were made on the same principles as any former estimates on the same subject had been made?—I dą not apprehend that an exactly similar case could have occurred before the calculations had been made of what future expenses would be; those were always caculated as if the corps had been com plete; it was an object of govern ment to keep the corps in Oude as full as possible; the native corps were always full and complete, there was no difficulty in filling them; and the European corps were kept as full as the circumstances would admit of.

Had you collected from any communication. public or private, with the marquis Wellesley, that it was his lordship's wish or intention that the calculation should either be reduced below, or swelled above the just amount of the demand?—I certainly understood from lord Wellesley, in private conversa. tion, that it was his wish that the charge should not be pressed upon the nabub beyond what was justly due from him; that he should rather be favoured in the charge.

State

State how long you have served at Bengal?-The whole of my services have been about twenty years.

Did you know colonel Scott?-By character very well, personally better.

dominions, including arrears payable in England, and every fixed contingency, did you think, or mean, that that was to be applied to the then actual strength of the 27th dragoons?—No, I did not conceive the 27th dragoons to be complete.

In some cases accounts were made out where the corps were not full, but were charged so ?-Thy were.

But in others, to balance that inaccuracy, charges were not made which, upon the whole left the account favourable with the nabob ?-Certainly, I con

ceive so.

Have the goodness to look to page 171 of the printed papers, that purports to be a statement of a regiment of European infantry; at the time you made out that statement, had you any idea that it was the actual establishment of the first regiment of European infantry ?-Certainly not.

Look at the estimate, No. 2; at the time you made out that estimate, of course you had no idea that it was the identical regiment of artillery actually serving in the vizier's country?-It was the statement of those companies of artilTery, of no specific regiment; I did not refer to the specific company as it stood in battalion, but merely stated it to be four companies of artillery, which might be drawn from different regiments.

Look at statement No. 3; at the time you made out that statement, did you intend or think that it was applied to the actual strength of the second regiment of native cavalry?-Yes, I apprehend the regiments of native cavalry to be complete.

Had you the actual returns of that regiment before you when you made that estimate? In no case did I think it necessary to refer to them, as it was an estimate.

Have the goodness to refer to the estimate No. 5; at the time you made out that estimate, purporting to be a statement of the expense of a regiment of British dragoons in cantonments in the vizier's

mate, did you really know or believe that it was to be applied to the first regi ment of native infantry ?-I conceive it to be a statement of the expense of a regiment. I do not know whether No.1, or any other number, but the statement of a regiment of native infantry, as it then stood in the vizier's provinces, with the exception of some absentees among the native officers.

Of course, when you made out that estimate, you had no idea that it was to be applied to the specific first regiment of native infantry?-I do, not now remember what were the numbers of the regiments in Oude at that time; I had reference only to a given number of regiments, conceiving all those to be com plete that were stationed in Oude. I see it is mentioned as the first regiment of na tive infantry, therefore I presume it was

the first.

At the time you made out that estimate did you know that that was actually the strength of the first regiment ?—I do not know that such a question occurred to my mind at the time.

Looking at those six regiments, you meant them only as a general estimate, without meaning to apply them to any specific corps?-Certainly.

Whether the artillery serving in the vizier's provinces was not generally complete ?-Generally complete.

Have you received any mark of the approbation of the company since you returned to England, for services rendered to them in Bengal, in your capacity of military auditor general? Yes, I have.

After those particulars have been pointed out to your attention, do you still think, or do you not think, hat the estimate was made out in a favourable manner towards the vizier ?—I still think it was made out in a favourable manner to the vizier.

When those estimates were made, were they made for a prospective and

future

future service, or as an account for a service done ?-As an account for a service

done.

Were there not then documents relative to the actual strength of the several regiments actually employed ?-They might have been had; but, as I stated before, it would have taken a good deal of time and trouble to have gone through them, and made a statement in that way.

Do you not think, that the actual claim of the company on the vizier would have been more accurately ascertained, if, on the one hand, he had been debited with the amount paid by the company for troops serving in the vizier's dominions, and, on the other, had been credited by the sum actually paid by him for troops, and for the other charges which he was bound to pay under the treaty, and the balance only had been demanded from him?-I apprehend it would have been more accurate.

Will you take upon you to state, whether you believe, if the account had been so minute, that the sum that would have been demanded of the vizier would have been greater or smaller than the sum actually demanded ?—I believe the demand would have been greater, from the circumstances I have stated; that the number of men allowed by colonel Scott's calculation were considerably less than the number, I conceive that actually composed them, and that no charge was made for interest and other incidents, which might have been charged very fairly.

Is the account of the expenditure of the Bengal army, which is made up and submitted to parliament annually, made up at the auditor's office ?-That part of it is which relates to the military expenses of the particular pre

sidencies.

You having said, that you think the account made up on that principle of estimate was more favourable to the vizier than a more accurate and real account would have been; have you ever at all compared those documents for the purpose of ascertaining that ?Never.

Then it is mere opinion ?-Merely opinion.

In your capacity of inspector of accounts in Bengal, you must have had frequent official intercourse with lord Wellesley on military subjects, and par

ticularly any thing that related to military expenditure; what is your opinion of the conduct of lord Wellesley in every thing that related to keeping and check. ing the accounts of military expenditure, on all subjects connected with the regularity of that branch of the service ?I think his lordship was extremely particular in having the accounts of the army regularly kept, and certainly was in many instances an economical military governor; he has received the thanks of the court of directors in some instances for being so, and I have received my share of thanks for the small concern I had in furnishing him with the best information I could on the subject.

You having said that lord Wellesley received the thanks of the court of direc tors for some instances of economy; has he received the thanks of the court of directors generally for his economy?— I believe not; if I might be allowed to make the distinction, I believe I could do it satisfactorily; lord Wellesley has not had the thanks of the court of directors on account of the military expenses generally, because I believe the court of directors have been of opinion the army has been augmented beyond what was necessary; but they have thanked him for having obtained the largest efficient force at the least possible expense, and it was my duty to assist him in that branch of economy.

At what time, and on what occasion, was that? I think it was attended to during the whole time I was in the office of military auditor general, which was near three years.

At what time were the thanks of the court of directors given?-I could not specify the date, but I have seen the letter.

About what year ?-I cannot say, it' was after I left Bengal.

Was it after the Mahratta war ?Ithink it must have been about the time of the Mahratta war.

At what time did you leave Bengal?I left Bengal in November, 1809.

Do not you know that marquis Wellesley made an excuse about that very time' for not having sent all the military accounts home, and that they did not know the expenses at that time of the new corps ?→ I am not competent to speak to that question.

Will

Will you have the goodness to look at those accounts, I believe you will find them mad up from the 21st of February, 1798, to the end of 1799; did you continue the accounts of those specific regiments; the first regiment of European infantry, the second of Native cavalry, and 27th dragoons, from the period of November, 1799, up to the end of the year. 1801? It does not appear that that calculation was made by me; I speak partly from memory and partly from reference to those documents; it appears that the calculation made by me was only to November 1799.

You cannot say, then, whether the expenses charged to the nabob were actually the bona fide expenses of the troops so charged?-I perceive colonel Scott's calculation is formed on the basis of my calculations, that it was rather an estimate than a charge as well as my

own.

[Withdrew.

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON THE OUDE

CHARGE.

Mercurii 25° die Junii, 1806. BENJAMIN HOBHOUSE, Esq. in the chair.

Major-General SAINT LEGER called in, and examined. In 1798, did you not command the 27th dragoons?-I did.

Where were they stationed during the whole of that year?-At Cawnpore.

To whom did you make the returns of the regiment? They were transmitted to the commander-in-chief through the adjutant-general.

From whom did your paymaster receive the pay and allowances of the 27th light dragoons during that time?- He received the pay from the paymaster of the king's troops.

Was the 27th dragoons complete as to men and officers during the whole of the year 1798?—The public returns

will speak most accurately on that subject, I can only speak from recollec tion.

What is your recollection?-To the best of my belief it was not entirely complete; the establishment was four hundred and eighty; I believe the regiment to have been four hundred and upwards.

Were all the officers present during that time; were none absent on leave?➡ I cannot exactly recollect.

Was not colonel Wynyard senior major of the 27th dragoons?-He was.

Do you remember at what time colo. nel Wynyard quitted the regimen ?— To the best of my recollection in 1802; but I am not positive.

Was the regiment complete in 1799? -As I said before, not entirely so.

Were they not fewer in number in 1799 than in 1798?-Much the same I should think; but at so remote a period, I cannot be positive.

Will you state, to the best of your recollection, the state of the 27th dragoons in 1800?- To the best of my recollection, it received drafts from the Cape of Good Hope, part of the 28th dragoons, which placed them in a state of completion, or nearly so; I hope for the indulgence of this house, if I should mistake in point of time or of numbers, for I was not prepared for questions of this sort, and when I obeyed the command of this house to day, I had only heard about an hour before that I was to attend it; I had no possibility of looking even to any little memo randum, should I have found any, but I do believe, that what I have stated is

correct.

What was the state of the 27th dragoons in the year 1801 ?-From the number of men that are invalided annually in that country, and as I do not particularly recollect that it received any addition to its strength in the course of that year, I think it may have been weaker, and I rather think it was, but I cannot say to what extent.

Do you think it was weaker by fifty or by an hundred men than it was in the year 1800?-Certainly not by an hundred or any thing like an hundred, whether by fifty or any thing near fifty, I cannot positively say; I should rather suppose, if I am to speak on supposition, that it might have been something about twenty

or