VOL. VII. No. 14.]

513]

AFFAIRS OF INDIA. SIR,I have attentively read your remarks on the present state of India. In many of your observations I fully agree I will take the liberty to mention certain points, on which I differ from you, and I will endeavour to explain the causes to which our present embarrassments in India, ought fairly to be imputed.I am afraid, Mr. Cobbett, that the actual debts of India, instead of being twenty millions as you state them, are at this moment thirty millions sterling at the least. In this country we have unhappily been able to borrow money to such an extent, that a debt of thirty millions appears a mere trifle; especially, when it is considered that the revenues of India are ten millions a year. But no reasoning can be more dangerous, or more fallacious. The debt of India bears an interest of 12 per cent, or at least, a part of it does, and the remaining part an interest of 10 per cent., which is a deduction of three millions a year, from the Indian revenues, leaving seven millions a year, for the civil, judicial, and military expenses of India, which at present far exceed seven millions sterling a year.--If the present system is continued, therefore, so far from India being the brightest gem in the British crown, it will be a severe clog upon Great Britain-You are in an error, Mr. Cobbett, when you impate to the Court of Directors, or to the East India Company any blame, for the measures which have occasioned the present debt. From the year 1784, when Mr. Pitt's bill passed, to this day, the political affairs of India have been under the management of a board of commissioners appointed by his Majesty. That board fixed the civil and military establishments, and appointed the governors of India. Mr. Dundas invariably avowed in Parliament, that as president of the board, he was alone responsible for the good and economical government of India. The merit or demerit therefore, of each important transac tion belongs to him to 1801, and from that time to his successor in office, Lord Castlereagh. Allow me as shortly as it is pos

[514

sible to do it, to contrast the past with th present state of India.-Prior to our territo tial acquisitions, the trade from India was carried on by the exportation of bullion from Great Britain. Since 1765, when we a quired the sovereignty of Bengal, no bullion was sent to India until 1802. The invest ments of each year were made by the surplus revenues of Bengal, by the very small drafts which the directors permitted their governments to draw upon their treasury in England, and by the sale of exports, which were not very considerable, with two exceptions. In 1770 bills were drawn upon the directors to the amount of one million; and, in 1781, when we were engaged in an arduous contest with Frauce, the Mahrattas, and Hyder Ally Cawny Mr. Hastings was compelled to purchase the investment of that year with borrowed money, and to draw upon the Company for the amount of that investment.--Lord Clive had calculated in 1765, that after paying every expense, there would be a surplus of one million ster. ling each year in Bengal.-In 1772, Mr. Hastings succeeded to that government. The debt of Bengal was then a million sterling, contracted chiefly by the remittances sent by the Bengal government to Madras, and Bombay, in the three preceding years. This debt he not only paid off, but in 1777, there was a surplus of above a million sterling in the Bengal treasury; and very valuable cargoes were sent every season, from Bengal to Great Britain. India at that period, was indeed, the brightest jewel in the British crown.--In 1778, the war with France commenced. It was the great object of France to recover her lost consequence in India. To effect this she sent secret agents to Poona, and to Hyder Ally, prior to the commencement of the war, an official information that she had done so, was transmitted to Mr. Hasting, by Lord Stormont, then the British ambassador at Paris. The Mahratta war was solely occasioned by the anxious endeavour of Mr. Hastings to counteract the schemes of france, and not with a view of a wish to

A se

acquire territorial dominions. The invasion of the Carnatic by Hyder Ally, was also the result of French intrigues, and in the progress of the war, France sent out seventeen sail of the line, and three thousand of her best troops under De Bussy.--We succesfully resisted this most formidable confederacy, and at the close of the war, France and Holland had lost all their settlements in India. We had several armies in the field, actively employed for five years, and when peace was concluded throughout India, the whole debt of India amounted to eight millions sterling, while two millions sterling were added to the annual resources of Bengal by Mr. Hastings.--1 dare say, Mr. Cobbett, you can remember the difference of opinion which prevailed in England in 1782, as to the origin of the Mahratta war. cret committee of the House of Commons was appointed expressly to report the origin and the causes of that war; Mr. Dundas was the chairman, and he moved various resolutions tending to show that it was a war of offence, not of precaution and defence. He deprecated the idea of further conquests in India, and trusted that no future governor, after the sense of parliament was known, would endeavour to rival the Emperor Aurengzebe; since any addition of territory in India by conquest, was contrary to the bonour, the policy, and the justice of Great Britain. Here, then, you had the political creed of Mr. Dundas. It matters not whether he was right or wrong, in imputing the Mahratta war to Mr. Hastings, or in supposing that he wished to extend our dominions in India by conquest.In 1784, Mr. Pitt's bill passed, and under that bill, Mr. Dundas immediately became the minister of India His first important measure was, to fix the civil and military establishments of India. It had been the fashion to declaim at large upon the supposed extravagance of Mr. Hastings's administration. The strictest attention to economy, was therefore, to be expected from Mr. Dundas. Mr. Hastings had been thirteen years governor general of Bengal. For five years he had to support a war against France, Hyder Ally, and the Mahrattas. This he did support without the assistance of any kind from England, except that in one year he drew bills to the amount of the investment, which in that year he sent home. The debt of Bengal did not exceed three millions when he quitted the government, though the whole In a debt was eight millions.--What, Mr. Cobbelt, is the situation of India at present? The debt is thirty millions, and bullion to the amount, I believe, of our millions has been sent to

--

India during the administration of the Marquis Wellesley. But this is not all. The India debt of eight millions which existed in 1784, has in great part been paid off in England. I do not think I exaggerate, therefore, when I say, that the affairs of the Company are worse by thirty millions than they were in 1784.- -To what cause are we to attribute this? Is it to the wars in which we have been engaged since 1784. I think not. The first war withTippoo Sultan was finishedin two campaigns." We acquired twenty lacks of rupees by the peace which Lord Cornwallis concluded with him; besides a very valuable territory; and seventy lacks of rupees paid the extra expenses of the war. The second war with Tippoo Sultaun was finished in one campaign, by his final overthrow; and our acqu sition of his dominions, of which we retained as much as we thought proper. The extra expenses of the Mab ratta war must have been considerable undoubtedly, and the warfare still maintained with Holkar, must occasion heavy extra ex penses.--The expedition from Bengal to Egypt was a very heavy extra expense, which fell for the time upon Bengal.. But, Sir, the great cause of the magnitude of the debt, has been the increased expense of the civil, judicial, and financial branches of the governments in India, and the still greater increase of the armies in India.--Prior to the French war in 1778, the establishment of the Bengal army was four companies of artillery, three regiments of European Infan try, and twenty-four battalions of Sepoys; each battalion commanded by a captain.The establishment at Madras was not so considerable, and that of Bombay very trifling.- As there was no longer a French force in India after the peace of 1783, if it had been thought prudent to revert to the establishment of 1778, the expenses of India would have been two millions at the least, within its annual resources. All that was necessary if this establishment had been deemed prudent, was to send out two of three thousand recruits to complete our European regiments; and our Sepoy corps might have been augmented to any extent, when the necessity arose for augmenting them. Such I have every reason to believe would have been the plan of the directors, had the management remained in their bands.--But, Mr. Dundas thought it right entirely to new model the army in India. The Sepoy battalions became regiments commanded by colonels. Each regiment formed into two battalions, and each batta lion had a lieutenant-colonel, and a major, with a certain proportion of captains and

subalterns.-The old establishment of a battalion of Sepoys was a captain commandant, and ten subalterns, that is one officer to each company. Under this establishment our Sepoys faced French regiments, and were equal to any service. I see no objection to the change however, except as to the expense, which certainly is a very material one The Company's. European regiments continued mere skeletons, because it was Mr. Dundas's plan to have King's regiments in India; and, therefore, the Company were hot permitted to recruit in England beyond a certain extent. Another great expense was incurred, by the rank which it was necessary to give the Company's officers, to tank and put them on a footing with the officers in his Majesty's service. Formerly, when an officer with the rank of captain commanded a battalion of eight hundred Sepoys, it was of no consequence what he was called, whether captain or colonel; but when he acted constantly with his Majesty's forces, it became necessary that his rank should be equal to his command.-The establishment of the army in India, therefore, was under Mr. Dundas, treble as to expense in peace, to the peace establishment of 1778.--A great change also took place in the civil establishments. Under the Company, the pay of their civil servants was by no means equal to their necessary and unavoidable expenses; but their emoluments when they obtained official situations were considerable, though nor avowed. It was Mr. Dundas's plan to make their salaries so large, that a moderate fortune, with economy, might be saved in twelve or fourteen years, and to cut off every possibility of secret emoluments.--I am not finding fault with the principle, but the effect was, an increase of half a million sterling a year in the civil disbursements of Bengal alone, and the system extended to Madras and Bombay also.--The simple question is this. Was there a necessity to make these important changes in the civil and military service of the Company? I think not. I think that every thing which has been done in India by the joint exertions of the King's and Company's forces, might have been effected by the Company's troops had the directors been permitted alone, to keep their European regiments complete.

in the field. Sit Hector Munro, in 1764, gained the battle of Buscar, against the Vizier Sujah Dowlab, though the latter was strongly entrenched, had 20,000 troops, and à numerous artillery, well served Sir Hecfor Munro's force was less than 7,000 men, and not a seventh of the number Europeans.

Sir Eyre Coote defeated Hyder Ally in three several engagements, in 1781, when Hyder was flushed by his recent victories, though Sir Eyre had at no one time 7.000 men under his command.--Colonel Goddard marched across the continent of India, in 1778, at the head of six battalions of Sepoys, and a small body of Candahar horse, in despite of every opposition of the Mahrattas. He afterwards conquered the province of Guzzerat, and defeated the Mahrattas in various general actions. The question may be asked, whether the Mahrattas fight better now than they did formerly? I do not believe it. Their late success against Colonel Monson has been owing to other causes, not to the military skill of Holkar, not to the bravery of his troops. As far as we know, the misfortune was occasioned by a want of provisions, by incessant rains, and a want of co operation. There has been no French force to assist the Mahrattas, except in the management of their artillery, and that force was destroyed by Lord Lake.- -We have acquired by the destruction of Tippoo, in 1799, and by the late war with the Mahrattas, a vast accession of territory in India. We possess the whole sea coast, from Surat on the Malabar side, to the Bay of Bengal; so that it is impossi ble the French, at any period, should effect. a landing in force, if they were mad enough to attempt it. We have this additional advantage, a revenue in India of ten millions sterling a year. Were the French to attack us in India, they must send with their fleet, and with their troops, money for their subsistence, if they could find provisions to pur chase. I have no idea, therefore, that the petty warfare with Holkar can endanger our empire in India. But, Mr. Cobbett, I say with you, that if India does not much more than support itself in future, our acquisitions are a misfortune, and a loss. I agree that your quotations from Lord Melville's speeches are very correct. Many of them I heard him deliver, and I concurred in opinion with him, that India, instead of requiring assistance from us, would afford relief to Great Britain. Why it has not yet done so, is plain. The expenses which Mr. Dundas found so enormous in 1784, and which it was his plan then to reduce, have been increased beyond all calculation. This is the

sole cause of our disappointment.-France has never been able since 1783, to give us the smallest disturbance in India, beyond the capture of a few trading vessels, and we have always had a superior fleet in the Indian Ocean. Our debt has not been con. tracted by the wars with the country powers, in which we have been engaged since 1784, but by the extent of our civil and military establishments, (both of which were formed by Lord Melville) and by the expenses of the expedition to Egypt.--It may be said in opposition to my humble opinion, that our military establishments must remain as they now are, and that no reduction of the civil charges can take place. If so, I am most confident, that instead of a diminution of the India debt, it must increase as long as money can be borrowed in India.-Lord Melville once observed in the House of Commous, that since he had looked into the Company's accounts, he was astonished to find how very inconsiderable the extra expenses, incurred by the wars in India had been, compared with the idea which he had formed of their amount. Though the observation, as applied to himself was correct, yet it does not follow that the extra expenses occasioned by war, in India, are trifling; on the contrary, they are very large, owing to the increased allowances to officers and men when on service, and to the increased expense of the ordnance department. But at the periods to which Lord Melville referred, the armies with which we conquered, and preserved India, were so small, that the largest force employed in any one body, would appear as an advanced guard to the armies we now maintain.- -ASIATICUS.

--

SCOTCH PATRONAGE. SIR, Though a century has very near elapsed, since the union of England and Scotland, it is surprising to observe how little the people, or even the statesmen of the former country, know of, or interest themselves in the affairs peculiar to the latter. Various examples of this might be given; but at present I am only to state one. We hive all, or at least many have heard of the Civil Establishment of Scotland, as distinct from the English establishment. We have heard of the Scots Pension List, which forms no inconsiderable part of that establishment; and though a few years ago a copy of it was laid before the House of Commons, yet no person on that, or any other occasion, thought of inquiring out of what fund that establishment and those pensions were paid! With your permission I will, through the

medium of your Register, let the public a little into the secret, or rather put them on the scent, if it shall be thought worth presecuting.The proper revenue of the Scottish monarchs arose from the quit rents or duties paid out of lands; the tithes which came to the crown, by the reformation, and the abolition of episcopacy; and what are called casualties, that is, fines upon the change of property and other contingencies. The amount of these, though much diminished by the lavish grants made by James the 6th (the 1st of England), and his sec cessors, was, at the union, still very considerable. These composed the privy purse, out of which the civil establishment, the salaries of the judges, &c. were paid. The remainder was considered to be at the disposal of the monarch, that is, of his minister; for I presume you are not to learn, that ever since the union, there has been a person, well known to the country, though not, perhaps, altogether so well known to the constitution, by the title of minister for Scotland. That office has been held for many years by Lord Melville, and the great duty of it is the recommendation for places and pensions, and particularly the distribu tion of the surplus of the revenue abovementioned, through the channel of the Treasury, the Barons of the Scots, exchequer, and the Receiver of the King's land rents and casualties.--What now comes into the hands of the general receiver from that source, is reduced to a trifle: a new mode of giving pensions has been adopted, by making grants of the revenue arising in par ticular districts, or which ought to be paid out of particular estates. There is now be fore the House of Commons an instance of this in the grant to Lady Melville, of the rents of the lordship of Fife, by which about 9001. a year (not to mention 3,6001. of arrears) are put into her ladyship's pocket, taken from the fund especially appropriated for the civil establishment. It were easy, but it might be deemed invidious, to name many others pensioned in the same way, And there is another mode of lessening the revenue. The debtors of the crown, when the annual payment is considerable (and you will guess who these are) are suffered to run in arrear, and, from time to time, obtain discharges, or their quietus; but that is by the favour of the minister, and depends, you will easily believe, upon their good beba viour.While the fund out of which the establishment and the direct pensions ought to be paid is thus abstracted, the list increases every day. There is no limitation upon the Scots minister, as there is upon the English,

who, by Mr. Burke's bill, is restrained from granting above 400l. a year, (I think) with out the consent of parliament; witness the pension of 1,5001. lately granted to Lord Melville, in addition to his salary of 3,000!. a year for discharging the sinecure office of privy seal. It is said, that when Lord Melville resigned his English office about three years ago, he left with Mr. Addington a list of pensions he had promised to procure so numerous, and to such an amount, that that gentleman stood aghast at it, and, with a few exceptions, they were not granted during his administration. Whether the promises have been fulfilled since I ord Melville and Mr. Pitt came again into office will appear, it any member of parliament thinks it worth while to call for the pension list, and the dates of the several warrants.That the land rents and casualties, and other inonies actually coming into the hands of the receiver general, who is the paymaster of the establishment, are not sufficient for that purpose, seems therefore highly probable. --They are generally understood to be greatly deficient, and yet the establishment and pensions are paid with much more regularity in Scotland than in England. From whence does the money come? That is the question I wish to be put, where an answer can be compelled, and an evasion or false answer detected.--Till I see whether this attracts notice, I shall only add, that I believe if an investigation were made, a scene would be laid open sufficient to excite astonishment, even in these times, and after the appearance of the Tenth Report. -SCOTO BRITANNICUS.

DOMESTIC OFFICIAL PAPERS. CAPTURE OF DOMINICA, Copy of a Letter of General Prevost, commanding at Dominica, to the Master of the Sloop Endeavour, to be delivered to the Commander in Chief of His Majesty'e Forces, or to the Governor or President of the first Land he should make. Dated 24th Feb. 1805.

SIR,-You will inform the commander in chief of His Majesty's naval and land forces, that a force from France, consisting of one three-decker and two 74's, frigates, &c. with troops on board, invested the island on the 20th, and made good their landing on the following day (the 21st); they were most successfully resisted by the troops under my command, and repeatedly driven back.- The ships of the line in vain attempted to silence the batteries; but unfortunately the town being on fire, the militia on the right, notwithstanding their spirited conduct, were compelled to fall back.

I deemed it prudent to allow the council to capitulate for the town of Roseau and its dependencies, whilst I attempted, by forced marches, to get into Prince Rupert, with such force as I could collect, in which I have succeeded, and wait their attack on this post, with a well grounded expectation that His Majesty's regulars and militia forces will again distinguish themselves. I retreated from Roseau on the 21st, at 4 P. M. and understand the terms I prescribed are acceded to. I ordered none to be accepted that were not honourable, and desired the French commander not to allow his troops to disgrace themselves by plundering, or any act of wantonness. You are hereby desired to sail immediately, and make the first island' you can. If privateers in the Guadaloupe) Channel prevent your turning to windward,' make Montserrat or Antigua.

CATHOLICS' PETITION.

On Monday, the 25th of March, the following Petition of the Roman Catholics of Ireland was laid before the two Houses of Parlia

ment.

ΤΟ THE RIGHT HONOURABLE AND HONOURABLE THE KNIGHTS, CITIZENS, BURGESSES OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED,

The humble Petition of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, whose names are hereunto subscribed, on behalf of themselves and of others his Majesty's subjects professing the Roman Catholic religion,

SHEWETH, That your petitioners are stedfastly attached to the person, family, and government of their Most Gracious Sovereign; that they are impressed with sentiments of affectionate gratitude for the benign laws which have been enacted for meliorating their condition during his paternal reign, and that they contemplate, with rational and decided predilection, the admirable principles of the British constitution.— Your petitioners most humbly state, that they have, solemnly and publicly, taken the oaths by law prescribed to his Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects, as tests of political and moral principles; and they confidently appeal to the sufferings which they have long endured, and the sacrifices which they still make, rather than violate their consciences (by taking oaths of a religious or spiritual import contrary to their belief) as decisive proofs of their profound and scrupulous reverence for the sacred obligations of an oath.--Your petitioners beg leave to