II Letter to the Right Hon. 
 
 |1 Henry luncHs . . .on the State- 
 
 l| ment of the Affairs of the '-list 
 
 li India Company 
 
 II By 
 
 r George Tierney 
 

 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 AT LOS ANGELES
 
 A LETTER 
 
 TO THE 
 
 RIGHT HON. HENRY DUNDAS, 
 
 PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF CONTROUL, 
 
 O N T H E 
 
 STATEMENT OF THE AFFAIRS OF THE 
 EAST INDIA COMPANY, 
 
 LATELY PUBLISHED 
 
 BY GEORGE ANDERSON, ESQ. 
 
 ACCOUNTANT TO THE COMMISSIONERS FOR THE 
 AFFAIRS OF INDIA. 
 
 BT GEORGE TIERNET, ESQ. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 FRINTJSD FOU J. DEBRETT, OPPOSITE BURLINGTON HOUSE, PICCADILLY. 
 1792.
 
 17?* 
 
 TO T H E 
 
 RIGHT HON. HENRY DUNDAS. 
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 Page 43 For 13,248,673, read 13,258,673. 
 For 1,003,342, read 1,013,342. 
 
 The References to the Pages in Mr. Anderfon's 
 Publication are according to the laft Edition. 
 
 might be prefixed : perfonal refponlibility, 
 however, I never fhrunk from, having, on 
 all occafions, where queftioned, uniformly 
 acknowledged myfelf to be the writer of 
 that pamphlet which I now conceive I am 
 called upon in this more public manner 
 to avow. 
 
 After a hefitation of near twelve months, 
 you are pleafed to take up the gauntlet 
 which has fo long lain before you ; and, by 
 B your 
 
 ,154788
 
 FOR REACiNG ROOM 
 0*5 
 
 TO T H E 
 
 RIGHT HON. HENRY DUNDAS. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 I 
 
 N the month of May, 1791, I took the 
 liberty to addrefs to you a letter on the 
 fubjecl: of the Finances of the Eaft India 
 Company. This letter, it is true, was not 
 figned with my name, for I felt too ftrongly 
 the infignificance of that name to fuppofe 
 that, in the eftimation of the world, it could 
 give weight to any flatement to which it 
 might be prefixed : perfonal refponfibility, 
 however, I never fhrunk from, having, on 
 all occafions, where queftioned, uniformly 
 acknowledged myfelf to be the writer of 
 that pamphlet which I now conceive I am 
 called upon in this more public manner 
 to avow. 
 
 After a hefitation of near twelve months, 
 you are pleafed to take up the gauntlet 
 has fo long lain before you ; and, by 
 B your 
 
 354788
 
 your fquire Mr. Anderfon, Accountant to 
 the Commiifioners for the Affairs of India, 
 you at laft come forward to accept a chal- 
 lenge of which the giver had almoft loft the 
 recollection. Your valour, Mr. Dundas, 
 has been fomewhat tardy, but it {hall not 
 be difappointed ; and, though I will confefs 
 that I had for fome time ceafed to expect 
 any fuch effort of refolution on your part, 
 I inftantly obey your fummons, and enter 
 the lifts. 
 
 I am called upon to defend two accounts ; 
 the firjl of which Mr. Anderfon afferts to 
 abound with " grofs miftatements/' leading 
 to conclufions " very different from the ac- 
 tual refult ;" and the fecond of which he 
 chuies to infmuate, contains a moft material 
 error, " committed for the pur-pofe of giving 
 " a ftatement that fhould apparently fup- 
 " port the inferences which it was previoufly 
 " intended to exhibit." 
 
 The firft account is the following 
 
 GENERAL
 
 
 
 f: 
 
 a' * 
 
 H 
 If 
 
 v- Cn-< 
 -1 = 1 
 = = 
 
 ^ f S 3 S 0, 
 
 ^ O o _ 
 
 => F,- ,'v.f 
 
 : B.r* 
 
 5T? 
 
 
 ? I 
 13 s 
 
 On
 
 C 4 3 
 
 On this ftatement Mr. Anderfon com- 
 mences his attack in thefe words, 
 
 " The nett furplus of India from 1786-7 
 " to 1 789-90, is computed by this writer at 
 " JC3*$&&54 From the fame accounts 
 " it appears, in page 67 of the foregoing 
 " meets, that the nett furplus amounted to 
 " 3'95^> 2 4^ i which, from the circum- 
 " fiances there explained, was not the 
 " whole mm which the refources of India 
 " had afforded to the purpofes of trade, &c- 
 " In making this computation, the writer 
 " ftates the whole intereft incurred on the 
 " debts in India as paid, and the whole 
 " of the charges defrayed, as incurred ; 
 " whereas, very little of the intereft in- 
 " curred at Bombay (vide No. 5 of s^th of 
 " March, 1790, and the two Nos. 34 of 
 " 1791) was paid in this period ; but ar- 
 " rears there, and at the other fettlements, 
 " were paid to nearly an equal amount, and 
 " form a part of the charges defrayed. By 
 " not attending to this circumftance, he has 
 " charged near 700,000 too much againft 
 " the refources of India. This fum, and 
 " his having taken the revenues and charges 
 ' of Bombay, in 1789-90, and the expences 
 
 of
 
 C 5 3 
 
 " of Bencoolen and Prince of Wales' Ifland 
 " on eftimate, accounts for the error of 
 " 759^9^ m the article of Surplus Re- 
 " venue from India/' 
 
 In anfvver to the laft part of this charge, 
 I admit that an error does arife from my 
 having taken the accounts of Bombay, Ben- 
 coolen, and Prince of Wales' Ifland on efti- 
 mate ; but the reafon for my having fo done 
 will furely appear fatisfaclory, when I bring 
 to your recollection, that at the time my 
 pamphlet was printed, no actual accounts 
 had been received, and there was nothing 
 but an eftimate to take. Previous, however, 
 to its publication authentic accounts did 
 come to hand, upon the receipt of which 
 I immediately prefixed an advertifement to 
 what I had written, dating the facl, and 
 pointing out a miftake of 84,436 in my way 
 of giving the total furplus in India ; and 
 this very fum is now brought againft me as 
 one of my " grofs miftatements." So much 
 for the candour of your accountant. 
 
 With refpect to the next head, namely, 
 my having ftated " the whole intereft in- 
 " curred on the debt in India as paid," I re-
 
 ply, that in examining the fituation of the 
 Company with a view to afcertain the fair 
 refult of their income and expenditure, I 
 apprehend the method I adopted to have 
 been perfectly correct. I affumed that the 
 Company received what was annually due 
 to them, and paid what was annually due by 
 them, and I know of no other way by which 
 the true value of an eftate can be afcertained. 
 A man who has a thoufand a year, and lives 
 at the rate of five hundred but neglects to 
 difcharge his bills, furely cannot be faid to 
 be a man of better fortune than his neigh- 
 bour who, with the fame income, and the 
 fame eftablifhment, regularly pays his 
 tradefmen ; and yet I muft be brought to 
 that way of thinking, before I can agree to 
 alter my ftatement according to Mr. Ander- 
 fon's fuggeftion. 
 
 But, in truth, the difference between your 
 accountant and me refpecting the Surplus 
 Revenue in India, arifes from the different 
 objects we have in view. / wrote to {hew 
 what the Annual Gain of the Company 
 amounted to upon a Four Years average of 
 their Current Income and Expenditure : 
 He writes to Ihevv how much in four years 
 
 they
 
 C 7 3 
 
 they have bettered their fituation, without 
 attending to the nature of the articles 
 which promote or diminifh the improve- 
 ment. In bis way of treating the fubjecl, 
 actual difburfementS) and no other, ought to 
 be charged : whereas, / am to look for 
 thofe which have been incurred during the 
 period in queftion, all of which, whether 
 paid or poftponed, I contend I am entitled 
 to bring forward. 
 
 Maintaining, upon this principle, my 
 right to charge whatever annual intereft of 
 debt the Company were actually liable to, 
 I very readily allow that if the next part of 
 the accufation againft me were well founded, 
 I fhould have drawn up my account moil 
 unfairly ; that is to fay, if I had fet down 
 old arrears introduced into the outgoings* 
 and added them as a part of tie current 
 expence. But examine the fact ; have I 
 done fo ? Turn to my publication (page 4) 
 and you will find thefe words " From the 
 " Bombay Charges in 1786-7, 1 have deducted 
 " 40 lacks (or 464,000!.) becaufe it is dated, 
 " in a note accompanying the account, to 
 <c be a fum arifmg from arrears." Much as 
 I admire the fpirit with which you come 
 
 forth
 
 C 8 3 
 
 forth to anfvver my letter, I cannot but 
 lament that you did not previoufly con- 
 defcend to read it. 
 
 Confining myfelf thus to what was in- 
 curred, and proving that I have not made 
 the miftake imputed to me refpecling what 
 was defrayed, I will only further beg your 
 attention while I mention one error which 
 I have myfelf difcovered, and which is this, 
 The intereft payable on the Indian debt, 
 during the period in queftion, I dated to 
 have been .1,963,142 ; whereas Mr. Ander- 
 fon (Appendix, No. 5) has fhewn it to be 
 2,110,785; I have therefore charged too 
 little by 
 
 The refult then of this invefligation into 
 my Statement of the Nett Surplus of In- 
 dian Revenue for the Years 1786-7-8-9-50, 
 is, that I have charged too little by 
 
 JC 1 47643, and i( x> mud* b j 8 4>43 6 ' Tne 
 difference is, 63,207, to which amount I 
 have improperly given the Company credit. 
 
 The next items which Mr. Anderfon has 
 attacked, relate partly to Trade and partly 
 to Territory ; and I am happy that, while 
 
 he
 
 C 9 3 
 
 he has (hewn how egregioufly in thefe 
 particulars I have been wrong, he has 
 given me an opportunity of afcertaining, 
 from his own figures, how I may be cor- 
 rectly right. Heaven forbid that I mould 
 detain you for a moment in the labyrinths 
 of my erroneous calculations, when, by 
 following the Accountant to the Com- 
 miflioners for the Affairs of India, I can 
 at once put you into the road to truth. 
 
 In Mr. Anderfons ftatement (page 82) 
 the " expences incurred at home on account 
 " of the pofleffions in India," amount to 
 829,326, and (page 87) the " nett amount 
 realized from the Import Trade, after de- 
 fraying all charges, dividends, &c. is 
 400,315." The difference gives, upon 
 thefe articles, a balance againft the Com- 
 pany of 429,011. 
 
 In my ftatement, the ten firft articles of 
 the Dr. fide, and the four firft articles on 
 the Cr. fide, include every thing relative to 
 the Import Trade, and the Charges incurred at 
 home on account of the Territorial PoJJeJJions in 
 India. Under thefe heads the Company 
 is debited 15,341,710, and credited 
 C 14,857,661 ;
 
 C 2 
 
 .14,857,661 ; which leaves a balance againft 
 them of .4,84,04,9. From this deduct: the 
 balance ftated by your Accountant to be 
 againft them 429,011, and the error com- 
 mitted by me will appear to amount to 
 
 There remains but one article more in 
 my account to be difcufled, and that is, 
 the fum of 560,000 for " Lofs on Goods 
 " and Stores," of which fum, 493,5.56 ls 
 dated by your Accountant to be error. 
 
 I feel no difficulty in acknowledging 
 that the correction of Mr. Anderfon, in 
 this inftance, is perfectly right, and that 
 the error arofe precifely in the way he 
 mentions. Only let me fay, that the mif- 
 take did not originate from my mode of 
 making up the account, but from a mif- 
 application of the materials I had to ufe. _ 
 For inftance, in the Paper before the Houfe 
 of Commons (No. 39, 1791) Goods and 
 Stores are ftated to be exported in the 
 feafon 1786. To this I annexed the idea, 
 that the fhips which carried out fuch 
 goods and ftores, failed in the fpring of 
 that year, and under that impreflion drew 
 
 up
 
 up my ftatement. It appears, however, 
 that in this I was wrong, becaufe what are 
 called the Exports of 1786 are, in truth, 
 all exported in January, February, March, 
 April, May, and June 1787 ; and this my 
 mifapprehenfion has fo highly delighted 
 your Accountant, that, in his anxiety to 
 ridicule my ignorance, he has faved me the 
 trouble of vindicating myfelf againft the 
 only charge which could have given me 
 uneafmefs, namely the charge of having 
 defignedly mifreprefented the affairs of the 
 Company. Having no other fources than 
 the papers delivered to the Houfe of Com- 
 mons, from which I can procure informa- 
 tion, it would be ftrange indeed if my 
 knowledge of the practice of the India 
 Houfe were equal to that of Mr. Anderfon, 
 to whom, as your reprefentative, Directors, 
 as well as Clerks, are bound to give every 
 afiiftance. 
 
 I have thus gone through every article 
 in my ftatement, and will now requeft 
 your attention while I briefly recapitulate 
 what corrections Mr. Anderfon's publica- 
 tion has rendered it neceflary to make : - 
 Ca In
 
 12 
 
 In the Article of " Lofs on Goods and Stores,' 
 I have charged too much againft the Com- 
 pany, 
 
 On the whole of the Articles which relate to the 
 Import Trade, and the Expences incurred at 
 home on account of the Territorial Pofleflions, 
 I have charged too much againft the Com- 
 pany, 
 
 In the Article of " Nett Surplus 
 Revenue," I have charged too 
 little, ... 147.643 
 
 In ditto, too much - - 84,436 
 
 Deduft the difference, to which amount I have 
 
 improperly given the Company credit, 63,107 
 
 The Error in my General Statement of the 
 Profit and Lofs of the Eaft India Company tor 
 Four Years is, ^485, 387 
 
 It muft, however, be remembered, that 
 of this fum, no more than 400,851 is a 
 miftake of mine, for the reafons before ex- 
 plained reflecting 84,436, which I par- 
 ticularly mentioned to be incorrect. 
 
 And here, Sir, let me entreat you to paufe 
 a moment, and to recollecl, that the object 
 of the letter which I laft year took the li- 
 berty to adddrefs to you, was exprefsly 
 
 ftated
 
 C '3 3 
 
 ftated to be, " to bring the leading points be- 
 " fore the public, and not minutely to fcru- 
 " tinize every figure." Confider next, the 
 voluminous and complicated accounts from 
 which my information was to be derived, 
 and the very peculiar and intricate manner 
 in which thofe accounts are kept. Confider, 
 that, whatever doubts or difficulties arofe, 
 I had none of that official affiftance from 
 the India Houfe which your Accountant 
 can command. Confider, that my General 
 Statement includes an Inveftigation of the 
 Eaft India Company's Affairs, both in Eu- 
 rope and Afia, during a period of Four 
 Years, and is drawn from accounts amount- 
 ing to above One Hundred Millions Ster- 
 ling * ; Confider all thefe circumftances, 
 and then tell me, why, becaufe in fuch an 
 undertaking I have committed a miftake of 
 400,000, you fend out your Champion 
 to proclaim, that 1 have brought forward 
 " S r f s miftatements," leading to conclufions 
 "Jo very different from the actual rejult !" 
 
 Having done with my Profit and Lofs 
 
 * See Mr. Anderfon's Appendix, Nos. 4 and 5. The 
 Receipts aud Payments at home amount 10^53,664,506; 
 The Revenues and Charges abroad, to .50,675,960. 
 
 State-
 
 C H 1 
 
 Statement, let me next proceed to that part 
 of Mr. Anderfon's attack which is levelled 
 at my obfervation on the " Encreafed Value 
 of the Goods on hand." In reply to my 
 objection to this being confidered as Profit 
 to the Company, your Accountant fays, 
 " It is fufficient to obferve, that an encreale 
 " of Trade neceflarily requires an encreafed 
 " Stock of Goods to carry it on ;" and he 
 afterwards ftates the Company " to have 
 " encreafed their goods in the warehoufes, in 
 " order to render them adequate to the de- 
 " mands of their trade, on its prefent ex- 
 tended fcale" 
 
 To make this reafoning of Mr. Ander- 
 fon's conclufwe, there is but one thing 
 wanting, which is, the fat of the Com- 
 pany's Trade having been extended in fuch 
 a manner as to have required the great in- 
 creafe which appears in the Stock of Tea 
 in Warehoufe. As for the Value of India 
 Goods on hand, it is lefs than it was in 1787, 
 (fee No. 38, 1791) 
 
 The following papers will (hew the de- 
 gree of credit to which your accountant's 
 argument is entitled : 
 
 AN
 
 C '5 
 
 H T', 
 
 
 S 
 
 
 
 5' 
 
 n 
 
 
 *$ 
 
 
 
 
 3_ 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 c 
 
 
 ?T 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 cP 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 * 
 
 3 
 
 l>f 
 
 
 
 
 o W 
 
 ? 
 
 
 3 > 
 
 vo 
 
 
 
 ri 
 
 5' 
 
 vo 
 
 _ 
 
 Isy 
 
 3- 
 
 "Ji 
 
 c 
 
 5" 
 
 
 ** h 
 
 s 
 
 ~^\ ^ 
 
 ir 
 
 P" 
 
 w 
 
 ^H " 
 
 g. 
 
 ij 
 
 ^ 
 
 ? 3 
 
 n 
 
 
 n 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 -. 
 
 ^ 
 
 C 
 
 C- 
 
 0* 
 
 ^ ? 
 
 z 
 
 n 
 
 vO S- 
 
 3 
 
 s'-ig 
 
 ^ 5. 
 
 | 
 
 y. 
 
 1 
 
 1- 8, 
 
 3 
 
 c= 
 
 n 
 
 ~-J ^ 
 
 | 
 
 4- 
 
 C 
 X 
 
 p 1 
 
 &- 
 
 
 P 
 
 ^* - 
 
 1' 
 
 4- 
 _p cr 
 
 V. 
 
 6 
 
 M 
 ^4 
 
 o 
 
 c 
 
 ? 
 &. 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 & 
 
 
 cr 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 Ln 
 
 X 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 S" 
 
 
 
 
 CT3 
 
 
 Ja 
 
 H 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 oc S" 
 
 
 
 Hj 
 
 cr 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 O. 
 
 
 < 
 
 r 
 
 rfj 
 
 
 
 
 S 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 * 
 
 g g g 
 
 * 
 
 s* s* 
 
 1 
 
 S g S 
 
 0. g. P. 
 
 | 
 
 ||1 
 
 1 
 
 g 3 & i 
 
 PI 
 
 ^ -S 
 
 s= 
 
 ^ 30 "^ 
 
 S 
 
 
 g 
 
 
 ** 
 
 t f 1 
 
 VD 
 
 , , , 
 
 ' 
 
 4" "ON " 
 
 1 
 
 w 
 
 ' 
 
 "S "%> ^ 
 
 
 ' III* 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 Z 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 " VD OS 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 VO ^p ^J ^p 
 
 K 
 
 
 *CJ oo t2 " 
 
 O 
 
 - 
 
 ^4 Vxt O 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 ' 
 
 "oo "oo "o 
 
 o 
 
 ' 
 
 ill 1 
 
 (* 
 
 p 
 
 1 
 
 -;^_1 3 
 
 i2 -5 JS ?" ?? 
 
 1 
 
 o ^5 "o 
 
 NW' 
 
 M 
 
 - 
 
 H 
 
 f 
 
 i 1 1 ? 
 
 s 
 
 6 
 
 1 S 1 
 
 C 1 
 
 S. a. H 
 
 M 5i O 
 
 N. 3' ^* 
 
 ^ CfQ a- 
 
 tiff 
 
 C I 
 
 
 S? 
 B-l 
 
 !^ 
 
 y' 
 
 After
 
 After the perufal of the firft of thefe pa- 
 pers, I think it will not be contended, that 
 the Company's trade to China has received 
 any very material extenfion within the four 
 years ; but, if you fhould be of opinion that 
 it has, I will beg of you to caft your eyes 
 over the fecond of thofe papers, and to ob- 
 ferve the peculiar mode the Company have 
 adopted in confequence of that extenfion. 
 Of the Congou and SoucJiong, for which there 
 appears to have been a very encreafing de- 
 mand, they have provided only Ib. 4,299,964, ; 
 and of the Bobea and Singlo, the confump- 
 tion of which they have found annually to 
 diminifh, they have ftored in their ware- 
 houfes no lefs than Ib. 17,637,918. If Mr. 
 Anderfon means gravely to infift, that the 
 Directors have acted in this manner on pur- 
 pofe, I fhould imagine they would feel little 
 obliged to him for the compliment ; but, 
 though I think the fa6l admits of a very diffe- 
 rent explanation, I can have no object at pre- 
 fent in difcufiing the point. I have in my 
 account, to prevent all difpute, taken the 
 amount of the Company's goods on hand at 
 their own valuation, and I (hall therefore dif- 
 mifs this part of the fubjecT: with merely afk- 
 ing, whether the tradefman who encreafes his 
 
 ftock
 
 {-..*!.' 
 
 flock by heaping up articles, the demand for 
 which daily falls off, ought to gain any great 
 degree of credit for the additional contents 
 of his (hop. 
 
 I now come to the laft and moft ferious 
 
 charge* made againft: me by your Account- 
 
 D ant, 
 
 * With refpect to the bmiflion of what the Company 
 gain on fending out bullion, &c. to China, I beg to obferve, 
 that this can by no means be brought againft me as an 
 error, becaufe the papers explaining the amount received in 
 China were not before the Houfe of Commons, neither 
 could I ever have feen them till they appeared in Mr. An- 
 derfon's publication. I have, however, no objection to 
 adding the fum he fets down, provided he will, on the other 
 hand, make the deductions which, in this view of the fub- 
 je6l, ought to be brought forward. Undoubtedly the Com- 
 pany do, as your Accountant ftates, by obtaining their car- 
 goes with the produce of the goods and bullion they fend 
 out, fave that intereft which they mufl pay if the cargoes 
 were obtained for bills drawn upon them ; but we muft 
 alfo confider the length of time they lofe the ufe of the mo- 
 ney employed in the purchafe of the goods and bullion fo 
 fent out, and the rate of infurance, or rifle at which they are 
 tranfported ; and this applies equally to goods, &c. ex- 
 ported to India. 
 
 The amount of goods, ftores, and bullion, ex- 
 ported to China, from 1785 to 1788, was 
 , 3'?8o>799 on which two years intereft 
 .(the leaft that can be charged for the time 
 
 during
 
 C >8 3 
 
 ant, in which I am accufed of having, in my 
 comparative review of the debts of the 
 
 during which the company remain out of 
 their money) at only 4 per cent, is 302,463 
 
 The amount of goods, &c. exported to India 
 in the fame period, was 1*396,554, of 
 which fum, before any return is made to the 
 Company, they lofe the ufe at lead three 
 years. On this the intereft, at 4 per cent, is 167,586 
 
 Infurance on j5i77353> being the total 
 amount exported, at 3-5- per cent. 
 
 (For the above fums fee Anderfon's Appen- 
 dix, No. 9.) 
 
 From this, however, muft bo deducted whate- 
 ver the Company have under the head of 
 " Charges of Mrchandize," paid for Loans. 
 
 300,000 borrowed of the Bank on 
 Exchequer bills, for four years, at 
 4 per cent, is - 48,000 
 
 700,000 borrowed of the Bank on 
 mortgage of annuities, at 4 per 
 cent, for one year - 28,000 
 
 76,000 
 
 575' 2 5 6 
 
 (For thefe fums, the lad of which I have been obliged to 
 take on eftimate, fee No. 7, printed i^th March, 1790, 
 and No. 20,1791.) 
 
 The difference between this fum and what Mr. Anderfon 
 has fet down as Profit on export trade, would only leave a 
 balance in favour of the Company ot 3545- 
 
 Company,
 
 C 19 3 
 
 Company, as they ftood in 1786 and 1790, 
 committed an error to no lefs an amount 
 than ^1,676,231 ; and to this Mr. Anderfon 
 chufes to add a very coarfe infmuation, that 
 the error was committed " for the purpofe 
 " of giving a ftatement that fhould appa- 
 " rently fupport the inferences which it 
 " was previoufly intended to exhibit." 
 
 The comparifon referred to was publifhed 
 by me in the following form : 
 
 COMPARISON between the DEBTS of the EAST INDIA 
 COMPANY, as they {tood in India and China in 1786 and 
 1790, and as they ftood in England in 1787 and 1791. 
 
 Debt in India, 30 April, 1786 8,097,028 
 Debt in China, aCth Feb. 1 786 510,841 
 Debt in England, ift March, 
 
 1787 - - 15,443,349 
 
 i ,2 1 8 
 
 Debtinlndia, 30th April, 1790 6,878,507 
 
 Debt in England, ift March, 
 1791 
 
 Add more received oni ,000,000 
 encreafed ftock, fubfcribed in 
 1 789-90, at 1 74 per cent. 740,000 
 
 Add debt transferred to England 
 from India, remaining due ift 
 March, 1791 - 2,303,937 
 
 -- 23,900,880 
 
 Diminution of debt in four years 150,338 
 
 D 2 In
 
 i: o 3 
 
 In this ftatement I have, according to 
 Mr. Anderfon, committed an error of 
 1,676,231, becaufe I ought to have fet 
 down the debt in India on 3oth April 1 786, 
 at 9,773,805, inftead of 8,097,082, the 
 fum at which I have taken it. In anfwer to 
 this accufation I will beg your attention 
 to a plain recital of facts. 
 
 I moved in the Houfe of Commons for 
 an account of the debts and aflets as they 
 flood at the different fettlements in India 
 on the 3oth April, 1786, and a return was 
 made from the India Houfe, dated 24th 
 March, 1790, dating the debts to have 
 amounted to 8,097,082. (See No. 12, 
 printed 2^th March, 1790.) Afterwards 
 you moved for a copy of the letter from the 
 Court of Directors to the Governor Gene- 
 ral, dated 19th May, 1790. (See No. 29, 
 papers of 1791.) It is on the 13th para- 
 graph of this letter that Mr. Anderfon af- 
 fumes the amount of the debt in India on 
 the 3oth of April, 1786, to have been 
 9>773>85 ; and it is on the official account 
 from the India Houfe, drawn up not quite 
 two months preceding the date of that let- 
 ter, that I afliime the amount to have been 
 
 at
 
 C 21 U 
 
 at the fame period ^8,097,082. Both of 
 thefe could not be right : the queftion is, 
 which of them was entitled to the prefe- 
 rence. 
 
 It pleafes Mr. Anderfon to fay, that if it 
 be fuppofed I had read the i3th paragraph 
 in this letter from the Court of Directors, 
 it would follow I had committed an error 
 on purpofe; and, as I certainly did read this 
 igth paragraph, it might feem that I ought 
 to plead guilty. Before, however, I receive 
 fentence, I beg I may be allowed to ftate, 
 that previous to feeing the igth paragraph, 
 I favv the 12th, which, when you have pe- 
 rufed, you will, 1 think, admit, either that 
 your Accountant reads backwards, and, 
 therefore, though he got as far as 13, 
 never reached 12 ; or that, notwithftand- 
 ing his extreme averfion to miftatements, 
 he is not over choice in the feleclion of his 
 materials for forming an accurate opinion. 
 
 The lath paragraph is in thefe words : 
 " We doubt not but that if the inveftiga- 
 " tion of the amount of arrears of every 
 " defcription were purfued with accuracy, 
 " a much larger amount of debts would 
 
 " appear
 
 L 22 3 
 
 ' to have been owing in 1786 than we have 
 " any where computed upon ; but the mate- 
 " rials before us are too defective to enable us 
 " to go through fuch an invejligation in a fa- 
 " tisfaStory manner. The coniequence, how- 
 " ever, of the omiffion of arrears has oblig- 
 " ed us, in the computations we have made 
 " of the total of our Indian debts, to ftate 
 " the amount at a later period greater than 
 " at the former, and prevents our forming 
 " any accurate opinion of the progreffive fate 
 " of our affairs in India" 
 
 So much for the authority of the account 
 to which Mr. Anderfon gives a preference ; 
 and now, Sir, let me beg your attention to 
 the paper which, on the fame fubjecl:, I have 
 adopted. It is the official paper delivered 
 from the India Houfe, unaccompanied by 
 any doubts or difficulties ; it is figned by 
 Mr. Wright, Auditor of Indian accounts, 
 a gentleman who has been too long tried in 
 that public capacity to be fufpe6ted either 
 of error or fabrication ; and, which is moft 
 extraordinary, it is a paper quoted by Mr. 
 Anderfon himfelf, in ftating the amount of 
 the affets on the soth April, 1786. It is 
 plain, therefore, that your Accountant had 
 
 read
 
 C 2 3 3 
 
 read it, and it remains for him to give us 
 fome good reafon, why he rather chofe to 
 rely on the opinion of the Court of Direc- 
 tors, founded as they themfelves admit on 
 defective materials, than to adopt an official 
 ftatement for the accuracy of which the 
 vouchers were at hand. 
 
 In examining the refults brought forward 
 by Mr. Anderfon in his publication, I (hall 
 have occafion to confider this comparative 
 ftatement of the debts in a different point ot 
 view ; for the prefent it is fufficient for me 
 to have (hewn, that the authority I have 
 adopted is fuch as perfectly jiiftifies me in 
 any calculations I may have founded upon 
 it. In truth, if we do not agree that all the 
 accounts, officially figned by the refpeclive 
 Accountants at home and abroad, are to be 
 aflumed as correct, we muft abandon the 
 idea of pretending to inform ourfelves of 
 the ftate of the Company ; in no other way 
 can we have any data to proceed upon, and 
 profit or lofs muft become a matter rather 
 of opinion than figures. To the Eaft India 
 Company themfelves, you will alfo permit 
 me to fay, you have, for the fake of venting 
 a little fpleen againft me, done an elTential 
 
 injury,
 
 C s 4 3 
 
 injury, and difpofed men to turn with dif- 
 guft and contempt from the accounts they 
 annually deliver. What real or fatisfaclory 
 information can be expected from merchants 
 \vho, between the months of March and 
 May 1790, make a difference of \ ,670,000, 
 in ftating the amount of what they owed on 
 the 3oth of April, 1786 ? and how are we 
 to place any confidence in what they publifh 
 as the amount of their debts in 1790, when 
 they {hew themfelves fo ignorant of what 
 their fituation was four years antecedent to 
 that period ? There is, Sir, a fufpicious 
 myftery in all this. Let us fee what light 
 we can obtain by examining the ftatement 
 of the Accountant to the Commiflioners for 
 the affairs of India. 
 
 Expofition
 
 Expofition of the Fallacy of the Accounts pubUJbed 
 by the Accountant to the Commijfioners for the 
 Affairs of India, and Remarks upon the Con- 
 clufwns to be drawn from them. 
 
 THE general refult of Mr. Anderfon's 
 review of the Affairs of the Eaft India Com- 
 pany for four years, ending in 1791, is to 
 be found in the fifth chapter of his publica- 
 tion. The four preceding chapters are in 
 that brought to a point, imagined, I confefs, 
 with extreme ingenuity, and fo managed as 
 to afiume a very flattering and plaufible 
 appearance. 
 
 Your Accountant's object is, to fhew 
 that the improvement in the Company's 
 fituation in four years has amounted to 
 4,244,336. To prove this, two ftate- 
 ments are produced ; the Jirjl of which 
 affirms that, on a cbmparifon of debts and 
 aflets, as they flood, at home and abroad, 
 at the commencement and clofe of the 
 period in queftion, there appears the im- 
 provement contended for, viz. 4,244,336 ; 
 and thefecond explains the aclual refources, 
 E from
 
 C 26 3 
 
 from which this improvement is fuppofed 
 to have been derived, to have amounted, in 
 the four years, to 4,209,96*2 . " The re- 
 " fults thus drawn," fays Mr. Anderfon, 
 tf from accounts very diftincl: from each 
 " other being fo nearly equal, is a fufficient 
 " proof of their general correclnefs." 
 
 The ftatements being made in this man- 
 ner to depend upon and confirm each other, 
 it is plain, that whatever tends to invalidate 
 either, muft be fatal to both. If I fhew, 
 that, in the amount of debt faid to be de- 
 creafed, there is a moft material error, all 
 the reft of your figures neceflarily become 
 faulty ; becaufe, if you are right in the af- 
 fets, then you muft be wrong in the re- 
 fources, and if you are right in the re- 
 fources, then rauft you be wrong in the af- 
 fets. You have either taken credit for a 
 certain fum without {hewing how you got 
 it ; or you have obtained a certain fum 
 without (hewing how you have diipofed 
 of it. 
 
 I deny that the debts in India have, in 
 the four years, decreafed in the proportion 
 your Accountant contends for ; and I affirm, 
 
 hat
 
 C 27 1 
 
 that his ftatement is erroneous to the 
 amount of .1,594,327. There can be no 
 difficulty in underftanding the iflue be- 
 tween us. 
 
 I have before obferved that, in my way of 
 viewing the queftion, I was only entitled to 
 bring forward the regular charges incurred 
 between 1786 and 1790, becaufe my object 
 was to fhew, from an investigation of the 
 current income and expenditure of the 
 Company, what, on an average of four 
 years, was the annual fum gained. What- 
 ever was an old claim recovered, ought to 
 have been thrown out of the amount of re- 
 ceipt ; and whatever was a former arrear 
 difcharged, ought to have been excluded 
 from the payments. Accordingly, from 
 the Bombay Charges in 1786-7 I deducted 
 464,000, becaufe Stated to be a fum arif- 
 ing from arrears, and I Ihould have been 
 equally justified in rejecting that part of 
 the Receipts from Land Revenue which is 
 defcribed as " Balances of former Years." 
 From the manner in which the accounts 
 are made up it was, however, impracticable 
 to do this, and therefore I have been 
 obliged to give the Company credit for 
 E 2 more
 
 C 28 3 
 
 more than their due, by whatever the 
 amount of thofe balances may be. 
 
 The ingenuity of Mr. Anderfon has con- 
 trived to draw up a ftatement with ad- 
 vantages annexed to it beyond what my 
 imagination, fertile in deception as he feems 
 to confider it, could have conceived. He 
 accufes me of having charged both the ex- 
 pences incurred, and the expences defrayed, 
 which, had I done it, certainly would have 
 been a bold meafure, but in point of enter- 
 prize and dexterity would, notwithftanding, 
 have fallen infinitely fhort of your Account- 
 ant's feat, who has given us what he calls 
 the " Excefs of Revenue," without deduct- 
 ing either one or the other. The Intereft in- 
 currred on the Debt in India he omits, be- 
 caufe it was not actually paid ; but why 
 the Amount of Arrears which were de- 
 frayed is alfo kept back, requires con- 
 fiderable explanation, unlefs you have de- 
 termined, that the Company (hall neither 
 be charged with what they ought to pay, 
 nor what they do pay. The amont of 
 Charges defrayed at Bombay in the years 
 1786-7 was By. Rs. 88,04,489*; whereas 
 
 * See No. 8, Papers laid before the Houfe, 1791. 
 
 Mr.
 
 Mr. Anderfon has taken them at only 
 
 By. Rs. 48,04,489 *, and confequently made 
 
 the fame deduction that I did, viz. 40 lacks, 
 
 or ^464,000 , which fum he has no where brought 
 
 to account I am the more furprifed at this, 
 
 becaufe it appears that be was aware of the 
 
 faff relative to thefe Bombay Arrears, and has 
 
 mentioned the exact amount in the ^Qih page of 
 
 his publication ; fo that, if it be fuppofed he 
 
 read the firft part of his work before he 
 
 wrote the laft, it would follow, to fpeak in his 
 
 own ftyle, that " the error was committed 
 
 " for the purpofe of giving a ftatement that 
 
 " fhould apparently fupport the inferences 
 
 " which it was previoufly intended to ex- 
 
 hibit." 
 
 The "Excefs of Revenue above the Payments" 
 
 is ftated by Mr. Anderfon (page 79} at 3,956,246 
 
 Dedudl amount defrayed omitted to be charged, 464,000 
 
 And the real Excefs of Revenue above Pay- 
 
 ments, is 3,4.92,246 
 
 The next error to be fhewn, is in your 
 Accountant's ftatement of what has been 
 fupplied from the refources of India to car- 
 goes, &c. (fee page 80 and 81). This he 
 
 * See Mr. Anderfon's Appendix, No. 5. 
 
 makes
 
 C 30 3 
 
 makes to amount to ^4,124,072 ; which is 
 more than even Mr. Anderfon has ftated 
 the excefs of revenue to have afforded by 
 /* 167,826. This difference, which is ab- 
 folutely necefiary to keep all his machinery 
 together, and make the feparate parts fit, 
 Mr. A. endeavours, in the following man- 
 ner, to perfuade us really was fupplied : 
 " Although the Accounts of the Annual 
 " Revenues of the Provinces in India in- 
 " elude all the large Articles of Receipt, 
 " yet various fmall particulars are omitted, 
 " which, in the aggregate for feveral years, 
 " afford confiderable aid to the Indian Re- 
 " fources. Thefe confift of Debts recovered 
 "from Individuals, Sums overdrawn refunded, 
 " Gain on Remittances, and at the Factories, 
 " Fees paid, &c. of which, a variety of par- 
 " ticulars may be found under the heads of 
 " Extraordinary Receipts in Nos. 27, 28, 
 " and 34 of the Accounts for 1791, and 
 " Nos. i, 2, 3, 4, 5 of thofe for 1/90, printed 
 " on the 24th of March *." 
 
 There is no doubt that, in the papers 
 referrred to, there are to be found, under 
 the head of Extraordinary receipts, all the 
 
 * See Mr. Anderfon's pamphlet, page 78. 
 
 par-
 
 C 3' 3 
 
 particulars mentioned by Mr. Anderfon ; 
 but, in his exultation at having difcovered 
 a new refource, he has totally overlooked 
 the oppofite fide of the account, and omit- 
 ted to make any mention of the Extra- 
 ordinary Difburfements. The fame docu- 
 ments which he has quoted fhew thefe to 
 confift of" Sundry Adjiijlments on Remittances, 
 Lofs in Mini and on Remittances, Cuftoms re- 
 funded, Sundry Balances, Paid on Account of 
 Fees, Bills paid, Lojfes at Fadtvries" and a 
 variety of fmall " Advances" in different 
 departments, (exclufive of the inveftment) 
 all of which, together, more than counter- 
 balance the amount obtained by Extra. 
 Receipts. I will not fay, this is " a grofs 
 " miftatement," but I am fure it is a moft 
 extraordinary overfight in Mr. Anderfon, 
 to have feen only one fide of the account, 
 and to have turned away his eyes from 
 the other. 
 
 Thefe two errors rectified will make the 
 account ftand thus : 
 
 India,
 
 n s* 3 
 
 India, by Mr. Anderfon's ftatement, page 81, 
 has, in the four years, fupplied to Cargoes, 
 &c. 4,124,072 
 
 And it has been fhewn, that the Excefs of Re- 
 venue in four years, deducing 464,000 
 omitted by Mr. Anderfon, was, 3,492,246 
 
 India, therefore, has fupplied more than it pro- 
 duced, and confequently muft have encreafed 
 
 its debt by, 631,826 
 
 But it appears by Mr. Anderfon's fhewing, 
 (pages 79, 80) that the " Excefs of Re- 
 venue " was obtained by adding the Intereft, 
 payable at Bombay within the four years, 
 to the Principal ; and this Intereft, amount- 
 ing to 670,976, muft certainly have en- 
 creafed the debt, 670,976 
 
 Therefore your Accountant's own ftatements 
 prove an Encreafe of Debt in India, in 
 the four years, - 1,302,802 
 
 There is however another fum 
 ftill to be added. By No. 27 
 of the Papers 1791, it ap- 
 pears that the Advances for 
 the Bengal Inveftment in 
 1789-90 amounted to, C.Rs. 1,07,54,912 
 
 By Mr. Anderfon's Appendix, 
 No. 6, it appears that the 
 Prime Coft, including Char- 
 ges, of the Goods (hipped 
 for Englandin 1 789-90 was, 78,57,288 
 
 The difference between thefe 
 two fums makes an addition 
 to the debt, . 269,762 
 
 The Total Encreafe of the Debt In India in the 
 
 four yean has therefore been, - - 1,572,564 
 
 Now,
 
 C 33 ] 
 
 Now, in order that the extent of Mr. 
 Anderfon's miftatement may be accurately 
 under flood, I will lay before you his own 
 figures, and, for the fake of the argument, 
 admit them to be correct. 
 
 In his Appendix, No. j, he ftates the Amount 
 of the Debts in India, on the 3oth of April 
 1786, to be, /9>773> 8 S 
 
 And on the goth of April 1790, to be, 7)069,337 
 
 Decreafe of Debt in four years, - 2,704,468 
 
 In the note to page 52 he dates the Amount of 
 Debt transferred from India to England in 
 the fame period to be, 2,682,505 
 
 Your Accountant therefore makes the Amount 
 of Debt paid off'm India in four years to be 
 only, 21,963 
 
 But he has himfelf (hewn how ever)' {hilling 
 obtained, or even pretended to have been 
 obtained, has been difpofed of ; fo that this 
 fum, fmall as it is, muft be an error ; and 
 adding to it the Amount of New Debt 
 which I have proved to have been incurred 
 within the four years, - i*57 2 >564 
 
 Mr. Anderfon has mijlated the Delts of the 
 Company, in his comparison of them between 
 
 April 1786 and April 1790, by no lefs 
 
 than - .i,594>5 2 7 
 
 The
 
 c 34 n 
 
 Thefrft part of your Accountant's ftate- 
 ment being thus proved erroneous to fo 
 very great an amount, renders it perfectly 
 unneceflary to inveftigate ihzfecond ; from 
 the nature of the accounts it muft be inac- 
 curate in a correfponding fum, and it would 
 be an idle wafte of time to enter into a dif- 
 cuflion of the various errors out of which 
 that fum arifes. 
 
 But, though 7 am not called upon to en- 
 quire further, you are bound to take care 
 that your Accountant fliould immediately 
 come forward, and afford the public fatis- 
 faclion upon an error of fuch material im- 
 f port as that which I have pointed out. You 
 
 v will be pleafed to obferve that Mr. Ander- 
 fon, if he has been right in {iating the 
 debts in 1786 at 9,773,805, has detected 
 the Company in mifreprefenting their debts 
 in 1790 by no lefs than 1,594,527 ; and 
 the Auditor of Indian Accounts, if he was 
 right in Hating their debts in 1790 at 
 7,069,337, convicts the Accountant to the 
 Commiffioners for the Affairs of India of hav- 
 ing officially given a falfe credit to the Com- 
 
 j\ pany of 1,594,5*7. This, Sir, is fo very 
 myfterious a bufinefs that no time ought to 
 
 be
 
 C 35 3 
 
 be loft in explaining it. If I am any 
 thing like correct in my figures, it is ob- 
 vious that either the Company have de- 
 ceived you, or you, by your Accountant, 
 have mifled the public. The readinefs with 
 which I have met the inveftigation or Mr. 
 Anderfon on every point where he has at- 
 tacked my ftatement, will, I truft, fuggeft 
 to you the neceflity of defending your 
 accounts in a fimilar manner ; for furely that 
 explanation which pride tells a private gen- 
 tleman he owes to his own character, a 
 fenfe of duty will convince the Board of 
 Controul they cannot refufe to enter into. 
 Do not, however, miftake me, and fuppofe 
 that I am inviting a controverfy, fince I can 
 with much truth aflure you that nothing is 
 further from my intentions than again to 
 interfere on this fubject. I conceived myfelf 
 bound to defend the ftatement which I ori- 
 ginally publifhed and the grounds on which 
 I reft my vindication being now laid before 
 the public (who will make their own com- 
 ments upon them) I have done with Eaft 
 India accounts. There is nothing very fe^ 
 ducing in the ftudy of Indian papers, and, 
 as I have no . natural difpofition to act s 
 eftablifhed cenfor over the Company, I leave 
 F s it
 
 C 36 3 
 
 it to thofe to watch their future operations 
 who, from parliamentary fituation, fhall feel 
 it to be incumbent upon them fo to do. 
 
 But it might feem as if I were inclined to 
 treat Mr. Anderfon as cavalierly as he 
 has treated all thofe gentlemen who have 
 written on the other fide of the queftion, if 
 I were to conclude without taking fome fur- 
 notice of his pamphlet. Let me, therefore, 
 having fhewn wherein he is wrong, haften 
 to avail mylelf of his fuperior intelligence 
 on thofe points, where I bow to his autho- 
 rity, and acknowledge him to have afforded 
 us moft important information. 
 
 Mr. Anderfon has enabled us correctly to 
 afcertain, what the value of the territories in 
 India is, confidered as an eftate what the 
 advantage is which the Company derive from 
 the pofTeffion of that eftate what the fitu- 
 ation of the proprietors of India ftock would 
 be upon a general fettlement of their affairs 
 and, laftly, what ground there is to ima- 
 gine that Parliament will take the territo- 
 ries, and fecure their prefent dividend of 
 8 per cent, to the Proprietors. 
 
 The
 
 c 37 n 
 
 The nett revenues of India are ftated by Mr. SdSf w 
 
 Anderfon to have amounted in the four Eftatc. 
 
 years to (a) 3,956,246 
 
 But as this was procured by poftponing the 
 payment of the annual intereft incurred 
 on the Bombay debt, the amount of the 
 intereft fo poftponed muft, in this view of 
 the fubject, be deduced, in order to fhew 
 the value of India as an eftate. Dedud 
 therefore (b) ... 670,976 
 
 Surplus Revenue in India 3,285,270 
 Deduct " Expences incurred at home on 
 
 account of the pofleflions in India" (c) 893,226 
 
 The nett value of the Company's eftate in 
 
 India in four years was - - 2,392,044 
 
 Orperann. - 598,011 
 
 (d) The quantity of Indian goods fold in the Advanta 
 
 four years amounted to - - 
 
 (d) Their prime coft and feveral charges of ny from the 
 
 V ' poffeffionof 
 
 freight, cultoms, &c. to - 75"> 2 33 th <= territo- 
 
 __ rial Rcvc- 
 406, 4 82 nUC " 
 
 Add to this the amount which Mr. Ander- 
 fon ftates the Revenues of India to have 
 furnifhed in thefe four years to the aid of 
 the Company's treafuries, or the payment 
 of commercial charges, over and above all 
 the expences incurred at home on account 
 of the territorial pofleflions (e) - 3,230,846 
 
 The apparent advantage derived from India / 
 
 was 3 6 3732 8 V 
 
 (a) Anderfon, page 79. (b) Ditto, page 79-80. (c) Ditto, page 81-2. 
 d) Ditto, page 86. (e) Ditto, page 83-4. 
 
 Carried forward 3,637,328 
 
 3547S8
 
 C s8 3 
 
 Brought forward 3.637,328 
 From this, however, muft be deduced 
 
 (a) Indian goods in warehoufe id 
 March 1 787 - 1,158,617 
 
 Ditto, ditto, ditto, ift 
 
 March 1791 - 826,842 
 
 V^lue of goods in warehoufe lefs 
 
 1791 than 1787 33 1 >775 
 
 (b) The cargo of the Houghton not 
 brought to account - I^'SS 
 
 (c) Half the expences incurred for 
 
 St. Helena - 57>35S 
 
 (b) Half the amount of freight incur- 
 red more than charged againft the 
 goods fold - 240,017 
 
 (b) Jialf a debt incurred in the de- 
 partment of {hipping 6,262 
 
 (b) Intereft on bills drawn from 
 
 India - - 8,829 
 
 (d) Half of the Intereft incurred 
 
 on Bonds 205,258 
 
 (e) Three Years Intereft, at 4 per 
 Cent, on 1,396,554, Prime 
 
 (a) Papers of 1791, No. 38. (b) Andeifon, page 88. (c) Ditto 87. 
 
 (d) Anderson's, Appendix, No. 3 and 4. 
 
 (e) These articles are taken arbitrarily, and may be subjeft to altera- 
 tion in favour of a greater or less sum. Respecting the Insurance, I 
 apprehend there can be no material difference of opinion, and as to the 
 three years Interest on the Prime Cost of Goods &c. I cannot see how 
 less can be charged from the time of the first Investiture of the money ad- 
 vanced for them, and the realizing their Produce from the sales of the 
 goods procured by them in India. The total Amount would be 167,586 
 but I have deducted one half of what the Company are supposed to have 
 paid for loans, under charges of merchandize ; (vide ante page 18). The 
 Articles I have set down at half, are those of which it was impossible to 
 distinguish what proportion ought to be charged to China, and what to 
 ltdia. 
 
 Carried forward 963,945 3,637,32,8
 
 n 39 3 
 
 Brought forward, 963,045 3,637,328 
 
 Coft: of Goods, &c. exported to 
 
 India in the four years, - 125,586 
 
 (b) Infurance out on ditto, at 3^ 
 
 per Cent. 48,879 
 
 (b) Infurancehomeon4,i 83,830, 
 
 being the Prime Coft of Goods 
 
 Sold and the Houghton's Cargo, 
 
 at 3 per Cent, 146,434 
 
 Total to be deduced, 1,283,1544 
 
 Apparent Balance in Favor of the Company, 2,353,384 * 
 
 But, to obtain this Balance, it has been (hewn 
 that a Debt was incurred in India amount- 
 ing to, 1,594,527 V 
 
 The actual Advantage, therefore, derived by 
 the Company from their Poffeffions in India 
 in four years was, 758,857 </ 
 
 Or, on the average, per Annum, 189,714 <y 
 
 It is from this fum the proprietors ought 
 to have regulated their dividend, and when 
 the capital they employ is confidered, and 
 the fum that ought to be fet apart to an- 
 fwer contingencies is eftimated, I leave it 
 to any honeft merchant to decide what that 
 dividend ought to have been, or whether 
 there ought to have been any. 
 
 (a) The
 
 Situation of fa\ The Debt due in India, 3oth April 1790, 7,069,337 
 
 the Propric- * 
 
 torsonaGc- _ , , , ,. _ 
 
 nerai Settle- (b) The Debt due in England (exclufive of 
 
 * the Ca P ital Stock ) on the lft of March 
 
 1791, 8,978,436 
 
 (b) Debt transferred from India to England, 
 
 due ift of March 1791, - 2,189,336 
 
 Total of Debts to be difcharged before the 
 
 Proprietors are entitled to make any Divi- _ 
 dend amongft themfelves, - - .18,237,109 
 
 To difcharge this, they had 
 (a) Aflets in India, 3Oth 
 April 1790, - - 6,265,221 
 (a) Aflets in China, I4th 
 Feb. 1790, - - 79,241 
 
 Aflets in England, i ft March 
 
 19,952,037 
 
 So that the Proprietors who have fubfcribed to 
 the Capital Stock ^5,748,000, would have 
 to divide amongft them, - 1,714,928 
 
 That this lofs of Four Millions mud fall 
 upon the Proprietors, Mr. Anderfon has 
 very corre6lly explained when, fpeaking of 
 the Capital Stock, he properly obferves, 
 that " the value of each refpeclive lhare 
 
 (a) Anderson's Appendix, No. i. 
 
 (b) Appendix, No. 2. The Capital Stock is called 5 ,000,000, but 
 the rate at which it was subscribed makes the real Amount paid by the 
 
 Proprietors 5,748,000. 
 
 muft
 
 C 41 1 
 
 " muft depend altogether on the balance 
 " which lhall remain after the difppfal of 
 " their property, and the payment of their 
 " feveral debts {a)" 
 
 Still the title of Bankrupts cannot, in ftrict- 
 nefs, be applied to the Eail India Company 
 upon the foregoing ftatement, becaufe the 
 lofs is limited to the Proprietors, and there 
 appears fufficient to anfwer the demands of 
 the Creditors. You are, however, to re- 
 collect, that, in the preceding account 
 I have taken Mr. Anderfon's word for 
 the Amount of the Debts, and arTumed 
 the Aflets to be convertible into the fum at 
 which they are valued by the Company. 
 But, if it be not too much to fay that (b) 
 io per Cent, is a lofs reafonably to be ex- 
 pected upon the realization of the value of 
 the efre6ts in queftion, the Company would 
 appear to be in a ftate of actual infolvency, 
 and that too without mentioning the 
 1 594"5 2 7' which, if Mr. Anderfon has 
 been accurate in his publication, ought cer- 
 tainly to be added to the amount of their 
 debts. 
 
 To counteract any bad effects which 
 might ariie from this gloomy view of the 
 G fubject,
 
 C 42 3 
 
 {abject, a more flattering profpe6l has 
 lately been held out to us. It has been 
 infmuated, that Parliament would take 
 from the Company their Territorial PoJJef- 
 fwns, and fecure to tbe Proprietors the 
 prefent Divide fid of 8 per Cent. The Ac- 
 countant to the Commiflioners for the Af- 
 fairs of India has enabled us thoroughly to 
 examine the probability of this. I will 
 only aflume, on the one hand, that the Ex- 
 pence of tbe War in India will create a debt of 
 jive millions, and, on the other, that tbe Terri- 
 torial Pofcffions are worth ten years pur chafe : 
 every other figure {hall be accurately copied 
 from Mr. Anderfon. 
 
 (a) See Anderfon, page 31. 
 
 (b) I have ftated the lofs on the Aflets in this manner, 
 becaufe it is moft eafily to be comprehended, and the ob- 
 ject here is not to prove to what extent the Company may 
 be infolvent, but merely to mew that they are fo. If a 
 complete inveftigation was to be entered into, the value of 
 the Company 's AfTets would be reduced at lealt 40 per Cent. 
 Immenfe lofles would arife on the advances to the manufac- 
 turers in India, the Debts outftanding (particularly that from 
 the Nabob of Arcot; the Stores and Export Goods in India, 
 the value of Goods in Warehoufe at home, the value of the 
 India Houfe, Warehoufes, Ships, Claims on Government 
 ibr Manilla expedition, &c. &c. &c. 
 
 The
 
 C 43 3 
 
 The nett value of the Company's Eftate in 
 India has been fhewn to be 598,011 per 
 ann. which at 10 years purchafe would 
 be worth - 5,980,110 
 
 But as it fhall be fuppofed that Government 
 are to adopt the whole of what the Com- 
 pany pofUfs in India, their aflets there fhall 
 be added, and that too even at their own 
 valuation - 6,265,221 
 
 The mmoft value of what the Company have 
 
 to fell in India is 12,245,331 
 
 Now, it is expe<5ted, as the confideration 
 of being put into pofleflTion of thefe valu- 
 able premiles, that the public fhould take 
 upon themielves the following debts : 
 
 The debt in India - jC7' c ^9'337 
 
 The transferred debt, which Mr. Dundas has 
 declared mult always be confidered as fol- 
 lowing and being a burthen on the ter- 
 ritories - (a) 1,189,336 
 The debt incurred by the prefent war efti- 
 
 mated as low as - 5,000,000 
 
 Therefore the price expected is - 13,248,673 
 And the (b^ utmofl value of the thing is 1 2,245,331 
 
 The price more than the value 1,003,342 
 
 G 2 I am 
 
 (a) As the five millions new debt is aflumed up to this day, the amount 
 ef the transferred debt difcharged at home fince 1791 is, to the amount of 
 a million, dedu&ed. 
 
 (b) With refpeft to the value of what the Company call their dead lock t 
 1 confidcr it as being a part of the territory. It chicily conaits of build- 
 ings
 
 C 44 3 
 
 I am afraid you would think I laughed 
 at you, if I were to aik, whether you 
 could ever ferioufly propofe to give fuch a 
 premium for an incumbrance ; and ftill 
 more fhould I fear offending you by talk- 
 ing about an annuity of 8 per cent, to be 
 fecured to the Proprietors of India ftock as 
 an addition to the bargain. It may not, 
 however, be improper to obferve, that if 
 any advantage arifing from conqueft in the 
 prefent war Ihould be fuggefted, as adding 
 to the value of the Company's pofleffions 
 in India, it will be neceflary, before the 
 argument can have any weight, to fhew that 
 the new acquifitions produce a nett income 
 Of 566,000; otherwife they will not pay 
 the intereft at which the five millions ex- 
 pended has been obtained. 
 
 Thefe, Sir, are the general conclufions 
 which Mr. Anderfon's publication has en- 
 abled us to form, and if, in fubftance, they 
 are correct, it is obvious that the whole re- 
 liance of the Eaft India Company muft be 
 placed upon the China trade, as the only 
 
 trigs zndfortifcations, which even if it were practicable to fell them fepa. 
 lately, could not be fold without deftroying the value of the Company'* 
 eitatc. They are in truth the beft title deeds they poffcf*. 
 
 fource
 
 C 45 3 
 
 fource from which they can hope for relief. 
 The nature of that trade, its operation, and 
 confequences, are fubjects foreign to the 
 prefent difcufTion. It is fufficient for me to 
 obferve that, at any rate, it cannot be 
 looked upon as a very permanent afliftance 
 to the Company, becaufe if, in a national 
 point of view, it is detrimental, no par- 
 tiality for any particular body of men ought 
 to encourage its continuance ; and, if it be 
 fraught with general advantage, there can 
 be no pretence for vefting it in individuals 
 as a monopoly. The exclufion of Ireland 
 from this branch of commerce is, particu- 
 larly, fuch an act of injuitice as no argu- 
 ments can reafonably defend, and perhaps 
 no meafures, for any great length of time, 
 effe6l. 
 
 It is to the ftate of the Company as con- 
 neffed with India that we muft turn our at- 
 tention, when the renewal of the charter 
 comes into queftion : and a moft important 
 and ferious difcuflion it will afford. The 
 minds of men have been worked up to a 
 pitch of extravagant expe6tation, with re- 
 gard to fome advantages which are fuppo- 
 fed to be near at hand. On what thofe ex- 
 pectations
 
 t 46 3 
 
 peclations are built, I know not, but this I 
 am fure of, that it will add but little to the 
 credit of the Houfe of Commons, if they 
 feperate this feflion without taking fome 
 fteps to inform themfelves of the Company's 
 real fit nation. The year is perhaps too far 
 advanced to inveftigate their extenfive con- 
 cerns in all their various branches, and fi- 
 nally to decide upon the fate of the Charter : 
 fuch a work would require more labour 
 and attention than, poflibly, at this time can 
 be fpared. But I am certain that a Com- 
 'mittee, appointed by Parliament, might, in 
 one week, produce a report abundantly 
 fufficient to elucidate and aicertain all thofe 
 leading points which muft ferve as the 
 foundation of future arrangements. Let 
 fuch a Committee be fairly and impartially 
 appointed, and the Eaft India Company 
 will, in a few days, appear, either a great 
 and opulent body entitled to refpect and 
 confidence, or a fociety of fpeculative ad- 
 venturers, themfelves catching at, or hold- 
 ing out to others, an empty bubble. It 
 will be fecn too, whether the object of 
 thofe who fupport them, be commercial ad- 
 vantage to the nation, or extenfive patro- 
 nage to themfelves. 
 
 If 

 
 c 47 : 
 
 If the Commiffioners for the Affairs of 
 India, at the head of whom you fo ably 
 prefide, ftill feel confident in the ftrength 
 and accuracy of thofe accounts which they 
 have, by their Accountant, given to the 
 Public, they can have no objection to the 
 appointment of fuch a Committee ; if not, 
 we muft continue in doubt, whether the 
 Company be thriving, or bankrupts ; and all . 
 we can be certain of will be, that the patron- 
 age which, through the medium of the Court 
 of Directors, Adminiftration enjoys, is found 
 quite great enough to fatisfy their prefent 
 demands, and much too great to be expofed 
 to the hazard of any inveftigation. 
 
 I have the honour to be, 
 
 &c. &c. &c. 

 
 27 95
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 Form L9-32m-8,'58(5876s4)444 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 i63 Tj 
 
 P2 Letter to the Rt 
 Hon. Henry Dui 
 on Affairs of 
 East India Company 
 
 A 000017757 
 
 DS 
 
 A2P2 
 1792 
 v.fc