Substance of a Sneech De 
 livered ^t the East In- 
 dia' House 
 
 / 
 
 By 
 Thomas Henchman
 
 Eqft India Affairs. 
 
 SUBSTANCE 
 
 OF 
 
 A SPEECH 
 
 DELIVERED AT THE 
 
 EAST INDIA HOUSE, 
 
 BY 
 
 THOMAS HENCHMAN, ESQ. 
 
 AT 
 
 A SPECIAL GENERAL COURT, 
 
 Held on Thurfda,/, April 8, 1802, 
 
 ON THE SUBJECT OF 
 
 THE PRIVATE TRADE, 
 
 AS REPORTED BY 
 
 WILLIAM WOODFALL. 
 
 Xou&on : 
 
 PRINTED BY T. GILLET, SALISBURY-SQUARE. 
 
 1802.
 
 
 The Refolution moved at this Court by Mr. 
 TWINING, and fecorfded by Mr. HUDDLESTONE, 
 
 was as follows : 
 
 Refolved, That this Court confirm and approve the Proceed- 
 ings of the Court of Directors upon the Subject of the Private 
 Trade of India. That in their proceedings they have Shewn 
 themSelves, and the Court are convinced will always Shew them- 
 felves, defirous of prefcrving, by reafonable arrangements, that 
 good understanding with the Board of Commiffioners, which is 
 fo important to the interefts both of the Public and the Eaft 
 India Company ; but that the Court of Directors be authorised 
 to take Such further Steps as may appear to them neceffaiy for 
 the defence of thofe rights which have been Solemnly Sanctioned 
 to the Company by their charter, which are eflential to the in- 
 tereSts of the Public, as well as of the Company, and to the vio- 
 lation of which the Proprietors of Eaft India Stock can never 
 confent. 
 
 To this the following Amendment was moved 
 by Mr. IMPEY, and Seconded by Mr. HENCHMAN : 
 
 Refolved, That the queStion of Private Trade between India 
 and Britain, on which fuch oppofite opinions are holden by per- 
 Sons of the higheft authority, appears to this Court to involve 
 considerations of the utnnoft importance, as well to the Eaft 
 India Company as to the Maritime, Commercial, and Political 
 Interefts of this Kingdom ; and this Court is of opinion, that 
 previous to the final arrangement of a permanent fyStem, a full 
 and fair experiment Should be made, as propoSed by the Board 
 of Commiffioners for the Affairs of India. 
 
 The numbers were, 
 
 For the original Motion 134 
 
 Again ft it - - 32 
 
 Majority 1O2
 
 SUBSTANCE 
 
 OF 
 
 [Among other obfervations in the courfe of his 
 fpeech, Mr. Bebb faid, I take the prefent oppor- 
 tunity of noticing a part of the Obfervations 
 publifhed by the honourable Proprietor (Mr. 
 Henchman) upon thefe Reports. I have been 
 quoted by name, and made to fay,* " The 
 " manufacturer prefers the employment of the 
 " Private Agent to that of the Company." I 
 never held fuch an opinion, nor are there any 
 fuch words in the letter alluded to. I have 
 too much refpect for the character of the ho- 
 nourable Proprietor, to fuppofe he designedly 
 made an erroneous quotation ; but I wifh he 
 had perufed my letter with more attention, be- 
 fore he quoted it.-j~ One other matter in 
 
 thefe 
 
 * See Obfervations, page 46. 
 
 t Mr. Henchman has, fince the General Court on the 8th 
 of April, read Mr. Bebb's letter of the i;th Nov. 1788, with 
 particular attention, and he fees no reafon to alter his opinion 
 that Mr. Bebb fays, " the manufadlurer prefers the employ 
 
 A 3 ment
 
 ( 6 ) 
 
 thefe Obfcrvations I muft alfo notice; an Ad- 
 vertifement of the Board of Trade in Bengal 
 is exhibited, in which the public are informed 
 of the freight paid by the Company on their 
 regular (hipping, amounting to 521. 15s. per 
 ton, and this freight is invidioufly contrail ed 
 with foreign freight, at l()l. per ton. The 
 occafion of this advcrtifement was this : There 
 were, at the time fpoken of, in the river of 
 Bengal, feveral Britifh-built fhips, fent out by 
 the Directors for the purpofc of bringing to 
 London the goods of individuals, and the Com- 
 pany's own gruff goods. They were fea- worthy 
 infurable fhips, which coil the Company, a? 
 near as I can recollect, from 14\. to 201. per ton. 
 \vhillt individuals were charged the Act of Par- 
 liament price of 221. I Os. per ton. But feveral 
 perfons wiftieel to put their goods on board the 
 Company's regular (hips, in order to benefit by 
 the low rate ui which the regular fhips are 
 always infured. It was fignified to them they 
 might do thi?, provided they would confcnt to 
 
 " ment of the private Agent to that of the Company.'' Mr. 
 Bebb, it is true, is correct, when he alFcrts tlu-fe very wordi 
 are not to be found in his letter. Mr. Henchman found them 
 in hu vj/ictal paper <y '/-(Jinnee, given with a manulmpt volume 
 of papers at the India-iloufe, of which Mr. Bebb's letter form- 
 ed a part ; and Mr. IlL-nchm.in is confirmed iii hii opinion, 
 that the couftruc'lion ib peiicctly iair, according to the tenor of 
 the lettei . 
 
 pay
 
 pay the fame freight as thefe (hips coft the Com- 
 pany. For their guidance, the particulars of the 
 freight was publifhed. The items were fpeci- 
 fically given, where they were fpecific ; where 
 they were contingent or uncertain, the fairefl 
 computation that could be made, was ftated. 
 Nothing was meant to miflead. The permiffion 
 to lade private goods in the regular (hips, in- 
 flead of being oppreffive to the trade of indi- 
 viduals, was an indulgence.*] 
 
 Mr. HENCHMAN rofe, and addrefled the Chair as 
 follows : 
 
 MR. CHAIRMAN, 
 
 BEFORE I enter upon the fubject which has 
 been already fo much debated this evening, I 
 fhall take the liberty of begging permiffion briefly 
 to explain the caufe of iny wifhing to have been 
 heard for a few minutes, on the first opening of 
 the bufmefs this day. I defired then to be heard 
 to a point of privilege, which, in moll affemblies, 
 is allowed to have precedence before any other fub- 
 
 * This indulgence was of fuch a defcription, that no one is 
 iiated to have taken the benefit of it. Mr. Bebb admits the 
 freight of thefe regular (hips coft the Company 52!. i^s. per 
 ton. which is a faft of fonie importance in the prefent queftion- 
 
 A 4 ject
 
 ( 8 ) 
 
 jeet whatever: and for the beft of reafons; becaufc, 
 if your privileges are infringed, you may foon have- 
 no opportunity of debating at all, for that may be 
 taken away alfo. I fhould then have dated, as I 
 fhall now, that the privileges of this Court have 
 been ferioufly infringed and difrefpecled and 
 by your own agents, the Court of Directors ; the 
 inftance is this: In May lad, when we had under 
 our confideration the very fubject we are ftill en- 
 gaged upon, this Court came to a refolution ap- 
 proving of the report and proceedings of the Di- 
 rectors, and inftrucling them to act without delay* 
 upon the principles therein contained. From 
 that time to this, for ten months, the Proprietors 
 have never been called together, or informed in 
 any way of what the Court of Directors had done 
 in confequence of thofe inflrucYions : at lad we 
 learn, by the papers now printed, that they found 
 fuch ferious difficulties as to prevent their execut- 
 ing the orders they had received; that they had 
 exerted themfclves to do fo, hut found fuch objec- 
 tions in the fuperior Board, that they had aban- 
 doned thofe inftructions, and entered into a new 
 and different negotiation, which they now lay be- 
 fore this Court. Sir, I mean to contend, that the 
 Directors, in this proceeding, have infringed the 
 privileges of the Court of Proprietors ; that they 
 were under the cxprcfs orders of this Court to 
 carry into execution without delay certain rcfolu-
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 lions they had approved ; and, in cafe they found 
 that impracticable, they had only one courfe to 
 take, which was, to come back to this Court to tell 
 the Proprietors fo, and to receive fuch further in- 
 fh'uclions as they might think proper to give 
 them. It may be very proper here to confider 
 the nature, circumftances, and importance of this 
 fubjecl. It concerns one of the largeft branches 
 of Britifh commerce ; and it had been fo fully dif- 
 cufled and reported upon by the Court of Di- 
 rectors, that they faid long ago all further delibe- 
 ration was necdlefs ; that they had afcertained 
 what was right to be done ; and they entreated 
 the General Court to give them the inftruclions 
 they received. Now, Sir, I muft infifr, that it is 
 a ferious breach and contempt of the privileges of 
 this Court, for the Directors, under fuch circum- 
 ftances, to let alidc the orders of their conftituents, 
 without telling them that they found themfelvcs 
 in fuch a predicament that they could not. fulfil 
 them : and betides that, entering upon a different 
 negotiation, which gave up the cilcntial points be- 
 fore intifled on, and at laft agreeing with his Ma- 
 jefly's Minifter, that a different fyftem fhould be 
 adopted ; but fuch a fyftem as the Directors them- 
 felvcs had reprefented to this Court would inevita- 
 bly bring ruin on the Company I mean the ad- 
 miffion of the claims of the Merchants, and Teak 
 Ships into the trade between England and the Eaft 
 
 Indies.
 
 Indies. My intention was, early in this day, if I 
 had been permitted to fpeak, to have ftated this 
 cafe, and to have propofed a rcfolution, vindicat- 
 ing our own rights, by declaring that we are 
 fenfible of this want of refpe6t on the part of the 
 Executive, to the Conftituent Body ; but, Sir, if 
 there prevails such an apathy in the Court, I shall 
 content myfelf with this notice of the matter; and 
 with only remarking, that if this difpofition con- 
 tinues, the Proprietors will be no more than tools 
 or inftruments in the hands of the Directors ; 
 called on when they pleafc, to vote juft what they 
 defirc; to be regarded, juft as much as they in 
 their good pleafure may think fit. By the motion 
 now propofed this Court is about to tell the Di- 
 rectors, as they were told before, that all they have 
 done fince May lad meets their approbation, al- 
 though it differs fo materially from their former 
 infiruclions; fhould that be carried, I think there 
 will be Icls reafon to cxpecl: they will pay any at- 
 tention to it, fiuce they have given fo lately this 
 unqualified inftance of treating the authority of 
 their Conliituents with contempt. An apology. 
 at any rate an explanation, is clue from the Di- 
 rcclors ; but I fhall not purfuc the fubjecl further : 
 It refts with the Court to difpofe of it as they 
 pleafc ; all I hope is, that they may not eftablifh 
 a dangerous precedent again It themfelves, by 
 pafling it over without notice. 
 
 I (hall
 
 c ) 
 
 I (hall now, Sir, proceed to make fome re- 
 marks upon the correfpondence that has pafled 
 between the Court of Directors and the Board of 
 Commiffioners ; and alfo upon the paragraphs 
 which were prepared for India by the Directors, 
 and the corrections which were made in them by 
 the Board of Commiffioners. Thefe paragraphs 
 were framed by the Directors, for the purpofe of 
 inftructing their Governor-General to carry the 
 eleven Proportions relative to Private Trade into 
 effect, which had received the fanction of the 
 Honfe of Commons on the 25th of November laft ; ^ 
 and I have no hefitation in declaring my opinion, 
 that, inftead of being formed with a fair and 
 honeft intention to that end, they feem to me 
 to be of a complexion that mult have a direct 
 contrary tendency, and have all the appearance of 
 being meant to defeat, inliead of promoting the 
 object of his Majefty's Minitter, which was a fair 
 experiment between Britifh and Indian Ships. ,\ 
 No wonder, then, that the Board of Commiffioners 
 difapproved and altered thefe paragraphs, and fub- 
 iiituted others in their ftead, which might anfwer 
 the real end and purpofe intended. Upon the 
 correfpondence I fhall not fay much ; it has been 
 well commented upon already : I (hall only re- 
 mark, that there is evidently throughout it a 
 fixed determination to oppofe the Board of Com- 
 miffioners in every application they make for 
 
 papers
 
 ( 14 ) 
 
 papers to guide them ; and fometimes very extra 
 ordinary reafons affiance! for fuch refufals. Fof 
 inftance, when Lord Dartmouth requefts to fee the 
 feparate opinions of the Directors, belonging to 
 their firft Report, arid which Mr. Dundas had 
 leen, they reply " The papers therein mentioned 
 " had only for object a free and full interchange 
 " of fentiments among the Members of the Spe- 
 " cial Committee, preparatory to their laying their 
 * c opinions upon the important matters referred to 
 " them before the Court at large ; that they made 
 " no part of the Report to the Court of the 27 tk 
 il cf January I a ft ; arid had never been made life 
 " of to influence the decision of the Court upon 
 " that fubjcct. The papers, therefore, are confi- 
 f dcred by the Members whofe fignatures they 
 '* bear, as well as by the Court at large, as pri- 
 " vate papers/' No\v, Sir, to determine this 
 point, it is only nccciiary to appeal to the Report 
 itfelf, which exprefsly refers every reader to them, 
 * : as containing much fupplementary detail, and 
 k large illulirations of a variety of relative topics." 
 But, Sir, the truth may be, that one Director 
 having publicly admitted, that his feparate opi- 
 nion would prove his difference in fentiment, and, 
 of courfo, that the Directors were not unani- 
 mous ; fo the Directors generally have pcrfifted in 
 refuling to produce thefe other feparate opinions., 
 ielt they lliuuld prove that others among them 
 
 alto
 
 { 13. ) 
 
 alfo differed. Such conftruclion I might have a 
 right to put upon their refufal ; and it muft tend 
 to increafe the fufpicions afloat, until fuch time 
 as thefe papers are produced. There can be no 
 fuch thing as private documents among public 
 officers. I infift, therefore, that this Court has a 
 right to the papers in queftton. 
 
 In the middle of the letters now printed (p. 15) 
 will be found one from the Minifter, who being 
 very reafonably alarmed at the Directors adver- 
 tifing for hiring fhips in the fummer, fays " I 
 " am induced by a ftrong fenfe of public duty, to 
 " reprefent to you the inexpediency of entering 
 " into fuch contracts, until the very important 
 " fubjecl, which has recently occafioned a corre- 
 " fpondence between the Commiffioners and your 
 fi Court, has undergone the inveftigation and dif- 
 " cuffion which, it may be prefumed, will take 
 " place in the enfuing feffion of Parliament." 
 In anfwer to which, the Chairman, with the appro- 
 bation of the Court, explained to the Minifter, 
 " that all the fhips they were about to take up 
 " were for the Company's own ufe and cargoes." 
 To which the Minifter replied, " That he had 
 * f good reafon to believe, that the additional (hip- 
 " ping was not folely intended for the purpofes 
 " which he defcribed ; but if it was agreed that 
 " it was only to be made ufe of in the manner 
 5 defcribed by the Chairman, his objections were 
 
 " removed."
 
 *' removed." After this clear underftanding, that 
 they were fo take np no Jhips for Private Trade at 
 that time, the Directors perfevere, and take up 
 many fhips ; which they now Jlate to I e Jhips taken 
 up fofitwely for Private Trade (Vide No. 38, 
 printed papers,) and not for the Company's ufe. 
 Sir, I do fay, that here is an appearance fo un- 
 handfome and fo uncandid on the part of the Di- 
 rectors, that it requires from them a very clear 
 explanation indeed. 
 
 I fhall not go into the letter which you, Mr. 
 Chairman, addrcfled to Mr. Addington, evidently 
 with the hope of alarming him refpecling this 
 inquiry. My learned Friend (Mr. Impey) has 
 done all that could be wifhed refpecling that 
 letter ; and, to be fure, it is a moft extraordi- 
 nary circum (lance, that you fhould in that letter 
 deprecate an inquiry into the Company's affairs, 
 as extremely dangerous ; and yet, in your prefent 
 Report, go very deep into that inquiry yourfelf. If 
 this was the only inconfiftcncy difcernible in thefe 
 papers, I fhould attribute it to accident ; but, Sir, 
 I find fo many others, that they are to be attri- 
 buted to fome other caufe. 
 
 I now, Sir, come to the Paragraphs which 
 the Court of Directors had prepared to accompany 
 the eleven Propofitions to India refpecling Private 
 Trade ; and if I do not fhew that they bear ftrong 
 evidence of a fettled intention to throw obftaclcs in 
 5 the
 
 the way of the Indian (hips, inftead of giving 
 facilities to them, I do not defire credit with this 
 Court for any thing I may fay here this day. No 
 wonder, Sir, that paragraphs of fuch a tenure 
 fhould be objected to by the Board of Commif- 
 lioners ; but there is much wonder, that the Di- 
 reclors (hould ever have framed them. Some hcfi- 
 tation, I think, has been exprefTcd in admitting, 
 that the Directors have had the intercourfe which 
 is imputed to them with the Treafury ; but, Sir, 
 there needs no referve on the occafion ; for my 
 honourable Friend (Mr. G. Johnftone) was right 
 in charging them with having been intriguing in 
 that quarter. I know it to be a fact ; we all know 
 that the Directors foon found that they could not 
 perfuade the Board of Commiffioners to give into 
 their views ; and therefore they went directly to 
 Mr. Vanfittart : they faw both the Secretary and 
 the Minifter ; they carried on the negotiation there 
 inftead of with their proper fuperiors, the Board of 
 Commiffioners. That they did this, I aflert on my 
 own knowledge. I alfo faw Mr. Vanfittart, on the 
 part of the Agents, and he told me the Direclors 
 had been with him, and he with them. There- 
 fore, there can exift no doubt that the Direclors 
 transferred their applications from the Board of 
 Commiffioners to the Treafury. And, Sir, were 
 you not there obliged to promife thofe conceffions,, 
 which it is now the object of thefc curious orders 
 
 to
 
 to defeat ? It may be fairly charged, that fuch is 
 the riefign ; for nothing elfe could induce the 
 framing them of the tenure they arc. To (hew 
 the fpirit throughout thefe orders, I fhall firft 
 notice a part of the introduction, where the Di- 
 rectors account for the Paragraphs being delayed : 
 They fay, " That when an honourable Member 
 " of the Houfe of Commons moved there, that 
 " the papers mould be laid before the Houfe, and 
 " his motion was acquiefced in, the tranfmiflion 
 " of the orders we had prepared was, in confluence, 
 " fufpended." Now, Sir, the very printed papers 
 which I hold in my hand, prove the contrary ; for 
 Sir William Pulteney moved for thefe papers the 
 beginning of June, 1801 ; but in (lead of fufpend- 
 ing their orders in confequence, the Directors ftili 
 went on contending with Lord Dartmouth for the 
 tranfmiflion of them, and never ccafed till, at the 
 end of two months, they found his Lord Hi 5 p wa 
 not to be moved, but pointedly told them, " That 
 " he dared not (hew a marked contempt for what 
 " might be the opinion of the Legislature ; that 
 " he dared not riik the adoption of meafures 
 " which may counteract the regulations of Parlia- 
 " ment." Such refpeclful attention to a branch 
 of the Legiflature mud meet with approbation 
 every where but behind that bar. My point, how- 
 ever, I think, is now made clear, that you did not 
 fufpend your orders in confiquexce of the Houfe of 
 
 Commons,
 
 ( >7 ) 
 
 Commons entertaining Sir William Pulteney's 
 motion for papers, but in confequence of Lord 
 Dartmouth's fpirited oppofition to your repeated 
 attempts to gain his confent to them. 
 
 Soon after, in thefe Paragraphs, the Directors 
 fay " Our oppofition to the introduction of In- 
 " dian fhips here did not arife from a defire to 
 " exclude them from mixing in the commercial 
 " fhipping of this country." Yet in your former 
 Report, and in your fpeeches, you had been 
 (Irongly arguing againft them ; becaufe they would 
 interfere with the (hip-builders, artificers, and 
 tradefmen of all forts ; and becaufe they would 
 throw Englifh feamen out of employ. When 
 you almoft recommended to the (hip-builders and 
 failors to rife up againft the proportion to allow 
 Indian fhips to come here, can it be faid you had 
 no defire to exclude them from mixing in the 
 commercial (hipping of this country ? I am afraid 
 this aflertion muft appear as ill founded as many 
 others. 
 
 I next find in thefe Paragraphs " That many 
 " publications have been induftrioufly difTemi- 
 " nated in this country againft the matter and 
 " reafoning of thefe Reports : and in thefe pub- 
 " lications there are not a few grofs errors in point 
 " of fact." Sir, I cannot refrain from faying, 
 that this is mere aflertion ; and I call upon the 
 author of this paragraph to (hew, to point out 
 
 B thrfc.
 
 C 18 ) 
 
 thefe grofs errors, which are fo glaring and fo nu- 
 merous: and I hope you will not have credit for the 
 fa 61, until you prove, by inftances, that your afier- 
 tion is well grounded ; which is not yet done in 
 any part of the papers you have printed. If, how- 
 ever, it (hould now, or at any future day, be fhewn 
 that I have fallen into errors of any defcription 
 (which I am far from thinking is not the cafe) I 
 (hall, I declare, be ready to confefs them. 
 
 The next, point in thefe Paragraphs I fhall 
 notice is that, where, after defcribing the Private 
 Trade as you think it ought to be, it is faid "This 
 u Remittance Trade, thus dcfcribcd, forms the 
 " point at which we wifh to flop." Why then 
 have you not done fo long ago ? No ; you have 
 admitted the Trade to go on much beyond this 
 point year after year ; and if you had not leen fome 
 other caufe, you would not have objected even now. 
 Sir, it is fair to charge, that confl ruing the acl of 
 Parliament as the Directors have done (viz. that all 
 the Private Trade fhould be confined to the returns 
 for Britifh exports, and the acquifitions of indivi- 
 duals in India, after deducting what might be takers 
 up by bills drawn by the Governments abroad on 
 the Court of Direclors), they ought long fmce in 
 duty to have ftopt the Private Trade altogether; for 
 there have been no Britilh manufactures exported 
 un their (hips; and the bills drawn from India an- 
 nually have exceeded all the fa v ings that the higheft 
 
 calculation
 
 ( 19 ) 
 
 calculation ever admitted it were practicable for 
 the fervants of the Company and others to make. 
 If fo, the Directors fhould have brought this 
 queftion to iffue much earlier ; there exifts no 
 legal capital, in their opinion, to carry it on ; all 
 that is done muft, therefore, be unwarrantable. 
 Yet it was too delicate and too interefting a quef- 
 tion for them to ilir : they were afraid to meet 
 what appears to have been their duty and fo they 
 are ftill ; for they are even now propofing a plan 
 for continuing this Trade, though, it muft be 
 confefled, not with much apparent fincerity for its 
 fuccefs ; at leaft as I view it. 
 
 I next come to the Paragraph which directs 
 how the Teak Ships are to be contracted for, 
 which it was agreed (houid be built in India ; 
 nnd it ftatcs, that the terms and conditions are to 
 be agreeable to a printed fchedule tranfmitted with 
 the orders. 
 
 ["Here Mr. Henchman flopped to obferve, 
 that he fhould want feveral papers in the 
 courfe of what he had to fay, and handed 
 up a lift of them, begging that a Clerk 
 might get them at hand. As Mr. Hench- 
 man now wanted the fchedule, which was 
 the firft, fome demur feemed to arife within 
 the bar, whether he fhould have it] 
 Mr. Henchman on this faid, Mr. Chairman, I 
 am at a lofs to account for any hesitation on this 
 
 B 2 point.
 
 C 20 ) 
 
 point, becaufe the fchedule ought to have been 
 printed with the Third Report ; however, I am 
 not diftreffed for want of it ; I have read the fche- 
 dule- it is printed, and in the hands of every (hip- 
 owner ; I (hall, therefore, quote what is neceflary 
 to my argument from memory: you will, I truft, 
 fet me right if I (hould make any miftake. Sir, 
 that fehedule requires, that the Captain and Of- 
 ficers of any Indian Ships contracted for, (hall be 
 bred up in your regular fcrvice. Now, you know 
 no fuch men are to be found in India, and there- 
 fore that claufe would prevent any (Lips from 
 being contracted for at all ; but if they could be 
 met with, you know, and have formerly admitted,* 
 that it would be moft unreafonable to expect that 
 owners fhould commit fuch large properties to 
 the management of Grangers : fo that at all event?, 
 it would act very much to the impediment of thefe 
 contracts. Your orders alfo direct, that no more 
 than \A\. per ton (hall be allowed for the freight ; 
 being the rate nt which you have contracted here 
 and when Lord Dartmouth inquires of you, in 
 his letter of the 23d of February lad, " Whether 
 " there are no contingencies, fuch as an allowance 
 '" on the building, home demurrage, or other cir- 
 " cumftances, which will make the rale exceed 
 ki 141. per ton ?" the Court of Directors an- 
 
 "* Vide former Debates on Shipping. 
 
 fwcred,
 
 C 21 ) 
 
 fwered, " They forefee no circumftances which 
 " can increafe the rate of freight of Ul. per ton ; 
 u but if any fhould occur, the increafe will equally 
 " apply to Indian as to Britifh fhips." Then, Sir, V 
 you do not admit the 3l. per ton in the building, 
 or the 3d. per day per ton home demurrage, in the 
 fchedule, is to be allowed to thefe Indian fhips. 
 Are not thefe contingencies that will encreafe the 
 rate of freight ? And taking them into the calcu- 
 lation, you have not contracted to build any (hips 
 at 141. per ton. The value of thefe two items 
 would make an increafe of at leaft ll. 10s. per ton. V 
 Yet, Sir, you would exclude the Indian (hips, 
 unlefs the owners will contract fimply for J4l. 
 which is lower than any contracts you have made 
 for building in England : and you tell Lord Dart- 
 mouth, you forefee no circumftances which can in- 
 creafe the rate of freight. Is this giving facilities, 
 or an equal participation to the Indian ftiips ? So 
 far from it, that it is denying them common juftice ; 
 and I therefore muft confider this part of the 
 orders as an intended impediment to the ufe of In- 
 dian fhips on equal terms, until a fatisfadlory ex- 
 planation is given. 
 
 I have now to notice that part of the Paragraphs 
 which fays " In order to afford a provilional aid 
 l< to the fupply of a due proportion of Indian 
 " tonnage for Private Trade, and alfo to give en- 
 " couragement to the difpofal of Indian fhips in 
 
 B 3 " this
 
 ( 22 ) 
 
 ic this country, we permit extra fhips of that de- 
 " fcription (about 50O tons) to be hired for one 
 ** voyage home, under exprefs flipulation, that 
 " they are not to return to India, either direclly or 
 " circuitoufly on account of any Britifh fubject 
 " whatever." Now, Sir, I would afk, what mer- 
 chant will enter irito fuch an engagement ? Would 
 any man make himfelf liable, after the (hip poffibly 
 has been fold half-a-dozen limes, and at latl goes 
 again to India, perhaps under foreign colours, and 
 fome Englifhman bearing a (hare in her, to a pe- 
 nalty for fuch an event ? It clearly is an article to 
 which no prudent man will fubfcribe. But this is 
 not all ; the Dircclors furely never meant fuch 
 fhips fhould come to England at all ; I think they 
 have acknowledged as much. The Proprietors need 
 only refer to the 74th page of the Third Report, 
 in which the Dircclors cxprefsly date, " there are 
 " few fervices, except that of the Eaft India Com- 
 '* pany, in which they (fhips of four or five hun- 
 " dred tons) can be employed ; nor is ihcre a chance 
 " for their being fold, unlefs there (hall be a de- 
 ** mand for the Commerce of France or Holland." 
 It is impoffiblc, Sir, that this can by any inge- 
 nuity be explained away : it (lands in pofnive op- 
 pofition to your profeffions ; but muft be taken as 
 a direct proof, that you never intended any fuch 
 fhips fhould come to this country for falc. I 
 think I have the faireft ground for faying this, 
 
 when
 
 r 23 ) 
 
 when you yourfelves acknowledge, that there is ^ 
 no chance of that clafs of fhips being fold, which 
 is the only clafs you are willing to allow to come 
 to this country for fale. 
 
 Next, Sir, I muft refer to your inftructions about 
 manning thefe Indian (hips, when they may be 
 contracted for : you fay, in thefe intended orders, 
 " the Act of Navigation allows one third of the 
 " crew to be aliens, and therefore Lafcars to this V 
 " extent may be employed, but by no means in 
 " any greater proportion." This I may furely 
 challenge as another impediment to the Indian 
 fhips being employed. You know that Euro- 
 pean feamen in great numbers are not to be found 
 in India. Suppofe twenty teak (hips, or as many 
 as are this year in the Thames, to be wanted, two / 
 thirds of each crew may be forty men, and the. 
 whole number would be eight hundred. It is a 
 thing impoffible to find eight hundred Britifh fea- 
 rnen in the Eaft Indies: therefore no contracts 
 can be made, if this is infilled on. 
 
 After this follows an acknowledgment, that " it 
 " is our (the Directors) intention to give an equal 
 " participation, on equal terms, to the Indian (hips, 
 < c in bringing home the Private Trade." This, 
 however, is infiantly done away by the particle 
 BUT, which provides, that " the Directors may 
 " hire at any time a (hip or (hips cafually (which is 
 " a mode we (hall never be inclined to prefer), but 
 
 B 4 " that
 
 ( 24 ) 
 
 " that is to give no pretcnfion to the Indian fhip- 
 " owners for furniftiing one in that way, or on fuch 
 " terms." Here the equal participation is imme- 
 diately deftroyed (vide Report, p. 102.) : and can 
 this be reckoned fair between the Directors and 
 Private Traders ? Or, does it not rather prove the 
 neceffity of there being fome declared umpire be- 
 tween two fuch parties ? Who can this be but the 
 Board of Commiffioners ? To whom this power 
 was evidently intended to be given by the fpirit, 
 and indeed I may fay, by the letter, of the Act of 
 17Q3. 
 
 Next, Sir, with refpect to the loading of thefe 
 Indian fhips. The Directors would order, " if the 
 " fhips fent from Europe, and engaged in India, 
 " cannot both be laden at parallel periods, thofe 
 " from Europe, which cannot be diverted to any 
 " employment in India (as the country ihips may) 
 " muft be laden firft." Is this another inftance 
 of the impartiality of the Directors, and of the equal 
 participation which they intend to deal out to the 
 Merchants in India ? Or did not this article, in 
 common candour, require the aid of fuperior au- 
 thority to correct the manifeft injudice it exhibits ? 
 I will not detain the Court longer by detailing 
 other inftances of the fame fpirit, ib clearly mani- 
 fefted from the beginning to the end of thefe 
 Paragraphs. I will content niyfelf with adding, 
 that I read nothing in the corrected copy of the 
 
 Paragraphs
 
 ( 25 ) 
 
 Paragraphs returned by the Commiffioncrs, but a 
 defire to do away thefe evident obftacles, thrown 
 intentionally, as I conceive, in the way of the 
 Indian (hipping ; and to make the Paragraphs what 
 they ought to be, the means of " opening a fair 
 " competition between Indian and Britifti fhips, 
 " for bringing home the Private Trade." 
 
 It is a very neceilary obfervaticn to make in this 
 place, that the Court of Dire6tors have, on receiv- 
 ing thefe corrected Paragraphs, only come to a 
 general rcfolution, that " taken altogether, they 
 lt dernonftrate a decided and unequivocal intention 
 " of invading and deftroying the commercial rights 
 " and privileges of the Eafl India Company." 
 They have not (hewn to what parts they particu- 
 larly object : many parts remain, as they them- 
 felves originally formed them ; others are only 
 calculated to make the facilities to Indian fhips 
 the fame as to Britim ; and where there are any 
 that are to deftroy the rights and privileges of 
 the Company, I am at a lofs to difcover. I call, 
 however, upon any and every Gentleman behind 
 the bar to point out thole paragraphs which can be 
 charged with being big with any fucli confer 
 quences. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, there is an opinion given by 
 your learned Counfel, among thefe printed Pa- 
 pers, to which it is very neceflary I fhould not omit 
 to refer upon the prefent occasion. We all with 
 
 good
 
 good reafon pay high refpcft to his advice: and 
 yon, Sir, and the Court of Directors have, I 
 make no doubt, been guided, in the conflruclion 
 of the Aft of the 3Qth Gco. III. cap. 89, by the 
 learned Counfel's detailed opinion, given on the 
 2d of -October lafl, at your defire. The part of 
 that opinion to which I at prefent beg to draw the 
 attention of the Court, is that refpefting the taking 
 up of fhips for the Company's fervice for eight 
 voyages, when the Aft of the 3f)th Geo. III. ex- 
 prcfsly fays, u the Company fhall employ no fhips 
 " in their regular fervice, unlefs contracted for to 
 " ferve in trade and warfare, or in any other fer- 
 " vice, for fix voyages." The learned Counfel. 
 after affigning his reafons, fays, " I think, there- 
 " fore, that the Company may contract for eight 
 " voyages, which is only extending the principle fur- 
 " ther than the law requires." The opinion (lands 
 No. 26 in thefe printed Papers ; every Proprietor, 
 therefore, has an opportunity of referring to it: 
 and the ufe I intend to make of the extract I have 
 quoted from it is this. Extending the principle of the 
 Att, I think I may venture to (late, is taking the 
 fpirit of the Act in (lead of abiding by the letter of 
 it. The Act of the 3Qth fays positively, that the 
 Directors mull contract for their flrps for fix 
 voyages. There is no latitude given, as there 
 might have been by the words or more ; and I am 
 ready, on the authority of the learned Gentle- 
 8 man,
 
 man, to believe that they were unneceflary ; 
 though there might have been fome plaufible rea- 
 fons affigned, at the time the Act was palling, 
 again ft taking up (hips for more than fix voyages, 
 if fuch an authority had been known to be con- 
 tained in the Act as it is now worded. However, 
 Sir, I repeat, that extending the principle (by mak- 
 ing a pofitive injunction to take up (hips for fix 
 voyages, includes a liberty to take them up for 
 eight, or for eighteen, for any number may as 
 reafonably be taken as eight) is in other words, 
 adopting the fpirit of the Act, inftead of abiding 
 by the letter of it. If I am wrong in this, I fhall 
 be much obliged to any one who will fet me right. 
 But, Sir, if the fpirit of one Act can be adopted 
 inftead of the letter, I would fubmit, whether the 
 fpirit of another Act may not alfo be adopted in- 
 ftead of the letter ; and therefore I mean to claim 
 it for the Act of the 33d Geo. Ill as it has been 
 claimed in this in fiance in refpect to the Act of 
 the 3gth Geo. III. The Act of the 33d ex- 
 prefsly grants a controuling power to the Board of 
 Commiffioners over the Private Traders to and 
 from India, in feveral different feet ion s ; and 
 fpeaking of that Act, it has been fa id by a Gentle- 
 man of the profeffion, that " nothing can be more 
 " manifeft than the diftinction eftablifhed by the 
 " ftatute between the two forts of Commerce (the 
 " Company's and the Private), and the authority 
 
 " which
 
 <f which it veils in the Com miffio tiers to decide all 
 " controverfies which (hall arife out of the Private 
 " Trade" and again, that " no doubt can be en- 
 " tertciined of the reafon of the law, and the in- 
 " tcntion of the Legislature."* If this opinion 
 be well founded, and the fpirit of the Act of the 
 33d Geo. III. be clearly of this defcription, I afk, 
 for information, why the principle of this Act may 
 not be extended, as well as the principle of the 
 Act of the 3Qth ? All that is wanted is an umpire 
 between the Court of Directors and the Private 
 Merchants it is not fit that either fhould be the 
 judge in his own caufe the Legiflature could 
 never intend any fuch thing ; what they did in- 
 tend is perfectly clear, and the clamour about 
 chartered rights, and the infringement of them, 
 on the prefent occafion, is nothing but a popular 
 outcry, raifed, in default of argument, to preju- 
 dice the minds of the Public, in a cafe where no 
 rights of the Company arc attacked, but the rights 
 of the Private Merchants are ferioufly endangered; 
 and the evident intention of the Legiflature is at- 
 tempted to be overruled. In fhort, Sir, if the 
 principle of an A6t of Parliament can be extended, 
 or, in other words, the fpirit can be adopted in- 
 ilead of the letter, I afk again, can it not as rea- 
 
 * Vide Mr. Henchman's Observations, 2d edit, for the 
 ttiiole of this opinion, p. 1.97- 
 
 fonably
 
 ( 29 ) 
 
 fonably be claimed in refpcct to the Act of the 
 33d, as in refpect to the Act of the 3Qth of Geo. 
 III.? 
 
 Before I proceed to the Third Report, I would 
 here juft enquire, with what confiftency do the 
 Directors come to this Court complaining againft 
 the Government of the Country, as having "a 
 "decided and unequivocal intention of invading 
 " and destroying the commercial rights and privi- 
 " leges of the Company ?" If you, Sir, are cor- 
 rect in bating the queftion at iffue to be purely 
 commercial, I may very reafonably afk, by what 
 authority, and upon what grounds, the Court of 
 Directors engaged, by their fccrct Refolution of 
 the 25th of November laft, to fubmit the Para- 
 graphs intended for India to the approbation of 
 the Board of Commiflioners ? This part of your 
 unauthorized compact with Mr. Addington, how- 
 ever, was not of long continuance : as foon as the 
 Directors difcovered that the Board of Commif- 
 iioners would not approve juft fuch orders as they 
 wifhed to tranfmit to India, becaufe they were 
 not calculated to carry into fair effect the eleven 
 Proportions offered to the Minilter as the bafis of 
 an experiment, the concefTion was withdrawn. 
 By this mode of conduct, the Directors firlt infill, 
 the queftion is commercial, and fubject to no con- 
 troul : fecondly, they take upon themfelves to de-^ 
 j that it fhall be fubmitted to the controul or 
 
 approbation
 
 approbation of the Comrniffioners : and laftly, as 
 foon as they difcover that this mode of proceeding 
 will not anfwcr the end they expected, they pra- 
 ted againft their own conceffion, and fay, for the 
 fecond time, that the queftion is purely corn- 
 's/ mercial ; and that the Comrniffioners, in attempt- 
 ing to exercifc a controul (which the Directors had 
 taken upon th em 1 elves to agree to) (hewed a de- 
 cided and unequivocal intention of deftroying the 
 rights of the Company. Are men high in office 
 in the State to be treated in this capricious man- 
 ner ? Will they allow the Directors of the Eaft 
 India Company to fay and nnfay juft as they 
 pleafe ? Or, will they not rather be diflatisfied with 
 fuch conduct ; and if there is fo much doubt upon 
 the fubjc6t, remove the doubt, by a reference to 
 that tribunal, which alone is able to put an end to 
 thefe angry controversies ? Such is the predica- 
 ment into which the Directors have brought the 
 Proprietors ; and now they expect them to approve 
 all they have done, involving a grofs breach of the 
 privileges of this Court. I truft there may be 
 found fpirit enough among us to difappoint any 
 fuch expectation, by negativing the prefent motion. 
 I fhall now proceed to the Third Report of the 
 Court of Directors, which has been printed fepa- 
 ratcly, and is intended to fupport what was never 
 heard of before, an IMPERIAL EMPIKK, by avert- 
 ing the dreadfal ronfeqncnces which the Direc- 
 tors
 
 ( 3J ) 
 
 tors fee in the employment of Eaft India (hip- 
 ping. But, Sir, before I enter upon the Report, 
 I muft beg to do an acl of juftice to an old friend 
 of mine, Mr. C. Grant, who is confefledly the / 
 author of the Firfl. and Second Reports from your 
 Committee. That Gentleman's talents I well 
 know, and they are to be traced in thofe Reports ; 
 his language, his ftyle, arid his ingenuity are evi- 
 dent : and, Sir, with a full recollection of their 
 contents, it would be unjuft indeed, that in com- 
 menting upon this Third Report, it fhould for a 
 moment be fuppofed by any one that I was com- 
 menting upon a work of Mr. Grant's. No, Sir; 
 I do moft (incerely acquit him of having had any, 
 the lead (hare in this compofition ; there is not a 
 (ingle fentence that bears the dump of his pen ; it 
 is the work of fome other hand ; and Mr. Grant 
 need not be envious of the laurels the author will 
 gain by the fupport this Third Report will give to 
 the long contefted queftion. 
 
 Perhaps, Sir, fome idea may be formed of what 
 is to be expected in the courfe of the argument 
 from the terms of the introductory paragraph. 
 We are told, that " in their former Report the 
 " Court of Directors endeavoured, hit without fuc- 
 " cefs, to explain the dangerous confequerices that 
 " are likely to follow from fueh a fyftem" (mean- 
 ing the fyftem of Indian (hipping) and then im-. 
 mediately afterwards, that " the object of the fame 
 
 " Committee
 
 ( 32 ) 
 
 " Committee at prefent is, to endeavour to give 
 " the fubjecl a different form, and to refer to their 
 " former Report for elucidations which they can- 
 " not improve" It is very true, Sir, the author 
 has not improved upon the former Reports ; but 
 it is rather an extraordinary way of convincing, by 
 referring to former Reports, which have been un- 
 fuccefsful, and which the Committee confefs they 
 cannot improve ; and I was puzzled ftill more, 
 when I turned to the laft page of this Third Re- 
 port, for there I am told, that in thcfe (unfuccefs- 
 ful) Reports it was demonftrated } that the plans of 
 the Private Traders muft terminate in the deftruc- 
 tion of the Britifh Empire in India. Now, Sir, how 
 a demonstration could be unfucccfsful, I fhall ex- 
 pect to hear explained from your fide the bar ; for 
 it is generally underfiood to be proof fo ftrong and 
 invincible, that the mind mufl yield to it. This, 
 however, is not all the fingularity of the prefent 
 cafe : for we arc next told, that this queftion is fb 
 extraordinary in its nature and circumftances, that 
 " what would be decorous, prudent and deiire- 
 able on almofl every other occafion, would be cul- 
 pable and even criminal at prefent." How, Mr. 
 Chairman, could the Court be brought into this 
 ft range and wonderful dilemma; and what path 
 are we to purfue, when that which would be de- 
 corous, prudent and dcfireablc on other occafions, 
 is to be fo injurious on this ? I did hope, Sir, that 
 
 I fliould
 
 ( 33 ) 
 
 I (hould have met with fome comfort, however, 
 when I proceeded further, becaufe I found in the 
 fame page, that " riot only the truth, but the 
 " whole truth, fhould be fubmitted to the confide- 
 *' ration of his Majefty's Minivers," (mark, not 
 the Board of Co mmiffi oners) " the Proprietors, 
 " and the Public" and I read again, in a later 
 part of this Report, that " it is indifpenfible for 
 " your Committee, and for the Court (of Direc- 
 " tors) to diveft themfelves of their private feel- 
 " ings, in order to do juftice to the Company and 
 " to the Public." From all this the Proprietors 
 muft perceive, that they have not had the whole 
 truth yet laid before them (perhaps the feparate 
 opinions, fo often aiked for, contain fome part of 
 it), nor do I, after a careful perufal of the pre- 
 fent Report, difcover what this wonderful infor- 
 mation confifts of. I really fee nothing new, ex- 
 cept it is the attack upon Mr. Dundas, of which 
 I (hall take further notice by and by. But, Sir, 
 I (liould have thought thefe Gentlemen would at 
 all times have done jufiice to the Company, and 
 that upon this queftion they would have fubmitted 
 to the General Court the whole truth long ago. 
 It has been rather extraordinary treatment, tho* 
 I believe not unprecedented here, to require the 
 Proprietors to give a decifive opinion, without 
 having the whole cafe fubmitted to them. 
 
 Proceeding further into this Report, I agree 
 
 C with
 
 ( 34 ) 
 
 with the Committee of Directors, that " on a 
 " queftion which, in its progrefs, produces fuch 
 " very important and ferious confequences, mere 
 " opinions, drawn from inferences and fpeculative 
 *' calculations, ought not to be admitted." Sir, I 
 thii.k we ought mod readily to acquiefce in this 
 way of thinking; and in confcqucnce, I cxpecled 
 to find the Report replete wiih evidence that 
 could not be contefted : but in ft cad of any fuch 
 proofs, perhaps of all others this is the publication 
 mod generally fupported by inferences and bold 
 N aflertions. In one place the Committee confefs 
 they have no regular returns ; but they contend 
 that fuch accounts as they have fhall (land till 
 their infufficiency be (hewn ; and " that in the 
 " mean time the unauthcnticatcd rcprcfcntations 
 " of the perfons who are interefted in dcpriv- 
 " ing the Company of their Trade, be not taken 
 " as a bafis upon which any argument whatever 
 " can be built." And even afterwards the Di- 
 rectors add, " they truft that their adversaries fhall 
 " be compelled to prove, that the Trade they pro- 
 " pole to carry on is, in its nature, likely to be 
 " permanent." It appears immediately, however, 
 to be rather hard fervice they would impole upon 
 their advcrfarics, for they inftantly add, " this, 
 *' hcivei-ci') is impojfible" and aliign the rcafons 
 why. 
 
 This Report, in an early part, declares, that 
 
 the
 
 ( 35 ) 
 
 the Company are always willing to remove ob- 
 ilacles to exports from this country. All that I 
 fball fay in anfwer to this is, that there is no proof 
 but of the contrary. In this Report the Directors / 
 Ihew, that 800 tons of Britifh goods were export- 
 ed on the Company's (hips in the year J793, but 
 that the exports of Private Merchants on the 
 Company's (hips have long fince dwindled into 
 nothing; yet when Indian fhips have come to the 
 Port of London, they have carried away fix or feven 
 hundred thoufand pounds worth of Britifh goods 
 in a feafon. Thefe are fa els, and therefore there/v 
 muft have been fome obftacles and obje6Hons to 
 the Company's fhips, which the Directors have 
 not removed. Indeed, it is well known there 
 were many, and they have been often enumerated. 
 I perceive, Sir, that you ftill perlift in the idea, 
 that (hips are the end, and goods only the means ; 
 but I do not difcover any proofs to eftablifh this 
 opinion, and the queftion has already been fully 
 difcuffed. I find, however, the Directors them- ^ 
 feves allow in this Report, that " in a very fhort 
 " time the Traders in Goods, and the Owners of 
 " Ships, \viil become in India, as they are in other 
 " parts of the world, different pevfons." If fo, 
 what becomes of all the long arguments we have 
 heard about the means and the end, and the bad 
 confcqucnces of the Ship-owner and the Mer- 
 chant being one and the fame party ? 
 
 C a I
 
 ( 3d ) 
 
 I fhall now proceed to the queftion of Capital, 
 upon which your Committee fay, " they fhall 
 " prove, that the larger part of the capital em- 
 " ployed in this Trade is Britifh, and not Indian." 
 After fome fearch, I found the promifed proof, 
 and it is this : they ftate the amount exported from 
 Bengal, by Private Merchants, at 783,0001. and 
 the amount imported by them to the fame place 
 at 303,0001. leaving a balance of 483,0001. The 
 Indian capital, therefore, fay the Direclors, does 
 not exceed 303,0001. Sir, this is a moft extraor- 
 dinary fort of proof. The Merchant draws bills 
 of exchange on his correfpomlent in London for 
 the 483,0001. it is admitted ; but he muft get the 
 money for which he draws, from fome refident in 
 Indra, and therefore furely it is, bonajide, what has 
 been called India Capital. If you mean to de- 
 prive the Indian Merchant of his credit, I under- 
 Hand you : but I cannot confent, that it is Britifh 
 Capital he trades on, becaufe his correfpondent in 
 London accepts his bills, upon goods coniigned 
 to him. But there is an eafy remedy for this, fay 
 the Committee : " check the trade of Indian Mer- 
 <f chants; fuch a check will not operate to the pre- 
 "judice either of India, the Company, or the 
 * c Public." Here is the prcfent opinion of the Di- 
 reclors, briefly and openly given : return to all 
 your former coercive meafures; renew all your 
 penal laws; there is your remedy. Now, Sir, have 
 
 we
 
 ( 37 ) 
 
 we any proof, in Head of this mere afTertion, that 
 it will be a remedy ? No ; but we have abundance 
 of experience in proof, that thefe checks will revive 
 and fupport Foreign and Clandeftine Trade; in- 
 fomuch, that the Dire6tors were very loud againft 
 them; and defired, only a fhort time fince, that 
 they might be removed. 
 
 The comparifon that is made in this Report 
 between Britifh, Indian, and foreign fhips ; and 
 between Britifh and Indian owners, is not the leaft 
 extraordinary part of it. It is not my wifh to 
 enter into, this comparifon between any two de- 
 fcriptions of Merchants; it is not for me to take 
 the liberty of pointing one out as extortioners, 
 and crying up the other for their public fpirit and 
 generofity. Nor will the old owners be very thank- 
 ful for this panegyric, when they recollect that the 
 very fame Directors, only a few years fince, 
 charged them with fimilar extortion, and faid the 
 Company only employed their fhips becaufe they 
 could not get any others. It fuits the prefent pur- 
 pole to ufe this language; but the juitice of it is 
 very questionable. As to generofity in counting- 
 houfes, I believe that is not the place to look for 
 it; every Merchant makes the belt bargain he can, 
 according to what he has to difpofc of; thefe Gen- 
 tlemen have done no more, and I am perfectly 
 fatislied, that they poflefs as much generofity and 
 liberality in fociety as any other men. 
 
 C 3 But,
 
 ( 38 ) 
 
 But, Sir, the inftance brought forward in the 
 prefent Report, carries with it its own refutation. 
 The Governor General found himfclf, above a 
 twelvemonth ago, under a cafual ncceffity to en- 
 gage all the Iliips he could meet with for an extra 
 and dangerous fervice: the Bengal Merchants were 
 called on to derange all their commercial engage- 
 ments; and to let their Ships to the Government ; 
 they did fo ; but they required a high price, 
 \vhich the Governor General gave. " The Gabriel, 
 " one of thefc (hips," fay the Directors " is cn- 
 " gaged at loOol. per month, for nine months, or 
 "13,5001. ; whilft the Rockingham, one of the 
 " Company's fhips, performs the fame ferv ; ce for 
 *' 6301. per month, or for nine months, 5,4501. 
 t( making a difference and a lofs to the Company 
 " of 8,0501. : the Public and the Company, lays 
 " the third Report, ought to be rcfcued from fuch 
 " avarice and extortion." But, Sir, is this a fair 
 ilate of the cafe? Was the Rockingham engaged 
 for this fingle and dangerous fervice ? You know 
 fhe was not, but that (he is, after fervirig fix 
 voyages as a regular fhip, engaged to perform a 
 voyage in the Company's frrvirc, upon their dif- 
 mantled plan ; that she happened to be in India at 
 the time, of courfe was railed upon to go on this 
 fervice, as within the covenants of her contract. 
 The Directors, therefore, take the rate agreed to 
 under very different circumstances, to make a com- 
 
 parifon
 
 ( 3Q ) 
 
 parifon with the Gabriel ; and bcfkles this, they 
 omit to ftate, that at prefent they have a law-fuit 
 with the owners of another (hip, the Martha, on 
 this very queftion. And, Sir, I have good reafon 
 for thinking, that the owners of the Rockingham 
 will difpute this very point with the Directors, 
 and not reft fatisfied with 6;30l. per month as here 
 allowed them. A lew months will fhew whether 
 I am right or wrong, and even then, if they are 
 compelled to fubmit, it will be only in confequence 
 of a previous exifting contract, by which they are 
 obliged to fcrve in trade and in warfare on cer- 
 tain conditions. It is therefore impofllble to draw 
 a fair companion between the two. But, Sir, the 
 Directors might, if the object had not been to dif- 
 parage the Indian owners, have ftatccl, that when 
 Lord Wellefley lately talked of fending three or 
 four regular (hips to China for want of cargoes, 
 that arch offender, Mr. Fairlie, offered to furnifa 
 the Governor General with goods to the value of 
 18 or 2O laes, in order to preverr it: and it is very 
 probable thefe fhips are now on their voyage home, 
 fupp'ied with cargoes by one of thole very men 
 who are ab tiled as extortioners; and inftead of 
 aiding, to be taking every opportunity to injure 
 and diftrcfs the Company. Next, Sir, with regard 
 
 i " * 
 
 to the companion between Indian and European 
 (hips, as to dcarnefs ; foreign Europe (hips are 
 fait! to be the chcapcft, and teak (hips the dearcft; 
 
 C 4 this
 
 ( 40 ) 
 
 this I totally deny, upon the information I have 
 had. Perhaps many people will agree with me, 
 when they are acquainted that teak fhips will go 
 eight or ten voyages to India and back, without 
 any repair at all ; whilft an oak fhip is never able to 
 go above three voyages without a thorough repair, 
 at an expence of many thoufand pounds. In an 
 early part of this Report, great fault is found with 
 an honourable Friend of mine, (Mr. D. Scott) not 
 only becaufe he has differed with the reft of the 
 Directors on this fubjccl, but a letter of his, of fo 
 old a date as 1787, is brought forward, to (hew 
 what unfounded and ill digcfted proportions he 
 at times recommended. This letter contained a 
 plan of increafing the exports of Britifh manufac- 
 tures yearly to a great amount. He aflerted, that 
 the Company had riot for years fent out above one 
 quarter of their tonnnge in goods. Now, Sir, it 
 is curious to fee the method, which, the Report 
 ftates, was followed, toafcertain whether this affer- 
 tion was correct or not. " To fuch a propofal, 
 " one Jingle faft was oppofedby the Court of Direc- 
 <e tors, namely, that at the time Mr. Scott made 
 " the propofals, returns were received of the draught 
 " of water of each fhip, as the only means to enable the 
 " Court to a [certain^ whether the fhips were not too 
 " full to perform the voyage from Europe to 
 " many parts of India with fecurity ; and on fe- 
 c vcral occaiions, (hips were not fuffered to pro- 
 
 " ceed
 
 * 5 ceed until fome part of the cargo was taken out, 
 (( in confequence of the (hips being overloaded. 
 " Suck a decifi've proof of the want of any bafis on 
 " which a project of fo much importance could 
 " reft, gave the Company a fhort refpite until the 
 "years 17Q2-Q3, when it appeared in another 
 tf form, &c. &c." Mr. Chairman, I really doubt / 
 my own fenfes, to undcrftand fo (imple a cafe as 
 this, when the Court of Directors fhall ferioufly 
 aflert, that the only means to afcertain whether their 
 Jhips 'were overloaded (with Company's cargo) was to 
 take their draught of water, and this is called a de- 
 ciftve proof, Pray, Sir, was it not poffible that / 
 other perfons betides the Company might have 
 goods on board thofe fhips ? Such things have 
 happened ; there have been times when (hips 
 outward-bound have been half laden with Clan- 
 deftine Tade ; and on that occafion, there was a 
 more obvious and decifive teft, which might have 
 been referred to I mean the invoice of each (hip's 
 cargo belonging to the Company, and the ac- \ 
 count of the tonnage it occupied. However, in- 
 ftead of throwing a reflection on the offer of Mr. 
 Scott, it is entitled to much praife ; for on a refer- 
 ence to the amount of Britifh goods exported by 
 the Company, it did not much exceed half a mil- 
 lion in 1 787, and it has continued to increafe gra- 
 dually ever (ince, infomuch, that this laft feafon it 
 amounts to two millions. This has been the effect 
 
 of
 
 of that letter; and whoever was the author of a 
 propofition producing fuch a confequence, has done 
 great fervice to the Public. 
 
 In purfuing this Report, I find the Directors 
 afTert, that " the Foreign Trade mud revive and 
 " will increafe," but they foon afterwards fay 
 tc there appears to be an npprchenfiori about the 
 " Foreign Trade, which no practical Foreign Mcr- 
 " chant can underfland. It is but fair to alk for a 
 " fingle inftance wherein it lias fuccceded ?" And 
 they then defcribe how every Foreign Company has 
 been ruined, as well as numbers of Private Mer- 
 chants, and the remainder of them are ftated to be 
 infignificant. In fhort, fay the Directors, " there 
 " was a wreck of general and individual enterprise" 
 Thcfe furcly are not proofs that the Foreign Trade 
 mnjl rev I've and wilt incrctifc. I do not, however, 
 go this length with the Directors ; I know there 
 will be a Foreign Trade, as well as that there was 
 a Foreign Trade, of good credit ; but how exten- 
 five that Trade will be, depends more upon the 
 fettlcment of the prefent quell ion than upon any 
 other circumftancc uhatcver. y\ll 1 contend for is, 
 that the Britilh Government fhouid interpofe, and 
 bring as much of this Trade as poiiible to the 
 River Thames, and in particular that which is car- 
 ried on with Brililh capital. 
 
 Thefe. Private Traders are, in various parts of the 
 prcfcnt Report, ftated to intercept the Company's 
 
 funds,
 
 ( 43 ) 
 
 funds, and to foreftall the Company's market. 
 How are thcfe points maintained ? In my opinion, 
 not more fatisfactorily than any of the preced- 
 ing. Let us firft examine into the funds What 
 have the Company raifed during this war by bills 
 on the Directors, and by bonds given in India ? I 
 fhall not be contradicted, when I ftate it at ten or 
 twelve million fterling. But I need not go fo far 
 back ; I have evidence enough in my favour in this 
 Report ; it is there dated, that very late loans in 
 India amount to 2,200,OOOl. ; and that 1,200,0001. 
 of this laro;e fum is borrowed at Madras at one 
 
 o 
 
 time, in the autumn of laft year. Now, Sir, 
 initead of intercepting the funds, here is a clear 
 proof that the Government of Madras were able, a 
 few months ago, to negociate a larger loan than 
 they ever negociated before., fince the exiftence of 
 the Company. How does this happen ? Why, it 
 happens from the trade, credit, and circulation of 
 thefe very men, whom the Directors wifh to de- 
 ftroy. In the former war (diftinguifhed as the 
 American war) there was no fuch clafs of men 
 What was the flate of the Company's credit then? 
 They had incumbrances of only half the amount of 
 the prefcnt debt, yet their means were exhaufted, 
 and their paper at Bombay was 65 per cent, dif- 
 count at Madras it was 50, and at Bengal 3O 
 or 35 per cent, below par. What is it now ? Such 
 
 Paper
 
 ( 44 ) 
 
 Paper as bears an intereft of 6 per cent, is at a dif- 
 count of 22 per cent. 
 
 Paper of 8 per cent, is at a difcount of 7 or 
 8 per cent. 
 
 Paper of 12 per cent, is at par. 
 The Company's credit is therefore much better at 
 this time than it was at the former ; and there is 
 no doubt it will continue to be fo, as long as en- 
 couragement (hall be given to the general trade 
 of their fettlements. Next, Sir, as to forestalling 
 the Company's markets It is a circumflance de- 
 ferving attention, that in the early part of the Re- 
 port thcfc Merchants are reproached with not ex- 
 porting Eritifh manufactures; and the proof is, 
 that in 800 tons of merchandize exported by one 
 houfe, there was only one ton of woollens. Here 
 is a glaring proof that they do not interfere or 
 foreflall the Company's markets ; for woollens are 
 one of the grand ftaples the Company deal in. 
 But the Merchants are accufed of failing without 
 convoy, and doing every thing they could to get 
 to an early market. It is true, they ufed, as all 
 Private Merchants mull, the beft diligence they 
 could ; they often failed with any convoy to the 
 weilward, inftead of the Eaft India convoy, but 
 very feldom, I am told, failed abiblutcly without any 
 convoy at all. There are, however, other circuin- 
 ftanccs to be brought into this account ; the ar- 
 ticles they generally deal in arc clifkTcnt from the 
 
 Company's
 
 ( 45 ) 
 
 Company's Trade : woollens, copper, naval ftores, 
 the Company may engrofs ; and for the fale of 
 thefe articles in India, the Company have fettled 
 periods by auction, which they would not alter, 
 whether the fhips of individuals arrived before or 
 after them. This regards the outward Trade. 
 With refpecl: to the imports from India, it is well 
 known that the Company's goods are always fold 
 firft, fo that the goods of Private Merchants can- 
 not get to auction till after them ; and this is more 
 particularly evident, as they are all under lock and 
 key in the Company's warehoufes. 
 
 We are told in one part of the Report, that the 
 Exclufive Trade is to be the falvation of the Court ; 
 I wifh, Sir, it could be fhewn to be equal to any 
 fuch effect ; the profits of the China Trade may 
 poffibly be equal to the annual dividends ; but we v- 
 are here fpeaking of the Indian Trade. That 
 there are no profits upon the exports is admitted, 
 and I have many doubts as to the returns from 
 India. I have a right to entertain thefe doubts, 
 from your own Reports and accounts given at dif- 
 ferent periods ; but I will mention one circum- 
 fiance that poffibly may make every man who 
 hears me, doubt alfo. In the calculations made 
 by the Directors, no intereit of money is charged 
 on the capital employed, yet a great part of the 
 Company's Indian investment is made with money 
 borrowed at Indian hucreli ; and the courfe of the 
 
 bulineis
 
 bufinefs is this it is borrowed early in the yea? 
 to be advanced to the native Manufacturers the 
 goods are delivered in the courfe of the year- 
 they are (hipped the beginning of the next year 
 at the end of it they arc fold in England and 
 in the beginning of the third year Britifh manu- 
 factures are (hipped in return, which may be fold 
 in the courfe of that feafon ; fo that it muft be 
 thirty or thirty-fix months before the money is 
 realized to pay off the bond that was given for 
 the firft loan to make the investment. To this 
 we may add 5 per cent, conferred to be lolt in 
 the exports, fo that it may fairly be faid 35 per 
 cent, is on this account to be added to the Com- 
 pany's expences in making up the account. I 
 will not ftop to notice many other charges not 
 calculated on by the Directors ; this alone is fuf- 
 
 J 
 
 ficicnt to raife very fcrious doubts, whether the 
 Company gain any thing by their Indian inveft- 
 ments ; but, fay the Directors, " the furplus has 
 *' not appeared fo large as it ought to have done, 
 " from the Company's adherence to the old forms 
 " of making up the accounts." Now, Mr. Chair- 
 man, I contend the very contrary of this, and af- 
 fcrt, that if they did not adhere to thefe old forms, 
 the furplus would appear liill Icfs, in Head of more ; 
 for the practice of the India-houfe is, and has long 
 been, to value the rupee at two (hillings, whereas 
 they have bills upon them at rates of exchange 
 
 much
 
 much higher, which, of courfe, muft reduce in- 
 ,itead of augmenting their furplus profits. 
 
 In this part of the Report, it is alked with 
 fome confidence, " Will the Indian Agents and 
 Traders fubmit to a limitation of their profit, in 
 the fame manner as the Company ? Will they 
 " pay what they get, over and above 10 per cent. 
 tl into the public Trcafury, for the benefit of the 
 " State ?" It may fafely be anfwered, the India 
 Company do no fuch thing. (Look to the Acl of 
 1793, Seel. 3.) When the Company had a Trade 
 only to carry on, and no territory, the Govern- 
 ment knew them to be equal to but a very mode- 
 rate contribution ; and it was only when the Com- 
 pany appeared to have a furplus revenue of above 
 a million, that they ftipulated with them for 
 500.0001. per annum for the benefit of the pub- 
 lic, \vhich the circumftances of the times have and 
 will prevent them from paying, during the whole 
 of their prefent Charter. It may, therefore, rea- 
 fonably be aiked What great benefit the Public 
 receive, except from the increafe of the India Trade 
 generally ? 
 
 On thefubject of Lafcars, and the appeals which 
 are here made to humanity concerning them the 
 cafes are overftrained and are few. Many fhips 
 have come with their crews of Lafcars, as health v 
 as fhips with Europeans, or we thould have had 
 more examples. But. Mr Chairman, the fair way 
 
 of
 
 ( 48 ) 
 
 of deciding where the inhumanity refts, is by giving 
 a comparative account of the number of Lafcars 
 and Englifh feamen, loft in this Trade altogether. 
 I iincerely believe it would be found, that as 
 many Britifh failors die on the Ganges as Lafcars 
 do on the Thames, or, why are your regular (hips 
 fo often obliged to take black feamen to aflift in 
 your homeward bound voyages ? 
 
 It is not a matter of any furprife to me, but it 
 is deferving of attention, that the Directors take 
 fo little notice of the Cotton Trade, and the large 
 fupply of tonnage it would require. It is a trade fo 
 precarious, that the Directors know they cannot 
 attempt to furnilh Britifh tonnage for it ; yet they 
 would rather leave it to the Americans than to 
 Private Merchants in India. Ten or twelve thou- 
 fand tons of teak (hipping have come here with 
 this article in one feafon ; but a bad harveft may 
 prevent any coming, when the Directors have fent 
 (hipping to bring it. Thofe (hips may only be 
 juft returned, when the next harveft (hall have in- 
 creafcd the flock in fuch a degree, that the Mer- 
 chants would wi(h to export it to Enghmd in as 
 large a quantity as ever. Nothing but Chipping 
 on the fpot can fuit fuch a trade, in oppofition to 
 the vigilance and cnterprizc of America, who has 
 at this time 300 vcffcls engaged in the trade with 
 India and China, and who had lately fcvcral Chips 
 on the Malabar coaft, wanting cargoes of cotton, 
 
 as
 
 they declared, to fupply the Englifh Manufac- 
 turers on this ifland. I now come, 1 confefs, to a 
 part of this Report, and it is the only part very flat- 
 tering and gratifying to myfelf ; it is that where 
 the Directors exprefs a hope that the fame thing 
 will be done which I recommended to them to do 
 laft May ; I mean, to confult the late Governors 
 General of India. They would infinuate indeed, 
 that the queftion then propofed to be put to thefe 
 high characters was, u Whether the Exclulive 
 " Trade (hall remain in the hands of the Com- 
 " pany, or be transferred to a few Indian Traders ?" 
 But, fortunately, the motion ftands on record, and 
 bears the cleareft evidence of the contrary. At 
 that time, Mr. Chairman, fuch a reference, the Di- 
 rectors laid, would have been " unconftltutional in 
 " itfelf." I hope it will be explained how that is 
 poffible. " It would have degraded the dignity of 
 < c the Proprietors, and would have proved hutni- 
 " Hating to the Directors." All thefe objections 
 are now got over, and I am happy to find it is fo ; 
 I am as ready as ever to abide that teft, confident 
 that they are the proper parties to advife with on 
 fuch an important fubjcct. 
 
 In this part of the Report, there is a paragraph 
 which I hardly know how to defcribe, perhaps it 
 may be intended for the profound it is fhort, and 
 I will read it. Speaking of the Priv 7 ate Merchants 
 and their deftructive Propofitions, the Report (page 
 
 D 100)
 
 ( 50 ) 
 
 100) proceeds : " But they (the Merchants) are 
 " not aware, that, whilft they contend to deftroy 
 te the part of an ancient, firm, extcnfive fabric, over 
 *' which they have no legal right or claim what- 
 "ever, the ancient, real Proprietors, finding thcm- 
 " felves deprived of that broad (hield, which has 
 " hitherto protected and preferved inviolate, under 
 " the Britifh Constitution, all corporate bodies, may 
 " fpurn at the ruin which will remain." Mr, 
 Chairman, I really do not understand 
 
 [Here Mr. Bofanquet (a Director), got up 
 haftily, and was about to interrupt Mr. 
 Henchman ; when Mr. Henchman, turning 
 to him, faid " Sir, if you are the Author 
 of this part of the Report, and wifh to ex- 
 plain it, I will readily take my feat, while 
 you do fo." Mr. Bofanquet made no an- 
 fwcr, but fat down. Mr. Henchman went 
 on ] 
 
 Other rcafons, befidcs the want of time, prevent 
 me from following this Report through every part ; 
 and from comparing it with other opinions which 
 the Directors have given : there are, however, con- 
 trarieties fo very apparent, that they mufi ftrike 
 every reader. The Private Merchants arc too often 
 ace u fed of wilhing to ruin the Company, and to 
 exclude cverv body from the Trade but thcmfeJves. 
 It is fometimcs faid, that they cannot make the 
 Trade to anfwer ; that two Ihort years will cxpofe 
 
 their
 
 ( 51 ) 
 
 their errors, and fhew that their plans are not 
 practicable ; yet in that (hort fpace of time thefe 
 adventurers are to acquire fortunes, and the Com- 
 pany's Charter will be deftroyed. All this is to 
 happen, although we have already the experience 
 of a few years, and no fingle inflance is produced 
 to fhew that they have deviated from the rules 
 laid down for them ; that any perfons have got to 
 India that ought not, through their means ; or 
 that any thing has occurred to make Colonization 
 more apparent. If any complaint can be made 
 againft thefe Traders, \vhilft ufing Teak Ships, I 
 beg it may be brought forward ; and, that we 
 may have proof, inftead of affertion, according to 
 the doctrine laid down early in this Report itfelf. 
 [We lament that we have to ftatc, that Mr. 
 Henchman had now for a long time expe- 
 rienced great interruption from the noife 
 in the Court, and a continual call for the 
 Queftion. It was abfolutely impoffible for 
 him to proceed ; and the Chairman inter- 
 pofed without effect. Mr. Henchman, 
 however, perfevered ; and when the cla- 
 mour and noife was very loud, he flopped 
 entirely, and waited until itfubfided. Mr. 
 Twining ir.terpofed fometimes with efF< cl, 
 but oftcncr without it. Sir Francis Bar'wp 
 
 c3 
 
 faid, if there were time enough, he would 
 
 pledge himfelf to refute every argument 
 
 D '2 advanced
 
 ( 52 ) 
 
 advanced by the honourable Proprietor, who 
 had rifcn to fpeak at a late hour of the day, 
 and was continuing to fpeak, till it was 
 fo late that no one could anfwer him ; and 
 then he would fill the newfpapers with 
 what he had faid. Mr. Henchman bore all 
 this interruption with remarkable patience, 
 attending to nothing but the qucftion, and 
 proceeding, from time to time, as filence 
 could be obtained. Surely this difordcr of 
 the Court was highly unbecoming, and 
 would better become a bear-garden than a 
 deliberative aflembly of rcfpeclable mer- 
 chants. Are the Gentlemen aware that fuch 
 diforder and difgrace ftrikes at the free- 
 dom of debate, one of the moft important 
 and boafted characleriftics of the bleffings 
 of our glorious Conftitution one of the 
 happy di functions between free fubjecls, 
 and the flavcs of arbitrary power and clef- 
 pot ic government ?] 
 
 Mr. Henchman faid, he was forry for the late- 
 nefs of the day, but it was not his fault ; the fub- 
 ject was fo copious, that it was not to be gone 
 through in an hour. lie faid he was perfectly 
 ready to adjourn, and meet again at twelve to-mor- 
 row, if Gentlemen preferred it. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN laid, No, no. We had better 
 have it all out now. The Proprietors would not 
 
 be
 
 ( 53 ) 
 
 be pleafed at having fuch another long day to- 
 morrow. 
 
 Mr. Henchman continued. I now, Sir, come to 
 a part of the Report, which I am exceedingly forry 
 to find treated in the manner it is : I mean the 
 attack upon the late Minifter for India, Mr. 
 Dundas 
 
 [The clamour and noife in the Court was now 
 renewed ; fome called out, that was not the 
 queftion ; that Mr. Henchman was difor- 
 derly ; that the queftion was Private Trade ; 
 and one Director faid, that for the laft ten 
 minutes Mr. Henchman had been fpeak- 
 ing from the queftion. J 
 
 Mr. Henchman replied, I truft I am in order ; 
 I mean to be fo ; and I am fpeaking to nothing but 
 the contents of the Third Report. [Clamour re- 
 newed, and queftion loudly called for.] I am 
 forry I cannot yet come to a conclufion, I may 
 be an hour longer, and thefe interruptions will 
 make it ftill later. I appeal to the Chair ; if the 
 Chair fhall declare that I am not to be admitted 
 to fpeak to certain parts of the Report, I (ball 
 fubmit. I beg the Chair to declare whether I am 
 in order or not. 
 
 [The Chairman at laft was heard, and de- 
 clared Mr. Henchman was perfectly in or- 
 der, and ought to be allowed to proceed.] 
 Mr. Henchman continued. Sir, I thank you 
 
 D 3 for
 
 ( 54 ) 
 
 ior your candour, and I repeat, that I am exceed- 
 ingly forry to find in the Report, this wanton, 
 unmerited, and difrcfpeclful attack upon Mr. Dun- 
 das ; and I more particularly regret to find, among 
 the Gentlemen who fign it, the name of an ho- 
 nourable Baronet and Friend of mine (Sir H. Inglis) 
 who fo lately, and fo creditably filled the feat you 
 occupy. Sir, that very Gentleman about a twelve- 
 month fince. brought forward certain Kefolutions of 
 a very different complexion, refpeclingthe fame right 
 honourable Character. I beg, Mr. Chairman, that 
 the papers relative to the penfion granted to Mr. 
 Dundas may now be read. [[Here confiderable in- 
 terruption occurred, and much difinclmation ap- 
 peared within the bar to the production of the 
 Papers.] I think I have a right to the papers, they 
 are in pofTcffion of the Court of Proprietors ; they 
 are on their own records : but as the objection 
 feems to be ftill maintained, I will do without them ; 
 though I beg the refufal may be marked : I have 
 the Kclolution in my mcrnoiy, and I will repeat it. 
 In Feb. 180), upon IV] r. Dundas' s rcfignation of 
 the office of President of the Board of Commif- 
 fioncrs, the Directors came to a rcfolution highly 
 flattering to Air. Dundas ; pafling high enco- 
 miums on his ad mini it ration ; and begging that he 
 would accept a penfion of 20OO1. per annum, as 
 fomc acknowledgment of the great ferviccs he had 
 rendered to the Company, during the time he had 
 
 filled
 
 ( 55 ) 
 
 filled the pod of Proficient of the Board of Comrnii- 
 fioners; and, not content \vith this liberal offer, 
 they requcfted further, that he would condefcend 
 to accept of the ufe of a houfe during his life, at 
 the expence of 50Ol. per annum more to the Com- 
 pany. I remember well with how much zeal my 
 honourable Friend recommended to the Court of 
 Proprietors to confirm this proportion, which the 
 Directors had made to Mr. Dundas: and I do not 
 recollect at that time, that any one Director offered 
 a fingle objection, or faid that he dirTented from it. 
 The right honourable Gentleman has been out of 
 office from that time to the prefent day ; he can 
 therefore have done nothing fince, to induce the , 
 Directors to alter their opinion of him, except it < 
 be, having manifefted, that he entertains the fame 
 fentiments which he did before he went out of of- 
 fice, reflecting the employment of Teak Ihips in v" 
 Private Trade : and which fentiments particularly 
 appear in his letter of the 2d of April, 1800. Sir, 
 thefe fentiments are now fo offenfive to the Direc- 
 tors, that in difcuffing the fubjcct, they cannot 
 forego an opportunity, however indifcreet, to intro- 
 duce irrelevant matter, to take away from the 
 weight of an opinion to which both Ikies of the 
 bar have been long ufed to pay fo great a (hare 
 of refpect. A review is therefore to be taken of 
 the general ftate of the Company's affairs, al- 
 though you, Mr. Chairman, fo earneftly deprecated 
 D4 all
 
 ( 56 ) 
 
 all fuch enquiry, as extremely dangerous, in your 
 famous letter of the 7th of November lad, ad- 
 dreffed to Mr. Addington ; and which has been fo 
 fully commented on by my learned Friend (Mr. 
 Impey) this day. How can the prefent diflertation 
 be juftified, if what you faid in that letter was rea- 
 fonable? However, the fact is, that in this Report, 
 we find the late Prefident, whofe adrniniftration 
 was fo much extolled laft year, and fo amply re- 
 warded, is now charged with being the author, or 
 acceflbry of almoft every thing that has brought 
 the prefent. imminent diftrefs upon the affairs of 
 the Company, and that has reduced their affairs to 
 fuch a ftatc, according to your opinion, that it 
 would be dangerous to look into them. He has 
 increaled our cftablifhments to a ruinous extent; 
 he has allowed our political rcfourccs to be ab- 
 forbed ; he has given afliftancc to deprive the 
 Company of the resources they aclually poflcfled, 
 under pretence of contributing towards the prof- 
 perity of the Indian Empire. And a companion 
 is gone into between the period of diflrcfs in which 
 he began his adminift ration, and the ftatc in which 
 he has left the Company's affairs, on retiring from 
 office ; and after this companion is drawn, it is 
 faid, " Thcfc difcuffions and compariibus are pain- 
 " ful in the extreme; but when the Company 
 ''' find that attempts arc made, and fn^ortcd l>y 
 ' fuch powerful intcrrjl, to deprive them of the 
 
 " only
 
 ( 57 ) 
 
 " only means to reftore their affairs, under un- 
 " founded pretences, it is indifpenfable for your Com- * 
 " mittee, and for the Court, to diveft themfelves of 
 " their private feelings, in order to do juftice to 
 " the Company and the Public." 
 
 Sir, this paragraph from the Report fpeaks too 
 plainly for itfelt ; I do not vvifh to give it an inter- 
 pretation ; it is too clear who is meant by this 
 powerful intereft, that is acting this extraordinary V 
 part under unfounded pretences. But I muft afk, 
 if all this objection lay again ft Mr. Dundas, where 
 was the juftice towards the Company in unani- 
 moufly recommending for him the penfion of 
 2O001. per annum ? And where was the duty to- 
 wards the Company in keeping all thefe opinions 
 fecret ? for I believe I may venture to ttate, that 
 hardly an in fiance occurs for many years paft, of 
 the Directors communicating to I lie Proprietors, 
 that the late Prelident had fuggcfted any one thing V 
 which threatened injury to the Company's affairs. 
 It may alib reafonably be a Heed, whether many of 
 the arrangements alluded to, were not the a els of 
 the Directors themfelves, and only paffed in review 
 before Mr. Dundas from his prclidingin the Board 
 ot Control ? 1 will not at prefcnt take up more 
 time in inquiring who is relponlible ; I will only 
 repeat, that the introduction of this matter in the 
 prelent Report appears to have arilcn from a mo- 
 tive that I am lorry fhould influence a public body ; 
 and that it is probable, if it had not been for that 
 
 influence,
 
 ( 58 ) 
 
 influence, the Directors would not even now " have 
 " divefted themfelves of their private feelings to do 
 "juftice to the Company." But, Sir, this exa- 
 mination having been gone into by the Commit- 
 tee of Directors, and the ftate of the Company re- 
 prcfented as deplorable, comparatively with what it 
 was in J/83: it becomes necefTary to look at 
 their circum (lances at that period, and at prefent. 
 Abroad, in 1785-4, the Company was indebted ten 
 or twelve millions fterling ; at prefent they owe 
 twenty millions fterling. But, Sir, in thefe twenty- 
 millions, there may be five millions with which the 
 Company charge the Government of Great Britain, 
 for military and other fervices, including the expe- 
 dition to Egypr, undertaken on their account. If 
 fo, Sir, it is doubtful whether your debts abroad at 
 this time, exceed what they were in \ 783-4, more 
 than three or four millions : but, Mr. Chairman, I 
 have no objection to looking at the companion 
 between the two periods, with all the a (fumed dif- 
 fence between a debt of ten millions in 17S3-4, 
 and twenty millions at the prefent day, which is 
 ftated to occafion fuch infinite d ill reft. If we look 
 to the diftrcfs abroad in 1 783-4, it will be feen that 
 the Company's credit was quite cxhaufted ; their 
 bonds and other feeurities were at the enormous 
 difcount of ()5 per cent, at Bombay ; of 50 per cent. 
 at Madras; and of 30 or 35 per cent, at Bengal. 
 Bills of exchange were never regularly paid ; the 
 civil and military were greatly in arrears; and the 
 
 army
 
 ( 59 ) 
 
 army at laft in a ftate of abfolute mutiny for their 
 pay. In 1801, the army is paid up ; the civil fer- 
 vants are paid in paper without murmuring ; the 
 difcount on bonds and fecurities is very low ; not 
 exceeding 7 or 8 per cent, except on paper that 
 bears the lovveft intereft, that is 6 per cent, and 
 upon that only 22 per cent. ; and fo far from the 
 Company's credit being exhaufted, the Govern- 
 ments in India have, within thefe few months, bor- 
 rowed more money than ufual ; in particular at Ma- 
 dras, they have negociated one loan for 1,200,0001. 
 a thing unheard of till now. This is not a ilate 
 for defpair; it may require a fyftem of reform and 
 economy both abroad and at home ; and peace, 
 which is now accomplifhed, affords the faired op- 
 portunity of entering upon both. As to the lit ua- 
 tion of the Company in Great Britain, it has been 
 repeatedly ftated from behind the bar as very prof- 
 perous, and I hope we are not in any error on that 
 fubjccl:. The Sales have been very large ; the 
 Treafury has been very full ; Bills of Exchange have 
 been paid in advance ; you have not been obliged 
 to go to Parliament in forma paupens, or in any 
 form, unlefs it may be to defire they will difcharge 
 the long bill you have again (I the Government. 
 Your credit is fo perfectly good, you could circu- 
 late a million more Bonds ; you could purchafe to 
 any amount of Exports on credit. The Bank will 
 lend you ; you have 1 ,200,0001. of annuities you 
 can fell ; in fhort, you have afTets at command, if 
 
 Government
 
 Government will but be ju ft towards you, of at 
 leaft eight millions fterling. You may, therefore, I 
 hope, go on without calling for any additional capi- 
 tal ; and, I believe, you owe in England at this 
 time one million and a half lefs than you did in 
 1/83-4, at which time the Company's credit and 
 ability was fo very low, that you were obliged to 
 go to Parliament to folicit that you might have a 
 longer time allowed for the difcharge of 900,000!. 
 arrear of duties ; and that you might be protected 
 againft the holders of bills from India, and be au- 
 thorifed to defer payment of them for two or three 
 years after they became due. Now, Mr. Chair- 
 man, if there is any truth in this fiat e of the Com- 
 pany's affairs at home and abroad, taking into the 
 confideration whatever the prefent debt may ex- 
 ^eed the former, I do not think there is reafon 
 fufficient to conclude, that things arc now lo in- 
 finitely more alarming and defpcrate than they 
 were in 1 783-4. All this is open to the obferva- 
 tion of every man who will take the trouble of ex- 
 amining fuch accounts and documents as are pub- 
 lifhed ; but, as it is pofftblc we do not yet " know 
 " the whole truth," I do not pretend to offer any 
 dccifive opinion on the real ft ate of the Company's 
 affairs. Perhaps we may be allowed, one day or 
 other, to go into a complete examination of them ; 
 and I differ, I confels, Mr. Chairman, fo far from', 
 you on the fubjcct, that the fooner that is done, in 
 my opinion, the better. 
 
 But.
 
 ( 61 ) 
 
 But, Sir, condemn no man, and efpecially a mad 
 like the late Minifter for India, whom you have 
 fo uniformly praifed, without a very different re- 
 view and examination of your affairs, than what is 
 given in this Report : common juftice would re- 
 quire it for any man ; refpect for paft and acknow- 
 ledged fervices requires it for the Ex-Minifter. 
 
 There are many other parts of this Report which 
 challenge obfervation. 
 
 [Here was a violent call for the QuefHon, and 
 Mr. Henchman could not proceed for fome 
 time. At laft filence was obtained.] 
 Mr. Chairman, I have ftill much to lay, particu- 
 larly about Shipping, and in anfwer to the aflertions 
 which are made to convince that Indian (hips are 
 
 the dearclt ; but I fhall not trouble the Court 
 
 %^ 
 
 further on that fubjcct at prefent than to obferve, 
 that I ftill retain the opinion I have long enter- 
 tained of teak fhips being upon the whole the 
 cheapeft ; that thev are the bed fuitcd for the 
 Trade, the Directors themfelves confeis in their 
 former Report, wherein they fay, " Indian fhips 
 " would have a clear advantage over others, be- 
 < caufe the equipment would be acljuficd with cer- 
 " tainty to the number and times of the cargoes 
 " procurable." But, Sir, there is a matter which 
 the Directors carefully keep out of fight, that I 
 
 * inuft brine; into view : and that is, their Memorial 
 \ i 
 
 to the Lords of the Treafury in 1797> containing 
 fentiments and principles diametrically oppofite to 
 
 what
 
 ( 62 ; 
 
 tvhat they contend for at prefent. It is reafonable 
 to afk, why the Court of Directors have not in any 
 one place attempted to fhew how their opinions 
 declared in 179/ 5 are to be reconciled with their 
 opinions in 1801? Even after they have been fo 
 often reminded of the contradictions, this Third 
 Report is as cantioufly filent upon that point as 
 the two preceding. My learned Friend (Mr. Im- 
 pey) has handled this point with his ufual ability, 
 and I afk with him, what anfwer can be given 
 to this memorial ? How can it be reconciled with 
 the later conduct of the Court of Directors ? 
 
 Neither do the Court of Directors point out 
 any of thofe grofs errors they fay exift in opinions 
 that have been publifhcd in oppofition to their Re- 
 ports, although they exprcfs confiderable anxiety, 
 that nothing but proofs fhould be paid any atten- 
 tion to by this Court. I with, Sir, they had 
 abided by their own rule ; and it may not be af- 
 fuming too much to conclude, that they would have 
 done fo oftencr, if they had been poffeded of any 
 proofs fatisfaclory to thcrnfelves. 
 
 The laft part of the Report that I (hall this 
 evening take notice of, is the repented afTertion, 
 that the Surplus Trade of India cannot be brought 
 to the River Thames ; and that a thort time would 
 (hew the erroneous principles and plans of the 
 Merchants. If fo, why not allow an experiment to 
 be made on equal terms ? If the Merchants will 
 fo foon be lofers and bankrupts by the trade, why 
 
 all
 
 ( 63 ) 
 
 all this anxiety to prevent them from making a 
 trial, that, by the declarations of the Direclors, muft 
 fo iliortly afford proof, that they (the Direclors) are 
 right, and their opponents wrong? The violent 
 oppofition that is made to any fuch experiment, 
 affords a very ftrong prefumption, that the Direc- 
 tors are not fo confident in the" event as they are 
 in the aflertion. However, Sir, be the error on 
 which fide it may (and I have great and moft re- 
 fpeclable encouragement ftill to think it does not 
 lay with thofe whofe caufe 1 efpoufe), I do truft 
 the Court will difcern, that no good confequences 
 can refult from their confirming, as is propofed, 
 the intemperate Refolution of the Court of Direc- 
 tors of the 26th of laft month. Is it reafonable, 
 is it refpectful, is it true, that the Government 
 of the country has " demonftrated a decided and 
 " unequivocal intention of invading arid deftroying 
 <c the commercial rights and privileges of the Eaft 
 " India Company ?" What can the Eaft India 
 Company gain by making this violent declaration 
 of war with the Adminifiration ? and where have 
 the Directors fhewn this to be the fact ? They 
 have not pointed out in what part of the corrected 
 orders this intention is manifeftcd ; and the mo- 
 tion before you will only lead to the continuation 
 of that, predicament in which the Directors have 
 been for many months, in confequence of a Re- 
 folution equally imprudent, pafled by this Court on 
 the '28th of May : or it muft lead to a confequence 
 
 which
 
 ( 64 ) 
 
 which all have profefled a defire to avoid, that is^ 
 the fubjecl going into Parliament, where, for my 
 Own part, if this amendment is rejected, and the 
 original motion is approved, I think it impoffible 
 to prevent its going; and it is indeed time we had 
 done with it, if intemperance is fo far to prevail, 
 that his Majefty's Minifters are treated with marked 
 difrefpecl, and if common decorum and civility can 
 no longer be prefervecl in the courfeofour debate, 
 even towards the perfon and character of the re- 
 fpeclable Nobleman who now prefides at the Board 
 t of Commiffioners. Too much heat, animofity, and 
 influence of private interefts, is got amongft us ; 
 it is time, therefore, that the difcuffion fhould come 
 to an end in this place, and be referred to ano- 
 ther, where it will be entered upon coolly and dif- 
 paffionately ; where the examination will proceed 
 upon public principles, and where clamour and 
 uproar is not admitted ; where thofe who are to 
 decide will not be under the influence of favours 
 received or expelled ; bur will, after a candid and 
 thorough inveftigation of the merits, come to that 
 decifion which (hall be juft towards the India 
 Company, and moft beneficial to the general in- 
 terefts of the kingdom at large. 
 
 T.Gitlet, Printer, u..r. .
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 tu ' Los Angeles 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 Form L9-32m-8,'58(5876s4)444 
 
 *? 95 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 AT
 
 -^? :.:eiichman- 
 
 'ubstprioe rf s 
 s pee c h d elj_v^inp 
 lv.3 qt the "ast 
 " He-use. 
 
 -1-63 
 
 A2P? 
 18C? 
 v.3