oath, or in such manner as the committee shall deem most expedient, that neither they nor any person on their account, or with their privity or knowledge, have given or promised to give any consideration on account of such nomination, either to the director from whom they obtained the same, or to any person on his behalf: and it was agreed to recommend to the court to direct each individual member of the court to do the same. -1st August, 1798. The court approved this report, and (15th August) each director in office, as well as those out of by rotation (except Mr. Devaynes) gave explanations in writing:-28th Feb. 1799. It was resolved, that every appointment made in consequence of corrupt practices be null and void, unless the parties to whom the appointment is given, shall, upon examination before the committee, make a fair and candid disclosure of all the circumstances attending the same. It was likewise resolved, that each director should in future, on the petition of the writer, whom he nominates, "declare upon his honour to whom he has given the appointment, and that he neither has received himself, nor is he to receive, nor has any other person to the best of his knowledge or belief received, nor is he to receive, any pecuniary consideration, nor any thing convertible in any mode into a pecuniary benefit on this account." The direction being changed in April, on the 14th of August, 1799, a new committee to investigate the truth of the sale of patronage, &c. was appointed.-17. Jan. 1800. The draft of a letter proposed to be addressed to the parents, &c. of persons appointed writers since

1793, requesting them to declare whether the appointments were given without anypecuniary or other consideration, was considered by the committee; when a discussion arose, whether it should be on oath ; when it was adjourned till the 21st of Jan., and it being then suggested whether it would be proper for the committee to proceed in their inquiry, it was decided in the affirmative.

The committee then proceeded to consider the drafts of the letter to the parents, &c. a draft of a report to the court, stating their reasons for recommending this mode of investigation, as also the form of a declaration for the persons who have received such appointments The consideration was adjourned to the 24th of Jan., when a discussion ensuing thereon, and on the necessity and expediency of the mode of public investigation therein proposed; it was agreed to postpone the said report, and to proceed to act agreeably to the authority and instructions already received from the court. The committee resolved, that in their opinion the parties to whom each director had given nominations, should be called upon to state on what grounds they have received the same, in every case that the committee may deem it expedient so to do.

The committee then examined, viva voce, its different members, as a preliminary to the proposed measure; each member declared upon his honour that what he had stated in regard to his appointments was strictly true, and expressed his readiness to confirm the same by his oath.

28th Jan. 1800. The committee met to consider a draft of a report

to

to the court, communicating their proceedings, and proposing further measures for the court's adoption, as also a draft of a letter referred to in the said report.

31st Jan. The report of this day's date, with the letters to the parents, &c. and the declaration to be made by them, was approved.

5th Feb. The court, after considerable discussion of the above, confirm the same; but resolve that the consideration of what is further to be done on the said report be adjourned to the 11th of Feb.; when it is resolved, that the committee of patronage be instructed to proceed in the examination of the other members of the court, as they I did with themselves. It was then moved, that the declaration proposed in the report be upon oath; on this, the motion of adjournment was carried.

25th Feb. A report signed by 15 directors, approves the declaration, and recommends that the several persons to whom the same is sent, be requested to confirm such declaration upon oath.

Another report on the same day, signed by 12 directors, recommends that no further proceedings be had in this business till the 1st of May. Both the above reports are approved by the court.

26th Feb. 1800. The right honourable Henry Dundas addressed the court acknowledging the receipt of their minute; and stating, that he feels it a duty that he owes both to himself and the court, to omit no means in his power for ascertaining whether any person whom he has obliged through the favour of the court, has presumed to abuse his kindness in so sordid and unwarrantable a manner.

Sir Francis Baring dissents from the resolutions to call for the declaration on oath.

The committee of patronage ceasing with the direction in April, on 18th June, 1800, the court took into consideration the propriety of re-appointing the said committee.

It being moved, "That a committee of patronage be re-appointed;" an amendment was moved, to leave out all the words after the word "that," and to insert in their room the following, "it does not appear to this court, that any circumstance has been stated to the court, by the committee lately appointed for an inquiry into the disposal of patronage, that can induce or would justify the court in adopting the illegal and novel administration of extra-judicial oaths to a variety of persons not directly connected with the East India company or the management of its affairs, and which, though it would tend to throw a suspicion upon the court at large, which no circumstances that have hitherto come to the knowledge of the court can induce them to suppose the members thereof merit, would not, they conceive, be an effectual mode of bringing to light any such practices, even if such in any partial instance should have existed."

On the question for the amendment being put, the votes for, and against, were equal; when the lot decided for the amendment.

25th June. The chairman, deputy chairman, and eight other directors, dissent from the resolution not to re-appoint the committee of patronage.

24th Sept. A motion was made in the court of proprietors, that the above proceedings be read; they

were

were read accordingly, and notice given by the mover, of his intention of bringing the subject forward at a future court.

20th Jan. 1801. It was moved, "That it is the opinion of this court that the inquiry into the alleged abuse of patronage, ought to be continued."

It was moved to amend the said motion, by adding thereto the fol.. lowing words, "to investigate any charge that may be made of corrupt practices against any one or more of the court of directors." The above amendment passed in the negative; when a ballot was demanded on the original question, it was, 3rd Feb. 1810, lost by a majority of 139; 411 voting for the question against it, 550.

The following opinion of counsel was given to the court of directors, previous to the ballot being taken; viz.

"Case for the East India company:

"Whether the court of directors, or any committee of the said court, whether considered as a committee of that court, or as a committee of proprietors, be legally authorized to call for the examination of such persons upon oath, as recommended by the court of directors in their resolution of the 25th Feb. 1800; or whether in their opinion any magistrate would be justified in administering the oath so recommended; and generally to advise concerning the legality and effect of such proceedings.

"We are of opinion, that neither the court of directors, nor any com mittee of the said court, or committee of proprietors, have any legal authority to require or receive examinations of persons upon oath, as

If this house should in its wisdoni adopt any legislative measures for the purpose of preventing all traffic in the disposal of offices under government, it will, in the opinion of your committee, be proper to extend the same protection to patronage held under the East India company; but they see no reason to recommend any special or separate provisions as applicable to their case, judging that the East India company has within its own power the most effectual means for accomplishing that end.

It can never be advisable, without absolute necessity, to add new offences to the long catalogue already enumerated in the penal statutes; nor is it wise to diminish the sanctity of oaths by resorting to them upon all occasions. Where solemn declarations have been habitually disregarded, little reliance can be placed upon the sanction of any other species of asseveration. Instances occur but too frequently, where an oath comes to be considered merely as part of the official form by which an appointment is conferred; and the human mind, fertile in self-deception, accommodates itself with wonderful facility to overcoming all scruples, or applies a perverse ingenuity to evad

ing all restrictions which stand in the way of present interest. Little fear of detection is entertained, when transactions are in their nature private and confidential; and the appellation of honour, most improperly applied to negociations of this clandestine kind, attaches by a singular perverseness, stronger degree of obligation to the performance of such engagements, upon the very ground that they are illegal.

a

With a view to prevent all dealings in patronage, the obvious and natural mode will be to take away all inducement to traffic in it; and this can only be attained by making the hazard of such speculations greater than the temptation.

The regulations of the company are founded upon this true and ef ficacious principle. But examples have hitherto been wanting to demonstrate the determination of the court of directors to enforce their orders; no instance of purchasing or procuring by undue means an appointment in the civil or military service of the East India company, after such appointment had actually taken place, and since the court's resolution of 28th of Feb. 1799, having been so far established, as to enable the court to dismiss the party appointed.

The immediate consequence of the information contained in this report, must be, that a certain number of persons in the service of the company will be instantly deprived of their employments, recalled from India, and declared incapable of again receiving any appointment under the company. The money improperly given for procuring these situations, will be absolutely lost, without any possibility

of recovery; and those who have either imprudently or corruptly been concerned in obtaining what they conceived to be benefits for their relatives or friends, will find that they have done the greatest injury to those whom they desired to serve, by inducing them to dedicate some of the best years of their lives to an employment, which the original defects, and corrupt practices through which it was obtained, must disqualify them from prosecuting.

Hard as some of these cases must be, and innocent and ignorant as many of the young men nominated under these circumstances probably are, of the undue means by which their appointments were acquired, your committee are of opinion, that nothing but a strict adherence to the rule laid down by the court of directors, can put a stop to the continuance of these abuses, and prevent the chance of their recurring.

In 1779, when, in the course of the investigation already mentioned, indemnity was offered to all those who would make a fair and candid disclosure of all the circumstances through which their situations had been procured, though information was gained with regard to facts, no example could be made, in consequence of such disclosure, of those who were found offending; and it may be doubted whether such practices have been less prevalent since that inquiry, than before. The deficiency of their power to compel persons to answer, precluded the court of directors from discovering if they punished, or from punishing if they discovered the traffic which was the subject of complaint.

The

The oath taken by the directors seems as effectual as any thing which can be devised for the purpose of guarding against corruption, so far as the directors themselves are immediately concerned; and your committee have already remarked, that no one case of corruption or abuse which has been before them, affects any member of that court. It is, in the passing through several hands, which happens frequently with regard to the more numerous and less valuable appointments of cadets, that opportunities for this sort of negociation are presented, which, without a greater degree of vigilance and strictness on the part of each director, at the time of making such nomination, it will be impracticable to prevent in fu

ture.

Your committee may perhaps be exceeding the limits of their province, in the further considerations to which this subject leads; but as they decline recommending any special legislative enactment, their view of the proper remedy for these abuses may be incomplete, unless they proceed to suggest some other observations.

The unpleasant duty of increased vigilance is not likely to be performed without some incitement of benefit or disadvantage, attendant upon the exercise, or neglect of it; and it is equally conformable to experience to presume, that patronage will continue to be abused, so long as no inconvenience is felt by the person primarily giving, or by the person ultimately receiving it.

Where strict examination is a duty, any species of negligence cannot be wholly blameless; and it appears not unreasonable to curtail in some degree, the patronage of those

who have either not been sufficiently watchful in the disposal of it, or whose diligence has been unsuccessful in preventing the abuses which are complained of. As an additional check against those who are inclined to purchase such appointments, it may be expedient that a bond should be given by the parent, guardian, or friend of every person receiving a nomination, containing a penalty to be paid to the East India company, upon proof being made at any subsequent period, that any valuable consideration was given for such appointment; that species of proof being deemed sufficient to levy the penalty, upon which the court of directors may think themselves authorized to vacate the appointment.

The practices which are developed in the present report, and other transactions which this House has recently had under its cognizance, are sufficient to demonstrate, that patronage of various descriptions has, in several instances, become an article of traffic; that an opinion of the generality of such practices has been prevalent to a still greater extent; and that fraudulent agents have availed themselves of this belief, to the injury of the credulous and unwary, and to the discredit of those in whose hands the disposition of offices is lodged. It will depend upon the steps which may be taken in consequence of these inquiries, whether such abuses shall receive a permanent check, or a virtual encouragement.

Attack on Martinique.-Intelligence has been received by the Ilam, arrived at Liverpool from Barbadoes, which she left on the

1