330} 
@estruction of Tippoo. This was 
a design equally unjust and impo- 
litic. Were this prince to be de- 
stroyed, no power would remain 
‘to balance the formidable one of 
the Mahrattas, who were chiefly 
kept in restraint by that prince; 
but when delivered from appre- 
hensions on that quarter, would 
become extremely dangerous, from 
their restlessness and rapacity. 
The principal reply to Major 
Maitland was by Mr. Powis, who 
argued the necessity of supporting 
the executive government in India 
m the war they had undertaken 
against Tippoo, from the general 
system long adopted in that coun- 
try by British councils. He ac- 
Lnowledged that system to be high- 
ly pernicious in itself; but it must 
be effectually maintained until. we 
could wholly abandon it. This, 
however, was impracticable while 
viber European powers retained 
territorial possessions in the east; 
which was one of the greatest evils 
that had ever befallen Europe. 
Several other speakers took part 
im this debate; which concluded 
by a negativeon Major Maitland’s 
motions. 
_ Jt was again resumed on. the 
2th of March; when the Major 
declared, that from. the: most. at- 
tentive perusal of the papers that 
had been produced by ministers, 
mstead of finding himself compel- 
Jed to retract his. opinions, he was 
farther confirmed in their pro- 
priety; these papers clearly. prov- 
mg that the English resident at 
the Rajah of Travancore’s court, 
been instructed to prevail upon 
him to admit a force ia) his domi- 
miens: much greater than was re- 
-Quisite to protect. them, and. in 
ANNUAL REGISTER, (1792. 
reality sufficient to carry, on, the 
most extensive hostilities against 
Tippoo, according to the plan al- 
ready projected. This and. other 
particulars of a like tendency, 
evinced the existence of such a 
plan. 
In answer to these assertions, it 
was averred by the other side, that 
from the personal character and 
conduct of Tippoo, no person in In+ 
dia entertained any doubt of his 
hostile intentions and preparations; 
and that Lord Cornwallis had la- 
mented with marked repugnance, 
the necessity which he clearly fore- 
saw, of again taking up armsagainst 
that prince. 
In consistency. with theseasseve- 
rations it was moved, that. the con- 
duct observed by Lord Cornwallis 
on this occasion, accorded withthe 
true spirit andintent of the rules'‘of 
government, established by the 
British parliament for the affairs of 
India. 
A motion of this nature was 
warmly opposed. It was represent- 
ed as involving in our general vote 
of approbation, allthe measures pro- 
secuted in India, whether worthy, of 
praise or deserving of blame. The 
correspondence on our part, with 
the enemiesto Tippoo, plainly refers - 
red to a dismemberment of his:de- 
minions in their favour, and proved 
of course an intended rupture with 
him. His pacific offers had also 
been refused; and the terms had not 
been communicated. to parliament. 
All this wore a suspicious: aspect’; 
but what was still more reprehensi- | 
ble, the civil and military govern- 
mentofour Indian settlements. were 
contrary to. the fundamental spirit 
and essence of the Brittsh constitu- 
tion, vested in.a single person, sub 
ject 
