HISTORY OF EUROPE. 



Ill 



txpressly stipulated, at the renewal 

 of the company's charter, that the 

 country should receive half a million 

 annually : and yet, after the first 

 year, this sum was never paid. It 

 was strange, that, out of a territo- 

 rial revenue of 13 millions, and a 

 flourishing home trade, there was 

 not surplus enough to pay a sum so 

 comparatively trifling. The com- 

 pany may say, " We have spent the 

 money, there is no surplus, and 

 therefore you can have no claim." 

 Such an answer ought not, how- 

 ever, to satisfy the countr} . Par- 

 liament should enquire how they 

 speiW: their mon^,. before they ad- 

 mitted such a plea. Our Indian 

 prosperity is always in hope^nd in 

 future prospects, and the estimates 

 are always made higher than the 

 event justifies. This hacj been the 

 constant practice for the last 21 

 years, and appeared the system of 

 those who produce Indian accounts. 

 He hoped, at a future day, that the 

 whole system of the administration 

 of the company's affairs, in India, 

 would undergo that full examination 

 that its great importance deserved. 

 If no other gentleman, more com- 

 petent, would bring the subject be- 

 fore parliament, he should consider 

 it his duty to do so. 



Mr. C. Grant (deputy chairman 

 of the East-India company) admit- 

 ted, it was a national misfortune, 

 that the allairs of India were so little 

 known, or attended to. He assert- 

 ed, from his o.wn positive know- 

 ledge, that the company's aflairs 

 were in a much better situation 

 now, than they were in the year 

 1793. 



After a reply from Mr. Francis, 

 and some explanations from lord 

 Casilercagh, the resolutions were 

 agreed to in the tomuiillee. 



On the day appointed for the dis- 

 cussion of the resolutions, lord Cas- 

 tlereagh entered into a very detailed 

 statement, to prove, that neither he 

 nor his predecessor had ever held 

 out any promises which would not 

 have been fulfilled, if it had not 

 been for wars, that could not have 

 been foreseen. He concluded, bj 

 moving, that the proper officer 

 should be directed to lay before the 

 house an account of the revenue, 

 and charges of India for the last 10 

 years, distinguishing each year. 



This motion gave rise to a long 

 conversation, in which Mr. John- 

 stone, Mr. Prinsep, Mr. C. Grant, 

 and lord Castlereagh, were the 

 principal speakers. The motion was 

 at last carried, without a division. 



Independently of the subjects of 

 great general importance, which 

 gave rise to the debates which we 

 have already detailed, the Ayles- 

 bury and Liskeard elections pro- 

 duced some eager discussions. — 

 Those in the Liskeard case Avere 

 confined to the house of commons ; 

 but in that of Aylesbury, there was 

 a bill of partial disfranchisement, 

 which produced warm debates in 

 both houses of parliament. The 

 committee, upon the petition on the 

 Aylesbury election, had reported, 

 that Mr. Bent had been guilty of 

 bribery. 



Sir G. Cornwall, who was chair- 

 man of that committee, stated, from 

 tho report,' that many of the voters, 

 not being content with having only 

 two candidates, looked out for a 

 third, and accepted bribes of money 

 for giving him their suflrages. The 

 object of the committee was not to 

 prosecute nor disqualify those cor. 

 nipt voters, but to extend the right 

 of voting for. (hat borough to other 

 persons ja the neighbouring hun- 

 dreds. 



