LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

and the persons in possession, very unfavorable to the interests of the public and to the duty of their situations.

      Since the act two persons have been nominated to the ministers of the crown by the Court of Directors for this succession. Neither has yet been approved. But by the description of the persons a judgment may be formed of the principles on which this power is likely to be exercised.

      Stuart and Sulivan's appointment to succeed to vacancies. Your Committee find, that, in consequence of the above-mentioned act, the Honorable Charles Stuart and Mr. Sulivan were appointed to succeed to the first vacancies in the Supreme Council. Mr. Stuart's first appointment in the Company's service was in the year 1761. He returned to England in 1775, and was permitted to go back to India in 1780. In August, 1781, he was nominated by the Court of Directors (Mr. Sulivan and Sir William James were Chairman and Deputy-Chairman) to succeed to the first vacancy in the Supreme Council, and on the 19th of September following his Majesty's approval of such nomination was requested.

      Mr. Stuart's situation at the time of his appointment. In the nomination of Mr. Stuart, the consideration of rank in the service was not neglected; but if the Court of Directors had thought fit to examine their records, they would have found matter at least strongly urging them to a suspension of this appointment, until the charges against Mr. Stuart should be fully cleared up. That matter remained (as it still remains) unexplained from the month of May, 1775, where, on the Bengal Revenue Consultations of the 12th of that month, peculations to a large amount are charged upon oath against Mr. Stuart under the following title: "The Particulars of the Money unjustly taken by Mr. Stuart, during the Time he was at Burdwan." The sum charged against him in this account is 2,17,684 Sicca rupees (that is, 25,253l. sterling); besides which there is another account with the following title: "The Particulars of the Money unjustly taken by Callypersaud Bose, Banian to the Honorable Charles Stuart, Esquire, at Burdwan, and amounting to Sicca Rupees 1,01,675" (that is, 11,785l.),—a large sum to be received by a person in that subordinate situation.

      The minuteness with which these accounts appear to have been kept, and the precision with which the date of each particular, sometimes of very small sums, is stated, give them the appearance of authenticity, as far as it can be conveyed on the face or in the construction of such accounts, and, if they were forgeries, laid them open to an easy detection. But no detection is easy, when no inquiry is made. It appears an offence of the highest order in the Directors concerned in this business, when, not satisfied with leaving such charges so long unexamined, they should venture to present to the king's servants the object of them for the highest trust which they have to bestow. If Mr. Stuart was really guilty, the possession of this post must furnish him not only with the means of renewing the former evil practices charged upon him, and of executing them upon a still larger scale, but of oppressing those unhappy persons who, under the supposed protection of the faith of the Company, had appeared to give evidence concerning his former misdemeanors.

      This attempt in the Directors was the more surprising, when it is considered that two committees of this House were at that very time sitting upon an inquiry that related directly to their conduct, and that of their servants in India.

      It was in the same spirit of defiance of Parliament, that at the same time they nominated Mr. Sulivan, son to the then Chairman of the Court Mr. Sulivan's situation at the time of his appointment of Directors, to the succession to the same high trust in India. On these appointments, your Committee thought it proper to make those inquiries which the Court of Directors thought proper to omit. They first conceived it fitting to inquire what rank Mr. Sulivan bore in the service; and they thought it not unnecessary here to state the gradations in the service, according to the established usage of the Company.

      The Company's civil servants generally go to India as writers, in which capacity they serve the Company five years. The next step, in point of rank, is to be a factor, and next to that a junior merchant; in each of which capacities they serve the Company three years. They then rise to the rank of senior merchant, in which situation they remain till called by rotation to the Board of Trade. Until the passing of the Regulation Act, in 1773, seniority entitled them to succeed to the Council, and finally gave them pretensions to the government of the Presidency.

      The above gradation of the service, your Committee conceive, ought never to be superseded by the Court of Directors, without evident reason, in persons or circumstances, to justify the breach of an ancient order. The names, whether taken from civil or commercial gradation, are of no moment. The order itself is wisely established, and tends to provide a natural guard against partiality, precipitancy, and corruption in patronage. It affords means and opportunities for an examination into character; and among the servants it secures a strong motive to preserve a fair reputation. Your Committee find that no respect whatsoever was paid to this gradation in the instance of Mr. Sulivan, nor is there any reason assigned for departing from it. They do not find that Mr. Sulivan had ever served the Company in any one of the above capacities, but was, in the year 1777, abruptly brought into the service, and sent to Madras to succeed as Persian Translator and Secretary to the Council.

      Your Committee have found a letter from Mr. Sulivan to George Wombwell and William Devaynes, Esquires, Chairman and Deputy-Chairman of the Court of Directors, stating that he trusted his applications would have a place in their deliberations when Madras affairs were taken up. Of what nature those applications were your Committee cannot discover, as no traces of them appear on the Company's records,—nor whether any proofs of his ability, even as Persian Translator, which might entitle him to a preference to the many servants in India whose study and opportunities afforded them the means of becoming perfect masters of that language.

      On the above letter your Committee find that the Committee of Correspondence proceeded; and on their recommendation the Court of Directors unanimously approved of Mr. Sulivan to be appointed to succeed to the posts of Secretary and Persian Translator.

      Mr. Sulivan's succession of offices. Conformably to the orders of the court, Mr. Sulivan succeeded to those posts; and the President and Council acquainted the Court of Directors that they had been obeyed. About five months after, it appears that Mr. Sulivan thought fit to resign the office of Persian Translator, to which he had been appointed by the Directors. In April, 1780, Mr. Sulivan is commended for his great diligence as Secretary; in August following he obtains leave to accompany Mrs. Sulivan to Bengal, whence she is to proceed to Europe on account of her health; and he is charged with a commission from the President and Council of Fort St. George to obtain for that settlement supplies of grain, troops, and money, from the Governor-General and Council of Bengal. In October the Governor-General requests permission of the Council there to employ Mr. Sulivan as his Assistant, for that he had experienced (between his arrival in Bengal and that time) the abilities of Mr. Sulivan, and made choice of him as completely qualified for that trust; also requests the board to appoint him Judge-Advocate-General, and likewise to apply to the Presidency of Madras for him to remain in Bengal without prejudice to his rank on their establishment: which several requests the board at Madras readily complied with, notwithstanding their natural sensibility to the loss of a Secretary of such ability and diligence as they had described Mr. Sulivan to be.

      On the 5th of December following, the President and Council received a letter from Bengal, requesting that Mr. Sulivan might be allowed to keep his rank. This request brought on some discussion. A Mr. Freeman, it seems, who had acted under Mr. Sulivan as Sub-Secretary whilst his principal obtained so much praise for his diligence, addressed the board on the same day, and observed, "that, since Mr. Sulivan's arrival, he [Mr. Freeman] had, without intermission, done almost the whole of the duty allotted to the post of Secretary, which it was notorious Mr. Sulivan had paid but little attention to; and neither his inclination or duty led him to act any longer as Mr. Sulivan's deputy."

      Here your Committee cannot avoid remarking the direct contradiction which this address of Mr. Freeman's gives to the letter from the President and Council to the Court of Directors in April, 1780, wherein Mr. Sulivan is praised for his "diligence and attention in his office of Secretary."

      The President and Council do not show any displeasure at Mr. Freeman's representation, (so contrary to their own,) the truth of which they thus tacitly admit, but agree to write to the Governor-General and Council,

Скачать книгу