Page images
PDF
EPUB

treaty and war) his refusal to communicate his whole correspondence with Mr. Middleton to the superiour Council; yet the said Warren Hastings, in defiance of the opinion of the Directors, and the unanimous opinion of the General Court of the said East-India Company, as well as the precedent positive orders of the Court of Directors, and the injunctions of an Act of Parliament has, from that time to the present, never made any communication of the whole of his correspondence to the Governour-General and Council, or to the Court of Directors.

II. SHAW ALLUM.

THAT, in a solemn Treaty of Peace, concluded the 16th of August 1765, between the East India Company and the late Nabob of Qude, Shuja ul Dowla, and highly approved of, confirmed, and ratified by the said Company, it is agreed, "that the king Shaw Allum shall remain in full possession of Corah, and such part of the "province of Illiabad as he now possesses, which

[ocr errors]

are ceded to his majesty as a royal demesne "for the support of his dignity and expenses."That, in a separate agreement, concluded at the same time between the king Shaw Allum and the YOL. XI.

CC

[ocr errors]

then

[ocr errors]

bon

then Subudar of Bengal, under the immediate security and guarantee of the English Company, the faith of the Company was pledged to the said king for the annual payment of twenty-six lacks of rupees for his support out of the revenues of Bengal; and that the said Company did then receive from the said king a grant of the Dewanny of the provinces of Bengal, Bahar, and Orissa, on the express condition of their being security for the annual payment abovementioned;that the EastIndia Company have held, and continue to hold, the Dewanny so granted, and for some years have complied with the conditions, on which they accepted of the grant thereof; and have at all times acknowledged that they held the Dewanny in virtue of the Moguls gr That the said Court of Directors, in their letter of the 30th June 1769, to Bengal, declared," that they esteemed "themselves bound by treaty to protect the king's

L

grants.

grants.

person, and to secure him the possession of the Corah and Illahabad districts," and, supposing an agreement should be made respecting these provinces between the king and Shuja ul Dowla, the Directors then said, "that they should be subject to no further claim or requisition from the king, excepting for the stipulated tribute for "Bengal, which they (the Governour and Coun"cil) were to pay to his agent, or remit to him in แ such manner as he might direct." 93 to 1939.

[ocr errors]

That

That, in the year 1772, the king Shaw Allum, who had had hitherto resided at Allahabad, trusting to engagements, which he had entered into with the

[ocr errors]

Mahrattas, quitted that place and removed to Delhi; but, having soon quarrelled with those people, and afterwards being taken prisoner, had been treated by them with very great disrespect and cruelty that among other instances of their abuse, and of their immediate power over him, the Governour and Council of Bengal, in their letter of the 16th of August 1773, inform the Court of Directors, that he had been compelled, while a prisoner in their hands, to grant Sunnuds for the surrender of Corah and Illiabad to them; and it appears, from sundry other minutes of their own, that the said Governour and Council did at all times consider the surrender abovementioned as extorted from the king, and unquestionably an act of violence, which could not alienate, or impair his right to those provinces; and that when they took possession thereof, it was at the request of the king's Naib, or viceroy, who put them under the Council's protection; that on this footing they were accepted by the said Warren Hastings and his Council, and for some time considered by them as a deposit committed to their care by a prince, to whom the possession thereof was particularly guarantied by the East-India Company. In their letter of the 1st of March 1773, they (the said Warren

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

C C 2

Warren Hastings and his Council) say, " In no

[ocr errors]

shape can this compulsatory cession by the king "release us from the obligation we are under to "defend the provinces, which we have so particur"larly guarantied to him." But it appears that they soon adopted other ideas, and assumed other principles concerning this object. In the instruc tions, dated the 23d of June 1773, which the Council of Fort-William gave to the said Warren Hastings, previous to his interview with the Nabob Shuja ul Dowla at Benares, they say, that "while "the king continued at Delhi, whither he pro"ceeded in opposition to their most strenuous re"monstrances, they should certainly consider the

66

engagements between him and the Company as "dissolved by his alienation from them and their "interest; that the possession of so remote à

[ocr errors]

country could never be expected to yield any "profit to the Company, and the defence of it

must require a perpetual aid of their forces;" yet in the same instructions they declare their opinion, that," if the king should make overtures "to renew his former connexion, his right to re"claim the districts of Corah and Illiabad could

not with propriety be disputed," and they authorize the said Warren Hastings to restore them to him, on condition that he should renounce his claim to the annual tribute of twenty-six lacks of rupees, hereinbefore mentioned, and to the arrears,

which might be due ;--thereby acknowledging the justice of a claim, which they determined not to comply with but in return for the surrender of another equally valid;-that, nevertheless, in the treaty concluded by the said Warren Hastings with Shuja ul Dowla, on the 7th of September 1773, it is asserted, that his majesty (meaning the king Shaw Allum) "having abandoned the districts of "Corah and Illiabad, and given a Sunnud for "Corah and Currah to the Mahrattas, had thereby

3

forfeited his right to the said districts," although it, was well known to the said Warren Hastings, and had been so stated by him to the Court of Directors, that this surrender on the part of the king had been extorted from him by violence, while he was a prisoner in the hands of the Mahrattas, and although it was equally, well known to the said Warren Hastings, that there was nothing in the original treaty of 1765, which, could restrain the king from changing the place of his residence, consequently that his removal to Delhi could not occasion a forfeiture of his right to the provinces secured to him by that treaty.

[ocr errors]

"

[ocr errors]

That the said Warren Hastings, in the report, which, he made of his interview and negotiations with Shujah, ul, Dowla, dated the 4th of October 1773, declared "that the administration would

[ocr errors]

have been culpable, in the highest degree, in retaining possession of Corah and Illiabad for

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »