NEW SOUTH WALES SHIPPING. Arrivals at Sydney.-Jan. 24. Florentia, from London and Cape.-Feb. 1. Martha, from London; Eleanor, from London; and Fame, from Cape and Hobart Town.-3. Daphne, from Mauritius and Hobart Town; and Princess Victoria, from Hobart Town.-6. Leda, from Cape,-8. Bolina, from London.-10. Atwick, from London and Hobart Town.-15. Fairlie, from London.

Departures.-Jan. 30. Layton, for China.-31. Neptune, for Singapore.

Arrivals at Hobart Town.-Nov. 4. Eliza, from Dublin.-Dec. 11. Neptune, from London.-12. John Dunscombe, from Mauritius; and Gem, from London.-14. Aurora, from Sydney; and Tamar, from Port Arthur.-25. Brazil Packet, from New Zealand. Jan. 2. Merope and Enchantress, both from Maritius.-8. Eagle and Prince Regent, both from N.S. Wales.-9. Jolly Rambler, from ditto; and Emma Kemp, from Rio.-14. Southworth, from London.-15. Atwick, from London. - 16. Daphne, from Mauritius.-21. H.M.S. Alligator, from Swan River.-26. Brilliant, from London and Swan River.-Feb. 6. Argo, from Sydney. Departures from ditto.-Dec. 28. Lord Lynedoch and Isabella, both for Madras (with H.M. 63d regt.)-Jan. 5. Aurora, for Madras.

Arrival at Launceston.-Oct. 26. Countess Dunmore, from London.

St. Helena.

GENERAL ORDERS.

April 17, 1834.-The Governor and Council think proper to publish in General Orders the following Extracts from the Hon. Court of Directors' despatches to this Government, dated 22d January 1834.

"We have to acquaint you that, at the request of his Majesty's Government, we have undertaken to administer the government of your island, in the name of the crown, for one year from the 22d April next (unless a final arrangement should be previously made by the King's Government).

"We have resolved, in accordance with the wish which his Majesty's Government have expressed, that no vacancies, either in the civil or military establishments, shall be filled up, nor any new appointments made, nor any re-enlisting take place, without prévious communication with the Lords of his Majesty's treasury.

"The clothing indented for by you, on the 4th April 1833, will be forwarded by an early opportunity.

"We are under the necessity of declining to comply with Lieut. Knipe's petition (for twelve months' back rank).

"We authorize the grant of horse-allowance to Lieut. Col. Hodson, from the period at which he ceased to draw it.

"We do not object to your having granted a ration to Lieut. O'Connor.

"We will not object to Mr. Reed having the rank of captain, with the distinct understanding that the Company is to incur no expense thereby, beyond the ration of a captain, to commence from the date of his memorial, viz. 1st April 1833.

"The reasons that made it necessary for us to decline to sanction the invaliding of Col. Wright, as explained in our despatch dated 31st July 1833, paras. 3 and 4, apply with equal force to the case of Major Sampson. We must, therefore, withhold our sanction from the grant to that officer of full pay and allowances as an invalid, and we desire that, in the event of Major Sampson's final retirement, his retiring pay be limited to the amount fixed by the Regulations, viz. 16s. per day, in this case as in that of Colonel Wright.

66

Major Sampson will have the option of returning to the effective establishIf he do so, you will cancel all promotions made in consequence of your resolution to invalid him.

ment.

"The orders issued to heads of departments, on the 9th January 1834, are still to continue in effect."

India. The election ought not to be, as it had heretofore been, a mere matter of form: the committee was intended as a check upon the Court of Directors, and it was a mere farce that the appointment of members should depend upon that body, upon whom it was the duty of the committee to act as a check. The nomination of the body, which was meant to operate as a check on the directors, should rather proceed from that (the proprietors') side of the bar, and therefore he should propose that Col. Blackburne be elected to the vacant situation.

The Chairman denied that the appointment of the committee was under the influence of the directors. The election was made by the court at large, any member of which was at liberty to take exception to any name proposed. As was usual, the names of those who served on the committee last year were put in succession, and those individuals were re-elected without a dissentient voice. He had deemed it proper to name Mr. Lewis Loyd in the place of a gentleman who had disqualified, but it was for the court to decide on that proposition. He must be allowed to say, with respect to Mr. Loyd, that there was not in that court a more respectable individual. He was a man of talent, possessing great commercial knowledge, and was, in all respects, a character that would do honour to the committee of by-laws, or to any other body. As to Col. Black burne, neither the hon. proprietor, nor any other member of that court, had a higher respect for him than he (the Chairman) had. He had, however, proposed Mr. Lewis Loyd; and, if any gentleman seconded the amendment of the hon. proprietor, it must be put. If not, he would put the main question for the appointment of Mr. Lewis Loyd.

The proposition of Capt. Gowan was not seconded, and Mr. Lewis Loyd was elected on the committee, Capt. Gowan being the only dissentient.

Mr. Twining hoped that he would not be considered as intruding on the court, if he briefly noticed an expression which had fallen from the gallant officer. The gal lant officer had said, that he considered the appointment of the committee of bylaws as a mere farce. He, of course, spoke with great diffidence of the proceedings of any committee or body of which he was himself a member; but he felt that he should be scarcely discharging his duty, standing in that court as he did, if he did not come forward and suggest to the court the impropriety of such language. He did this, on the present occasion, the more readily, because he was quite willing to confess, that the labour of the committee had, of late, been extremely light. That circumstance, however, did not arise from want of attention on their

part; it did not arise from a want of anxiety to examine any matters that might be brought before them. No; the lightness of the duty was occasioned by the very able, persevering, and laborious attention of former committees of by-laws, who had exerted themselves most beneficially, before he had the honour of belonging to that useful body. He stated this fairly, observing, at the time, that he had, on his own part, no merit to lay claim to, with respect to what had been done by the committee. Of this he was perfectly confident, that if reference were made to their records,—and they could easily be referred to, as to what had been done by former committees of by-laws, they would be found to bear ample testimony to the fact, that the appointment of the by-laws committee had not been a farce. It was only owing to their attention formerly, and to the regularity which prevailed in every department, from the highest to the lowest, that less had been done in the committee, of late, than had been heretofore required. He could assure the court, and the gallant captain himself, that when he spoke of the appointment of the committee as a farce, he was in error.

Capt. Gowan said, the hon. proprietor had misunderstood and quite misrepre sented him. He never meant to say that the labours of the committee of by-laws was a farce. What he said was, that the proposition coming from the directors to that (the proprietor's) side of the bar, was a farce. It was a mere nomination without inquiry. The names were mumbled over, and agreed to, as a matter of course, without observation. Now he thought that, if he went into an examination of the present committee, he could point out some members who had been inefficient for se

veral years. Surely the hon. proprietor would not say, that the whole of the members of that committee always appeared, or took part constantly and regularly in its proceedings. He wished that they on that side of the bar, as East-India proprietors, should look, with a more discriminating eye, to the individuals who were appointed on this committee. The appointment should not be left with the gentlemen at the other side of the bar, who selected their private friends or connec tions, however unfit they might be for the situation. He was anxious that those who were appointed should have knowledge, judicial or political, of India. In conclusion, he repeated, that he had merely described the mode of election to be a farce; and he was of the same opinion still.

RETIRING ALLOWANCES.

Mr. Weeding was not quite sure whether the subject he was about to notice would apply to the committee of by-laws on the ground of omission or neglect on

their part. It was not his intention to make any such charge. He had, indeed, no desire to accuse or complain of any one. All that he intended was to point out an error, to amend it if possible, and to prevent its recurrence in future. In passing, he would just glance at the conversation then before them, by stating, that he thought it a judicious practice in the recommendation of gentlemen to be appointed on the committee of by-laws coming from the other side of the bar, No men could so well understand as the Court of Directors what individuals were best fitted to perform the duties which devolved on the committee. The office being gratuitous, it would be difficult to find able and honourable men to undertake it, if it were to be made matter of canvass. Few men would like for such an object to be brought into invidious collision or comparison with others equally respectable. The subject which he was now about to mention was one of very great importance. They had all heard that, in consequence of the situation in which they were placed, under the new charter, they were about to discharge a number of their commercial servants, who would no longer have any duties to perform; and a scale of remuneration to be granted to the officers thus retiring had been drawn up. Amongst those remunerations, there was a great variety of sums, many of them amounting to more than £600.

The Chairman.-Does the hon. proprietor mean to end with any motion?

Mr. Weeding answered, that he did. He believed that he was privileged to do so, as that was a Quarterly General Court. What he wished to point out was of great importance, as it affected the rights of the Com. pany; and he hoped it was not too late for their interference in support of those rights. He had already observed, that it was proposed to grant, in the way of remuneration, many sums exceeding £600 in amount, and he contended that, in the first intance, those grants, so exceeding £600, ought to be laid before the proprietors for their sanction. The second section of the act under which the Company was now constituted, provided ·

"That all and singular the privileges, franchises, abilities, capacities, powers, authorities, whether military or civil, rights, remedies, methods of suit, penalties, forfeitures, disabilities, provisions, matters and things whatsoever, granted to or continued in the said United Company by the said Act of the fifty-third year of King George the Third, for and during the term limited by the said Act, and all other the enactments, provisions, matters, and things contained in the said Act, or in any other Act or Acts whatsoever, which are limited, or may be construed to be limited to continue for and during the term granted to the said Company by the said Act of the fifty-third year of King George the Third, So far as the same, or any of them, are in force, and not repealed by or repugnant to the enactments hereinafter contained, and all powers of alienation and disposition, rights, franchises, and immunities, which the said United Company now have, Asiat. Jour.N.S. VOL. 14, No.55.

shall continue and be in force, and may be exercised and enjoyed as against all persons whomsoever, subject to the superintendence, direction, and control hereinbefore mentioned, until the thirtieth day of April one thousand eight hundred and fiftyfour."

Now it was provided by the 53d of George III. cap. 155, sec. 88, "That from and after the passing of this Act, it shall not be lawful for the said Court of Directors to charge the funds of the said Company with the payment of any gratuity, to any officer, civil or military, or other person, exceeding the sum of £600, unless the grant, or resolution for that purpose, shall have been sanctioned by the Court of Proprietors, and approved and confirmed by the Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India." Now, considering this enactment, and looking at the proposed appropriation of sums exceeding £600, he thought that those grants ought to be laid before the Court of Proprietors in the first instance. He confessed that he had not a knowledge of the law, so as to practise it. But laws were, or ought to be made for the understanding of those to whom they applied; and having, as far as he could, studied the provision which he had quoted, his interpretation of it was that which he had stated. He would go as far as any man in granting a liberal remuneration to their servants; but he felt that one part of their service had not been sufficiently compensated, and that, under the circumstances which he had stated, the Court of Directors and the Board of Commissioners could not give rewards to the Company's servants exceeding £600, unless the same were sanctioned by the Court of Proprietors. He did not object to the amount being liberal, because he was sure that the Company had property enough to meet every demand that could be made on them, and such had always been his argument. What he now con tended for was a point of principle. His proposition simply was, that their commer cial servants on the home establishment could not legally receive remuneration to an amount exceeding £600, unless the grant was first brought before the proprietors. He hoped that some hon. pro prietor would second the motion, in order that the subject might be at once brought before court. The hon. proprietor then moved, "That the Court of Directors do not proceed in the remuneration to any party connected with the home establish ment, or any other, where the sum proposed to be granted. to the discharged servant shall exceed £600, until the same be submitted to the consideration of the General Court."

Sir C. Forbes said, that he felt it to be his duty to second the motion. The proprietors unquestionably owed if to them selves to assert such rights as were left to them by law under the late act; and he (2 D)

hoped that they would not be silent on this occasion. What construction might be put on the clause, to which their attention had been drawn, by lawyers, he could not say; but surely every man of common sense must admit, that sums of above £600, intended to be granted by way of remuneration, ought to be laid before them. He understood that a very liberal remuneration was to be granted to the servants of the Company connected with that house. Undoubtedly he would say, let the Company act with liberality to their servants. He would give his sanction and vote for any reward to which they had a just claim. But he could not help stating, that he most highly disapproved of the very shabby manner in which he understood the Court of Directors and the Board of Control intended to compensate their able and faithful and meritorious maritime servants. He hoped, however, that they had not yet made up their minds definitively on the subject. Many captains and officers had been thrown on the wide world without the means or the hope of getting employment. He saw from the first, that these various changes would end in the ruin of that service, and he did all he could at the time to enable the officers connected with it to better their situation. He, however, was not supported in his efforts. Of these officers there were very few who had property sufficient to enable them to live even moderately. If some of them had saved a little money, he believed the number was very small. He understood that a great proportion of these meritorious individuals were to be remunerated on a very low scale indeed. He hoped, however, that the Court of Directors would reconsider their case; and he was quite sure that the Court of Proprietors would willingly assist them in making a liberal provision for those gentlemen.

The Chairman said, he was convinced that the hon. mover and seconder could not for a moment suppose that the Court of Directors had any wish to contravene the law, or that they felt any desire to dimi nish the powers of the Court of Proprietors; those powers, whatever they might be, were established by law, and it was not within their competence, if they felt any such wish, to narrow or confine them. With respect to the matter then before the court, it was clear that the question of compensation must be decided by the late bill. The compensation to be granted to certain servants under the late change, with respect to their commercial character, which had been effected in the constitution of this body, was to be determined by the bill. In the first place, it was to be considered by the Court of Directors, it was then to be transmitted to the Board of Control, and afterwards laid before Par liament. If they were called upon under

was

the act of 53d of George III. to lay before the Court of Proprietors every compensa tion, remuneration, or donation of a certain amount, then of course that act must be complied with. Now, under the provisions of the new act, the Court of Directors had brought the matter before the Board of Control. They had submitted certain propositions to that board, and until they were decided on, it would be premature in that court to entertain a question of this kind, ignorant as the court must necessarily be of the nature of the propositions which were laid before the Board of Commissioners. Hereafter they might make any movement which they thought proper. At present, however, it would evidently be premature to enter on the question; and if the hon, proprietor persisted in his motion, he certainly must raise his voice against it. Mr. Weeding said, the Chairman under a mistake. The course which had been taken was not justified by the provisions of the new act. The propositions which had been submitted to the board should have been previously submitted to the General Court. The directors therefore had been premature. He (Mr. Weeding) had scarcely made baste enough, but he had made all the haste which his opportunities allowed him, and he feared his object would be defeated by any further delay. Certain propositions, it appeared, had been submitted to the Board of Control. Now, if these propo sitions received the official sanction of the Board, it would then, he believed, be too late for the Court of Proprietors to interfere, since they could "not revoke, suspend, or vary any order of the Court of Directors, which had been sanctioned by the Board of Control." Therefore it was that he brought the question forward now. The Chairman. Allow the clause to be read under which you are proceeding.

Mr. Weeding said, it was the 7th clause of the act of 3d and 4th of William IV. chap. 85, which mentioned "it shall be lawful for the said Company" not "the Court of Directors." The said Company were to do so and so. And as all the rights and immu nities of the Company, except such as were repugnant to the enactments of the new bill were preserved to them, he contended that all compensation exceeding £600, should be submitted to the Court of Proprietors before being sent to the Board of Control. Unless this interpretation of the law were declared upon good authority to be wrong, it was evident to him that these compensations ought to be laid before the Court of Proprietors.

Mr. Serjeant Spankie (the Company's standing counsel) said, it appeared to him that the law enabled the Company, by their ordinary agents, the Court of Directors, to do all that was necessary to be done in cases of this kind. The Court of Direc