observed on personal feeling advanced against the gent. behind the bar, he could not avoid animadverting on any unseemly language that was used to those before it. The hon. chairman had said, he wished he could find out the art of insuring unanimity. He (Mr. K.) could tell him the way to prevent unanimity in that courtit was by adopting that querulous tone which he was too much in the habit of using!-(Loud cries of "order!") He applied to those who cried" order," whether they did not hear fall from the hon. chairman, a direct accusation against individuals on that side of the bar, attributing to them a desire to misrepresent the motives of the directors? (Hear! hear!) If, therefore, he was not at liberty to say that this was not a proper tone to be used by the person who made the accusation, for what purpose did he sit there? The hon. chairman wished he knew how to procure unanimity. He (Mr. K.) would point out to him the various meetings, held within those walls, to grant honourable rewards for honourable services; and he would advise him to take the same course, on the present occasion, and the hon. gent. would find that the same unanimity would be the consequence. It was a rare instance in the annals of that court, when merit like that of sir D. Ochterlony was brought forward in such a shape as to prevent the proprietors from being unanimous. On whose heads, then, did this want of unanimity rest? He would tell the hon. gent. that those persons were accountable for it who had adopted a course different from that which had been usually pursued! By following the tract pointed out in former times they could alone hope to arrive at unanimity. In this case if the gentlemen wished to consult the feelings of sir D. Ochterlony, by having the motion carried unanimously, let a little delay be afforded, until the papers could be read. It was a most precipitate measure to come to the court and ask a specific reward for a subordinate officer, without in the slightest degree noticing the commander-in-chief. It was also remarkable, that in the papers before the directors, there was not a single extract from the dispatches of the commander-in-chief, who certainly was the best judge of the merits of sir D. Ochterlony. The hon. chairman had called on the court to look to the conduct of government, as justificatory of the proceeding now adopted. would also call the attention of the court to the conduct of government, with a different view. What was done during the whole of the peninsular war? who was then rewarded, on the very moment? the commander-in-chief, and no other person. The other officers, many of whom had bled in the field, were not thought of till the war was completely wound up. He Asiatic Journ.-No. 1.

He

was one of those who thought it unwise to give pecuniary rewards, on all occasions

but he knew, that when rewards were given, by great public bodies, to military men, it was not the pecuniary, but the honorary part that gratified them; that part which tended to ennoble the blood in the veins of their posterity! Feeling thus, he could not but be surprised, that there was not a single quotation in the papers, taken from the dispatches of the commander-in-chief, in which honourable mention was made of this experienced and valorous officer. There was, in the report of the committee of correspondence, a species of wording, that conveyed a strange idea to his mind-if he read it aright, the directors were rejoicing in the success of the Napaulese war. He alluded to that part, in which, after stating that theeminent services of sir David Och terlony had upheld the honour of the British arms," it goes on to say, "and the enemy, after the capture of extensive provinces, important to them;" these are the words, "provinces important to them," by which, in his opinion, the directors pledged themselves to approve of the war. With this sir D. Ochterlony had nothing to do-he was an officer acting under the commander-in-chief and, if the directors rejoiced in the capture of those important provinces, they must recollect that the whole of the merit of the accession belonged to earl Moira, and they ought to honour him accordingly. The report then states, that "the enemy were reduced to sue for peace, on terms understood to be advantageous to the company." This paragraph, he supposed, was introduced to shew that the peace was not yet concluded, or at least that the terms were not sufficiently known, as a sort of excuse for not granting thanks to earl Moira. Being prepared to say all this on the subject of the war-having stated the capture of the provinces as matter of exultation, admitting that the terms of the peace are supposed to be advantageous-with these points conceded, the first time when the subject is brought forward by the directors, it is connected with a grant of money-it is not even introduced in the form of a mere vote of thanks. Now for what purpose was this system followed? Because, if the directors proposed a vote of thanks, without a grant of money, they knew they would fail, for they knew it was impossible for the court to vote their thanks to a particular officer, to the exclusion of the rest of the army. The directors had gone quite out of the common tract of travelling, and, if they could see their way, he was not sufficiently conversant with the turnings and twinings of that court to be able to do so. He wished to know, when the marquis Wellesley had finished the war in India, and it was understood that the VOL. 1.

L

court disapproved of it, whether, on the arrival of dispatches stating the discomfiture of the enemy, a vote of thanks was not given to him-the court expressly reserving to themselves the right of deciding on the policy of the war afterwards? Hear! hear!) thus supporting the principle, that no subordinate officer should receive thanks, until they were offered to the commander-in-chief. He would ask of any man who heard him-he would ask of any military man, whether he would not conceive it to be a slur on his character, if his subordinate officer were rewarded, while he, beneath whom all the operations of a campaign were carried on, remained neglected and forgotten? If any of the gentlemen who proposed this vote were at all conversant with military etiquette, they must perceive the truth of this observation. And he was sure, if there was one man, who, more than another, would be displeased with thanks, which insinuated a slur upon an individual, that man was sir D. Ochterterlony. To suppose otherwise, would be to suppose that he had feelings very different from those which his brother officers knew him to possess. It would be to suppose him willing to wound the feelings of those brave men who had shared his toils, and partaken of his glory.(Hear! hear!) He, therefore, for one, could not vote for this grant to sir D. Ochterlony, in its present state. He would not vote for any reward, which he felt would not be agreeable to that gallant general. This he was certain would not, because it must excite unpleasant feelings in other officers of the army-it must even strike the commander-in-chief, who had highly approved of sir D. Ochterlony's talents, as a tacit reproach to him. Actuated by these sentiments, and no others, he should now oppose the grant ; but, if it were brought forward in a regular manner, he would be the first to hold up his hand in favour of it. He conceived that the company were bound to defend the interest and honour of the lowest of their servants-and surely they were no less powerfully called on to defend the credit and character of those who were placed in the highest situations. If there were any case in which an officer particularly demanded their support, it was when he had taken on himself the dreadful responsibility of going to war and when he was placed at such a remote distance, that he could not immediately furnish those by whom he was employed, with a connected chain or statement of events.

This protection was still more necessary, when it was known that some individuals opposed themselves to the policy of that war, and would, perhaps, endeavour to prevent the rewards which its successful termination deserved, from flowing in that channel to

which they properly belonged. Here he could not withhold his testimony of applause from the spirit and skill with which the Napaulese war was conducted, and the glorious success by which its termination was distinguished. In this resolution, he conceived the directors had partially approved of the war, when they spoke in such terms of the territory which it had given to them. As to the policy in which it commenced, that still remained open for discussion. But he called on the court to act as they did in the case of lord Wellesley. On that occasion thanks were voted to him and to the whole army -but the right to decide afterwards on the conduct of the governor-general, in entering on the war, was specially reserved. He conceived it right to keep the general and commander-in-chief separate; because though his conduct in the field might be worthy of praise and reward, his proceedings in the cabinet might demand censure and disapprobation. An hon. friend of his (Mr. Hume) had surprised him very much by his course of argument. That hon. gent. had, on all occasions, been most desirous for the establishment of settled rules for conducting the business of that court, and of the court of directors. In the endeavour to promote regulations of this nature, the hon. gent. had not found a warmer co-operator than he was. It was extremely curious, that the hon. gent., who had been a fellow-labourer with him in the vineyard-who had assisted zealously in the formation of those rules-should, the first time one of them was broken through, beg of the court to pass over the infraction. "Oh," says he, "sir David is a very gallant officer, you had better therefore, overlook this breach of your rules." But the hon. gent. had made a very fair proposition. "If," said he," by delaying this grant, no slur is thrown on sir David Ochterlony, then I am willing to postpone it." Now, he could not conceive, that, by putting the motion off, sir David Ochterlony could be supposed to labour under any slur whatever; whereas, by agreeing to it now, a sort of censure would be passed on other officers. It was, on the other hand, denied by the executive body, that the smallest reproach was intended to be cast on any individual-but could they say that the proceeding would not be construed differently out of doors? He was convinced, that nine-tenths of those acquainted with the circumstances, would immediately conclude, that the present motion had for its great object, to mark with reproach, the conduct of those officers whose services were not even hinted at, when the hon. chairman said, as a crown of praise to sir David Ochterlony, that he was successful, when all others were unsuccessful.

The Chairman.-I did not say so.

Mr. Kinnaird.You qualified the expression by saying, "when many others had failed."

The Chairman.-I deny I ever said so. I give a point-blank denial to the assertion. What I said was this, "while sir D. Ochterlony was uniformly successful, other officers were unsuccessful."

Mr. Kinnaird regretted that other officers should have been at all spoken of, or introduced. Sir D. Ochterlony might have received the full meed of praise, without any attempt being made to disparage the conduct of other persons. Now, if the conduct of that gallant officer was fairly entitled, as assuredly it was, to approbation and reward, were they not equally due to lord Moira, from whom, in the regular course of things, the successes obtained must have originally sprung? On this point he would confidently appeal to the military part of that assembly, who must necessarily answer in the affirmative. He gave the court reason for what they should do, fortified by precedents drawn from what they had done. If the hon. chairman were really desirous that unanimity should prevail in this court,-if he were anxious to spare the feelings of sir D. Ochterlony, he would consent to put off this motion, until general thanks to earl Moira, and the army have been voted. And, when sir D. Ochterlony had been included,-by name, if the hon. chairman pleased,by a special resolution, if he thought proper, for he (Mr. K.) professed the utmost respect for him ;-then the court of directors might come forward with that motion which was not only second, in point of form, but second in the consideration of that deserving officer. There was one other expression of the hon. chairman, which, he conceived, called for notice. No conduct, he thought, deserved the encouragement and thanks of the court, more than that of those gentlemen, who, like his hon. and learned friend, took the trouble to read and sift such papers as were connected with subjects before the court, for the benefit of the proprietors at large. When his learned friend took that trouble, he sincerely thanked him ;-and the proprietors, he thought, were much indebted to him. But how did the hon. chairman speak of his having so occupied himself? "I am sure," said he, "there was no wish to keep the papers back ;-the learned gent. had seen them, and a pretty use he makes of our liberality." Now, for his part, he did not thank the gentlemen opposite for the production of those papers. The bye law gave them a right to demand them. There was no courtesy in shewing those papers, which the interest of the proprietors required, and which the directors could have no motive, at least no proper motive, for withholding;-therefore no thanks were due. He should vote against

the present motion, because he thought it threw a slur on the earl of Moira, and the rest of the officers of the army, and because he did not conceive that this was the mode in which reward ought to be conferred on sir D. Ochterlony. He should therefore move, as an amendment :— .

"That this court, though it entertains a high sense of the merits of sir D. Ochterlony, think it expedient to adjourn the present question."

If (continued Mr. Kinnaird) the court of directors do not consider it proper, which I am sure they will, to propose a vote of thanks to earl Moira and the rest of the army,-which, I am convinced, will be carried by acclamations on this side of the bar,-though I have no wish to take the executive power out of their hands, yet, in that case, I shall feel it my duty to propose such a motion on a future day.

He

Mr.Herriott having called the hon.gent., who had just sat down, to order, wished to explain his reasons for having done so. He did so, for this plain reason-because the hon. gent. was not content to speak in general terms, but adverted to the hon. chairman, in such a manner, as compelled him (Mr. Herriot) to interfere. He not only spoke of the conduct of the hon. chairman on the present question, but referred to it, on former occasions. As he was on his legs, he wished to say a few words with respect to the question before the court. The hon. gent. (Mr. Kinnaird) had looked round, and asked, if there were any military persons present? (Mr. Herriott) now answered, that he had been for three-score years in milita ry habits-and, with respect to the proposition made by the court of directors, he could see no impropriety in it—either with reference to etiquette or to any other point. It was not an uncommon thing to give thanks to officers in subordinate situations, without noticing their superiors. Thus, when the lords of the admiralty sent out an officer who achieved any great victory, that officer, though acting under their lordships, received the thanks of parliament. Should the commander-in-chief in the Mediteranean, or elsewhere, send out a division, by which any glorious action was performed, those only received thanks who were immediately instrumental in obtaining it. Thus lord Nelson was under the command of a superior when he went to the Madeiras, where he achieved that, for which he received the thanks of the country, no notice being taken of his commanding officer. He (Mr. Herriott) believed this was so. Now, it struck him, from what knowledge he possessed as a military man, that the individual, who was employed in giving orders, as governor-general, far from the scene of action, had nothing to do with achievements in the field of battle.

Therefore, he considered the thanks and rewards proposed to be given to sir D. Ochterlony, as due to him for the skill and ability he displayed in executing certain commands which he had received from his superior. When he said this, he could assure the court, that no man honoured lord Moira more than he did. Of that eminent character he had some personal knowledge-but none whatever of sir D. Ochterlony. It was evident, therefore, that he spoke from principle, and not from any feeling of partiality. He should support the proposition of the court of directors.

Mr. Bosanquet rose to speak to the order of their proceedings. The hon. gent. shortly adverted to the original motion, and the amendment. The latter, he observed, could not possibly be entertained, in its existing form. It was, in fact, nothing more nor less than a species of question of adjournment; and it would be infinitely better to move a direct adjournment, (if the opponents of the motion wished to do it away entirely) which would, of course, take precedence of all other questions. Under the present circumstances, he could not help submitting to the learned gent,, whether it would not be better to reconsider the amendment, and to put it in a shape consistent with the course usually taken in that and every other deliberative assem bly.

Mr. R. Jackson felt much obliged to his hon. friend for setting him right when he was out of order. If his hon. friend would hand the motion and amendment to him, a moment's time would be sufficient to rectify the error.

Mr. Howorth regretted exceedingly the tone in which his hon. friends, on the right and left, had made their objections. The executive body was a delegated body, and was responsible for its proceedings: therefore, if it acted improperly, it could be called to account in a regular manner, and ought not to be subject to hasty remarks, the offspring of momentary feeling. (hear, hear!) Two objections had been urged against the motion, one founded on the form of the proceedingthe other resulting from a feeling of delicacy towards lord Moira. With respect to the form of proceeding, he at first feared that the directors were departing from the regular line; but when he looked to sect. 19 and 20 of the bye-laws, he found they were complied with, and that the course pursued was perfectly regular. The second objection, that lord Moira was not mentioned on this occasion, appeared to him to be totally irrelevant to the question. The resolution recommended by the directors was nothing more than an act of liberality, with which they followed up the example of government. The Prince Regent had conferred a very high honour on sir D, Och

terlony, and the court were now called on to give him the means of supporting it. What information was wanting on this question? Were not the papers before the proprietors ? Was it not notorious that the army of sir D. Ochterlony had to penetrate a country so naturally strong, as to require but few troops to defend it? Had they not to cope with an enemy different, in every respect, from any they had before encountered in India -a race of highlanders-men of hardy habits, and of undoubted courage? (hear, hear!) men actuated, not by the motives of mercenaries, but by those feelings which were imprinted in the hearts of the human race in every clime-to defend their native country, their friends, relatives, and every thing dear to them! (hear, hear!) Could it be forgotten that the army of sir D. Ochterlony had to cover the tarnish which British glory had sustained, by reverses in other quarters? (hear, hear !) That they had to meet an enemy flushed with success, and confident of victory? (hear, hear!) Now he desired to know what gen. Ochterlony did, under circumstances so disadvantageous? Did he not alter the whole system of warfare? Did he not concentrate his forces, to attain the object he had in view? Did he not persevere in preventing the enemy from receiving supplies, and, at length, compel him to attack the British troops, instead of being attacked by them in his strong holds? (hear, hear!) This plan succeeded. The enemy did attack his forces-he was repulsed and discomfited. Sir D. Ochterlony displayed the most consummate skill and valour in the field. He lost not a moment. The enemy was followed up, sword in hand, and the British troops took possession of his provinces. Sir D. Ochterlony appeared to be as wise in the cabinet as valorous in the field. No sooner did the enemy propose terms of ac commodation than he closed with them -and put an end to a war, the most bloody, the most expensive, and the most hazardous that we ever waged in India. After this short statement, what papers, he would ask, were wanting? For his own part, he acceded, with heart and hand, to the motion. (hear, hear!)

Mr. H. Twiss said, the speech which had just been delivered, had called the attention of the proprietors to the real question before them, from which it had been directed by some of the addresses they had previously heard, Much had been said on this occasion about unanimity-but, whenever he heard a great deal of talk about it, he always suspected that it would be wanting. What had occurred this day, fully verified the correctness of that suspicion. The very first proposition that had been made, went to disturb that unanimity, which probably would otherwise have prevailed.

For

the purpose of enjoying unanimity hereafter, the present was to be sacrificed. The hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. Jackson) had introduced what he (Mr. Twiss) conceived had nothing to do with the question. He had brought forward the claims of the earl of Moira, which were totally distinct and different. He would not enter into that subject, not only because he was not prepared, but because it was wholly irrelevant to the motion before the court. It appeared clear, however, that the analogies on which the opponents of the motion founded themselves were inapplicable. They contended, that the vote of thanks should always be given to the commander-in-chief, in the first instance, and not to the subordinate officer. He did not believe that this was a general custom; but, if it were so, it would only come to this that where a commanding officer had under him one who achieved what he directed, there the vote of thanks should be claimed by the superior. But that was not a case similar to the present, where the superior officer was commander-in-chief and governor-general. Because, when s'r D. Ochterlony had done all that rested with him, it could not be said, that lord Moira had also performed every thing that devolved upon him. The governor-general had not only to look to the operations in the field, he had also to wind up those in the cabinet. And, therefore, those who talked of the prematureness of the present question, had themselves recommended the most premature of all courses. The motion adverted to none but military objects, and yet with that, those gentlemen requested the court to give a vote of thanks for the winding up of the war. Now, they could not tell whether it was terminated or not-hostilities might have again broken out-and, until this point was settled on a broad and immovable basis, it would be wrong to thank lord Moira for that which probably might not at the time be effected. The hon. gent. (Mr. D. Kinnard) observed, that, during the peninsular war, votes of thanks were frequently given to the Duke of Wellington, he being commander-in-chief. That was very true-but, when he received those votes of thanks, he had completed every thing connected with the specific acts for which he was thus rewarded. When he had finished his military operations, he had nothing more to do-it was not for him, as for lord Moira, to wind up the war, and make a treaty of peace. He, having performed certain acts, had no farther duties to execute. Surely this could not be considered a precedent for voting thanks to an individual, who, at the close of a war, probably had many ulterior measures to complete. He agreed with the hon. gent. in thinking, that those persons, who by

a just statement of facts, by the examination of papers, by a constant attention to the forms of their proceedings, could detect and point out deviations from those forms, did a very great service to that court; and he conceived, if any informality, with respect to the mode of advertising existed, in the present instance, a very great benefit would be derived from pointing it out. Before he proceeded, he should be glad to know whether the papers connected with this vote had been advertised?

The Chairman-" There has been no advertisement-and there ought to have been none."

Mr. H. Twiss-Certainly the impres sion made on this court was, that a notice called for by the terms of the bye-laws had not been regularly given. If this had been the case, he should have felt, that what was lost of time now, by the discovery of such an informality, would be more than made up on future occasions, by the regularity of their proceedings. But the fact was, that the production of papers was necessary, only when a different species of grant was to be made. The 20th section of the byelaws ordained, that where a gratuity of more than £600 was called for, the report of the directors, stating their reasons for recommending it, should be laid before a general court; and that all the papers relative thereto, should also be produced, for the inspection of the proprietors. But gentlemen would do him the favour to recollect, that the bye-laws referred to three distinct species of grant. The 1st related to salaries, the 2d to pensions, and the 3d to gratuities. The first applied to offices, the second to different services-the third to money given in the lump. Now, the present motion fell under the 19th section, which related to pensions—and which required no reports, no papers. It only directed, that " every pension, amounting to more than £600, should be laid before, and approved by a general court summoned for that purpose, prior to its being made known to the board of control." Here there was not a single syllable about papers, report, or advertisement. But the hon. gent. (Mr. Hume) stepped out of that section; and, then, they found, that if something else had been done, which was not done, then something that had not been done, ought to have been done(a laugh). He appealed to the court, whether there was any thing in the 19th section that called for the production of papers? Certainly there was not. The forms under that section having been strictly obeyed, all that the court had to consider was, whether they would suffer those general hints and vague requisitions to prevent them from giving to a brave officer, who had nobly performed all he was appointed to do, that recompense