Mr. Jolin Manson was appointed Cadet for Bengal the 26th February 1808, by the India Board, at the recommendation of Edward Cooke, esq. Mr. Cadman Etches procured this appointment through Mr. Cooke, for a relation of his, on account of services performed by Mr. Etches for the Government. Thomas Watson was employed as agent to sell the same, as mentioned in the next appointment. Mr. Robert Manson was appointed Cadet for Bengal, February 1808, by G. W. Thellusson, esq. at the recommendation of Mr. Herbert. Thomas Watson sold this appointment, and received the sum of 500 guineas of Messrs. Anderson, of Philpot-lane, for this and Mr. John Manson's appointment, who purchased the two for a friend of theirs for his two nephews. A. Mc K. Shee received £.35. of Watson; and Lady Leigh received from Watson about £.200. for the latter appoint ment. Mr. Thomas Casey was appointed a Cadet by William Devaynes, esq. on the 9th July 1806, at the recommendation of Mr. Herbert, now abroad as Purser of the Euphrates extra ship. Mr. Herbert sold this appointment to Messrs Hendry Houghton & Co. of King's Arms Yard, correspondents of Mr. Casey's relations, who lived in Ireland, for the sum of 250 guineas; Mr. John Henderson was agentfor Mr.Herbert, andreceived 50guineas. Mr. Thomas Locke was appointed a Cadet for Madras on the 3d February 1807, by John Bebb, esq. at the recommendation of James Pattison, esq. in exchange for one of Mr. Pattison's Bombay nominations. This appointment was purchased by the Rev. Dr. Locke of Farnham, for his nephew, of Thomas Watson, who sold it for Lady Lumm, and paid her £.200. Mr. Samuel Lewis was appointed a Cadet in 1800, by Sweney Toone, esq. at the recommendation of Mr. Evans. This appointment was passed from Mr. Evans to Mr. Sanderson: Annesley Mc Kercher Shee seems to have procured it of Mr. Wright, and received 300 guineas from the Cadet's father. Mr. Samuel Lewis being a Mulatto, and thereby disqualified, procured a young man of the name of Phillips to personate himself, and pass the previous examinations, for which he paid him 20 guineas. A Cadetship for Madras appears to have been purchased for a person of the name of Brown in 1804 or 1805, which was sold by Mr. Herbert for 250 guineas; but your committee could receive no satisfactory information by whom the party was nominated, nor his Christian name. Henderson and Shee were employed as agents, and received part of the above sum. A Cadetship in the nomination of J. N ship, esquire, given by him to Mrs. W appears to have been sold; but the parti that transaction, who have been exam state, that they are unable to recollec name of the person appointed. The nar Mrs. Welch does not appear as recommen to any of Mr. Manship's Cadetships in or 6. Another in the nomination of Sir Li Darell, appears to have been given to sold by the Rev. Thomas Lloyd; but Lloyd's name does not appear as recommen. any of the Cadets nominated by Sir Li Darell in 1801 and the following year. It appears in evidence, that some nominations of this description have been chased: but your Committee have not able to discover and bring before them s of the persons who appear to have been pa to these transactions; particularly Sir Nich Nugent, Mr. William Lewen Tugwell and Captain Holmes. bins, Mr. Joseph Home, Captain Matt A further examination into some o bargains, is precluded by the death of I Lumm, Lady Leigh, and Captain Sealy. The attention both of the Legislature of the East India Company has been attra at various periods to Abuses, which w supposed to exist in the disposal of t Patronage; in consequence of which, at time when their charter was renewed, an was framed, to be taken by each Dire within ten days after his election, containi among other engagements the following: do swear, That I will not directly nor ir rectly accept or take any perquisite, emo ment, fee, present or reward, upon account whatsoever, or any promise or enga ment for any perquisite, emolument, f present or reward whatsoever, for or in resp of the appointment or nomination of a person or persons to any place or office in gift or appointment of the said Company, of me as a director thereof, or for or on count of stationing or appointing the voy or voyages of any ship or ships in the s Company's employ, or for or on account or any ways relating to any other business affairs of the said Company." 33 Geo. I c. 52. s. 160. In the Bye Laws of the East India Compan c. 6. sect. 5. a penalty is imposed upon eve Director taking any reward on account of a appointment, in double the amount of su reward, two-thirds of which to the Compar and one-third to the Informer; and such I rector is rendered ipso facto incapable of holdi any place whatever under the Company. The form of Declaration on every Writer petition is, "I recommend this Petition, an do most solemnly declare that I have given The form of Certificate required to be signed by the nearest of kin to each Cadet, contains the following declaration: "I do further declare, that I received the said appointment for my son gratuitonsly, and that no money or other valuable consideration has been or is to be paid, either directly or indirectly, for the some; and that I will not pay or cause to be paid, either by myself, by my son, or by the hands of any other person, any pecuniary or valuable consideration whatsoever, to any person or persons who have interested themselves in procuring the said nomination for my son or from the Director above-mentioned." The printed preparatory Instructions which are circulated by the East India Company for the use of those who may be nominated Cadets, begin with the following Resolution: "That any person who shall in future be nominated to a situation, either civil or military, in the service of this Company, and who shall have obtained such nomination either directly or indirectly by purchase, or agreement to purchase through the medium of an agent or other person, shall be rejected; and the perso so nominated shall be rendered incapable of holding any situation whatsoever in the Company's service: and in the event of any person having obtained an appointment in the manner before stated, and proceeded to India previous to its being discovered, such person shall be dismissed the Company's service and ordered back to England, and shall also be rendered incapable of holding any situation whatsoever in the Company's service." 25 April, 1798-A Committee of the Directors was appointed to investigate into the truth of the alleged practice of the sale of Patronage, and to consider of such means as may appear likely to prevent the same in future, if such practices have occurred. 9 July-Each Director's nomination of Writers was laid before the Committee, who resolved that each Member of the Committee should state in writing the names of the parties to whom he has given the nomination, together with the reason which induced him to give the same; and that the several parties who have received such nominations for their sons, &c. be required to produce satisfactory information to the Committee upon oath, or in such manner as the Committee shall deem most expedient, that neither they nor any person on their account, or with their privity or knowledge, have given or pronised to give any consideration on account of such nomination either to the Directors from whom they obtained the same, or to any person on his behalf: and it was agreed to recommend to the Court to direct each individual Member of the Court to do the same. 1st August 1798-The Court approved this Report; and (15th August) each Director in office, as well as those out of rotation (except Mr. Devaynes) gave explanations in writing. 28th February, 1799-It was resolved, That every appointment made in consequence of corrupt practices be null and void, unless the parties to whom the appointment is given shall, upon examination before the Committee, make a fair and candid disclosure of all the circumstances attending the same. It was likewise resolved, that each Director should in future, on the Petition of the Writer whom he nominates," declare upon his honour to "whom he has given the appointment, and "that he neither has received himself, nor is "he to receive, nor has any other person to "the best of his knowledge or belief received, It is to be observed, that abuses in the disnor is to receive, any pecuniary consideraposal of Cadetships are better guarded against" ation, nor any thing convertible in any than in that of Writerships since the present" mode into a pecuniary benefit on this acform of Certificate has been applied to them;" count." for in the Writerships the Director himself only declares, that to the best of his knowledge or belief no pecuniary consideration has been or is to be received. but with regard to every Cadet, the parent or next of kin makes a simifar declaration for himself. The cases which are exhibited in this Report demonstrate that such declarations are not of sufficient force to prevent a very extensive traffic in those nomninations, which are apparently the best secured by a positive denial of all undue practices. An inquiry was set on foot by the Court of Directors in 1798 upon the allegation and suspicion of abuses in the nominations of Writers; the origin, progress and failure of which it may be proper to give in some detail. VOL. VI. Lit. Pan: April 1909.] The Direction being changed in April, on the 14th August, 1799, a new Committee to investigate the truth of the sale of Patronage, &c. was appointed. 17 January, 1800-The draft of a letter proposed to be addressed to the parents, &c. of persons appointed writers since 1793, requesting them to declare whether the ap pointments were given without any pecuniary or other consideration, was considered by the Committee; when a discussion arose, whether it should be on oath; when it was adjourned till the 21st of January and it be ing then suggested whether it would be proper for the Committee to proceed in their inquiry, it was decided in the affirmative, C : no means in his power for ascertaining w ther any person whom he has obliged thro the favour of the Court, has presumed abuse his kindness in so sordid and unw rantable a manner. Sir Francis Baring dissents from the R lutions to call for the declaration on oath. The Committee then proceedel to consider the drafts of the letter to the parents, &c. a draft of a report to the court stating their reasons for recommending this mode of investi gation, as also the form of a declaration for the persons who have received such appointments. The consideration was adjourned to the 24th of January; when a discussion ensuing thereon, and on the necessity and expediency of the mode of public investigation therein proposed; it was agreed to postpone the said report, and to proceed to act agreeably to the authority and instructions already received from the Court. The Committee resolved, that in their opinion the parties to whom each Director had given nominations, should be called upon to state on what grounds they have received the same, in every case that the Committee may deem it ex-appointed for an inquiry into the disposa pedient so to do. The Committee then examined viva voce its different Members, as a preliminary to the proposed measure; each Member declared upon his honour that what he had stated in regard to his appointurents was strictly true, and expressed his readiness to confirm the same by his oath. 28th January, 1800-The Committee met to consider a draft of a Report to the Court, communicating their proceedings, and proposing further measures for the Court's adoption, as also a draft of a Letter referred to in the said Report. 31st January-The Report of this day's date, with the letters to the parents, &c. and the declaration to be made by them, was approved. 5th February--The Court, after consider ble discussion of the above, confirm the sune; but resolve that the consideration of what is further to be done on the said Report be adjourned to the 11th of February; when it is resolved, that the Committee of Patro nage be instructed to proceed in the examination of the other Members of the Court, as they did with themselves. It was then moved, that the declaration proposed in the Report be upon oath on this, the motion of adjournment was carried. 25th February-A Repost signed by 15 Directors, approves the declaration, and recommends that the several persons to whom the same is sent be requested to confirmi such declaration upon oath. Another Report on the same day, signed by 12 Directors, recommends that no further proceedings be had in this business till the 1st of May. Both the above Reports are approved by the Court. 26th February, 1800-The Right Honourable Henry Dundas addressed the Court, acknowledging the receipt of their minute; and stating. that he feels it a duty that he owes both to himself and the Court, to omit The Committee of Patronage ceasing w the Direction in April, on 18th June, 18 the Court took into consideration the 'priety of re-appointing the said Committe It being moved: "That a Committee Patronage be reappointed," an amendm was moved, to leave out all the words a the word "that," and to insert in their ro the following," it does not appear to Court, that any circumstance has been sta to the Court, by the Committee la Patronage, that can induce or would jus the Court in adopting the illegal and no administration of extra judicial oaths to a riety of persons, not directly connected w the East India Company or the managem of its affairs, and which, though it wo tend to throw a suspicion upon the Cour large, which no circumstances that have therto come to the knowledge of the Co can induce them to suppose the Memb thereof merit, would not, they conceive, an effectual mode of bringing to light a such practices, even if such in any partial stance should have existed." On the question for the amendment be put, the votes for, and against, were equ when the lot decided for the amendment. 25th June The Chairman, Deputy Cha man and eight other Directors dissent in the Resolution not to re-appoint the Comm tee of Patronage. 24th September-A motion was made in Court of Proprietors, that the above Proce ings be read; they were read accordingly, a notice given by the mover, of his atenti of bringing the subject forward at a fut Court. 20th January, 1801-It was "That it is the opinion of this Court, t the Inquiry into the alledged abuse of Pat nage, ought to be continued." It was moved to amend the said moti by adding thereto the following words, investigate duy charge that may be made corrupt practices against any one or more the Court of Directors." The above Amendment passed in the gative; When a ballot was demanded on the o ginal question; it was, 3d February, 180 lost by a majority of 139; 411 voting for question, against it 550. The following opinion of Counsel was ven to the Court of Directors, previous to t ballot being taken, viz.“ "Case for the East-India Company: "Whether the Court of Directors, or any Committee of the said Court, whether considered as a Committe of that Court or as a Committee of Proprietors, be legally authorized to call for the examination of such persons upon oath, as recommended by the Court of Directors in their Resolution of the 25th February 1800; or whether in their opinion any Magistrate would be justified in administering the oath so recommended; and generally to advise concerning the legality and effect of such proceedings." We are of opinion, that neither the Court of Directors, nor any Committee of the said Court, or Committee of Proprietors, have any legal authority to require or receive examinations of persons upon oath, as recommended by the Resolution of the Court of Directors of the 25th February 1300; and that no Magistrate will be justified in administering such oaths. "We therefore think the proposed proceedings would be contrary to Law." (Signed) J. MITFORD. W. GRANT. J. MANSFIEld. obligation to the performance of such engagements, upon the very ground that they are illegal. With a view to prevent all dealings in Patronage, the obvious and natural mode will be to take away all inducement to traffic in it; and this can only be attained by making the hazard of such speculations greater than the temptation. The regulations of the Company are founded upon this true and efficacious principle. But examples have hitherto been wanting to demonstrate the determination of the Court of Directors to enforce their orders; no instance of purchasing or procuring by undue means an appointment in the civil or military service of the East India Company, after such appointment had actually taken place, and since the Court's Resolution of 28th February 1799, having been so far established, as to enable the Court to dismiss the party. appointed. The immediate consequence of the infor mation contained in this Report, must be, that a certain number of persons in the service of the Company will be instantly deprived of their employments, recalled from India, and declared incapable of again receiving any appointment under the Compa ny. The money improperly given for procuring these situations, will be absolutely lost, without any possibility of recovery; and those who have either imprudently or corruptly been concerned in obtaining what they conceived to be benefits for their relatives or friends, will find that they have done the greatest injury to those whom they desired to serve, by inducing them to dedicate some of the best years of their lives to an employment, which the original defect, and corrupt practices through which it was cbtained, must disqualify them from prosecuting. Hard as some of these cases must be, and innocent and ignorant as many of the young men nominated under these circumstances probably are, of the undue means by which their Appointments were acquired, your Committee are of opinion, that nothing but a strict adherence to the rule laid down by the Court of Directors, can put a stop to the continuance of these abuses, and prevent the chance of their recurring. If this House should in its wisdom adopt any legislative measures for the purpose of preventing all traffic in the disposal of Offices under Government, it will, in the opinion of your Committee, be proper to extend the e protection to Patronage held under the East-India Company; but they see no reason 10 recommend any special or separate provions as applicable to their case, judging that the East-India Company has within its own power the most effectual means for acconiplishing that end.-It can never be advisable, without absolute necessity, to add new offences to the long catalogue already enumerated in the penal statutes; nor is it wise to diminish the sanctity of oaths by resorting to them upon all occasions. Where solemn declarations have been habitually disregarded, little reliance can be placed upon the sanction of any other species of asseveration. Instances cur but too frequently, where an oath comes to be considered merely as part of the official form by which an appointment is con- In the year 1779, when, in the course of ferred; and the human mind, fertile in self- the investigation already mentioned, indemdeeption, accommodates itself with wonder-nity was offered to all those who would make ful facility to overcoming all scruples, or ap plies a perverse ingenuity to evading all restrictions which stand in the way of present interest. Little fear of detection is entertained, where transactions are in their mature private and confidential; and the appellation of honour, most improperly applied to negociations of this clandestine kind, attaches, by a singular perverseness, a stronger degree of a fair and candid disclosure of all the cir cumstances through which their situations had been procured, though information was gained with regard to facts, no example could be made, in consequence of such disclosure, of those who were found offending; and it may be doubted whether such practices have been less prevalent since that inquiry, than before. The deficiency of their power to compel persons to answer, precluded the Court of Directors from discovering, if they punished, or from punishing if they discovered the traffic which was the subject of complaint. The oath taken by the Directors seems as effectual as any thing which can be devised for the purpose of guarding against corrup tion, so far as the Directors themselves are immediately concerned; and your Committee have already remarked, that no one case of corruption or abuse, which has been before them, affects any Member of that Court. It is, in the passing through several hands, which hapens frequently with regard to the more numerous and less valuable Appointments of Cadets, that opportunities for this sort of negotiation are presented, which, without a greater degree of vigilance and strictness on tie part of each Director, at the time of making such nomination, it will be impracticable to prevent in future. Your Committee may perhaps be exceeding the limits of their province, in the further considerations to which this subject leads; but as they decline recommending any special legislative enactment, their view of the proper remedy for these abuses may be incomplete, unless they proceed to suggest Some other observations. The unpleasant duty of increased vigilance is not likely to be performed without some incitement of benefit or disadvantage, attendant upon the exercise, or neglect of it; and it is equally conformable to experience to presume, that Patronage will continue to be abused, so long as no inconvenience is felt by the person primarily giving, or by the person ultimately receiving it. Where strict examination is a duty, any species of negligence cannot be wholly blameJess; and it appears not unreasonable to curtail in some degree, the Patronage of those, who have either not been sufficiently watchful in the disposal of it, or whose diligence has been unsuccessful in preventing the abuses which are complained of. As an additional check against those who are inclined to purchase such Appointments, it may be expedient that a Boad should be given by the parent, guardian, or friend of every person receiving a nomination, containing a penalty to be paid to the East India Company, upon proof being made at any subsequent period, that any valuable consideration was given for such Appointment; that species of proof being deemed sufficient to levy the penalty, upon which the Court of Directors may think themselves authorized to vacate the Appoint ment. tronage of various descriptions has, in se ral instances, become an article of traf that an opinion of the generality of s practices has been prevalent to a still gre= extent; and that fraudulent Agents h availed themselves of this belief, to the jury of the credulous and unwary, and to discredit of those in whose hands the disp tion of offices is lodged. It will depend the Steps which may be taken in conseque of these Inquiries, whether such Ab shall receive a permanent check, or a vir encouragement. A Narrative of Circumstances attend the Retreat of the British Army under Cominand of the late Lieut. Gen. John Moore, K. B. with a Concise count of the memorable Battle of Corur 2nd subsequent Embarkation of His 1 jesty's Troops; and a few Remarks conne with these Subjects; in a Letter addre to the Right Hon. Lord Viscount Ca reagh, one of His Majesty's Prin Secretaries of State, &c. &c. By Milburne, Member of the Royal Col of Surgeous, London, and late Surgeo the Spanish Service. 8vo. pp. 133. I 2s. 6d. London, Egerton, 1809. Ir is our intention on the first fav able opportunity to avail ourselves of correct information on Spanish aff which we have been so fortunate a obtain. At present, therefore, we strict ourselves to such a view of expedition from, and retreat to, Coru as may naturally be expected to com a part of our remarks, on a tract like before us. We readily express our satisfaction accounts of distinguished events com nicated by eye witnesses; and percei clearly that this writer has seen wha describes, with an attentive spirit, shall merely correct an error or two, which he has fallen, and suffer his tracts to speak for themselves. The thing we shall notice is, the asserted periority of the British artillery: th true; but not in an unlimited or univ acceptation. Mr. M. says, The French this day (Jan. 16.) posted guns at a detached house on the road, whence they fired on the British lines. The practices which are developed in the were soon silenced by two English field-f present Report, and other transactions which and obliged to retire with precipitation. this House has recently had under its cogni-English guns were so extremely well zance, are suflicient to demonstrate that Pa- and pointed, that a shot from one of |