a collective term, understood of several persons assembled together in the same place, or with the same design. The word is formed of the French compagnie, and that of companio, or companies, which, Chifflet observes, are found in the Salic law, tit. 66, and are properly military words, understood of soldiers, who, according to the modern phrase, are comrades or mess-mates, i.e., lodge together, eat together, &c. of the Latin cum "with," and panis "bread." It may be added, that in some Greek authors under the western empire, the word συμπανία occurs in the sense of society.

in a familiar or fashionable sense, is used for an assemblage of persons met for the purpose of conversation, pastime, or festivity.

The love of company and of social pleasures is natural, and attended with some of the sweetest satisfactions of human life; but, like every other love, when it proceeds beyond the limits of moderation, it ceases to produce its natural effect, and terminates in disgustful satiety. The foundation-stone and the pillar on which we build the fabric of our felicity, must be laid in our own hearts. Amusement, mirth, agreeable variety, and even improvement, may be sometimes sought in the gaiety of mixed company, and in the usual diversions of the world; but if we found our general happiness on these, we shall do little more than raise cattles in the air, or build houses on the sand.

To derive the proper pleasure and improvement from company, it ought to be select, and to consist of persons of character, respectable both for their morals and their understandings. Mixed and undistinguished society tends only to dissipate our ideas, and induce a laxity of principles and practice. The pleasure it affords is of a coarse, mixed, noisy, and rude kind. Indeed, it commonly ends in weariness and disgust, as even they are ready to confess who yet constantly pursue it, as if their chief good consisted in living in a crowd.

Among those, indeed, who are exempted by their circumstances from professional and official employments, and who professedly devote themselves to a life of pleasure, little else seems to constitute the idea of it, but an unceasing succession of company, public or private. The dress, and other circumstances preparatory to the enjoyment of this pleasure, scarcely leave a moment for reflection. Day after day is spent in the same toilsome round, till a habit is formed, which renders dissipation necessary to existence. One week without it would probably induce a lowness of spirits, which might terminate in despair and suicide. When the mind has no anchor, it will suffer a kind of shipwreck; it will sink in whirlpools, and be dashed on rocks. What, indeed, is life or its enjoyments without settled principles, laudable purposes, mental exertions, and internal comfort? It is merely a vapour, or, to drop the language of figure on so serious a subject, it is a state worse than non-entity, since it possesses a reflexive power of action, productive of nothing but misery.

It is recommended, therefore, to all who wish to enjoy their existence (and who entertains not that wish?), that they should acquire a power not only of bearing, but of taking a pleasure in temporary solitude. Every one must, indeed, sometimes be alone. Let him not repine when he is alone, but learn to set a value on the golden moments. It is then that he is enabled to study himself and the world around him. It is then that he has an opportunity of seeing things as they are, and of removing the deceitful veil, which almost everything assumes in the busy scene of worldly employments. The soul is enabled to retire into herself, and to exert those energies which are always attended with sublime pleasure. She is enabled to see the dependent, frail, and wretched state of man as the child of nature; and incited by her discovery, to implore grace and protection from the Lord of the universe. They, indeed, who fly from solitude, can seldom be religious; for religion requires meditation. They may be said to "live without God in the world;" not, it is true, from atheistical principles, but from a carelessness of disposition; a truly deplorable state, the consciousness of which could not fail to cloud the gaiety of those halcyon beings who sport in the sunshine of unremitting pleasure.

There is no doubt but that man is made for action, and that his duties and pleasures are often most numerous and most important amidst the busy hum of men. Many vices, and many corrupt dispositions, have been fostered in a solitary life. Monks are not favourable to human nature or human happiness; but neither is unlimited dissipation.

In short, let there be a sweet interchange of retirement and association, of repose and activity. A few hours spent every day by the votaries of pleasure in serious meditation, would render their pleasure pure, and more unmixed with misery. It would give them knowledge, so that they would see how far they might advance in their pursuit without danger; and resolution, so that they might retreat when danger approached. It would teach them how to live, a knowledge which indeed they think they possess already; and it would also teach them, what they are often too little solicitous to learn, how to die.

in a commercial sense, is a society of merchants, mechanics, or other traders, joined together in one common interest.

When there are only two or three joined in this manner, it is called a partnership; the term company being restrained to societies consisting of a considerable number of members, associated together by a charter obtained from the prince.

The mechanics of all corporations, or towns incorporated, are thus erected into companies, which have charters of privileges and large immunities.

COMPANY seems more particularly appropriated to those Company. Those grand associations set on foot for the commerce of the remote parts of the world, and veiled by charter with peculiar privileges.

When companies do not trade upon a joint stock, but are obliged to admit any person, properly qualified, upon paying a certain fine and agreeing to submit to the regulations of the company, each member trading upon his own stock and at his own risk, they are called Regulated Companies. When they trade upon a joint stock, each member sharing in the common profit or loss in proportion to his share in this stock, they are called Joint-stock Companies. Such companies, whether regulated or joint-stock, sometimes have, and sometimes have not, exclusive privileges.

However injurious companies with joint-stock, and incorporated with exclusive privileges, may at this time be reckoned to the nation in general, it is yet certain that they were the general parent of all our foreign commerce; private traders being discouraged from hazarding their fortunes in foreign countries, until the method of traffic had been first settled by joint-stock companies. But since the trade of this kingdom and the number of traders have increased, and the methods of assurance of shipping and merchandize, and the navigation to all parts of the known world, have become familiar to us, these companies, in the opinions of most men, have been looked upon in the light of monopolies; their privileges have therefore been lessened from time to time, in order to favour a free and general trade: and experience has shown, that the trade of the nation has advanced in proportion as monopolies have been discouraged. In short, as all restrictions of trade are found to be hurtful, nothing can be more evident, than that no company whatsoever, whether they trade in a joint stock or only under regulation, can be for the public good, except it may be easy for all or any of his majesty's subjects to be admitted into all or any of the said companies, at any time, and for a very inconsiderable fine.

I. Regulated Companies resemble, in every respect, the corporations of trades, so common in the cities and towns of all the different countries of Europe; and are a sort of enlarged monopolies of the same kind. As no inhabitant of a town can exercise an incorporated trade, without first obtaining his freedom in the corporation; so in most cases no subject of the state can lawfully carry on any branch of foreign trade, for which a regulated company is established, without first becoming a member of that company. The monopoly is more or less strict according as the terms of admission are more or less difficult; and according as the directors of the company have more or less authority, or have it more or less in their power to manage in such a manner as to confine the greater part of the trade to themselves and their particular friends. In the most ancient regulated companies the privileges of apprenticeship were the same as in other corporations; and intitled the person who had served his time to a member of the company, to become himself a member, either without paying any fine, or upon paying a much smaller one than what was exacted of other people. The usual corporation spirit, wherever the law does not restrain it, prevails in all regulated companies. When they have been allowed to act according to their natural genius, they have always, in order to confine the competition to as small a number of persons as possible, endeavoured to subject the trade to many burdensome regulations. When the law has restrained them from doing this, they have become altogether useless and insignificant.

The regulated companies for foreign commerce, which at present subsist in Great Britain, are, The Hamburg Company, The Russia Company, the Eastland Company, the Turkey Company, and the African Company.

1. The Hamburg Company is the oldest trading establishment in the kingdom; though not always known by that name, nor restrained to those narrow bounds under which it is now confined. It was first called the Company of merchants trading to Calais, Holland, Zealand, Brabant, and Flanders; then it acquired the general title of Merchant-adventurers of England; as being composed of all the English merchants who traded to the Low Countries, the Baltic, and the German ocean. Lastly, it was called the Company of Merchant-adventurers of England trading to Hamburg.

This company was first incorporated by Edward I., in 1296; and established again, by charter, in 1406, under the reign of king Henry IV. It was afterwards confirmed, and augmented with divers privileges, by many of his successors. Before the charter of Henry IV., all the English merchants who trafficked out of the realm, were left to their own discretion, and managed their affairs with foreigners as might be most for their respective interests, without any regard to the general commerce of the nation. Henry, observing this disorder, endeavoured to remedy it, by uniting all the merchants in his dominions into one body; wherein, without losing the liberty of trading each for himself, they might be governed by a company till subsisting; and be subject to regulations, which should secure the general interest of the national commerce, without prejudice to the interest of particulars. With this view, he granted all the merchants of his states, particularly those of Calais, then in his hands, a power of associating themselves into a body politic, with directors and governors, both in England and abroad; to hold assemblies, both for the direction of business and the deciding of controversies among merchants; make laws; punish delinquents; and impose moderate duties and taxes on merchandizes, and merchants, to be employed in the service of the corporation. These few articles of the charter of Henry IV. were afterwards much augmented by Henry VII., who first gave them the title of Merchant-adventurers to Calais, Holland, &c.; gave them a power of proclaiming and continuing free fairs at Calais; and ordered, that to be reputed a member of the society, each person pay twenty marks sterling; and that the several members should attend the general meetings, or courts, appointed by the directors, whether at London, Calais, or elsewhere.

A petition being made to queen Elizabeth, in 1564, for an explanation of certain articles in the charter of Henry VII., and a confirmation of the rent granted by other kings; that princes, by a charter of the same year, declares, that to end all disputes, they shall be incorporated anew, under the title of the Company of Merchant-adventurers of England; that all who were members of the former company should, if they de- Company fired it, be admitted members of this; that they should have a common seal; that they should admit into their society what other persons, and on what terms, they pleased, and expel them again on misbehaviour; that the city of Hamburg and neighbouring cities should be repented within their grant, together with those of the Low Countries, &c., in that of the former company; that no member should marry out of the kingdom, nor purchase lands, &c., in any city beyond sea; and that those who do, shall be, ipso facto, excluded for ever. Twenty-two years after this first charter, queen Elizabeth granted them a second; confirming the former, and further granting them a privilege of exclusion; with a power of erecting in each city within their grant a standing council.

The revolutions which happened in the Low Countries towards the end of the sixteenth century, and which laid the foundation of the republic of Holland, having hindered the company from continuing their commerce with their ancient freedom; it was obliged to turn it almost wholly to the side of Hamburg, and the cities on the German ocean: from which change, some people took occasion to change its name to that of the Hamburg Company; though the ancient title of Merchant-adventurers is still retained in all their writings.

About the middle of the last century, the fine for admission was fifty, and at one time one hundred pounds, and the conduct of the company was said to be extremely oppressive. In 1643, in 1645, and in 1661, the clothiers and free traders of the west of England complained of them to parliament, as of monopolists who confined the trade and oppressed the manufactures of the country. Though these complaints produced no act of parliament, they had probably intimidated the company so far, as to oblige them to reform their conduct. The terms of admission are now said to be quite easy; and the directors either have it not in their power to subject the trade to any burdensome restraint or regulations, or at least have not of late exercised that power.

2. The Russia Company was first projected towards the end of the reign of king Edward VI., executed in the first and second years of Philip and Mary; but had not its perfection till its charter was confirmed by act of parliament, under queen Elizabeth, in 1566. It had its rise from certain adventurers, who were sent in three vessels on the discovery of new countries; and to find out a north-east passage to China: these, falling into the White Sea, and making up to the port of Archangel, were exceedingly well received by the Muscovites; and, at their return, solicited letters patent to secure to themselves the commerce of Russia, for which they had formed an association.

By their charter, the association was declared a body politic, under the name of the Company of Merchant-adventurers of England, for the discovery of lands, territories, islands, &c., unknown, or unfrequented. Their privileges were, to have a governor, four consuls, and twenty-four assistants, for their commerce; for their policy, to make laws, inflict penalties, send out ships to make discoveries, take possession of them in the king's name, set up the banner royal of England, plant them; and lastly, the exclusive privilege of trading to Archangel, and other ports of Muscovy, not yet frequented by the English.

This charter, not being sufficiently guarded, was confirmed by parliament in the eighth year of queen Elizabeth; wherein it was enacted, that in regard the former name was too long, they should now be called Company of English Merchants for discovering new trades; under which name, they should be capable of acquiring and holding all kind of lands, manors, rents, &c., not exceeding a hundred marks per ann. and not held of her majesty; that no part of the continent, island, harbour, &c., not known or frequented before the first enterprise of the merchants of their company, situated to the north, or north-west, or north-east of London; nor any part of the continent, islands, &c., under the obedience of the emperor of Russia, or in the countries of Armenia, Media, Hyrcania, Persia, or the Caspian sea, should be visited by any subjects of England, to exercise any commerce, without the consent of the said company, on pain of confiscation. The said company shall use no ships in her new commerce but those of the nation; nor transport any cloths, serges, or other woollen stuffs, till they have been dyed and prelled. That in case the company discontinue of itself to unload commodities in the road of the abbey of S. Nicolas, in Russia, or some other port, on the north coasts of Russia, for the space of three years, the other subjects of England shall be allowed to traffic to Narva, while the said company discontinues its commerce into Russia, only using English vessels.

This company subsisted with reputation almost a whole century, till the time of the civil wars. It is said, the czar then reigning, hearing of the murder of king Charles I., ordered all the English in his states to be expelled; which the Dutch taking the advantage of, settled in their room. After the Restoration, the remains of the company re-established part of their commerce at Archangel, but never with the same success as before; the Russians being now well accustomed to the Dutch merchants and merchandise.

This company subsists still, under the direction of a governor, four consuls, and assistants. By the 10th and 11th of William III. c. 6, the fine for admission was reduced to £1.

3. The Eastland Company was incorporated by queen Elizabeth. Its charter is dated in the year 1579. By the first article the company is erected into a body politic, under the title of the Company of Merchants of the East; to consist of Englishmen, all real merchants, who have exercised the business thereof, and trafficked thro' the Sound, before the year 1568, into Norway, Sweden, Poland, Livonia, Prussia, Pomerania, &c., as also Revel, Coningsberg, Dantzig, Copenhagen, &c., excepting Narva, Muscovy, and its dependencies. Most of the following articles grant them the usual prerogatives of such companies; as a seal, governor, courts, laws, &c.

The privileges peculiar to this company are, that none shall be admitted a member who is already a member of any other company; nor any retail-dealer at all. That no merchant qualified be admitted without paying five pounds thirteen shillings and six-pence. That a member of another company, desiring to renounce the privileges thereof, and to be received into that Company, that of the East, shall be admitted gratis; provided he procures the same favour for a merchant of the East willing to fill his place. That the merchant-adventurers who never dealt in the East, in the places expressed in the charter, may be received as members of the company on paying forty marks; that, notwithstanding this union of the Adventurers of England with the Company of the East, each shall retain its rights and privileges. That they shall export no cloths but what are dyed and pressed, except a hundred pieces per annum, which are allowed them gratis.

This charter was confirmed by Charles II. in 1629, with this addition, that no person, of what quality soever, living in London, should be admitted a member, unless he were free of the city. This company was complained of as a monopoly, and first curtailed by legal authority in 1672; and since the declaration of rights in 1689, exist only in name; but still continue to elect their annual officers, who are a governor, a deputy, and twenty-four assistants.

4. The Turkey or Levant Company, had its rise under queen Elizabeth, in 1581. James I. confirmed its charter in 1605, adding new privileges. During the civil wars, there happened some innovations in the government of the company; many persons having been admitted members, not qualified by the charters of queen Elizabeth and king James, or that did not conform to the regulations prescribed. Charles II. upon his restoration, endeavoured to set it upon its ancient basis; to which end, he gave them a charter, containing not only a confirmation of their old one, but also several new articles of reformation. By this, the company is erected into a body politic, capable of making laws, &c. under the title of the Company of Merchants of England trading to the seas of the Levant.

The number of members is not limited, but is ordinarily about three hundred. The principal qualification required is, that the candidate be a freeman of London, and a wholesale merchant, either by family or by serving an apprenticeship of seven years. Those under twenty-five years of age pay £5 sterling at their admission; those above, twice as much. This fine was reduced by act of parliament, in 1753, to £1, and the privilege of admission extended to every British subject. Each makes oath at his entrance not to send any merchandizes to the Levant but on his own account; and not to consign them to any but the company's agents or factors. This restriction is likewise enlarged by the above mentioned statute.

The company has a court or board at London, which is composed of a governor, deputy-governor, and fifteen directors or assistants; who are all actually to live in London or the suburbs. They have also a deputy-governor in every city and port, where there are any members of the company. The assembly at London sends out the vessels, regulates the tariff for the price at which the European merchandizes sent to the Levant are to be sold, and for the quality of those returned. It raises taxes on merchandizes, to defray impositions, and the common expenses of the company; presents the ambassador which the king is to keep at the Porte, elects two consuls for Smyrna and Constantinople, &c.

One of the best regulations of the company is, not to leave the consuls, or even ambassador, to fix the imposition on vessels for defraying the common expenses (a thing fatal to the companies of most other nations); but to allow a pension to the ambassador and consuls, and even to the chief officers, as secretary, chaplain, interpreters, and janizaries, that there may not be any pretence for their raising any sum at all on the merchants or merchandizes.

In extraordinary cases, the consuls, and even the ambassador, have recourse to two deputies of the company, residing in the Levant; or, if the affair be very important, they assemble the whole body. Here are regulated the presents to be given, the voyages to be made, and everything to be deliberated; and on the resolutions here taken, the deputies appoint the treasurer to furnish the moneys, &c. required.

The ordinary commerce of this company employs from 20 to 25 vessels, carrying from 25 to 30 pieces of cannon. The merchandizes exported thither are, cloths of all kinds and colours, pewter, lead, pepper, cochineal, and a great deal of silver, which they take up at Cadiz: the returns are in raw silk, galls, camlets, wools, cottons, Morocco leather, ashes for making glaas and soap, and several gums and medicinal drugs. The commerce to Smyrna, Constantinople, and Scutari, is not esteemed much less considerable than that of the East India company; but is, doubtless, more advantageous to Britain; because it takes off much more of the British manufactures than the other, which is chiefly carried on in money. The places reserved for the commerce of this company are, all the states of Venice, in the gulph of Venice; the state of Ragusa; all the states of the grand seignior, and the ports of the Levant and Mediterranean; excepting Carthagena, Alicante, Barcelona, Valencia, Marseilles, Toulon, Genoa, Leghorn, Civita Vecchia, Palermo, Messina, Malta, Majorca, Minorca, and Corfica; and other places on the coasts of France, Spain, and Italy.

5. The Company of Merchants trading to Africa, established in 1750. Contrary to the former practice with regard to regulated companies, who were reckoned unfit for such sort of service, this company was subjected to the obligation of maintaining forts and garrisons. It was expressly charged at first with the maintenance of all the British forts and garrisons that lie between Cape Blanc and the Cape of Good Hope, and afterwards with that of those only which lie between Cape Rouge and the Cape of Good Hope. The act which establishes this company (the 23d of George II. c. 31.) seems to have had two distinct objects in view; firstly, to restrain effectually the oppreotive and monopolizing spirit which is natural to the directors of a regulated company; and, secondly, to force them as much as possible to give an attention, which is not natural to them, towards the maintenance of forts and garrisons.

For the first of these purposes, the fine for admission is limited to forty shillings. The company is prohibited from trading in their corporate capacity, or upon a joint stock; from borrowing money upon common seal, or from laying any restraints upon the trade which may be carried on freely from all places, and by all persons being British subjects, and paying the fine. The government is in a committee of nine persons who meet at London, but who are chosen annually by the freemen. Company, freemen of the company at London, Bristol, and Liverpool; three from each place. No committee-man can be continued in office for more than three years together. Any committee-man might be removed by the board of trade and plantations; now by a committee of council, after being heard in his own defence. The committee are forbid to export negroes from Africa, or to import any African goods into Great Britain. But as they are charged with the maintenance of forts and garrisons, they may for that purpose export from Great Britain to Africa goods and stores of different kinds. Out of the money which they shall receive from the company, they are allowed a sum not exceeding eight hundred pounds for the salaries of their clerks and agents at London, Bristol, and Liverpool; the house-rent of their office at London; and all other expenses of management, commission, and agency, in England. What remains of this sum, after defraying those different expenses, they may divide among themselves, as compensation for their trouble, in what manner they think proper. "By this constitution, it might have been expected (Dr Smith observes), that the spirit of monopoly would have been effectually restrained, and the first of these purposes sufficiently answered. It would seem, however, that it had not. Though by the 4th of George III. c. 20, the fort of Senegal, with all its dependencies, had been vested in the company of merchants trading to Africa, yet in the year following (by the 5th of George III. c. 44.), not only Senegal and its dependencies, but the whole coast from the port of Sallee, in South Barbary, to Cape Rouge, was exempted from the jurisdiction of that company, was vested in the crown, and the trade to it declared free to all his majesty's subjects. The company had been suspected of restraining the trade, and of establishing some sort of improper monopoly. It is not, however, very easy to conceive how, under the regulations of the 23d George II. they could do so. From the printed debates of the house of commons (not always the most authentic records of truth), it appears, however, that they have been accused of this. The members of the committee of nine being all merchants, and the governors and factors, in their different forts and settlements, being all dependent upon them, it is not unlikely that the latter might have given peculiar attention to the consignments and commissions of the former, which would establish a real monopoly."

For the second purpose mentioned, the maintenance of the forts and garrisons, an annual sum has been allotted to them by parliament, generally about 13,000l. For the proper application of this sum, the committee is obliged to account annually to the curitor baron of exchequer; which account is afterwards to be laid before parliament. "But parliament (continues our author), which gives so little attention to the application of millions, is not likely to give much to that of 13,000l. a-year; and the curitor baron of exchequer, from his profession and education, is not likely to be profoundly skilled in the proper expense of forts and garrisons. The captains of his majesty's navy, indeed, or any other commissioned officers, appointed by the board of admiralty, may enquire into the condition of the forts and garrisons, and report their observations to that board. But that board seems to have no direct jurisdiction over the committee, nor any authority to correct those whose conduct it may thus enquire into; and the captains of his majesty's navy, besides, are not supposed to be always deeply learned in the science of fortification. Removal from an office, which can be enjoyed only for the term of three years, and of which the lawful emoluments, even during that term, are so very small, seems to be the utmost punishment to which any committee-man is liable; for any fault, except direct malversation, or embezzlement either of the public money or of that of the company, and the fear of that punishment, can never be a motive of sufficient weight to force a continual and careful attention to a business to which he has no other interest to attend. The committee are accused of having sent out bricks and stones from England for the reparation of Cape Coast Castle on the coast of Guinea, a business for which parliament had several times granted an extraordinary sum of money. These bricks and stones too, which had thus been sent upon so long a voyage, were said to have been of so bad a quality, that it was necessary to rebuild from the foundation the walls which had been repaired with them. The forts and garrisons which lie north of Cape Rouge, are not only maintained at the expense of the state, but are under the immediate government of the executive power; and why those which lie south of that Cape, and which too are, in part at least, maintained at the expense of the state, should be under a different government, it seems not very easy even to imagine a good reason."

The above company succeeded that called The Royal African Company, which traded upon a joint stock with an exclusive privilege. Though England began to trade to Africa as early as the year 1536, and several voyages were made to Guinea in 1588, and some following years, for the importation of gold and elephants' teeth, nothing like a company was formed till the year 1588, when queen Elizabeth granted a patent of exclusive privilege to certain persons for ten years. In 1618, king James I. established a company by charter, which was soon dissolved. Another company was erected by charter of Charles I. in 1631, which met with little success; but the demand for negroes in the English American plantations increasing, a third company was established by a charter granted 1662, in favour of the duke of York; securing to him the commerce of all the country, coasts, islands, &c. belonging to the crown of England, or not possessed by any other Christian prince; from Cape Blanco in 20° N. Lat. to the Cape of Good Hope in 34° 34' S. Lat. The charter was soon after returned into the king's hands by the duke, and revoked, by consent of the parties associated with him in the enterprise; in consequence of which, the fourth and last exclusive company was established and incorporated by letters patent in 1672, under the title of the Royal African Company. A capital was soon raised of 111,000l. and this new company improved their trade, and increased their forts; but after the Revolution in 1689, this trade was laid open. In 1698, all private traders to Africa were obliged by stat. 9 and 10 Will. to pay ten per cent. in order to assist the company in maintaining their forts and factories. But notwithstanding this heavy tax, the company were still unable to maintain the competition; their stock and credit gradually declined. Company. In 1712, their debts had become so great, that a particular act of parliament was thought necessary, both for their security and for that of their creditors. It was enacted, that the reduction of two-thirds of these creditors in number and value, should bind the rest, both with regard to the time which should be allowed to the company for the payment of their debts, and with regard to any other agreement which it might be thought proper to make with them concerning those debts. In 1730, their affairs were in so great disorder, that they were altogether incapable of maintaining their forts and garrisons; the sole purpose and pretext of their institution. From that year till their final dissolution, the parliament judged it necessary to allow the annual sum of ten thousand pounds for that purpose. In 1732, after having been for many years losers by the trade of carrying negroes to the West Indies, they at last resolved to give it up altogether; to sell to the private traders to America the negroes which they purchased upon the coast; and to employ their servants in a trade to the inland parts of Africa for gold dust, elephants teeth, dyeing drugs, &c. But their success in this more confined trade was not greater than in their former extensive one. Their affairs continued to go gradually to decline, till at last being in every respect a bankrupt company, they were dissolved by act of parliament, and their forts and garrisons vested in the present Regulated Company of Merchants trading to Africa.

II. Joint-Stock Companies, established either by royal charter or by act of parliament, differ in several respects, not only from regulated companies, but from private copartnery. 1. In a private copartnery, no partner, without the consent of the company, can transfer his share to another person, or introduce a new member into the company. Each member, however, may, upon proper warning, withdraw from the copartnery, and demand payment from them of his share of the common stock. In a joint-stock company, on the contrary, no member can demand payment of his share from the company; but each member can, without their consent, transfer his share to another person, and thereby introduce a new member. The value of a share in a joint-stock is always the price which it will bring in the market; and this may be either greater or less, in any proportion, than the sum which its owner stands credited for in the stock of the company. 2. In a private copartnery, each partner is bound for the debts contracted by the company to the whole extent of his fortune. In a joint-stock company, on the contrary, each partner is bound only to the extent of his share.

The trade of a joint-stock company is always managed by a court of directors. This court indeed is frequently subject, in many respects, to the control of a general court of proprietors. But the greater part of those proprietors seldom pretend to understand any thing of the business of the company; and when the spirit of faction happens not to prevail among them, give themselves no trouble about it, but receive contentedly such half yearly or yearly dividend as the directors think proper to make to them. This total exemption from trouble and from risk, beyond a limited sum, encourages many people to become adventurers in joint-stock companies, who would upon no account hazard their fortunes in any private copartnery. Such companies, therefore, commonly draw to themselves much greater stocks than any private copartnery can boast of. The trading stock of the South Sea company, at one time, amounted to upwards of thirty-three millions eight hundred thousand pounds. The directors of such companies, however, being the managers rather of other peoples money than of their own, it cannot well be expected that they should watch over it with the same anxious vigilance with which the partners in a private copartnery frequently watch over their own. Like the stewards of a rich man, they are apt to confer attention to small matters as not for their master's honour, and very easily give themselves a dispensation from having it. Negligence and profusion, therefore, must always prevail, more or less, in the management of the affairs of such a company. It is upon this account that joint-stock companies for foreign trade have seldom been able to maintain the competition against private adventurers. They have, accordingly, very seldom succeeded without an exclusive privilege; and frequently have not succeeded with one. Without an exclusive privilege they have commonly mismanaged the trade. With an exclusive privilege they have both mismanaged and confined it.

The principal joint-stock companies presently subsisting in Great Britain are, the South Sea and the East India companies; to which may be added, though of very inferior magnitude, the Hudson's Bay company.

1. The South-Sea Company. During the long war with France in the reign of queen Anne, the payment of the sailors of the royal navy being neglected, they received tickets instead of money, and were frequently obliged, by their necessities, to sell these tickets to avaricious men at a discount of 40 and sometimes 50 per cent. By this and other means, the debts of the nation unprovided for by parliament, and which amounted to 9,471,32 l. fell into the hands of these usurers. On which Mr Harley, at that time chancellor of the Exchequer, and afterwards earl of Oxford, proposed a scheme to allow the proprietors of these debts and deficiencies 6 per cent. per annum, and to incorporate them for the purpose of carrying on a trade to the South Sea; and they were accordingly incorporated under the title of "the Governor and Company of Merchants of Great Britain trading to the South Seas, and other parts of America, and for encouraging the Fishery," &c.

Though this company seem formed for the sake of commerce, the ministry never thought seriously, during the course of the war, about making any settlement on the coast of South America, which was what flattered the expectations of the people; nor was it ever carried into execution by this company.

Some other sums were lent to the government in the reign of queen Anne, at 6 per cent. In the third of George I. the interest of the whole was reduced to 5 per cent., and the company advanced two millions more to the government at the same interest. By the statute of the 6th of George I. it was declared, that they might redeem all or any of the redeemable national debts; in consideration of which, the company were empowered to augment their capital according to the sums they should discharge; and for enabling them to raise such sums for purchasing annuities, exchanging Company changing for ready money new exchequer bills, carrying on their trade, &c. they might, by such means as they should think proper, raise such sums of money as in a general court of the company should be judged necessary. The company were also empowered to raise money on the contracts, bonds, or obligations under their common seal, on the credit of their capital stock. But if the sub-governor, deputy-governor, or other members of the company, should purchase lands or revenues of the crown upon account of the corporation, or lend money by loan or anticipation on any branch of the revenue, other than such part only on which a credit of loan was granted by parliament, such sub-governor, or other member of the company, should forfeit treble the value of the money so lent.

The fatal South Sea scheme, transacted in the year 1720, was executed upon the last mentioned statute. The company had at first set out with good success, and the value of their stock, for the first five years, had risen faster than that of any other company; and his majesty, after purchasing 10,000l. stock, had conceded to be their governor. Things were in this situation, when, taking advantage of the above statute, the South Sea bubble was projected. The pretence was, to raise a fund for carrying on a trade to the South Sea, and purchasing annuities, &c. paid to the other companies; and proposals were printed and distributed, showing the advantages of this design. The sum necessary for carrying it on, together with the profits that were to arise from it, were divided into a certain number of shares, or subscriptions, to be purchased by persons disposed to adventure therein. And the better to carry on the deception, the directors engaged to make very large dividends; and actually declared, that every 100l. original stock would yield 50l. per annum; which occasioned so great a rise of their stock, that a share of 100l. was sold for upwards of 800l. This was in the month of July; but before the end of September it fell to 150l. by which multitudes were ruined, and such a scene of distress occasioned, as is scarcely to be conceived. But the consequences of this infamous scheme are too well known; most of the directors were severely fined, to the loss of nearly all their property; some of them had no hand in the deception, nor gained a farthing by it; but it was agreed, they ought to have opposed and prevented it.

The South Sea company never had any forts or garrisons to maintain, and therefore were entirely exempted from one great expense, to which other joint-stock companies for foreign trade are subject. But they had an immense capital divided among an immense number of proprietors. It was naturally to be expected, therefore, that folly, negligence, and profusion, should prevail in the whole management of their affairs.

Their stock-jobbing speculations were succeeded by mercantile projects, which, Dr Smith observes, were not much better conducted. The first trade which they engaged in, was that of supplying the Spanish West Indies with negroes, of which (in consequence of what was called the Asiento contract granted them by the treaty of Utrecht) they had the exclusive privilege. But as it was not expected that much profit could be made by this trade, both the Portuguese and French companies, who had enjoyed it upon the same terms before them, having been ruined by it, they were allowed, as compensation, to send annually a ship of a certain burden to trade directly to the Spanish West Indies. Of the ten voyages which this annual ship was allowed to make, they are said to have gained considerably by one, that of the Royal Caroline in 1731, and to have been losers, more or less, by almost all the rest. Their ill success was imputed, by their factors and agents, to the extortion and oppression of the Spanish government; but was, perhaps, principally owing to the profusion and depredations of those very factors and agents; some of whom are said to have acquired great fortunes even in one year. In 1734, the company petitioned the king, that they might be allowed to dispose of the trade and tannage of their annual ship, on account of the little profit which they made by it, and to accept of such equivalent as they could obtain from the king of Spain.

In 1724, this company had undertaken the whale-fishery. Of this, indeed, they had no monopoly; but as long as they carried it on, no other British subjects appear to have engaged in it. Of the eight voyages which their ships made to Greenland, they were gainers by one, and losers by all the rest. After their eighth and last voyage, when they had sold their ships, stores, and utensils, they found that their whole loss, upon this branch, capital and interest included, amounted to upwards of L. 237,000.

In 1722, this company petitioned the parliament to be allowed to divide their immense capital of more than L. 33,800,000, the whole of which had been lent to government, into two equal parts: The one half, or upwards of L. 16,900,000, to be put upon the same footing with other government annuities, and not to be subject to the debts contracted, or losses incurred, by the directors of the company, in the prosecution of their mercantile projects; the other half to remain, as before, a trading stock, and to be subject to those debts and losses. The petition was too reasonable not to be granted. In 1733, they again petitioned the parliament, that three-fourths of their trading stock might be turned into annuity stock, and only one-fourth remain as trading stock, or exposed to the hazards arising from the bad management of their directors. Both their annuity and trading stocks had, by this time, been reduced more than L. 2,000,000 each, by several different payments from government; so that this fourth amounted only to L. 3,662,784, 8s. 6d. In 1748, all the demands of the company upon the king of Spain, in consequence of the Asiento contract, were, by the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, given up for what was supposed an equivalent. An end was put to their trade with the Spanish West Indies, the remainder of their trading stock was turned into an annuity stock, and the company ceased in every respect to be a trading company.

This company is under the direction of a governor, sub-governor, deputy-governor, and 21 directors; but no person is qualified to be governor, his majesty excepted, unless such governor has, in his own name and right, L. 5000 in the trading stock; the sub-governor is to have L. 4000, the deputy-governor L. 3000, and a director L. 2000, in the same stock. In every general court, every member having in his own name and right L. 500 in trading. Company trading stock, has one vote; if L. 2000 two votes; if L. 3000 three votes; and if L. 5000 four votes.

2. The East India Company. The first, or as it is called the Old East India Company, was established by a charter from Queen Elizabeth in 1600; but for some time the partners seem to have traded with separate stocks, though only in the ships belonging to the whole company. In 1612, they joined their stocks into one common capital; and though their charter was not as yet confirmed by act of parliament, it was looked upon in that early period to be sufficiently valid, and no body ventured to interfere with their trade. At this time their capital amounted to about L. 740,000, and the shares were as low as L. 50; their trade was in general successful, notwithstanding some heavy losses, chiefly sustained through the malice of the Dutch East India company. In process of time, however, it came to be understood that a royal charter could not by itself convey an exclusive privilege to traders, and the company was reduced to dilapidation by reason of the multitude of interlopers who carried off the most of their trade. This continued during the latter part of the reign of Charles II., the whole of that of James II., and part of William III., when in 1698 a proposal was made to parliament for advancing the sum of L. 2,000,000 to government, on condition of erecting the subscribers into a new company with exclusive privileges. The old company endeavored to prevent the appearance of such a formidable rival, by offering government L. 700,000, nearly the amount of their capital, at that time; but such were the exigencies of the state at that time, that the larger sum, tho' at eight per cent. interest, was preferred to the smaller at one half the expense.

Thus were two East India Companies erected in the same kingdom, which could not but be very prejudicial to each other. Through the negligence of those who prepared the act of parliament also, the new company were not obliged to unite in a joint-stock. The consequence of this was, that a few private traders, whose subscriptions scarce exceeded L. 7200, insisted on a right of trading separately at their own risk. Thus a kind of third company was established; and by their mutual contentions with one another, all the three were brought to the brink of ruin. Upon a subsequent occasion, in 1730, a proposal was made to parliament for putting the trade under the management of a regulated company, and thus laying it in some measure open. This, however, was opposed by the company, who represented in strong terms the mischiefs likely to arise from such a proceeding. "In India (they said), it raised the price of goods so high, that they were not worth the buying; and in England, by overstocking the market, it sunk the price to such a degree, that no profit could be made of them." Here Dr Smith remarks, that by a more plentiful supply, to the great advantage and convenience of the public, it must have reduced very much the price of India goods in the English market, cannot well be doubted; but that it should have raised very much their price in the Indian market, seems not very probable, as all the extraordinary demand which that competition could occasion, must have been but as a drop of water in the immense ocean of Indian commerce. The increase of demand, adds he, though in the beginning it may sometimes raise the price of goods, never fails to lower it in the long run. It encourages production, and thereby increases the competition of the producers, who, in order to underbid one another, have recourse to new divisions of labour and new improvements of art, which might never otherwise have been thought of. The miserable effects of which the company complained, were the cheapness of consumption and the encouragement given to production, precisely the two effects which it is the business of political economy to promote. The competition, however, of which they gave this doleful account, had not been allowed to continue long. In 1702 the two companies were, in some measure, united by an indenture tripartite, to which the queen was the third party; and, in 1708, they were, by act of parliament, perfectly consolidated into one company by their present name of The United Company of Merchants trading to the East Indies. Into this act it was thought worthy to insert a clause, allowing the separate traders to continue their traffic till Michaelmas 1711, but at the same time empowering the directors, upon three years notice, to redeem their capital of L. 7200, and thereby convert the whole capital of the company into a joint-stock. By the same act, the capital of the company, in consequence of a new loan to government, was augmented from L. 2,000,000 to L. 3,200,000. In 1743, another million was advanced to government. But this being raised, not by a call upon the proprietors, but by selling annuities and contracting bond-debts, it did not augment the stock upon which the proprietors could claim a dividend. Thus, however, their trading stock was augmented; it being equally liable with the other L. 3,200,000, to the losses sustained, and debts contracted, by the company in the prosecution of their mercantile projects. From 1708, or at least from 1711, this company being freed from all competitors, and fully established in the monopoly of the English commerce to the East Indies, carried on a successful trade; and from their profits made annually a moderate dividend to their proprietors. Unhappily, however, in a short time, an inclination for war and conquest began to take place among their servants; which, though it put them in possession of extensive territories and vast nominal revenues, yet embarrassed their affairs in such a manner, that they have not to this day been able to recover themselves. The particulars of these wars are given under the articles Britain, and Indostan. Here it will be sufficient to observe, that they originated during the war in 1748 through the ambition of M. Dupleix the French governor of Pondicherry, who involved the company in the politics and disputes of the Indian princes. After carrying on hostilities for some time with various success, they at last lost Madras, at that time the principal settlement in the East Indies, but it was restored by the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle. During the war of 1755, they acquired the revenues of a rich and extensive territory, amounting, as was then said, to near L. 3,000,000 per annum.

For several years they remained in quiet possession of the revenue arising from this territory, though it certainly never answered the expectations that had been formed concerning it. But in 1767 the British ministry laid claim to the territorial possessions of the company. Company, company, and the revenue arising from them, as of right belonging to the crown; and the company, rather than yield up their territories in this manner, agreed to pay government a yearly sum of £4,000,000. They had before this gradually augmented their dividend from about five to ten per cent.; that is, on their capital of £3,200,000, they had raised it from £192,000 to £320,000 a-year. About this time also they were attempting to raise it still further, viz., from 10 to 12½ per cent.; but from this they were prevented by two successive acts of parliament, the design of which was to enable them to make a more speedy payment of their debts, at this time estimated at more than six or seven millions Sterling. In 1769 they renewed their agreement with government for five years more, stipulating, that during the course of that period they should be allowed gradually to augment their dividend to 12½ per cent.; never increasing it, however, more than one per cent. annually. Thus their annual payments could only be augmented by £68,000 beyond what they had been before their late territorial acquisitions. By accounts from India in the year 1768, this revenue, clear of all deductions and military charges, was stated at £2,948,747. At the same time they were said to possess another revenue, arising partly from lands, but chiefly from the customs established at their different settlements, amounting to about £439,000. The profits of their trade, too, according to the evidence of their chairman before the house of commons, amounted to at least £400,000 per annum; their accountant made it £500,000; and the lowest account stated it at least equal to the highest dividend paid to their proprietors. Notwithstanding this apparent wealth, however, the affairs of the company from this time fell into disorder; inasmuch that in 1773 their debts were augmented by an arrear to the treasury in the payment of the £400,000 stipulated; by another to the customhouse for duties unpaid; by a large sum borrowed from the bank; and by bills drawn upon them from India to the amount of more than £1,200,000. Thus they were not only obliged to reduce their dividend all at once to five per cent. but to apply to government for assistance. A particular account of this transaction is given under the article BRITAIN. Here it may be mentioned in general, that the event proved very unfavourable to the company, as they were now subjected to an interference of government altogether unknown before. Several important alterations were made in their constitution both at home and abroad. The settlements of Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta, which had hitherto been entirely independent of one another, were subjected to a governor-general, assisted by a council of four assistants. The nomination of the first governor and council, who were to reside at Calcutta, was confirmed by parliament; the power of the court of Calcutta, which had gradually extended its jurisdiction over the rest, was now reduced and confined to the trial of mercantile causes, the purpose for which it was originally instituted. Instead of it a new supreme court of judicature was established, consisting of a chief justice and three judges to be appointed by the crown. Besides these alterations, the stock necessary to intitle any proprietor to vote at the general courts was raised from £500 to £1,000. To vote on this qualification, too, it was necessary that he should have possessed it, if acquired Company, by his own purchase and not by inheritance, for at least one year, instead of six months, the term requisite formerly. The court of 24 directors had before been chosen annually; but it was now enacted, that each director should for the future be chosen for four years; six of them, however, to go out of office by rotation every year, and not to be capable of being re-chosen at the election of the six new directors for the ensuing year. It was expected that, in consequence of these alterations, the courts both of the proprietors and directors would be likely to act with more dignity and steadiness than formerly. But this was far from being the case. The company and its servants showed the utmost indifference about the happiness or misery of the people who had the misfortune to be subjected to their jurisdiction. This indifference, too, was more likely to be increased than diminished by some of the new regulations. The house of commons, for instance, had resolved, that when the £1,600,000 lent to the company by government should be paid, and their bond-debts reduced to £1,500,000, they might then, and not till then, divide eight per cent. upon their capital; and that whatever remained of their revenues and nett profits at home should be divided into four parts; three of them to be paid into the exchequer for the use of the public, and the fourth to be reserved as a fund, either for the further reduction of their bond-debts, or for the discharge of other contingent exigencies which the company might labour under. But it could scarce be expected that, if the company were bad stewards and bad sovereigns when the whole of their nett revenue and profits belonged to themselves, they would be better when three-fourths of these belonged to other people. The regulations of 1773, therefore, did not put an end to the troubles of the company. Among other institutions, it had been at this time enacted, that the presidency of Bengal should have a superiority over the other presidencies in the country; the salary of the chief justice was fixed at £800 per annum, and those of the other judges at £600 each. In consequence of this act, Sir Elijah Impey, who was created a baronet on the occasion, set sail, with three other judges, for India in the year 1774. The powers with which they were invested were very extraordinary. They had the title of His Majesty’s Supreme Court of Judicature in India. Civil law, common law, ecclesiastical, criminal, and admiralty jurisdiction, belonged of right to them. They were empowered to try Europeans on personal actions, and to assess damages, without a jury. Every native, either directly or indirectly in the service of the company, or in their territories, was made subject to their jurisdiction, with a view to prevent the Europeans from excluding justice under the pretence of employing natives in the commission of their crimes; so that in fact they were absolute lords and sovereigns of the whole country.

Such excessive and unlimited powers conferred on any small number of men, could not but be extremely disagreeable to the Europeans, who had been accustomed to enjoy a liberty almost equally unbounded before; nor was it to be supposed that the judges, thus suddenly raised from the rank of subjects to the height of delpotism, would always use their power in an unexceptionable Company. tianable manner. The design of the establishment was to preserve the commerce and revenues of the company from depredation, by subjecting its servants to the control of the court; to relieve the subject from oppression by facilitating the means of redress; and to fix a regular course of justice for the security of liberty and property. Instead of considering the circumstances of the country, however, or the manners and customs of the natives, the judges now precipitately introduced the British laws in their full extent, without the least modification to render them agreeable to the Asiatics, who had been accustomed to others of a quite different nature; nor did they even pay the least regard to the religious institutions or habits to which the Indians are so obstinately attached, that they would sooner part with life itself than break through an article of them.

Besides this it was said, that, on the first arrival of the judges, they endeavoured to extend their authority beyond even what the British legislature had allowed them. Hence they were frequently at variance with the council; and complaints of their conduct were repeatedly sent to England by the servants of the company. These produced a letter in 1777 from the directors to Lord Weymouth, secretary of state for the southern department. In this they stated, that the supreme court of India had extended its jurisdiction to those whom it did not appear to have been the intention of the king or parliament to subject to its authority. It had also taken cognizance of matters which, they apprehended, belonged properly to other courts. That the judges considered the criminal law of England as in force, and binding on the natives of Bengal, though utterly repugnant to the laws and customs by which they had hitherto been governed; and that the jurisdiction exercised by the supreme court was incompatible with the powers given by parliament to the governor-general and council, obstructed the administration of government, and tended to alienate the minds of the natives; all which they feared would prevent the establishment of the government of India upon any settled or permanent foundation.

This letter not having produced any effect, the difficulties of India, both in the Europeans and natives, continued and increased. The decisions of the judges were such as by no means did them honour. A number of adventurers had also emigrated along with them, in hopes of enriching themselves under the new constitution. Some of these were of the lowest sort of people, who had rendered it in a manner impossible for them to remain in England on account of their services or extravagance. Many such persons had enrolled themselves among the domestics of the judges, or had become their immediate dependents; and some of these were permitted to assume the characters of attorneys, court-officers, under-sheriffs, and bailiffs. It may easily be supposed, that people of such characters would find it for their interest to promote suits in the supreme court; and in this some of them employed themselves with great success. The consequence of all this was, that on the 4th of December 1780, a petition was presented against the supreme court by a great number of British inhabitants in the kingdoms of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. In this complaint was made of the indiscriminate manner in which the judges of the supreme court attempted to exercise the English laws in that country, at the same time that they refused the undoubted right of every British subject, viz. that of trial by jury. They intreated the house "to reflect on the innumerable hardships which must ensue, and the universal confusion which must be occasioned, by giving to the voluminous laws of England a boundless retrospective power in the midst of Asia, and by an application of those laws made for the freest and most enlightened people on earth, the principle of whose constitution was founded on virtue and liberty, to transactions with the natives of India, who had, from time immemorial, lived under a despotic government founded on fear and restraint. What must be the terrors of individuals to find their titles to property, and their transactions with the natives previous to the establishment of this court of judicature, tried by the standard of the English law, and by men educated under its forms, and unavoidably imbibing its prejudices, when no such laws could be known to or practised by natives or Europeans then residing in the country, and that at a time when there were few persons of legal knowledge in the country to advise or assist them? No tyranny could be more fatal in its consequences, than that a court, invested with all the authority of one of the first courts in England, should also possess undefined powers and jurisdiction, of which its judges were the sole interpreters, and at such an immense distance from the mother country. This was in truth the situation of the British subjects in India at that time; for the judges of the supreme court could at pleasure determine on the denomination of a civil jury, the degree of guilt incurred by any offence, the statute by which it should be tried, what penalties should be inflicted, as well as who were and who were not amenable to the jurisdiction of the court.

Besides their other powers also, the judges of the supreme court were allowed to sit as a court of chancery, and in that capacity to revise, correct, rescind, or confirm the decisions passed by themselves as a court of law; and, by another part of their constitution, they were allowed to stop execution in criminal cases until his Majesty's pleasure was known. The petitioners conceived, that there must be some fundamental error in that institution, which required a more than ordinary degree of temper, integrity, and ability, to carry its purposes into execution; and they did not hesitate to declare, that to administer the powers appertaining to the institution of the supreme court, without committing flagrant acts of injustice, and doing great detriment to the public, required more equity, moderation, discernment, and enlightened abilities, than they could hope to find in any set of men." They concluded with earnestly soliciting parliament, that a trial by jury might be granted to the British subjects in Bengal, in all cases where it was established by law in England; that the retrospective powers of the supreme court might be limited to the time of its establishment in Bengal; that it should be defined beyond the power of discretion or disjunction, who the persons were that properly came under the jurisdiction of the court, and who did not; that it should be expressly declared what statutes should, and what should not, be in force in Bengal; that distinct and separate judges Company, for the law and equity sides of the court should be appointed; and that a power of delaying executions in criminal cases until his Majesty's pleasure was known, should be lodged in the governor and council.

This petition was soon followed by another signed by Warren Hastings, Esq.; governor-general, Philip Francis and Edward Wheeler, Esqs.; counsellors for the government and presidency of Fort-William in Bengal; in which they represented, "that, though the jurisdiction of the supreme court of judicature at Calcutta, as well as the powers granted to the governor-general and council, were clearly limited by parliament and the king's letters patent, yet the chief justice and judges of that court had exercised authority over persons not legally within their jurisdiction, and had illegally and improperly advised and admitted suits against the governor-general and council; that they had attempted to execute their writs upon natives of high rank in the kingdom of Bengal, who were not within their jurisdiction: the governor and council therefore had found themselves under a necessity of opposing them, and of affording protection to the country and people, who were placed under their own immediate inspection, and freeing them from the terrors of a new and usurped dominion. They had even been obliged to make use of a military force, in order to resist the proceedings of the judges and their officers: And they declared, that no other conduct could have saved those provinces and the interests of the company, or of the British nation itself, from the ruin with which they were threatened. They also declared themselves to be of opinion, that the attempt to extend, to the inhabitants of these provinces, the jurisdiction of the supreme court of judicature, and the authority of the English law, which were still more intolerable than the law itself, would be such a constraint on the minds of the people of those provinces, by the difference of such laws and forms from their laws, that they might at least inflame them, notwithstanding their known mildness and patience, into an open rebellion." The petition was concluded, by soliciting an indemnity from the legal consequences of the resistance they had been obliged to make to that court.

While the British were thus expressing their displeasure against the conduct of these judges, the natives were thrown into the utmost consternation and despair by the acts of oppression and violence committed by them. A prosecution for forgery had been commenced against Nundcomar, a bramin of the first rank in Bengal. The crime was not capital by the laws of Indostan, and had been committed many years before; yet with the utmost cruelty and injustice was this man condemned and executed on the British statute, by which forgery is made capital; a statute which, at the commission of the crime, he had never heard of, nor could ever dream that he would be subjected to its power. What rendered this execution the more remarkable was, that, at the very time when charge of forgery was brought against him, Nundcomar had been employed in exhibiting an accusation against Mr Hastings. This, together with the hurry in which the court were to have him put to death (for the court refused to allow him a respite till his Majesty's pleasure was known), made the natives conclude, that he was executed, not on account of the

N° 86.

forgery, but for having ventured to prefer an accusation against an English governor. In other respects they were terrified to such a degree, that many of them ran into the river on seeing a bramin put to death with such circumstances of ignominy.

The alarm excited by the execution of Nundcomar was kept up by fresh decisions of the supreme court. Among those the Patna cause, as it is commonly called, was one of the most remarkable. An adventurer, named Shahaz Beg Cawn, had come from Kabul in Persia to Bengal, where he entered himself in the service of the company, and was preferred to the command of a body of horse. Having gained a competent fortune, and obtained from the Mogul a grant of lands called an Ultungbaw in the province of Bahar, he retired from the army, and settled in Patna. About this time, when advanced in years, he married a woman of low rank, named Nadara Begum, by whom he had no children. His brother, Allum Beg, came likewise to Patna; and on his leaving the place some time after, committed the care of one of his sons, named Behader Beg, to his brother Shahaz Beg Cawn. On the death of the latter in 1776, a dispute ensued concerning the inheritance betwixt the widow and Behader Beg. The widow having taken possession of the whole property of Shahaz, the nephew, as adopted son and heir, gave in a petition to the provincial council at Patna, on the 2d of January 1777, setting forth his claim. In this petition he stated, that the widow was removing and secreting the effects of the deceased; and concluded with a prayer, that orders should be given to prevent their removal; to recover such as had already been carried away; and that the cadi or Indian judge should be directed to ascertain his right. As the parties were Mahometants, the council of course referred the cause to the cadi and two muties, the proper officers for determining it according to the established laws of the country. These having inquired into the matter, reported, that the title-deeds, on which the widow pretended to found her right, appeared to be forged; and that, even if they had appeared in the life-time of Shahaz, they were still informal, on account of a point of the Mahometan law, which requires, that to make deeds of gift valid, possession should be entered into at the time of executing or delivering them over; but that, as no possession of this kind had been given, the estate ought to be divided according to the Mahometan law; viz. one-fourth to the wife, and three-fourths to the nephew, as the representative of his father Allum Beg, who was considered as the more immediate heir of the deceased. This decision was confirmed by the council of Patna, with the following exception in favour of the widow, that the heir at law should pay her one-fourth of the rents of the ultungbaw, or royal grant, for her support during life. The widow, however, refused to submit to the decision, or to deliver up the effects of her husband; in consequence of which compulsory methods were used; when, by the advice of some English lawyers, an action of trespass was brought, according to the law of England, against the cadi and two muties for their proceedings against her, laying the damages at about 66,000l. Sterling. This process being brought before the supreme court, was by them conducted in such a manner as must entail everlasting infamy. Company. infamy on the actors. They began with obliging the cadi and mufties to find bail in no less than 40,000 pounds for their appearance, which was immediately given by the council at Patna. The supreme court then having entered into the merits of the cause, and decided the matter in the most rigorous manner, according to all the forms of English law, affected the cadi and mufties in damages no less than 30,000l. Sterling. Their houses and effects were seized by the sheriff's officers, and publicly put up to sale; the cadi, who was upwards of 60 years of age, and had been in office for many years with great applause, died on his way to the common gaol at Calcutta, to which the nephew and two mufties were conveyed, being a distance of no less than 400 miles from their former residence at Patna. A suit, however, was commenced against the widow, on account of having forged the title-deeds by which she claimed her husband's estate; but it was suppressed on account of some informality.

Another decision, by which the supreme court likewise incurred much censure, was that against Jaggernaut, the principal public officer of a Mahometan court at Dacca. The action was brought at the instigation of an English attorney, in behalf of one Khyne, a servant or messenger, who had been fined and imprisoned for a misdemeanor, in which Jaggernaut had concurred in virtue of his office as judge of the Nizamut (the name of the Mahometan court just mentioned). The sheriff-officers attempted to arrest the judge as he sat on the tribunal; which could not fail to produce much disturbance. Jaggernaut, with his officers, denied the authority of the supreme court over the Nizamut, and refused to comply with the writ. The English sheriff-officers proceeded to force; and a violent scuffle ensuing, Jaggernaut's father was wounded in the head with a sword by one of the under-sheriff's attendants, while his brother-in-law was very dangerously wounded with a pistol bullet by the under-sheriff himself. The immediate consequence of this was an absolute refusal of the judge to take cognizance of any criminal matters; and this was intimated in a letter from the council at Dacca to the English governor and council of India; wherein they declared that all criminal justice was at a stand.

The supreme court, having proceeded in this arbitrary and oppressive manner for some time, at length attempted to extend their jurisdiction over the hereditary Zemindars of Bengal. These are a kind of tributary lords, or great landholders, who are answerable to the company for the revenues or rents of the districts; and excepting the circumstance of remitting their revenues to the company, have not the least connection with the English in any respect. At the time we speak of, however, a writ, upon an action of debt, was issued out to arrest one of these Zemindars in his palace. Timely notice, however, was given, by one of the company's collectors, of this attempt to the governor and council, and application made to protect a man of such quality from the disgrace of an arrest. They being unanimously of opinion that the Zemindar was not within the jurisdiction of the court of Calcutta, desired him to pay no regard to the writ. The court, however, determined to enforce their process by a writ of sequestration; upon which the natives, who are superstitiously attached to their Zemindars, rose in his defence, and insulted the sheriff's officers. The latter having obtained a reinforcement, the Zemindar's palace was entered by 86 men armed with bludgeons, cutlasses, and muskets; the apartment of his women, always held inviolably sacred by the Asiatics; was broken open; his temple profaned; and the image, which was the object of his worship, put into a basket, and carried off with some common lumber. This roused the attention of the governor and council; who, from a full conviction of the ruinous tendency of these proceedings, determined at last to oppose force by force. They accordingly sent a party of military to apprehend the sheriff's people, and they were all conducted prisoners to Calcutta. The judges ordered attachments against the officer who commanded the troops, and against two other servants of the company; while the governor and council endeavoured to justify their proceedings, by writing to England as already mentioned.

Besides all this, the natives themselves testified their disapprobation of the conduct of the supreme court in very strong terms. A petition to his Britannic majesty was sent by the natives of Patna; in which are the following remarkable passages: "When the ordinances of this court of judicature were issued, as they were all contrary to the customs, modes, usages, and institutions, of this country, they occasioned terror in us; and day by day, as the powers of this court have become more established, our ruin, uneasiness, dishonour, and discredit, have accumulated; till at last we are reduced to such a situation, that we consider death to us as infinitely preferable to the dread we entertain of the court: for from this court no credit or character is left to us, and we are now driven to the last extremity. Several who possessed means and ability, deeming flight as their only security, have banished themselves from the country; but bound as we are by poverty and inability, and fettered by the dearth of confanguinity, we do not all of us possess the means of flight, nor have we power to abide the oppression of this court."—"If, which God forbid! it should so happen, that this our petition should not be accepted, and should be rejected at the chamber of audience, those amongst us who have power and ability, discarding all affection for our families, will fly to any quarter we can; whilst the remainder, who have no means or ability, giving themselves up with pious resignation to their fate, will sit down in expectation of death."

These repeated complaints could not but be taken notice of in parliament. On the 12th of February 1781, General Smith made a motion in the house of commons, that the petition from the British inhabitants of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa, should be taken into consideration by a select committee, consisting of 15 persons, chosen by ballot. In the introduction to his motion, he stated briefly the bad conduct of the supreme court in the particulars already related; and concluded, that the affairs of Bengal required the immediate attention and consideration of parliament. The matter was accordingly debated; when, after various proposals, a motion was at length made by General Smith, for leave to bring in a bill "to explain and amend so much of an act passed in the 13th year of his present majesty, for the better regulation of the East India Company." Company. India company, as related to the administration of justice in Bengal; and also to indemnify the governor and council of Bengal for having resisted by force of arms the execution of an order of the supreme court of judicature in that kingdom." Leave was accordingly given to bring in the bill. The house having resolved itself into a committee, Lord North observed, "that it had been much his wish that an agreement for the renewal of the company's charter had been made in an amicable manner; and that voluntary propositions should have come from themselves, offering terms for the benefit of the exclusive trade and the territorial acquisitions. No such terms, however, had been proposed, nor any agreement made. A negociation had indeed taken place between him and the chairman and deputy-chairman; but the propositions made by them were neither such as the public might expect, nor had the company any right to them. With regard to the territorial possessions, he was clearly of opinion, that they of right belonged to the public; though how far it might be proper to allow the revenue of them to remain in the possession of the company was quite another matter. In his opinion, it would be proper to allow it to remain in their hands as long as they possessed an exclusive trade, but he never would consent to forego the claim of the public. He made a motion, therefore, that it was the opinion of the committee, that three-fourths of the surplus of the net profits of the East India company, ever since the company's bond-debt was reduced to L1,500,000, and the company's dividends had been eight per cent. per annum, belong to the public; and that L600,000 in lieu thereof, and in discharge of all claims on the part of the public, be paid into his majesty's exchequer by instalments, in such manner, and at such times, as shall be agreed on." This proposal was vehemently opposed by the minority. Mr Burke called it the daring effort of a minister determined on rapine and plunder, without regard to truth, honour, or justice. Mr Hufsey reprobated the idea of taking L600,000 from the company in their circumstances at that time. He produced a paper full of arithmetical calculations, which he read to the house; asserting that they contained an exact state of the amount of the company's exports and imports, the expenses of their trade at home, and the balance of profit of each year, for many years past, distinguishing the territorial from the commercial income and expenses. From these he showed, that the commercial and territorial revenues of the company had, upon an average for 16 years, constituted a sum equivalent to a proportion of 16 per cent.; that 9 per cent. of this had arisen from the commercial profits accruing to the company; and therefore, that there had not been 8 per cent. divided upon that part of the profits to which the public had any claim or pretension. The accession of territorial possessions, he observed, had brought along with it additional expenses; and the public had already received a very large share of the company's profits. He declared it to be his opinion, that the company should always make it a rule to give as ample and full relief to the public burdens as their situation would allow; and if they did this, he saw no reason why the minister should expect any more. Mr Dempster reminded the house of the consequences of violating the American charters; and added, that to tear from the company by force what was not stipulated in any act of parliament, would be a breach of public faith disgraceful to the nation, and such as would damp the spirit of enterprize and adventure which had been productive of such happy effects.—Notwithstanding these remonstrances, however, the bill was at last passed into a law; only with this mitigation, that the company should pay only L400,000, instead of L600,000 demanded originally by the minister.—Another bill was also passed the same year, in consequence of the motion made by General Smith. This act declared, that the governor-general and council of Bengal were not subject to the jurisdiction of the supreme court, and indemnified the former for the retinace they had made to the orders of that court. It enacted also, that no person should be subject to the jurisdiction of that court on account of his being a landholder or farmer of land in the provinces of Bengal, Bahar, or Orixa; that no judicial officers in the country courts should be liable to actions in the supreme court for their decisions; and the two mutties, with Behader Beg, who were then in prison, in consequence of the decision of that court in the Patna cause, were ordered to be set at liberty.

The debates on this subject were attended with the most violent charges against the minister, and assertions the most humiliating and disgraceful to the British nation. Mr Townshend affirmed, that it was from the minister's screening the delinquents who came from India that all the evils in that quarter had originated; and if matters were suffered to go on in that country as they had done for some time past, the conduct of the Britihi in the East Indies must be viewed in a light still more detestable than that of the Spaniards in America. It was reported, that the nabob of Arcot had several members in the house of commons! If it were true, that by sending over a sum of money to England he could seat eight or ten members in that house, then Mr Townshend declared, that in his opinion they were the most abject and contemptible beings in the world.—The bill for regulating the powers of the supreme court, also, though so evidently founded in reason and justice, did not pass without opposition, particularly from Mr Dunning; who was thought on this occasion to have allowed his regard for his friend Sir Elijah Impey, the chief justice, to bias him too much.

The regulations just mentioned did not yet put an end to the troubles of the East India company, nor allay the ferment which had been so effectually excited. Their affairs were still a subject of parliamentary discussion; and in the month of April 1782, a motion was made by Mr Dundas, then Lord Advocate of Scotland, for taking into consideration the several reports concerning affairs, which had been made by the secret committee appointed to inquire into them during the last and present session of parliament. In his speech on this occasion, he remarked, that the opinion of Lord Clive had been against keeping too extensive a territory in that country. Instead of this, he had restored Sujah Dowlah to the possession of his country; considering the British territories in Hindostan, with those on the coasts of Coromandel and Bombay, as sufficient for all the purposes by which this country could be benefited; but instead of adhering to the maxims of sound policy laid Company laid down by his Lordship, they had become so ambitious of extending their territories, that they had involved themselves in a war with almost all India. He then considered the finances of the company. The revenue of Bombay, he said, fell short of the necessary civil and military establishment by £200,000 a-year, which was annually drawn from Bengal. With regard to that of Madras, it appeared, on an average of 12 years, from 1767 to 1779, that there had been eight years of war and only four of peace; and that, during the whole time of war, the revenue had not been able to support the civil and military establishments; though, in time of peace, it was able to do nearly one-half more. Bengal, however, was the most lucrative of all the East India settlements; but such had been the expenses of the Mahratta war, that the governor-general had been obliged to contract a very large debt, in order that it was doubtful whether the investments for England should be wholly or partially suspended. Mr Hastings, he said, had in many instances proved himself a very meritorious servant; but he wished that every one of their servants would consider himself as bound in the first place to prove a faithful steward to the company; not to fancy that he was an Alexander or Aurengzebe, and prefer frantic military exploits to the improvement of the trade and commerce of his country.—General Smith observed, that by the evidence produced to the committee, it appeared that there had been a variety of great abuses in India. Sir Elijah Impey, his majesty's chief justice in that country, had so far derogated from the character of a judge, as to accept of a place from the company; by which means he was brought under their control, and consequently allowed himself to be deprived of that independence which he ought to possess as a judge. Justice had been so partially administered, that several worthy and respectable persons had been imprisoned, some had been ruined, and others died in jail. From all which considerations he moved, that the affairs of the company ought to be taken into consideration by a committee of the whole house. Some hints were thrown out by Mr Dundas, that the territorial possessions in the East ought to be taken from the company entirely, and put under the direction of the crown; but this was opposed by Mr Fox, as furnishing ministers with such ample means of corruption and undue influence, as might overthrow the constitution entirely. For this reason, he thought it would be more prudent to leave the appointment of its own servants to the company; but at the same time to keep a watchful eye over them, in order to be able to punish and remove those who should be found delinquent.

The house having resolved itself into a committee, a motion was made by General Smith, "That Warren Hastings, Esq; governor-general of Bengal, and Sir Elijah Impey, the chief justice, appear to have been concerned, the one in giving, the other in receiving, an office not agreeable to the late act for regulating the company's affairs; which unjustifiable transaction was attended with circumstances of evil tendency and example." Resolutions were also passed for ascertaining more distinctly the powers of the governor-general and council of Bengal; and votes of censure against Laurence Sullivan, Esq; chairman of the East India Company, for having neglected to transmit to India an act for explaining and amending the act for regulating the affairs of the company, and for the relief of certain persons imprisoned at Calcutta. Among the number of this gentleman's transgressions, also, was his imposing an oath of secrecy on Mr Wilkes, one of the company's clerks; and especially his restraining him from giving information to a select committee of the house of commons.

Mr Dundas having made several motions tending to criminate Sir Thomas Rumbold, formerly governor of Bengal, a bill was brought in, and passed into a law, for restraining him and Peter Perings, Esq; from going out of the kingdom for the space of one year, for discovering their estates, &c. An address was also presented to the king, requesting him to recall Sir Elijah Impey from India, in order to answer for high crimes and misdemeanors. A number of other resolutions were now passed by the house, in consequence of motions by Mr Dundas, and which were founded on the reports of the Secret Committee. Among these it was resolved, "That the orders of the Court of Directors of the East India Company, which have conveyed to their servants abroad a prohibitory condemnation of all schemes of conquest and enlargement of dominion, by prescribing certain rules and boundaries for the operation of their military force, were founded no less in wisdom and policy than in justice and moderation. That every transgression of these orders, without evident necessity, by any of the several governments in India, has been highly reprehensible, and tended in a great degree to weaken the force and influence, and to diminish the influence of the company in those parts. That every interference of the company as a party in the domestic or national quarrels of the country powers, and all new engagements with them in offensive alliance, have been wisely and providentially forbidden by the company in their commands to their administrations in India. That every unnecessary deviation from these rules should be severely reproved and punished. That the maintenance of an inviolable character for moderation, good faith, and scrupulous regard to treaty, ought to have been the simple grounds on which the British government should have endeavoured to establish an extensive influence, superior to that of other Europeans; and that the danger and discredit arising from the forfeiture of this pre-eminence, could not be compensated by the temporary success of any plan of violence and injustice. That should any relaxation take place, without sufficient cause, in those principles of good government on the part of the directors themselves, it would bring upon them, in a heavier degree, the resentment of the legislative power of their country. That the conduct of the company, and their servants in India, in various instances specified, was contrary to policy and good faith; the company's servants, in their presidency of Bombay, had been guilty of notorious instances of disobedience to the orders of their employers, particularly in forming an alliance with Ragobah, or Ragonaut Row: that they had undertaken, without any adequate military force, or certainty of a sufficient revenue, and without proper communication with the superior government upon which they were to depend for sanction and support, to reinstate the... Company, usurper above mentioned, and thereby to involve themselves in a war with the ruling ministers of the Mahratta state, while Ragobah himself was not in the mean time able to give the company any secure possession of the grants he had made to them for the purchase of their assistance. That it was the opinion of the house, that all the disasters in which the British empire in the East were involved, had proceeded from the unjustifiable manner in which the Mahrattas had been treated, and the conduct of the Madras presidency in other respects specified. That it is the opinion of this house, that it must be reckoned among the additional mischiefs arising chiefly from the improvident war with the Mahrattas, that the military force of the Carnatic had been weakened by reinforcements sent to the Malabar coast; that the Bengal government had been under a necessity of supporting, on their confines, the army of a power confederated against them (a); that they had been under the necessity of suing for the mediation of the same power; had submitted to a refusal, and purchased at last an uncertain, because apparently an unauthorized, treaty, on most extravagant and dishonourable conditions, with Chinnagee the rajah of Berar's son; and, finally, that being burdened with the expenses of a variety of distant expeditions, while their allies were in distress, and their tributaries under oppression, there was also an alarming deficiency in the resources of revenue and commerce, by the accumulation of their debt, and the reduction of their investment. That it was the opinion of the house, that an attempt made by the government-general, in the beginning of January 1781, to form an engagement of alliance, offensive and defensive, with the Dutch East India company, in the manner stated by the proceedings of their council, was unwarranted, impolitic, extravagant, and unjust.

These severe censures extended even to the directors themselves, whose conduct on some occasions was declared to be indefensible, as well as that of their servants and agents. It was also resolved, "That Warren Hastings, Esq; governor-general of Bengal, and William Hornby, Esq; president of the council of Bombay, having, in sundry instances, acted in a manner repugnant to the honour and policy of this nation, and thereby brought great calamities on India, and enormous expenses on the India company, it was the duty of the directors to pursue all legal and effectual means for the removal of the said governor-general and president from their offices, and to recall them to Britain."

The commons having thus seriously entered into a consideration of East India affairs, soon found still more abundant reason for censure. It was discovered, that corruption, fraud, and injustice, had pervaded every department. It had become an object with the servants of the company to oppress the natives by every possible method. They monopolized every article of trade, and seemed to have no other principle of commerce but lawless violence: the Court of Directors sent out instructions; but for the most part without any effect. Though the delegated administration of India ought to have preferred the strictest obedience to Company, that of Britain; yet, being at so great a distance from the seat of supreme authority, and being possessed of endless means of abuse, it had become corrupt in an extreme degree. Instead of being subservient to government at home, the administration of India affected independence. The maxims of Mr Hastings were arbitrary; and he seemed to have no inclination to obey. He treated with sovereign contempt the authority of the Court of Directors; and the confusion produced by the disputes between them were foistered by the body of India proprietors, who were disposed to act as a check upon the directors. The necessity of new regulations in the government of India was universally admitted; and a bill for this purpose was accordingly brought in by Mr Dundas. His propositions were, that the governor and council of Bengal should have a controlling power and jurisdiction over the inferior presidencies of India; and he was of opinion, that the governor-general should be invested with a power to act even against the will and opinion of the council, whenever he should imagine that, by so doing, he could contribute to the public good; though, in these cases, he alone should be responsible for the event. With regard to the inferior governors, though he did not think it proper that they should be authorised to act contrary to the advice of the council, he was of opinion, that they ought to have a right of negativing every proposition, until application was made to the governor-general and council of Bengal. With regard to the Zemindaries, and other tenures of land, he observed, that when Hindostan had been conquered by the Moguls, a tribute was imposed upon the Zemindars; and while they continued to pay this tribute, they accounted themselves to be the real proprietors and masters of the lands they possessed. The people called Rajas, to whom these Zemindaries were let out, considered themselves likewise as secure in their possessions, while they performed the articles of their respective contracts. Of late, however, these rights had been infringed; and the Mogul came to consider himself as the absolute master of all the soil of Hindostan: which maxim he was inclined to destroy, and erect upon it another, that might secure the land-holders in their property. He proposed to secure the nabob of Arcot and rajah of Tanjore in their territories, by making an act of parliament in favour of the latter; but was of opinion, that the debts of these princes ought not to be too nicely inquired into, as the greatest part of them originated in corruption. He was clearly of opinion, however, that Governor Hastings ought to be recalled; and that steps ought to be taken to prevent the court of proprietors from presuming to act in contradiction to parliament. Lord Cornwallis appeared to be the most proper successor to Mr Hastings. His personal honour, and that of his ancestors, were pledges for his good behaviour; and being independent in his fortune, he could have no view of repairing his estate out of the spoils of India; and from his profession, he could add to the character of governor that of com-

(a) The power here alluded to was Movdajee Boofla, Rajah of Berar. See INDOSTAN. Mr Hastings was defended by Governor Johnstone, who endeavoured to ridicule the arguments and proposals of Mr Dundas. He observed, to the honour of the former, that he had been able to conclude a peace with the Mahrattas; and while he enlarged on his talents for negotiation, he admired the resources with which he had supplied the expenses of the war. It ought to be considered, that Mr Hastings was in a situation the most difficult, and that no man could have sustained it with more fortitude and ability. His enemies had dealt in insinuation and invective; but when the hour of trial came, they would find that their charges would be refuted with equal ease. He was defended also by Mr Dempster, who advised the house ferociously to think before they passed a vote for the removal of Mr Hastings. His exertions had been extraordinary; and it would then be as ridiculous to supersede him, as it would have been to recall General Elliot, when the Spanish batteries were playing against Gibraltar. He was not, however, an advocate for all the measures of Mr Hastings; his errors might be numerous: but no censure of him should be established before they were pointed out and explained.

Mr Dundas having now obtained leave to bring in his bill, another was moved for by Sir Henry Fletcher, "That leave be given to bring in a bill to discharge and indemnify the united company of merchants trading to the East Indies, from all damages, interest, and losses, in respect to their not making regular payment of certain sums due to the public, and to allow farther time for such payment; to enable the company also to borrow a certain sum of money, and to make a dividend to the proprietors of four per cent. at midsummer 1783." He endeavoured to show, that the public had derived very considerable advantages from the company; that their dividend had been L. 8, 4s. annually during the time of peace, and L. 7, 15s. per cent. during war; they were by no means in a state of insolvency, as some members had endeavoured to prove, their present application proceeding only from a temporary embarrassment. A new dispute took place concerning Mr Hastings, who was warmly attacked by Mr Burke, and defended by Governor Johnstone. The former enlarged on the bloodshed, ravages, and rapacity, which had taken place in India. The established system of the servants of the company, he said, was rapine and robbery. The Mahratta war was occasioned by their refusal to be robbed; the famine at Madras was occasioned by the misconduct of the English government in India; and he set forth in strong colours the manner in which the Indian princes and princesses had been plundered. He intimated, that Mr Hastings had raised L. 800,000 in Bengal by private loan; and used it as an argument, that the company had ceased to exist, and that their commerce was nothing more than an instrument for procuring immense fortunes to individuals, totally destitute of conscience or principle.

All this was excused by Governor Johnstone. He regarded the sum of L. 800,000 as merely trifling, when the number of civil and military servants on the Bengal government was considered. The famine at Madras was owing to the modes of war which prevailed in the East; as the enemy there marked their course by defoliation. He concluded with censuring the manner in which Mr Hastings had been spoken of; and insisted that his high reputation ought to have guarded him from such insults. Mr Burke replied by an intimation of his design to impeach Mr Hastings on his return; whom he called the greatest delinquent that had ever violated in India the rights of humanity and justice.

It was observed by Lord John Cavendish, that the territorial acquisitions of the company were a fruitful source of grievance; and it would have been more for their advantage to have confined themselves to their original character of merchants. However, as the territorial acquisitions had been obtained, it was proper to take means for their preservation; as otherwise they would not revert to the natives, but fall into the hands of our natural enemies the French.

In the house of peers the cause of the company was ably defended by Earl Fitzwilliam. He maintained, that their situation was desperate, and bankruptcy inevitable, unless relief was instantly afforded. A report of their being in an insolvent state had gone abroad; and nothing was better calculated to preserve and support their credit than a large dividend sanctioned by act of parliament. The expenditure on their settlements had far exceeded their revenue; of consequence their servants had drawn bills, which they were unable to answer without a temporary supply. Thus the existence of the company might be said to depend on the bill; and he hoped no objections could be raised strong enough to destroy it.

On the 18th of November 1783, Mr Fox proposed his celebrated East India bill, which for some time attracted the attention of the nation at large in a very considerable degree. By this it was intended to take from the India proprietors and directors the entire administration of their territorial and commercial affairs. It took from them also their house in Leadenhall-street, together with all books, papers, and documents, vesting the entire management, the appointment of all officers and servants, the rights of peace and war, and the disposal of the whole revenue, in the hands of certain commissioners. These were, in the first instance, to be appointed by the whole legislature, but afterwards by the crown; and were to hold their offices by the same tenure as the judges in England, viz. during their good behaviour; and could be removed only by an address from one of the houses of parliament. They were required to come to a decision upon every question within a limited time, or to assign a specific reason for their delay. They were never to vote by ballot; and, almost in every case, were to enter the reason of their vote in their journals. They were also to submit, once every six months, an exact state of their accounts to the court of proprietors; and at the beginning of every session, a state of their accounts and establishments to both houses of parliament. Their number was limited to seven; but they were to be assisted by a board of nine persons, each of them possessed of L. 2000 company's stock; who, as well as the commissioners, were to be appointed in the first instance by parliament, and ever afterwards by the court of proprietors. They were also to be removable at Company, the pleasure of any five commissioners, and were disqualified from sitting in the house of commons. The whole system of government thus proposed, was to continue for the space of three or five years.

This was accompanied with another bill, the professed design of which was to preclude all arbitrary and despotic proceedings from the administration of the company's territorial possessions. By this the powers of the governor-general and supreme council were ascertained more exactly than had hitherto been done; it deprived the governor-general of all power of acting independent of his council; prohibited the delegation of any trust; and declared every British power in the East incompetent to the acquisition or exchange of any territory in behalf of the company, to the acceding to any treaty of partition, the hiring out of the company's troops, the appointing to office any person removed for misdemeanor, or to the hiring out any property to a civil servant of the company. By this also monopolies were entirely abolished; and illegal profits recoverable by any person for his sole benefit. The principal part of the bill, however, related to the Zemindars, or native landholders, who were now to be secured by every possible means in the possession of their respective inheritances, and defended in all cases from oppression. Lastly, a mode was presented for terminating the disputes between the nabob of Arcot and the rajah of Tanjour; disqualifying every person in the service of the company from sitting in the House of Commons during his continuance in their service, and for a certain specified time after his demission.

During the course of the debates on this bill, Mr Fox set forth the affairs of the company as in the most deplorable situation. They had asked leave, he said, the year before, to borrow £500,000 upon bonds; had petitioned for £300,000 in exchequer bills; and for the suspension of a demand of £700,000 due to government for customs. He took notice also, that, according to an act of parliament still in force, the directors could not, by their own authority, accept bills to the amount of more than £300,000; under which circumstances it would no doubt surprise the house to be informed, that bills were now coming over for acceptance to the amount of £2,000,000. It was evidently, therefore, and indispensible necessity, that government should interfere in the affairs of the company to save them from certain bankruptcy. He stated their actual debt at no less than £11,200,000, while their stock in hand did not exceed £3,200,000. There was therefore a deficiency of £8,000,000; a most alarming sum when compared with the company's capital. Unless speedily assisted, therefore, they must inevitably be ruined; and the ruin of a company of merchants so extensive in their concerns, and of such importance in the eyes of all Europe, could not but give a very severe blow to the national credit. On the other hand, the requisite assistance was a matter of very extensive consideration. It would be absolutely necessary to permit the acceptance of the bills to the above mentioned amount; and to do this without regulating their affairs, and reforming the abuses of their government, would only be to throw away the public money.

The conduct of the company's servants, and of the company itself, was now arraigned by Mr Fox in the Company most severe terms; and their misconducts were pointed out under the following heads:

1. With regard to Mr Hastings.—The chairman of the committee had moved in the house of commons, that it was the duty of the company to recall that gentleman; to which motion the house had agreed. In obedience to this resolution, the directors had agreed that Mr Hastings should be recalled; but supposing this to be a matter rather beyond their jurisdiction, they had submitted their determination to a court of proprietors, who rescinded the resolution of the directors; and after this the whole affair came to be laid before the house of commons. In the meantime everything was anarchy and confusion in the East, owing to this unsettled conduct with regard to the governor; as the whole continent had been made acquainted with the resolution of the house for recalling him, while that of the proprietors for continuing him in his office was kept a secret. The proprietors had also been guilty of another contradiction in this respect, as they had voted their thanks to Mr Hastings for his conduct in India. Hence Mr Fox was led to comment on the nature of the company's connections with their servants abroad, as well as on the character of the company themselves. Among the former, he said, there were a few, who, being proprietors themselves, endeavoured to promote the trade of the company, and increase its revenues. The views of the rest were otherwise directed; and from the difference in speculation between the two parties, the former were inclined to support that governor who enabled them to make large dividends; and who, for that reason, after having speculated for his own advantage, was obliged to do the same for the benefit of the proprietors. The latter, therefore, could not better gratify their wishes, than by supporting a governor who had in his power so many opportunities of providing for his friends.

2. The next charge was against the servants of the company, whom he accused of a regular and systematic disobedience to the orders of the proprietors.—The supreme council of Bengal, he said, had resolved, in opposition to Mr Hastings, to send two gentlemen, Mr Fowke and Mr Britton, the one to reside with the Nabob of Oude, the other at Benares. Mr Hastings, however, refused to send them: the directors transmitted the most positive orders to carry the vote of the supreme council into execution; but still Mr Hastings disobeyed; alleging in his defence, that he could not employ persons in whom he had no confidence. Afterwards, however, Mr Hastings seemed to contradict himself in a very curious manner. He granted Mr Fowke a contract, with a commission of 15 per cent.; which, he observed, was a great sum, and might operate as a temptation to prolong the war. "But (added he) the entire confidence I have in the integrity and honour of Mr Fowke, amounts to a full and perfect security on that head."

To this Mr Fox added some other instances of a similar kind; but though he supported these and the projected bill with all the argument and eloquence for which he is so remarkable, he found it impossible to make his scheme agreeable to the majority of the house. The strongest opponent was Mr William Pitt, who Company, who insisted chiefly on the two following topics. 1. Its infringement, or rather annihilation of the company's charter; and, 2. The new and unconstitutional influence it tended to create.—He owned indeed, that India stood in need of a reform, but not such a one as broke through every principle of justice and reason. The charter of the company was a fair purchase from the public, and an equal compact for reciprocal advantages between the proprietors and the nation at large; but if it was infringed in the manner proposed by the bill, what security could other trading companies have that they should not be treated in the same manner? nay, what security could there be for Magna Charta itself? The bill, he said, amounted to a confiscation of property. It had been suggested indeed, that it was not a bill of disfranchisement, because it did not take from the proprietors their right to an exclusive trade; but this was not the only franchise of the proprietors. A freehold might have a franchise annexed to it, the latter of which might be taken away, and yet the property of the former remain; in which case it could not be denied that the freeholders would have great cause to complain. The case was exactly parallel with the India stock. Persons possessed of this to a certain amount, were entitled to a vote upon every important question of the company's affairs; and on this account the purchase-money was more considerable. But, by the bill in question, this privilege was to be taken away; which plainly amounted to a disfranchisement.

The great objection to this bill, however, seemed to be a suspicion that it was a scheme of Mr Fox to gratify his own personal ambition as a minister, he being at that time secretary of state. On this account he was deserted even by the patriotic members, who, upon former occasions, had so strenuously supported his cause.—Mr Dundas accused him of attempting to create a fourth estate in the kingdom, the power and influence of which might overturn the crown and subvert the constitution of Britain. A petition was presented from the proprietors, and another from the directors of the company, representing the bill as subversive of their charter, and confiscating their property, without either charge of delinquency, trial, or conviction. They prayed, therefore, that the acts of delinquency presumed against them might be stated in writing, and a reasonable time allowed them to deliver in their answer; and that they might be heard by counsel against the bill. About the same time the directors gave in a state of the company's affairs, differing in the most extraordinary manner from that given by Mr Fox. In this they represented the creditor side of the account as amounting to £14,311,773, and they brought themselves in debtors to the amount of £10,342,692; so that of consequence there was a balance in their favour of £3,968,481. This was vehemently contested by the secretary, who said he could bring objections to the statement of the directors to the amount of more than £12,000,000 Sterling. He then entered into a particular discussion of the articles stated in the directors' account, and made good his assertion. Objections to his method of calculation, however, were made on the part of the company; so that nothing could certainly appear to the public but that the company were at that time much distressed, and would fail entirely unless powerfully Company, supported by government.

Mr Fox now proceeded to a particular refutation of the arguments brought against the bill; in which indeed he displayed an astonishing force of argument and acuteness of reasoning. The objection drawn from the validity of the company's charter, he set aside, by showing that the company had abused their power, and that it was therefore necessary to take it from them. This he said always had been the case, and must be the case, in a free nation; and he brought the example of James II. who, on account of the abuse of his power, had been deprived of it by the nation at large. The case was the same with the company. They had made a bad use of their power, and therefore the nation at large ought to deprive them of it. It had been objected by the country gentlemen, that the bill augmented the influence of the crown too much; and by Mr Dundas, that it reduced it to nothing. Both these objections, he said, were overturned by the circumstance of making the commissioners hold their office only during good behaviour. Thus, when conscious that they were liable to punishment if guilty, but secure in case they faithfully discharged their trust, they would be liable to no seduction, but would execute their functions with glory to themselves, and for the common good of their country and of mankind. He then drew a comparison between his own bill and that of Mr Dundas's already mentioned. The bill of the latter, he said, had created a despotic authority in one man over some millions of his fellow-creatures; not indeed in England, where the remedy against oppression was always at hand; but in the East Indies, where violence, fraud, and mischief everywhere prevailed. Thus the bill proposed by Mr Dundas afforded the most extensive latitude for malversation, while his own guarded against it with every possible care; as was intimated in its confiding in no integrity; trusting in no character; and annexing responsibility not only to every action, but even to the invention of the powers it created.

After having expatiated for a considerable time, the secretary was seconded by Mr Burke, whose force of oratory was chiefly directed, as indeed it usually has been when speaking of India affairs, on the monstrous abuse of the company's power in that quarter. He affirmed that there was not in India a single prince, state, or potentate, with whom the company had come into contact, whom they had not sold; that there was not a single treaty they had ever made which they had not broken; and that there was not a single prince or state that had ever put any confidence in the company who had not been ruined. With regard to the first article, Mr Burke instanced the fate of the Great Mogul himself; of the Rohillas; the nabob of Bengal; the poygars of the Mahratta empire; Ragobah the pretender to that empire; and the Subah of Decan.—The second article was proved by a review of the transactions from the beginning to the end of the Mahratta war. With regard to the third, viz., the ruin of such princes as put any confidence in the company or their servants, he desired them to look into the history and situation of the nabob of Oude. In the year 1779, this country had been visited by a famine; a calamity which had been known to relax the severity Company. rity even of the most rigorous government; yet in this situation the president of Bengal had put an absolute negative upon the representation of the prince; adding, that perhaps expedients might be found for affording him a gradual relief; but their effect must be dilatory. This dilatory relief, however, never arrived, and the country was ruined.

Our limits cannot allow a particular detail of the charges against the company on the one hand, or the defences on the other. In general, it must appear, that such severe and heavy charges could not be advanced without some foundation, though perhaps they may have been considerably exaggerated by the orators who brought them. The picture drawn by Mr Burke on this occasion indeed was shocking. "The Arabs, Tartars, and Persians, had conquered Indostan with vast effusion of blood; while the conquests of the English had been acquired by artifice and fraud, rather than by open force. The Asiatic conquerors, however, had soon abated of their ferocity; and the short life of man had been sufficient to repair the waste they had occasioned. But with the English the case had been entirely different. Their conquests were still in the same state they had been 20 years ago. They had no more society with the people than if they still resided in England; but, with the view of making fortunes, rolled in one after another, wave after wave; so that there was nothing before the eyes of the natives but an endless prospect of new flights of birds of prey and passage, with appetites continually renewing for a food that was continually waiting. Every rupee gained by an Englishman in India was forever lost to that country. With us there were no retributory sufferings, by which a foundation of charity compensated, for ages, to the poor, for the injustice and rapine of a day. With us no pride erected stately monuments, which repaired the mischiefs pride had occasioned, and adorned a country out of its own spoils. England had erected no churches, no hospitals, no palaces, no schools (the trifling foundation at Calcutta excepted); England had built no bridges, made no high-roads, cut no navigations, dug no reservoirs. Every other conqueror of every other description had left some monument either of state or beneficence behind him; but were we to be driven out of India this day, nothing would remain to tell that it had been possessed, during the inglorious period of our dominion, by any thing better than the ouran outang or the tiger!"

All this eloquence, however, was at present entirely ineffectual, and the bill was finally rejected: much confusion and altercation ensued, which terminated in a change of ministry and dissolution of parliament. On the 26th of May 1784 a petition from the company was presented to the house of commons, praying for such relief as the nature of their affairs might seem to demand. This was followed on the 24th of June by a bill for allowing the company to divide four per cent. for the half year concluding with midsummer 1784. This having passed, after some debate, a new bill was proposed by Mr Pitt for relieving the company in the meantime, and regulating their affairs in time to come. A bill to this purpose had been brought in during the last session of the former parliament by the same gentleman, which he wished to bring to a comparison with that of Mr Fox, of which an account has already been given. In this bill he began with laying it down as a principle, that "the civil and military government of India, or, in other words, the imperial dominion of our territories in the East, ought to be placed under other control than that of the merchants in Leaden-hall street; and this control could be no other than the executive branch of the constitution. The commerce of the company, however, ought to be left as free from restrictions as possible; and, lastly, capricious effects from the government of India upon the constitution of Britain, were to be carefully avoided. A control in the executive branch of the legislature over the government of India had indeed been established by the regulation bill of 1773; but the former interference of ministers had not been beneficial, because it had not been active and vigilant. He now proposed, therefore, that a board should be instituted expressly for the purpose. This board was to be appointed by the king, and to consist of the secretary of state for the home department, the chancellor of the exchequer, and a certain number of the privy council. To this board the dispatches of the company were to be submitted, and were not to be sent to India until they were countersigned by them. To prevent questions concerning the commercial and political concerns of the company, it was proposed, that the dispatches upon the former subject should be submitted to the board; and that, in case of any difference, an appeal should be made to the king in council. Though he (Mr Pitt) had not thought proper to accept of the proposal of the company to yield the appointment of foreign councils to the crown, he was nevertheless clearly of opinion, that the commander-in-chief ought to be appointed by the king. He proposed also that this commander should have a vote in council next to the president; that the king should be empowered to bestow the reversion of his office; that the king might recall the governor-general, the presidents, and any members of their councils. He yielded the appointment of all officers, with the single exceptions he had stated, to the court of directors, subject, however, to the approbation of the king; and that, in case of a negative, the directors should proceed to a second choice, and so on. He deprived the court of proprietors of their privilege of rescinding or altering the proceedings of their court of directors; and with respect to the foreign government, he was of opinion, that their authority should comprise in it a considerable discretion, accompanied with the restraint of responsibility. He proposed, that there should be a revision of the establishments in India with a view to retrenchments; that appointments should take place by gradation; and that a new and summary tribunal should be erected for the trial of offences committed in that country. With regard to the Zemindaries, though he could not help paying a compliment to Mr Fox, on his intention of restoring them to their proper owners, he yet thought that a general and indiscriminate restitution was as bad as an indiscriminate confiscation. He therefore proposed, that an inquiry should be instituted for the purpose of restoring such as had been irregularly and unjustly deprived, and that they should in time to come be secured against violence.

In the bill of 1784 few alterations were made; and these Company, these uniformly tended to enlarge the powers of the board of control. They were permitted, in cases of emergency, to concert original measures, as well as to revile, correct, and alter those of the directors. In matters relative to peace or war, where secrecy was a principal object, they were allowed to send their orders directly to India, without any communication with the directors; to the commander in chief, without any communication with the presidencies; and the number of persons constituting the different councils of Bengal, Fort St George, and Bombay, was determined.—The governor-general and council of Bengal were to have an absolute power to originate orders to the inferior presidencies, in such cases as did not interfere with the directions already received from Britain; adding a power of suspension in case of disobedience. The supreme council were forbidden, unless any of the Indian princes should have first commenced or meditated hostilities, to enter upon war, or form an offensive treaty, without orders from home. The inferior councils were forbidden in all cases to form alliances; and in cases of urgency, were commanded to insert a provisional clause, rendering the permanency of the alliance dependent on the confirmation of the governor-general.

Various salutary regulations were proposed concerning the behaviour of the company's servants, against whom so great complaints had been made. Inquiry was ordered to be made by the different presidencies into the expulsions that might have been made of any of the hereditary farmers, and of the oppressive rents and contributions that might have been extorted from them; and measures were directed to be taken for their relief and future tranquillity. A similar examination was ordered into the different establishments in the Indian settlements; a report of which was to be laid annually before parliament. The company were prohibited from sending out a greater number of cadets or writers than what were absolutely necessary; and it was likewise provided, that the age of such as were sent out, should not be less than 15, nor more than 22 years. It was likewise provided, that promotions should be made in the order of seniority, unless in extraordinary cases; for which the presidencies should make themselves specifically responsible. Crimes committed by English subjects in any part of India, were made amenable to every British court of justice, in the same manner as if they had been committed in Britain. Presents, unless such as were absolutely ceremonial, or given to a counsellor at law, a physician, a surgeon, or a chaplain, were absolutely prohibited, under the penalty of confiscation of the present, and an additional fine at the discretion of the court. Disobedience of orders, unless absolutely necessary, and pecuniary transactions prejudicial to the interests of the company, were declared to be high crimes and misdemeanors. The company were forbidden to interfere in favour of any person legally convicted of any of the above crimes, or to employ him in their service for ever. The governors of the different presidencies were also permitted to imprison any person suspected of illicit correspondence, and were ordered to send them to England with all convenient speed. Every person serving, or who should hereafter serve, in India, was also required, on his return to England, to give an exact account, upon oath, to the court of exchequer, of his property, within two months after his arrival; one copy of which was to be kept in the court of exchequer, and the other at the India-house. The board of control, the court of directors, or any three of the proprietors whose stock should amount together to £1000, were allowed to move the court of exchequer to examine the validity of the account. In case of an apparently well founded accusation, the court of exchequer were allowed to examine the party upon oath, and even to imprison him until the interrogatories proposed to him should be answered. The whole property of a person who should neglect to give in such an account within the time limited, or who should have been guilty of a misrepresentation in that account to the amount of £2000 sterling, was ordered to be confiscated; ten per cent. to be paid to the accuser, and the remainder to be equally divided between the public and the company. Every person who had once been employed in India, but had afterwards resided in Europe for five years, unless such residence had been expressly on account of his health, was declared incapable of ever being sent out to India again.

As a farther curb on the company's servants, the attorney-general or court of directors was authorized to file an information in the court of King's-bench against any person for crimes committed in India. That court was empowered also to imprison or admit the accused to bail immediately. It was then ordered, that within 30 days a certain number of peers should be chosen by the house of lords, and of the members of the house of commons by that house, to constitute a court for the trial of the accused. The court was finally to consist of three judges appointed by the crown, four peers, and six members of the house of commons; and the accused had a right to a peremptory challenge. From this court there was no appeal; and it was empowered to adjudge the party incapable of ever serving the company; to punish by fine or imprisonment; and in order to proportion the fine to the property of the convict, the court of exchequer might, at the requisition of the attorney-general, or of the company, examine him upon oath concerning the sum he was worth. A refusal to answer was to be punished with confiscation of property, and imprisonment during pleasure.

With regard to the treatment of delinquents in India, Mr Pitt observed, that at that time we had it not in our power to punish them. Either a new process must therefore be instituted, or offences, equally shocking to humanity, and contrary to every principle of religion and justice, must be permitted to continue unchecked. Every person therefore who went hereafter, would know the predicament in which he stood; and would understand, that by so doing he agreed to give up some of the most valuable privileges of an Englishman: yet in this he would do no more than a very numerous and honourable body of men, the military, did daily, without the least hesitation, or the smallest impeachment of their character.

This bill, so tremendous in its appearance to the company's servants, was vehemently opposed by the minority. Mr Francis observed, that it went upon two principles, viz. the abuse of power abroad, and the want of it at home. To remedy these, Mr Pitt had proposed to augment the power abroad, and to diminish... An objection had been stated, that the declaratory bill conveyed to the king the power of maintaining an army without the consent of parliament. No proposition (Mr Pitt observed) could be more adverse to his intentions than that which was thus imputed to him. But in reality the troops in question had already been recognized by parliament when they voted the estimate for raising them; and the number of king's regiments serving in India would always be to be ascertained by the company belonging to each, which remained in England for the purpose of recruiting, and the expense of which would be to be provided for by parliament.

Mr Pitt acknowledged, that it had been the object of the act of 1784 to assume the power of superintendence and control, without afflicting the power of patronage. In the present bill he declared, that everything had been done which his understanding had suggested for the diminution of patronage. The regiments in question belonged to the crown; and of course it could not be supposed that the sovereign could entirely depart from his prerogative of naming his own officers. But the king had acted with the most gracious attention to the company, and to the merits of the officers who had grown grey in their service; having relinquished nearly half the patronage of the regiments, and leaving the disposal of these commissions to the court of directors. The company indeed alleged that they had 600 officers unemployed; but the king could not forget that he had 2800 officers upon half-pay, not perhaps more meritorious, but certainly not less so, than those in the company's service, and many of whom had actually served with distinction in India. Such had been the forbearance he had thought it proper to exercise upon the subject of patronage. But if, by the objection that had been started, it was intended to refer to the great political patronage, this he did not deny that he had at all times intended to affix. Men who were responsible for the government of a country, ought undoubtedly to have the appointment of those whom they were to entrust with the execution of their orders. But it would be admitted that the patronage left to the company was very considerable, when the great extent of their military establishment was properly recollected. Mr Pitt added, that the objections that were started on this head would possibly throw difficulties in the way of the consolidation of the two armies in India; an object on many accounts desirable, and which in some way or other must be attempted. If it should be thought advisable to make the whole army royal, then undoubtedly the patronage of the crown would be greatly increased. He believed, however, that the measure was necessary; and there was scarcely any thing to which he would not assent, to remove the apprehensions of the nation respecting the undue use of this patronage. For the bill now before the house, Mr Pitt professed himself ready to propose clauses that should annihilate every suspicion of danger.

The speech of Mr Pitt produced a favourable effect upon the country gentlemen; and the clauses which he had alluded to being moved, were received without any debate. These provided, That no king's troops, beyond the number which was now proposed, should be sent to India under the authority of any existing law; that no increase of salary should be given to any of the servants of the company, without the dispatches for that purpose being laid before both houses of parliament thirty days previous to their being sent; and that no gratuity should be given, the proposal for which did not originate with the court of directors. A fourth clause was added to these by the minister, which had not precisely the same object; it directed, that an account of the revenues and disbursements of the company should be laid before parliament at a certain assigned period in the course of every year.

The bill was carried up to the house of lords on the 14th of March, read a first time on the following day, which was Saturday, and proposed for a second reading on the ensuing Monday. This precipitation was made the subject of a petition, offered by certain proprietors, and presented to the house by the Duke of Norfolk, in which they requested a delay of three days, till a general meeting could be held of the proprietors of the East India company. To this suggestion it was objected by Lord Thurlow and Lord Hawkesbury, that the ships of the East India company were now detained in port at the enormous expense of three or four hundred pounds per diem. By Lord Stormont and Lord Loughborough it was replied, that no expense, however great, ought to weigh in the consideration of the present question. The bill decided upon a matter of private right, and parliament could not justly refuse to hear the petitioners. The house divided upon the question, contents 32, not contents 75. A motion of Lord Porchester was rejected by a similar majority, for referring a question to the twelve judges respecting the true meaning and intent of the act of 1784.

The Duke of Richmond said, that he was peculiarly circumstanced on the present occasion, since he had never been pleased with any of the bills for the government of India that had yet been brought into parliament. He had ever been of opinion, that the concerns of the East were trusted in the best hands when they were vested in the company itself. He had opposed the bill of 1783, because it flagrantly violated the charter of the company, and placed an immense power in the hands of a commission, that was not responsible, so far as he could find, either to the king or the parliament. He had opposed the act of 1784, because it gave to the crown an enormous addition of power. But he could not admit that that act was in any degree so violent and despotic as the bill which preceded it. The declaratory measure now under consideration must necessarily have his complete approbation. It consisted of two distinct parts; its exposition of the act of 1784, and certain enacting clauses containing checks and restraints upon the extensive patronage that the government of the East naturally gave. To the former part he must inevitably agree. That the act of 1784 gave to the board of control complete authority, had always been his opinion. For that reason he had opposed it; but, entertaining that opinion, he must justify the present bill, which in his mind was a true declaration of the fact. He could not but equally approve of the restraints that were proposed upon the exercise of patronage. Patronage was inseparable from power. But when he saw the Company. industry with which it was limited, and ministers were tied down from the abuse of it; when he saw that it was not to be used otherwise than for the good of the service, he could not view the present measure with the same jealousy with which he was accustomed to regard propositions for extending the power of the crown.

The bill, however, underwent a severe discussion in this as it had done in the other house; but at length passed.

In May following a petition was presented to the house of commons by the company, stating certain pecuniary embarrassments which they apprehended to take place on the first of March 1790, owing to the arrears of the war, to the government claim of £500,000, to the debt incurred in China, and to the advances necessary to be made for the purposes of the China trade. In compliance with their petition, Mr Pitt moved on the following day that they should be empowered to borrow a sum not exceeding £1,200,000. He at the same time observed, that in all probability the company in 1791 would have upwards of £3,000,000 sterling more than sufficient to discharge their debts. The measure was carried through both houses without opposition.

3. Hudson's Bay Company. The vast countries which surround Hudson's Bay abound with animals whose furs and skins are excellent, being far superior in quality to those found in less northerly regions. In 1670, a charter was granted to a company, which does not consist of above nine or ten persons, for the exclusive trade to this bay; and they have acted under it ever since with great benefit to themselves. The company employ four ships and 130 seamen. They have several forts, viz. Prince of Wales's fort, Churchill river, Nelson, New Severn, and Albany, which stand on the west side of the bay, and are garrisoned by 186 men. The French, in May 1782, took and destroyed these forts, and the settlements, &c. valued at 500,000l. They export commodities to the value of 16,000l. and bring home returns to the value of 29,340l. which yield to the revenue 3734l. This includes the fishery in Hudson's Bay. This commerce, small as it is, affords immense profits to the company, and even some advantages to Great Britain in general; for the commodities we exchange with the Indians for their skins and furs, are all manufactured in Britain; and as the Indians are not very nice in their choice, such things are sent of which we have the greatest plenty, and which, in the mercantile phrase, are drugs with us. Though the workmanship too happens to be in many respects so deficient that no civilized people would take it off our hands, it may be admired among the Indians. On the other hand, the skins and furs we bring from Hudson's Bay, enter largely into our manufactures, and afford us materials for trading with many nations of Europe to great advantage. These circumstances tend to prove incontrovertibly the immense benefit that would redound to Great Britain, by throwing open the trade to Hudson's Bay, since even in its present restrained state it is so advantageous. This company, it is probable, do not find their trade so advantageous now as it was before we got possession of Canada. The only attempt made to trade with Labrador has been directed towards the fishery, the annual produce of which exceeds 49,000l.

The above are the principal trading companies presently subsisting in Great Britain; but to the number might have been added one, of vast importance, the Scotch Darien Company, had it not been for the crooked and pusillanimous policy of the English ministry at the time. For an account of which, see the article DARIEN.

Greenland Company. See Greenland.

Banking Companies. See Bank.

Of establishments similar to the above in other countries, the following, belonging to the Dutch and French, may be mentioned as the most important.

I. Dutch Companies. 1. Their East India company had its rise in the midst of the struggle which that people had for their liberty: for the Spaniards having forbidden all commerce with them, and shut up all their ports, necessity inspired some Zealanders to seek a new north-east passage to China.

This enterprise proving unsuccessful to three several armaments in 1594, 1595, and 1596, a second company was formed, under the name of the Company of remote Parts: which, in 1595, took the ordinary route of the Portuguese to the Indies, and returned in two years and a half's time with little gain but good hopes.

This company, and a new one just established at Amsterdam, being united, equipped other fleets; and these occasioned other companies at Amsterdam, Rotterdam, in Zealand, &c., inasmuch that the states soon began to apprehend they might be prejudicial to each other. Under this concern, they called all the directors of the several companies together, who all consented to an union, the treaty whereof was confirmed by the States in 1602; a very remarkable epocha, as being that of the most solid and celebrated establishment of commerce that ever was in the world.

Its first capital was six millions six hundred thousand guilders. It had sixty directors, divided into several chambers; twenty in that of Amsterdam, twelve in that of Zealand, fourteen in that of Delft and Rotterdam, and a like number in those at Sluys and Horn. As each grant expires, the company is obliged to procure a new one, which it has already done five times since the first, paying a considerable sum each time. The last application was in 1773, when the company, after stating that its trade had declined, solicited the states-general to grant a diminution of the sum formerly paid for the renewal of the charter. Upon this representation, their high mightinesses, in order to have time to inquire into the matter, prolonged the charter for three years, upon the old establishment; and finding, upon examination, that the company had really sustained great losses, and its trade considerably declined, they acted with the spirit of a wise commercial commonwealth, by complying with the company's request. They therefore, in 1776, granted them a new charter for 30 years, on the same terms as the former, on the immediate payment of 2,000,000 florins, instead of 3,000,000 which they paid before, and the sum of 360,000 florins yearly; which annual pay- Company payment they were allowed to make either in money or merchandize. In consequence of this indulgence, the stock of the company rose in a short time no less than 19 per cent.

Their factories, residences, &c. in the East Indies, are very numerous; reaching from the Persian gulph to the coast of China: the principal is that of Batavia, the centre of their commerce; here resides their general, with the state and splendor of a sovereign prince; making war and peace with the eastern kings and emperors at pleasure.

The other more considerable factories are, Taioam on the coast of China, Nanjifac in Japan, Malacca, Surat, Amboyna, Banda, Siam, Moluccas, &c. several on the coast of Coromandel, and at Isfahan, Cape of Good Hope, &c. in all, they number 40 factories and 25 fortresses. They have the whole trade of the spicey in their own hands.

2. Their West India Company was established in 1621, with an exclusive privilege to trade 24 years along the coasts of Africa, between the tropic of Cancer and the Cape of Good Hope; and in America from the south point of Newfoundland, through the straits of Magellan, that of Le Maire, or others, to the straits of Anian, both in the North and South Sea. The directors are divided into five chambers (as in the East India company), out of which 19 are chosen for the general direction of affairs. In 1647, the company renewed its grant for 25 years; but it was scarce able to hold out the term, on account of its great losses and expenses in taking the bay of Todos los Santos, Fernambuc, and the greatest part of Brazil, from the Portuguese. The weakness of this company, which had several times in vain attempted to be joined to that of the East Indies, occasioned its dissolution at the expiration of its grant.

In 1674, a new company, composed of the ancient proprietors and their creditors, was settled in the same rights and establishment with the former; and still subsists, though considerably decayed. Their first capital was about six millions of florins. Its principal establishments are, one at Cape Verd, another on the Gold Coast of Africa, at Tobago, Curaffao, &c. in America.

II. French Companies. 1. Their East India Company was established in 1664, with an exclusive privilege to trade for 50 years in all the seas of the East Indies and South Sea. No adventurer to be admitted without 1000 livres in stock; and foreigners who have 20,000 livres in stock to be reputed proprietors.

The patent grants them the island of Madagascar; and the king to be at one-fifth of the expense of the three first armaments, without interest: the principal to be refunded in ten years; or, if the company find it losses on the whole, the loss to fall on the king's side.

The capital fund of the company, which was mostly furnished by the king, was seven or eight millions of livres, but was to have been fifteen millions.

In effect, though no means were wanting to support the company, yet it still drooped and still struggled; till having subsisted ten years without any change in its form, and being no longer able to discharge its engagements, there were new regulations concerted, but to little purpose. At length, things not being disposed for a new East India company, nor much good to be expected from the old one, in 1708 the ministry allowed the directors to treat with the rich traders of St Malo, and resign to them their privilege under certain conditions. In the hands of these last, the company began to flourish. See India Company, below.

Its chief factory is at Pondicherry, on the coast of Coromandel. This is the residence of the director-general; the other factories are inconsiderable. The merchandizes which the company brings into France are, silks, cottons, spices, coffee, rice, saltpetre; several kinds of gums and drugs, wood, wax, printed calicoes, muslins, &c.

2. Their West India Company was established in 1664. Their charter gave them the property and seigniory of Canada, Acadia, the Antilles islands, Isle of Cayenne, and the Terra Firma of America, from the river of the Amazon to that of Oronooko; with an exclusive privilege for the commerce of those places, as also of Senegal and the coasts of Guinea, for 40 years, only paying half the duties. The stock of the company was so considerable, that in less than six months 45 vessels were equipped; wherewith they took possession of all the places in their grant, and settled a commerce; yet this only subsisted nine years. In 1674, the grant was revoked, and the countries above reunited to the king's dominions as before; the king reimbursing the actions of the adventurers. This revocation was owing partly to the poverty of the company, occasioned by its losses in the wars with England, which had necessitated it to borrow above a million, and even to alienate its exclusive privilege for the coasts of Guinea; and partly to its having in good measure answered its end; which was to recover the commerce of the West Indies from the Dutch, who had torn it from them; for the French merchants, being now accustomed to traffic to the Antilles, by permission of the company, were so attached to it, that it was not doubted they would support the commerce after the dissolution of the company.

3. Their Mississippi Company was first established in 1684 in favour of the Chevalier de la Salle; who having projected it in 1660, and being appointed governor of the fort of Frontignac at the mouth of that river, travelled over the country in the year 1683, and returned to France to solicit the establishment. This obtained, he set sail for his new colony with four vessels loaded with inhabitants, &c. but entering the Gulph of Mexico, he did not, it seems, know the river that had cost him so much fatigue, but settled on another river unknown, where his colony perished by degrees; so that in 1685 there were not 100 persons remaining. Making several expeditions to find the Mississippi, he was killed in one of them by a party who mutinied against him; whereupon the colony was dispersed and lost. M. Hiberville afterwards succeeded better. He found the Mississippi, built a fort, and settled a French colony there; but being poisoned, it is said, by the intrigues of the Spaniards, who feared such a neighbour, in 1712 M. Crozat had the whole property of trading to the French territories called Louisiana granted him for 15 years.

4. Company of the West. In 1717, the Sieur Crozat surrendered his grant; and in the same year a new com- Company was erected under the title of Company of the West; to which, besides every thing granted to the former company, was added the commerce of beaver, enjoyed by the Canada company from the year 1706, but expiring in 1717. In this establishment, an equal view was had to the finances and the commerce of the nation; and, accordingly, part of the conditions of its establishment regarded the settling a colony, a trade, &c. the other the vending part of the bills, called bills of state, which could no longer subsist on their present footing. The former are no more than are usual in such establishments: for the latter, the actions are fixed at 500 livres, each payable in bills of state; the actions to be deemed as merchandise, and in that quality to be bought, sold, and trafficked. The bills of state, which make the fund of the actions, to be converted into yearly revenue. To put the finishing hand to the company, in 1717 its fund was fixed at an hundred millions of livres; which being filled, the cash was shut up.

5. India Company. The junction of the former company with that of Canada was immediately followed by its union with that of Senegal, both in the year 1718, by an arrêt of council; which at the same time granted the new company the commerce of beavers, and made it mistress of the negro or Guinea trade to the French colonies in America.

Nothing was now wanting to its perfection but an union with the East India company, and with those of China and St Domingo; which was effected, with the two first in 1719, and with the third in 1720. This union of the East India and China company with the company of the West, occasioned an alteration of the name; and it was henceforth called the India Company.

The reasons of the union were, the inability of the two former to carry on their commerce; the immense debts they had contracted in the Indies, especially the East company, complaints whereof had been sent to court by the Indians, which discredited the company so that they durst not appear any longer at Surat; the little care they took to discharge their engagements; and their having transferred their privilege to the private traders of St Malo, in consideration of a tenth in the profits of the returns of their ships.

The ancient actions of the company of the West, which were not at par when this engraftment was projected, before it was completed, were risen to 300 per cent.; which unexpected success gave occasion to conclude the new actions of the united companies would not bear less credit. The concourse of subscribers was so great, that in a month's time there were above fifty millions subscribed for: the first twenty-five million actions which were granted to the India company, beyond the hundred millions of stock allowed the company of the West, being filled as soon as the books were opened; to satisfy the earnestness of the subscribers, the stock was increased by several arrêts to three hundred millions. Credit still increasing, the new actions rose to 1200 per cent. and those of the ancient company of the West to 1900 per cent.; an exorbitant price, to which no other company ever rose. Its condition was now so flourishing, that in 1719 it offered the king to take a lease of all his farms for nine years, at the rate of three millions five hundred thousand livres per annum more than had been given before; and also to lend his majesty twelve hundred millions of livres to pay the debts of the state. These offers were accepted; and the king, in consideration hereof, granted them all the privileges of the several grants of the companies united to that company to the year 1770; on condition, however, of discharging all the debts of the old East India company, without any deduction at all. The loan of twelve hundred millions not being sufficient for the occasions of the state, was augmented, three months afterwards, with three hundred millions more; which, with the former loan, and another of one hundred millions before, made fifteen hundred millions, for which the king was to pay interest at the rate of three per cent.

The Duke of Orleans, in February 1720, did the company the honour to preside in their assembly, where he made several proposals to them on the part of the king: the principal of these was, that they should take on them the charge and administration of the royal bank. This was accepted of; and Mr Law, comptroller-general of the finances, was named by the king inspector-general of the India company and bank-united.

This union, which, it was proposed, should have been a mutual help to both those famous establishments, proved the fatal point from whence the fall of both commenced: from this time, both the bank bills and the actions of the company began to fall. In effect, the first perished absolutely, and the other had been drawn along with it but for the prudent precautions taken for its support.

The first precaution was the revoking the office of inspector-general, and the obliging Mr Law to quit the kingdom: the ancient directors were discarded, and new ones substituted; and, to find the bottom of the company's affairs, it was ordered they should give an account of what they had received and disbursed, both on the account of the company and of the bank, which they had had the management of near a year. Another precaution to come at the state of the company was, by endeavouring to distinguish the lawful actionaries from the Mississippi extortioners; whose immense riches, as well as their criminal address in realizing their actions either into specie or merchandise, were become so fatal to the state; in order, if possible, to secure the honest adventurers in their stock. To this end, an inquisition was made into their books, &c. by persons appointed by the king; and the new directors, or, as they were called, registieurs, began fervently to look about for their commerce abroad. Their affairs, however, declined, and at length sunk into a ruined and bankrupt state about the year 1769. The king immediately suspended their exclusive privileges, and laid the trade to the east open to all his subjects; confining, at the same time, the affairs of the company to the care of the ministry to adjust and settle. But the various schemes which were then formed for the restoration of the old company, and the establishment of a new one, were accompanied with such unsurmountable difficulties, as to prove wholly ineffectual. Nor was the laying open of the trade attended immediately with the success that was expected; the merchants being very slow in engaging in it, though the king, by way of Company, encouragement, lent them some of his own ships to convey their commodities to the East; and the garrison and civil establishments continued to be supported in their existing form by the crown. The measure, however, proved in time successful; so that for a course of years previous to 1785, the annual importation from India was considerably greater than during any former period. But whether it were that they regarded this prosperity as precarious; or that they aimed at a more extensive success; or that they wished, in imitation of Britain, for territorial acquisitions in that climate, and believed an incorporated society the best instrument of obtaining them; the French court was induced to listen to proposals for establishing a new East India company. Their privilege was for seven years, with the special proviso, that years of war which might occur in the interim should be excluded from the computation.

In the preamble of the act of the 14th April 1785, by which the scheme was adopted, it was alleged, "that the commodities of Europe not having of late years been regulated by any common standard, or proportioned to the demands of India, had on the one hand sold at a low price; while, on the other, the competition of the subjects of France had raised the price of the objects of importation: that, upon their return home, a want of system and assortment had been universally complained of, the market being glutted with one species of goods; and totally destitute of another: that these defects must necessarily continue as long as the trade remained in private hands; and that, on their account, as well as that of the capital required, the establishment of a new company was absolutely necessary."

These reasonings did not appear altogether satisfactory to the persons principally interested. France has been so far enlightened by the discussions of the excellent writers she has produced upon questions of politics and commerce, as not to be prepared to behold the introduction of monopolies with a very favourable eye. By many persons it was remarked, that the arguments of the preamble did not apply more to the trade of India than to any other trade; and that, if they were admitted in their entire force, they were calculated to give a finishing blow to the freedom of commerce. The capital of the new company, which amounted to L. 83c,000, was ridiculed as altogether inadequate to the magnitude of the undertaking. The privileges with which it was indulged were treated as enormous. The monopoly of East India goods imported into France from any part of Europe, was granted to them for two years, as well as the monopoly of East India goods imported from the place of their growth. It was said, that during that period they would fit out no adventures for India; that they hoped to obtain a prolongation of this injurious indulgence; and that, of consequence, their incorporation was in reality a conspiracy to prevent all future communication between France and the sources of commerce in Asia. A provision in the act, directing that the prices of East India goods in the islands of Mauritius and Bourbon should be regulated by a tariff to be fixed by the court of Versailles, excited still louder exclamations. In this instance, it was said, the first principles of commerce were trampled upon in a manner the most wanton and absurd. Instead of suffering Company, it to find its own level by the mutual collision of the wants of one party and the labour of another, it was arbitrarily to be fashioned by a power whose extreme dislike must necessarily render its decisions ill-timed and inapplicable. The very mode in which the monopoly was introduced was a subject of complaint. It was determined by a resolution of the king in council; a proceeding totally inadequate to the importance of the subject, and which was to be regarded as clandestine and surreptitious. In all former instances such measures assumed the form of edicts, and were registered in the parliaments. It was the prerogative of these courts to verify them; that is, to inquire into the facts which had led to their adoption. The injured parties had an opportunity of being heard before the privilege assumed the form of a law; not privately by the ministers of the sovereign, but publicly by the most considerable bodies in the kingdom, and in the face of the nation.

The act of council establishing a new East India company, was followed on the tenth of July by another declaration, intended still farther to promote their interest; by which it was expressly forbidden to import cottons, printed linens, and muslins, except through the medium of the company. The act proceeds upon the same principles of monopoly as in the former instance. It sets out indeed with a declaration, "that nothing can appear more desirable to the king, or better accord with the sentiments of his heart, than a general liberty, that freeing at once the circulation of commodities from every species of restraint, should seem to make of all the people of the world but one nation with respect to commerce." But it adds, "that the period of this liberty is not yet arrived: that it must either be, with respect to the nations of Europe, unlimited and reciprocal, or that it cannot be admitted: that the revocation of the former indulgence respecting cottons and linens was become necessary on account of the opportunities it created for contraband trade; and because the competition of the East India company and private traders would occasion a surplus in the market, and the admission of foreign manufactures would decrease and annihilate the national industry."

The provisions that were made for carrying this law into effect were considered as unjust and severe. The merchants possessing any of the prohibited commodities were allowed twelve months to dispose of them; but upon the express condition, that the commodities were to bear a stamp, importing that they were vendible only to a certain period, a circumstance that must necessarily depreciate their value. It was also enacted, that the house of any trader might be entered by day or by night, at the solicitation of the directors, to search for prohibited goods, which were to be confiscated to the use of the company. These kinds of visits of the officers of revenue, hitherto unauthorized in France, were represented as peculiarly obnoxious, when they were made for the sole benefit of a privileged monopoly.

military affairs, a small body of foot, commanded by a captain, who has under him a lieutenant and ensign. The number of centinels or private soldiers in a company is from 50 to 100; and a battalion or regiment consists of 9, 10, or 11, such companies: one of which is always grenadiers, and posted on the right; next them stands the colonel's company, and on the left the light infantry company. Companies not incorporated into regiments are called irregulars, or independent companies.

Artillery Company. See Artillery.

Company of Ships, a fleet of merchantmen, who make a charter party among themselves; the principal conditions whereof usually are, that certain vessels shall be acknowledged admiral, vice-admiral, and rear-admiral; that such and such signals shall be observed; that those which bear no guns shall pay so much percent of their cargo; and in case they be attacked, that what damages are sustained shall be reimbursed by the company in general. In the Mediterranean, such companies are called corsairs.