m^^ ^j' -¥•■ mi^MMyy%M,3y^- 'vTLm %M7.^. !i~ yv y A^ \ 'b 4- lO <^T^ J6.j.*..^-^ ^:^.^^-^- -^-^ ^;,/< *. .V s >> >. > LETTERS T O The Direftors of the Eaft-India Company, AND The Right Hon. Lord Amherst, FROM ANDREW lSTUART, Esq, In die Years 1777, 1778, and 1781; ON THE SUBJECT OF CERTAIN EVENTS IN INDIA, AND OF GEN. STUART'S CONDUCT IN HIS MAJESTY'S SERVICE, AND IN THAT OF THE EAST-INDIA COMPANY. LETTER \ TO The Chairman of the Eaft-India Company, FROM £ ANDREWSTUART, Esq. o en IT. O [ April 14, 1777. J OOtf^y-iiS [ i 3 S I R, IT may poflibly appear to you, or to fome df the Gentlemen In the Diredlion of the Eaft India Company's affairs, fomewhat lingular, that during your late important dlfcuffions, where the propriety of my brother's condudl was diredtly or indiredly brought in quelVion, there fhould have been no fymptoms of my taking any intereft in thefe mat- ters ; nor any attempt made to prevent or remove prejudices, with regard to the part Colonel Stuart had adted, during the late unhappy convulfions at Madras. It is on that account, that I now take the liberty of addrefling to you this letter, to explain the reafon of my filence hitherto ; and at the fame time to communicate to you without referve, the ftate of my mind with regard to the reported tranfaftions at Madras, and the proceedings "which I am informed thefe reports have recently given rife to in this country. From the iSth of March, to the 5th of this month, I was not in London, having gone to Scotland, where I was neceffarily detained, attending my re-ele6lion, during the very period which I now under- ftand was fo much occupied here by difputes, and proceedings relative to the Madras bufmefs. From this you will perceive, that fuppofmg me to have been difpofed to take a part in thefe difputes, my neceflary abfence from London had deprived me of the opportunity. But I may venture to go one ftep further, by afluring you, that even if I had been upon the fpot, the only part I fhould have taken during A 2 that [ 4 ] that period of imperfed Information, would have been to requeft the Diredors, and Proprietors, to fufpend their opinions of my brother's condurc, until there Ihould be an opportunity of inveftlgating, and learning with certainty, what that condud, and the motives of it, had truly been. Even at this hour I do not think m^-felf fufficiently informed in thefe refpeds, to be able to form a decilive opinion ; it is my intention to colled the beft information that can be obtained of the real tranfadions, and after examining to the beft of my judgment, the accounts given by the contending parties, I Ihall then have no difficulty in declaring to you fmcerely, the point of view in which thefe matters prefent themfelves tQ j-^-ie, — I have not the prefumption, however, to fuppofe that any judgment that may happen to be formed by me on this fubjed, is to have influence in forming or altering the opinions of others. It may eafily be fuppofed, that, in this inquiry, I wifh exceedingly, that I may have reafon to think that my brother has aded properly, and in fuch a manner as may entitle him to the approbation of the Public. So confcious am I of the earneftnefs of this wifh, that I fhall endeavour, as much as pofllble, to be upon my guard againft its mif- leading my judgment ; nor ihall I willingly fuffer myfelf to be engaged either in any precipitate unauthorifed defence or approbation of my bro- ther's condud, or in any attack upon the condud of others with whom he has happened to differ upon this occafion. I will fairly own- to you, that the arrefting and confining the perfon of a Governor, appears to me a fti^ong meafure, and fuch as requires. very powerful reafons to juftify it. I fliall further acknowledge, that if the accounts given by one party of the mode in which this was accompllfhed, and of the circumftances attending it, be ftridly true, there is fomething in it which conveys to me a very difagreeable impreffion ; nor fhall I attempt to reconcile to the minds of others, what I find fo difficult to reconcile to my ov/n. If [ 5 ] If the fads as dated could be fuppofed to be true, and that the only defence for tlie mode in which the arreft of Lord Pigot's perfon was conduced and completed, fhall be, that there was no other poflTiblc method of avoiding bloodfhed and civil war, the fite of the perfon un- fortunately obliged to make the option in fuch an alternative, muft have been very difagreeable and diftrcfTmg ; for I can hardly fuppofe a man fo conftituted, as not to feel ftrong reluclance and averfion to employ the methods afcribed by one party to Colonel Stuart, in the accomplifli- ment of Lord Pigot's arreft. It is fo improbable, that thefe things fliould have happened in the manner they are related, and if ftrong meafures have been reforted to at Madras, the materials forjudging of the neceflity of them are at prefent fo incomplete, that juftice and candour require us to fufpend our judg- ments, with regard to the condudt of the principal aQors, until that conduit, and the motives of it, are properly inveftigated, and that all parties ihall have an opportunity of being heard. Great pains, I xmderftand, have been taken in various quarters, not only to excite the greateft degree of prejudice againft my brother's con- du(St, but to hurry the Direftors and Proprietors into precipitate opi- nions and refolutions, which are of fuch a nature, as infer both judg- ment and condemnation before trial. I am therefore under the neceflity of fubmitting to your confideration fome circumftances, entitled to weight with the Direftors and Proprie- tors, for difpofing them to fufpend fuch opinions or refolutions, until my brother's condudt fliall be fully and fairly examined ; and I beg I may be underftood to ftate them with that view only. In the firft place, it is a certain faL LETTER TO THE HONOURABLE The Dire6lors of the Eaft-India Company, FROM ANDREW STUART, Efq; RESPECTING The Condua: of Brigadier-general JAMES STUART, at Madras. [December, 177S.] GENTLEMEN, IT is now near eighteen months fince 1 had the honour of addrefling to you any requeft or application in behalf of my Brother, Colonel Stuart, who for fome time pad has been Rrigadier-feneral in the fervice of the Honourable Eafl India Company. I have at all times thought it my duty to abftain from giving you unneceflary trouble, and though frequently urged to reprefent to you the peculiar hard- fhips of my Brother's cafe, it appeared to me more fuitable to re- frain from any remonftrances, until we (hould know here the event of his trial by a Court-martial, for which orders were fent to India, by the Company's general letter of the 4th of July, 1777. But the difpatches recently received from Madras, which contain an account of what has pafTed there, in relation to the propofed Court- martial, put me under the unavoidable neceffity of immediately folicit- ing your attention to the peculiarity of my Brother's fituation. Without partiality or prejudice, I may venture to fay, that the circum- ftances of his cafe, when deliberately and candidly confidered, will be found worthy of your moft ferious attention ; and, I truft will call aloud for fome immediate redrefs, to flop the further progrefs of the accumu- lated feverities, hardfhips, and indignities, which appear to me to have been inflidted on Colonel Stuart, a perfon fucceeding, by your own appointment, to be Commander in Chief of your army in theCar- natic. B Thefc ( 2 ) Thefe feverlties have been inflifled, not only antecedent to any trial of his conducTt, but without any proper evidence of his being culpable ; and the influence and effeds of them ftiU continue to fubfifl; with full force and rigour againfl; him, in confequence of the refufal he has lately met with at Madras, of a Court of Enquiry, or a trial by a Court-martial. This enquiry and trial you had, by your orders, fent by the Befbo- rough in July 1777, diredled to take place, and in conformity with that diredion, Colonel Stuart, flattering himfelf that the wifhed- for moment was arrived for vindicating his character and condu£t on the fpot where the tranfaftions had happened, and that a period would i(~)on be put to his fufferings, folicited that public trial in the mofl: earned and fervent manner ; but hitherto in vain ; — for the refult brought by the Lift difpatches from Madras, is, that the Governor and Council there, at the fame time that they refufe the trial fo earneftly requefted, and even infificd upon by Colonel Stuart as his right; are pleafed, in confequence of the diredtions they had received from home, to continue for an indefinite time that fufpenfion, which, in the early ftages of this bufinefs, had been inflidled during the fpace of fix months. The confequence now is, that after having exerted himfelf, while Commander in Chief of your forces, in the moft indefatigable and confefledly ufeful manner for the interefts of the Company, by many new military regulations, and by putting the army and military ports in the Carnatic on the moft refpedable footing, of which the Com- pany, if I am rightly informed, has received undoubted intelligence, and from which, by the circumftances of the times, they may pro- bably foon feel material advantages : 1 fay, after thefe exertions, which, jointly with the baneful influence of the climate on European confti- tutions, have greatly impaired his health ; he finds himfelf degraded from the firft military fituatlon, with fevere marks of difplcafure, waiting the return of t.lie difpatches lately brought home; and fuf- fering in this unpleafant interval, all the anxieties and Impatience 8 incident ( 3 ) incident to an o/Ticcr of fplrlr, exnofcd to the continuance of the pre- judices and afpeiTions wlih which his charadler and condu£l had, in the rirfl: heats of party-rage, been aflailcd, without any means afforded him of vindicating his honour, by oppofmg, in the courfe of a public trial, authentic fadls and proofs to groundlefs or illiberal imputa- tions. To fatisfyyou, Gentlemen, that there is nothing exaggerated in this fliort fketch of his fituatlon, I muft beg your permiffion, to bring under your view, fome of the moft ftriking incidents which have hap- pened fmce the period when he received from you his firft commiflion in the fervice of the Honourable Eaft India Company. * In the year 1775, Colonel Stuart, at that time a Lieutenant-Colonel of many years ftanding in the King's fervice, was, with his Majelly's permiffion, appointed fecond in command of all the Company's forces upon the coaft of Coromandel, with the rank of Colonel in their fer- vice; and by the fame appointment, it was fettled and eflablifhed, that upon the death, refignation, or removal of the then Commander iu Chief Sir Robert Fletcher, the command in chief, with the fame rank of Brigadier-General, fhould devolve upon and be enjoyed by Colonel Stuart. — Upon the faith of thefe agreements and appointments Colonel Stuart entered into the Honourable Company's fervice, and failed for India. He left England in November 1775, and arrived at Madras in May 1776. Before his arrival, there had been many difputes and diflentlons between Lord Pigot the Governor, and the Members of the Council at Madras. The conteft and animofity between them with regard to their refpedive powers and privileges, as well as with regard to fome matters of government, was far advanced at the time of Colonel Stuart's arrival, and according to all appearances in a way of increafing daily. I have letters in my poITeffion from my Brother foon after his arrival, mentioning thefe diflcntions, and his intentions to avoid taking part B 2 with ( 4 ) with either fide in their dlfputes, and to apply himfelf entirely to his own bufinefs in the military line. in particular, the diiTention between Lord Pigot the Governor, and Sir Robert Fletcher the Commander in Chief, foon increafed to fuch a height, that in the month of July 1776, Lord Pigot iffued an order for putting Sir Robert Fletcher under arreft, and offered the command of the army to Colonel Stuart, then fecond in command. This, though a very inviting offer. Colonel Stuart declined ; he accommodated the dif- ferences between the Governor and Commander in Chief; prevailed on Lord Pigo: to withdraw the arreft; and Sir Robert Fletcher was thus continued in the command of the army. In the month of Auguft 1776, the dlfputes between Lord Pigot the, Prefident, and the Majority of the Members of Council, came to fuch ex- tremities, that it was evident there could be no further hopes of accommo- dation between parties who confidered their powers, and the conftltu- tional goveroment at Madras, in fuch oppofite points of view. — It was the crijis of a contefl in which there was no likelihood of either party^ voluntarily yielding to the other, — a fituation which almoft unavoidably produces the neceffity of reforting to ftrong and violent meafures for aflerting or preventing the annihilation of thofe powers which the contending parties feverally think themfelves entitled to exercife. It was this crifis and neceffity which probably made Lord Pigot, oa the one hand, think himfelf entitled to refort to the violent meafures to which he had recourfe on the 2 2d and 23d of Auguft 1776; when his Lordfhip firft fufpended from their offices two of the Members of the Ma- jority of Council, and then fufpended the whole of them, ordering at the fame time Sir Robert Fletcher the Commander in Chief under arreft, upon a charge of exciting mutiny and fedition among the troops in garrlfon, which was inferred from his concurring with the Majority of Council in a proteft figned and circulated by them on the 23d of Auguft. On the other hand, it was probably the fame crifis and neceffity gave rife to the idea and to the refolution taken by the Ma- 3 io"ty ( 5 ) jority of Council, and by Sir Robert Fletcher the Commaiicler in Chief, upon the fame 23d of Aiiguft, when they affumcd the reins of go- vernment, and figncd an order to Colonel Stuart the fecond in com- mand, on whom they conferred the temporary command of the army on account of the indifpofition of Sir Robert Fletcher, by which order they required him, Colonel Stuart, to put them, the Majority of Council, in pofleffion of the fort-houfc, fortrefs and garrifon of Fort St. George, and to arreft the perfon of Lord Pigot the Governor. By the fame order, the Majority conferred upon Colonel Stuart the command of the garrifon of Fort St. George, during the prefent danger. Here I think it proper to declare that it is by no means my intention to criminate or exculpate either Lord Pigot, and the Gentlemen who ad- hered to him, or the oppofite party compofed of the Majority of the Mem- bers of Council : I do not wifh to embark myfelf in any part of that con- troverfy relating to the merits of the queftions which firfl produced the diflentions, and afterwards the total rupture between Lord Pigot and the Majority of Council; for befides a natural diflike to all manner of con- troverfies where I am not neceflarily and unavoidably called upon to take a part, I do apprehend that the merits of my Brother's cafe, ftand upon grounds totally feparate and diftlnd from thofe which have been contefted between Lord Pigot on the one hand, and the Majority of Council on the other; I have hitherto avoided, both in the India-houfe and in Parliament, taking any fhare in the queftions agitated between thefe parties, and it is my intention to continue to do fo, unlefs points fhould occur where my Brother's honour or intereft might happen to be eflentially affetted, and in which I may think him fo much in the right, as to make it an unavoidalile duty on me to ftand forward in his behalf. I mean, therefore, here to confine myfelf to the particular circum- ftances under which Colonel Stuart adled, in obedience to orders from. Superiors, whom he thought himfelf bound to obey, without taking upon myfelf to fay or inunuate, whether thefe Superiors did righr or ( 6 ) -or wrong, In ifTuing thofe orders; neither fliall I prefume to give an opinion, whether the violent a£ts, either of the one party or the other, were ri.ght in themfelves, or jufiifiable from reafons of expe- diency or neceffity. ^'he difficuU al- The written order of 23d of Auguft 1776, to Colonel Stuart, for ternative to puttine the Majority of Council in poffeflion of the fort, and for arreft- ivhich Colonel ^ o j j Stuart was re- ing the perfon of Lord Pigot, was hgned by Seven Members of the diiced by the cr- Council, which conftituted an unqueftionable Majority; and it is far- ^EVS T6C€l'VCu from the oppofite ther to be obfcrved, that one of thofe Members who figned that order, far/ies. vv'as the Commander in Chief, Sir Robert Fletcher. At the time when Colonel Stuart received this order, he had no feat or vote in Council, no deliberative voice ; his duty was that of obedience only to his lawful fuperiors, civil and military; he thought it therefore indifpenhbly his duty to obey the joint orders of a clear Majority of Council, concurring with the Commander in Chief; convinced, as he has always been, and ftill declares himfelf to be, that the legal conftitutional government in the Company's fettlement at Madras is veiled, not in the Governor or Prefident alone, nor in the Gover- nor with a Minority of Council, but in the Majority of the Members of Council. Upon the fame day that the Majority of Council and the Commander in Chief figned the above order to Colonel Stuart, there was an offer to him of the command of the army, from Lord Pigot and his Lordfhip's friends in Council. The general orders iffued by them of that date were in thefe words : " Fort St. George, 23d Aug. ijy6. ** The Right Honourable the Prefident and Council having been ^' pleafed to order Brigadier-general Sir Robert Fletcher in arreft, for be- (( mg ( 7 ) •' ing concerned in circulating letters tending to excite and caufc mutiny " and fedition among the troops in this garrifon, Colonel James •' Stuart is ordered to take upon him the command of the troops under " this Prefidency, and all reports and returns arc to be made to him *' accordingly." Here then Colonel Stuart, to whom upon the fame day the tem- porary command of the army was offered by one party, and the abfolute unlimited command by the other, with pofitive requifiiions from each to a£t under their authority, was placed in one of the moft delicate and difficult fituations that ever fell to the fliare of any military man ; — it was impoffible for him to be an inadive or an idle fpec- tator. Had he refufcd the command of the army, and thus incurred difobedience to the orders of both parties, he was liable to be per- fecuted by both, at leafl by the party which fhould gain the afcen- dant, by whom he would certainly have been put under arrefl, and brought to trial by a Court-martial for difobedience of orders. He was therefore reduced to this alternative, that he mufl: either give fupport to the government of Lord Pigot, to the prejudice of all the fufpcnded Members of the Majority, and to the prejudice of his Commander in Chief, then ordered under arreft, and about to be tried for his life ; or he mufl: obey the joint orders of the Commander ia Chief, and the Majority of Council. The fituation was a very hard and difagreeable one for Colonel Stuart; The confequences- becaufe, whether he obeyed the orders of one or the other party, he . '^r uTi '^'^^ ■was certain to meet with much blame, outcry, and perfecution, from Colonel Stuart'y the oppofitc party. We all know how liberally thefe have been be- ^^0''^Z ^^^ . . . ' order, cf the flowed upon him, in the event which has happened ; but let us fup- Prefidint anL pofe -^^^^'^'"'0!- ( 8 ) pofe the contrary event, that he had difobeyed the orders of the Majo- rity and Commander in Chief, and given his fupport to the government of Lord Pigot and the Minority, what an opening would that have afforded for obloquy and perfecution ? His accepting of the command from the Governor and the Minority would have been afcribed to the bafe ungenerous motive of fupplanting Sir Robert Fletcher, the Commander in Chief; and, fuppofing Lord Pip-ot to have prevailed at that time, and to have proceeded with the fulleft career of fuccefs in eftablifhing his government upon the ruins of the Majority of Council, and even without any further refiftance on their part, or any difturbance in the fettlement, there can fcarcely be a doubt that when the news of thefe tranfadtions reached England, they would have excited a general difapprobation of the violent meafures hy which a Majority of Council had been deprived of their functions, and the Commander in Chief of the forces put under arreft, and fuper- ceded in his command. Upon that occafion too, the military officer who had lent his aid for eftablifhing that new government, who had availed himfelf of the op- portunity to fupplant and to get into the place and profits of his Com- mander in Chief, and who had been guilty of difobedience of orders, both with refped to that Commander and the Majority of Council, would moft probably have felt the feverefl: effeds of the indignation of the Diredors and Proprietors of the Honourable Company, and of the public at large. My reafon for faying that there can fcarcely be a doubt that fuch would have been the reception given at home to the violent proceedings in Auguft 1776 in fufpending the Majority of Council, is founded not only on the nature of the incidents themfelves, but on the difapprobation which has been exprcfled by the India Company of that part of Lord Pigot's condud, when taken into confiderfrtion in this country at a time, and under circumftances the moft favourable for his Lordfhip, and the leaft auf])icious for thofe who had oppofed him. if ( 9 ) If any degree of difipprobation and cenfure of thofe parts of his Lorddiip's condudl could take place at a time when fo much generous and natural fympathy arofe from the hardfliips and reverfe of fortune which Lord Plgot had experienced, — at a time when the minds of men were in general more filled with animofity and indignation againft thofe who had been the occafion of his fufFerings, than attentive to any errors or irre- gularities in his Lordflilp's condudl or principles of government, how different would it have been, if the difpatches from India, inftead of bringing accounts of any hardfliips fuffered by Lord Pigot, or by thofe who adhered to him, had been filled only with the news of the hard- fliips, indignities, and prejudices fuftained by the oppofite party, and of Lord Pigot's having been affifted and abetted in the eftablifliment of this new government by the fecond in the military command, who by this revolution had attained the command in chief? I am well warranted to fay, that in the cafe here fuppofed, the outcry and indignation both againft Lord Pigot and Colonel Stuart would have been more general, and better founded, though they could not have been more violent than what Colonel Stuart has experienced in the oppofite cafe which has happened. It muft be allowed then, that Colonel Stuart was moft unfortunately clrcumftanced, fince whichever fide of the queftion he efpoufed in thefe unhappy difputes between the Governor and the Council, and to whichfoever of the parties he gave his obedience and fupport, he was certain of receiving for his reward much future obloquy and perfe- cution. But the confequences affeding hlmfelf were not the only or the mofl material ones which Colontl Stuart at the time of taking his decifive refolution was bound to attend to ; it became proper for him further to confider, what the poffible or probable confequences might be, to the Company's fettlement in that part of the world, in cafe he fhould obey the orders of Lord Pigot and the Minority, in preference to thofe of the Majority of Council and the Commander in Chief. C Is ( lo ) Is it at all probable, that Sir Robert Fletcher, the Commander in Chief, known to have been of a difpofition neither timid nor indolent, and who was drove to the neceffity of making fome exertion for his own fafety, to refcue himfelf from his impending fate ; I fay, is it probable, that he would have tamely and placidly acquiefced in the eftabllfliment of the government of Lord Pigot and the Minority, and in his own fuperceflion and trial by a Court-martial, even fuppofing that Colonel Stuart had given his fupport to Lord Pigot ? Or again is it probable, that all the gentlemen of the fufpended Ma- jority would have placidly and tamely acquiefced in that new govern- ment, and in their own fufpcnfion, degradation, and difgrace, without making fome efforts to preferve their rights and their confequence in- the important fettlement of Madras ? Is it further to be fuppofed, that thefe gentlemen of the Council, many of whom had been long eftabliflied in India, and had extenfive connec- tions there, and who were embarked in a common caufe with the Commander in Chief of the troops, would have had no fupport of friends, civil and military, to efpoufe their interefts ? Thefe things. cannot be fuppofed in confiftency with any jull obfervation on the common courfe of events. The probability is, if Colonel Stuart, then fecond in command, had in the month of Auguft 1776 given his obedience and fupport to Lord Pigot and the Minority, in oppofition to the Majority of Council, and Sir Robert Fletcher, the Commander in Chief of the forces, that the confequenccs would have been much more ferious and alarming to the peace and fecurity of the fettlement, than any which either atftually happened, or were likely to happen, from Colonel Stuart's adting in obedience to the orders of the Majority. What a dreadful fcene, and how alarming in its confequenccs mufl it have been, if, while one part of the army fliewed a readinefs to obey the orders of Lord Pigot and Colonel Stuart, another part, either from at- tachment or obligations to Sir Robert Fletcher their Commander in 1: Chief, ( II ) Chief, or from thinking his life in danger, or from an opinion that the legal Government which ihcy were bound to obey was veiled in the Majority of Council had declared themfelvcs ready to follow his and their fortunes, and to give their aid for fiipporting that go- vernment ? Surely no man can maintain, with any degree of certainty, or even with a fuperior weight of probability, that this would not have been the cafe ; perhaps I might venture to exprefs my fentiments more ftrongly on this fubjed, becaufe, after having been at conlidcrable pains to in- form raylelf accurately, the information I have received from good au- thority is very pofitive, that fuch would have been the confequences ; efpecially too, as the Supreme Council in Bengal had, even before that pe- riod, expreffed their fentiments very ftrongly, in difapprobation of fome parts of Lord Pigot's conduct ; and it is well known, that they after- wards had no hefitation to pronounce the Majority of the Council of Madras to be the legal government^ and to declare their firnj refolu- tion to fupport It *. Thefe particulars have appeared to me neceffary to be ftated at fomc length, becaufe, in the courfe of all the difcuffions hitherto in relation to thefe unhappy difturbances at Madras, they feem almoft to have efcaped obfervation ; no juft allowance has been made for the very critical and difficult fituation in which Colonel Stuart was placed, and in the midft of the outcry againfl; him, a notion feems fomehow or * In the letter from the Supreme Council to Lord Pigot of the icth of September 1776, they exprefs themfelves thus : " We therefore deem it incumbent on us to declare, that the " rights and powers of the Governor and Council of any of the Company's Prefidencies, are *' veiled by their original conllitutlon, in the Majority of the Board ; that the violence coni- " mitted by your Lord(hip, in excluding two of the Members of the Council of Fort St. <' George, fr m their places, was a violation of that conftitution ; that the meafures taken " by the Majority to recover the adual government, which of right is verted in them, arofe " from the nccefiity of the cafe ; and that v.e lliall acknowledge and fupport the title and au- " thority which they confequently pofl'efs." At the fame 'time, the Supreme Council wrote to Sir Edward Hughes, commanding hi» Majefty's fquadron in India, " reqiieftiiig that he would unite with them in afi'ording his ailift- " ance and fupport to the aftual government of Madras, if any change of circumftance fhould •' render it neccflary for them to defire it." C 2 Other ( I^ ) other to have prevailed, as If he had been officioufly and unneceflarily adtive, without confidering that he was placed in a fituation, where it was impoffible for him to be an idle fpedtator, and where he was reduced to the alternative of paying obedience and giving adive fupport either to Lord Pigot and the Minority, or to the Majority of the Council united with the Commander in Chief. We all know the total extent of the prejudice and mifchief that has happened in the one cafe; but no perfon can take upon him to fay, of how much greater magnitude the mifchief and confufion in the fet- tlement might have been, if the contrary event had happened, by Colonel Stuart's obeying the orders of the Minority, inftead of thofe of the Majority. It is the bufmefs of the Members of the Majority who iffued the orders, to fhew the neceffity or propriety of thefe orders, for which they alone are refponfible; and the only thing incumbent on Colonel Stuart, is to fhew the neceffity he was under to obey them ; and he perfuades himfelf that he fhall not only be able to give the utmoft fatisfadion on that head, but likewife further to prove, be- yond the poffibility of doubt, that he executed thofe orders in a man- ner, which of all others was the beft calculated to avoid bloodlhed and confufion in the fettlement. q-i^ J f I take it for granted that It will not be difputed by any man, and cuting the orders much lefs by any man of military experience, that it is a material part of the Majority ^(^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^^ officer charged with fuch an unpleafant and jorobtainingpoj- •' ° ^ feffion of the for- hazardous order, to ftudy to execute it in fuch a manner, as may t.reJs,andforar- jg^{^ endanger the lives either of thofe who are the 'obiedls of the rejtmg the perfon ° ^ . . ' . cf Lord Pigot. order, or of thofe by whom it is to be carried into execution, and at ( 13 ) at tlie fame lime may be the beft calculated for avoiding tumults in the community. It is admitted on all hands, that all thcfc material purpofcs were completely anfvvcrcd by the mode in which the arrefl: of Lord Pigot, and the pofTcflion of the fortrefs of Fort St. George, were accom- pliflied ; for there was not a life loft ; nay, not the fmalleft perfonal hurt received by any one man in the fettlement upon this occafion.— Not only fo, but from the day of Lord Pigot's arreft, on the 24th of Auguft 1776, to the arrival of the new Government at Ma- dras, in the end of Auguft 1777, there had not been any tumult or difturbance in the fettlement, in confequence of the incidents of the month of Auguft 1776, nor any man imprifoned or injured in his per- fon or property ; and further, fo little was there of confufion or anar- chy in the fettlement, that according to my information, the accuracy of which you, Gentlemen, have the beft opportunities of knowing, the inveftments for the Company during that period, from the Madras prefidency, were to a greater amount than they had ever been known during any fimilar fpace of time, and the revenues of the Company on re-letting their home-farms contiguous to Madras were very confider- ably encreafed. From thefe fads, one would be apt to think, that a great commer- cial Company, whofe chief and ultimate objed muft be the peace and tranquillity of the fettlements belonging to them, and the profperity of their commercial interefts, would feel fome partiality for an officer in their fervice, who in the execution of fuch orders, which he thought himfelf under a neceftity of obeying, had fo managed, as to avoid every mifchief that might have been fatal to the peace of the fettle- ment, or to the lives and properties of thofe who refided in it. In all the papers or letters from Colonel Stuart, public or private, he has always exprefled the higheft fatisfadion that the arreft of Lord Pigot, and the obtaining pofTeffion of the Fort, had been accompliflied without any ( 14 ) any perfonal injury to his Lordfhip or any of his friends, and without one drop of blood being fpllt upon the occafion : this he at the fame time is very confident could not have happened, if he had purfucd any other plan, than that which was adopted ; and particularly that a very different fcene, and mofl probably much bloodfhed and tumult, mufl have enfued, if Lord Pigot had been arrefled in the fortrefs of Fort St. George ; or if, from the conduft of Colonel Stuart or others. Lord Pigot had perceived or fufpedled that there was an intention of arrefting him. - , Colonel Stuart is alfo perfuaded, and the nature of the cir- cumftances demonflrate, that difagreeable confequences of the fame nature muft have happened, if the obtaining poffeffion of the fortrefs and garrifon of Fort St. George had been attempted, without the previous arreft of Lord Pigot, while his Lordfliip, by his perfonal prefence, joined to that of his adherents, was at liberty to have infti- gated the whole or part of the garrifon, to declare on his fide, and to refift the orders of the Majority of Council ; which orders, he. Co- lonel Stuart, was bound at all hazards to carry into execution; for the terras of them were very exprefs; they peremptorily required him to put them (the Majority of the Council) in poffeffion of the Fort- houfe, garrifon, and fortrefs of Fort St. George. Colonel Stuart had accordingly formed a plan and taken his arrange- ment for getting poffeffion of the fortrefs at all hazards, and he has no doubt that he could have fucceeded in it; but at the fame time thinks that it might very probably have been attended with the lofs of many lives, and in all likelihood would have been more fatal to Lord Pigot and his adherents, than to thofe who were to carry the orders of the Majority into execution, who knew that they could depend upon the numbers, fidelity, and firmnefs of that part of the troops which they had at their command for the accomplilhment of this undertaking. The probability or even the chance of fuch difagreeable events happening, was fufficient to determine Colonel Stuart to avoid the meafures ( ^5 ) meafures of open force, while there was any poffibillty of accom- plifliing the fame ultimate ohjcds by any other juftifiabic means permitted by the terms of the order he had received. This gave rife to the plan concerted with Colonel Eidington, Captain Lyfaght, and Major Home, for arrefting the perfon of Lord Pigot, when on his road from the Fort to the Company's Garden- houfe, and of conducing his Lordfhip with fafety and without infult of any fort to the Mount, at the diftance of about feven miles from Madras, there to be under the charge of Major Home, the command- ing Officer of the corps of Artillery, who was a perfon well known to and rcfpe£ted by Lord Pigot, and whofe general charader put him above any fufpicions of improper treatment of his Lordfhip. As foon as the arreflof Lord Pigot was over, Colonel Stuart inftantly returned to Madras, and put the garrifon and fortrefs into the poffeffion of the Majority of Council, from whom he had received his orders ; and in this manner, by the fecrecy and rapidity with which he car- ried into execution the orders he had received only the preceding day, every objedt was accomplifhed, without the lofs of one life, and with- out any difturbance in the fettlement. But, notwithflanding the rapidity with which thefe decifive fteps w-ere taken, an incident happened on the evening of the 24th, even after it was known that the perfon of Lord Pigot had been arrefted, which, though it has hitherto been little adverted to, is well worthy of atten- tion, becaufe it tends to fhcw what alarming confequences might pof- fibly have happened, not only to Lord Pigot himfelf, and his friends, as well as to thofe that oppofed them, but even to the fettlement in. general, if Colonel Stuart, in the execution of the orders, had followed; any other plan than that which he adtually adopted for attaining pof- feffion of the fortrefs. The incident I allude to, is what happened on the parade, in the evening of the 24th of Angufl, after Lord Pigot had been arrefted,. and when the fortrefs of Fort St. George had been put into the pofTeffion of ( I6 ) of the new government. Mr. Claud RufTel, one of the Civil Counfel- lors of LordPigot's party, was found that evening ordering the guards to ftand to their arms, to pay obedience to him, as the commanding officer in the abfence of Lord Pigot, and endeavouring, by every means in his power, to excite the guards to refiftance and violence, while, at this very time too, Mr. Stratton and- Mr. Brooke, both feniors to Mr. Ruffell in the Council, were actually in Fort St. George, and affembled upon pubhc bufinefs in the Council-chamber at the Fort-houfe. I beg leave to ftate thefe incidents precifely in the words of the in- formation given by Mr. RufTel himfelf, when examined upon oath before the Coroner's inquefi; at Madras, upon the 13th of May 1777 ; in page 29th and 30th of the collection of papers lately publiflied relating to that Inqueft, Mr. Ruffell ftates what paffed upon the parade in the fortrefs of Fort St. George, in the evening of the 24th of Auguft, in thefe words : " Hear'wg foon after that Lord Pigot had been carried a prifofier to *' the Motint, this hiforinant (Mr. Rujfel) thought it his dut}\ as fe- *' cond 171 Council t to repair immediately to the Fort. In his ivay thi-_ *' ther, this Informant met -with Air. Stone, luho accompanied this In~ *' formant ; ivhen they entered the Fort and came near to the main-guard^ *' this Inforynant met the Toivn-major, Captain Wood, nvho told this In- *' formant, that he f Captain Wood) hadheenptU under an arrejl for doing *' his duty ; this Informant therefore dire^ed the Town-adjutant, Lieu- *' tenant Pefidergait, lu/jo happened to be near, to go to the Captain of *' the maiji-guard, and acquaint him, that it ivas his orders, in the ab- *' fence of Lord Pigot, that the guards Jljould fiand to their arms. Ob- ** ferving that the Captain of the main-guard (Captain Adair^ befit at ed ' to comply ivith thofe orders, this Informant ivent himfelf to Captain Adair and repeated his orders, apprifmg Captain Adair of the danger ' of reftfing obedience, as this Informant ivas the commanding Officer in *' the abfence of Lord Pigot, under nsohofc orders the guards ivere. " Captain Adair feemed to be much alarmed, and muttered fotnething " about the Commander in Chief; upon ivhich this Informant afked Cap- 4 ' " tain ( 17 ) *' tain Adair, if be had received any orders contrary to tvhat this In- *' formant then i^ave him. Captain Adair aufivercd in a confiifed man^ " jier, that he had received orders from the Commander in Chief. About ** this time a croivd of ojjlcers ,affemhled round, and as the guard ap- " peared to be flanding to their arms, part having ahcady fallen in., ** this Informant ivas advancing totvards their front, ivhen Colonel " James Stuart came up to this Informant, aiid told him he nmfl go to *' the Confnltation-room. This Informant replied, he ivas not under *' the orders of Colonel Stuart, but on the contrary, that he nvas under *' the orders of this Informant. Some more ivords to the fame tendency " pajfed betnjueen Colonel Stuart and this Informant, ivhen Colonel Stuart " called out orderlies, ordering them to feize the Informant. Lieutenant " Colonel Eidington and Captain Barclay, each feiztng this Informant «* by the arm, this Informant called out to the officer of the guard for " affflance, but in vain, although fome of the grenadiers did fep out of " their ranks. In this mariner, this Informant ivas dragged by Colonel *' James Stuart, Lieutenant- colonel James Eidingtoun, and Captain " Barclay, fome orderlies pifjjing this Informant behind, to the Council' *' romn ; "where this Informant found Mejfrs. George Stratton, Sir Ro- *' bert Fletcher, Henry Brooke, Charles Floyer, Archdale Palmer, Francis " J our dan, and George Mackie, fitting at the Council-table. 1 'his informant *' ivas detained in the Council-room, until Colonel James Stuart diclated a " narrative of ivhat had pajfed upon the parade, to Mr. Jourdan, ivho ** appeared to a£i as fecretary^ In another account given by Mr. Ruffel of this fame matter, alfo upon oath, in the month of Ai]guft 1776, there are the following ad- <3itional circumflances: " '^hat Colonel Stuart, upon feeing feveral of the grenadiers advancing <' from the ranks toivards him fMr. Rujfcl), feenCd to be fo much *' alarmed with this, that he quitted his hold of the Deponent (Mr. Ruf- ** fOi '^"^ ^^" ^^^^ ^^ P^^fi ^^•'^ grenadiers into the ranks, •with oaths " and threats ; that, after effe^ing this. Colonel Stuart returned to afjijl *' Colonel Eidington, and Captain Barclay, by laying hold of the Depo- D " nent's- ( i8 ) *' nent*s ivrijl, and calling for an orderly ferjeant, to pu/h hm fMr. «' Rufel) behhidr The inference I draw from thefe fads is, that when we fee that fuch a fenfation and beginning of difturbance could be produced in the garrifon at a time fo unfavourable for Lord Pigot's friends, when his Lordfhip was in fafe cuflody with the corps of artillery at the Mount; and when there was fo little time or opportunity afforded them to prepare for any plan of refiftance ; and when we fee that this Gentleman, Mr. Ruffel, though unfupported by the other Members of the Minority, was refolutely bent on refift- ance, did every thing in his power to excite the guards to it, and had adlually made fuch an impreffion, as at one time to make fome of the guards ftand to their arms, and afterwards to excite fome of the grenadiers to ftep out of their ranks to give him fupport, if the further progrefs of thefe firft impreffions had not been checked by Colonel Stuart's violently threatening and puftinig back thefe grenadiers, and afterwards laying hold of Mr. Ruffel, and forcibly taking him from the parade ; I fay, when we obferve all thefe things, do they not afford the mofl complete convidion, that if Lord Pigot had not been arretted, but had been with the garrifon, or at liberty, at the time when Colonel Stuart, in obedience to his orders, was to feize the fortrefs, there muft have enfued a very ferious confiidl, and the lofs of many lives. "Without any difparagement to Mr. Ruffel, who I know enjoys a re- fpedable character, and who fliewed as much zeal and refolution as was poflible for any man in his circumflances, I may on good grounds prefume, that Lord Pigot himfelf, had he been in a fituation to adt, would not have been lefs zealous or lefs determined ; and that his perfonal prefence in the garrifon, where, as Governor of the fort, he had a right to command, and accompanied with friends who would have fupported him on the occafion, could not have failed to have produced a very different fpirit and degree of refiftance among the troops in the garrifon ; it muft have been of a much more ferious nature, than v;hat was or could be produced by the efforts of any of the Counfellors of.Lord Pigot's party, who had never aded but in a civil capacity. Lord ( 19 ) Lord PIgot's former military aftlons, his rank, the command he was accuftomed to have of the guards of the garrifon, and his known in- trepidity and warmth of temper, would certainly have difpofed many of the guards to have obeyed him ; and there can hardly be a doubt that he would have rifked his own and their lives, rather than yield to the power which required pofleflion of his garrifon ; and that in all probability he and many of his adherents, overpowered by numbers, would have fallen. Let any man fairly eflimate in his own mind thcfe events which, in all human probability, would have happened, compare them with thofc which adlually did happen, and then declare ingenuoufly, whether he thinks Colonel Stuart is entitled to merit or demerit, with the Eaft India Company, with Lord Pigot's friends, and with this coun- try in general, for preferring to every other, the plan which was adlually purfued. The mode of arrcfting Lord Pigot, and fome of the circumftances at- q-j^g ohje^ions to tending the accomplifliment of it, have been loudly complained of, not the mode of c.r- as affeding either the peace of the fettlement, or the interefts of the Company; but on this ground, that the arreft is faid to have been brought about in a manner that was unhandfome, and deceitful, and that I may not feem to avoid ftating it in the ftrongeft terms, even treacherous to Lord Pigot. Upon thefe topics every circumftance or commentary that could be collcdlcd from the mouths of enemies to Colonel Stuart, has been wrought up with uncommon ingenuity to inflame the minds of the < Eafl: India Proprietors, and of the public at large, againft him j fo much fo, that there could not have been moi-e rage and violence, if, inftead of applying his utmoft attention and management to fave Lord Pigot's life, he had been guilty of his murder j or if, inftead of avoid- D 2 ing ( 20 ) ing confufion in the Settlement, he had involved it in tumult and bloodflied. If it were unqueflionably afcertained upon an examination of unpre- judiced and impartial perfons, that Colonel Stuart, in the circum- ftances in which he was placed, had a£led improperly and with deceit, harfhnefs, or treachery to Lord Pigot, I may venture to fay that there is no perfon to whom that part -of his condu£t could give more uneafinefs, 'and real concern, than to myfelf; or who would be lefs apt to attempt any vindication, even of a Brother, in fuch particulars. I fhould have no hefitation to condemn any harfli or improper beha- viour towards Lord Pigot, on a double account ; both becaufe fuch beha- viour would be very unfuitable from one Gentleman to another, and' becaufe Lord Pigot was a charader entitled to refped and atterr- tion from the world in general, and particularly from thofe connedled' with the Eaft India Company, to which he had rendered fuch fignal' fervices at a former period of his life. But when the minds of men are much heated rn party conteft, we^ are not to give implicit faith to the affertions either of the one party or the other, with regard to the condudt of a perfon, whofe part in the bufinefs allotted to him has rendered him obnoxious, — efpecially in fo far as thefe affertions relate not to fubftantial fadls, incapable of being miftaken, but relate to expreffions uttered in the courfe of converfation^ and even to the manner, and the tone of voice which accompanied them.. It happens fo often that fuch expreffions, and the circumftances attend- ing them, are meant, underflood and related in fo very different a manner, by different perfons prefent at the fame inflant, that, no folid. reliance can be placed on them as articles of accufation. I therefore fliall not think it neceflary to take much notice of fome o£" nhe articles which fall under that defcription ; let it however be remem- bered, that the accounts which were in the beginning circulated by one party, concerning Colonel Stuart's expreffions, or converfations, in the courfe of the tranfadlions of the 24th of Augufl, are exprefsly denied and contradided by the other party. Whea f =1 ) ^^Hicn the accounts of the diflurbanccs at Madras firft reached this country, Colonel Stuart's friends were not fupplied with the j-nopcr informaiion far anfwerlng the various affertions or ca- lumnies with which his condudl was attacked; becaufe not having any idea that he was to be traduced in fuch a manner, he had not fupplied his friends with the means of obviating or refuting the imputations. — Colonel Stuart at Madras could not divine the terms of the Letter which Mr. Dalrymple wrote from Alexandria, at the dif- tance of many hundred miles ; — nor could he forefee at Madras, the liberties which, in confequence of that Letter, and of other reports cir- culated at the commencement of this Indian difpute, were taken with, him in this country, at the diflance of fome thoufand miles. The firft time that his attention to certain imputations was more parti- cularly excited, was in the month of April 1777. He was at that time at Tanjore, and received, by means of a friend at Madras, the copy of a pamphlet or cafe drawn up on Lord Pigot's part, which had been printed with great fecrecy in Lidia, to be forwarded to this country. By the firft conveyance, after he had feen that pamphlet, I received a letter from my Brother, wherein, amongft other things, he parti- cularly gives an account of what palled in the Council- room on the evening of the 24th of Auguft, immediately before the arreft took place; and the account there given, exprefsly contradicts the de- clarations, imputed by Lord Pigot's friends to Colonel Stuart, during the courfe of that interview in the Council- room. What he fays to me in his private letter on this fubjed, which I am ready to fubmit to your perufal, is in thefe words : " As to what \% falfely Jald of my having given my honour to obey " the orders of Lord Pigot's fadlion, I truft, that, independent of my ** own aflertion being full as good as the affertion of Mr. Ruflel 'i.o *' nearly conneded, the evidence of Mr. Sullivan, who was prefent, " and then ading as Secretary, will be more than fuflicient to overturn " the calumny; but if I may be believed to have any memory, or to ** be poflJeiTed of common fcnfe, or confiftency of condud, none who^ " know ( 22 ) " know me as fuch can poflibly think, that the man who wrote and de- " livered the letter the morning of that memorable day, the 24th of " Auguft (of which you have a copy), could poflibly make fuch a " declaration the fame evening. *' Very true it is, indeed, that the members of Lord Pigot's fadlion " had fummoned me to meet them in order to crofs-queftion, and if " poflible, commit and entrap me in fome fnare; and as I had no pre- •' vious notice of their intention, it required the utmoft effort of " caution and prudence in me to elude their intentions. At the " precife time of this fiery ordeal, the fecret was in the power of near " fifty perfons, including the parties at that very moment polled on *' the road to the Garden-houfe under the Adjutant-general, and Cap- " tain Lyfaught ; the commanding officer of the artillery at the Mount, " had alfo orders to receive him ; the Commandant of the Fort had *' likewife agreed to receive my orders on every emergency ; Lord *' Pigot's chaife was at the door; what then was for me to do, at *' that moft critical period ? Had I bluntly contradided their aflertions, *' with regard to their legal powers, or in dire£l terms refufed to obey, *' the Settlement muft have been involved, together with myfelf and *' the Gentlemen who obeyed my orders from a fenfe of their duty, in " fcenes of the greatefl horror ; for Lord Pigot, as was natural to " fuppofe, was refolved to have remained in the Fort, and to have " exerted every authority given him by his military commiffion ; and I *' was equally refolved to have carried him by force from thence to the *' Mount, at the rifk of falling in the attempt. What other line could *' a man of common prudence or humanity follow, than that which I *' I did, viz. neither aflerting nor denying their propofitions, but ap- " pearing, as I really did, paffive on the occafion. It was a trial of " (kill, which laftcd at leaft three quarters of an hour. Inflead of felf- " condemnation, the retrofped of the part I adted at that time affords me the greatefl fatisfadion, becaufe, under Providence, to that is '• owing, what the annals of hiflory will not produce, viz. fo univer- 4 " fal ( tc ( 23 ) *' fal a change being brought about To fuddenly and without any indl- *' vidual being hurt in his perfon." But there is one circumftance, which docs not fall within the de- fcription of expreflions or converfations, liable to be miftakcn, and it is that which of all others has made the moft noife, and excited the greatcfl: prejudice againft Colonel Stuart in this bufinefs, the circum- ftance of his accompanying Lord Pigot in the chaij'e at the time when he was arreftcd. That Colonel Stuart did accompany Lord Pigot in the chaife from the Fort to the place where he was arretted, on the 24th of Auguft, which was about 700 paces from the fort of Madras, is certainly true ; and I have no hefitation to fay, that fince Lord Pigot was to be arreftcd, 1 moft fincerely wifli that it could have been accompliftied without Colonel Stuart's attending him in the chaife, fuppofing that pra(flicable with equal fafety to his Lordftiip's perfon, and to the peace and fecurity of the fettlement : for I do own, that to perfons at a diftance from the fcene of adion, this circumftance carries, upon its firft appearance, fome- thing very difagrecable and unfavourable for the perfon who was placed, or placed hiinfelf, in that fituation. I have no right to be furprifed that it {hould have excited, in the early ftages of this bufinefs, a confiderable degree of prejudice againft Colonel Stuart, fince even the relation and frienddiip between him and me did not at that period totally exempt me from the influence of the fame prejudices. At the tinne when thefe prejudices moft prevailed, which was upon the arrival of the firft accounts of the unhappy difturbances at Madras, no perfon in this country was fupplied with proper information as to the motives of Colonel Stuart's condud in that particular ; nor was there any allowance made for the confiderations of a public nature, which might have induced him to take this ftep of attending Lord Pigot in the chaife, even at the rifque of temporary imprcflions to the prejudice of his charaQer as a private man. Ido { u ) 1 do not mean, however, to enter into the difcuflion of any abflract unneceflary queftions ; nor fliall I attempt to mark out the precife line to be purfued, where the duties which one owes to the public, are to be put in competition with thofe which a man may fairly be fuppofed to owe to himfelf. Thefe are queftions of delicate difcuflion, and whether decided in one way or the other, there are fo many hazards that general maxims upon fuch topics may produce mifchief to fociety rather than utility, that it is perhaps better to avoid, than to embrace any opportunity of abftra£t reafoning upon them. But this I may venture to aflirm, that when the condudl of any man is unfortunately diflradled by contradidtory obligations, and when the duties he owes to the general interefts of the ftate, or to that par- ticular body of men, in whofe feivice he is employed, happen to in- terfere with the attention due to his own private charader and repu- tation; the decifion in fuch an alternative mufl: be truly diftrefling. A plaufible ground will always remain for cenfure and difapproba- tion, and, as has happened in Colonel Stuart's cafe, men will impute to the errors of condudl what arofe from the difficulties of fituation. Inftead, therefore, of entering into the difcuffion of any general queftion, I fhall only beg leave to ftate the particular fituation in which Colonel Stuart found himfelf, at the time when it appeared to him of efl'ential confcquence that he ihould accompany Lord Pigot in the chaife, — to point out the hazards which might have enfued if this mode had not been adopted,— and to endeavour to corred the errors and mif- reprefentations which attended the firft; editions of this ftory ; for in the accounts at firft: circulated, circumftances of friendfliip and con- nection between Lord Pigot and Colonel Stuart, and of treacherous deceits pra£tifed upon his Lordftiip, were fuperadded to the fadt of Co- lonel Stuart's accompanying him in the chaife, and thefe mifrepre- fentations no doubt contributed greatly to excite the violence that at firft appeared againft; Colonel Stuart. 1 After ( 25 ) After performing thispropofed taflc, I fliall not prefumc to ofi'cr any opinion of my own, but leave it to you, Gcailcmen, to form your own judgment upon this part of Colonel Stuart's conduct. Whatever degree of management or addrefs, Colonel Stuart may have employed in the arrefting Lord Pigot's perfon, and obtaining pofl'efrion of the fortrefs, I prefumc that I may be allowed to take it for granted in the fiifl: place, that no one at all acquainted with Colonel Stuart's charadler, or the incidents of his life, will fuppofe that his condudt upon this occafion was fuggefted or regulated by the motives of attention to his own perfonal fafety; his military fervices, and even the acknow- ledgment of his enemies, leave no room to queflion his perfonal cou- rage and intrepidity. There can hardly be a doubt in the mind of any man, that the meafure of arrefting Lord Pigot privately, in preference to the other alternative of fecuring his perfon in an open and violent manner, pro- ceeded from a defire of not occafioning the lofs of lives, and of prevent- ing any tumults and confufion in the fettlemcnt ; and it may not be affum- ing too much to add, that it proceeded alfo froni a defire to avoid any chance of injury to Lord Pigot's perfon. The only qucftion is, whether, in the accompllihment of thefe purpofes. Colonel Stuart employed more addrefs, than is juftifiable, even for the attaining any great public objedts. It feems to be generally agreed, that fince Lord Pigot was in all events to be arretted, it was much more proper that his arreft fliould be accomplifhed in a private manner, without noife or difturbance, than that the hazard fliould be incurred of any tumult or fcufflc, by an open and violent arreft. This preference of a private arreft, includes in it an approbation of fome degree of management, fome addrefs or furprife in the accomplifliment of the bufinefs recommended to the executive officer J for without thefe it ceafes to be of the nature of a private arreft, the very objedt of which is to lay hold of the perfon to be arrefted, when unfufpeding any fuch intention againft him, and unprepared for re- fiftance, E So ( ^5 ) So far at leafl: then Is clear, that It ought not to create any prejudice againft Colonel Stuart, that he fecured Lord Pigot's perfon when un- prepared for refiftance, and without any fufplcion of what was in- tended. This may afford an anfwer to a confiderable part of the outcry which was raifed by the undiftinguifliing multitude, who were affedted by the contraft drawn, and by the pathetic defcriptlon given of Lord Pigot, unprepared for defence, and free from fufplcion ; while he, Colonel Stuart, had fettled in his own mind the plan which he was to purfue, and fo conduced himfelf, that Lord Pigot could form no fufplcion of the event that awaited him. Even if Colonel Stuart had been on terms of great intimacy or friendfliip with Lord Pigot, the very reverfe of which I beg leave to obferve, was the fa£l, it will probably be allowed by thofe who attend to the circumftances of the refpedive fituations of Lord Pigot and Colonel Stuart, at that time, that it would have been a blameable inftead of a praife-worthy adion on Colonel Stuart's part, if he had not concealed from his Lordfhip the orders he had received, and the means by which he propofed to carry them into execution ; for in judging fairly upon this point, it mufl; be taken into confideration, that Colonel Stuart was not only convinced of his duty to obey that order with fidelity and fccrecy, but at the fame time convinced that the fafety of Lord Pigot's perfon, and the prefcrvation of many lives, depended upon his Lordfliip's having no fufplcion of what was intended. That the merit or demerit of thefe fteps of concealing from Lord Pigot the intended arreft, and of attending him in the chaife, may be fairly appretiated, it is necellary, that they fhould be feparated from thofe additional circumftances, which were artfully interwoven with the firft accounts of this tranfadion, and having ever fmce accompanied the criticlfms on Colonel Stuart's condud, they have been one of the prin- cipal means of carrying to fuch a height the prejudices againft him. 5 It ( 27 ) It was faid, that Colonel Stuart, at the time of thefe tranfaclions, was in habits of fricncllliip and intimacy witli Lord Pigot, and even pofleired a confiderable fliare of his confidence ; that he was under ob- ligations to Lord Pigor, or at lead was courting his favour and con- fidence, that he had invited himfelf to fnp with Lord Pigot on ihe 23d of Auguft, and to breakfaft, and then to dinner and fupper with him on the 24th, the day of the arreft ; and that all this was done folely Vv'ith a view of betraying his friend. This, to be fure, was a very unfavourable reprefentation for Colonel Stuart, and it is not furprifing that it fhould have excited a warm In- dignation againft him ; — it will now, however, appear tlrat not one of the above particulars has the leaft foundation in fadt. That Colonel Stuart was in no habits of friendfnip or intimacy with Lord Pigot, at or about the time of thefe tranfadlons, is a fad not only aflerted by Colonel Stuart, in the various letters received from him, but was known almofi: to every perfon at Madras ; and there are feveral Gentlemen from India, now in London, both in the civil and military departments of the Company's fervlce, who can at- teft the truth of thefe aflertions. But, independentof any other teftimony, the records of the Company afford fatisfadory evidence upon this point. It there appears, that Lord Pigot, for a confiderable time before the Incidents of the 23d and 24th of Auguft 1776, had been in a courfe of thwarting and oppofing every plan that had been propofed by Colonel Stuart's friends, with a view to his being eflabliflied in a particular military command, which from his rank in the fervice, from the importance of the command, and from the opinion of the Commander in Chief, Colonel Stuart was thought to have a good title to exped. From the 25th of June 1776, upon which date Sir Robert Fletcher propofed at the Council Board, that Colonel Stuart fhould be appointed to the command of Tanjore, to the 22d of Auguft 1776, when Lord Pigot fufpended two of the counfcUors, for figning an order to the Se- E 2 cretary, ( 28 ) cretary, diret^lng him to fign the inftrudlions to Colonel Stuart, a« Commander of Tanjore ; Lord Pigot was condantly in oppofition to the propofed appointment of Colonel Stuart to that command, and it was the difpute between the Majority and his Lordfliip, in relation to thefe inftrudions to Colonel Stuart, that brought matters to a crifis between them on the 2 2d of Auguft, which, it is material to obferve,. was but two days before the arrefl of Lord Pigot. By attending to this fa£t, and to thefe dates, every man muft be convinced, that there were no apparent habits of friendfliip between Lord Pigot and Colonel Stuart at or about the time when the Colonel,, in obedience to the orders which he received from the Majority of Council on the 23d of Auguft, concerted and executed the plan for arrefting Lord Pigot's perfon ; at leaft, the flrong and marked oppofi- tion which Lord Pigot, had given during the courfe of many weeks, to Colonel Stuart's obtaining the command at Tanjore, was either a fymptom of their being on bad terms, or a circumftance not likely to produce much cordiality and friendfhip between them. The other imputation of Colonel Stuart's courting Lord Pigot*s favour, will be found equally unjuft and injurious. Inftead of Colonel Stuart's courting Lord Pigot, for the command of the army, it has already been fhewn that he declined that command in. July 1776, when Lord Pigot, wifhing to get rid of Sir Robert Fletcher, offered the command in chief to Colonel Stuart, then fecond in com- mand ; from that time till the 23d of Auguft there was no intercourfe between Lord Pigot and Colonel Stuart, nor were they in any habits of friendfliip or intimacy. With refpCiTt to the tranfadlions and conferences between them on the 23d and 24th of Auguft, they exhibit an uncommon and fingular fcene, in which there appears fomething very different indeed from Colonel Stuart's attempting to infinuate himfelf into the good graces of Lord Pigot and his friends. Inftead of Colonel Stuart's courting Lord Pigot, if is evident that Lord Pigot was courting Colonel Stuart ; fenfible of 3, the ( 29 ) the Importance of gaining him over to their interefts, Lord Pigot and his friends were at that very time not only endeavouring to perfuade him to a£l as Commander in Chief, but ufing every effort and addrefa to obtain from him fome exprefs or implied acknowledgment that he had accepted of that command ; while he, on the other hand, thus be- fet, was very much puzzled how to avoid this proffered honour, and at the fame time not to divulge the fecret of the orders he had re- ceived from the Majority of Council, which he thought himfelf indifpenfably and confcientioully bound to obey. Colonel Stuart's prefence at the fupper on the evening of the 23d, and at the breakfafl and dinner on the 24th, at Lord Pigot's houfe, have alfo been converted into charges againft him. They happened merely as the accidental and natural confcquences of the intercourfe which was brought on in the courfe of thefe two days, at Lord Pigot's defire, that he might have a more favourable opportunity of ufing every effort to prevail on Colonel Stuart to accept the command in chief. Had it not been for this circumftance, Colonel Stuart, who had not dined or fupped with Lord Pigot during feveral weeks, and who, in that interval, had met with no new inducements to increafe his defire of intruding upon his Lordfhip at his convivial hours, \vould certainly not have partaken of his repafls on the 23d and 24th of Auguft, and it is now well afcertained that he did not intrude himfelf, but zvas in- vited; and particularly it appears, that when he accepted of Lord Pigot's invitation to fup wath him on the 23d, he (Colonel Stuart) added this condition to the acceptance of the invitation, " that there fliould be " nothing of bufinefs talked of." As to the dinner on the 24th, whether Colonel Stuart invited him- felf, or was invited, though the fad is, that he went there by invitation,. it is really of little confequence ; for at Madras it is cuflomary for the officers, and in general for every perfon in a certain rank, to dine with the Governor, who keeps an open table; and the partakers of the dinner ( 30 ) dinner are fo very numerous that it is no mark of particular intimacy or friendfliip for a man either to be invited, or to come uninvited upon fuch occafions. With regard to the propofed fupper at the Garden-houfeon the even- ing of the 24th, which did not take place, it was at firft pofitively aflerted in this country, that Colonel Stuart had invited himfelf to that fupper, and much emphafis was put upon that, as well as upon the other fuppofed felfinvitations ; but it has fince appeared from Lord Pigot's own letter to the Diredors, dated the 3d of September i776, that the invitation came from hisLordfhip, whofe words in that letter are : " After dinner I invited him to fupper at the Company's Garden- *' houfe, which invitation he accepted." That you may perceive the authority I have for contradiding the aflertions, not only with refped; to Colonel Stuart's intruding himfelf upon Lord Pigot at his convivial hours, but alfo as to his being on terms of intimacy or friendfhip with his Lordfhip about the time of the arreft, I beg leave to infert the paragraph of a letter which I received from Colonel Stuart, of foold a date as 13th December 1776. It is in thefe words : " It has llkewife been given out by my enemies, that I was at the " time in the greateft habits of intimacy with him (Lord Pigot), and " approved of his meafures. The fa£t is diredly the contrary ; for *' we had not been on fpeaking terms for a very confiderable time be- " fore, and I had not dined at his houfe from the latter end of June " until the 24th of Auguft, that he afked me to dine, as is ufually the " cafe when any one breakfafts with the Governor, and the occafion *' of my breakfafting was the delivering a letter of which I fent you a " copy." It remains now to ftate what relates to the fad of Colonel Stuart's accompanying Lord Pigot in the chaife to the place of arrelt; feparated from thofe mifreprefentations concerning his friendfliip and intimacy with Lord Pigot, which have hitherto conilantly attended the men- tion of that fad. It C 31 ) It was on ihc 23d of Auguft that Colonel Stuart received the or- ders from the Majority of Council, to put them in poiiefhon of the fortrefs and garrifon of Fort St. George, and to arrcd J.ord Pigot. Colonel Stuart accordingly took his mcafures for fcizing the fortrefs, and for arrefling the perfon of Lord Pigot, even in the Fort, if it could not be otherwife accomplifhed ; but he forefawr that this might be at- tended with very difagreeable and fatal confequences. It therefore became a mofl: natural and meritorious wifli, on Colonel Stuart's part, that the moft effe^lual means fhould be ufed to avoid thefe confequences; there was little time left for deliberation, nor could the matter be allowed to hang over in fulpence, in expectation of any ac- cidental opportunities of arrefting Lord Pigot's perfon in a private man- ner, for the fecret of the orders figned by the feven Members of the Majority was already in many hands. On the 24th of Auguft, Colonel Stuart having learnt that Lord Pigot intended to fup that evening at the Company's Garden- houfc, it occurred, that this was an opportunity not to be neglected ; and that it afforded the beft, if not the only chance of arrefting Lord Pigot in a private manner, without tumult or bloodfhed. It was there- fore refolved, that Lord Pigot's carriage fhould be flopped, and his perfon fecured, when on the road from Madras to the Garden- houfe. The execution of the plan was intrufted to three officers of diftin- guiftied rank and merit in the Company's fervice, Colonel Eidington, the Adjutant-General, Captain Lyfaght, commanding officer of a bat- talion of Sepoys, and Major Home, who commanded the artillery at rtie Mount; and their inftrudions were, to condud Lord Pigot to Major Home's houfe at the Mount, there to be under the charge of that officer, and to be treated with every poffible mark of perfonal at- tention and refpe£t. The place where Lord Pigot was to be arretted was very near both to the Fort and town of Madras, and to the Sepoy guard at the Garden-houfe. The total diftance from the Fort to the Garden-houfe is ( 32 ) IS fomewhat lefs than a mile, and the place chofen for the arreft was iiot three quarters of a mile from the Fort, and not 200 yards diftant from the barracks of the Governor's guard at the Garden-houfe, which is the place of his refidence, and where there is always a confiderable part of a battalion of Sepoys for the Governor's guard. In thefe cir- sCumftances it was not cafy to forefee what incidents might pofTibly .arife to obftrudl or prevent the arreft in the event of Lord Pigot's making jefiftance, nor was it eafy to guard againft the fatal confequences that •might he produced by a fcuffle enfuing, where an alarm might fo sfpeedily be fpread. Colonel Stuart having given pofitive orders to Colonel Eidington and Captain Lyfaught, to arreft Lord Pigot that evening, thefe officers would have thought themfelves peremptorily bound in all events to have obeyed thefe orders; nor could they have taken it upon them, if their ~ •commanding officer was not prefent, to vary the orders, or the execu- tion of them, as circumftances might require.— This was one ftrong inducement to Colonel Stuart to be prefent, and for that purpofe to accompany Lord Pigot in the chaife that evening ; — Colonel Stuart being the commanding officer, who had given the orders, he was the •only perfon who could adapt the execution of them to the exigency of fuch circumftances as might occur ; for, in critical affairs of this nature, it often happens that unexpeded circumftances beyond the reach of human forefight arife in a moment, fufficient to baffle the beft concerted plan, unlefs the remedy be as inftantly applied. It occurred alfo to Colonel Stuart, that his being in the fame chaife •with Lord Pigot, would more eafily prevent the confufion which would probably take place from his Lordftiip's attempting to drive his horfes paft the officers who were ordered to arreft him, and who were on foot, and in the event of a fcuffle might very probably have fired into the chaife. No fituation can be imagined in which more reafons could concur, for ftudying every precaution that could poffibly tend to prevent any alarm, ftruggle, or confufion; for if the plan of arreft had failed ( 33 ) Jii the execution that night, the 'very attempt^ whether defeated by rc- fiftance and the lofs of lives, or by Lord Pigot's efcaping from thofe who had been ordered to arrefl: him, mufl have been produdive of the greatcfl confufion, and have involved the fettlemcnt in all the horrors of a civil war. In {hort, it appeared to Colonel Stuart at that time, and he ftill con- tinues of the fame opinion, that it would have been unpardonable in him in his fituation to fuffer the apprehenfion of the commentaries wliicli malice, or miflake, might fuggeft, to have outweighed the importance of the various objeds and motives of a pub- Tic nature, as well as the confiderations of humanity for Lord Pigot himfelf, and for others, which concurred to excite him to this ftep of attending his Lordfhip in the chaife to the place of arreft. If the events fubfequent to the arreft had (hewn that Lord Pigot, by Colonel Stuart's attending him in the chaife, had been brought into a fnare which would not otherwife have happened ; — if the objed of it had been to afFed his life, or even to expofe him to more perfonal in- jury; — or if it had appeared that Colonel Stuart could have been aduated to this particular mode by finifter views or motives of felf-interefl, • and was to receive any perfonal benefits from accomplifliing the arreft in this manner; in all or either of thefe cafes. Colonel Stuart admits that the circumftance of his attending Lord Pigot in the chaife ought to be viewed in a very exceptionable light, and to receive every unfa- vourable interpretation which either has been, or can be beftowed upon it. But he apprehends that the reverfe of all thefe injurious fuppofitions have been eftabliflied beyond the pofTibility of doubt. I fliall here beg leave to tranfcribe the paragraph of a letter dated the 14th of September 1777, which I received a confiderable time ago from my Brother, the original of which is at your command ; and what I am now to tranfcribe, will ferve alfo for the purpofe of refuting the very unjufl imputation endeavoured to be fixed upon Co- F lonci ( 34 ) lonel Stuart's charadler, by thofe who pretended to believe, or attempted to perfuade others, that in the moment of the arreft, Colonel Stuart, by his expreflions and manner, had behaved harfhly and even brutally to Lord Pigot. The paragraph is in thefe words : *' I again and again repeat, that no other way than what I followed, " fuggefted from the moft tender regard to humanity, and to the " fafety of Lord Pigot's own life, could have efFeded this arreft with- " out confufioQ or bloodfhed. In the letter I wrote feveral weeks ago, " I have entered particularly into the mode of my feizing Lord Pigot, " in anfwer to the paper printed here ; I (hall here add, and declare the " fame before God, that not an uncivil or improper word fell from my *' mouth on that occafion. When the Adjutant-general flopped the chaife, " in which I was along with Lord Pigot, he (Lord Pigot) made a fhort *' paufe, and was looking about him ; we were then in the middle of " the road, at a very fmall diftance from the Sepoy-guard at his Gar- *' den-houfe, and many fervants round the chaife, and many people *' pafTing in the road. — The moment was critical, not only becaufe the *' leaft noife extraordinary would have alarmed, but what is particular, *' as the reins were in his hands, and the horfes very fpirited, he might *' have forced them on, in fpite of me, and the certain confequence *' would have been his getting home ; and myfelf, with all the officers or *' others, who, with me, thought it our duty, to obey the Majority as the *' legal government, muft have been difmiffed the fervice, or tried for our " lives. This led me, on obferving a kind of hefitation to obey on *' the part of Lord Pigot, forthwith to feize the reins with one hand, *' and put my other hand to his arm: to the beft of my recolledion, *' the precife words ! made ufe of were, *' My Lord, jou mujl go out J* " They were uttered, not in a brutal or contemptuous tone of voice, " but with the tone of refpedl as well as anxiety. — Lord Pigot then " inftan iy went out, without my faying one word more, or his making ** any anfwer." la ( 35 ) In another letter, wrote by my Brother to me from Tanjore, in May 1777) there are the following paragraphs on the fubjed of Lord Pigot's arrcfl : " I chofo to obey, what I judged from common fcnfe, and what the *' Governor-general and Council has fince eftabliflied to be, the only le- *' gal government. I have faid that it was at a great rilque that I did this ; " becaufe every thing that has happened to mc would have come to mc " in courfe, and by the Company's orders, without any rifque at all, had *' I feigned ficknefs, or remained an unconcerned fpedlator; but in *' truth, I loft my health, and gained nothing in other refpe(5ts by the '* change, except the fatisfa£tion of having done my duty; and there- *' by, I hope, deterred others from i«novating or overturning the efta- *' blifhed law or conftituiion of Government. " 1 know the perfonal refledlions of my enemies upon the occafion ; *' but as it can never be faid that perfonal fear or apprehenfion in- *' duced me (under the appearance of going to his, Lord Pigot's, *' country-houfe) to have a place in the chaife with him, and to make •' that an eflential part of my plan ; I obfervc, that as that cannot be *' afterted with rcfpeft to me, who had the army under my ahfolute *' command, and who had adtually given my orders to take hitn by *' force from the Fort, or wherever he was, had no opportunity *' offered of my going in the chaife with him, the unprejudiced Public, " in judging of this adt, will, I hope, therefore, do me the juftice to " infer, that it was from motives of humanity, to prevent bloodflied " and public difafter, and for the perfonal fafety of Lord Pigot." I fiiall conclude what relates to this fubject, by barely mentioning the ftrong and marked approbation, which the whole of Colonel Stuart's conduct, at that difficult crifis, received from the Governor- general, the Commander in Chief, and Supreme Council in Bengal, to whom a fuperintending power over all the Company's fettlements in India, both in matters civil and military, was delegated by the authority of Parliament. F 2 That ( 5(^ ) That Supreme Council had the beft^ opportunities of being parti- cularly and impartially informed of all the fails, and circumftances, which gave occafion to, which preceded and accompanied the arreft of Lord Pigot, and after receiving the fulleft information from both parties, and frpm Lord Pigot himfelf, they gave their complete ap- probation, not only of the refoiution taken by the Majority of Coun- cil at Madras, of aflerting their rights, and' affuming the govern- ment, but of the mode in which that refoiution had been executed. The letters of Sir John Claverlng, of the 15th, and of Governor Haftings, of the 18th of September 1776, which were publifhed when thefe difputes were recent in this country, prove that, befules a ge- neral approbation in Council, they both gave great credit to Colonel Stuart, for the mode in which the orders of the Majority of Council had been carried into execution, ^without bloodJJjed, ivithoiU tumult, and nvitJjoiit the -• VS72^B OtJ i 38 ) Ithe punijbments Having given fo full an account of Colonel Stuart's condud in con- and hardjhips fequence of the orders he had received from his Superiors, and having Cokmel Stu / A^ewn the motives as w^ell as the confequences of that condudl, I hope in ccnfequence of I may now be permitted to put the queftion, What crime has Colonel t M T ^'"'^^ Stuart been guilty of towards you, Gentlemen, his Honourable Em- ployers, or againft the Interefts of the Eaft-India Company ? If the crime is to be judged of from the nature and extent of the punifliments inflidled, it muft have been a crime of great magnitude indeed, and fuch as could not eafily be atoned for.- — A fhort review, therefore, of the punifhments and hardfhips he has fuffered, becomes ' abfolutely neceflary, and will clearly evince the truth of this propofition. In confequence of the firft reports brought to England in the year 1777, of the tranfadions at Madras in Auguft 1776, Colonel Stuart •was fufpended the Company's fervice for fix months ; the general letter which contained this order of fufpenfion, was carried out by Mr. Whitehill, who arrived at Madras in Auguft 1777; the order of fuf- penfion was immediately intimated to Colonel Stuart, who, by the death of Sir Robert Fetcher, in the month of December preceding, had attained the fituation of Commander in Chief, and the rank of Brigadier-general in the Company's fervice ; to both of which he fuccecded in confequence of an agreement with the Eaft-India Com- pany before his departure for India. Immediate obedience was given on the part of Colonel Stuart, to the will and pleafure of his Honourable Mafters, and he was deprived of the command of the army, which, for many months preceding, he had been making every exertion to improve and to put on the moft refpedable footing. 4 Colonel ( 39 ) Colonel Stuart was not only thus rufpendcd without any trial, without any fpecific crime or charge being alleged againfl: him in the order for fufpenfion, but he was fuperccded in the command, by the appointment of another officer, Colonel Monro, who was fent from England on purpofe to take the command of the army at Madras. The fuperceffion of Colonel Stuart by a younger, though a very defcrving officer in his Majefty's fervice, was, according to the mili- tary etiquette, an additional circumftance of mortification, cfpecially as the new Commander in Chief, Colonel Monro, obtained at once the rank of Major-general in the Company's fervice. This fuperceffion was not for a limited time; as General Monro's com- miffion was unconditional and abfolute, without reference to the refult of any future inquiries or trials in relation to Colonel Stuart's con- duiH: ; fo that he had before him the melancholy profpedt of being certainly punifhed and degraded at all events, whether innocent or guilty : indeed, the only cafe that was at all in contemplation or provided for, was that of his being guilty and deferving of punijh- jnent ; but no fort of provifion was made, no care whatfoever was- taken of him, in the event, that, upon inquiry or trial, he fhould be found to have been innocent, or to have a^ed meritorioujly for the ia- terefts of the Company. The general letter of the Company, fent by the BefLorough in July 1777, continued Colonel Stuart's fufpenfion, and directed that his condutfl fhould be examined into by a Court of Inquiry, and that he fhould he tried by a Court-martial ; but in cafe he had been guilty of no military offence that was cognizable by Martial Law, then it was ordered that his fufpenfion from the fervice, inftead of being taken off, as one might reafonably exped, fhould be continued indefinitely, and without limitation of time. Such are the diredions which have been fent from this country with refped to Colonel Stuart ; and it may be proper before flating what ( 40 ) -what pafTed at Madras, in confequence of the late/1 of thefc diredions, refpedUng the trial by a Court-martial, to mention fome of the inter- mediate hardfhips which he fuffered in India, by the means of vexa- tious fuits, both of a Civil and of a Criminal nature, brought againfl: him at Madras, in confequence of the tranfadions of the month of Auguft 1776. Upon the 14th of Odober 1776, a Bill was filed in the Mayor's Court at Madras, by Lord Pigot againfl Colonel Stuart, for damages, to the amount of 2CO,ooo L, on account of the arreft of his perfon on. the 24.th of Auguft : and his Lordfliip's Attorney having appeared and made aflidavit, that he believed Colonel Stuart was about to withdraw himfelf from the jurifdidion of the Court, he therefore prayed that a warrant of arreft might be iffued. Colonel Stuart having appeared by his Attorney, the Court, by a majority of five to four, ordered bail to be found to the extent of 1 5,000 1- which was diflented from by fome of the Members as exceffive. At the fame time, in Odober 1 776, a Bill of complaint was filed in the Mayor's Court, by Mr. Ruflel, againft Colonel Stuart, for damages, totlie amount of 40,000 1., founded on his forcibly carrying Mr. Ruffel from the Parade to the Confultation-room, on the 24th of Auguft, in the manner already related. Mr. Ruflel's Attorney having made a fimilar affidavit with Lord Pigot's Attorney, and prayed for a warrant to arreft Colonel Stuart, the Mayor's Court was pleafed to order him to find bail in this adion likewife, to the amount of 4000 1. As the Mayor's Court was thought to be very partial in thefe pro- ceedings, and that the amount of the bail thus ordered, by them was, in the circumftances of the cafe, judged to be exccflive. Colonel Stuart was advifed to carry the caufe immediately from that Court by appeal to the Governor and Council. In his reafons of appeal he gave anfwers to the various articles con- tained in thefe Bills of complaint againft him, and maintained that he was in no refped rcfponfible for the mcafures which, as ading in obedience ( 4t ) obedience to the orders of his fiiperiors, both civil and military, he had carried into execution, that it was therefore highly vexatious and oppreffive to diftrefs him by thcfe fuits, or by an order for bail fo exorbitant and exceffive, that it was even greater than what the fame court had obliged the Commander in Chief, Sir Robert Fletcher, to find in a fimilar adlion brought by Lord Pigot againfl: him, for the like fum of qoo,ooo/. damages. Colonel Stuart further averred, that he had no intention of with- drawing himfelf from the jurifdidion of the court ; and that, all circumftances confidered, fo far from being fubjcdcd to cxccjfive had in both thefe cafes, he ought not to be put to the hardfhip and incon- venience of finding any bail in either. With refpetSt to Mr. Rulfel's adlion, Colonel Stuart gave this additi- onal anfwer, that the fituation in which he, Mr. Ruflel, was found, on the evening of the 24th of Auguft, exciting the troops in the garrifon to mutiny and fedition, which, if not inftantly checked, might have been of very fatal confequences, had put Colonel Stuart under the abfolute necelTity of forcing Mr. RufTel from the main-guard. The matter was carried firft from the Mayor's Court by thefe ap- peals to the Governor and Council, who declined taking any cogniz- ance of it, as they had been parties interefted in the bufinefs ,which gave rife to the adions. Colonel Stuart therefore afterwards appealed to the King and Council in England. But thefe v/ere not the only adiions by which he was vexatloufly and unneceflarily haralTed for obeying the orders of his Superiors. He was one of thofe againft whom the proceedings of the Coro- ner's Inqueft, aflembled at Madras upon the death of Lord Pigot, were direded. That Inqueft aflembled at Madras on the nth of May 1777, the day on which Lord Pigot died, and continued their examina- tions and deliberations from that time till the 7th of Auguft 1777; when, in the fervency of their zeal, they were pleafed to pronounce one of the moft notable and extraordinary verdifts, that in fuch or any other circumftances has appeared in the records of this or of any other country. G Mr. ( 42 ) Mr. Ram, the Cgroner, and his Inqueft, pronounced and declared, *' That George Stratton, Henry Brooke, Charles Floyer^ Archdale *' Pahncr., Francis Jourdain, and George Alackie, in the civil fer- *' vice of the Eaft-India Company at Madras, and Brigadier-gejieral ** Sir Robert Fletcher, Colonel James Stuart, hieutenant- colonel Javies *' Eidingtoun, Adjutant general, and Captain Arthur Lyf aught, in the *' faid Company's fervice at Madras, and Major Matthew Home, com- *' nianding the corps of artillery in the faid Company's fervice, then *' ftationed at St. Thomas's Mount, did, in manner and by means ** therein recited, felonioujly, 'voluntarily, and of their malice fore- " thought, kill atid murder the faid George Lord Pigot ; and that a *^ferjeantandfepoysxh.QX€\nditicx\hQ6, and certain officers and foldiers *' belonging to the corps of artillery, and another ferjeant and other fe~ ♦' poys ftationed at the Garden-houfe, all of whom were to the Jurors *' as yet unknown, were at divers times prefent, aiding, abetting, af- *• fifting, and maintaining the faid George Stratton, Sir Robert *' Fletcher, and the other perfons before named, to do and commit *' the felony and murder aforefaid.'' What makes this verdid the more remarkable is, that it was not alleged, nor was there the moft diftant fufpicion of any fort in India, that Lord Pigot had died an unnatural death, or that any means had been ufed with a view of occafioning his death ; on the contrary, the phyficians who attended his Lordfhip during his illnefs, declared upon oath, that: difeafe was the immediate caufe of Lord Pigot's death, and that the difeafe was 2, putrid bilious fen} er, originating in a difordered liver. In the courfe of the evidence it alfo came out, that, to all outward ap- pearance. Lord Pigot enjoyed an uninterrupted ftate of good health, from the day of his arrival at the Mount, after his arreft on the 24th Auguft 1776, until the beginning of March 1777, about which time the ap- pearance of his bilious fever firft began, of which firft illnels, with the afliflance of Dodlor PaOey, his Lordfhip recovered in a great degree; but not having afterwards taken fufficient care of himfelf, he had a re- lapfe, which carried him off on the nth of May 1777. Here ( 43 ) Here it is well worth obfcrvlng, that during the whole period of Lord Pigot's illncfs, and at the time of his death, Colonel Stuart was abfent from the Prefidency of Madras, at the dlftance of fome hundred miles from his Lordfliip; as he went to Tanjorc, on the iith of Fe- bruary 1777> at which time Lord Pigot was known to have been ia pcrfed health, and did not return to Madras until the end of June that year. Neverthelefs Mr. Ram, and his Inquefl, thought proper to pro- nounce a verdid of ivilful murder, againft Colonel Stuart, and the other Gentlemen, founded on artificial and metaphyfical reafonings (delivered upon oath), from which they wifhed to eftablifh a belief, that the arreft of Lord Pigot, on the 24th of Augufl: 177^), and the agi- tation of his mind on that and fubfequent occafions, had, by the im- perceptible influences of the mind upon the body, generated the difeafe of which his Lordfliip died in the month of May 1777. The whole proceedings of that Inqueft, and the evidence kid before them, together with Colonel Stuart's defence, drawn up by himfelf,. in anfwer to the accufations brought againfl: him, have been lately printed and publiflied ; and I believe I may venture to fay, that every impartial man of found judgment, who reads that publication, will be of opinion, that nothing could be moreunjuftifiable, and reprehenfiBle, than the condu£t of that Coroner and his Inquefl ; the ablurdity of it would deferve only to be laught at, if fuch an at;empt againfl: the lives and reputations of a number of perfons of rank and charader could be viewed without abhorrence and indignation. Vexatious, contemptible, and ill-founded as thefe proceedings were, they had however the unavoidable efl'edt of haraffing Colonel Stuart exceedingly; they fuujeded him to a degree of public afi^rmt and op- probrium, from his being expofed to the imputation of luil/n I mur- der, by the vcrdid: of twelve men upon oath, fix of whom how- ever, at one time, voted that it was only tuanjlaugh.'er, while the other fix declared it murder; upon which the Coroner was plcafcd to remark, That the matter mufi be re-confidereJ, and he afterwards p'evailed on. a Majority of them to agree in opinion that it was wilful murder. G 2 This ( 44 ) This verdidt was, upon the 24th September 1777, fent by tlie Coro- ner to the Governor and Council of Madras, with a requeft from the Coroner, to be affifted in apprehending the perfons therein accufed; upon which the Governor thought it regular for him at that time to fign a warrant of commitment againft Colonel Stuart, and the other perfons accufed, direfted to the Sheriff of Madras. Colonel Stuart and the other Gentlemen were accordingly in the cuftody of the Sheriff until fome time in October following, when the Juftices, after having examined Sir Edward Hughes and fome other refpedlable witneffes, judged it proper to admit the prifoners to bail, in the fum of 10,000 1. each. The proceedings and the examinations before the Juftices were con- tinued until the end of November 1777, when the Juftices received from Bengal the opinions of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Judi- cature there, by which thefe Judges, upon confiderationof thefadts, and of the proofs ftated in Mr. Ram's inquifition, declared their unanimous opinion, that there were not materials fufficient for an indidlment either of murder or tnanjlaughter, and they alfo, from other defeds and irre- gularities in that inquifition, gave their opinion, that it might be quaftied or fet afide. In conformity with this opinion received from the Judges of the Su- preme Court of Judicature in Bengal, the Juftices at Madras, upon the 26th of November 1777, declared, " That the faid proceedings were '* irregular, and contrary to law. And refolved, that the whole be *' quaflied and fet afide, and that the perfons accufed be difcharged *' by proclamation." Thus ended the malevolent and irregular proceedings of the Coro- ner's Inqueft ; from the fhort ftate of which it muft appear, thai Colonel Stuart, was for many months (during which time too he was in a bad ftate of health from the confequences of a bilious fever), very unjuftifiably haraffcd by the charge brought and verdidl given againft him, and by having his name and charadler expofed as guilty of fo heinous a crime, Amidft ( 45 ) Amidft all thefe diflrcfrcs, however, one confolation nil! remained. Colonel Stuart comforted himfclf with the profped that lie fliould foon have an opportunity of vindicating his charadcr and condudl in tlic courfe of a regular trial \ when not only the orders under which he a£ted, but when likewife all the fads and circumftances would be afcertaincd by unqueflionable evidence, and then he flattered himfelf, that the pre- judices which had been ralfcd againft him would take an oppofite direc- tion, and that he {hould meet with the redrefs due to an injured officer. In this expedlation, of a fpeedy trial, and confequent redrefs, he has alfo been difappointed ; for the orders which were carried out by the Befborough for his trial by a Court-martial have not hitherto produced any effed. That trial, which he fo ardently wifhed for the vindica- tion of his honour and charadler, has been denied him, by the Com- mander in Chief, and by the Prefident and Council of Madras; at the fame time his fufpenfion has been continued, and he remains in that country waiting with impatience the return of the difpatches fent from Madras in the month of March laft. It is not my intention to impute blame either to the Commander in Chief or to the Prefident and Council of Madras, for the part they took; in refunng to Colonel Stuart his trial by a Court-martial ; they have aded, no doubt, upon grounds which afforded convidion to their minds, and it is well worth obferving that this refufal was founded on opinions which were very far from containing any thing unfavourable to Colonel Stuart's condud, but the very reverfe, for as far as they go they may be confidered as prefumptive proofs of his innocence, at leaft of his having committed no offence that V'/as cognizable by martial law. Their General Letter to the Court of Diredors, dated the 14th of March laft, fhews how anxioufly Colonel Stuart courted the opportu- nity of vindicating his condud by a public trial. Paragraph 14th of that letter is in thefe words : " General Stuart, as foon as he was furnifhed with a copy of ♦* your Orders, and before we came to any rcfolution concerning 3, " him, ( 45 ) *' him, addrefled three letters to us, all of them prefTing upon *' us, in the mofl anxious manner, his deiire to be tried by a Court- *' martial ; and fearing left any doubts or difficulties ftiould occur to *' us on the fubje£t, he introduced feveral arguments to fhew his right *' to demand a Court-martial, and pointed out different articles in the *' Articles of War by which he thought he might be tried. Although " his letters did not contain any reafons of fufficient flrength to in- " duce us to alter our opinions upon his cafe, yet the uneafinefs of " mind exprefl'ed in them was fuch, that we felt much concern for " the peculiar circumftances of his fituation." The reafons which induced the Prefident and Council and Com- mander in Chief at Madras to refufe the trial by a Court-martial ap- pear to have been founded upon prudential grounds, and upon a doubt whether a Court-martial were competent to decide upon a cafe which involved queftions of nice difcuffion relative to the Company's confti- tutlonal government. This is expreffed very clearly in the loth para- graph of their General Letter above mentioned, which is in thefe words : " The a£ts of arreting and imprifoning the perfon of the late Lord «' Pigot were fufficiently clear ; your difapprobation of thofe adts is *' ftrongly exprefled in your late orders; but that difapprobation does *' not make them offenfive in the eye of martial law, and no charge *' could be grounded upon it. In order to determine whether General " Stuart's conduct be criminal in that view, and before any charge *' could be prepared, it became requlfite to confider the nature of the *' orders and authority under which he a(5ted, with other particular " circumftances attending the arreft of Lord Pigot. The Company's " records, and General Stuart's own Narrative of the tranfadion, clear- " ly fhew, that his Lordihip was arretted by an order under the fig- " nature of George Stratton F.fquire, Sir Robert Fletcher, Henry ** Brooke, Charles Floyer, Archdale Palmer, Francis Jourdain, and " George Mackie. Ffquires; which order General Stuart In the Narra- " tive declares he confidered as legal, and the Gentlemen who iflTued " it the legal Reprefentatives of the Company. General Stuart appears 4 " to ( 47 ) ** to have done nolljing in this irnnfccllon independent of that authority " which gave him the order. If that authority were clearly illegal, •' or the order illegal, the arrefl and imprifonment of Lord Pigot by ** military force, may be deemed an a£t of mutiny, and the perfons con- *' cerned liable to be tried by an exprefs article of war; but we own to " you, ihel'e queftions appear to us to be of fo nice and important a nature, " that we did not think ourfelvcs competent to form a judgment upon " them, with that precifion which was necedliry to conftitute and " maintain a charge againft an officer for a crime deemed capital by " Martial Law. It is true, indeed, that in the firfl; paragraph of *' your Letter, dated the nth of June laft, you were pleafed to ex- *' prefs yourfelves in very ftrong terms of the arreft and imprifonment *' of the late Lord Pigot; calling it " a total fuhvcrfion of your legal *' government." Yet, when we confider the doubts expreffed in the *' 53d paragraph of your Letter of the 4th of July, we could not but " be of opinion, that they muft in fome degree have arifen from doubts *' concerning the legal authority and orders by which the arrefl: was *' executed; and under the influence of this opinion, we thought it *' would not only be prerumi)tuous but imprudent, and even danger- *' ous, for us, upon the authority of our own judgment, to found a *' crime which might touch the life, charader, or fortune of any " man ; and that even if wc had gone fo far as to have prepared 2t " charge and delivered it to a Court-martial, it might admit of great *' doubt, whether a Court of that nature were competent to decide *' upon a cafe, which involved queftions relative to the Company's '' conftitutional government, fo nice and intricate as thofe which have " been before mentioned." I cannot help obferving here, that the whole tenor of the above para- graph indicates the opinion of the Governor and Council of Madras to be, that Colonel Stuart's innocence or guilt depends totally on the lega^ lity or illegality of the orders he received ; an opinion which I can- not entirely acquiefce in, — but which neverthelefs makes it fufficiently evident that, when upon the fpot, they did not fee his condud, as to the " mode ( 43 ) mode of the anejl and the clrcumftances preceding it, in the light they have been reprefented in this country; for they fay exprefsly, that Co- lonel Stuart appears to have done nothing in this tranfaSlion itidependeni of that authority ivhich gave him the orders; they doubtlefs would have expreffed themfelves in another manner, if they had found any mifcon- dud: in the execution. The correfpondence and papers vvrhich pafled upon this occafion be- tween the Governor and Council of Madras and Colonel Stuart, in the months of February and March laft, have, as I underftand, been all fent home to you ; I fhall therefore beg leave to refer to them as con- taining his reafons, flated at great length, why he thought that, notwithftanding the difficulties pointed out by the Governor and Coun- cil, and by General Monro the Commander in Chief, ftill he was en- titled to expefl:, and even had a right to demand, that, in the peculiar circumftances of his cafe, the door of trial by a Court-martial (hould be thrown open to him, and every poffible indulgence granted for faci- litatingto him the means of redrefs. At the time when Colonel Stuart gave in to the Board at Madras, the papers wherein he fo earneftly contended for his trial, he was ignorant of one additional misfortune, of a very ferious nature, brought upon him in confequence of the order from the Diredlors of the Ho- nourable Company appointing him to be tried by a Court-martial ; had he known it, that confequential misfortune would have added greatly to the weight of thofe which preceded, and if poffible have increafed the zeal of his remonftrances upon the hardlhip of refufing or de- laying that trial. The difappointment which Colonel Stuart, in the courfc of laft year, met with, in relation to his preferment in his Majefty's fervicc, is what I allude to. Subfequent to the orders for a Court-martial, which you were pleafed to fend out to Madras by the Befborough, in July 1777, a very ex- tenfive ( 49 ) tcnfive promotion of ofllccrs in his Majefly's fcrvice took place in the month of September of that year; by which a great nimiber of Lieu- tenant-colonels attained the rank of Colonel in the King's fervice. Colonel Stuart, who had been a Lieutenant-colonel in his Majefly's fervice llnce the year 1762, w^as very near the head of the lift of thofe Lieutenant-colonels who were to acquire rank from this promotion; but it is a rule with his Majefty's fervants in that department, that an officer under orders for trial by a Court-martial is not to be promoted till the event of fuch trial is known. It was thought therefore that Colonel Stuart could not, with propriety, be included in the general promotion which at that time took place, until the ilTue of that trials ordered by the Diredors, was known : the confequence was, that he was paffed over in that promotion, and thirty-two Lieutenant-colo- nels, younger in the fervice than Colonel Stuart, obtained the rank of Colonel, notwithftanding that Colonel Stuart's merit and fervices were univcrfally allowed to entitle him to that preferment. Thus, by a complication of peculiar hard fate and misfortunes, the obedience which Colonel Stuart had given in the month of Auguft 1776, to the orders of his Superiors both civil and military, produced — /irft his fufpenfion from the Honourable Company's fervice for fix months, — then his fuperceffion in the command of the army in the Car- natic, — then an order for his trial by a Court-martial, — which order pro- duced the meafure of denying to him the rank of Colonel in the King's fervice, at a time of general promotion; — and laftly, he meets with a refufal of that trial, which if it had taken place, Colonel Stuart is con- fident, would have remedied not only this hardfliip in the King's fer- vice, but likewife the other evils of which he has fo much rcafon to complain. That you may perceive, Gentlemen, that there is nothing exaggerated in the account I have here given of the fevere difappointment my Brother and his friends met with at the time of the general promotion of Officers in his Majefty's fervice laft. year; and that this difappoint- ment was occafioned by the order you had given for his trial by a H Court- ( 50 ) Court-martial, I beg leave to annex the whole of the correfpondence on this fubjedl, which paiTcd between Lord Barrington, the Secretary at War, and mc, in the months of September and Odlober 1777. In that correfpondence you will obfcrve, that it is not on account of any opinion, formed by his Tvlajefty's fervants of Colonel Stuart's having aded improperly in India, that he was pafled over in the King's fervice ; but that it was occafioned from etiquette, by xhe orders for bis trial, and which was to be afterwards remedied, if the refult of the trial fhould be in his favour. The exprefllons in Lord Bar- rington's letter to me of the 3d of September 1777, are, " That full •' and perfect juftice will be done to him (Colonel Stuart) hereafter, if ", his condu£l in India referables the reft of his condudl through life." His Lordfliip was afterwards pleafed to explain the matter further, and to mention to me various inftances, where officers of good repu- tation, who were liable to be tried by a Court-martial, at a time when a general promotion took place, which they would otherwife have been entitled to the benefit of, were denied that promotion until the decifion of the Court-martial, after which their rank was allowed to them in the fame manner as if they had not been pafTed over. Although I was fully perfuaded that it was no part of the wifh or intention of the Eaft-India Company, that the hardfhips which they had inflided, fhould be produdive of any additional evil to Colonel Stuart, in any other line than their own fervice ; yet I have hitherto abftained from giving you any trouble or reprefentations about thefe confequential unintended hardfhips ; nor fhould I have mentioned them at this time, or prefumed to give you the trouble of reading the cor- refpondence between the Secretary at War and me upon this fubjed, if it had not now become unavoidably necefl'ary, for two reafons. One is, that 1 find falfe reports have been fpread about the manner and occafion of my Brother's being palfed over in the promotion of lafi year in his Majefty's fervice ; it has been ftated as a proof of his guilt, and ( 51 ) and the turn given to it in many quarters is, that his Majefly's fer- vants, upon being fully apprifed of all the circumftances of Colonel Stuart's condud in the difturbances at Madras, had formed fuch a decided opinion, that his preferment in the King's fervice was now abfolutcly and unconditionally flopped. The other reafon is, that you, Gentlemen, from the perufal of that correfpondence with the Secretary at War, may not only be informed of the true ftate of the cafe, but likewife may perceive the great fuper- venient hardfliips which he has fuffered, though not intentionally, by the late refufal or delay of his trial by a Court-martial. It is not with a view to find fault, nor in the fpirit of complaint or »-7 . , * * The motives and ill-humour, that I have taken up fo much of your time in flat- objeSIs of the ing the various hardfliips that have been heaped upon my Brother P^^fi'^^ appua- in confequence of the unfortunate difturbances at Madras, but merely that the nature of his condudl and the extent of his fufferlngs, fliould be brought under your confideration, more precifely, and with lefs mixture of foreign matter than they have ever hitherto been. So far am I from flating his cafe merely with a view of imputing blame, that I am ready fairly to acknowledge, that when the ac- counts firft came to this country of the diflurbances at Madras, with all the circumflances /aid to have attended it ; and when it was not forefeen to how much greater length thefe convulfions might proceed, and what the confequences might be to the peace and fecurity of the Settlement; I fay, upon that occafion, it was extremely natural, not only to feel a degree of prejudice and difplcafure at what had happened, bur to be alarmed for the future confequences, and to endeavour to avert them, by marking a difapprobation of the feemingly violent and improper conduit of all the adtors in the late difturbances. H 2 It ( 52 ) It was a difficult tafk for you, Gentlemen, amidfl the rage and ani- mofity which actuated the minds and influenced the reprefentations of theoppofite parties, to difcriminate the guilty from the ihnocent, or to afcertain the different degrees of offence which had been committed by your fervants in that Settlement ; neither was it poffible for you to pronounce any judgment, or to purfue any general meafure, that would be fatisfadory to all parties. Perhaps, indeed, the fteps you did purfue on that difScult occafion were, upon the whole, as little exceptionable, and had as many pro- bable appearances of being well calculated for eflablifhing peace in your Settlement, and to prevent the growth of further evils, as any that could have been devifed in the circumftances in which you were placed ; and there is this ftrong prefumption in favour of the wifdom and impartiality of your meafures, that countenancing the extremes of neither party, they were in fome degree unacceptable to both. But give me leave. Gentlemen, to obferve, that the very fame conduft, which, with a view and upon a plan of prevention, may properly be adopted at a particular crifis of public confufion, and while there is yet an uncertainty to what iffue that confufion is to lead, may and ought to be very different from thofe meafures which Ihould be taken with regard to offences already pafl, and where the whole extent of the mifchief has been already afcertained; when the latter is the cafe, there is room for taking into confideration the exad meafure and pro- portion of each man's offence or merit, and it is a matter of juftice to- o-ive redrefs to thofe, who, though unavoidably involved in the general hardfliips incident to individuals upon public diflurbances, fhall be found, either to have fuffered far beyond the magnitude of their offences, to have been innocent, or perhaps highly meritorious. It is to this confideration, Gentlemen, that, with your permiffion, I wifh to condud your attention; for the Madras diflurbances are now and have been long at an end, the period is arrived, which not only admits but loudly calls for, the difcriminatlon of every man's con- dud, ( 53 ) dudl, and for proportioning the punifhment or rcdrefs that is due to liim. During many months after the arrival of the firft accounts of the Madras difturbances, which reached England in the month of March 1777, there was an extenfive field opened for men of warm imagina- tions to alarm themfelves and the Public, by painting fcenes of horror, anarchy, and confufion, which were to be the infallible confequences of the fteps taken by the Majority of Council, and by Colonel Stuart, in the month of Auguft 1776. We mufl all remember the difmal predidions which were made in the General Courts of Proprietors, and circulated in the Public at large, with a degree of confidence little fhort of certainty. The prophets and orators of thbfe times afFcded to dread the arrival of any fliip, or other means of intelligence, from India, becaufe they feemed pcrfuaded, that we fhould foon have the melancholy accounts of many lives loft, and of complete anarchy and confufion from one end of the Carnatic to the other. The Princes or Powers of that part of India, either with or without the alfiftance of the French, were to take advantage of thofe confu- fions, and to fubdue or expel us from the country ; the Nabob of Arcot, at leaft, after getting rid of Lord Pigot, his moft formidable oppofer, and the controller of his views, would undoubtedly eftablifh his own power and independency upon the overthrow of the Britifh dominion in the Carnatic; and there could be no danger of the Na- bob's being thwarted in his attempts by thofe corrupted and feditious counfellors, whom he had inftigated to fuch violent proceedings againft Lord Pigot, and who were totally at the devotion of this Mahommedan Prince. Above all, it was perfectly clear, according to thofe predidions, that Colonel Stuart, who had taken fo a£tive a part in the arreft of Lord Pigot, by military force, and who had the army totally at his devotion, would find out a better interefl to cultivate, than that 3 of ( 54 ) -of his Honourable Employers, the Eaft India Company; and that he meant to fet up for him/elf m that part of the world, and would either laugh at any orders that fhould be fent from the India-Houfe, to de- prive him of his power, or would oppofe force by force. Such were the gloomy predidlions, and it was in vain to argue againft them in whole or in part; but the period has long been clofed within which thefe prophecies were to have been fulfilled, and what has really happened within that period, is fo totally unlike every thing which difturbed the imaginations of fome too credulous Proprietors, that it will hardly be believed that fuch unfaithful pictures could ever have been drawn of Colonel Stuart, and of the events which were to be produced by his condudl. Inftead of confufion] and civil war, there never was a more fettled ftate of quiet and tranquillity. — Inftead of refiftance on the part of Colonel Stuart, and Jetting up for himfelf there has been the moft uniform and implicit obedience to the orders of his fuperiors. When Mr. Whitehill arrived at Madras, in the month of Auguft 1777, with the new commiffion of government, and with your directions, by which Mr. Stratton and the other Gentlemen of Council were called home, and by which Colonel Stuart, the Commander in Chief of the army, was fufpended and fuperceded ; he was the firft perfon who accom- panied Mr. Whitehill to the parade, was prefent at reading the new commiffion of government, and of the order for his own fufpenfion. Upon that occafion, he openly and immediately declared his refolu- tion to obey the orders of his Honourable Mafters, however hard they might be on himfelf, and declared that he wifhed, and did not doubt, that every other perfon affedted by thefe orders, would be in the fame difpofition. On this fubjed: there is the following paragraph of a letter from Mr. Whitehill the Governor, and the Council at Madras, to the Su- preme Council at Bengal, extracted from the Minutes of Confultatlon of the 3 1 ft of Auguft 1777. 2 " They ( 55 ) " They think it alfo neccfTary to obfervc, with rcfpc6t to Bri- *' gadier-gencral Stuart, whofe fituation in tlic late tranfadions ivas *' peculiar, that he fliewcd the fame implicit obedience on his part to " the authority of the Company, attended on the parade at the reading " of the Company's commifTion of government to the troops, and was " fludious, by his whole condud', to fhew to the officers and foldiers, *' the proper fenfe which he entertained of the Company's orders." Upon a fubfequcnt occafion, in September 1777, when Mr. Ram, the Coroner at Madras, in confcqucnce of his extraordinary ver- dict already mentioned, applied to the Governor and Council to be affiftcd in apprehending Colonel Stuart, and the other perfons who had by that unjuRifiable vcrdi£l been accufed of the wilful murder of Lord Pigot ; Colonel Stuart, Mr. Stratton, and the other perfons ac- cufed, voluntarily delivered themfelves up to the cuftody of the She- riffs, and declared they were willing and defirous to undergo every fort of trial that the laws of their country could authorize. Another inflance of the fame fpirit of good order and obe- dience on the part of Colonel Stuart, and the other Gentlemen who concurred with him, appeared in the month of January in this prefent year, and is fct forth in three letters which pafTed be- tween them and the Governor and Council, which are printed at the clofe of the Colledion of Authentic Papers lately publillied, relating to the proceedings of the Coroner's Inqueft. As they are too long to be inferted here, I fhall only beg leave, in confirmation of what has been mentioned, to infert a part of the letters to you from the Governor and Council of Madras, received by the Houghton in Auguft laft ; it is in thefe words : " It is ajuftice, however, that we particularly owe to the Members " of the late government, to obfcrve to your Plonours, that their lead- " ing example in Jhewing the mojl implicit Jubmijfton to your orden *' for ejlahlijlnng your neiv adminijlrat'ion, has been of the greate/l ufe " in refloring that harmony and good undcrflanding ive have juft fpoken of. " But ( 56 ) *' But befides the general tenor of their behaviour as individuals, " of which we have been eye-witnefles, we beg leave to refer you to *' the letter figned by General Stuart, Meflrs. Mackay, Palmer, and " Floyer, and to the anfwer which we thought proper to make to thefe *' Gentlemen; who, for the peace of the fettlement, and with a view " to the welfare of your affairs, have agreed to v/ave the agitation of *' quellions at this time, which muft neceffarily have taken our atten- " tion from the immediate bufmefs of your government." Such has been the condud of Colonel Stuart, regulated by tlie moft fincere attachment to good order, and to the profperity of your affairs, and proved by the mon: unqueftionable evidence. As it has been fo fully laid before you, it would be needlefs, and therefore fm- perlinent to make the obvious inferences, by pointing out, and ob- /erving upon the many falfe and injurious reprefentations, which have been circulated to Colonel Stuart's prejudice. ^he redrefs due to Colonel Stuart^ and the modes by which it may be accom- plijhed. Now that the fcene is clofed with refpe£l to the courfe of events at Madras, conneded with, or following the dlfturbances of the month of Auguft 1776, when you are fatisfied, that none of the many pre- didled mifchiefs have happened ; on the contrary, that without confu- fion of any fort, both the temporary government of Mr. Whitehill and his Council, and the completely eflablifhed government of Mr. Rum- bold, and the Council which now manages your affairs at Madras, have taken place, and with the moft complete fubmiffion and obedience to your orders on the part of Colonel Stuart ; may I not be permitted, with a degree of confidence, to maintain, that this is the proper time to take into confideration, all the particulars of his cafe, fo very peculiarly circumftanced. If C 57 ) If it fliall now appear to you, that Colonel Stuart has either not heen guilty of any oflencc, or rather, if it fliall appear, as I flatter myfelf it nuift, upon a difpaffionate review of his conduct, that the perfon expofed to fuch a variety of hardfliips, inftead of meriiing them, has rendered material fervices to the Honourable Company; I trufl:. Gentlemen, that in thefe events, you will diredl the remedies and redrefs bed fuited to the circumftances of the cafe. After having given you the trouble of reading fo much on the' fubjedl of Colonel Stuart's conduct, and entertaining more than a hope, that the true ftate of his cafe has by this time made fome im- preflion on your minds, it may rcafonably be expeded from me to point out, which I fliall do with great fubmiflion, the objeds I have in view by this application. Upon this principle, therefore, I fliall take the liberty of fuggefting to your confideration, the general nature of the redrefs to which Colonel Stuart, or his friends, may think him entitled; and the modes in which, if it fliould meet with your approbation, that redrefs may, without difficulty, be accompliflied. For this purpofe, it feems necefl'ary, that one or other of the two following meafures fliould be adopted. The Jirji is by perfevering in the plan which had already occurred to you, and to which Colonel Stuart mofl cordially agreed, that of having every circumftance of his conduct tried by a Court-martial, on the fpot where the tranfadtions happened ; but then it is extremely material, in the event of your renewing your order for this trial by a Court-martial, that the order be made peremptory and abfolute, without any difcr-etion left in India, to rcfiife that Court-martial ; for it is of the utmofl; importance, to avoid the fame uncertainty and hurtful delays which have already happened to Colonel Stuart in con^ fequence of the firfl: order, fuch delays being cf themfelves, and efpe- cially when attended with fufp.enfiun, to any perfon in his fituation, a ftrong degree of punifliment. I As ( iS ) As the principal difficulty which prevented the Governor and Coun- cil at Madras from granting the Court-martial was, that no fuch trial could be proceeded to with any effed, until it fhould be nrevioufly de- clared, whether the legal government had been vefted in a Majority of Council ; therefore, it feems effentially neceflary, if there can flill be found thofe who think that point not already fufficiently clear, that when the orders are fent out for Colonel Stuart's trial by a Court- martial, your fentiments with regard to this point, refpedling the legal government, fhould accompany the dire£lion for a trial. If this mode of taking Colonel Stuart's cafe into confideration is adopted, which I beg leave to obferve would of all others be the mod acceptable to him, I fubmit to your confideration, whether, at the fame time that you fend out the orders for his trial by a Court-martial, there fliould not be directions fent to fix and afcertain the particular redrefs he is to receive, in the event of his being honourably acquitted; for what is extremely remarkable, there has never hitherto been any provifion made for the cafe even cf his innocence, and much lefs for the fuppofition of his merit; — the only thing in contemplation has been the cafe of guilt, and it becomes the more neceflary that fuch inftrudtioas fhould accompany the order for trial, on account of the immenfe dif- tance of place, and confequently the material and inevitable lofs of time, if Colonel Stuart fhall again be obliged to wait the returns from this country to India, before he receives any beneficial effeds from his innocence, fhould the determination of the Court-martial be in his favour. The Jecond mode of doing juftice to Colonel Stuart, is by your being pleafed to enter upon the examination of his cafe, and to decide upon it from the ample fails now in your pofTeflion, without the interven- tion of any other Court of Enquiry, or of a Court-martial. Any propofition of this kind, at the time when you fent out your former orders, either thofe by Mr. Whitehill, in the month of June, or the fubfequent orders by Mr. Rumbold, in the month of July, ^777* ( 59 ) 1 777, I admit, would have been improper ; bccaufc, at thcfe periods, the knowledge of fads was not fufficiently attained, nor could you then conjeiSture what confcquential mifchicfs had arifcn, or might arife in the interval between the time of arrefting Lord Pigot in Augufl 1 776, and the time at which the new government fliould be eftablidied by the orders then fent out ; neither could you know, and much lefs judge, VN'hat Colonel Stuart's condud had been, or might be, in that interval. But now that all thcfe things are paft, that they are become hiflori- cal fadts, not matters of fpeculation, it has occurred to many im- partial and judicious perfons, that it would be highly proper if you. Gentlemen, would now enter into the confideration of this matter, and that the circumftances of Colonel Stuart's cafe, as well as the fituation of affairs in India, do in reality make it requifite and fuitable, that you fliould, from the full materials in your- pofTeffion, take it upon yourfelves at this time, to decide upon his condud. In the general letter from your Governor and Council at Madras dated 14th of March, 1778, brought home by the Duke of King- flon, paragraph 6th, they tell you, " that the queftions involved in *' General Stuart's cafe, were fuch as no authority in that connfiy could ■ " properly decide." In the gth paragraph of the fame letter, where tliey flate the inutility of a Court of Enquiry, for afcertaining fads upon evidence, they give the following reafon for being of that opinion, " Becaufe in regard to fads, we apprehended that the records of the *' Company were already fufficiently explicit for all the purpofcs re- " quired ; every part of General Stuart's eondud is there fet forth by " his own acknowledgment, or the teftlmony of others, and that ap- " parently in the fulleft and moft circumftantial manner." In paragraph loth, of the fame letter, after mentioning that Lord Pigot was arrefted by an order under the llgnature of George Stratton, Efq; Sir Robert Iletcher, Henry Brooke, Charles Floyer, Archdale Palmer, Francis Jourdain, and George Mackay, Efqrs. they tell you I 2 exprefsly, ( 6o ) cxprefsly, " that General Stuart appears to have done nothing in this «' tranfa^iony independent of that authority ivhlch gave him the or~ " der-'^ — and in the courfe of the fame paragraph, they clearly ex- prefs to you their opinion, that the merits of General Stuart's cafe muft turn upon the legality or illegality of the orders and authority under which he a£led; and that this being a queftion of fo nice and im- portant a nature, they did not think themfelves competent to form a judgment upon it. Are not all thefe very ftrong and powerful reafons for you, Gentle- men, in the diredion of the Eaft India Company's affairs, to relieve the Government and Council at Madras from the difTKuhies which have ■prevented their ading in this bufinefs, and to take upon yourfelves the immediate decifion of it ? It appears from the opinion of the Governor and Council at Madras, and from the circumftances of the cafe itfelf, that it needs not be a niatl;er of long difcuffion, nor attended with much difficulty to decide ivhat relates to Colonel Stuart in this bufinefs. If it be true, as ftated in the letter from the Governor and Council at Madras, that he did nothing independent of the authority under •which he aded, then Colonel Stuart muft unqueftionably be free from blame for his obedience to thefe orders, provided you fhall be of opinion, that the powers of Government were in the Majority of Coun^ cil, who ifTued them. But even though you fhould be of opinion that the legal Government was vefted in the Majority of Council, I beg leave to obferve it might ftill remain a feparate and very different quefion, Whether that Majo- rity aded properly or improperly^ ivifely or impoliticly, in ifluing to Colonel Stuart an order for putting them in pofFefTion of the Fort- houfe, garrifon and fortrefs effort St. George, and for arrefting Lord, Pigot ? But this is a queftion with which Colonel Stuart, vi'ho w^as no Member of Council, who iffued no order, but obeyed only the orders 4 which C 6i ) which others had iirued, can have no earthly concern ; the refponfihl- lity for that meafiire refting totally with the Majority of Council a,nf\ the Commander in Chief. It is, therefore, by no means, as has been generally and erroneoufly fuppofcd, a common caiife between Colonel Stuart and the Majority of Council J their calcs ftand upon a different footing, and may be de- cided upon a different principle. This diftindion betwixt his cafe and that of the Majority, fcems to have occurred to the Governor and Council at Madras, who, in their letter to the Supreme Council in Bengal in Auguft 1777, exprefs themfelves thus : " We think it necefTary to obferve with rcfped to " Brigadier-general Stuart, whofe fituation in the late tranfa£tions ivas *' peculiar,'' £cc. In the proceedings at Madras, Colonel Stuart hlmfelf has very care- fully feparated it; nor will your deciding upon bis cafe^ by itlelf, imply your approbation of the policy and difcretion of the Majority of Council who iffued thofe orders under which Colonel Stuart a- z menCy ( v; ) ment, againft the juft and eftablillaed prefumption, which makes innocence pre- fumed rather than guilt, nntil legal convicStion puts an end to that prefump- tion. I beg your Lordfliip's excufe for giving you the trouble of reading fo long a letter ; but the duty which I owe to an abfent brother, who, at the date of the laft advices from him, was flattering himfelf with the hopes of public marks of approbation inflead of punifhments or marks of difpleafure, made it appear to me unavoidable, and I hope will obtain for me your Lordfhip's pardon for trefpaffing fo much upon your time. I have the honour to be, with great truth and efl:eem, Your Lordfliip's moft faithful and obedient fervanr, (Signed) Andrew Stuart. From Lord Barrington to Mr. Stuart, SIR, Beckett, 1 6th 0(5lober, 1777. T Am to acknowledge the honour of your letter, dated the 3d inftant. The polite candour with which it is written claims, and has my beft thanks. The matter it contains, I think, may be difcufl*ed in converfation better than by letter-, I will therefore, with your permiffion, defer entering into it till we meet. In the mean time you are at liberty to make any ufe which your prudence and brotherly afi^eftion can fugged of the letter I firfl: wrote to you, after the ge- neral promotion of Lieutenant-colonels by Brevet. I am, with great truth and regard, SIR, Your moft obedient humble fervant, (Signed) Barrington. Addrefl"ed thus : 'to Andrew Stuart, Efq; Berkley- Square, London. LETTER TO THE Right Honourable Lord AMHERST, FROM ANDREW STUART, Esq. [ January 3, 1781. ] i MY LORD, TH E duty whlcli I ow'-e to an abfent Brother, whofe fituatioii ftands diftinguifhed by an accumulation of hardfhips, puts me under the necefTity of requefthig your Lordfliip's attention to the un- ufual circumftances of his cafe. It is well known to your Lordfliip, that my Brother Colonel James Stuart had the honor to ferve his Majefty during the courfe of lafl; war ; and that in the various branches of military duty which fell to his fliare in Europe, North America, and the Weft Indies, he conducted himfelf to the fatisfa£tion of his feveral refpedlable Commanders, and a'e fhall be well fatisfied that he remain in India as Second in military command at Fort St. George, during the continuance of General Munro at that Settlement; and that he fucceed to the Chief Command of the troops, on the coaft, upon the firft vacancy that fliall happen In fuch com-, mand, after he fliall have been fo acquitted by a Court-Martial as iiforefaid. LETTER TO THE HONOURABLE The Dire6lors of the Eaft-India Company, FROM ANDREW STUART, Esq. [ March, 1781. } [ I 3 GENTLEMEN, TT7HILE there was any profpedt of doing juftice to Brigadier » ' General Stuart by the means of a regular trial at Madras, I thought it fuitable, on my part, to wait the event of the orders which had been fent to India for that purpofe ; and to abftain from any in- termediate applications inconfiftent with the plan of thofe orders. Bui the repeated refufals which General Stuart has met with of that trial by a Court-Martial which he had fo long folicited, and had fo much reafon to expedl, have brought matters to fuch a crifis, that it is impoffible for me to remain longer filent; and I am perfuaded, when you have pcrufed this Letter, that you will be of the fame opinion. To have fliewn great anxiety, and to have exerted fome degree of activity in behalf of a Brother at the beginning of his fufFerings, and to relinquifii all attention to him when thofe fufferings are not only in- ■creafed, but in danger of being perpetuated^ would be a condufl at once injurious to him, and dlfreputable to myfelf, Thefe are the apologies I have to offer for addrefling you at prefent ; and you may reft aflured, Gentlemen, that the trouble I mean to give you wall terminate with this Letter; and that it may be as little tedious as poflible, I fhall ftudioufly avoid the repetition of any thing which has been already laid before you, either in my former Addrefs in December 1778, or in the Letter which I had lately the honour to prefent to Lord Amherft, any further B than [■ 2 1 than may be neceflliry to conne£l together what has pafled on that fubjedt, and to place before you, in one view, the objed of my former, and of my prefent, appUcation. For that pui-pofe, I beg leave fhortly to remind you, that in my former Letter, I took occafion to fuggeft tWo different methods of redrefs; to the one or the other of which. General Stuart and his friends were of opinion he was at that time entitled. The firft was, a trial by a Court-Martial on the fpot where the tranf- aftions happened. — The fecond was, that you, Gentlemen, fhould enter into the examination of his cafe, and decide upon it your- felves, from the ample materials then in your poffeffion, without the- intervention of any other Court. Of thefe two methods of redrefs. General Stuart himfelf ftrongly and uniformly preferred the trial by a Court-Martial, as a Judicature the bed calculated to decide upon every military offence, and to clear up the conduQ of a military man. The fecond was the mode w^hich I preffed the moft, for reafons explained at large in my Letter of 1778, and becaufe I forefaw, from the nature of the objedions which had been made by the Governor and Council at Madras, to granting the trial in March 1778, that thofe objedions would moft probably be again infifted upon; and that the only confequences of a new order for a trial, would be a new refufal on the part of your Servants at Madras, and a new difappointment to General Stuart. It was your pleafure, not to comply with my requeft, of taking upon yourfelves the examination of his cafe, but you preferred a renewal of the orders for a trial at Madras; and thofe orders were made peremptory and abfolute. Your General Letter in De- cember 1778, contained pofitive orders to the Governor and Council at Madras, forthxvith to make the neceffary reqinfuion to the Com- mander [ 3 ] inander in Chief of tlie King's troops tliere, for aHlmbling a Court- Martial on General Stuart's cafe. But the fame Letter contained alfo a paragraph, direifling the Jioppagc of bis Pay ; to which I beg leave to call your particular at- tention, as that circumflance will appear in the fequel to have in- creafed all the former difficulties on the fubjedt of the propofcd trial. The paragraph relating to the ftoppage of his Pay is in thefe words : *' As we mufl; now take for granted, that a Court-Martial will be " aflembled, without delay, to try Brigadier General Stuart, and that he " will be legally acquitted or condemned by the moft proper tribunal, " wc fliall only add by this opportunity, that whatever may be the " fentence of the Court-Martial to be held on Brigadier General Stuart, *' or on any other military officer, in confequence of the late troubles, " you are to obferve, that the pay and emoluments of every fuch " officer ceafed immediately on his fufpenfion from the fervice ; and " that, even if fentence of acquittal fhall be paffed by the Court-Martial, " no fufpended officer fliall receive any allowance on the Company's " account, for any part of the time which he has remained, or fliall " remain, under fufpenfion, except by the exprefs oi'ders of the Court *' of Dirc£lors, to be firft fignified to you for that purpofe." The paragraph containing tlicfe directions about the ftoppage of Pay was ftrongly objeded to by me, from the moment I received intimation of it, becaufe it feemed to be formed upon an un- ufual and unjuftifiable plan of feverity. The complaints I made on this fubje£l to the Chairman of the Eaft India Company at that time, .received for anfwer, that this was a mere temporary inconvenience, that the circumftances of the cafe required it ; but tliat it would be remedied at a future period, and- with a retrofpefl:. I fliould certainly have objedted to that meafure much more :ilrongly, if I had forefeen, what I confefs I did not forefee, the addi- :tional reafon or pretence which it was likely to afford to the Governor B 2 and [ 4 ] and Council of Madras,, for refufing to General Stuart the wiihed- for trial by a Court-Martial. I fhall now bring under your view, as concifely as poffible, what pafled ■at Madras in confequence of thefe renewed orders for the trial, accom- panied with the dlredions for the ftoppage of pay. General Stuart, as foon as he received notice of the arrival of thefe orders at Madras, prepared immediately for his defence, and ufed every effort to forward your intentions refpedting the trial you- had ordered, and which he fo ardently wifhed for. January 13, With a vIew of expediting the matter, he figned and delivered to ' ■ the Governor and Council,, on the 13th of January 1780, a paper^ containing a ftate of fa£ls admitted by him, in order that thefe ad- mitted fafts might affift the Governor and Council in forming the Charges againft hira, and afford a ground for his being brought to a Court-Martial. During a confiderable time he flattered himfelf, that the Court- Martial would be granted, and that nothing could poffibly prevent Februarys. its taking place. But on the Sth of February 1780, he received a letter, ligned by the Governor Sir Thomas Rumbold, the Commander in Chief Sir HeSlor Munro^ and by Mr. Wbithill and Mr. Smith, Members of the Selecl Committee, acquainting him, " That they " had met feveral days on the fubjed: of the Company's orders " of the 22d of December, 1778, relative to his trial by a Court- *' Martial, and had taken up the whole matter with the view of " executing thei'c orders to the utmofl of their abilities ; but that " they were forry to fay, that fjch difliculties had occurred to them *' as appeared infurmountable," &c. They then proceed to ftate thefe difficulties. — In the firft place,^ they mention the imperfedions, which, as they conceived, ftill exifted in the Cx)mpany's general inftrudions for a trial ; and then they take notice [ 5 ] notice more particularly of tv/o additional difficulties, arlling from the predicament in which he then flood in confequence of the Company's orders. Thefe were his fufpaifioji from the fervice, and the Jloppaga of his pay \ upon which fubjedl there is the following paragraph iu their Letter to General Stuart : " Being wnAcv fufpcnfton from the fervice by the exprefs authority " of the Company, and your Pay d.n<\ Allowances having been likewife " (lopped by the fame authority, we do not conceive you to be, in " any refpedt, within the cognizance of martial law." Upon the 9th of Fe])ruary, General Stuart wrote a full anfwcr to February 9,. the letter he had thus received the preceding evening, and in that anfwer expreffed his aftonifhment and mortification on perceiving their intention of rcfufmg the Court-Martial which he had ib long and fo earneftly folicited. He maintained, " That it was contrary " to military pra6lice, and military juflice, and to the general principles " of equity, to delay, or in effeft to deny him, a fair hearing and " trial before a Court-Martial." He then applied himfelf particularly to anfwer the difficulties that had been fuppofed to exift from the cir- cumftances of \\\%fufpcnf:on^ and of xSxe, Jloppagc of his pay. — In fliorr, after particularly combating every objedlion, he concludes with thefe words : " I defire and infill on my trial taking place, as an adt of " juflice, which the Court of Direftors have exprefsly ordered to ** take place. The materials for the charge are in your polTeffion, and " on record ; or they may be taken from the paper inclofed in my " Letter, dated the 1 3th of January lafl." On the nth of February General Stuart received a fecond Letter February u. from the Governor and Council in thefe words : " S I R, ** We have received your letter of the 9th inflant, and have taken *' the fame into our ferious eonfideration. — We are of opinion, that " the reafoniug contained in that Letter has not removed the dif- " ficulties ■So. [ 6 ] " ficulties we ftated in ours of the 8th hiftant ; and as thefe and other *' embarraffments arifing from the nature of the Company's orders, and " from the opinions given by the Counfel in England upon the queflions " ftated to them, have abfolutely determined us to refer the matter back " again to the Court of Directiors ; — we fliall write to them on the " fubjed by the veffel now going to Suez, which will be difpatched ^' to-morrow evening at fartheft," &c. February 12, Upoa the 1 2th of February, he addreiled another Letter to the Governor and Council, wherein he complains feverely of " the very " great injury done him by their refufing to carry the orders of the " Diredors concerning his trial into immediate execution." Upon the fame date, the Governor and Council, at leaft that part of the Council which forms the Select Committee at Madras, wrote a -very long Letter to the Court of Directors, ftating their reafons for the refuild of the Court-Martial, and juftifying their condud in that xefped. From that Letter, and from the whole of the proceedings, it appears, that their refufal, in the year 1780, of the Court-Martial, was founded on the fame reafons which had induced them to refufe it in the year 1778; with this diiFerencc only, that they availed themfelves of an additional reafon or pretence, from the circumftance of the Diredtors of the Eafl India Company not having taken off General Stuart's fnfpcnfion before they required his trial, and from the further circum- ilance of their orders for his trial having been accompanied with an 4)rder for the Jloppage of his Pay. I have thus related, as briefly as poffible, my folicitations to the Eaft India Company, the orders which they fent to Madras, and the proceedings there in confequence of tliofe orders ; you will novr, ihcrefore, permit me, Gentlemen, to make a few fljort reflcdions [ 7 ] en the means by which General Stuart lias tlius been brouglit into a very fingular and mortifying fituation. Having exerted every nerve to obtain a trial by a Court-Martlal, and having fullained much prejudice from the refufal of it; it muft be allowed that he has reafon to complain of one of thcfe two things, either of the nature of the orders fent to India, or of the difobe- dience of thofe orders on the part of the Company's Servants. If your orders refpedling his trial were either in themfelves imper- fedt, as your Servants aflert, or were accompanied with fuch diredlons concerning \\is fiifpetijton^ and the ^opp^ge of bis Paj, asjuftified thenv in thinking that the trial by a Court-Martial was rendered imprac- ticable ; in fuch a cafe, General Stuart has certainly the ftrongeft' reafon to complain, that, by the infufliciency of the orders, or by the addition of dire£lions which defeated the exprefl'ed intentions of thofe orders, he has been engaged in fruitiefs conteits, and fufferod fur- then delays. If, on the other hand, there w^as not any thing either in the orders themfelves, or in the diredions which accompanied them, that ought to have prevented the Governor and Council at Madras from pro- moting the trial ; in that cafe. General Stuart has the ftrongeft ground of complaint againft thofe who have difobeyed your pofitive orders refpe£ting the trial by a Court-Martial. His friends, therefore, apprehend, that the Eaft India Company are, in juftice, called upon to redrefs, in fuch manner as they are able,, the injuries which they have been the occafion of, either immediately, and in the fu-ft inftance, from the imperfedtion of their orders ; or remotely, by the error and difobedience of their Sei"vant3 : for, in either cafe, it cannot be pretended, that a particle of blame can be imputed to General Stuart; and yet he is, in every refped, the real fufFerer. The confequences of thefe errors, either of the Directors of the Eaft India Company, or their Servants, . have been of effential prejudice to 8 ■ hixa,, [ 8 ] him, becaufe otherwife he muft, long before this time, have either ob- tained his acquittal, and all the benefits annexed to it ; or muft have received fuch a determination upon his cafe, as would have enabled him to take a decided part as to his remaining in India, or returning to Great Britain ; and whether it was eligible for him to continue any longer in the fervice of the Eaft India Company. But while there was a difpofition on your part to give the orders for the trial at Madras, and while there was a declaration alfo on the part of . your Servants there, that they were willing to promote that trial. General Stuart could not abandon his ftation in India, without laying himfelf open to many fufpicions ; and par- ticularly to the difgraceful fufpicion of meaning to evade the proper trial by a Court-Martial upon the Ipot where the tranfadions had hap- pened. In thefe fentiments he was the more confirmed, from the terms of your letter of the 14th of April 1779, to the Governor and ■Council of Madras; for, in that letter, you were pleafed to exprefs the moft honourable approbation of his conduit upon various important occafions ; and upon the fuppofition of his being tried and acquitted, you gave, for the firft time, pofitive orders that he fhould be Second in Command during the continuance of General Munro (who had given notice of his intentions of fpeedily returning to England) ; and that upon his leaving the Settlement, General Stuart fliould be reftored to the Command in Chief of the army, in cafe he had before that time obtained his fentence of acquittal from the Court-Martial. But your Letter went further : — It clearly indicated a wilh, that he fhould remain in India in expe&ation of thefc evc7its. This appears particularly from that part of it where you were pleafed to exprefs yourfelves in the following terms: " Confirmed, as we are, " in our opinion of his (General Stuart's) great experience, and " of his ability to render the mojl ijnportant fervices to the Company in --*' the prefcnt conjunEltire of public affairs^ we think proper to acquaint 7 " you," f 9 1 " you," &c. Independent of all other motives, this change of condudt on your part, and thefe declarations fo flattering to General Stuart, were llrong ties upon any officer of juft and honourable prin- ciples, not to leave India, while there was any profpedt of liis ren- dering to the Company thofe important fervices, which your Letter diflindly marked out, were, in the prcfcnt conjundure of public affairs, expected from him. Without pretending to unfold the motives, or to afcertain the caufes, which have produced the refufal of a trial, and a long feries of mif- fortunes, to General Stuart, I mufl be allowed to obfcrve in general, that this method of proceeding, by keeping every thing in fufpcnfe^ is the moft cruel, and, if it had been defigned, would be the mofl ungenerous, and at the fame time the beft calculated to afperfe, and bring into difrepute, the characters of men who are perfedly inno- cent, or even highly meritorious. When imputations of any fort arc brought to diftind: points, and reduced to a precife charge, the evidence and arguments offered in their fupport may, by ftronger evidence and better arguments, be refuted, and the innocence of the party accufed be clearly vindicated and eftablifhed. But while no mcafure is adopted, that, from the nature of it, mufl \>z filial', while no trial is held, becaufe by that means there can be no <7ry/«V/i7/, every thing is necelTarily left open to miflake and to mifrepre- fentation; and permit me. Gentlemen, to obfer\'e, that the extraordinar}'- condud', and the very unufual proceedings, by which General Stuart has been made to fuffer the confequences of crimes without the guilt of them, and without the poffibility of proving his innocence, cannot but be felt both by himfelf, and by thofe who interefl themfelves in his profperity, as a very high aggravation of his misfortunes, as G giving [ 10 ] giving a keener edge t6 eyery injury, and embittering it by a feverity \vhich is fcarce fupportable. It is not from a difpofition to arraign the condu£l of individuals, or any defcription of men, that I have endeavoured to excite your atten- tion to the hardfhips fuftained by General Stuart, from the cruel and unexampled ftate of fufpence in which he has been held for many years. — Complaints of vv^hat is paft, and cannot be recalled, M'ould be ufelefs and invidious, unlefs they had in view the regulation of fome future proceedings. — It is for that purpofe only, that I have folicited your attention to the confequences of your former orders ; and my objedl in mentioning what he has already fuffered, is mere- ly that you may be induced, upon juft grounds, to put a period to thofe fufferings, by taking upon yourfelves the examination of his cafe, and by granting fuch redrefs as fhall appear to you the moft fuitablefor him, and at the fame time the beft calculated for the in- terefts of the Eaft India Company. The objeds of your deliberation are reduced, at prefent, withia much narrower limits than they were in December 1 778 ; there is now no option left, and you mufl take upon yourfelves the decifion of this matter : for all hopes of a trial upon this cafe, by a Court- Martial in India, are now at an end. The proofs which I fhall beg leave to fubmit to your confideration, in fupport of this affertion, take their rife partly from the nature of the objedlions which have been already made by your Servants in India, and partly from fome additional and very ftrong objedions, which, if the matter was to be again fent to India, would infallibly be made in bar of any military trial in this cafe, on account of the dij- tance of time fmce the date of the fuppofed offence. S When [ " ] When your Servants at Madras refufed the Court of Inquiry, and the Court-Martial, in the year 1 778, it was not a hafty decifion, which further rcfledion might probably over-rule, but the rcfult of fre- quent meetings, and of much deliberation on the fu])je6l ; and the principal reafons given by the Governor and Council, for that rcfu- fal, were founded on a pofitive opinion, that General Stuart had not been guilty of any military offence^ or of any traiifgrejfton agaitrjl the Articles of War. In proof of this, you will permit me to appeal to the opinion given upon that occafion by the Commander in Chief, General Munro, who, on account of his knowledge in military matters, had been re- quefted, by the Members of the Council, to take into his confideration the Company's orders refpedting General Stuart. In confequence of I 7"'3. this requeft, he firft delivered in to the Board his opinion in writing, Feb. 23d. in relation to the nature of Coar/j- ^///yw; J ; and afterwards he gave Feb. 24th. in an additional paper, containing his anfwers to the qucftions which had been put to him by the Prefident, Mr. Rumbold. Thefe qucftions and anfwers were as follows : ilucry \Ji. " Whether or no fuch an Inquiry^ as diredted by " the Company, can, from the nature and tendency of " a Court of Inquiry^ be ordered upon Brigadier General " Stuart?" yhifwer. " It is my opinion, that no fuch Inquiry^ as direded " by the Company, can be ordered upon Brigadier General " Stuart, as will more fully appear from the opinion I have " already given relative to the intention of ordering Courts *' of Inquiry^ idly. " Whether or no a charge againft a military ofEcer " mufl: not be grounded on the infringement of military " law ?" C 2 Anfwcr. [ 12 1 Anfuaer. " It Is my opinion, that any charge againft a military " officer, muft be grounded upon the infringement, or fup- " pcfed infringement, of fome article of war, if to be tried " by military law." 3^/j'. " Whether or no Brigadier General Stuart, arrefting the " perfon of George Lord Pigot, then Prefident and Go- *' vernor of Fort St. George, by a fpecial licence from *' George Strattoft^ Efq; Sir Robert Fletcher^ Henry Brooke^ " Charles Floyer, Archdale Palmer^ Francis 'Joiirdain, and *' George Mackie^ Ffqrs; then part of the Council of Fort *' St. George, is an offence that comes under any one of the " articles in the Articles of War, intitled, " Rules and Articles " for the better Government of the Officers and Soldiers in " the Service of the United Company of Merchants of *' England trading to the Eaft Indies ?" Anfwer. " It is my opinion, that Brigadier General Stuart having " arretted the perfon of George Lord Pigot, out of the gar- *' rifon of Fort St. George, is not an offence that comes under " any one article in the Articles of JVar, intitled, " Rules " and Articles for the better Government," &c. as above. (Signed) Hector Mukro. In this opinion delivered by General Munro all the Members of the Board concurred, and the matter was referred back to the Court of Directors in March 1778. When the renewed orders, for the trial, were und& confideration at Madras in the year 1780, General Munro and the other Members of the Council continued in the fentiments they had formerly declared ; and they were furnifhed with an additional reafon for not promoting the trial, from the circumftance of General Stuart's fufpcnfion being continued^ and of his pay being Jlopt, If [ »3 ] If the matter were to be fcnt back to Madras a third time, what poflible reafon can there be to expcdl a change of fentiments amongft your Servants there ? and particuhirly, what reafon can there be to fuppofe that General Munro, who is a Member of the Council, would not continue of the fame opinion with that which he had formerly declared ? for I have no doubt that it was his real opinion ; neither have I any occafion, in order to maintain what I contend for, to contravert thi fads or the principles on which that opinion was founded^ I mufl now beg leave to diredl your attention to an additional objeElion^ to which I have already alluded, and which, if the cafe were to be fent again to India for trial, would infallibly occur to your fervants there as a bar to any military trial ; and the obje£tion is this: — That the period within which militaiy men are liable to be tried by military law, is actually expired. In the Muiiny Act palled annually in England for regulating the army, and which is declared to extend to all officers and foldiers in his Majcfty's fervice, within Great Britain, or in any of his Majejlys dominio7is beyond the feas^ the limitation of the time for trying military offences is exprefled in the 76th claufe in thefe words ; " Provided always. That no perfon fhall be liable to be tried and " punifhed for any offence againft any of the faid Adls, w^hich fliall " appear to have been committed more than three years before the ^' ijjiiing the coynwijjion or warrant for fuch trial, except only for the " offence of defertion." From the above claufe it is perfectly clear, that no officer in his Ma- jrfys fervice, either in Great Britain, in India, or in the mofl diftant parts of his Majefty's dominions, can be tried by a Court-Martial for any of- fence committed three years before the date of the warrant for fuch trial. In [ H ] In the year 1754, an A^ pafled la the Brltlfli Parliament, for the punifhing mutiny and defertion in tbcfervice of the Eqft India Company.-— The claufes of that Mutiny Adx are in general formed precifely upon the plan of the claufes in the Britifh Mutiny Law; but the Britifli Mu- tiny Acl:, which confifts of eighty-three different claufes, fpecifies a much greater variety of cafes than the Mutiny Law refpedling the Eaft India Company's forces, which confifts only of thirteen claufes. When, therefore, any military offences are committed in India, which have not been particularly fpecified and provided for by their military law, but which are fpecified and provided for in the Britifh Mutiny Law; in fuch cafes, Courts- Martial in India have thought themfelves bound by, and have adopted the diredions and provifoes of the Britifh Mutiny Law, fo as to make the condition of an officer and a foldler in India as fimilar as pofTible to the condition of officers and foldiers in Great Britain, or in other parts of the Britifh dominions. The Members upon a Court-Martlal in India, hold themfelves the -more bound to obferve this rule, on account of the terms of the oath taken by them upon the trial; in which oath, after mentioning the Arti- cles of War and the Mutiny Lav*^, relating to tlie troops of the Eafl India Company, there is this claufe : " And if any doubt fhall arife *' which is not explained by the fiiid Articles, or Afl: of Parlia- *' ment [I will duly adminifter juftice] according' to my confcience, the " heft of my underfianding^ euid the cvjiom of nvar in the like cafe s^ One of the articles, not fpecially provided for in the fhort Mu- tiny Law for the Eaft India Company's troops, is that which relates to the limitation of time, after which oflicers and foldiers are not liable to be tried for military offences ; but according to the heft iiifor- mation that I have been able to colledt on this fubje£l, it has been underftood in India, that in a cafe of this nature, it was the duty of the Members of a Court-Martial to obferve the fame rule that is laid down by the 76th claufe above recited of the Britifl; [ 15 3 Brltlflx Mutiny A£l:, which declared that no officer or foldlcr is liable to be tried and puniflied for offences committed more than three years before the ifliiing the comm'tjjion or warrant for fuch trial, except only for the offence of defertion. The application of tliis to General Stuart's cafe is obvious. — There has never to this moment been any commijfion or warrant iffued for his trial by a Court-Martial ; for the Governor and Council at Madras, who in the year 177S had the power of iffuing that warrant, refufed it ; and, in the year 1780, they refufed to make the rcquifition to the officer who at that time had the power of granting the warrant for the Court-Martial. — More than four years are already elapfed fmce the date of the offence imputed to General Stuart ; confequently, if any appli- cation were now to be made in India for a Court-Martial on his cafe, this circumftance of the d'ljlance of time ^ fmce the date of the fuppofed offence, would of itfelf prevent the trial. Even if there were doubts both as to the point of law, and as to the prayur/u/. K ''Ou/rfH ' t ///^ar/<^ ^S^, Q O o ^ L ^v t//y^l//k ^7nMi / 'J'-' o4ucro ^?^f' Jv C7ff ^^^ *y^yGr^^yS^t^ cr i^occ/z^ f^^^cxyz/fco C^/^^ere^j'-z^^j^v /cr^/ iyc?0, u-f^tc/ //ici/ Me'A^^^£/ erf Me > /j^cr^ ^eA£e/zj>f^^ ^o J£^i^ a/:/ rc^'i^^ tAnja/rxy^ c^L^^y:f Cf^ /^Act-^ tre^xc/ . .(^^■^yzc/e^ -ocrA^'-cAy A&/£ct^&^^ A^^^^J'^ /Ac^2Jl jcexy>7y S-A-^i^ /ije^ i^'^^c^/:^ CtJi'Cr^ 0^9-1 £^)£JiytcA e ^qr^^e^iyy/otycA, 4^oc/A Of-7 AAe(^J)£jrryrA,,tfiUt:^^^cc-Ao/i^ 'C^l ^^ ^.So^^^j^f^rrocf^^^'i^^i^i^ '^'vAUeAc^^t.o^i^i AAc^ %OG^f\, Ae , l/^.f^^ e^t:^ A f AA^^-cc^ caAo a.'f /^AccA A{>^n e>> Ataaf AAk'J 6^£t,'^i A (?yvA(^ of)^Ac^^ e A ^f'/ ^ ^yo^^^ €AuJ rCJZ^ '«e^•e^A7.'" ! iyyo^ ^o^^/^t^A i/rcc^^t^iA ^ca^-f-z-e crjc-azx/t^e ^ Wf>t'y7-f^yfa!>^icAe.-i. ^s^t (£>Ai^eA CocAA AAej ^oi>fiA of (A^tAaa c/-^^e/i^^A^eyia:Ac4^ AAf (fi<:?f■ — — -> Of'i^cfi^-^ ^//(Ay CU?o/yj0r CoA^AA/AA/J^^ Jc^^ti^ic/^c^"^ {^i-c^LJ t/A^At^ y^r I AJe/iA/^AoT^^ AA^oco'Ayi tTy^<7/-ze^^(?!<^ hoc'ty/— Azr /txAc aJi(X^Ac£^ co AAec Ae3 A.O j^-7 AAm} t(^ccai(A^ a^f^c6^0'->^y^^-(^^cc4cO'7'Ty* oA /Ao *.^ t^7 , , cc7/trfcpr^<.e^ce^' oA^ey> t^^^ (>^T?) 4o/^',cAA a:/^^adz^^ i^'czAcc/A/^e /Jf af ^ iA^Ay>cf f^y^/ Ci^eyieAAeaVeW Ao e^c/f^^J^ A/te Ax'aA^^ / 0'/ifi^^orA^, n/c^e.^. ^ £^7 e/yy.e^ f7^ .y '*' -H^^f ^T'^^ct^ e.4^^i^^^eJi^-ej^ ccy-? erf r/^'*^ Q'/>i S/ of 0^c/rt^^a^^,j iyiPO Ac ■ ^e ce.<^c^ ^^'^ I /f^/«5?^<-^ y^^ ^ a/to/ /^cry /f^ c-refa^e^ //iey (*/eo<^r(j|^^^H^(rA /v*-/ /i^x-ry/f c-^■<■£x^y /^/u^-cy /ne.fP'y-7yi^^^a'r.y3!>/'T£/c4^^fy}^fyi,-^/Ajy*:fyz-y^ '^ 0:4/ cA^^yyz^ Ar2 *'>-t(;^tAcy A^ ^y:/'Azy Ae^y^ ^ Oi /Acf-/ c/ Aiyy^ ^y*ie^ii tJ^^J ce ^ ^jC^^^ ''Z ^c/iA^ <^}fA?r ^At^yi^t^ r \ *-'^/y:/c<7/^y Ac aA^2> KyVy-yr-Ae^^ t^ l^J£y/, AAtxA eY/r-()-^ y?c<'-;^?^»^e//^^^^eS!l, yA^ • ,. -J JA;i>r*^' cffAo^^ra/ i^ ^^:.y f^Ady^^^Ay i/ i/f'(^y<' ^^oc^ yyr cc^^^eS AcJ \ // // /la^t/ a^ ^^1:^z4ryfW -4^ r.'0'i:.^Ae-^ ^rfiC'*/ C^^g^^^^ff ^CtW a-a:ct^ ^ « ^«,^ ('c^^ ^^i^ /hj' /^z^' 'rrJo^*^,cr /^«/ il^bcJ' fto-?^^ ; ^^ (yAAe^.y /Act A Aix f^UarA-/ Aocc/e AAc^ A^Jt^ajj^jfj /^?' /A^ ^n-t^c^A e.yt7i iJi^<^:x^j^ /AtxA A/le ^ d^i^'ccj^ tj^'/ueoc Aad(^ Lka/e..^c/b ^^ /^^-^^s^y^^^*^ ^^ t/oc^x^n^^^AAy c'o'A^-c.^'Ac^ iy e/:c^7e.iu!^l i/Ac^ootJ^ a/c AfaB^aJ ; ^a^^yC<^y^^ AAe^ i^^^Ae4!CCJ(TAAAs- ^'4ai^t c/eyTC>iAt:c>7^y of i^^ActA ^ctAA ^y^^.^^^ ^/o-i ^:tt^c.d crjfr*j^z^AAAjLO ^ , // c-^^^i/^^^^. 0^xcrocc//c^2 6^.t^a^a:I'/c^^4^'ifA^^^, />?^^^^.y^« y<^-'^«>^ A AAtc^A /^^ A^ 0/ c/ ^/ ^^^y ^* /Au^^/mj, a*/ (p€x AAdc>Ard/^^ /A^& ' "V^ t/^-t-i^A^^t ^jz > -urh^ c A ci/Aect/'.>^ coatfaA/'i^cyucd S^ f A-^1 Ao Uiy cey9~ A^io/ty}^ oA ^Atf /A • of lyVy-zi^/ ^Tyy'^ Uoc-cffyiV^ OcAyofiA^cc-^ Oi^iytof ^/ • (/!)f /Jtyf-?'^^»e^ tVd^O cAfcZmi^ttyA?^ AYa^e^ a- A lAAcae^. ^^ of ^'ox4 ^i>Je^, r>f //i-Ot/e t/y.' e cf^c'^m^f/ /Ae c^//ci'i^c^2.z(7f /A.C t^^/e/i-L/ /cfAcit , /^crY ^ fntj! ^ *| (i<^ CoefCor-i/ cr fie 1 //f't<^''^^c<->c>: ^ ? «^<=tf ***-«// AAc^^oero) o^ ex aroo^t^Tty^ S^ t7/^c>/xc( t/Aio t^trAyA-^'t^tcAe^ t^ eA AA-iP- y Cc^xo-pe'^^ArAe Acrx/j^/&t,2-A of AA^c/t/.d' -'^ \ 6ixtfeX/fiycrjl'/ia^Ctfi^ i-y*^^ o i2[ c^f^ryf to^j ccrA^'cA e^t^^f A^/^ i^^ tAoce<^.gy*^-eeJ « \ ^i>yt<^ /^^er/e£Aya<^ c/Ac Aexd j-zexifC.^f^ t^/-/ ■^^cx.a^AJg£^i c ,. ViufA'^^'^^^^^ ^^^*"^^ ^^ ^><^ e^t^ oA ^^ t^^ a:A ,^ (X^^a^Jtyz.A^^cx^^^'crX' ^ J,\-/fe^i^^^^*:^;rvj.i^^^/^ ^^^^-.a^^-^^ (%t'ct/a^ c^' A^i. ^^AA^je^z^. / ' // ^ ■ ^. '^ / r f i'i^/ Hi^^ y^t.<'>/ /^^t^^f^fJ'/f a^^7^/ /r^y-c£A Oi-r A/tf y/iCr^/^-£c^ -Ucx^ ^i^ee* M^ /T^^ocAfa^/cTf A<:^ 6^ '(X.£ cz^c^ MeJ 0^ej&x /u^-'»t^y/^^ t/id iy:f^e'2^i^A^ or /Ac ^cy»'i-iyic>c^L^e-' /Aie(W^'^rr^/e^ A'oe^^^ a^o c^.^ /A^^a^t^cxA^ £^7 AAe j^d^i-rtyi^^ry Z?/^^ ■ --.■ j -^-^■*^ie> c/y'j^ex^y^ £'/^7(f ^^'^ ^^^^^'-^^'^^f^^^^J / ^^t-i^/cif-t^ ijycc^p-*o^yf e7ij'^^y/-t'0pf. \ i^^-fy^i^/a f7-^ /o //re {9/^ef A^' -Ace^j/ yf^-,of a/js' {^ cCp /9ey.y /A'? ^^rd^-^/ c/or^/ -^'^ ' c' ^ /> y • / ■ /AT.e<£^^^ y^e^£y/e^/Act/^'a.^ra-tct^ c— — \ 4:f''t£/^^4:3^tr'ii-!'_.. {i>c>^■^^/'■7/ x.'Tf'^/j^^fy^'zyx-f^t ^^c/ ■ • / Y.f-' I e^1re*,t i^^e ary-^t/^fJeo/ /7i/>'i./<:'c)( /c^!(y >^ /V^tr/ '^^ a^^^^ i?c>^ AAc<^ / A^k'^ tif ^^JecAef> AAe /(/v.&'A/ofJ^i/tty^yio' ty/^'^cr/A^ /o cUar^cx^ AA'cj^ > t'Ai^^e AA-Zi^i^yo */Ai:c.oc? A^toi^/i^ fz^t.' ^i/'?-?iCceA%^cx.^^^/^o Aff lAAa/ce/ cc-^ ^"A JO' ///->/ a^tyfAtJ^. Am /i^^ t/tauy C3e>p-, tp^p , &f'^io//y/j:;-jc:y^A^ ^ p>7 '-^cr./y^p7e A<' j^ AAoe^f £yocx^ c-cy^z ^ t-j-j^f-z.^c;^ Acf A<'z"> '<-.'^^/<*wt^'^<5*^ ' f/7 ycfA^ /f^^^ '/ <^/^^ cloc^Ti:///fcf ^Aa AAcc AAlt:cxifA/re) t-f'/ uA/' ti't^/j ic Aoc7 Gr,/e^ z^^yv^cr <^ / Af£*<^r Oe^e^^. Y,^ / 1 z^Ce^i ,? // ^Af ^ '^'^^■^^^^■'' ^/ ^'^ trf>^yy7yAeA/o^ytyoAAAig Ah'/or^' cc^-i^ /AfCfe^rAe^rc^ oA^Arrff-of*'^y i^ji^f'A Or^eij o^ /AiayA tA%^\.A- ^AokActC^ f^e x/t'qr /J {' fcac^y At^Of-p^ m.e (Aot^e^zA crAiA'i'f-e^i^Acn.^ 'cA^^t^oar/xe-eyfA Ao AA^<:ar^>e^AnA^ /^rc^Cctj \ /t<^^i:>i'frjicy /o /Ac t^/cj//y/^^j'(r ^t7fi^ei:^>y£>c(y-j./ t^/i4 (>j^ /t£ //o^ So^^tyt/ crAc^i^t?c/f7/^ f'A or^e'^^ A^cc^<- ■ ^if-e ^^yj ''' **^' ^ 'At^ cyi^i?-f^/ tr -/ //Ay t*j/ c^ n/Z/vf vat-/ Ae^i ect<.^^^/^^/ A/t^( ^ (^/^OJ-^AA-^/ir^ /^^^ /^^r-v/ o/ //g 0<.e^:/ of /A^i iS'^^^cx Cy c^ / ^Ac^c^^^ ^ Ao r^^r^ j /// ?^' // o/h//rSi', Acy c/^cf cycr/^ 0^^^-^^ ^ ^/^i^Af/cA c /l ^ <^e^^} e^^c^c^fc ^ /Ac A^^t^'o^- A<^Aca(?^ry AA^/^^i'^Uf/Aco <^£^r^d AAcc ^^A offA-^ i4,,y^-^..'^ i^/c^c^^-^iA^ /^aA. (A>^c^j,^<^^ ^/<9^- r< y-^yoi J ^O0cf'tJ^^i£X>f^Ay^ /ycr^y' ^A^j^'^ ^Me^if /Cr/yo^< ^<.'ASAey^-At^^^^> rtA A^c iy^j^y>z /^A^A//^cr A ^yc^^^ Ozc/e^ ^ y^/rr/y^/^^^.//47/>W>; ^^/ AA'ClJccA^::^/''^'-^ 7 . o^:^ c^i'i^ <- > A^^r/.' Oz^c^j AA^A A/i^---. 0iAfifi.' £^Ar/cAi /^ ^e^'^*/^^y^^ AAe tAr.*^^iJcrA±^nrc^y ircc^^^ycC^ /o .9^r'/ t>'/utA^ S . r y»/ i^ /ter/OT: ^Cf^ie^c^/ t^/f^ct^ / /^crt^ Oetr/-/ /i^ec/ ^} 7 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 't'frC iD I, -^rDus book is DUE on the last date stamped below BJK. OCT Z 3 \m