tural and neceffary produce, as operating in their peculiar fyftem of commerce.

These interesting topics were liberally and frequently agitated, not only in private or felect companies, and among friends, but in all the periodical mifcellanies of the times, and in multitudes of other temporary publications. The dispute was of peculiar importance, more especially to the mercantile part of the community. The anxieties, the industry, and the heat of both parties, increafed as the next quarterly meeting approached. It was at the fame time whifpered by great confidence, that government intended to interfere.And a few days before the Michaelmas General Court of 1766, the minifter actually fent a meffage to the Directors. It was then read from the chair to the proprietors at large. The message was from the first lord of the treafury, in thefe words:"As the affairs of the Eaft-India Company had "been mentioned in Parliament last feffion, it

was very probable they might be taken into "confideration again; therefore, from the regard "he had for the welfare of the Company, and that they might have time to prepare their papers for "that occafion, he informed them, that the par"liament would meet fome time in November."

Letters were at the fame time read, from Lord Clive, and the fecret committee at Bengal, which greatly exceeded all former accounts of the Company's opulence, the profperity of its trade, and the permanent bafis on which its interefts were establifhed. The Directors, notwithstanding, oppo

fed

fed an increase in the dividend. It was urged with accumulated force by the proprietors. A ballot was demanded, and a divifion for a day or two evaded. But another general court being called, the question was put, and the dividend to take place from the enfuing Christmas increased, by a prodigious majority, from fix to ten per cent.

On the meeting of Parliament [Nov. 25, 1766] the menaces of the minifter were realized. The affairs of the Company were fubjected to the cognizance of a committee appointed by the Houfe. It was ordered in a few days, and after a very interefting debate, that copies of the Company's charters, their grants from the native princes, their treaties, their letters and correfpondence to and from their fervants in India, the ftate of their revenues in Bengal, Bahar and Oriffa, and other places, fhould all be laid on the table, with an account of all expences incurred by government on the Company's account, whether in the naval, military, or whatever other departments. This order was followed with another, that these papers be printed for the ufe of the members, *

The Court of Directors immediately presented a petition to parliament, in oppofition to a measure which they fhewed would be attended with irreparable mischief to the Company. A motion was confequently made to discharge the former order. A debate enfued, but it was at laft agreed, that the private correfpondence fhould not be printed.

* Debret's Parliamentary Regifter for 1766.

F 24

On

On this occafion, the interefting point of territorial right, in confequence of the Company's charter, was warmly and ably debated. The arguments on both fides appeared feparately fo unanfwerable, and the queftion involved so many points of the greatest conftitutional importance, that the House feemed averfe to a decifion. The general opinion was against a trial of fuch a right, in fuch a place; and that an amicable agreement with the Company was the more eligible measure.

Adminiftration was at this time in too much diftraction to inveftigate or fettle a fubject of fuch magnitude. By their declining to take any part in the negociation out of Parliament, a petition, con taining two propofals, was prefented [May 20].

It was propofed that government should grant the Company fome advantages from the inland duties on teas; a drawback on the export of them to Ireland and the colonies; and others on raw filk, calicoes, muflins, the recruiting fervice, and military ftores. After deducting 400,000l. a year in lieu of their former profits, the Company were to divide equally with government all the net produce of the remaining revenues and trade, provided charges were not included, and the Company's property, in the new acquifitions, continued for three years. Or it was propofed, that the Company, on the fame terms, fhould continue the fpecific fum of 400,000l. a year, for three years, by half-yearly payments, and indemnify the public for any lofs the revenue might fuffer, by granting the adyantages required in the tea-trade, if the confump

tion of it, taken on an average of five years, did hot answer that end.

These laft proposals were accepted by the House with only this difference, that the agreement was limited to two, instead of three years. A bill was therefore brought in [June 12, 1767], and adopted by the legiflature, for carrying the meafure into immediate effect *.

Another meffage from the minifter had been read at the general court, reftricting the increase of the dividend, and recommending to the Company to admit no farther augmentation till their affairs were more fully inveftigated. This meafure not producing the intended alteration, two bills were framed and brought forward, one for regulating the qualifications for voters in trading companies, and one for further regulating the dividends of the, Eaft-India Company.

The last of these actually refcinded the act of the Company, and tied them down from raifing their dividends above ten per cent. till next meeting of Parliament. This met with great oppofition. All the former arguments were renewed and urged with peculiar ardour and obftinacy. The Company petitioned against it without effect, and even offered, though to no better purpofe, that, to defeat a bill thus hoftile to their privileges, they' would voluntarily bind themfelves from any additional increase of their dividend during the whole term of their agreement.

Debet's Parliamentary Regifter for 1767.

F 3

The

The abettors of the bill refted its defence for the moft part on their anxiety to prevent a fluctuation of ftock, and to preferve the credit of the Company inviolate. The public funds might be affected and kept down, and by that means the national debt would be increased, rather than diminifhed. This measure would at the fame time defeat that fpirit of fpeculation and gambling which might otherwise be expected. It would alfo guard the revenue of the Company's territorial acquifitions against encroachments fo effectually, that the claim of the public might not be injured, till the right of thefe acquifitions fhould be finally fettled.

The bill was charged by oppofition with injustice and violence. They denied that any fluctuation could take place, or that the credit of the Company could be injured by the proprietors apportioning their dividends to the fituation of their affairs. The propofal made by the Company anfwered all the purpofes for which the bill was intended. It was abfurd, that the owners of the capital fhould not be able to divide 80,000l. among themselves, on a trade which afforded government 400,000l. It was altogether without example in the annals of a free country, that the legislature fhould interpofe a controul over the dividend of a trading Company, legally voted, and declared by thofe to whom the power of doing it was entrusted, and to whom there was no ground to impute an abuse of that power. They had lent their money to the public upon the exprefs condition of using their difcretion in their dividends, provided their effects undivided continued equal to their debts.

It