than one hundred chests were sent off. This he stated from the accounts themselves. Mr. Hume replied that it would remain between him and the honorable director to decide that point. For his own part he was ready to prove the contrary. If the honorable director had seen any account upon the subject, so had he (Mr. H.) himself; and from that account he would state positively, as a matter of fact, that the price was not given in until two thousand half chests were sent out. He was willing, however to take the assertion of the honorable director for the present as true, and even upon his own statement it appeared that one hundred chests had been sent off before the price was ascer tained. With this admission of an instance, which he was afraid was only a part of a general practice before them, he intreated the court to agree to the proposed by-law, for they were to look at it, not as any thing which the court of directors wished to oppose, but as a thing which they would be most anxious to adopt and carry into execution. He had no doubt that the court of directors, as far as they were concerned, entertained a sincere desire to execute with fidelity the trust reposed in them: if so, then they need not be afraid of the operation of this law; for it was only calling upon them to see that the committee of buying and selling fairly reported to their court how they executed their contracts, and how they expended the Company's money. The sole object of the law being to prevent the directors from being left in ignorance of the contracts, for which the Company were liable, of the manner in which their bargains were made. The necessity of such a regulation was obvious when the result of this wine transaction was known for after calculating the interest of money and incidental expenses, and added to this the dead loss upon the sale, it would be found that the Company had not received in return more than £35,000, whilst the adventure itself amounted to £80,000, for the ordinary expences of the transaction, added to the prime cost of the wine. Therefore, with this most extraordinary transaction in proof before the court, no good man present could stand up to oppose a law, the object of which was to guard the Company from the loss incident to speculations carried on upon such an improvident principle. He held in his hand the list of those gentlemen who in the year 1814 formed the buying and selling committee; and it was to be remarked that committee consisted of sailors and soldiers, who knew nothing of commerce. The court had a right to expect that the directors, in acting for the Company, would act in the same manner as they would for themselves therefore he held that this, and many other transactions of the court of directors shewed that as trustees of the Company's funds entrusted to their care they did not act in the same manner that they would have acted towards their own funds. In giving his vote to any person placed within that bar, he expected that every individual undertaking that trust reposed in him, to manage the money entrusted to his care, would act with as much caution and prudence as if the money belonged to himself. (Hear! hear!) He was glad to hear the cheers of honorable members, because it shewed their sense, at least, of what ought to be done. He must consider that the attempt to deprive the servants of the Company of those little advantages which had been always allowed them, was a paltry pettyfogging transaction; because the object evidently was to appropriate to themselves that miserable advantage which ought to belong to those persons who had possessed it in all times. But in these shortsighted views of advantage, the authors of the speculation had been totally defeated; for instead of consulting the wants of the market and adapting the supply to the consumption, they at once determined to send out four thousand half chests of claret, hap hazard, without considering how it would affect the interests of the servants who had before enjoyed this trade, or considering what would be the result to the Company. Having said thus much on this transaction, he would not detain the court with entering into all the morti. fying details connected with it; but he did intreat them for their own honour, and for the interests of the Company, to to embrace the present opportunity of compelling the directors to be a little more attentive than they had been to these transactions, and to impose upon them the necessity of considering that they were appointed to take care of the interests of the Company, and that they were bound to look after those interests with the same anxiety that they would their own. He had too much reason to fear that the directors did not feel that interest in the concerns of the Company that they did in their own; for he had now to state, with the deepest regret, that he had heard, within the last forty-eight hours, that so far from the directors confining themselves to the payment of £26 per ton for their shipping, at a time when tonnage might be procured at £12 and £14, and perhaps at somewhat less, they had just undertaken, within the last few days, to give £28 per ton to some individuals, notwithstanding the distinct proposition agreed upon at the last court, that the freight to be paid to any person, under any circumstances, should not exceed £26 per ton. He would venture to say, as he had on a former occasion, that if the directors were to look for freight at the price of the day, they could obtain it to any amount at from £12 to £15 per ton. This was a fact which he stated with the greatest confidence. But what was the answer made him at the last court by an honorable director now present (Mr. Grant), when he urged this decisive objection to the ruinous system which the Company were pursuing? Why, the reply made by the hon. director was, It What would you do? Would you ruin £3,000,000 of property belonging to these ship-owners?" To this he (Mr.H.) would reply, that so far from ruining the shipowners, his object would be to prevent those who, in fact, had the arms in their hands, from ruining the Company. The object was not to rain, but to create the capital of the ship owners. Within the last eight months he, who was not desirous of destroying the capital of that body of men, had been a party to a system of taking up six new ships for six voyages, at the rate of £26 or £28 per ton. Was this ruining the capital of the ship-owners? On the contrary, was it not creating new capital for persons who had never tendered their ships before?" therefore, so far from meeting the views (as was pretended) of the old ship-owners, it was in fact entering into new contracts of the like injurious tendency. was entailing upon the Company £26 per ton for the freight of their goods for twelve years to come, and this at a time when they might have got freight of the same quality from £16 to £18 per ton. Undoubtedly, it was but justice to say, that the system of buying by contract had been carried on here under the superintendance of gentlemen, under circumstances highly advantageous to the Company; and he believed that, notwithstanding all that had been said against that system, it would appear that the practice of buying by contract had enabled the Company to purchase their stores at a rate cheaper by twenty per cent than they could by any other means. But after the melancholy experience which the court had had in the instance to which he had before alluded, he hoped the court would see the advantage of profiting by an untoward example, and that they would relieve themselves from the peril of utter ruin by placing such checks upon the conduct of the directors as would prevent the recurrence of the like misfortune. But above all, he intreated the court of directors to feel and act in the concerns of the Company as if they were their own; because he was quite persuaded, that unless they were animated by that determination, it would be impossible for the Company to meet and overcome those difficulties which they had on all sides to encounter. If it was really the wish of the court of directors to act as had been stated, like all other merchants, he hoped they would not op pose this by-law, which was the first step towards attaining the execution of that principle; and on that ground he hoped that no further opposition would be made to the wholesome regulation proposed. Mr. Elphinstone wished that the court would not take for granted all that had been stated by the hon. gentleman who spoke last, as if it was founded in fact. The hon. gentleman had either fallen into wilful errors upon this subject, or he had stated circumstances which he knew could not be proved by evidence. He would demonstrate that there was not a shadow of foundation, in fact, for the circumstances which he had detailed. It was true he was not able to meet the hon. gentleman in talking, but he was ready to meet him at a table with pen, ink and paper, and prove to the satisfaction of every one, by the strongest evidence, that what the hon. gentleman had brought forward as facts were without the least foundation. The more the hon. gentleman investigated the subject of which he' professed to be the historian, the more he would find that he was bottomed in fallacy and error; for he had not added one circumstance to his story which was not capable of being directly negatived by proof. There was not, he believed, a subject more thoroughly investigated and examined into than that which the hon. gentleman had made the theme of his attack upon the court of directors. The hon. gentleman might garble facts, and might make long oratorical speeches; but he defied him to read a single historical extract in support of that which he had contended for. Now, with respect to the claret transaction, the hon. gentleman supposed it to have originated with the committee of buying and selling; but the fact was, that it originated in the court of directors, with whom all the responsibility of it rested. The hon. gentleman' had contended that that transaction was injurious to the Company; but he would contend that at the time it was entered into it appeared the most promising for the interests of the Company that could then have been adopted. But as to the hon. gentleman's statement of the mode in which the wine was sent out, it was totally erroneous; the fact was, that there were about a hundred chests shipped off in the first instance, before the price was known; and there was a particular reason for that. There was then a ship on the point of sailing, and one of the agents had it in his power to ship off a hundred chests, which in the ordinary course of business could not have gone. Now as to the manner in which the wine was bought, it was perfectly consistent with the manner in which every private merchaut dealt. Would any man of common sense, or knowledge of mercantile business, in this great town, think of advertising to the world that he wanted a supply of a certain sort of wine? Certainly no merchant acquainted with the wine trade would go to work in that way. The Company went to the man to whom they had been recommended, as a person who would serve them honestly and conscientiously. But the hon. gentlemen talked about the wine sailing in one parcel why his object must have been to deceive the court by such a statement; because the hon. gentleman must know himself that the wine did not go out all at ouce, but that it in fact went out at different times and seasons, just after the manner in which all other wines were sent out. If they had sent out the whole quantity, the Company knew very well they must have laboured under the disadvantage of a glutted market. It was, however, to be lamented, that when it arrived in India it had to encounter an unaccountable prejudice The people in India set their faces against it, God knows why; for if the reports upon the subject were read, it would appear clearly that the object of the Company was to serve the gentlemen of India honestly, and with the best commodity. Certain it was, that the wine had to combat with a prejudiced market; which could only be attributed to the influence of persons who did not intend to act upon the same principles of honesty and fair dealing with which the Company were actuated, and who did not like to have such competitors in the market. The fact, however, unfortunately was, that the gentlemen in India sent the wine home again, telling the Company that it was not only not good, but not fit to be drank. The wine accordingly came home, but upon being tasted it was found that better wine never was tasted; and consequently it was discovered that the gentlemen of India had been the victims of some artful delusions. The fact which the Company believed, as accounting for this extraordinary prejudice was, that Mr. David Robertson had employed some of his friends in India to cry down the Company's wine, in order that his own wine might maintain the advantage which it had acquired, most unaccountably, in the estimation of the wine buyers. So much then for the badness of the wine. As to the price, it was absurd to suppose that the persons who sold the wine to the Company could fix the price at the time it was contracted for; because at that Asiatic Journ.-No. 26. time the wine was not in this country, and remained to be purchased in the country from whence it was to be imported. But at whatever time the price was known, he would undertake to say, that for goodness of quality the wine was purchased at a price much lower than could have been obtained had it been purchased upon the principle of open contract. Thus much, then, he had to state in answer to the hon. gentleman. He could not fight him with words-he could not speak for three hours, still less could he devote four or five weeks to prepare a speech; but he would undertake to put the hon. gentleman down in five minutes, if he would condescend to give him the meeting at a table. It Mr. Hume said he was ready to re-assert the facts which he had stated, and moreover to prove them to demonstration from the Company's own accounts. would appear, upon referring to those accounts, that the price of fifty-eight shillings per dozen was never reported until the 8th December 1815, the wine having been purchased in May 1814-so that the order was given near two years before the price was known; added to which, that the wine had arrived in parcels at its destination before the directors condescended to inquire what price they were to pay. So much, then, for the charge against him of having garbled facts. He was quite ready to meet the hon. director in the way proposed, and he would undertake to prove that the price of the four thousand half chests was not reported to the directors until the 8th Dec. 1815. He was induced to bring this subject forward, not as a matter of inclination (for in fact he had no wish to do so), but in consequence of the hon. director's having stated in round terms, that the directors in all their transactions dealt like other merchants. It was for the court to judge whether that was true, after this statement of the wine transaction; and it was for them to say, as merchants, whether they would make purchases of any commodity without troubling themselves about the price until nearly two years afterwards. The Deputy Chairman (having accounts in his hand) said, that the hon. gentleman was under a gross mistake when he stated, that the price of the wine was not reported until the 8th Dec. 1815. The fact was, as appeared from the accounts which he held in his hand, that the price of one half of the wine ordered was reported at fifty-eight shillings per dozen on the 9th Dec. 1814, instead of the 8th Dec. 1815. This proved what a happy knack the hon. gentleman had of mistaking facts, which might suit the purpose of the moment. If the hon. gent. would condescend to look again at VOL. V. Y son, the minutes of the transaction, he would find that the report of December 8th 1815 applied to a totally different seaand that the price he had referred to also applied to a different season. So much then for the fidelity of the hon. gent. in stating the facts upon which he had built so much crimination of the directors. Mr. Hume begged leave to explain, by stating that in substance what he had said was correct. In May 1814 the order was given for two thousand half chests, the price of which was not reported until the December following. After those two thousand half chests were delivered, but before the price was known, they gave a further order for two thousand half chests more. So that before they had determined what price they should give for the remainder, they gave the additional order for two thousand more, before they knew the price of the first quantity. If the hon. director would himself read, before he admonished other persons for their supposed error, he would find that the price of the first two thousand half chests was not given before the order issued to buy the remainder. The Deputy Chairman begged leave to repeat, that the first two thousand half chests were actually delivered and the price known before the remainder was ordered. That was, in fact, a separate transaction, and that part of the wine was shipped separately. The directors had received an account of the price of the first two thousand half chests delivered before the order was given for the remainder. The wine was not shipped all at once, but in separate parcels, as the supposed demand of the market required a supply. In 1814 part of the wine was ordered, and the remainder in the year following. Mr. Elphinstone requested permission to explain. The hon. gent. had chosen to point his observations at him with respect to the woollen manufactures, and built upon what he had said on that subject an hypothesis in order to suit his own purposes, in aid of his argument upon the wine transaction. He (Mr. E.) had merely alluded to the woollen manufacture, as one instance, amongst many others, to justify the principles upon which the directors had acted in making purchases. The same principle he had argued applied to other cases. He had never said, nor would ever say any thing in that court but what he thought to be -honest and true. He never tried to deceive the court of proprietors, in any part of his past life and certainly he would not attempt to do so now. He had lived too long amongst them, and he respected their character and his own too much to resort to any artifice. He had now lived amongst them for sixty years, and it was too late for him to try to deceive them. The hon. gentleman might try to deceive the court but he (Mr. E.) was above such practices. Mr. Inglis thought that the wine transaction ought not to be mixed up with the general question which the court were called upon to decide. It ought to be put out of the question now before the court, which was, whether this by-law ought to pass. For his own part, he must state, in the outset of the few words he had to say, that the by-law now proposed did not meet his approbation. The Company's export trade could not be carried on without a certain degree of competition, but he was of opinion that to attempt to carry on that trade by public advertisement would be to destroy it. In that point of view therefore he thought the by-law proposed was totally impracticable and unnecessary. He had now been a great many years in the direction, and the experince he had in those years enabled him at least to form some judgement upon the subject. He had heard a good deal of this wine transaction i and after the experience he had had in his business of a merchant, he would stake his character on that transaction. The shipping of the wine did not originate with the gentlemen who constituted the buying and selling committee, but with the court of directors who combined in the consideration of the subject their experience as merchants, having an anxious desire to do what appeared to them to be beneficial to the Company. The court of proprietors should be informed that the directors had been turning their attention to every thing that could create funds in India. Some years before that they had turned their attention to the expediency of carrying on the wine trade. Their determination at last to carry that idea into effect was not at all influenced by a wish to interfere with individual interests. Every man knew that some years ago e Company might have sold twenty tiines the quantity of wine which was now spoken of, if they had embarked in that part of trade; for in fact the consumers at that time could not get what they wanted. When the madeira wine trade was first taken up by the Company, the directors had laid before them a list of all the houses in the wine trade that existed at Madeira of the best reputation. Had they then resorted to the plan now proposed, of purchasing by open competition, the Company would have had all the wine dealers in town upon them, and they would be left to uncertainty as to the character and reputation of the dealer with whom they might at last contract: so that, in fact, they would have no security for the quality of the article which, they bought. It was absolutely necessary that the Company should have some warranty of the article to be exported, but this could only be obtained by the practice of dealing with respectable established houses, of known reputation. Out of all question, the mode of dealing by public advertisement was pregnant with another evil, in as much as it opened a door to combination against the Company, who might suffer by the speculations of persons of large capital. This system was besides impracticable, when it was considered how difficult it was for the Company to ascertain of their own knowledge, the character and quality of the article they bought. The directors might judge of the price, but they could not know any thing of the quality of the article. If they went to a man of character in trade, and he did not serve them well, why then they would not deal with him again. This was the principle upon which the Company had hitherto acted, as one which they had found advantageous to their interests. When the subject of the wine transaction was taken up by the directors, they gave it mature consideration, they looked to the state of the market abroad, and they calculated upon the probable advantages of such a speculation. It was at last determined by the court that they should have the article of claret amongst their exports, with a view expressly to improve the funds of the Company in India. The object was to have the wine in the month of March or April following, but it was found to be impossible to supply such a quantity without giving due notice to the merchants who were to import it from France. After much discussion of whom it should be bought, two of the most respectable merchants were fixed upon. He (Mr. I.) himself was at that time buying claret and he knew pretty well what was the state of the market, and at what price claret was selling. Being one of the committee of buying and selling, he put it to the character of the persons chosen to supply the best wine at the lowest possible price. Those gentlemen gave it as the reason why they could not then fix the price, that the wine had not yet been imported, and therefore it was impossible to ascertain it. The parties were informed that the trade would probably become of considerable extent, and that the Company's character would depend upon the quality of the article supplied. Now he would put it to the court of proprietors whether there could be a better practical mode adopted than this, of entering upon such a speculation. It appeared to him that the court could not have pursued a more advantageous course. But whilst he made this observation, he could not but express his opi. nion that the by-law which required that six directors should go out of office at the end of every four years, had been attended with very great inconvenience in its execution, in so far as it often produced a change of men unacquainted with the mode of proceeding previously adopted by their predecessors. The views, indeed, of the directors, in this particular transaction had unfortunately been attended with ill success, in consequence of circumstances which they could not have anticipated. The fact was, that there was a certain number of persons who had expected to share in the profit of supplying this wine, and the whole of the ill success of the speculation arose from jealousy. They had been defeated in their expectations of influencing the court of directors in their favour; a principle against which the directors had at all times set their faces, on account of its téndency to defeat the very object which they had in view, of benefiting the Company. It was on account of this known determination of the directors not to suffer themselves to be affected by private influence that this jealousy had arisen: and here it should be mentioned again in justice to the committee of buying and selling, that if they had had the least idea that the pursuit of this trade would he likely to produce any injury to the Company's officers, they would have abandoned the idea at once. But the fact was, it was under the conviction that this trade was passing out of the hands of the officers, and therefore it was taken up by the Company. The officers were deprived of this trade under the late renewal of the Company's charter, by which the world were let into competition with the ordinary trade of India belonging to the Company. The trade having in fact passed from their hands, it was wise and prudent that they should take advantage of the circumstances of the times. The Company were bound, as a commercial body to avail themselves of every opportunity to improve their own funds, which could only be done by commercial speculation. The Company therefore argued, first, when they entered into this new trade that they were violating no private claims of their own servants; and secondly, that there was the less discredit in their taking up such a trade, when they had an opportunity of competing successfully with private traders. The purchasers of wine in India might be very good judges of that article: but it did sometimes happen that they were governed in their judgment, not so much by the quality of the wine as the name of the person by whom it was sold. Therefore, if it happened that the wine brought to market did not come from a particular house, the agents of that house. would take good care to circulate a report that |