"of it, not a sullen discharge of constrained 66 duty; but obedience which comes from "the heart, and the cheerful, animated ser"vice of cordiality, affection, and zeal." The time will not permit us to take any particular notice of this order, or to publish any other part of it, than the foregoing short extract. This, like the former memorable order of Lord Minto, is tediously long and garrulous, though it contains some good and salutary doctrines, strongly interwoven, as in the prior instance, with many remarks, much out of time and place. Several topics are comprehended in it, which true policy would have left untouched. While the amnesty to the great body of the offenders is announced to be attended with a general oblivion, observations are unfortunately introduced in the same breath, tending to awaken and stimulate feelings freshly allayed, and before they had time to cool. Harsh and unnecessary contrasts are made, as if there had been a perverse bias in the pen, to a course foreign to the pious purpose of the writer. There are some distinctions taken in the cases, excepted out of the general amnesty, which it would seem difficult to reconcile with the prin ciples on which the act is stated to proceed. On this and other points, if an opportunity be allowed, we may offer some future remark. We cannot at present forbear the observation, that the measure would appear more consonant to our humble notions of what is right, if it had stood on more simple ground, or if, indeed, it had been applied without exception and distinction of any kind, and certainly without any long reasoning on an act, which if it carried not a plain and perspicuous meaning on the surface of it, could not be improved by argument or oratory, though urged by the ingenuity, or enforced by the eloquence, of the Governor General of India. If, in our present uncertainty, we may be indulged in the expression of a hope, it is, that the numbers embraced in the preceding list may be yet lessened, by a further exertion of mercy, and on the application of a party, who had no secondary share in the acts, that brought about the extreme events recorded in the foregoing pages. Such a hope springs not only out of our interests and wishes, but is founded on a report generally mentioned in the letters just received from Madras. It is with regret that we notice any thing which may disturb the satisfactory conclusions drawn in the order of Lord Minto, and adopted by the public, of the entire suppression of the discontents of the Madras army; but we think it our duty to add, though we hope that the information may prove erroneous, that private intelligence suggests, that the subsidiary force at Jaulnah, had manifested a disposition to resist the orders of Government, for the arrest of the officers attached to that division of the army. With pain we have also to remark, that a part of the ill effects, anticipated by us in an earlier place, has been already realized, and that two trials by Court Martial had taken place, arising out of the temper, generated among different members of the same service, by the different parts which they took in the late disputes. We fervently wish that these may be the last! March 14th, 1810. APPENDIX. Memorial from the Officers commanding Native Corps 1. That we, the undersigned memorialists, officers commanding native corps upon the Madras Establishment, have the honour, with all deference and respect, to solicit the attention of your honourable Court, to the subject of our appeal, which we, with the utmost duty and submission, offer to your consideration. 2. Your memorialists beg to state, that Captain John Munro, of the European regiment on this establishment, and QuarterMaster-General of the army, delivered some months since to the Commander in Chief at Madras, certain proposals, bearing date 30th June, 1808, recommending the abolition of the Tent Contract, which, on the the 1st of July last, was taken from officers commanding native corps in your army at Madras. 3. Whether the Tent Contract, as consistent with the good of the public service, should or should not have continued to exist, is a subject your memorialists will not presume to trouble your honourable Court upon; but certain articles which the Quarter-Master-General has inserted in his proposals, as motives that prevailed with him for recommending the abolition of the Tent Contract, your memorialists have to observe, no less excited their surprize, than they did the feelings of poignant concern, in perceiving such dishonourable principles so unjustly attributed to them. 4. Your memorialists will here furnish the extracts from the Quarter-Master-General's proposals, on which they ground their complaints to your honourable Court: 66 Six years experience of the practical effects of the existing system of the camp equipage equipment of the native army, has afforded means of forming a judgment relative to its advan S tages and efficiency, which were not possessed by the persons who proposed its introduction; and an attentive examination of its operations, during that period of time, has suggested the following observations regarding it: By granting the same allowance in peace and war for the equipment of a Native corps, while the expenses incidental to that charge are unavoidably much greater in war than in peace, it places the interest and duty of officers commanding native corps in direct opposition to one another; it makes it their interest that their corps should not be in a state of efficiency fit for field service; and therefore furnishes strong inducements to neglect their most important duties. 16 By charging Commanding Officers of corps with extensive concerns, immediately affecting their private interests, is calculated, particularly in the field, to divert their attention and their pursuits from the discipline and management of their corps; objects that should furnish them with sufficient employment for the whole of their time. (Signed) JOHN MUNRO, "Quarter Master General of the Army." 5. Your memorialists, with the justest sentiments of deference to your honourable Court, beg to state, that these articles unequivocally convey a most cruel and wanton insult, as well as an injurious aspersion (we all feel it) to officers who have faithfully served their country, many for nearly 30 years, some more, in affirming, that upon the experience and observation of six years, formed upon the judgment of practical effect, it appears, officers commanding Native corps have strong inducements, from interest, to neglect their most important duties, in order that their corps should not be in a state of efficiency fit for field service. 6. Your memorialists conceive that these assertions, in their application with regard to time, and operation, with respect to effect, are no less than accusing them of having sacrificed the interests and security of the public service for a base purpose, and of having violated that trust which your honourable Court, which Government, and which the Commander in Chief, in certain confidence place in them. Your memorialists perceive in them also an insinuation of an utter dereliction of the pride of military spirit, in their having a wish, from pecuniary motives, not to be prepared to meet the enemies of their country. 7. Impressed with those painful sensations, which such serious imputations cannot fail to create, your memorialists, in several instances, without delay, and with ali possible respect, separately |