authority to a diltinfi and feparate body, it can never, without a breach of the conditions on which it was granted, 'be refumed, with-

, out the molt manifelt injultice and

flagrant violation of public faith; that fuch doctrines were fubvertive of all true commercial principles; and were equally inconfilient with the high rights of the royal prcrot gative, the faith and honour of parliament, and that right of con- firmed property, which every man, and every b_ody of men, have, 0r ought to have, in'tlieir legal ac- quifitions. It was further obferved, that the Corripany’s polTefiions in lndia were not in firictnefs con- quells; that they~ were farms held from the prince who was their pro-

rietor and rightful owner; but iitat aquellion of property of that nature, was to be decided in a court ofjullice, andgwasnot a pro- per fubjeft Volt‘, difcufiion there, where the , public, who were them- lelves interelled _parties, would thereby become the judges in their

own caufe. _

i A In (ome time after,’ March 25d’ the two following re- folutions were propofed by the mi- niltér, and pallqd without a divi- lion, That fuppofing the public ihould advance theloan to the Eaft- lndia Company, it i_s the opinion Of this committee, that the Com- pany’s dividend lhouldy be rellrained to fix per cent. until the repayment ofthe fum advanced.” And, that the Company be allowed to divide no more than {even per cent. until their bond debt be reduced to 1,500,000 l.”

__ ln the firft fiating of thefe- pro- pofitions, the following words were added to the fecond ; but were af-

terwards firuck out, vii. ‘f and VOL. XVI.

[*9? no more thanzeight per cent. be- fore the participation of profits between the public and the Com- pany fhould take place.’_’

As thefe reflriétions were con- trary to the terms propofed by the Company in its petition to the Houfe, they were productive of confiderable debates. They were fupported, on the undoubted right which every creditor had, previous to his parting with his money, to exact fuch conditions and llipula- tions from the borrower, as he thought necefiary for, his own fecu- rity; and it was inlilled, upon the foundation of the reports made by. the fecret committee, of the {late of the Companyis aflairs, that it could not with jtfilice to the pub- lic, and a due attention to the welfare of the proprietary, afFord to make a greater increafe of divi- dend. It was hinted, that the Company had been guilty of‘ an aft 0F delinquency, by exceeding its legal powers in the amount of its bond debt, and it was inti- mated, that it probably would here- after be thought necelTary, H toagi- tatethe quellion of Rigbr, as to the territorial pofleliions in parlia- ment. As a falvo, however,,_to the apprehenlions excited by theft: dangers, it was alfo thrown out, that when the propoled reduction of the bond debt had taken place, and the loan was repayed to the public, the treafury might then, perhaps, contribute a moiety of its fhare of the participation, entirely to re- eflablifh the aflairs of the Com- Piml" .

On the other hand, the repre- fentations ofthe Company’s affairs, that had been made by the fecret committee, were declared to be

extremely erroneous; the injury frG] that