360
HISTORY OF INDIA.
[Book II.
A.D. 1C95.
Singular contract.
Parliarnen- tarj pro- ceedings.
Beside the aljove suspicious |);iyraents, tlie committee disajvered a contract of a very singular description. It bore the date of the 26th of February, 1694-; and bound the Company to pay for 200 tons of saltpetre, to be brought home in the ship Seymour from India, the sum of X'l 2,000, together with £2b freight per ton to the owners of the ship, besides all charges in England. It seems that this saltpetre, for which i?l 2,000 was to be paid, could be purchased in India for ,X'2000 ; and this sum was actually advanced by the Company for that puq>ose, and not only so, but they also granted bond under the Comj)any's seal for i,^10,000, as the remaining balance payable by a certain day, whether the .ship should arrive in safety or not. The result of the contract is thus accurately explained by the committee: — "The Company runs the adventure of i?l 2,000 for that which cost only ,£^2000, and mast consequently lose dC12,000 if the ship miscarry; and on the contrary, the seller on the other hand gets i?l 0,000 clear without disbursing or running the hazard of one penny ; and what is yet more, a certain loss of =P9000 or 0^10,000 will attend it if the ship arrive in safety."
The report of the committee was made on the 12tli of March, 1695; and on the 18th the House of Commons resolved, "that whosoever shall discover any money or other gratuity given to any member of this house for matters transacted in this house relating to the orphans' bill or the East India Com- pany, shall have the indemnity of this house for such gift." On the 26th it was ordered, "that Sir Thomas Cooke, a member of this house, do give an account to the house how the ,£'87,402, 12s. 3d mentioned in the report was distributed." When examined he refused to answer, and was committed to the Tower. At the same time a bill was ordered to be brought in for the purpose of obliging him to give an account. So much were the house in earnest that, in little more than a week, the bill, though counsel was heard against it, was passed and carried to the House of Lords. When it was read there for the first time it was vehementlv opposed by the Duke of Leeds, lord-president of the council, who commenced with a most solemn protestation of his cleanness and innocence, and lajdng his hand upon his breast, declared upon his faith and honoin " that he was perfectly disinterested, and had no part or concern in this matter, and therefore might the better appear against it." Sir Thomas Cooke, being brought from the Tower to the bar of the lords, declared himself ready and very willing to make a full discovery on obtaining an indemnifying vote ; and as the reports of the period express it, " bemoaned himself (weeping) that he was not indemnified at that instant, so that he might just then make the discovery which was expected, and which he was so desirous to make." On being asked what he wanted to be indemnified from, he answered, "All actions and suits, except from the East India Company, whom, if he had injured, he would be bound to undergo the utmost rigour." He also desired, he said, to be indemnified from scandaluins, which he explained to mean the action of scandalwni magimtum.
