CHAPTER XIII.
East India Company—Early struggles—Rival company—Private traders—Coalition effected—Their trade, 1741-1748, and continued difficulties up to 1773—Their form of charter—Rates of freight—Gross earnings—Evidence of Sir Richard Hotham before the Committee of Inquiry—The effect of his evidence—Reduction of duties, August 1784—Extent of tea trade—Opposition of independent shipowners—India-built ships admitted to the trade—Board of Control established, 1784—Value of the trade, 1796—Charter renewed, with important provisions, from 1796 to 1814—Restrictions on private traders—East India Company’s shipping, 1808-1815—The trade partially opened—Jealousy of free-traders—Efforts of the free-traders at the out-ports—Comparative cost of East India Company’s ships and of other vessels—Opposition to the employment of the latter—Earl of Balcarras—Her crew—Actions fought by the ships of the Company—Conditions of entering the service—Uniforms—Discipline—Promotion—Pay and perquisites—Abuse of privileges—Direct remuneration of commanders—Provisions and extra allowances—Illicit trade denounced by the Court, and means adopted to discover the delinquents—Connivance of the officers of the Customs—Pensions, and their conditions—Internal economy of the ships—Watches and duties—Amusements—Gun exercise—Courts-martial—Change in the policy of the East India Company—Results of free-trade with India, and of the Company’s trading operations—China trade thrown open, 1832-1834—Company abolished, 1858—Retiring allowances to commanders and officers—Compensations and increased pensions granted—Remuneration of the directors—Their patronage.
Early struggles.
We have already noticed the difficulties English navigators had to encounter in their earliest endeavours to gain a share of the lucrative trade which, after the discoveries of Vasco de Gama, the Portuguese carried on with India, and their long struggles against them and the Dutch East India Company, who shared it with them for more than a century, thus maintaining a virtual monopoly of the commerce of the East. Nor were the English any more successful when the Pope’s Bull ceasing to have effect induced the government of England to grant to the few merchants and shipowners we have named the charter of incorporation,[359] for the purpose of encouraging the systematic development of that valuable trade. Although the charter gave to the association an exclusive monopoly of the commercial intercourse between England and India, besides numerous special privileges, the directors had considerable difficulty in obtaining the requisite capital to equip their first expedition.[360] Indeed, their success, as a whole, for many years afterwards, though occasionally considerable, was not equivalent to the risk they encountered; and even when they had secured factories or depôts at Surat and settlements in Bengal, their prosperity was of so variable and unstable a character that their charter had to be frequently renewed with increasing privileges.
But it is unnecessary to further trace the varying fortunes of the East India Company[361] since the Revolution, or the origin of the clamour against their monopoly. Suffice it to state that the charges of delinquency and mismanagement which were brought against the directors and employés induced the House of Commons, re-echoing the feeling out of doors, to send up, in 1692, an address to the Crown requesting the immediate dissolution of the Company, and praying for the incorporation of a new association.
Private traders.
However, it was not until 1698 that the government, being in want of money, resolved to throw the trade of India open to the highest bidder. The existing Company was outbid by another association, whose tender to supply two millions sterling was accepted, and an Act passed embodying it under the name of “The English Company trading to the East Indies,” with exclusive possession of the commerce of the East for ever; subject only to the right of the Old Company to continue to trade for three years longer. But the Old Company, having through its treasurer subscribed for and obtained 315,000l. of the loan, became the largest shareholders in the new and rival body. The greatest confusion of conflicting interests consequently ensued. There was the Old Company, trading with its vessels for three years, and at the expiration of that period to be left in legal possession of all its forts and factories in India, besides whatever privileges it had acquired in the East from the native authorities, while, secondly, there was the New Company in the field, but without any Indian possessions whatever, and opposed by a rival body seeking its destruction, and wielding a controling power over its operations. Thirdly, there were a few subscribers to the late loan, who had declined to join the New Company, but who, by the terms of the original contract with the government, were, nevertheless, entitled to trade each for himself, so long as the two millions remained unpaid; and, lastly, there were such private traders as had cleared out from England previously to the 1st of July, 1698, who had a right, in virtue of a clause in the Act, to carry on their trade till they should think fit to return to England. No fewer than sixty ships were employed by these rival traders; a number far in excess of the requirements of the trade, so that the first effects of the competition were ruinous to all parties concerned.
The 100l. shares of the Old Company fell to 37l.; and their rivals being in no better position tended further to exasperate the two companies, whose animosities divided the whole kingdom into two parties, the Old Company being supported by the Tories, and the New by the Whigs. At the dissolution of Parliament in 1700, each party spent enormous sums to procure the election of their friends, and the nation was in a ferment about the contention between them. At length, in July 1702, a tripartite indenture was executed, wherein Queen Anne, with the Old Company and the New Company jointly concerned, became the contracting parties.[362]
Coalition effected.
Satisfactory estimates were taken of the value of the possessions in India of both companies, and adjusted accordingly. Various minor arrangements were made, and after a period of seven years the new association was inaugurated with the title “The United Company of Merchants of England trading to the East Indies;” and thus, in 1708, that powerful body was restored, or rather recreated, which became ultimately possessors of a considerable portion of the vast continent of India, and rulers over more than a hundred million people.
Their trade, 1741-1748, and continued difficulties
But this united Company was frequently opposed. In 1730 the merchants of Bristol and Liverpool, with other capitalists resident in London, made vigorous efforts to prevent the government from granting a renewal of the Company’s charter, under an impression that its profits were enormous. Such may have been the case in some branches of their trade, or in special years; but it afterwards appeared that, on an average of eight years, ending 1741, the value of British goods and products of all sorts exported by the Company to India and China amounted to only 157,944l. per annum, while the average annual value of imports during the seven years ending 1748 was not more than 188,176l.;[363] so that their profits as merchants could not have been large, unless the percentage of gain was excessive upon the amount of business they transacted. Some of their servants, no doubt, realised immense fortunes, especially when the Company secured possession of large tracts of land. But the Company itself, not many years afterwards, was involved in debt and difficulties; and, so far from being able to pay government the stipulated sum of 400,000l. per annum, the directors were compelled in 1772 to apply to the Treasury for a loan. Indeed, had it not been for the greatly increased consumption of tea in Great Britain, the Company at this period would have ceased to carry on any branch of trade with the East, so that its commercial monopoly would then have happily come to an end.
up to 1773.
Their form of charter.
Rates of freight.
A secret committee of Parliament[364] was, however, appointed to inquire into the mode in which the business of the Company had been managed, and from its proceedings some valuable information may be obtained with regard to the trade of the East at this period, and the mode in which shipping business of the highest class was then conducted. As the chief object of the inquiry seems to have been to ascertain if the Company could build and navigate ships at less cost than they could be chartered, the rates of freight, size of vessels, the conditions of charter, and other matters came under the consideration of the committee. The charter-party was exceedingly voluminous.[365] In it the Company covenanted with the shipowners that no vessel was to carry less than four hundred and ninety-nine tons at the rate therein specified, including eighty tons of iron kentledge[366] for the purpose of ballast. It further provided that notwithstanding “the ship is let to freight for four hundred and ninety-nine tons, yet the Company may, if they think fit, lade what more they please,” at certain rates. The rates of freight varied. For instance, from China the freights on rough goods were 24l. per ton in 1753; 37l. in 1760; and 29l. in 1772. Fine goods in the same years paid 27l., 40l., and 32l. respectively. The freights from Bombay in these years were somewhat higher; and the rate of demurrage[367] per day was 12l. 2s. in 1753, 20l. 3s. 4d. in 1760, and 18l. 3s. in 1772.
Gross earnings.
Voluminous accounts were produced of the vessels employed, their capacity and cost. Those engaged for India in 1772 will suffice to furnish an illustration. In that year thirty-three ships were employed by the Company, of twenty-three thousand one hundred and fifty-nine tons, builder’s measurement, which brought home twenty-one thousand one hundred and fifty-eight tons of merchandise, the cost of freight amounting to 457,600l., besides an allowance for surplus freight of 95,390l. 16s. 8d., and 57,733l. 11s. 4d. paid for demurrage. From a return furnished of the China ships engaged during the five years preceding 1773, the Company appears to have imported fifty thousand three hundred and forty-three tons of produce, in vessels registering forty-eight thousand eight hundred and sixty-five tons, builder’s measurement.
Evidence of Sir Richard Hotham before the Committee of Inquiry.
The effect of his evidence.
Among the witnesses who appeared before the committee, there was no one more intelligent than Sir Richard Hotham, an eminent shipowner, who declared that the existing mode of freighting ships by the Company was absurd, and that their charter-party was one of the most useless for the purpose that could possibly be conceived. Analysing the whole system, and the clumsy and expensive mode in which they conducted their business, he gave the following particulars of what they actually paid for carriage on every ton of produce imported from the East:—
| £ | s. | d. | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 80 | tons of kentledge, at the fixed rate of 9l. 13s. 4d. per ton | 773 | 6 | 4 |
| 11 | tons of China ware, at the chartered rate of 29l. per ton | 319 | 0 | 0 |
| 393 | tons of tea and silk, at the chartered rate of 32l. per ton | 12,576 | 0 | 0 |
| 15 | tons, private trade, at the chartered rate of 32l. per ton | 480 | 0 | 0 |
| 499 | 14,148 | 6 | 4 |
THE ‘THAMES’ EAST INDIAMAN, 1360 TONS REGISTER, 25 GUNS, AND 130 MEN. E. W. Cooke, R.A.
Or equal to 32l. 10s. per ton, after the freight on kentledge had been deducted; and he showed how a saving could be effected in the cost of freightage on the vessels employed, from China alone, of upwards of 43,000l. annually.[368] Sir Richard offered to bring goods from any part of the East at twenty guineas per ton, and this offer, combined with other important facts which had been adduced in evidence, produced at the time various changes in the mode of conducting the chartering and loading of their vessels. The Company also resolved to construct vessels of a larger class for their own use, vessels which became famous in more modern times, of which we furnish an illustration of one of the latest [on the preceding page].
Reduction of duties, August 1784.
Extent of tea trade.
Though the operations of the Company as traders continued in full force for ten years after this inquiry, its shipping business underwent very considerable changes by reason of Mr. Pitt’s judicious reduction of the duties on various Indian productions,[369] especially on tea; the duty on which was then reduced from 120 to 12½ per cent. ad valorem. High duties had been found to encourage smuggling,[370] and divert the trade from England to continental nations. Although in the nine years preceding 1780 the importation of tea from China to Europe amounted to 118,783,811 lbs., only 50,759,451 lbs. out of that quantity had been imported in vessels belonging to or chartered by the Company. But the change in the duty effected a revolution, and the sales and importations of tea by the Company were trebled. Their export trade also increased, and in 1789 they began to ship tin to China for the first time. Whilst the value of their exports in 1784 was only 418,747l., in twenty-seven ships, it rose in 1792 to 1,031,262l., employing forty-three vessels. On the other hand, the quantity of bullion despatched to the East materially declined. During the same period the “private trade” carried on by the commanders and officers of the Company’s ships, and by the merchants holding licences who resided in India, rose from 144,176l. of imports in 1783, to 400,784l. in 1794,[371] and increased to no less than double that amount in the following ten years.
Opposition of independent shipowners.
The Liverpool and Bristol shipowners now began to agitate still further for a participation in the East India trade. The Company, however, having obtained fresh capital, were thus enabled, combined with other causes, to secure a renewed lease of exclusive commercial power, which now virtually extended over Europe, and was not overthrown until many years afterwards. The Dutch East India Company having incurred enormous losses, and the other companies having either relinquished the business or declined to such a point as to render their rivalry no longer dangerous, left the trade of the East to a large extent in the hands of the English. In 1789 the Portuguese, who once engrossed the whole of the oriental trade, had but three ships at Canton, the Dutch five, the French one, the Danes one, the United States of America fifteen, and the English East India Company forty, while British subjects residing in India had a similar number. Moreover, a very considerable portion of the trade of the East was then conducted in Indian ships, owned by the natives, by whom as many voyages were undertaken from India to China, and from the coast of Malabar to the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea, as in the days before the passage to Europe by the Cape of Good Hope had been discovered.
India-built ships admitted to the trade.
It was not, however, until 1795 that India-built vessels were permitted to convey goods to London. In the course of that year a great number of the Company’s ships having been employed in the service of the English government, instructions were sent to the Presidencies to engage vessels of India build at 16l. per ton for rice and other dead-weight stowage, and 20l. for light goods to the Thames, with liberty to take back on their own account whatever merchandise they pleased to the territories of the Company, or to any place within the limits of its charter.
Many of them having been constructed on speculation, under an impression that they would be permanently employed, although warned by Lord Cornwallis to the contrary, their owners were greatly disappointed when they found that after the immediate wants of the government and the Company had been satisfied their services were no longer required. English shipowners in the service of the Company inflexibly maintained their monopoly, and having secured stipulations for a number of voyages during successive years, they successfully opposed for a time any innovation of a permanent character upon their chartered rights. The contest, however, which arose between the independent merchants of England, who had combined with the owners of native shipping against the Company on this point, induced the Directors to make various concessions, which were the prelude to the opening of the trade at a future period.
Board of Control established, 1784.
But, apart from this combination, the Act of Mr. Pitt, passed in 1784, constituting a Board of Control to superintend the affairs of the Company, had paved the way for many changes. This board consisted of six members of the Privy Council, who were to superintend, check, and control all operations and concerns in any way relating to the civil and military government or the revenues of the territory and possessions of the Company; and the Act further provided that all communications to or from India touching the above matters were to be submitted to this Board of Control, the Directors reserving to themselves power to amend their instructions. A secret committee of three directors was formed, with which the Board of Control might transact any business it did not choose to submit to the Court of Directors, and to whom persons returning from India were required, under severe penalties, to declare the amount of their fortunes; while a tribunal was constituted which had for its sole object the trial of any person accused of misconduct in India, consisting of a judge of each of the three chief law-courts in England, of five peers and seven members of the House of Commons, the last being chosen by lot at the commencement of each session. Although the Directors were left to superintend their shipping and commercial affairs, as they had hitherto done, the Board of Control exercised an indirect influence over their proceedings both at home and in India.
Value of the trade, 1796.
During the three years ending 1796, the value of the Company’s exports of British produce and manufactures fluctuated from 928,783l. to 1,031,262l.; but this increase may be attributed mainly, if not wholly, to the great reductions which the Act of 1784 had effected in the duties on tea, and the vast increase which consequently took place in its consumption.
Charter renewed, with important provisions, from 1796 to 1814.
When, in 1796, the Company’s charter was again renewed, the important provision was made that all his Majesty’s subjects, residing in any part of his European dominions, were to be allowed to export to India any article of the produce or manufacture of the country where they resided, except military stores, ammunition, masts, spars, cordage, pitch, tar, and copper, and the Company’s civil servants in India, as well as the free merchants resident there, were permitted to ship, on their own account and risk, all kinds of Indian goods, except calicoes, dimities, muslins, and other piece goods. But so jealous were the Directors of competition in their commercial operations, that they prevailed on the government to insert various clauses in the new charter whereby neither the merchants of India nor of England generally, nor any of the Company’s servants, were allowed to export or import except in ships belonging to or chartered by the Company; appropriating, however, under various restrictions, three thousand tons of space in their ships for the use of private traders, at the reduced rate, in time of peace, of 5l. outwards, and 15l. homewards, for every ton occupied by them in the Company’s ships, but stipulating that this rate of freight might be increased in time of war by the approbation of the Board of Control.
Restrictions on private traders.
“It might have been,” remarks Mr. M’Culloch,[372] “and indeed was most probably foreseen, that very few British merchants or manufacturers would be inclined to avail themselves of the privilege of sending out goods in the Company’s ships, or of engaging in a trade fettered on all sides by the jealousy of powerful monopolists, and where consequently their superior judgment and economy would have availed almost nothing. As far therefore as they (the English merchants) were concerned, the relaxation was more apparent than real, and did not produce any useful results.” Indeed Lord Melville quotes, from a letter written by the Marquess of Hastings to the Company, dated 21st of March, 1812, the following passage, “It will not be denied that the facilities granted by that Act (the Act of 1796) have not been satisfactory, at least to the merchants of this country or of India. They have been the source of constant dispute, and they have even entailed a heavy expenditure upon the Company without affording to the public any adequate benefit for such a sacrifice.”[373] This privilege was, however, made use of to a considerable extent by private merchants in India, and also by the Company’s servants returning from India, many of whom invested a portion or the whole of their fortunes in the produce of India suited for the English markets.
Notwithstanding the privileges secured by the Act of 1796, and the superintendence of the Board of Control, the finances of the Company again fell into the same unprosperous state in which they had previously been, although accounts of a large surplus revenue to be immediately derived from India were issued from time to time to the public, and various Acts of Parliament were passed for the appropriation of surpluses which never had any existence except in the imagination of the persons who framed them!
East India Company’s shipping, 1808-1815.
The wars in which they had been engaged with the Mahrattas, and other powers in the East, although they had terminated in a vast accession of territory, did not add to the pecuniary resources of the Company, and were consequently disapproved of at home. During 1808 and 1809 they were particularly unfortunate, having lost in those two years four outward-bound and ten homeward-bound ships[374], the cargoes of these vessels, with the advances made to the owners, including 60,729l., the value of one of the ships which belonged to the Company amounting to no less than 1,048,077l. The calamities of the French war had also reached the Company, which suffered by the deficiency in the amount of their sales at home, partly in consequence of a reduced demand for Indian produce and manufactures, but chiefly on account of the convulsed state of Europe, and the interdiction of commercial intercourse with almost every country of the Continent to which previously their goods were exported.
The trade partially opened.
Happily in 1814 the trade of the Company, for so many years jealously guarded as a strict monopoly, was thrown entirely open to private competition, in so far as respected the Indian continent, although the exclusive trade to China, deemed by far the most lucrative at the time, was still preserved, in spite of the efforts of Manchester, Glasgow, and Bristol to open it to the general competition of all classes. Several sensible men in the House of Commons urged upon the Company the policy of throwing open the whole trade to the enterprise of private shipowners and merchants, arguing that the affairs of the Company would be benefited, rather than prejudiced, by such an arrangement; but the interests of private individuals connected with the Company predominated both with the government and with Parliament.
Jealousy of free-traders.
The consideration of this Bill occupied the entire session of 1813, and in its conditions[375] may be traced the slow effects of the efforts of the free-traders to procure the total overthrow of the Company’s privileges in respect of shipping. Such was the jealousy with which these were viewed, that Mr. Baring moved an amendment to one of the resolutions confining the return of vessels from India to the port of London, though holding out the idea that this restriction was to be limited to five years. The mercantile men in the House of Commons supported the amendment, upon the ground that such a restriction would operate to the better security of the revenue, and would offer a more convenient market for foreigners. One speaker, Mr. Thornton, laughed at the pretensions of the out-ports to share in the trade, which in the same breath he pronounced delusive as regarded the profits to be made in it.[376]
Efforts of the free-traders at the out-ports.
But the people of the out-ports did not show any disposition to be deluded by these inconsistent arguments. They stood up stoutly for their own interests, and for the cause of free-trade. They considered themselves quite as well qualified as any of the East India directors to form a judgment how far a trade with the East could be carried on with profit by their own vessels.
Comparative cost of East India Company’s ships and other vessels.
Indeed the fact was beyond all dispute that the cost of the ships fitted out by the East India Company was thirty, forty, and even fifty per cent. greater than those of private shipowners. It was credibly stated that the Company paid for their vessels 40l. per ton, while more suitable vessels could be built and equipped for 25l. per ton. The Company’s ships were, it was admitted, fitted up very expensively for their passengers, but it was denied that this was necessary for the purpose of carrying goods and produce to or from India. On the other hand, the supporters of the East India Company’s monopoly inquired, and with considerable reason, whether any ship could be built and equipped for 25l. per ton which would be as capable of contending against an enemy as were the ships of the Company, or if such private ships would be fit for the service of the country during war.[377]
Opposition to the employment of the latter.
It is, however, interesting and amusing, if not instructive, to look back and reflect upon some of the arguments employed by the champions of monopoly in behalf of their own interests. They pretended that it was only out of regard to the shipowners of the out-ports, to protect them from the dangerous speculation into which they were about to precipitate themselves and their capital, that they desired all East India trading ships should by law be compelled to come to London. It was only to slip in between the rashness of adventurers and their ruin that they supported the measure; it was not to uphold monopoly; it was not to exclude the rest of the country from participating in the benefits of the Eastern trade; the opposition to the out-ports all sprang from pure benevolence, pure kindness and mercy! Such was the folly and blindness of the great merchants who supported the ultra claims of the Company. The shrewd men of the out-ports did not, however, appreciate such unexampled patriotism, and so struggled for their privileges, such as they were. But the difficulty with which they obtained these small concessions indicates how deeply rooted the principles of monopoly had become during a period of two hundred years; nor was it till many years afterwards that any material progress was made in the commerce of England with the East.
The number of ships employed by the Company varied now quite as much as in former years. In the “season” of 1809-10 they despatched to their different stations in Bengal, Madras, Bombay, China, Ceylon, and Penang forty-seven ships, measuring thirty-two thousand five hundred tons; and in the season of 1819-20 twenty-three vessels, measuring twenty-six thousand two hundred tons, besides twenty-one vessels which they had chartered, of ten thousand nine hundred and forty-eight tons; whereas, in 1829-30 they only despatched twenty ships belonging to or permanently engaged by the Company, and twelve which they had chartered.[378]
Earl of Balcarras.
Her crew.
Actions fought by the ships of the Company.
On the following page we furnish an illustration of another of the largest and finest vessels belonging to the Company. This ship, the Earl of Balcarras, built in 1815, registered one thousand four hundred and seventeen tons, and was manned by a crew of one hundred and thirty men, consisting of the commander, six mates, a surgeon and his assistant, six midshipmen, purser, boatswain, gunner, carpenter, master-at-arms, armourer, butcher, baker, poulterer, caulker, cooper, two stewards, two cooks, eight boatswains, gunner’s, carpenter’s, caulker’s, and cooper’s mates, six quartermasters, one sail-maker, seven servants appropriated to the commander and leading officers, and seventy-eight seamen. The crews of ships of from eight hundred to thirteen hundred tons register varied from one hundred and two to one hundred and thirty men, or nearly four times the number required for merchant sailing-vessels of similar size of the present day. But the vessels of the East India Company combined many of the requisites of ships of war, and gained numberless laurels in many a gallant and hard-fought action.[379]
EAST INDIA COMPANY’S SHIP ‘EARL OF BALCARRAS.’
Conditions of entering the service.
Uniforms.
Five supernumeraries beyond the crew were allowed to each ship, two of whom had the privilege of appearing on the quarter-deck. Penalties were inflicted for taking on board persons without the permission in writing of the Company’s agents, varying from 20l. for a black servant, up to 500l. for a European; and bonds had to be given by all passengers bringing native servants from India to bear their expense while in England, and the cost of their return to that country. Every commander in the Company’s service was required to be at least twenty-five years of age, and to have performed, before receiving his appointment as such, one voyage in the regular service of the Company as chief or second officer, or to have commanded a ship in the extra service. Chief mates were required to be twenty-three years of age or upwards, and to have made a voyage as second or third mate in the service to and from India or China; second mates must also have performed a similar voyage, and were not eligible unless they were twenty-two years of age. Third mates were required to be twenty-one, and to have made two voyages as midshipmen or otherwise in the Company’s service, whilst the fourth mate must have reached the age of twenty years, and been a voyage to or from India and China in a Company’s ship, or in that of any other service, of which he had to produce satisfactory certificates. Their uniform, in the case of a commander, consisted, when in full dress, of a blue coat, black velvet lappels, cuffs and collar, with a bright gold embroidery “as little expensive as may be;” waistcoat and breeches of deep buff; the buttons were of yellow-gilt metal, with the Company’s crest; cocked-hats, side-arms, “to be worn under the coat,” and black stocks or neckcloths; while the undress consisted of blue coat with lappels, black collar and cuffs, waistcoat and breeches deep-buff, and buttons similar to the full-dress suit.
Discipline.
Somewhat similar uniforms, though of a less ornamental character, and without swords, were worn by the chief, second, third, and fourth officers, but with the distinguishing mark of one, two, three or four small buttons, respectively, on each cuff of their coats. To preserve the “utmost uniformity” in the dress, so far as regarded the buff coat and the gilt buttons, patterns of these were kept for view at the shipping offices, and at the Jerusalem Coffee House, for the guidance of the masters and mates of the extra ships engaged by the Company. All officers in both divisions of the service were strictly enjoined[380] “not, on any account, to appear in boots, or black breeches and stockings;” and to be in full-dress uniform when attending the Court of Directors “on any occasion whatever.” Commanders were especially required[381] “to keep up the worship of Almighty God” on board their ships every Sunday when circumstances admitted, and to see that the log-book contained the reasons for any omission, under a penalty of two guineas for every omission of mentioning the performance of divine service or of assigning satisfactory reasons for the non-performance thereof.
Promotion.
With regard to promotions, the Company in their own ships adhered to the strict rule of seniority, always supposing good character, conduct, and abilities; and their promotions were made from one ship to another as vacancies occurred.[382] Commanders were appointed to ships before they were launched, so that they might superintend their equipment and outfit for sea. The first appointments of midshipmen to the ships of the Company were made by the members of the Court of Directors in succession, according to seniority, so that every member might have one nomination before any other member had a second; and no youth was eligible as a midshipman under thirteen or over eighteen years of age, unless he had been one or two years at sea, when the admission in the latter case might be extended to the age of twenty. Assistant surgeons were also nominated by the members of the Court, the chairman having the first nomination, rising by seniority to surgeons, if their abilities and conduct were in all respects satisfactory. The appointment of pursers was left to the commander, subject to the approval of the Committee of Shipping. When vacancies of any kind amongst the superior grades of officers occurred abroad, they were filled up temporarily by the Indian government, the Select Committee at Canton, or by the commander of the ship in which they occurred. But the command of a ship was not allowed to be given to an officer who was not competent, by the rules of the service, for the charge, unless the vacancy could not be otherwise filled, in accordance with these rules, at the place where the vacancy happened.[383]
Pay and perquisites.
In the [Appendix, No. 12], will be found the scale of wages paid in money to the officers and crew of a ship of eight hundred tons in the service of the Company, towards the close of the last and during the early part of this century; but 10l. per month to the commander, and 5l. per month to the chief mate, very imperfectly represent their remuneration. So many were their privileges, and so numerous their perquisites, that during five India or China voyages a captain of one of the Company’s ships ought to have realised sufficient capital to be independent for the remainder of his life. Under the head of “Indulgences,” the Court of Directors, “desiring to give all due and fitting encouragement to the commanders and officers of ships employed in their service,”[384] allowed them to participate in the Company’s exclusive trade by granting to them a certain amount of tonnage space outwards and homewards in their ships, wherein they might embark, on their own account, free of freight, any goods or manufactures they pleased, except “woollens, camlets, and warlike stores,” which goods the Company thought proper to reserve for their exclusive trade. They had likewise, in proportion to their rank, the privilege of exporting bullion to a specified extent. Homewards they could import any articles they pleased, except tea, China-ware, raw silk, or nankeen cloth from India; nor were they allowed to import from China raw silk, musk, camphor, arrack, arsenic, or other poisonous drugs. The quantity of tea allowed to be imported from China and Bencoolen was limited to 9,336 lbs. for the commander, 1,228 lbs. for the first mate, and 4,668 lbs. for the other mates, and the boatswain, gunner, and carpenter.
Abuse of privileges.
In each ship ninety-seven tons of space was also appropriated to the commander and officers, including those of a subordinate class, such as the quartermasters, stewards, cooks, carpenter, boatswain, gunner, caulker, armourer, and sail-maker; but the commander had the lion’s share, as his proportion of the whole amounted to no less than fifty-six and a half tons. They had besides the privilege of importing in similar proportions China-ware on their own account, provided it was brought as a flooring to the teas, and did not exceed from twenty to forty tons, according to the size of the ship. The commanders likewise received the passage-money of all passengers, except troops, less the cost of their provisions and wine. They, with the officers, were further allowed to bring home as much surplus tonnage as their ships could stow with safety and convenience, not exceeding thirty tons in each vessel, provided such goods were stowed in places not allotted to the Company’s cargo, or had not been tendered to them by the Company’s agents in India or China, or in the event of the ship not bringing home her expected quantity of goods, provided they produced satisfactory proof to the Committee of Private Trade that such deficiency was not occasioned by any default or neglect on their part. The importation of dunnage[385] appears also to have been a perquisite or privilege allowed to the commanders and officers; but this seems to have been abused, as no doubt many other privileges were, for we find that the Court resolved, “that as large quantities of rattans, shanghees, canes, bamboos, sapan, or other articles have been brought home in the Company’s ships, under the denomination of dunnage, far beyond what is necessary for the protection of the cargo and stores, occupying tonnage to the exclusion of goods, or cumbering the ship, the Court have resolved that unless what is brought home of those articles appears absolutely and bonâ fide necessary for and used as dunnage, any exceedings of such requisite quantity shall be charged against the tonnage of the commanders and officers.”[386]
Direct remuneration of commanders.
When we take these various privileges and perquisites into consideration, the direct remuneration to the commander of one of the Company’s ships, inclusive of his monthly pay must have averaged from 3,000l. to 5,000l. each voyage;[387] but considering the various other privileges and “indulgences” granted to him, and the opportunities he had for trading on his own account in the export and import of goods and produce at a time when the fabulously valuable commerce of India was an exclusive monopoly in the hands of the Company, we need have no hesitation in estimating the value in many instances on each voyage of a commander’s appointment at from 8,000l. to 10,000l., or perhaps a great deal more if he was a shrewd man of business, and had sufficient capital to fill the space allotted to him as well as the “dunnage” corners, and “places not allotted to the Company’s cargo,” or not appropriated by their agents, with goods and produce of their own.
Provisions and extra allowances.
Besides an ample supply of provisions to each ship, the commander had almost every luxury he could desire provided at the expense of the Company.[388] He was also allowed to import two pipes of Madeira wine,[389] which were not reckoned as part of his allowance. The first mate, besides his proportions of freight and provisions, had as “indulgences” on each voyage twenty-four dozen of wine or beer, two firkins of butter, one hundredweight of cheese, one hundredweight of grocery, and four quarter cases of pickles. The second the same as the chief, except that his allowance of wine or beer was limited to twenty dozen; and the other officers in somewhat similar proportions. So that their appointments, if not so lucrative as that of the commanders, must have been very desirable and comfortable.
If such were the advantages of the officers in the maritime service of the Company, what must have been the gains of its civil servants in India, who appear not to have been limited or controlled to the same extent in their perquisites or trading privileges. No wonder that the Company, even with its vast monopoly, found itself frequently in difficulties, and obliged to seek, especially in the earlier portion of its career, the assistance of government. Indeed instances sometimes occurred when the commanders and officers, not having filled their allotted space with produce of their own, received for it from China not less than 50l. per ton as freight to London; and in one instance within our own knowledge, the commander of one of the ships employed on the “double voyage”—that is, from London to India, thence to China,[390] and thence back to London, where he had a large interest in the freight on cotton or other produce conveyed from India to China—realised no less than 30,000l.
Illicit trade denounced by the Court,
But notwithstanding these numerous privileges, the Court of Directors having frequently received information of an illicit trade carried on by too many of the officers and commanders of their ships, at last resolved, with the view of putting an end to practices “so detrimental to the revenue, the Company, and the fair trader,” to invariably dismiss from their service any one found guilty of such practices. Indeed, in the hope of detecting the delinquents, they went so far as to publish advertisements, wherein they state that “having received information that great quantities of woollens, camblets, and warlike stores have been illicitly imported; also great quantities of tea, muslins, China-ware, diamonds, and other merchandise have been imported in their ships and smuggled on shore,” they “offer a reward to any person who shall make a discovery of such offence of one-half of what the Company shall recover and receive over and above all other rewards the parties are entitled to by law.”[391]
and measures adopted to discover the delinquents.
But these illicit practices appear at one time to have been carried on not merely in London and at the ports to which the ships of the Company traded in India and China, but at places in England, Scotland, and Ireland their ships had no business to be; for the Court of Directors passed a standing order wherein it was declared that within six weeks of the clearance of the cargoes of the homeward-bound ships, the commander and officers were required to attend a joint committee of private trade and shipping, to whom it was referred to make strict inquiry into the reasons of any deviations made on the passage to London, or during any portion of the voyage, and the committee were enjoined with all convenient speed to report their opinion to the Court. The Directors further “resolved unanimously” that, as these illicit practices were shown to have occurred, and were “frequently carried on” at foreign ports, as well as at out-ports in England, Ireland, and Scotland, to which the ships proceeded “contrary to the orders and instructions given to the commanders,” or by “means of vessels which meet the Company’s ships at sea, and there deliver goods to, and receive goods from them,” stringent measures should be adopted to detect the delinquents.[392] It was consequently further ordered that the clerk to the Committee of Private Trade should within four weeks of the arrival of each ship collect from her journals, and from letters and other means of information brought before him, an account of all the ship’s proceedings “to or towards any port or place, both outward and homeward, without or contrary to the Company’s orders or instructions, and of all the ship’s deviations from, or loitering in, the course of her voyage in the English Channel or elsewhere,” and report the same in writing to the chairman or deputy chairman, and also to the Committees of Private Trade and Shipping. If satisfactory accounts were not given for these deviations, the solicitor to the Court was instructed to file a bill in the Court of Exchequer against the commander of the ship or other persons implicated.
Connivance of the officers of Customs.
But though deviations for any such purposes must have been difficult to trace, as so many excuses could be brought forward in the shape of contrary winds, stress of weather, sickness, loss of spars and sails, or the necessity of a fresh supply of water and provisions for the crew and passengers, the Court of Directors appear to have done everything in their power to discover the delinquents by still further resolving, that on the arrival of the Company’s ships in the River Thames the clerk of the Committee of Private Trade was forthwith to give notice thereof to the Master Attendant or his assistant, or if they were otherwise previously employed, to the Surveyor of Shipping or his assistant, to proceed at once on board of the ship, and before any goods were delivered to carefully examine the state and condition of her hold, and of every part of the lower decks, and report to the Committee of Private Trade what vacant space, if any, remained therein which was fit and proper for the stowage of goods, and also whether any packages appeared to have been removed or displaced during the homeward-bound passage. When any vacant space was discovered which could not be satisfactorily accounted for, the commander was fined in the sum of 100l. for every sixty cubical feet of such vacant space. But these apparently stringent regulations were somehow or other too frequently of no avail, especially in cases where the illicit practices were effected by the connivance of the officers of Customs, or in various other ways, more easily understood than explained, so that convictions were too often rendered impossible or impracticable. And whenever these were made and actions were raised, the “compositions of such suits, very much to the prejudice of the Company,” were so frequent that the Court had to request the Commissioners of his Majesty’s Customs “to be pleased to give an account to its solicitor of all suits which were pending,” and from time to time “of all suits that shall hereafter be brought against any of the commanders and officers of the Company’s ships for practices of smuggling.”[393]
Considering the very high remuneration of the Company’s commanders and officers, and the very liberal manner in which they were treated, we should have thought that no one among them would have been guilty of illegal practices, especially when they were found to be highly prejudicial to the interests of employers at whose hands they were so handsomely treated. But such, we fear, must have been the case, towards the close of the last century, and that to a large extent, or the Court would not have deemed it necessary to issue such stringent regulations for their suppression. Happily the class of men, and the high character of the families to which, as a rule, they belonged, who entered the service in later years, combined with the rigorous enforcement of the Company’s regulations, brought about a different state of things, and put an end to a system which ought never to have prevailed in the best paid maritime service in the world: and did we not feel bound to record such instances of wrong and ingratitude, as these official documents too clearly reveal, we would gladly omit altogether the notice of acts which reflect great discredit on a class of men otherwise deserving our respect and our gratitude for the invaluable services they, on more than one occasion, rendered to their country.
Pensions, and their conditions.
But the liberality of the Company was not confined to the most ample remuneration to their commanders and officers while in active service. It extended to them in their retirement, and provided for those of their widows and children who required its aid. In 1800 the Court of Directors[394] resolved that every commander, officer, seaman, or other person who had served in any of the Company’s ships, or any of its freighted vessels, for eight years, and who had regularly contributed to what was known as the “Poplar Fund,”[395] should be entitled to a pension, subject to the following conditions: that is to say, where a commander was not worth 3,000l., or did not possess a fixed income of at least 150l. per annum, he became entitled to a pension of 100l.; and in cases where the chief or second mate had not 2,000l., nor a clear income of 100l., he received a pension of 60l. per annum. The other officers, down to the midshipmen, were also allowed pensions of from 30l. to 18l. per annum if they did not possess a certain fixed income, or were not worth 600l. Commanders’ widows who stood in need of aid received 80l. per annum, and 16l. for each child under five years of age; and their orphans were each allowed 33l. 6s. 8d. per annum. In these allowances were included the widows, children, and orphans of all mates, pursers, surgeons, and midshipmen who had served in the Company’s own or chartered ships, for the period of eight years; or who had been killed, or maimed, or wounded in the service, so as to be rendered incapable of further service at sea.
Internal economy of the ships.
Watches and Duties.
The internal economy and discipline on board of the Company’s ships were much more perfect than in any other merchant vessels of the period. The crew or seamen of each were divided into two watches, starboard and larboard; the officers into three watches. Each watch of the former had, during the night, four hours’ rest below, and four hours’ duty on deck. At half-past six A.M. the watch on deck commenced to wash and clean decks; at half-past seven the hammocks were piped up, and stowed in the hammock nettings round the waist by the quartermasters. At eight o’clock all hands breakfasted, after which they commenced the ordinary duties of the day. These consisted, when the men were not required to set, shorten, or trim sails, of work of the most multifarious description, such as setting up rigging, shifting or repairing sails, splicing ropes, making spun yarn, weaving mats, painting, tarring, greasing masts, and so forth. Twice every week, Wednesdays and Saturdays, they cleaned and holy-stoned[396] the ’tween-decks, in the fore part of which they slept and had their food, the whole crew being divided into messes of eight men each, who had a space allotted to them between the guns, where their mess utensils were arranged. When these cleaning and scouring operations were finished, the ’tween-decks were carefully inspected by the commander and surgeon, to see that everything was clean and in order, and that all mess kids, brass pots, and kettles, tin pannikins, and other utensils were properly scoured and polished.
On Sunday no work was allowed to be performed except what was urgent and necessary; and on the morning of that day the crew were mustered and inspected before assembling at prayers, which every person on board was expected to attend in his best attire. Dinner was served at noon; after that the men, on week-days, resumed their work until the “dog watches,” which commenced at four P.M. These, no doubt, derived their name from the fact that they were (according to Theodore Hook) cur-tailed, that is, lasted for only two, instead of four hours each watch, viz., from four to six, and from six to eight, when the crew, instead of going below to rest, usually employed themselves in sorting the contents of their sea-chests, or in making or repairing their clothes, and frequently in games or other amusements, which every good commander encouraged. On Saturdays, during these hours, if the weather permitted, they had their dance or songs and music, drinking health and wealth, long life and happiness to their “wives and sweethearts.” In harbour the crews of the Company’s ships performed, without the assistance, as now, of the natives, all the work on board, such as discharging, loading, and stowing cargo, as well as stripping and refitting the rigging of their ships, and keeping the boats in order. In China they rowed guard, on Sundays, among the ships in harbour. One day every week was allotted to washing their clothes; and once every month they scrubbed their hammocks. These were known as “washing” days.
Courts-martial.
Nor did their duties end here. The Company’s ships were ships of war, as will be seen by the many gallant actions they fought, as well as merchantmen. Each of them mounted from twelve to twenty-six guns, chiefly eighteen-pounders, and the men were drilled to gun-exercise with almost as much care as the gunners of the royal navy. They had likewise to go through a regular course of musket, cutlass, and other small-arms drill, in which they were expected to be thoroughly efficient, as also in the art of handling the boarding-pike, more especially for the purpose of defence. Courts-martial were held on board, as in ships of war, the members of which were composed of the commander and the four senior or sworn officers, the fourth or junior mate giving his opinion of what the verdict ought to be before any of the other members. And when punishments were inflicted, which was too frequently the case for the most trifling offences, the lash from the brawny arm of a boatswain’s mate over the bare back and shoulders of the delinquent was much more severely felt than would have been the lash of a drummer’s mate. Three dozen of such lashes was no uncommon punishment.
Change in the policy of the East India Company.
The renewal of the Company’s charter in 1814, until 1831, though granted by Parliament, was, as we have seen, so stoutly opposed by the representatives in Parliament of the out-ports and the great manufacturing districts, that various concessions were offered to the growing intelligence of the people and to their increasing wants. But the granting of licences and the extension of conditional privileges did not satisfy the demands of a people who were beginning to ask their rulers the unanswerable question why they should not be allowed to purchase what they required in the cheapest markets; and who saw that though the territory of the Company had increased to an enormous extent, its commerce, considering the extent of the land and the richness of the soil now in the Company’s possession, was altogether insignificant; in a word, that territorial aggrandisement had now become the Alpha and Omega of the Company’s policy.
Results of free trade with India,
Events thoroughly demonstrated the force and truth of these impressions. In the face of many difficulties, private traders, whenever they obtained a footing in the trade of the East, were certain immediately afterwards to secure an ascendancy over the Company in its trading operations, and in a very short time trebled the trade of England with the East. Such in this case, as in numerous other instances, are the effects of individual energy, even when curtailed and contracted as in the present instance, over monopoly, however influential and powerful. How indelibly marked are now the footprints of free-trade in the pages of the commercial history of the East Indies! In 1814, when the close monopoly of the Company was brought to an end, the value of exports from the United Kingdom to British India amounted to 1,870,690l.; in 1820, after the trade had been partially opened to individual energy, it reached 3,037,911l.; in 1830, when still somewhat fettered, it was 4,087,311l. In 1840 the exports amounted to 5,212,839l.; and in 1850 to 7,242,194l. In 1854 the value of the exports and imports was 20,293,572l.; in 1860 it had reached 32,791,195l.; and in 1870 it amounted to no less than 45,183,912l.[397]
and of the Company’s trading operations.
It is very questionable if the East India Company, even at the period of its closest monopoly, or, indeed, during any portion of its career, ever realised much profit by its commercial operations. Many of their employés were enabled to amass very considerable fortunes, but the shareholders were paid their dividends from other sources of gain than commerce: sources it is not our province to explore; and perhaps, for the credit of England, it would be better if a veil could be drawn over many of the acts of the Company and its servants. Nor were the Directors, whatever they may have been as individuals, competent, as a body, to conduct a lucrative commerce at distances so remote. “It was not in the nature of things,” remarks Mr. McCulloch,[398] “that the Company’s purchases could be fairly made; the natives could not deal with their servants as they would have dealt with private individuals, and it would be absurd to suppose that agents authorized to buy on account of government, and to draw on the public treasury for the means of payment, should generally evince the prudence and discretion of individuals directly responsible in their own private fortunes for their transactions. The interference of such persons would, under any circumstances, have rendered the East Indian trade peculiarly hazardous. But their influence in this respect was materially aggravated by the irregularity of their appearances. No individual not belonging to the Court of Directors could foresee whether the Company’s agents would be in the market at all, or, if there, to what extent they would either purchase or sell. So capricious were their proceedings, that in some years they laid out 700,000l. on indigo, while in others they did not lay out a single shilling, and so with other things. A fluctuating demand of this sort necessarily occasioned great and sudden variations of price, and was injurious alike to the producers and the private merchants.”
China trade thrown open, 1832-1834.
Indeed when, in 1832, the renewal of the Company’s charter came to be again discussed in Parliament, the Directors had no valid reasons to offer against the entire opening of their trade, and had evidently no longer any desire, especially in face of the increased power of the free-traders, to resist the demands which were made to allow private shipowners to trade to all parts of the East, including China, on the same conditions, in all respects, as the vessels belonging to or chartered by the Company: the owners, therefore, finding it impossible to compete, with any prospect of success, against individual energy, unless protected, sold their ships, and from that time the Company ceased to be traders.
Company abolished, 1858.
In the [Appendix][399] will be found an account of how the vessels belonging to the Company were disposed of, the names of their purchasers, and the prices realised, which are small indeed compared with what they must have cost.[400] From April 1834, when the Company’s trade with China ceased, its functions have been wholly political, and the Directors, though retaining their patronage in the civil and military services, became little more than a council to advise and assist the president of the Board of Control. In 1858 they were deprived by Parliament of all their power and privileges, and ceased to exist as a governing body, the whole of the British dominion in India being then placed under a Secretary of State in Council for India, and its military and civil services merged with those of the United Kingdom.
Retiring allowance to commanders and officers.
When the Company’s commercial operations were brought to a close the commanders and officers of their “maritime service”[401] memorialised the Court for compensation for loss of employment, and requested to be placed on a footing somewhat equivalent to what the officers and servants on their own ships would have been entitled to claim by law or usage, had they been discharged or otherwise deprived of employment. This memorial, which will be found in the [Appendix], contains a good deal of information connected with the service worthy of perusal. Though drawn up in the form of a petition, it reads more like a demand, the memorialists resting their claims upon certain words in their agreements for servitude, and upon one of the sections of an Act of Parliament.[402]
Compensations and increased pensions granted.
Although opposed to the demand, and furnishing very valid reasons for their opposition, the Directors,[403] nevertheless, after reference to a meeting of shareholders, and to Parliament, “being anxious to extend the measure of relief as widely as possible,” granted compensation to all commanders and officers who had been actually employed in the “maritime service” within the period of five years antecedent to the 22nd of April, 1834, upon their declaration that it had been their intention to continue to follow their profession in the maritime service of the Company. This compensation amounted to a money payment of 1,500l. to each commander, 1,000l. to a master, and sums ranging from 600l. to 150l. to the chief mate, down to the fourth mate and purser. Besides these payments, they gave by way of further compensation to each commander, upon their declaration as to the number of voyages which they would have performed had the service continued, the sum of 4,000l. for three unexpired voyages, 3,000l. for two voyages, and for one voyage of which they had been deprived, 2,000l. Pensions[404] were likewise granted by the Company on a graduated scale to commanders and officers who had served ten years in the service, not for sickness or incapacity, but simply on the ground, for which their own attestation was sufficient, that they were unable to obtain employment, and that any income they possessed should go in abatement of such pension.
The commanders of the ships belonging to the Company (their number was small compared with those on the hired or “maritime service”) who had five voyages to perform were each paid, by way of compensation, a sum of 5,000l.; four voyages, 4,500l.; three voyages, 4,000l.; two voyages, 3,000l., and one voyage, 2,000l.; while the officers of these ships received compensation according to the situations they filled.[405] Nor were they less liberally dealt with in the way of pensions when the commercial affairs of the Company were brought to a close. Each commodore then received 400l. per annum; each commander 300l.; and each officer, from the chief down to the warrant officer, was granted a pension for life, ranging from 200l. to 30l. per annum. Widows were allowed two-thirds of their husbands’ pensions during their widowhood. Nor were the children overlooked, for they too received pensions according to their wants.
We should have been at a loss to understand the cause of the very liberal conduct of the East India Company to its servants, had the Directors themselves not derived emoluments far beyond what they were entitled to receive by the conditions on which they had agreed to serve, and our readers also might have been puzzled to understand why they displayed such extraordinary liberality. No doubt some qualms of conscience led them to feel that they ought to pluck the beams from their own eyes before scrutinising too narrowly the motes in those of their servants.
Remuneration of the Directors.
The fixed and acknowledged remuneration to the Directors was 300l. per annum; but the general opinion of the day seems to have been (and this opinion was frequently expressed) that the worth of each directorship amounted to no less than 10,000l. per annum, in one form or another; and certainly the avidity with which these directorships were sought after, when a vacancy occurred, and the large sums of money expended in obtaining the appointment, too clearly show that there were valid reasons for the popular rumour. Candidates, who were nearly all men otherwise in the enjoyment of lucrative employment as bankers or merchants, or who had filled high appointments in the civil or military service of the Company, would not have sent “carriages and four” to remote parts of the kingdom for voters, each of whom was limited to four votes, to secure an appointment to which they were expected to devote some portion at least of their time, and this, too, for the paltry remuneration of 300l. per annum. Indeed it was not in the nature of things that they should do so.
Their patronage.
The reason, however, may be explained by the fact that, associated with the position of a Director, there was a large amount of patronage under his own immediate control, which he claimed by rotation. That this must have been of very considerable value, may be suspected from the fact that the successful candidate sometimes gave the whole of his first year’s patronage to the chairman of his election committee. The estimated value of these nominations we have no means of knowing, nor would it be possible to ascertain what other sources of gain were within the reach of those Directors who felt disposed to avail themselves of them. Among, however, the more common and direct appointments, all the cadetships were at their disposal, as were also assistant-surgeons, chaplains, solicitors, and pilots, who were constantly required to fill up vacancies, or meet the ever-increasing demands of the service. Governors and members of the Indian Council had likewise to be supplied, and their places filled as vacancies occurred. Then there were writerships, worth from 4,000l. to 6,000l. per annum, at the disposal of the Court; while there was a grand plum in the appointment of young gentlemen to the civil service of the Company in China, each of whom, if he lived, was certain to reach the office of “Tyepan,” known to be worth 20,000l. per annum. But the appointments to this special and highly-favoured service were exclusively in the gift of the chairman, who seems almost invariably to have bestowed them upon some member of his own family, or near relative, or upon the son of a Director who, no doubt, reciprocated so great a favour when he had the opportunity. These nominations, however, were considered so valuable, that, though the chairman had double patronage, he was expected not to exercise any portion of it during the remainder of the year when the nomination to the Tyepanship fell to his lot.