'History of the Indian Navy. (1613-1863).' [‎209] (228/622)

HISTORY OF THE INDIAN NAVY,
209
ment he had received; though, as the " Bombay Times " of the
20th of September, incidentally remarked, " he would, it is
said, have been restored had he survived." Lieutenant Bird
had been tried by court-martial, in December, 1843, for negli
gence in grounding the ' Cleopatra ' near Suez, but acquitted;
upon which the Commander-in-chief and Court of Directors The London-based directors of the East India Company who dealt with the daily conduct of the Company's affairs.
animadverted upon the leniency of the Court, and ever since he
had been a marked man.
There can be no doubt that Sir Robert Oliver possessed
abilities, though they were limited to his acquisitions as a good
"steam officer" and mechanic as well as sailor, but he had
small claims to be considered a scientific officer, and the marine
surveys, which have ever been one of the chief glories of the
Indian Navy, were discouraged by him, and only the most
urgent were undertaken during his For this, however,
it is more than probable that his masters in Leadenhall Street
were to blame, as Sir Robert Oliver went out to India as the
apostle of economy, and his orders were imperative to cut down
expenditure in every department. His honesty and high prin
ciple were unquestioned, and he served the Government to the
utmost extent of his capacity, regardless of the strain on his
physical strength.
Active and zealous in the discharge of his duties he had
obtained so completely the ear of Government and the Court of
Directors, that his word was law, and he was entrusted with
almost absolute power, which he did not always exercise wisely or
well. The effect of his arbitrary conduct on the discipline of
the Indian Nav^y, as we have seen, induced no less than nine
teen officers, including some of the best and steadiest in the
Service, to petition the Court against their chief, and, though the
Directors and Government supported him, that this state of
indiscipline was due to mismanagement is proved by the fact
that, after his death, the Service was always loyal to'the three
Commanders-in-chief, who ruled over it, in succession, up to the
date of its abolition, and no instances of an insubordinate spirit
were ever again manifested. Sir Robert Oliver also displayed
none of whom knew but tliat their own turn for victimization might be at hand.
A reprimand of unusual violence was returned from the India House, where the
Oliver interest was supreme and triumphant. That a greater degree of secrecy
than that in general prevailing would under such circumstances obtain, was, on
tins occasion, to have been expected, where there was so much meanness and
tyranny to be ashamed of, and the first light let in upon the secrets of the Council
Chamber, was afforded by the examinations before the Committee of Indian
lairs in 1852. Mr. Willoughby, one of the ablest of our public servants, and
Member of Council when these oppressions occurred, stated that he had then
recorded an opinion condemnatory, as it would appear, of the conduct of Sir
Kobert Oliver, and was told that his views being calculated, in the opinion of the
T\/^ U1 TTr^n P romo ^ e discontent in the Service, were highly disapproved at home.
Mr. V\ illoughby states that he felt so much shocked by this gratuitous insult,
that he considered his independence as a Member of Council extinguished."
VOL. 11. p