59
no fraud was committed, and the other is that no motive for a fraud does exist. Alum Ali Khan is paid for the maintenance of his troops stationed in five districts, from the District and Central Treasuries. A certain sum paid to him from the District Treasuries and not deducted from that owing to him in the District Accounts, was overdeducted by the Central Accounts Branch. Thus though mistakes were committed yet the result turned out to be what it ought to be. This the gentleman who congratulated himself on having discovered frauds and hastened to turn his discovery to account was too blind to see. Now as to the so-called motive for a fraud: it is inferred by the Government from the fact of the Nawab Imad Nawaz Jung's having sold his house "which was ultimately sold for Rs. 26,000 and which is really of that value to Alum Ali Khan for Rs. 45,000. The house according to the valuation of four professional men, is worth over Rs. 62,000 and that it was not "ultimately sold for Rs. 20,000" as stated by the Government plaint but for Rs. 45,000 is proved by a letter addressed to the Nawab Imad Nawaz Jung by Alum Ali Khan. And no portion of the purchase money was allowed to be appropriated by any one by the Nawab. These facts speak for themselves.
Jaya Rao has been acquitted. The Judges of the High Court who heard his appeal against the decision of Afzul Husain have reversed the sentence of the Lower Court. And to Mr. Norton, of the Madras Bar, is due the credit of having secured this. I commend Mr. Norton's able defence to the notice of those here who looked unutterable thoughtfulness when my letters commenting upon Afzul Husain's judgment appeared. They will now see that I was not fighting with shadows, that I evolved nothing out of my inner consciousness, that I but noticed what must be palpable to every one who is not born blind.
My attention has just been drawn to "A Member's" letter about "the Hindu Social Club" here. The letter is at best a sorry attempt to prove that I have "compromised the position
