2272. She having been rejected by the East India Company in 1841?--It was not for the same service, but for a very different service; but she was, in fact, employed upon the line. 2273. I understood you to complain, that in the year 1844, the Board of Admiralty laid down a certain condition with regard to the horse power of the vessels to be employed in conveying the mails between Suez and Calcutta, which condition excluded the steamer “India?”--Yes. 2274. I understood you also to say, that that very same condition as to the horse power had been previously laid down by the East India Company, and that in the year 1841 the steamer “India” was pressed upon the East India Company by the Peninsular and Oriental Company, who had expected to buy her as a good bargain; and that the East India Company, being so pressed, refused to accept her?--I can now explain it. 2275. Is all that true?--Partly so, but not in the way you put it. 2276. But are the facts true; yes or no. I have collected the facts from your previous answers, and am putting them to you again; if any one of them be inaccurate, point out the one which is inaccurate?--You ask whether she was rejected in 1841; she was. But allow me to give the reasons. 2277. Was she rejected for the service between Suez and Calcutta in the year 1841?--She was refused to be received under a certain engagement. 2278. Did the East India Company, in the year 1841, refuse to accept the “India” steamer for the line between Suez and Calcutta?--Yes, but that had no reference to her capacity as a mail steamer.