The Press. — London, England, 1853-06-25 00:00:00

17% SIR CHARLES WOOD'S LEGAL REFORMS FOR INDIA. TO THE EDITOR OF " THE PRES 6." Sir,—One of the most remarkable propositions in Sir Charles Wood's notable plan for the future go vernment of India is the consolidation in each of the presidencies of her Majesty's Supreme Courts and the ,udder Adawhus, or Chief Courts of the East India Company. The right honourable gentleman says "he believes that the constitution of both courts would be improved by the amalgamation." I should like to know in what way. The Queen's judges know no more of the peculiar laws administered in the Sadder Courts than the Man in the Moon, and their learned brethren who preside in the Sudder Adaw luta are of course equally, and perhaps happily, ignorant of the common law as it prevailed in Enema in 1726, which governs the justice dealt out to those who are so fortunate as to fall within the grasp of the Supreme Courts' juris diction. Sir C. Wood goes on to say-- We believe that the addition of the Queen's judges will in troduce the improved law and knowledge which they carry from this country into the Company's service, and that the Company's judges sitting with lawyers from this country will give these English lawyers what they want—an acquaintance with the manners, and habits, and laws of India." This is all very tine in theory. No doubt the Queen's judges would get some valuable hints in questions of HindO and Mu hammadan law from the old and tried Indian judicial sensate ; here, however, the improvement" would stop, while it is impossible to calculate the mischief that might arise from the interference of the former in matters of which they must of necessity be wholly ignorant. But the climax of the scheme is, that this proposed united court " shall be the Court of Ultimate Appeal in each of the presidencies from all the others." It is obvious that it would be pro ductive of the greatest advantage to retain the court of last resort in India ; and, if we could persuade such men as Knight Bruce and Pemberton Leigh to go into voluntary exile, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council might cease to trouble themselves with Indian cases. But no banister who has attained any eminence in his profession here will sacrifice his prospects of advancement, and run all the risks of cli mate, for 5,0001. a year; still less those who have already achieved greatness. Most people are now aware that the much-talked-of " judicial mind" and " legal edu cation" carried to India by her Majesty's judges is all fudge. Let any one look over the lists of Supreme Court judges, and see how many men were known before they went out, and how many became eminent afterwards. There are some few, Indeed, who have acquitted themselves admirably on the Indian bench ; 1 could name three, now alive, who would be an honour to Westminster-hall—but these are accidents. It is notorious that the sole requisite qualification for an Indian judgeship in the Supreme Courts is the friendship of the Attorney-General of the day. Sir Charles, in a former part of his speech, mentions that, on appeal to this country, two-thirds of the decisions of the Company's judges were affirmed, whilst of those of the Queen's judges only one-third was affirmed. This statistical fact redects great credit on the judges of the Sadder Adawluts but we confess that, as exactly one-haV of the decisions in appeal from the chief courts in India are re versed in the Privy Council, we do not quite see the advantage of abolishing the appeal to England, or exactly comprehend the process by which the supe rior courts in India are "to improve each other." The inconvenience and cost of an appeal to this country have been much exaggerated. The Lords of the Judicial Committee are now occupied with roes. sures for limiting the expense, and the time eon mimed is not unreasonable. The only alteration which, as it seems to us. would be really an improve ment on the present system is. that some of the most eminent retired Indian civilians should be appointed members or assessors of the Judicial Committee. This plan, we think, would greatly facilitate the administration of justice. The present members of the Committee, though the most learned men in England, are but slightly, if at all, acquainted with the subject matter of every appeal which involves questions relating to the revenue and to landed pro perty in the Slofussil (and these form a large pro portion of the appealed cases), whilst a Colebrooke, a Butterworth Bayley, or a Courtenay Smith, would at once be able to remove all doubts and difficulties. If this alteration were etfected we should bring into contact the greatest amount of judicial actuuen, and of local knowledge and practical experience, and we should have a court of last resort for India which could scarcely err.—l am, sir, yours, faithfully, Dawns. THE PRESS. Vrocubings in V arlianunt. INDIA BILL The second reading of this bill being moved on Thursday, Lord STANLEY proposed an amendment, which, he remarked, would pledge the house to nothing, except the opinion that further information and deliberation were necessary' before Parliament could deal satisfactorily with the question of Indian administration. In proof of his assertion that it VMS inexpedient, unadvisable, and indeed impossible to legislate for the permanent government of India, he adduced many reasons—the lateness of the ses sion ; the insufficiency of information ; the imma turity of public opinion ; and the fact that com mittees of both houses were still prosecuting their inquiries. He adverted to the precedents of former sessions, citing the dates both when previous changes in the India charter, and when important measures of home policy, were introduced ; and showing that in every instance a much longer period had been allowed for discussion than the six weeks which were all that now remained, even if they stretched the session out to the utmost length. Turning then to the pleas offered against delay, he remarked that the principal argument was based upon the pre sumed danger of agitation in India. That danger he could not consider serious. The Indian adminis tration had heretofore been in a transition state, without producing the slightest disturbance. For insurrection in that country there were few elements and no leaders ; and the natives were hardly likely to be stirred into sedition merely by the postpone ment of certain administrative regulations, of which multitude; among them would never hear, when they had quietly submitted to the death or dethronement of their own princes. But, whatever the positive peril, he argued that the comparative danger was less from delay than from the passing of a bad and in complete measure. In both cases the system would necessarily remain on a provisional basis : " The house was tokl that if they did not legislate im mediately they would weaken the authority of British rule iu India. But did out the bill itself bear the impress of provisional legislation ? ( Hear. ) The right hon. gentle man, at all events. had produced a measure which he said was to be regarded as an experiment, and which could be amended if it did not work well. But surely the result of that was to suspend legislation, and to product a pro visional state of things for au almost indefinite period. ( Hear.) As regarded the actual administration of affairs in India, what would be the result of putting the Company on its trial fur a little time longer? He believed it would be situply this—that all persons employed under the exist ing tirovernment would work under an increased sense of responsibility, and with increased activity in the endea vour to set their house in order, knowing that this ques tion would again shortly come under the consideration of Parliament. It was generally said in India that more local reforms and improvements were effected in the two or three years which preceded the expiration of the charter than in the whole previous period of its duration. That he believed to be literally the cage. There seemed every probability in its favour, and that was one good re sult which he should anticipate tioni the suspension fur a time of permanent legislation." Lord Stanley proceeded to deny—and corroborated his denial by the language of Earl Derby—the asser tion that the late Government had proposed to le gislate for India before receiving the completed re ports of the committees. His present amendment, he remarked, implied, of course, the passing of a " continuance bill," prolonging for one or two years the existing system. Admitting that some portions of the Government scheme were unobjectionable, he pro ceeded to criticise the three principal features it con tained, and in each of which there were many faults to be detected. Respecting patronage, he thought a greater change was desirable. He allowed that the charges brought against the directors were ex aggerated. The men were better than the system. But the system was essentially wrong which turned appointments for the public service into a source of private remuneration. The labours of the directors were performed in private, and very inadequately paid ; so that each member of the board received no equivalent in money or fame, but was practically paid in patronage. This justified the inference that patronage was not to be exercised entirely for the public benefit. Yet this erroneous system was not broken up by the new bill. Individually, he corn puted that the directors, in their reduced numbers, would enjoy very nearly the same amount of pa tronage as of old. And even with that portion of the civil patronage reserved for the Government they did not deal very judiciously : •• They had introduced a principle unknown in this country, but which was said to prevail in China. and there fore it might be called the Chinese principle- namely, that of unlimited intellectual competition for admission to civil offices. He did not fur a moment deny that the introduc tion of such a system was an improvement upon the pre sent one. He believed it was infinitely preferable that those appointments should be rescued pritIOUS who, by their intellectual meets, were more capable of filling them with credit than others. He approved of that principle ; but. though he was far from condemning the experiment, still he could not help thinking the right hon. gentleman SATURDAY, would find sowe practical difficulties in carrying out such a plan in detail. In the first place, the competition waa open to all England. He did not know exactly the number of applications that had generally been made fur civil ay puintmeuts; but, if it was anything like the number .4 ap plications which all persons received fur situations of infi nitely less importance, he apprehended that the number would be much greater than the right how gentleman seemed to anticipate. There would also be a practical difficulty in eubmitting to a proper examination such au enormous and unwieldy number of persona. He supposed there was something in the circumstance of making a man's fortune in life depend on his proficiency at a very early age ; but he thought the principle proposed with re spect to examinations was rather exclusive in refusing ad mission to civil otfices to all there who had not distin guished themselves at au early period of life. Upon the whole the propped principle of intellectual competition cast SO infinitely better than the present system of distri buting patronage that he was not willing to find fault with the details of that part of the measure. But be thought they were running some risk of flooding India with over educated mediocrity." Upon the second topic—that of the double-govern ment system—Lord Stanley postponed any minute criticism, remarking merely that the scheme proposed by the Government did not seem calculated to ensure efficiency. The chief requisite in any body of di rectors was perfect independence of the Government of the day. By the proposed plan six nominees of the Government, holding seats in the House of Commons, would be among the members of the board ; and it was impossible that such persons should not be under Ministerial influence. A worse fault in the measure was, that it abstained from alter • ing the constitution of the Court of Proprietors : had no hesitation in saying that if they were anxious to avoid continued agitation, or to introduce any change or reform, those reforms could only completely serve the people of India which dealt effectively with the Court of Proprietors. (Hear, hear.) A great deal was to be said on behalf of the double government, consisting of the Board of Directors and of the Board of Control, but he had never heard a single argument adduced in defence of the existing Court of Proprietors. That body possessed nu acquaintance with India, took no particular interest in Indian affairs, exercised no control over the director. who were elected by them, and possessed no responsibility to the people of India. (Hair, hear. The measure now proposed left this court in precisely the same state as at present, with the exception of the introduction of some bylaws, the object of which was to do away with canvassing fur directors." Lastly, regarding the internal management of a ff air:, the judicial system, public works, and education, the noble lord remarked upon the misdoings and short comings under the present system. With no inva sion to dread, there had been many wars—perhap, necessary, but always costly, and all of which were begun by the Indian Government. The financial condition of the country had, he thought. been treated too lightly, and was anything but satisfactory or ere. ditable. Public works should be estimated. not by single performances, but by the proportionate expendi ture ; and among the conflicting statements the most authentic pointed to an outlay of only 300,0001. out of a revenue of 20,000,0001. Education, by a similar process, was found to have been starve d upon a few thousands a year scattered among an enormous population. Lord Stanley then summed up his argument : - He had endeavoured to show that it was inexpedient, if not impossible. to legislate at this moment with &Ivan tagt‘ ; that the dangers which were likely to arise from delay were rather imaginary than real ; that. while upon the one hand the measure of the right honourable gentle man was not a measure of permanent and final reform, it only disturbed existing arrangements upon the other : lastly. taking one after another the principal branches of Indian administration. to express that which -fits un doubtedly his firm and conscientious opinion, that what ever the Indian tiovemnient might have dons, in whatever respects it might have been successful—and he did nut deny that it had been successful in many—in administer ing the territories of India, there was yet in its adminis tration. as conducted during the last twenty years. ,inil le room and sufficient cause for the strict and searching in. vestigations of Parliament, before Parliament either passed a verdict of approval upon its past conduct. or before it left in its hands am portion of the power which it still possessed. (Hear. "hear.)" The noble lord concluded by moving, as an amend ment : " That. in the opinion of this house. thrther information Is ne reasar) to etuible Parliament to legislate with *thantage for the permanent goverinueut .1 India; and that. a: this late period of the session, it is in.-xpe livut to proceed with a measure while It disturbs existing arnangemeuls, eailliOt a final sou event." Mr. Lows complained that the amendment rested on the assumption that the Government bill was permit nent. It was just the reverse, and proposed a plan which Parliament were always to have the power of altering. As for the lateness of the session, earl• or late were relative terms, turning upon a variety of considerations and necessities. He quoted instance: of bills, and even India bills, being introduced at more advanced periods than the present. Another argu rnent for delay was the prevailing ignorance of the English Legislature and public on the subject. That argument was worthless unless accompanied by the assunince--which could not bt giveu--thst in two