The Press. — London, England, 1856-04-26 00:00:00

Ann 26, 1856 limited to security for life and property, im partial and competent courts of justice to de cide their disputes, an absence of all vexa tious interference at the hands of Government officials, and that courteous bearing on the part of their rulers wherein the Queen herself sets so excellent an example—an example it would be well if her delegates in India more generally imitated. A native of India does not want, to be sure, to be allowed self-govern ment, for that is a privilege he is neither accustomed to nor understands. But, on the other hand, he conceives it his right to have the freest access to the Sovereign or her deputy, to whose sway he is subjected—the fundamental check upon abuse of power in all Asiatic despotisms having ever been such un limited power of personal representation to the head of the State. It is the almost total departure of our Government in India from this principle that has caused so ill a feeling to be created towards it of late years in the native mind. Excepting at the Presidency capitals the Governors are seldom seen, and the petitions sent to them are for the most part unheeded. To adopt the principles of a native despotism in ruling India while closing down the safety-valve, which alone could make it tolerable, is like what attempting to rule England would be on the principles of the Constitution, while extinguishing the power most necessary to its safe working—a free and independent House of Commons. In the same way there is not a single ques tion connected with agriculture or commerce in India in which the elements of prosperity or ruin are not precisely the same as those which would be productive equally of pro sperity or ruin, if applied to agriculture or commerce in England. To judge, therefore, correctly of an Indian agricultural question, one has only to reflect what would be the proper course if the question was one relating to lauds at home ; and the conclusion to which common sense would lead one in the latter case will be found on trial to be equally true of the former as well. In England, for in stance, what would be an impossible rent for a pauper tenant to pay is given willingly by a substantial farmer ; and the same would be found true at Madras. In England bank ruptcy would be the fate of a landlord who let his land to men who had not capital to stock or crop it ; and the same we find to be the case with the Company at Madras. In England what capitalists chiefly look to in land are the rights and honours of proprietorship, with a prospect of profits from improvements ; and therefore there is nothing wonderful in their refusing a year-to-year tenancy at Madras. In England one of the most gratifying of these proprietary rights is the entire absence of all extraneous interference, the being, in fact, one's own master. In Madras the man that accepts the occupation of land under the existing state of things becomes to all intents and purposes a serf: he is compelled on all occasions to provide supplies for the collec tor , he has his carts and his labourers ever litble to impreosment ; and he is himself sub jected to every pultawalla's insolence, and is eternally at every petty official's beck and call. If the lands of England were all the lands of the Crown, and subject to such ser vices and such annoyances as these, there is no doubt that they too would he avoided as a pest by all now engaged in their cultivation and left to be tenanted by the same miserable set of paupers that, owing to these causes, are the only tenants the Company can find for its lands iu Madras. The proper plan, therefore, of proceeding, if we would save the Indian revenue from de struction, is to reverse our whole system. and revert to that (corrected and enlarged by Euro pean intelligence) which was prevalent in India in happier times. Abolish the whole system of services of this kind, and all rights of purveyance and impressment on the Go vernment's part. Abolish in favour of those applying for the change all acreage assess ment throughout Madras. Let each zemin dar or ryot contract for the rent of his whole holding at its present rate, allowing him to increase his income by the cultivation of his waste lands at pleasure ; and let every village community do the same that wishes. Where the uncultivated lands within the THE PRESS. limits of such contract bear an overwhelming proportion to the cultivated, let the rent be a rent increasing annually by a small per centage, and give leases for such lands in perpetuity, or for long periods, if the tenants of them so desire. Add a clause to every such lease, allowing the tenant to redeem his rent and become the purchaser of the freehold at any time, and give security to such freeholds by making it lawful for the possessors to have any question arising out of them tried in the Supreme Courts of Judicature, if they prefer it, instead of in the Company's Courts. Do this— do in fact what in substance has brought Eng land to such a pitch of prosperity, and is now working such miracles in Ireland—and the public may take our words for it that the whole face of India will be changed within the lifetime of this generation ; and that a wealthier, or hap pier, or a better fed tenantry, will exist nowhere than on the rich and fertile plains of Madras. The Government officials will say that it is useless to make provision for the purchase of freeholds when the occupiers are paupers ; but the paupers would soon be super seded by, or fall into partnership with, a wealthier class, under circumstances which favored the application of capital to land. THE IRISH JUDICATURE. FOR the last few years it has been unfortunate that, owing to "a distaste for Irish subjects in " England," the Whig Oligarchy has been allowed to run riot in its caprices at Dublin Castle. The feeling which revolts from con siderations of Irish questions has been car ried too far. The Whigs have now assaulted the Irish Bench in the extraordinary appoint ment of Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH. The important part which the Judicature plays in Irish society, and its immediate connection with the Imperial Executive, will justify us in con tinuing to direct the attention of our readers to this grave matter. We are sorry to say that, owing to the or ganised clamour of late years, the voice of truth has been drowned in many affairs re• lating to the government of Ireland. For example, if the question were raised in any company as to whether there were more nomi nations to the Irish Bench by Conservative or Liberal Ministers, the answer would pro bably be—" Oh! the Bench of Ireland is in " the interest of the old Protestant ascendancy "It is a regular Tory institution." The very reverse is actually the case. So far from being " a Tory institution," the Irish Judicature is a " Liberal " connection. There are eight of the judges who have been nominated under " Liberal" Ministers, and only four under Conservative Cabinets ! We were struck with the fact, while perusing the returns to Sir JOHN SHELLEY's sinister motion ; but we were not surprised at it, recollecting Mr. DISRAELI'S recent remark about the Liberals having been in office since 1830, with a few brief excep tions. Here are the facts about the Cabinets who have advised the Crown in the nomination of the sitting twelve judges in Ireland : QUEEN'S BENCH. PRIME MINISTERS. Chief Justice Lefroy, appointed by Earl of Derby Judge Crampton ig Earl Grey Judge Moore gg Lord J. Russell Judge Perrin gg Vis. Melbourne COMMON PLEAS. Chief Just. Monahan, appointed by Lord J. Russell Judge Keugh Judge Ball Judge Jackson Vie. Palmerston Via. Melbourne Sir Robert Peel COURT OF EXCHEQUER. Chief Baron Pigot, appointed by Lord J. Russell Baron Pennefather ~ Earl of Liverpool Baron Greene ti Sir Robert Peel Baron Richards " Via. Melbourne As our readers will perceive, this is a most remarkable statement. Here we have the fact proved, that on the Irish Bench eight of the judges have been nominated by Liberal Cabinets, and only four by Conservatives. Or, in other words, that the " Liberal" judges of Ireland are in the proportion of two to one against their learned brethren selected from the Conservative connection. Let us n, again of the Irish Bench being a " T tution." Only four of the twelve Ireland—to wit, Chief Justice LEFROY JacasoN, and Barons PENNEF4THER an —have been nominated by Conscrvai nets. But we must now call attention claims of the Irish Bar. It is a fession, and none other offers finer Irishmen of talent and "reputable" The Bar of Ireland has glorious rep and spirit•stirring traditions. A great names illustrates its annals. many practical statesmen, and produ , ral orators of high renown. The the Irish race has been splendidly o•.Is in the vivid versatility of intellect . variety of mental force, shown by the leading practitioners at the Bar of Ireland during the last hundred years. In the opinion of some keen observers, her brilliant Bar is the finest proof of the power of Irish mind. It has sent forth many men whose names, in Lord PLUNKET'S words, " are buoyant enough to " float down the stream of time." Mr. HELY HUTCHINSON, the author of "Irish Commercial Restraints," was a formidable Parliamentary leader; YELVERTON (Lord Avonmore) encoun tered the famous HENRY FLOOD in 1783 with un common vigour, succeeding triumphantly when GRATTAN faltered. Lord CLARE (Fitzgibbon) was a bold thinker, and had signal capacity for affairs; CURRAN was a glorious child of genius, who challenged the rivalry of ERSKINE, and won the enthusiastic admiration of BYRON. Mr. SAURIN was a great proconsular ruler, deep, wary, and profound. Mr. BLACKBURN, in our own days, showed masterly talent in deal ing with grave emergencies,—as Lords ANGLE SEY, WELLESLEY, and Clarendon, well knew Sir MICHAEL O'Loarmix was reverenced for his truth, impartiality, and honour. 0 CONNELL, at the Bar, was universally admired for his extraordinary forensic prowess. SHELL and SHAW were debaters of refined style and vigorous effect. The talents of banisters now practising the law in Ireland we do not, from motives of delicacy, enumerate ; but we could easily specify upwards of a score of most honourable gentlemen, Conservative and Liberal, who have a better right than Mr. Wuxi/4m KEOGH to sit on the Judicial Bench. The Bar in Ireland, however, is peculiarly circumstanced. Though in many respects a powerful body, and with many prizes, yet when disgraceful appointments and scan dalous jobs are perpetrated it is tongue-tied. It cannot under ordinary circumstances hold meetings, and dispute the right of the Crown to make appointments. It refrains studiously from coming into collision with Government. Yet when Mr. CANNING nominated Mr PLUN KET to be Master of the Rolls in England, in 1827, the English Bar successfully protested against the nomination, as trenching on its rights. Now let us see how the Irish Bar has been treated by the nomination of Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH to a judgeship of four thousand pounds per annum. We have been assured, upon indisputable authority, that of late years the highest sum realised by private practice at the Irish Bar has been three thousand and five hundred pounds. The practice at the Irish Bar has from the decline of the country diminished in all respects ; and when a man is selected for elevation above his fellows in that learned body, his pretensions ought to be of a purer and loftier kind than the miserable claims of having " sold " the infamous Brass Band to an unscrupulous Cabinet in want of political sup port. Mr. KEOGH was only seven years at the Dublin Bar. He went into Parliament, at the ex pense of a Tory connection, which he afterwards de serted. It is worthy of note also that he was not retained during any of the State trials in 1848 and 1849. Surely if he had been a brilliant forensic orator, or a skilful advocate of the first class, it is not very likely that the friends of SMITH O'BRIEN, T. F. MEAGHER, MITCHELL, DUFFY, MARTIN, and 0130FIERTT, would have allowed him to go without a retainer? In those days Mr. WILLIAM KEOGH was a stuff gownman, but the friends of the accused sought talent in all directions, and along with the leading abili" - - Burr they enr • • 38 7 never hear Tory insti- judges in itOY. Judge id GREENE itive Cabi- in .to the noble pro- • prizes to conduct. eputations galaxy of It reared uced seve- genius of aonspicu- Tt and the ie leading , - ,ities of Mr. WHITESIDE and Mr. ;aged also the argumentative AA