The British Press; or, Morning Literary Advertiser.
London, England, 1826-06-22 00:00:00

The CHAIRMAN then read a Revolution of the Court of Di.
rectors of the 3d of June, which provided for the remuneration of
Captain Michael. who was appointed the Maliratta Interpreter to
the Company. By the 33d of Geo. 111. every officer is di.qualifit.d
after five years absence from service. Captain Michael*s term will,
it appears, expire on the 211th January next. It was therefore
proposed that this officer, in lieu of his forfeiture of rank and pro-
bable military emolument, should be entitled to such an addi-
tional sum as would make the total amount to 1,05 W. for life.
Mr. S. DIXON said, that he did not mean to make any objection
to the increase of salary, but he thought it more consonant with
the nature of the Company to pass an annual vote, to the effect of
granting a salary of Lou It should be left at the discretion of
the Court. and not be settled for the life of in individual who
might survive the existence of the Company itself. If the custom
of the Court did not tender the mode proposed compulsory, he
would consider the adoption of his suggestion desirable.
The CHAIRMAN said that the custom of the Court did not make
it imperative on them to proceed according to the course prescribed
in the Resolution of the Court of Directors. It was certainly not
one of that kind of grants called pensions ; but the circumstances,
however, justified its adoption in the present instance. Captain
Michael was the only person who was found to be competent to fill
the situation. By accepting the situation of 3lahratta Interpreter,
he must necessarily have been obliged to sacrifice many advantages
to be derived from his professional pursuits, and for that sacrifice it
was undoubtedly proper to compensate him. It would not be
worth his while, for the salary of 61121. 10s., to resign all the pros-
pects which presented themselves, of advancing to a station of
higher rank and of greater emolument in the military service. It
had been proposed that he should he allowed to retain his rank AO
receive the smaller annual sum of 6821. 10%. during the interval of
the five years, which would terminate In January next ; but to
that suggestion the Court of Directors objected, as they considered
that it would be a very unfair proceeding to those officers in actual
service, that an absent individual, who was exempted from similar
discharges of duty, should nevertheless be in the receipt of equal
pay as that given to those who were present and attending to their
offices. Resides, he was willing to apply his abilities in any other
department for which he was capable, and he would therefore be
employed to devote his valuable services in the College.
Dr. GILCHRIST said, that although a Mahratta Interpreter
sounded odd, yet he was of opinion that the Court of Directors
had acted with great judgment and propriety on the occasion, and
he trusted that their liberal conduct towards Capt. Michael would
induce other elan in India to follow his example, and render
themselves competent for similar situations.

The Resolution of the Court of Directors was then put for ap-
proval or rejection by the Court of Proprietors, and was agreed to.
BOMBAY POLICE.
_

The CHAIRMAN was proceeding to read a Requisition from
nine Proprietors, which stood next on the notices, when
Dr. GILCEINTST consented to postpone its consideration until
the motion of Col. Stanhope, who appeared ill, should be dis-
posed of.
The Hon. Colonel STANHOPE accordingly proceeded to address
the Court. He said that his minion was founded on the tyran-
nous conduct of the police establishment at Bombay. In former
times it had been considered the great glory and duty of the citi-
nos of Rome; to defend the rights of their distant colonies, and he
did not think that, in the present enlightened times, there existed
any cause which would render the people of England less attentive
to a similar obligation. 11 e could prose that the Magistrates of tha
Bombay establishment had been guilty of many illegal acts, and
had, by inflicting fines, flogging, and banishment. committed nu-
merous malpractices on the property, lives, and liberty of the sub-
jects. The mode in which justice was administered in that part
of the world was by a kind of dub law. The Honourable and Gal-
lant Colonel then proceeded to advert to many instances of the mis.
conduct in question. He quoted, in proof of :he correctness of his
assertions, the charge of Chief Justice Sir Edward Ware to the
Grand Jury of Bombay, in which the illegality of the practices was
severely censured. But the system had taken such a deep root, that
it was difficult, if not impossible, to eradicate the abuses, unless by
interference from this country, as the local government seemed to
be callous or indifferent, not to say favourable, to the continuance
of the atrocities of which he complained. In the year 1779
the Grand Jury presented as a nuisance a man of the name
of Todd, because he held the office of Superintendant of
Police, and yet eleven years elapsed before the situation
was established, and during that period he retained his place.
Sir William Jones called the office of Superintendent of
Police a deformity, and on the representation of Sir James Mack-
intosh it had been annulled by his Majesty the King of England ;
yet that office was renewed at Bombay. Indeed, Sir J. Mackintosh
had given it as his decided opinion that the acts of the police at
Bombay since the year 1753 were all illegal, and that actions of
damages would lie on them. The attempt of Marshal Broglio to
introduce the German system of flogging into the French armies
had, it was well known, caused the desertion of 30,000 men, and
was, in fact, the source to which to ascribe the death of the King.
It was subsequently abolished in a great measure in France, and
completely exploded by Napoleon in Italy; but since the restore-
tion of the Bourbon dynasty it was renewed. In Prussia, where it
originated, Frederick the Great always calculated at the commene-
ment of a campaign that he would lose a sixth part of his army in
consequence of it. In England the eloquence ofSir F. Burdett and the
remonstrances of Mr. Cobbett had produced its abolition. The law
in India only allowed twelve stripes to be inflicted, in a moderate
way, and under sanction of two Justices of the Peace; but the
provisions of the Legislature had been shamefully perverted and
abused. The nature of the punishment was of such a kind that
the culprit was stripped naked, fastened to a tree, and then flogged
with a rattan, the pain resulting from which was so severe that the
sufferers were sometimes obliged to be supported by an article of
leather dress resembling a cuirass. The Gallant Colonel proceeded
to cite several authorities of persons who condemned the practice of
flogging with a rattan. The High Sheriff of Bombay, who was a
military officer, anti therefore acquainted with the particulars of its
infliction, had expressed his aversion to it. The Director of Bom-
bay Gaol was of a similar opinion, and also the Rev. Mr. Jackson,
and Sir Edward West, the Chief Justice. All of them had con.
sidered the application of the rattan to be a most atrocious
and sanguinary punishment. 'set the Petty Sessions at Bom-
bay was in the habit of inflictingits horrors, not merely
on the natives, but also on the British, as was evident
from the charge of Chief Justice West, who stated in his
charge that there was no ground for the practice, in law
or statute. The trials were of so summary a character, that the in-
dividuals condemned, even if they possessed money, had not time
to vindicate themselves. for immediately after sentence they were
flogged at the police office. The indeterminate kind of securities
required from the prisoner for good behaviour, was also a subject
of complaint, as being against law. He was convinced that one
sixth part of the felonies tried at Bombay was against law. It
might be asked, why did not the Judges redress those enormities ?
The Judges, however, could not interfere, unless an application
were first made to them from the prisoner, who was generally pre-
vented, by want of pecuniary means, and deterred by fear of the
power of the police. The opinion of Sir Edward West was deci-
sive of the illegality of the proceedings at the Petty Sessions in re-
gard to the infliction of fines, of flogging, and of banishment ; and
he (Colonel Stanhope) trusted that the Court of Proprietors would
have the gooci of those from whom they derived profit so much at
heart as to rectify the abuses and grievances to which they were
subject. Sir James Mackintosh's opinion was also given on the
subject ; he most strongly disapproved of the practice of reducing
the people to the condition of galley slaves. The necessity of ex-
ertion in England was evident from the answer returned by the
Grand Jury to the charge of Lord Chief Justice Best. [Here the
Gallant Colonel read an extract frouathe answer of the Grand Jury,
in which they seemed to consider only the expediency and not the
legality of the practice. The local Government was supporting
the police in those measure. against the Chief Justice's opposition.
The appointment of Mr. Warden, a proprietor of a newspaper, as