The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-20 00:00:00

THE S

mitted by the President of the Board of Control
to the attention of the House of Commons, as may be
at once perceived by reference to the very interesting
debate of yesterday. The business of the session
could not have been more admirably resumed after
the close of the Easter recess than by the speech in
which Mr. LIEURIBS last evening called for the ap-
pointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the
operation of the Act 3d and 4th William IV., c. 85,
with a view to suggest some better
system for the administration of the affairs
of Hindostao. As the Right lion. Gentleman
very judiciously observed—after the well remembered
manner of the late Sir ROBERT PEEL--the Legis-
lature had, in regard to this subject, three courses
open to its acceptance—to allow the Act to expire, to
renew it as it was without further inquiry, or to
propose an investigation by means of a Select Com-
mittee of both Houses as a preparatory step to legis-
lation. Whatever might be ultimately the decision
arrived at by the Imperial Parliament in reference
to the renewal of the Act, which must in the ordi-
nary lapse of time expire in 1854, the
last mentioned suggestion was obviously from
the outset the most rational under all circumstances,
the least calculated to lead to a precipitate settlement
of the matter, and most certain to conduce to a sound
and dispassionate revisal of the Indian Government.
The motion was consequently agreed to without a
division, and the country may therefore anticipate
with confidence a result satisfactory in the end, not
simply to the interest of India, but one beneficial
likewise, and, in a peculiar degree, to the power of
the whole empire, and to the welfare of its entire
population.
From the preliminary glance taken by the Presi-
dent of the Board of Control at the effects already
produced by the operation of the Act passed in 1833,
it must be sufficiently apparent that with all its un-
questionable blemishes that Act has hitherto proved
in no way disastrous. During the last twenty years
it must be acknowledged, for example, that
the revenues derived from our oriental pos-
sessions have very considerably increased, that
our territories there have been enormously
extended, that our wars have conducted us only
through a series of victories, sanguinary it is true at
times, but invariably overwhelming, and that beyond
all this, the people of Hindostan have so far benefited
that they have been saved from the tyranny of petty
local despots, their laws being administered with
something more than Asiatic justice, and their
children being afforded to a considerable
extent the inestimable advantages of education.
Since 1834, for instance, the revenues of India
have been augmented by about 6,000,0001. sterling,
increasing gradually, that is to say from 18,407,0001.
to 24,379,0101. During the same period the imports
are found to have been actually doubled, increasing
from 6,154,000 to 12,544,000, while the exports have
considerably more than doubled, having advanced
from 8,000,000 to 18,000,000—the inward tonnage
being augmented from 108,873 to 04'2,153, and the
outward tonnage from 83,776 to 180,8001 Mean-
while the territories have been extended by no less
than 165,000 square miles, increasing by 9,000,000
the sum total of the population. Notwithstanding
these successes, however, it is not less obvious to the
more observant student of Indian history, that
in the approaching expiration of the existing powers
the Legislature of England possesses an opportunity
of inestimable importance, and the neglect of which
might be productive of incalculable mischief. It
is from our conviction in this particular that
we look forward with eager cariosity to
the result of the inquiry about to be ad-
ventured upon by the Select Committee of both
Houses—believing that from that inquiry enormous
advantages may result in the well-deliberated re-
organization of the whole system of our Indian
Government.

The Court of Exchequer has at length pronounced
judgment in the important case of MILLER 1. SALO-,
MONS. We regret to find that the decision is not
such as we had anticipated, and which would have
obviated the necessity for any legislation on the sub-
ject. It is not, however, final and conclusive.
The defendant is still entitled to appeal to the Exche-
quer Chamber, and should the judgment there be
unfavourable, to the House of Lords, and we know
little of Alderman SALOMONS if he is the man to
permit any expense, annoyance, or inconvenience, to
deter him from contesting it I' I:Pula-owe the cause in
which be has so boldly stepped forward as the
vigorous and unflinching champion. He has unques-
tionably sustained a temporary defeat, but it will
only elicit more energetic efforts on his part on be-
half of his co-religionists. We do not suppose that
he will interpose any technical difficulties in the way
of an early settlement of the question. He might
retard and procrastinate the proceedings, but such
is not his object; and the question may be argued
before the Exchequer Chamber even during the
ensuing, or, at farthest, Michaelmas Term, and
it could then be disposed of in the House
of Lords early in 1853, so that no delay should occur,
if legislation be really required.
It is with the greatest diffidence that we ever ven-
ture to differ from any one of our learned judges—
from men of profound learning, vast experience, and
great acuteness. However strong might be our own
impressions and feelings, we should distrust them if
in opposition to the views of any one of those who have
sustained the character of the judicial bench at as
high an elevation as it ever previously attained,
even in other times, when " there were
giants in the land." But, fortunately for the
cause for which we have felt intense anxiety, there
was not perfect unanimity in the Court of Ex-
chequer. The Junior Baron (MARTIN) in the elabo-
rate and able judgment which he pronouced, adduced
reasons which certainly appeared conclusive, and
which not even the arguments of his distinguished
brethren could in any degree shake or overturn. It
will long remain a monument of legal acumen, en-
titling the Learned Judge to a high and prominent
position among the most eminent jurists of any age.
There i., therefore, high authority to sustain and
console the defendant under the adverse decision, and
to induce him to proceed to the utmost in order to
obtain the judgment of the ultimate tribunal.
Four points had been raised in the course of the
argument, but three of them were of comparatively
trivial importance. The broad substantial question
was, whether the words " on the true faith of a Chris-
tian," were intended to create a "religious test" to
exclude persons not members of any Christian sect,
or for the purpose of giving additional solemnity to the
obligation, of creating the greatest sanction to the
oath. If the latter, it would of course fall within the
rule laid down in " Osamu:nu. v. BLEEER," and
the defendant, having sworn to the whole of the
to have complied
sub-
stantial part of the asseveration in the form most
binding on his conscience, should of course be deemed
with
existing penal code.
various
the requirements of the still
Now, from the clear and lucid historical account
of the
not have
mARTIN, it
alegislative Acts detailed by Baron
been
withinmrifest that the Jews could
of the statutes, but that, on the
st
whaton wtheree province of any
cothnetrnatreyr,mthedey"were
(as shown by
directed solely again
Pa-
pist recusants," and
for the purpose of preventing any Baron ALDERSON)
equivocation or re-
servation in the minds of thos
was framed, which it
weasagainet whom it
u
suppcsed they might otherwise hanve charitably
prac-
tised. It was immediately after the Gunpowder
Plot that the words were first introduced, and
were probably introduced in consequence. of thethdeisy-
covery of a book denominated " A Treatise on
Equivocation," discovered in the possession of FRANCIg
TRESELAM, one of the conspirators. The Jews were
never thought of, and as Baron MARTIN shrewdly
remarked, "the Legislature, in all probability, never
contemplated that there were any subjects in
the kingdom who were not Christians." This
did not then apply to Members of Parliament,
but it was shortly afterwards extended, the object
and meaning being the same. The same might be
observed of every subsequent statute. The words
were inserted, partly in consequence of the absurd
calumnies that prevailed against our Roman Catholic
brethren, and partly because they were already in
the oath. There was nothing whatsoever relating
to the Jews, and it was the letter and not the spirit
of the law that imposed the disability, perhaps the
last existing , one of a penal character that
remains a blot on the national
.app_t_a7hoo k" The