The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-23 00:00:00

Pziz,
..
I
. ,
,-;;,i..
. ~ , 41-111Thibb l'-.7 11 Pr
. ~..
rt.,. .- •,
tit ~,, - --(- • .1.. i ~ ,
..6;', iwv, ..,-;,..7• - , , ' 4'..-.• , .
t :,-.0!),:::,
\
I .
~
..,,,,
~,.".4,, 7.4i4___r4,•31';''"?1:,,1.g.,...49'4.47"---" tr
_114.--alr: 21..\e1?,4:-.1,::1411fr',/, -..-', A '
.10 \ , .0
.
~,, ,
I“ 4.4• V*
,0Yt'....: ,C
~,. ...._ ; ,
.
•
k, 4,-.., ~.
- \ ''. 4 ' ~.
~
...,.
Jo. hy
_..,• ,
.".._
• ~. .k.
~,
i,:,,.
~4......:,.Hi1d
r,.. -. : ~.- • -4., • .
~, ...., 4, „... .., A
'4: . 4r .- . -
,„
', ' i dr '
Cu, All- 1 / t 4.; C4`.—,..›, -- 1):41). lif M!'"A- li. '. 1 Xi, °..4. ,i /iii • 04:04..0.5 . ''t
~.„ 'l 2.),}t 0/T t. '
V4gAlifi i ..)..C.- "iiiikll.ll,l* ' , 4/,,,-±'
41. DI _
,
2N.'l' -i *,enxvi _ , ,
,
4•56%.°

LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, M ARCH 23, 1853.

L'AIGLE D'OR • MINING COMPANY of
VIRGINIA.
NOTICE Is HEREBY GIVEN, That the SCRIP of this Company will
be ready for deliyery to the Shareholders, in exchange for the
Banker's Receipts, on and after MONDAY next, the 28th inst., at the
Offices of the Company, as under, between the hours of eleven and
four. By Order of the Company.
D. NI6BETT, Jun., Secretary.
22, Austin-friars, March 21, 1852.

THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.

went of death. We know not what lurking doubt
of the legality of his decision may have operated
upon the mind of this learned individual, but we
find him interfering in the prisoner's favour with tke
court above, by leaving it for the consideration
of the Foujdaree if a lighter punishment than death
might not be inflicted, " because the parties were
near relatives and had previously been on friendly.
terms." No doubt, to a sensitive and well-regu-
lated mind, the fact that the person murdered was
in friendly relations with the murderer must give
many an additional pang. Lawyers in estimating
punishment should, of course, entertain the ques-
tion of the character and amount of an hypothetical
repentance. We can conceive cases in which the
anguish of a murderer may have been so great in
consequence of his act as not only to exonerate him
from the halter, but absolutely to entitle him to a
pecuniary reward from sympathising humanity—
could the balance be but nicely adjusted. We will
conclude our brief notice of criminal cases by men-
tioning one of robbery, in which a prisoner was
convicted of having stolen goods, not only without
proof, but in the teeth of a declaration from the
alleged owners that the property in question did
not belong to them. We are compelled by our
limits to break off at this point with our abstract
of Indian leading cases. It cannot be for the ad-
vantage of India that justice should be so traves-
tied. The general population of the three kingdoms
have no interest but that India should be contented
and prosperous—a fertile producer of all that we
require, and a bountiful customer in return. For
whose benefit is a system maintained in which she
is too misgoverned to produce and too poor to pur-
chase ? Who gains but the Directors and their
friends, and are not justice and good government
too dear to be bartered for their favour ?

"From the Tin,.)
The population of British; India amount to
150,000,000, or thereabouts • the number of 7 the
East Indian - potentates who Laid awful se ssi4 an in
Leadenhall-street is precisely 24. Now, it is far
from our intention, by this juxtaposition of fig urea,
to draw •• any such conclusion vis the one wln;.cli lost
Archdeacon Paley a biShopric. The Czar of B ,ussia
is, numerically speaking, but a unit, and the , pro-
portion between this unit and the millions of - units
psubmittedh
at
no
ihisn
the sw a
oya
si
es
and
the 150,000,000 Hindus, Mussuhnans, and what
ionffi,n, istoelhynmcooroeniopuanat off pro-
'
not, who dwell between the Himalayas anc 1. the
Bay of Bengal. But the Russian Emperc n• is
stringently bound, by every tie of interest as well
as of duty, to carry on the processes of Govern-
ment in such a manner as may be best ealcni lated
to promote the welfare of his vast empire. Lf3t us
continue the illustration, but alter the case. • Sup-
pose that the office of Czar, in place of being a
permanent " appointment," was but for a fixed
term ; in point of fact, that Nicholas I. were a
species of Russian Director. Suppose .further
that as the price of his elevation he had :been
compelled to canvass the electors for many pre-
vious years ; •that he had digested humiliation
of every kind, incurred refusals five and six time
at the door of every palace in St. Petersburgh
bartered his future patronage for promises oi
support, and so finally, through the gate of
humility and the byepaths of corruption, had
attained the object of his ambition. Could there
be any doubt in such a 'cad; that during the)
tenure of his power he would farm the ap-
pointments of the Russian empire from the baton
of the Field-Marshal to the insignia of a tide-
waiter at - Kronstadt, with a single view to the
advancement of his own fortunes and the advan-
tage of his friends and dependents ? Dearly would
he have purchased the opportunity, and strenuously
would he labour, no doubt, to make hay while the
sun shone. The position of an East Indian Director
is pretty much that of the Russian Autocrat in the
supposed case. We do not quarrel in a certain
sense with Directors for using the position which
they have laboured so hard to attain for the benefit
of their families and their_ immediate friends.
While human nature is human nature it is but
natural that Sir Horatio Mulligatawny should hold
that his eldest son John, who is of a studious turn,
and has already made considerable progress in the
Greek contract verbs, will one day or other prove
an ornament to the bench in the Sudder Dewanny
Adawlut, after he has collected taxes for certain I
years in the Trichinopoly district ; that Theodoric,
who has ever been friends with the old family
coachman, is admirably adapted for cutting his
country's enemies to pieces in the light blue and
silver of the Madras Cavalry ; and that the lively
Timothy, his youngest hope, has been predestined
by fate to a " direct appointment" to the Bengal
army without the preliminary purgatory of Addis-
combo. The only surviving son of Sir Horatio's
widowed sister, Louisa Ramsbottom—the late
Major Ramsbottom was on the Bombay establish-
ment—is a damp and flaccid student at St. Cathe-
rine's Hall, and has already given evidence of strong
theological twitches in his character. Why should he
not have the chaplaincy which falls to his uncle's
gift by rotation, or can readily be procured by ex-
change of patronage with a brother Director ? The
chances are that the young men will discharge the
duties of their several posts quite as satisfactorily
as their compeers, according to the Indian standard.
We do not say that a very high-minded man would
so juggle with his conscience, but we must not
apply too high a standard to human transactions if
we would avoid disappointment. The East Indian
Director uses his patronage as 99 per cent. of his
predecessors have done before him, and precisely
as his co-Directors are using it at the present
moment. If, then, the people of India groan
under such a mal-administration of justice, or
rather under such an administration of injustice
as that of which we gave a few examples on Satur-
day last, it is not for their own benefit, nor is
it for the benefit of the population of these islands,
who have as little to do with the matter as they
have with the internal administration of Patagonia
or Rupert's Land. The only persons really bene-
fitted in the business are the 24 East Indian Di-
rectors and their appointees. The Directors, as
we before observed, are 24 in number—the popu-
lation of India 150,000,000—in other words, each
Director farms 6,000,000 or thereabout of human
beiNgs for the benefit of his family, relations, and
friends.
The specimens of Madras justice which we laid
before our readers on Saturday were but a few
instances taken at random from Mr. Norton's

ASSURANCE COMPANY,

pamphlet. This gentleman had but culled a few
flowerets from the reports of the Courts of the
Civil and Criminal Appeal in the Madras Presi-
dency. These reports were only begun in 1849, but
they are more than sufficient to show the method
of legal administration in India. Let it be re-

membered that whilst tax-gatherers are placed upon
the seat of justice, there are hundreds and hun-
dreds of young 'and middle-aged men in this
country amply qualified to discharge the duties of
their profession, who are starving in Westminster-
hall. Common sense will not make a man a lawyer,

more than it will qualify him fora surgeon.
In the selection of judges why should competent
lawyers be just the peisons overlooked ? Why,
here we have before us a case in which a suit was

brought for a piece of ground of—the value of 15
rupees (U. 10s.) and a house of the value of 40
rupees (41.), and for an injunction to have a wall
built. The case was tried five times, and then one
court of appeal overruled the decision of their im-
mediate predecessors. Then •we come • upon
another, in which the plaintiff had exercised no
right over the land in dispute. since 1806. The
case was tried five times. At last the Judge's
decree was reversed, and it was declared that the
Statute of Limitations barred all further litigation.
In another case a simple fact was at issue—was
there or was there not a division of family ? This
was tried four times over, and the Sudder Court
remitted it for a fifth trial. ' Think of your Indian
brethren, ye unreasonable Jarndyces of England—
clap your hands and rejoice that ye live in a
country where justice is cheap, speedy, and just
Then, there is a special appeal from a decision of the
sub judge of Calicut. The matter in dispute was of
the value of ten rupees, with one rupee damage, for
cutting plantains. The case was tried four times,
and is marked in the report as remanded for a
fifth trial. Then we have a " leading case" from
a decision of the Judge of Salem. The suit was
brought to recover a house alleged to have been
forfeited under a mortgage bond. The bond was
illegal, as having been executed "to save the defend-
ant's property from liability to satisfy the claims of
other persons." The sub judge decided for the
plaintiff by giving him damages, not the house—he
was out of possession. The judge on 'appeal decided
that the plaintiff had no right, because the sale was
nominal. Then, one judge of the Sudder admitted
an appeal which the two others overruled. It turned
out after all that the suit which operated upon a
value of 124 rupees—had been barred from the be-
ginning by limitation. Of another case Mr. Norton
writes : It will be observed that this is nothing
but a continuance of errors from first to last. The
first judge decides upon a copy of an instrument.
The next judge decides that the defendants have
fraudulently made away with the very instrument
which would prove their case ; and, lastly,
the im-
portant point of law in it is overlooked altogether.
The case has already been tried five times." These
stories of fresh trial upon trial meet us at every
sentence. Considering the present condition of the
Indian bench, and that every fresh trial appears
but to lead to a fresh blunder, one can scarcely
help wishing that the first blunder were held
decisive, without possibility of reversal or power of
appeal.
We will conclude with one or two examples of
criminal justice, if but to complete the picture.
Three persons were committed on a charge of mur-
der ; the first was charged with having ordered the
two others to kill the deceased, They accordingly
beat and kicked her to death. The judge who
tried the case convicted them only of " culpable
homicide ; because, as water was thrown on the de-
ceased in order to revive her, it does not appear
that they intended to kill her." This " culpable
homicide" would appear to be a favourite decision
with Indian judges, who do not like calling things
by hard names. It was so held by a learned func-
tionary in a case in which a man confessed that he
had stabbed another in a fit of resentment, because
he interfered in a quarrel between the prisoner
and a third person. Sometimes, however, the de-
cision of an Indian Old Bailey goes the other way,
and the mercy of one judge is qualified by the se-
verity of another. Here is an instance : Two
men fall out ; about twenty minutes afterwards,
the one goes up to the other and gives him a blow
with a bullock yoke. The man so struck never
spoke again. The judge who tried the case held
that the prisoner should have been arraigned for
murder, and not for culpable homicide, as was the
case. He decided that he had incurred the punish-