The Sun.
London, England, 1854-07-12 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS-{YESTERDAY.)

PETITIONS.
Petitions were presented by several hon. members in
favour of the Ten Hours' Bill ; by Sergeant SHEE, from
certain poor-law guardians in Ireland, complaining of
the conduct of a Poor-law Inspector, in tampering with
the religions convictions of the inmates of the Irish
Workhouses ; and by Mr. COWAN, from Edinburgh,
against the Mortmain Bill ; by Mr. WICKHAM, from the
members of the Bradford Long-pledged Teetotal Asso-
ciation, in favour of closing public-houses on Sundays ;
by the same hon. member, from the inhabitants of Brad-
ford district, Yorkshire, signed by 5,000 persons pray-
ing for a committee of inquiry into the deplorable state
of the woolcombers in that district, consequent on the
introduction of machin-zy, which has destroyed their
trade ; by Mr. ROLT, two petitions from the work-
people, consisting of men, women, and children in two
bleaching eStablishments-in the county of Lancaster,
complaining of working 18 hours a day in heated rooms
of 90 degrees, and that their Sabbaths are frequently
violated, and pray that the " Ten Hours' Bill" be passed
into a law.
LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) BILL.
The house then went into committee on this bill.

On clause one,
Mr. Sergeant SHEE moved that the Chairman
do report progress, as at this late period of the session it
wag impossible to do justice to the measure. Fortu-
nately, Ireland was now in such a state of prosperity
as to enable her to wait yet a, little longer for any use-
fill legislation of this nature.
Mr. KIRK supported the proposition that the bill
should proceed no further this session.
Lord NAAS said it would be very much for the
convenience of the committee if the government would
state now what course they intended to take with re-
gard to this and the other landlord and tenant bill.
Mr. J. O'CONNELL thought that some legislation
on the subject was necessary in order to check the emi-
gration that was going on from Ireland, but the bills
before the house were a delusion to which he hoped the
Government would not commit themselves.
Mr. CONNOLLY vindicated the sincerity of the
Earl of Derby's government in endeavouring to settle
this great question upon a basis of mutual advantage to
all classes, and explained that the present government
had neither acted fairly nor honestly in the matter.
Mr. J. FITZGERALD said it was not the house nor
the Government who were responsible for the delay,
but it was another place that had thrown impediments
in the way of a fair settlement of this question. How-
ever, it was too late to proceed with these bills this ses-
sion, and he hoped they would be withdrawn, with a
view to their introduction early next session in an
amended form, under the immediate auspices of the
Government.

Mr. BELLEW considered that these measures were
Government bills by adoption.
Sir J. YOUNG disputed that, but if they had been
Government bills, they would not have been submitted
to the house at this late period of the session.
Nothing could be fairer than the course taken by the
Government with respect to them ; they were anxious
that the question should be settled as speedily as possible,
and to the satisfaction of all parties ; but he was afraid
that could not be done this year. He did not think it
would be right to press these measures upon the attention
of the house now, and he suggested that they should be
withdrawn.

Mr. NAPIER said he bad all along been led to ex-
pect that Government would support these bills to the
last, and he now learnt for the first time that it was not
their intention to go on with them.
The right hon. gentleman was still speaking, when,
four o'clock having arrived, Mr. Bouverie quitted the
chair, and the sittings of the house were suspended.

'The sitting was resumed at 6 o'clock.
The further proceeding in committee on the Landlord
and Tenant (Ireland) Bill was fixed for to•morrow (this
day).

THE NATIONAL EXHIBITION.
Sir J. WALAISLEY postponed until that day fortnights
Mr. Hume's motion in favour of thowing open the British
Museum, Marlborough House, and the National Gallery, to
the public on Sundays after morning and evening service,
the hon. member for Montrose being still unable to attend
in his place.

ALIEN ENEMIES.
Mr. I. BUTT had given notice of his intention to put a
question of some importance to the noble lord the Secre-
tary of State for the Home Department, and although that
noble lord was not in his place, yet, seeing another Secre-
tary of State present, he hoped he should be unable to ob-
tain an answer from him. The question had reference to
the reported arrival in London of a Russian subject of
some importance, a member of a distinguished Russian
family, high in the confidence of the Emperor of Russia,
the Count Palalen, who had been himself actively engaged
in the Russian diplomatic service, and whose brother was
understood to be regarded by the Emperor as an intimate
friend, and who occupied a distinguished place in his Ma-
jesty's councils. It had been further stated that this noble-
man had been introduced to society here under the special
patronage and auspices of one of her Majesty's present
cabinet ministers, and that an opportunity might be
afforded for contradicting the statement if it were untrue,
he thought it better at once to say that he alluded to the
Earl Granville, the Chanoellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.
(Hear.) He need scarcely say, for he was sure every mem-
ber of that house was aware of it, that the presence even
in this country of an alien enemy was a violation of the
law, and the question he wished to have answered by the
right hon. baronet (Sir G. Grey) was whether this Count
Pahlen had received from her Majesty that which alone
could entitle him to be here—a safe conduct—and if not
whether the Government was aware of his presence in Lon-
don, and if so, whether his presence here was with their
permission and sanction. (Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY—AII I can say, in the absence of my noble
friend, the Secretary of State for the Home Department,
is that I have no information on the subject to which the
bon. and learned member's question refers, and I must
therefore request him to repeat it,' when my noble friend
is in his place.
THE BISHOP OF NEW ZEALAND'S SALARY.
Sir J. PASINGTON begged to ask the Secretary of
State for the Colonies, whether any official communication
was sent from the Colonial-office in 1853 to either the
governor or the bishop of New Zealand, on the subject of
the removal froth the estimates for that year of the usual
vote for the bishop's salary. And, whether any official
communication, that the usual allowance had been with-
drawn had yet been sent to the Bishop of N9w Zealand ;
and, if so, whether there was any objection to lay it upon
the table of the house, together with any answer which
might have been received from the bishop ?
Sir G. GREY.did not find any direct official communi-
cation had been made to the governor or the bishop on the
rabject of the salary, but in the early part of the year 1853,
a copy of the estimate of 5,0901. for the service of the co-
lony, with a full detail of the expenditure, had been for-
warded to the governor ; the bishop however, left the co-
lony immediately after it arrived. With regard to the
second question, a special communication was addressed
to the bishop, announcing the withdrawal from the esti-
mates of the sum previously voted therein foe which communication the Governor
n of
.New Zealand had
been directed to make. He had his salary,
was_ to produce
the letter in which that decision wo rated, and
he might add that he had on that day- wininiv
the table,
to it which he should be also happy to la the answer
together with a copy of the despatch to &one,-
New Zealand, requesting him to bring the subremYr oeri
the attention of the Colonial Legislature with theet
their making provision for the payment out of tehlielwocaol
funds.

THE CANADIAN CLERGY RESERVES,p
t
Sir J. PAKINGTON repeated a question he had
a previous evening whether any despatch had been -
receiveduou
from the Governor-General of Canada respecting the dis-
solution of the Canadian Parliament, in consequence of
their having come to a vote upon the subject of the clergy gf
reserves, contrary to the recommendation of the Governor
--
and the wishes of. the Imperial Government.
Sir G. GREY had received yesterday a despatch from
Lord Elgin, describing the circumstances under which the
Canadian Parliament had been dissolved. It appeared
that the Governor-General opened the session on the 13th
of June by a speech—that an address was moved in answer
to that speech, upon which two successive, amendments
were moved. The first, which expressed regret that the
Governor had not recommended during the present session
a measure for secularising the clergy reserve; and also a
measure for abolishing seignorial tenures, was rejected by
a majority of 24 against 16; but the second amendment,
in favour of an immediate settlement of the clergy reserves,
instead of secularising them, was carried by 42 to 29. The
right hon. gentleman was aware that an act was passed by
the Canadian Legislature some time ago, by which the
lMive Assembly was to be increased from 84 to 130
in number; and the Governor thinking it would not be
t to submit a measure to the present Assembly,
de fined to postpone it until an Assembly, elected un-
der the new act for increasing their numbers, should have
met ; and it was under these circumstances that he had
Prorogued the Parliament, with a view to its dissolution.
THE
ESTIMATES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF

SECRETARY.WAR
Mr. J. WILSON having laid these estimates upon the
table,
Mr. DISRAELI inquired whether it was intended to
move them on Friday
bad on a previous evening intimated ?
next, as the noble lord (J. Russell)
Sir G. GREY believed that arrangement would stand.
TENURE OF LAND (XA.DRAS).
Mr. BLACKETT rose,
Pureuent to notice, to move an
address for the appointment of a commission to proceed to
India to inquire into the tenure Of land in the presidency
of Madras. The bon. member Observed that the-origin of
the land tax in India had been made the subject of much

dispute. It had been disputed whether the land tax was a
tax in the ordinary sense of the term, or whether it was
the legitimate rent of the land which in other communi-
ties was paid to the private landowner, and those who took
the latter view contended that it made no difference to the
tenant whether he paid a rent to a landlord, or a tax to
the Government for his land. This was by no means an
unimportant question, and it had been well argued by the
hon. member for Manchester in 1850, when he brought
forward a motion somewhat similar to that which he was
now submitting, and demonstrated the difference between
a land rent fixed arbitrarily by the Government, as in India,
and a rent which depended upon value, and was founded
upon a fair and equitable consideration of the relative pee
sitions of landlord and tenant as in this country. But
whatever the origin of the tax, and whether it was re-
garded as a tax or as a rent, the object should be to levy
it in that mode which would be least injurious to the cul-
tivator of the land, most productive to the revenue and at
the same time most calculated to stimulate private industry.
The hon. gentleman proceeded to :say that in the evidence
he should produce, he should only cite the authority of
Mr. Dyke, the collector of Salem, Mr. Thomas, a member
of the council at Madras, and Mr. Bourdillon. He ad-
mitted that the East India Company in stepping into the
shoes of the native princes, had bound themselves to many
duties which they would never otherwise have discharged,
but they were nevertheless bound to consider that, how-
ever, they were under some disagreeable necess.ties —they
were to look forward to a period when the Asiatic system
ought to disappear. He admitted that this policy was
laid down by the founder of our Indian empire, but you
were unable to detect any traces of it in the ryotwar sys-
tem as it was at present administered. That system in-
volved the perpetual meddling of the State with the affairs
of its subjects. The State acted as landlord over the
whole of its territory, and placed a money-tax on
every field in its dominions, over an area in Madras
of 7,000 square miles, and in other collectorships as
those of Cuddepore and Bakery of 13,000 square miles ;
each of which was under the superintendence of one
collector, with a number of assistants, who had to
make tours over the district, and ascertain the quan-
tity of land possessed by each cultivator, and the
amount of its produce. He believed this system of taxa-
tion tended to break down the cultivation of the land, the
property of which was practically in the hands of the Go-
vernment. It was true that the owner of the land held it
in fee, but the tax on it was so severe as to leave him in the
hands of the Government, which, inexisting circumstances,
meant in the hands of a host of native functionaries ; and
the land possessed no market value. This was the state of
things under the ryotwar as it was now administered,
but not as it was contemplated to exist by Col. Reid, Sir
Thomas Munro, and Lord William Bentinck. They in-
tended to give to the tenant fixity of tenure, and it was
Sir Thomas Munro's prime idea to make the land tax ap-
proximate as nearly as possible to a quit rent, and it was
intended to be permanent in amount. This also appeared
by a proclamation of Col. Reid to have been his intention.
The question of its being a permanent, involved the ques-
tion of its being a moderate rate. As regarded Madras, it
had been admitted last year by the President of the Board.
of Control that the land tax was too high, and that a re-
vision of the assessment was desirable. The principle on
which the assessment was made caused it to press pecu-
liarly on the cultivators of the soil. The assessment was
originally fixed by a survey made fifty years ago, which
was made under great disadvantages, and much of it with-
out the aid of maps. Upon that survey the gross produce
of the soil was taken, and a survey rate computed at the
then market price, and the amount of the tax fixed by that
standard. The market price was then high, but since then
prices had been steadily falling, and yet the Ryots paid the
tax now on a Beale calculated on the prices of sixty years
ago. The hon. gentleman here read a document to show
the view which Sir Thomas Munro took of this point, and
which was to the effect that he did not think that prices
would fall lower than they were in his day. So far from
that, it appeared by an extract from a minute made by
Mr. Thomas, member of council at Madras, that prices had
gradually ranged lower. There was a phenomenon which
illustrated the effect of this exorbitant assessment, and
that was that the beat land bore the highest assessment,
and it was so high as to drive the cultivator to prefer to
cultivate poor land, which was rated at a lower assessment,
rather than go to that which was so enormously taxed ;
and it appeared from a portion of Mr. Dyke's evidence,
that in his collectorate large patches of the best land were
left uncultivated, while evidence of the same state of things
was to be found in Mr. Bourdillon's pamphlet on the land
revenue. Here was an instance of the consequence of de-
parting from Sir T. Munro's policy, for the land tax which
he meant to be permanent had become fluctuating. There
had been an abandonment of another principle of Sir Thomas
Munro, which was that there should be something like
what was called tenant right. Sir Thomas Munro was
resolved that the land tax should not be increased or im-
posed in consequence of improvements made by the tenant
himself, and that no additional rent should be asked in
consequence of improvements (the hon. gentleman here read
an extract from Sir Thomas Munro's opinions on that
point). That policy had been clearly departed from. Mr.
Dyke stated that additions had been recently made to tax-
ation by taxing improvements, and Sir Charles Trevelyan
spoke of the objectionable system of taxation on improve.
ments, which he hold to be worse than the system of
tithes. Mr. Peacock was called to contradict the evidence
of Sir Charles Trevelyan, and he said that the ryots were
allowed the benefit of their improvements under an
order of 1852, which was explanatory of orders which
had been issued years before. But he did not in fact
contradict Sir C. Trevelyan, for he admitted that there
were such orders, but they had not been duly executed.
What he (Mr. Blackett) complained of -was that the East
India Company adopted and perpetuated a system of taxa-
tion which had all the disadvantages to which the Govern-
ment washable in the management of the revenue. Immense
power had been placed in the hands of a swarm of govern-
ment functionaries of a elan the least to be desired. He
had mentioned the immense space of land which was under
the control of one' collector, and which required to be
lookedafter by his assistants. It was awful to contemplate
the effect of this system on the families of the persons under
their control, and the state of dependence in which this
broken down race of people were placed under the rule of
revenue officials of native Indian race. However he might
advocate the employment of natives by the government,
yet he thought it objectionable that this particular class
should be employed in a position where they had every
temptation to ingratiate themselves with their English
masters at the expense of the other natives. It was felt
by Sir T. Munro, that there was a great want of proper
agency to carry out the ryotwar system; and one of the
main difficulties was to prevent the revenue officials from
collecting the tax by means at which humanity shuddered.
The hon. gentleman hare read an extract from Mr. Bour-
dillon's pamphlet, which showed that the number of
officials under a collector ranged from 1,500, and that every
sort of peculation and oppression was exercised by them.
Again, he (Mr. Blackett) gave credit to the East India
Company for regretting the difficulties they had to en-
counter in carrying out this system. There must be a
minute inspection, and you could not get English servants
to perform the duty, while it was not possible to pay such
salaries to the natives as to prevent peculation. But all this
showed that there was reason for inquiry into the abuses of
a system which required such means to carry it out. He
had pointed out the three main defects of the system of
ryotwar—viz., the enormous assessment, the taxing of
agricultural improvements, and the immense power placed
in the hands of native test-gatherers. He would now go
into the question of the state of the revenue, of the
land and population. The revenue had been declining or
at least was stationary. By the latest returns for the year
1852-53, the revenue was 3,687,8111. In 1848 49 it was
3,64708/. ; and in 1849-50 it was 3,479,4391. With re-
gard to the land it appeared by an appendix to the report
of the committee which sat last year, and which gave an
account of the rental for the eleven years ending 1851-52,
that a rental of 115,4851. when put up for sale fetched
omnr. ly
Dyke'sl67,lBo evidence /;
iavneryee
he
small ratio of a year's purchase. In
produced a letter written by Sir
Tr
yhootmw aa sr Mwuans rot ,0 which
odu Nevee nto
at
class
a ssshowof thatvery the
sm a tendencyll
farmers.of
The speed with which small properties multiplied was
frightful. Mr. Thomas had stated that the mass of the
landholders were holders of tenements of the annual value
of 30 or 40 rupees, and of course had no capital, and those
holders had within 20 years increased in one district from
971 to 3,607, while the holders of tenements of the value'
of from 50 to 500 rupees, hall decreased from 78 to 28.
(Hear, hear) He would read an extract from Mr Bour-
dillon's pamphlet with regard to the native populati in of
Madras. Having read the extract, the hon. member con-
tinued : Here was a picture of society, given by a 'most
experienced person connected with the administration of
the government which represented the people as livivg
from hand to mouth, and pressed down to the very
ground by death and starvation. Society here was
wholly destitute of those supports which were wit-
nessed in other countries, and he confessed it seemed to
him that it was their duty to ascertain if some remedy
coul,l not be applied to this deplorable state of things.
The President of the Board of Control met some of
these objections last year, when he said the remedy
for the evils complained of in Madras must be left to
the local government, but for his part he confessed he
had no confidence in the wishes or intentions of that Go-
vernment. Until the principle of private property was
established in the Presidency he could have no hope for
the prosperity of the people, and he insisted that the Bri-
tish Parliament was bound to do something towards the
recognition of that principle. The occupier of land should
have it in his power to redeem the objectionable tax that
pressed so heavily upon him, and since ho was anxious to
get in the small end of the wedge, he cared not how small
the beginning might be, so that the house would consent
to make it. Let them sow the seed at once, and he cared
not whether it was half a century before it tuck rcot.
With that view he only asked the Government to do for
Madras that which they had already done with so much
advantage for Ceylon, and by appointing a commission to
inquire into the evils on the spot see if something could
not be done to remove the lamentable state of society
which he had tried, though feebly, to picture to the house.
The hon. member concluded by moving an address to the
Crown for the appointment of a commission to proceed
to India to inquire into the tenure of land in the Presi-
dency of Madras.
Mr. BRIGHT seconded the motion.
lir. LOWE said his hon. and learned friend seemed to
think that He had nothing to do but to make out a case
against the prese t d f II tine the land revenues of
Misdrasisit%enthitlenhimmotoe aoskctoheechou*se to as to. his mo-
much stronger than an
tion.
duce the house
learned friend.
toe confessed he differed from his hon. and
dia was based thena. would require a case indeed
he had made out in order to in-
ditztke the step of sending out a commission
of India that there was
theory of the government of In-
:: the
ul
iartto necessityn despotism,bi te
uannwdi exceptto s h own I
ein
peoplecases
could supersede this despotic an impression to get abroad VI authority in England that
lower our inflnence there, aadclrnwer. If we allowed such
to this appeal to the Englishlndia, it would tend to
on that account he objected
mind on the subject. No-
body in England attended thoroughlyin to Indian matters
m interestedposed
munilsessiosnhewweraes
sn divested tde di f oaf com-
mission personally
out
of being so greatly
an interest, they might run the r
people as to make
ssible intentions,
deceived by the representations of
of
detrimental
them recommend measures with therfirsettohne
Another objection he had
which, when carried out, would proveAnot
taoliktehitso
nlniodtiiaonanwdatsfiftshcaotuuttreyegovernment
01
Madras
been changed since last year; as had
a new governor
sent out in the person of a nobleman of distinguished
and the Government had every reason to hope and expect
that great advantages would result from this change int
the
administration. These were the reasons which appeared
to him to require that his hon. and learned friend should
show something more than he bad yet clone to justify the
appointment of this commission ; a mere complaint, based
upon the mode of collecting the revenue of Madras, was
not sufficient ; and in order to make out a case for inquiry,
his hon. and learned friend must show at least one of three
things. He must either show that the Government of
Madras would not recognise some particular grievance, or
that, recognising it, they refused, or were not prepared to
apply a remedy. In want of either of these two things his
hon. and learned friend must show that the'Government of
India was doggedly opposed to all reform or remedy of '