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

would be glad to undertake, for it would be a mission of
benevolence and improvement. . (Cheers.)
Sir J. W. HOGG said the hon. gentleman had probably
not been aware, in the zeal and earnestness with which he
had pushed his case, that he had in reality been casting a
serious imputation upon the Government of India. In-
deed, he had seldom listened to a speech in which au hon.
gentleman had dealt so largely in assertions, of which he
had adduced no proof, or indulged in stronger 9 language
than that which the house had just heard. (" Oh, oh.")
The hon. gentleman on his return from India, had in fact
been turning everything out of his carpet bag, into which
he seemed to have thrust everything that he had heard
from every person on every possible subject. (A. laugh.)
The hon. gentleman said that persons going to India were
very apt to fall into the hands of interested and designing
persons, and the hon. gentleman seemed himself to have
been an illustration of the fact. (Laughter.) Why, as
soon as he got to Madras, he had put himself in communi-
cation with the society from which had emanated a peti-
tion which was certainly the most extravagant and un-
founded document which had been laid upon the table of
the house ; and which his right hon. friend (Sir C. Wood)
had truly observed, was a tissue of the grossest misrepre-
sentations, perversions, and 'ills-statements. (Hear, hear.)
Nay, more. The hon. gentleman had actually gone about
the country attended by two deputies from the associa-
tion itself.

Mr. BRIGHT—Hear, hear. Very proper.
Sir J. W. HOGG would put it to the house, whether
the information he would be likely to gain under such cir-
cumstances would not necessarily be of a very exaggerated
character. (Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman went
about and called, at every place where he stopped, parties
before him.
Mr. SE YMOITR—I never did so.

Sir J.W. HOGG—WeII, they came without being called.
The two emissaries of the association went with him, and
by some process which he would not designate, persons
were assembled before the hon. gentleman wherever he went.
An impression was produced that he was a royal commis-
sioner, and the people were persuaded to coma and make
their complaints before him in order that they might
be laid before Parliament. (Hear, hear.) It was only fair
to say that the hon. gentleman, when he became aware that
this impression had been encouraged, had done all in his
power to reprobate it. But an attempt was even made by
the designing persons into whose hands he had fallen to
levy contributions from the people among whom he went,
on the ground that they were wanted to defray the ex-
penses of the supposed royal commission. (Oh.) The hon.
baronet then proceeded to read from an Indian paper an
extract from a document published by the two persons to
whom he had referred, and who said, " This was the place
where the officials of the company began to oppose us by
calling Mr. Seymour a humbug, and saying it was of no
use giving money. (Laughter.) Fortunately, however,
this did not prevent the people from coming to Mr. Sey-
mour, or the subscription from proceeding." (Hear, hear.)
He was sure the hon. gentleman, on reflection, would see
that he had been led into indiscretion. Only fancy a mem-
ber of Parliament going into a district where, excepting
the collector and the judge, the people had hardlyf seen a
European face, exhibiting to them a picture on which
were pourtrayed various species of torture, and asking
them whether they had been subject to cruelties like that?
(Hear, hear.) With respect to the abuses of which the
hon. gentleman had complained, he would only attempt to
answer those cases which came within his own personal
knowledge. Take the lease of Mr. Blenkinsop. The fact
was that the rent of the best description of land was fixed;
and the rents of inferior descriptions varied in proportion
to their quality. Now Mr. Blenkinsop's lease specified
that he should pay a certain rent for twenty-one years,
and that afterwards he should be charged according to
the value of the land as compared with the best coffee
plantations, the price of phich was fixed. Now if this
were the strongest case the hon. gentleman was able to
bring, the house would judge of the value of his other
complaints. (Hear, hear.) As to the case of Mr. Norton,
it was perfectly inexplicable to him, because with the excep-
tion of the three towns of Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras,
there was no tax upon houses at all. [Mr. Seymour—
There is.] As to the case of the oil merchants at Calcutta,
why had he not made his complaint first to the board ?
He did not like a man who did not go with a grievance to
the right place. (Hear.) Then with respect to the returns
which the hon. gentleman said the right hon. baronet (Sir
C. Wood) had refused him, he thought the request was
not a reasonable one ; for the returns in question consisted
of the confidential reports of the collectors to the India
Board. The bon. gentleman had talked of the Governor-
General's "pet Punjaub," but he must say he was
astonished to find that any hon. gentleman could sneer
at the achievements of Lord Dalhousie. (Hear.) His
hon. and learned friend who had introduced this motion
had adverted to several cases of peculation, but most of
these cases occurred many years ago, and it could not be
said that there were any such cases occurring now. There
was only one recent case, and in that case the party was
tried, cashiered, and afterwards deprived of his pension,
although he had paid towards it for months and m .nths
before. And yet the hon. and learned gentleman said the
East India Company had shown a disposition to screen
such offenders ; so far, however, from having screened this
offender, the Court of Queen's Bench had pronounced him
to have been harshly dealt with by the company, and they
had been compelled to make him good his pension. Hav-
ing said thus much by way of reply to some of the obser-
vations of preceding speakers, he came now to the motion
before the house. In much that had been said by way of
statement and suggestion by the hon. and learned gentle.
man who had introduced it, he entirely concurred, and if
the debate had rested only on his speech, it need not have
lasted more than an hour. There were certain evils which
they all admitted, and the only question was how they
could be best remedied. The administration in India
were anxious to see them remedied as speedily as
possible, but there were difficulties in the way which it
was "not easy to get rid of. This question of the tenure
of land had engaged the attention of the greatest and best
informed men of India, but although there had been occa-
sionally a difference of opinion upon it, and although it
was now held up to execration, the ryotwar system had
yet been sanctioned by Sir T. Munro, Sir C. Metcalfe,
and other equally eminent authorities upon Indian affairs.
They, like many others, believed the Government was a
better landlord than the Zemindars, because the Govern-
ment were less exacting, while they preferred the ryot war
system far before that which prevailed in Bengal. A modern
system had recently been introduced at Bombay, which
was greatly in favour of the tenant; by that system the
Government were bound to let the tenant remain undis-

turbed for thirty years, but the tenant himself could put
an end to the tenancy at any time he pleased. That was
tenant-right with a vengeance ; but this question of im-
proving the ryotwar tenure was quite different from the
tenure itself. There was no doubt that it could be im-
proved, and that very materially ; for instance, the ground
was much too highly taxed. The hon. gentleman who
made this motion had stated the reason of that, and ho
had stated it correctly, because it appeared that grain had
greatly fallen in the market rate, but that very considera-
tion showed the necessity for increased means of commu-
nication and public works. If they increased the produc-
tion of corn in a country where the people were not suffi-
ciently numerous to consume it all, they greatly wronged
the cultivators of tho soil unless they gave them the
means of conveying it elsewhere ; but he did hope and
believe that the system which was now nearly com-
plete in the southern part of Bombay might ultimately
be applied to Madras. The subject was now engaging
the serious and permanent attention of the Government
of India, and he might go the length of saying that in
this respect Lord Dalhousie was acting as the commis-
sioner of England. That being so, he hoped they would
hear no more about the British rule deteriorating
the Indian race, which was nothing more than a senti-
mental idea applicable to the past perhaps, but certainly
not to the present time, because at this moment the Go-
vernment of India were spreading the blessings of educa-
tion throughout their territory, and doing their best to
regenerate the people, a work which could not be accom-
plished in 20 or 50 years, but might be completed in the
course of a century. (Hear.)

Mr BRIGHT concluded from the indignation expressed
by the hon, baronet that the speech of his hon. friend the
member for Poole had " told," and the hon. baronet had
succeeded very poorly in answering him. (Hear, hear.)
The speech of the hon. member for Poole was one of those,
however, which it was quite impossible to answer unless
they told the hon. member that they did not believe what
he said, he having simply related what he had himself seen.
(Hear, hear.) His hon. friend had been out to India for a
purpose which did him infinite credit; and he could not
help thinking that it would be greatly to the advantage of
India if other hon. members would follow his example,
and instead of spending the recess in Germany, Switzer-
land, and Scotland, go out to India, and make themselves
masters of the real state of the country. (A laugh.) The
information which the hon. member for Poole collected
there was nothing more than what was confirmed by every
work which had been written upon India, as well as by
the statements of many gentlemen, both civil and military,
who had been in the service of the East India Company.
(Hear, hear.) The grievances of India had too long been
uncarod for; and now that Englishmen were repairing
there, to ascertain the real state of things, considerable
jealousy was excited in the Government, who were anxious
to keep matters still in the dark. (Hear, hear.) 'There
was one conclusive evidence against their rule, and that
was this, viz., that although they had been in possession of
the country for upwards of a hundred years, there were not
as many Englishmen settled in the interior of India as
would make one side of the house on a fair division on any
considerable party question. (Hear.) If it had been in the
hands of any other country than this ; or if it had been
under any other government than that of the India-house,
such a state of things would not have arisen. (Hear.) Had
it been under an absolute monarchy, like that of France,
or a democracy, like the United States, in either case it
would have been more flourishing. But a corporation had
been truly said to be "deaf to mercy, and insensible to
shame ;" and this was the case with the company repre-
sented by the hon. member for Honiton. That hon. gen-
.tlernan had not at all succeeded in showing that the in-
habitants of Madras were not in the miserable state de-
scribed by a former speaker. It was not necessary that the
proposed commission should be sent from this country ; it
might consist of persons in India; but he sincerely hoped
that the President of the Board of Control would take the
matter up. The miserable state of Madras was undeniable;
every book, paper, and parliamentary report confirmed
this. The land was largely out of cultivation, and the in-
habitants were half starved. The great revenue drawn from
the land by the Government, and the miserable pittance of
the ryot, swallowed up the whole annual produce. Not-
withstanding the large annual resumptions of land by the
Government, which were most unjust, the land revenue
had actually declined. How did the hon. baronet account
for this fact? Did he pretend to deny that the practice of
torture was frequent in the collection of the revenue?
(beer.) Mr. Norton's book was an unquestionable autho-
rity ; he stated that if a ryot was unable to pay his rent
every species of severity was practised ; he was summoned
from home and subjected to the thumb-screw and other
punishments ; his property was then sold, and he was
turned loose on society to beg or steal. This was pre-
cisely the same kind of evidence as had been collected by
the lion. gentleman (Mr. Seymour) ; and all the sneers of t
the hon. baronet would not invalidate it, or excuse the I
barbarous treatment of his Government. (Hear, hear.) If ,
they took half the produce of the soil from the cultivators, i
it was impossible for them to be other than on the brink
of starvation and ruin. The case was proved not only by
the statements made, but by the admission of the hon.
baronet himself. When a former commission was ap-
pointed, the governor turned the cold shoulder to the COlll-
missioners, and even refused them the hospitalities of his
table. He hoped that the President of the Board of Con- ;
trol would take care that such treatment was not offered to I
any future commission. Col. Cotton, one of the most effi-
cient servants of the company, had rendered good service
to the country by promoting works of irrigation. The
government should-remember that they owed India a duty
far beyond anything that had been done for it by former ;
governments. Their onlyVnxiety ought to be to apply ,
correct principles of government to that cOuntry. (Hear.)
Sir C. WOOD said that anything had been discussed but
the motion before the house. A number of subjects had
been introduced which had no reference whatever to the
tenure of land in Madras, and into which a commission, if
appointed, could not inquire. He had no objection to

members of that house doing as the hon. member for Man-
chester recommended, and taking a summer tour to India
if they thought fit ; but he would suggest to them that it
might be more comfortable if they went in winter. (A
laugh.) But it was of little use to come to 'that house and
give specific instancas of alleged grievances, which it was
utterly impossible the government could inquire into and
remedy, when absolute silence was preserved before those
authorities on the spot, who might ascertain the truth of
the story, and apply a remedy. It was impossible to be-
lieve that an intelligent, mercantile young gentleman
could see his property seized by parties near to Madras,
anti that the authorities, had they been applied to, would
not have given him redress. But as he had neglected to
apply to those persons, it was a waste of the time of the
house to be occupied with grievances which it could not
remedy.
Mr. SEYMOUR—I said it was remedied.

Sir C. WOOD was glad to hear that that was so. He
hoped the remedy would be sought on the spot in every
other such case. He had never denied the existence of evils
enough in the presidency of Madras ; but it was nut to the
tenure of land that those evils were to be attributed. They
were owing rather to the over-assessment of the land. This
was proved by the hon. member's statement. For about
half a mile he found the land well cultivated ; all beyond
that was badly cultivated. The assessment in the former
case was 108. per acre; in the latter 20s. ; showing clearly
that the evil was over-assessment, not the tenure of the
land. (Hear, hear.) But the motion was for a commission
to inquire not into the assessment of the land, but the
tenure on which it was held. The tenure of land had no-
thing whatever to do with the condition of the peasantry,
whether distressed or prosperous ; this was produced, no
doubt, in great part, by the amount of the assessment; and
all the evils stated to exist would at once he remedied if
the assessment were put on a fair and equitable footing.
This would have to be done by an act of the executive go-
vernment of Madras. The commission might inquire whe-
ther the ryot tenure or zemindar tenure was the best for
holding land; but the over-assessment would equally affect
them all. Almost all the authorities referred to had given
the most decisive testimony that the best tenure 'in India
was the ryotwar tenure. That was the kind of tenure which
the natives had been longest accustomed. The greatest evils
inflicted in India had been inflicted by our endeavouring to
introduce English tenure, which was utterly contrary tothe
habits and customs of the country. This attempt had pro-
duced great distress and misery at Bengal, and also at Ma-
dras. If they wished for a proof of the folly of sending out
English gentlemen, and introducing English notions about
the tenure of land, he would quote what h.ad been done at
Madras, and refer to the book of Mr. Norton, quo.ed by
Mr. Bright, which afforded sufficient proof that nothing
could be so signal an evil. Atter converting the whole
tenure of the province into zenaindar tenure, in 20 years
the whole of the zemindars failed, and were sold up, and
they were forced back into the ryotwar tenure. He main-
tained that the zemindars oppressed their ryot tenants
quite as much as the Government did the tenants under
them. There was a proof in Mr. Norton's book that the
Government were far more lenient. But it was said it
was necessary to have certainty of tenure, and therefore
ryotwar system ought to be clone away with. The fact
was that that system gave the greatest certainty, for the
other only continued for 30 years. This was the case in the
north-western district, where the laud was held on 30
years' leases. ' Mr. Bourdillion stated that the ryot knew
his land would never be taken from him ; it descended
from father to son. Mr. Fisher also stated that no one
could have a greater interest in the land than the ryot ; if
he had 50 acres and cultivated only 10 he paid for only 10,
and no one could interfere with the rest. This might ex-
plain why there was a great deal of land out of culivation ;
but it was evident that the ryotwar system was the best for
the cultivator. The late Mr. Mackey, sent out to India
from Manchester, had reported that the ryotwar tenure
was the only one which would afford a solid foundation
fur the holding of land. Stich was the concurrence of testi-
mony in favour of this species of tenure. He admitted that
the assessment might be too high. But that was not the
tenure ; the assessment was the amount of payment fixed
upon the land, and Mr. Bourdillion stated that this pay-
ment was only in proportion to the quantity cultivated. All
the authorities showed that the ryotwar tenure, which was
perfectly well known and understood, was the best and
most certain. The worst thing ever done for India was
the attempt to force upon the people our English notions
and systems of tenure, thereby the greatest misery had
'been produced. In the north-west provinces the Go-
vernment had adopted and enforced the system most con-
sistent with the habits and wishes of the people; and this
system had been successful. In Madras the ryotwar sys-
tem had prevailed under the native princes, and had been
continued by Sir Thos. Monro. It was a system which
was prevalent in all Oriental countries, and experience
had proved it to be the most successful. Nothing could be
so useless as the commission proposed. It would be ex-
ceedingly impolitic and unwise to attempt to interfere
with the tenure of the land ; but there were many evils
that might be removed, particularly as related to the as-
sessment. This should be clone, not by a commission, but
directly by the government of the province. A governor
for Madras, Mr. Thomasson, had been selected, who would
be most likely to carry out these improvements. Subse-
quently to his time the Governor-General sent a commis-
sion to inquire into the mode of collecting the land re-
venue, and Lord Harris also was instructed that his first
duty would be to arrange the revenue and reduce the as-
sessment. He (Sir Charles Wood) had given his best at-
tention to the subject, but it was impossible to cure in a
few months evils which had been growing for so many years.
(Hear.) That much might be done was proved by what
Lord Dalhousie had already effected, and there was every
intention on the part of the authorities to proceed in the
direction of reform. His hope was that by an improved
mode of collecting the land revenue, and by a large expen-
diture on public works the condition of Madras might be
raised to as high a pitch of prosperity as was enjoyed by
any other part of India.
Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE complained of the manner in
which the hon. member for Poole had been censured and
misrepresented by the hon. baronet the member for Honi-
ton, but said that the hon. member for Poole had earned
a reputation which enabled him to laugh to scorn such at-
tempts at calumny and ridicule. Nobody could say of the
hon. member that he had any interest in perpetuating
abuses, or that personal power or emolument was the cause
of the interest he took in the affairs of India. (Hear.) The
hon. member had brought forward facts, of which no denial
had been attempted. The fact was that not more than one
fifth of the land in Madras was under cultivation, and the
next was that for the purpose of extracting a large amount
of revenue torture was constantly practised on the unfortu-
nate natives. That fact the hon. baronet, the member for
Honiton, had not dared to deny. (Hear, hear.) Aflother
fact, which had not been denied, was that the tenure of
land was such that to attempt the cultivation of land was
a wild speculation. In short, none of the facts advanced
had been disproved; and the result of their existence was,
that the population of Madras was in the lowest state of
misery and degradation.
Mr. MANGLES said that the evil of the case lay not in
the tenure of land, but in the mode of assessment; and
that certainty required alteration.
Mr. HENLEY thought the discussion which had been
raised exceedingly valuable. It was admitted that the rent
was excessive, but what was proposed was not the natural
remedy—namely, the reduction of the rent, but a commis-
sion to inquire into the mode of collection. This was only
a specimen of the mode in which the question was dodged
from one party to another. He hoped they would soon
hear that some action had, taken place, that the rent would
be reduced, and the natural result would be that more
land would be cultivated and the revenue would increase.
He was glad therefore to hear the right hon. baronet say
that the time for discussion had passed, and that the time
for action had come. He should be glad to hear it denied
on the authority of the right lion. gentleman, that torture
was inflicted in the collection of the revenue, as had been
stated.
Sir C. WOOD did not believe the story, but he was not
in a position to prove a negative. Inquiry should be made,
but until it was made it was impossible for him to deny a
statement put forward as a fact.
haMd
rb.e
enin MANGLESlndiahaes asserted
never th a the
ar daringdef the
torturem a nybyeienagrs hein-
flicted in Madras for the purpose of collecting the revenue.
Mr. V. SCULLY quoted the authority of a Mr. Morris-
son, who said that the infliction of torture had often drawn
forth a rupee the possession of which was denied. It had
been admitted that India was rack-rented from end to end
—(no)—and it was time, therefore, that the system was in-
quired into, in order that some improvement might be in-
troduced. The tenure appeared to be nothing more than
from year to year, upon an uncertain assessment—which
was even worse than rack-rent. He believed the tenure of
land was the root of all benefit c,r of all evil in every country
in the world. It was the same in India as in Ireland; an
insecure tenure produced discontent, want, and misery ;
while a secure and equitable tenure of land encouraged in-
dustry, and produced plpnty, independence, and tran-
quillity. He considered that there had been ample grounds
shown for the appointmentof a commission to inquire into
the tenure of laud in India.

After a few words in explanation from Sir J. HOGG,
Mr. OTWAY was astonished to hear from the hon. mem-
ber fur Guildford that he had never heard of the infliction
of torture iu India, when he must know that a motion for
inquiry into the subject had recently been made in the
India-house, t had been stifled in the way in which in-
convenient motions generally were in that house. But he
(Mr. Otway) knew that the practice of torture did prevail
in India, and to put the matter beyond doubt he would
road part of a letter addressed by a gentleman (Mr. Theo-
bald), a member of the Calcutta bar, to the hon. member
for Poole, in whichbe showed beyond doubt that the prac-
tice did prevail. It was as follows:—" We have had the
news of the course of your inquiries, and of some of their
results. Almost every vice and abuse flourishes in India.
Your discovery of the practice of torture is no news to
me. I believe it is practised in every lock-up house in
Calcutta. In the Mofussil I had personal proof of it
not long ago. Two ladies, a gentleman and myself,
went up to Burrackpore in a palkeegliarre, having
a coarse bag containing 400 rupees, which was certainly in
the gharry just before our arrival, but was missed on
arrival. After fruitless inquiry it was proposed to use the
thumb-screw' and we were assured by that means the
thief could bo discovered ; we refused permission, but
were assured it was a common practice. It ie high time
to depart from a system in which such practices are com-
mon. The root of the evil, in my opinion, lies in the civil
service; one man is placed officially over a million of
people, scattered over some thousands of square miles, and
everything depends on his virtue and ability. It is ab-
surd to make such distinctions between him and all the
uncovenanted ; he is the tyrant over all, and is too apt to
be hoodwinked by the clever but low class of natives.
Really the civilian
.governs only in name; the real gover-
nors are the kuavith natives. Tho support also which
civilians uniformly receive at head-quarters makes them
virtually irresponsible. There is a mutual compact
among the members of this class which defeats- ail com-
plaints against them, though complaints often are made,
and are well founded.
Mr. MANGLES explained that what he had said was
that he had never heard of torture being applied for the
purpose of the collection of the revenue ; though he had
heard of torture being inflicted by police officers, who ex-
ceeded their authority, for the purpose of extorting con-
fessions from criminals.
Mr, ELLIOT could confirm the statement of Mr. Mangle.
From his experience in Beng it and Madras, he did not be-
lieve torture had been inflicted as a means of enforcing
payment of the revenue. He would not say that instances
aright not have occurred of pe'ice.officers exceeding their
authority as was sometimes done here ; but he did not be-
lieve that torture was inflicted, except in rare instances—
and then it was wholly without authority—by tho police ;
and with regard to the thumb-screw, he believed• it was
unknown in India.
The house then divided—
For the motion 59
.Against it. 6l
Majority
Mr. BROTHERTON said that they had been sitting till
two o'clock this morning, and again from twelve, and be
should move the adjournment ot' the house.
Lord D. STUART said he hoped his hon. friend would
not persist in his motion.. He ought to consider that by
adjourning the house now, on a Tuesday night, he deprived
members of getting on with motions, which might be die-