The Sun.
London, England, 1838-03-23 00:00:00

EXPORTATION OF REFINED SUGAR.

Lord SANDON asked if it were the intention of the Ge.
vernrnent to repeal the drawback on the export of refined
sugar.
(qr. P. THONISON said that the question was under the
consideration of the Government.
FRENCH DUTIES ON IRISH LINEN.

Sir R. BATESON asked if the Government had received
any fresh information with regard to the duties which had been
imposed by the French Government upon Irish linens? The
Hon. Baronet was going on to complain that the Government
had not shown proper vigour in regard to this subject, and that
they ought to have raised the duties on French brandies and
silks, when he was interrupted by cries of " Order."
Mr. P. THOMSON said he had received no further intel-
ligence on the subject, except that these duties were not so
likely to be imposed now as they were before.
NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.

Sir ROBERT PEEL begged to ask the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, a question upon a subject of some
importance and one that related particular y to his own
department.—(Hear.) Towards the close of the last
Session a vote was passed sanctioning the proceeding with
the new Houses of Parliament according to the plan of
Mr. Barry. The question he wished to put to the Chancellor
of the Exchequer was, whether he considered that ques-
tion to have been decided, and whether her Majesty's
Government considered themselves competent to proceed with
the execution of the work, Parliament having decided the
plan of Mr. Barry was to be adopted, although the further in-
tervention of Parliament might be necessary, for the purpose
of providing the money.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had no
difficulty in replying to the question of the Right Hon. Bart.
Last Session the Report of the Woods and Forests with re-
gard to Mr. Barry's estimates was laid on the table of the
House. The Committee up stairs had decided on the plan.
The House had not before it any adequate means of judging
whether that estimate was a full and sufficient esti-
mate, and the matter was referred to the Woods and Forests.
Early in the course of last Session, he had laid the report of
the Woods and Forests on the table of the House. The
House did not disturb the proceedings before the Committee,
and consequently, the plan of Mr. Barry was acted upon
as the Government considered, from the Parliamentary
proceedings that had taken place—Mr. Barry's plan
was definitively approved of, and all that remained was
to lay on the table of the House the estimate required ; there-
fore they had no intention of coining to the House again for
any authority.

- -
mittees had recommended the introduction of Bills to amelio-
rate their condition. These Bills, however, had always been
resisted on the part of the Government. Now, when a Com-
mission was appointed, he wished no time would be lost
in carrying the inquiry into effect. Another subject
to wh ch he wished to direct the attention of the Hon. Gen-
tleman was this. He understood the Commissioners in Lan-
cashire had refused any allowance to witnesses fcr loss of time.
He trusted they would have the power of allowing some come
pensation to these people, who were suffering the must ex-
treme distress. He trusted the Hon. Gentleman would bo
able to give some explanaAion on these points, and with that
nnderstanding he should be inclined to postpone his motion.
Mr. P. THOMSON replied to the question of the Hun,
Member, but his answers were very imperfectly heard. H Vas
understood to say that the cause of delay had been explained
on a former occasion, as having arisen from the difficulty of
bringing the gentlemen together. With respect to the second
question, he was unable to give a satisfactory answer, being
unacquainted with the details of the measure, but he did not
doubt that a satisfactory answer could be given.
Mr. AG L lONB Y was glad the Hon. Member had seen
the expediency of postponing his motion during the siv.ing of
the Committee.—The motion was then withdrawn.
SHERIFFS (SCOTLAND.)
Mr. WALLACE rose for the purpose of moving the
appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the na-
ture and extent of the duties performed by the thirty
Stipendiary Sheriffs of Scotland who were paid out of the
Exchequer; also into the nature and extent of the duties per-
formed by the fifty-two stipendiary substitutes, and to report
how far it would be advisable to continue discharging the
duty of Sheriffs in Scotland. The object of his motion
was to save a sum of money that was now taken out of the
consolidated fund. The question did not relate solely to
Scotland, but to the Exchequer of the three kingdoms, and
therefore he prayed the attention of the House. He would be

able to establish his case satisfactorily by the documents in
his possession. He regretted that the Noble Lord the Secretary
for the Home Department was not in his place—his excellent
speech of last week on the subject of County Courts would
be strongly corroborative of the statement be had to make.
How would English or Irish gentlemen feel if their
Judges sat in London or Dublin, and have the causes
sent up from the country to them far adjudica-
tion? That was what he (Mr. 'Wallace) complained of.
Ile held in his hand a printed report which showed that the
Sheriffs of Scotland did all their work by deputy. There were
30 of these gentlemen, end they had no leas than 52 deputies,
thus saddling the country with the expense of 82 judges. He
was not opposed to the salaries—he would care little for them
—it was the system he objected to, as being a most vicious and
unprincipled one—it was a cowardly one.—it was cowardly in
the extreme, and therefore it was un- Scottish.—( A laugh.)
What he demanded was, that the Judges should sit in their own
Court-houses—that they should not act by deputy, but act as all
other Judges did by sitting in an open court hearing wit-
nesses, and having Counsel before them to argue points
of law, and so deciding the causes brought before them in
a fair and open manner. It was supposed by many
that
these county. Judges were not well and amply remune-
rated for their labour. He held a Report in his hand, from
which he would state to the House what these gentlemen ac-
tually received, From that Report it appeared that the
Sheriff of the county of Aberdeen had 5901., while his De-
puty had a salary of 378/., thus saddling the county with
an expense of 9681. The Sheriff of Argyle had a salary
of 544, he had_ four Deputies, and the county for these
five gentlemen was saddled with an expense exceeding 1,500/.
In each county in Scotland there was more paid from the Pith'
lie Exchequer than in the richest and largest county in Eng-
land.—( Hear, hear.) In Ayr, the Judge, who decided
nothing, had 6601. a-year, and the substitute 3691., and the
whole county paid one thousand and twenty-nine pounds a-year.
In Berwick the Judge had 4491, and the whole county poi'
1,065/. alear. In Dunbar the county paid 1,059/. Looking
at the whole of the counties in Scotland, 13,429/. was received
by those who did no duty-_.( Hear,)--while, on the other hand,
those who did the duty and had been most unjustly aspersed
by some Members of that House, for want of knowledge and
integrity—whereas all the knowledge was on their side--
received an equally large sum. The Hon. Member went en t°
say that he had observed it stated in the newspapers that tee
Learned Attorney-General for England, himself a Scotch-
man, seemed to think it would not be proper for the
professional Sheriffs to reside permanently within the
jurisdiction in which they were Judges. If they did nee
attend from day to day to their business--if theontentea
themselves merely with reading, and abstained fromc combs;
into collision with other lawyers, that was to say Scotch
lawyers, they would soon lose their legal habits.—( Hear.)
The Hon. Member then used a most excellent Scotch phrase
—he said the Learned Attorney-General must know this was
all "blather."---( Loud laughter.) The Learned Attorney'
Gentleman himself was employed in every Scotch case in the
House of Lords, and therefore the futility of his doctrine must
be seen. He (Mr. W.) knew this subject was very
agreeable a
_e.
agreeable one to the House. He should move for
a
Commix-
tee tee of Inquiry ; and he pledged himself that, if the
granted an inquiry, it should be a short one.—( Hear, lear.)
He pledged himself to show that these judges were not only
useless, but the causes of a very vicious system which ought
to be entirely done away with, He had no doubt, also, that
it would save to the country from 12,0001. to 15,0001. a-year,
and that there would also be a better administration of justice.
one more agreeable to the people, more consonant to commolt
sense, and more rational. The Hon. Member concluded by
moving for a Select Committee, to inquire into the nature and
extent of the duties performed by the thirty Stipendiary Sheriffs
in Scotland, who are paid out of the Exchequer ' • also into
the nature and extent of the duties performed by the fifty-tw°
stipendiary substitutes of the aforesaid sheriffs, who are also
paid out of the Exchequer, and to report how far it
will be
adviesblo to continue the system of performing by Deputy the
duties of Sheriffs in Scotland.
The LORD ADVOCATE understood that the enquire'
of the Honourable Member rested on two grounds—re
economy, the other the better administration of justice; eel
he also said that inquiry was necessary. His (the Lord Ad-
vocate's) answer was, that inquiry had been made by a Collt
mission, which had reported to the House, in which Report
t
there was full and ample information. It was said that
the Sheriffs did not perform their duties..—( Hear.) ,
(the Lord Advocate) contended that they had uniformly
performed these duties efficiently. With regard to rho
question of economy, he apprehended that if local judge.
were to be appointed, the expense would be great indeteel_
Suppose a gentleman to give up his profession to accept
.iema'
office, lie would require a large salary to compensate 0
for its loss, and to keep substitutes. He could see ?ies
advantage from a Committee, and it was better that ''
House should decide upon the matter at first. The establih
ses,
nient had existed for a long time, and from all of his eIS,
iienca the system had given very general satisfaction.
trusted therefore that the House would not agree to the
motion of his Hon. Friend.
Mr. HUM E said his Hon. Friend (Mr. Wallace) liec:
made no charge against any sheriff.—( Hear, hear.) It
complaint was not that they did not do their duty, but that they
had no duty to perform—that it was all done by deputy. id
Hon. Friend wished for a Committee, where he we''
prove that the business would be much better done ,
one Chief Judge going circuits, with assistance, if
he
wanted it, Was it possible that they should be paying 20 Judges'. ,
who did nothing but attend to their practice in Edinburgh i
Was not practice to be obtained elsewhere than in Westmioter
Hall ?—( Hear, hear, and a laugh. ) It was responsibility that
t
J made the man.—( Hear.) This was not a new question—it I),
been brought forward fifteen years ago, and the same aee
swer had been given as was offered now.—( Hear.) In Ire-
land the Assistant-Barristers went their circuits and left thee
practice—they gave satisfaction. Now on the Learned Lord
principle, they would be incompetent. He (Mr. Hume) sub-
mittedmen Noblewasa gLaoarsdtiotahewSoretchryetoafriyiisfoartttehteitiHonor Depart'
moot,
and that '
was not right to have an establishment of sinecure judges in 8,5
part of the country.---( Hear, hear.) Let those abe filled t"s
office of judges be well paid, but fully competent to discharge
their duty and let them discharge that duty—( Hear- )
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL felt bound to &cher° tae-
the system of Sheriffs-depute and Sheriffs-substitute w e
as -
system which he always admired, and the more so as he cell"
pared them with the system in other countries. Lord 1133C°rit;
in the time of Elizabeth, complained that En the
country was "
country at that time the worst off with respect to local Cello
and local Judges. He (the Attorney-General) thought oe
system in Scotland an admirable system. The advantage so
the Sheriff-substitute was, that law was thus brought home
the door of the poor man, and if any man was dissatisfied theeenet
was an appeal to the Sheriff-depute. He thought the ref' me
Sheriffs discharged their duty in a most exemplary me'neea
and that no good would arise from making any change in
exi ting system.
Mr. COL QUHOUN—On the grounds of common eensel
thought the present proposition exceedingly objectionable, a"bo
he might quote an opinion expressed by Lord Brougham,%%N.,
had stated that the Courts of the Sheriffs-depute were the to
voutite Courts of the people of Scotland. He felt bound
oppose the present motion.
Mr. R STE UA RT was anxious to say a few words on this
subject, as he had been prevented taking part in the debate on do):
Sheriffs Court Bill, having been in the Chair of the Meee he
that occasion. He wished to state the grounds on which ca
had the misfortune to differ from his Hun. and Learned
Friends, as well as the reason why he could not vote fer,,..h,
Committee moved for by the Member for Greenock. se
Attorney-General had truly stated that they were in peeeecd
lion of all the information necessary, and that no good wool
result from an enquiry before a Committee. He thought
n.
too, and should therefore vote against the motion of his Itieee
Friend ; but having that information, he arrived at a very
before
ferent conclusion from his Learned Friends. He bad L7sit
expressed his opinion that the present system of non-rest de
Sheriffs ria,a had, and he again most strongly dceiaore
tar
his disapprobation of it. The only argument in its faerees
was, that if resident always in the counties, the Shesviv's
would lose their knowledge of law. Now if
good against them, a fbrtiori it was good
substitutes, who on that principle ought to be displaced everyproved
the PaNeeti-
tive or six years but the returns More the House
the reverse to be the case ; for notwithstanding the rust
of
ululating from constant residence, they chewed that I
ou.
above 44,000 decisions made by these resident Sheriffs
wb
lute, only 3,000 Were appealed, and only 90 decisions
erriu
against tbeLr
altered b 4, their more learned principals in Edinburgh.
system
thew grounds he was anxious to see the present seae.re
changed, and one resident sheriff appointed on a good s eeed
t) each county ; there would be no increased expen_s:,ma'i't,
universal satisfaction would he felt in Scotland.
however, vote against the Committee for the reason baefe°`,.:
a ated, but he tveuht be quite ready to support any measure
that neighs be introduced to carry out these vie we.
their duties ifsa most satisfactory manner. though
Mr. INGHAM contended that the Sheriff substitutes per-
formed
Mr. WAABURTON would support the motion, t

he could not concur in all the objections stated by the Hon.
Member for Greenock. What he would recommend his Hon.
Friend was, in case his motion should be lost, to introduce
scene measure that would have the effect of establishing an
uniformity of decision in these different Courts.
Mr. PRINGLE said that the present motion was totally
uncalled for, and ho felt bound to oppose it.
After one or two observations from an Hon. Member whose
rolne we could not learn.
Lord 3, RUSSELL would vote against the proposition,
for the simple reason that it appeared to him that these
Unurts leave complotu satisfaction.—( Hear, hear.) They
had decided many cases of considerable importance, and there
had lam very few appeals from their decisions to the superior
Courts, Besides, it did not appear to him that the people of
Scotland were dissatisfied, or considered the present system us
dilattary, expensive, or uncertain.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. WALLACE, in reply to the Noble Lord, could give
his positive assurance that these Courts were detested all
Over Scotland_(" Oh, oh !")--and none but the lawyers in
that House would stand up in their defence.—( Laughter.)
He would make an offer, and that was to repair to any
country town in Scotland and ascertain public opinion as
to the system. He would certainly divide the House on
this motion.

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided—For the motion.--
Against it 53
Majority against the motion —34
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN INDIA.
Mr. WYNN presented a petition on this subject from se.:
veral inhabitants of Madras, both European and native.
Sir J. C. HOB 110 USE objected that Mr. Ward's motion
on this subject was before the House, and that this petition
bore no reference to that motion.
After a few words from Mr. WYNN and Sir J. Hoettouse,
Mr. WARD, in bringing forward his motion, said the mat-
ter at issue lay in a small compass, but the interest excited by
it in India was immense, as was proved by the number of peti-
tions from that country—petitions the only prayer of which
was for inquiry. He did not see how the House could refuse
the prayer without talsifying its own directions, given in 1833,
at the Passing of the Indian charter, which were that, if the
people of India were wronged, they were to look t) Parlia-
ment for sympathy and justice. He asserted that, by a single
act of the India Government, an inroad was made into the
rights of every British-born subject—an inroad totally uncalled
for, and which had excited a strong feeling of resentment
amongst the European population, without conferring any be-
nefit on the native population. He had analysed the signa-
tures to the petition, and found 200 European and 200
Hindoo ;and Parsec merchants .50 Armenians, and 200
Indo-British, with a great number from the Presidency.
This did not show party spirit, but showed that all were
moved by a common sense of a ccmmon grievance. And
what was this grievance? It was stated in the first passage
of the petition that " The Act was lately passed by the Le-
gislative Council as law, the object of which was to repeal
the 107th section of the 53d of George 111. ; that the effect of
this Act was to render British subjects subject to the juris-
diction of local Courts, which were presided over by Hin-
dons, and to take away the right of appeal in cases where
the air ount sued for did not exceed 4,000 rupees." He would
now state as briefly as possible the system adopted for the ad-
ministration of justice in India by the Company. First, they
had the Provincial Court, the jurisdiction of which was cir-
cumscribed in point of value. This Court was presided over
by a Hindoo or Mahometan. There was an appeal from this
Court to the district Court, presided over by an English gun
tleman—English in feeling, but having seldom any knowledge
of English law, save what he acquired at College. Then there
was the Court called the Zillah, the jurisdiction of which ex-
tended over districts containing populations of a million or a
million and a half. The jurisdiction of these Courts extended
to all cases whatever. Front the Zillah there was an appeal to
the Commissioner of the district, and from him to the Supreme
Company's Court, and from that to the King in Council.
This was the machinery established for the administration of
justice, and it was quite obvious that the whole was studiously
arranged to keep its dispensers totally and constantly de-
pendont on the Company. The Judges were often promoted
to political residences or commercial situations, as in the case
of Sir E. Colebrook, who, after being a Judge of the Suder
Dewany, became after a Member of the Council, and then po-
litical resident at Delhi. He merely mentioned these facts to
show how studiously the dependence on the Company was kept
Up. There were other considerations which affected the
Judges in India, namely, that they were all deficient in legal
knowledge as far as regarded English law, He found that at
a meeting at Calcutta a very experienced merchant, of large
property, who had reason to know the practice in all the
Courts, stated that bribes were notoriously given to obtain
justice from native officers. The English law was only ad-
ministered between British subjects in the Supreme Court,
Until the Act which was passed in 1813, which enacted that
jurisdiction should be given to justices of the peace in all civil
cases, with an appeal to the Supreme Court. Thus matters
remained until the renewal of the charter in 1832, when a
Commission was sent out to form a new code of laws for
India embracing one equal system of jurisprudence. Mr.
Macaulay was at the head of the Commission, and had much
difficulty to contend with, and therefore took another course
than that of forming a new code of laws, for he deprived the
small Courts of their jurisdiction, and restored the supreme
Court to its original power and jurisdiction, of which it had
been deprived by the Act of 1813. He hoped the President
of the Board of Controul would state to the House what was
tne law that was really to be administered in India to British.
.born subjects in all parts of the country. The Hon. Member
concluded by moving that a Select Committee bo appointed
to inquire into the allegations of the petition, to see whether or
not they were well founded, and to report to the House how
far the Act of the Legislative Council of India (No. XI.)
1836, affects the rights and privileges of the British and
native inhabitants of India, the prerogative of the Crown, and
the interests of the United Kingdom.
Sir J. C. HOBIIOUSE said the cause of all the present
turmoil in respect to the matter brought forward by his Hon.
Friend was Mr. Turton„ but his Hon. Friend he was bound to say,
had rather exaggerated than extenuated the instructions of his
Client when he informed the House of the discontent which
prevailed in India on the subject of this Act, and how the rights
and privileges of the British inhabitants of that vast country
were perilled by it. Alas for the case of his Hon. Friend 1 Ile
(Sir J. C. Hobhouse) felt bound to say that there were no
grievances felt in respect to it, end that hardly a single com-
plaint had been made against its operation. Hit Hon. Friend
had said that this Act affected the rights of all the British sub-
jects in India. Now, what was the fact? It affected none
except those who were in the Mofussil, or provinces, The in-
habitants of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay were not touched
by its operation. His Hon. Friend had said that the power of
appeal to the Supreme Court was the palladium of the liberties
of Englishmen in India. Now, what was the fact ? That
right existed from 1813 to the passing of this Act (1836) in
the
provinces ; •and yet during that period of twenty-
three years it had been resorted to only twice. Further-
more he was bound to state that on both occasions the
Judges of the Supreme Court, being unable to decide the
points, had to refer it to the Suraje-dewance- ad-dowlah, or
Supreme Court of the Company. What cause, then, had the
British residents in India to complain of the deprivation of
this right, so rarely exercised, and which when exercised was
asource of the greatest partiality and injustice? His Hon.
Friend. had said that this Act was uncalled for, but he ( sir
C. Hobhouse) was prepared to show, on the authority of the
highest law officers in India, that the Legislative Counoil
would be guilty of a gross dereliction of duty if they had not
passed it. The Right Hon. Baronet then went on to quote
the testimonies of Mr. W. Wynn, Mr. Warburton, Mr. C.
Puller, and Lord Sandon, given in the debate on the East
India Charter, in 1833, in proof of the great advantage it
would be to have all the inhabitants of India, British 4; well
as native, governed by one set of laws, with no exeluaive
Privilege for any particular class. Ho also quoted the au-
thorities of the Right Hon. Member for Teignmoutli and Sir
Edward Ryan, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court at Cal-
cutta, to the same effect. His Honourable Friend had abused
the Mofussil Courts as ignorant, incompetent, venal and
corrupt in their administration of justice, If they were
so the more shame for England who had governed the
country where they were for more than one hundred
years. But he ( Sir John Cam Hobhouse) denied the fact.
14e, was surprised to hear his Hon. Friend, who had evi-
dently bestowed much attention on this subject, state that
British residents stood in need of a safeguard in India. Did
he know how India was governed, or how our Government of
that peninsula was maintained ? Had he ever heard or
read of a difference between the races of India ? Did he
know that we were there in the place of conquerors, with a
Government maintained by a vast army, which, he was sorry
to say,
ex necessitate rei, was described and confessed to be
despotic ? Tell him that an Englishman, one of the con-
querors, and of those who still maintained their conquest,
Wanted a safeguard in India 1 Why, in such a province the
great difficulty must be to get a native who dared almost to
'`")ls an Englishman in the face. The Honourable Gentle.
man had laid great stress on the advantage of the protection
afford,ld by the King's Courts. He found the following ac-
count of the manner in which justice was distributed by the
King's Courts in Madras and Bengal :—" The expenses of li-
tigation in England are so heavy that people sit down under
b, Y°ogs and submit to losses rather than go to law ; and yet the
English-
are the richest people in the world. The people of India
is
Ire poor, and the expense of litigation in the Supreme Court
Ye times as great as the expense of litigation in Westinins-
ter Hall. An undefended case, which might be presented
successfully to the Court of King's Bench for about 81. sterl-
Thg, cannot be presented in the Supreme Court under 401.
sterling, Where our English Barristers receive a guinea, a
arrister there receives two gold mohurs, more than three
14.,tlineas- For making a motion of course an English Barris-
receives half a guinea, a Barrister here receive a gold
a 1)nr• Officers of the Courts are enabled to accumulate in
few years out of the substance of ruined suitors fortunes
larger_e than the oldest and most distinguished servant can ex-
Peet to carry home after thirty or forty years of eminent ser-
tio'es• I speak of Bengal, where the system is in full opera-
it n• At Madras the Supreme Court has, I believe, fulfilled
suitor within
It has done its work ; it has beggared every rich
,or within its jurisdiction ; and is inactive for want of some-
"u'ly to ruin. This is not all. Great as the evils of the Su-
preme Court really are, they are exaggerated by the appre-
tqn:ions of the natives to a still more frightful magnitude,
i
terror with which it is regarded by them is notorious.
within the last few months,
its in consequence of an attempt
gig de by s
°me persons connected with that Court to extet.d
jurisdiction over the suburbs of Calcutta, hundreds of re-
spectablel and wealthy natives petitioned the Government,
t.O
.gg”tglt:gber. indicating the greatest dismay, stating that
give a el h every English defendant in every civil cause
sobring the native plaintiff before the Supeeseo Court
give
al to ever dish t Enelislaman an immunity against
toe almost
.11 E
juris •
Civil pyrosceutions." This character given was of
thetion of those Courts by Mr, Nac,mtlaiy, and svaa

confirmed in much stronger language by Mr. Ross, Colonel
Morrison, and Mr. Shakespeare. His Hon. Friend had said
that Mr. Macaulay would have done well not to have legis.
lated so quickly in adopting the suggestion of the Law Com-
mission with respect to the Act under consideration. The
Law Commission had nothing to do with the matter. The
great merits an4.high genius of Mr. Macaulay all parties ac-
knowledged in and out of the House ; and even if he should
have that Act fixed on him, he did not think it would he much
detrimental to his fame. When the debates took 'lace in
Parliament oa the India Act the British Legislature decid-
edly contemplated giving to the Indian Government jurisdic-
tion over the Supreme as well as over the other Indian
Courts. " But," said the Hon. Member, " what a shame to
have Provincial Courts in India deciding on questions of
English inheritance, marriage, er divorce." Now, here was an
error. The Provincial Courts would not have to decide on any
such questions. If both parties were British they need not go
at all to the Provincial Courts. They might, in the first
instance address themselves to the King's Courts, and there
ruin themselves to their heart's content.—( A laugh.) It was
to the great credit of the Indian Government that for many
years past the British public heard little or nothing about it ;
and that without exciting any great resistance, or getting up
what was called a grievance, they had so successfully con-
trolled and maintained the sway of a vast empire. Such being
the case, he hoped the House would see the propriety of re-
jecting the motion of the Honourable Member for Sheffield.
But supposing a Committee were granted, and called to-
gether to-morrow, what, he begged to ask, could it do ?
what evidence could it collect ?—what documents refer to,
which were not at that moment before them? There was, to
be sure, Mr. Turton ; but all the evidence he could give was
detailed in his pamphlet.—( Hear, hear.) Under these cir-
cumstances, he hoped his Hon. Friend would let his motion
drop, and allow him to substitute for it °le to the following
effect :—" That the minutes of Council on which was found-
ed the Legislative Act (No. 11) of 1836 be printed."

Sir C. GREY said that it was not the first time that the
proceedings of the King's Court at Calcutta had been made
the subject of charges and imputations of the most serious
and improper kind—charges entertained in the security of
silence against his brother Judges of that Presidency, and
never intended for publication. He was glad to hear from
the Right Hon. Boronet that ho was not afraid of giving
publicity to those secret proceedings, and he hoped he would
publish the document containing them ; and under the convic-
tion that this publicity would do all the good that could be
expected at the present moment, he would vote against the
motion. But the Right Hon. Baronet had fallen into a great
error in his reasoning on the subject of the motives of the pe.
titioners. He had said that the British inhabitants of Madras,
of Bombay, and Calcutta, took no interest in the matter—
that the appeal came only from the country residents—the na-
tives merely I But did the Right Hon. Baronet suppose that
the British residents of India took no interest in the justice
dispensed to natives throughout the country ? He was con-
vinced that the British residents were as much interested in the
subject of the petitions as any other class of British subjects.
The Right Hon. President of the Board of Indian Commis-
sioners had made a little mistake as to the equality which the
petitioners were said to have protested against. It was a po-
pular topic to declaim against the exclusive privileges of par-
ticular classes, but in the present instance, the petitioners
sought no peculiar privileges. They had no objection to see
the natives raised to their own standard, but they did object
to be degraded to the level of a people who were looked upon
as unfit for a free Government. The motion of the Hon.
Member for Sheffield placed the House in a considerable diffi-
culty. In 1833 the House of Commons took from the East
India Company all its trading advantages, and, further,
gave a right to British subjects to hold land for any term
of years. When British subjects were thus not only ad-
mitted, but, as it were, invited to settle in India—in a
country every notion of which was connected with grandeur,
and wealth, and luxury—it became necessary to establish a
more perfect system of laws. —( Hear, hear.) Accordingly,
more power was vested in the Governor-General, and a Le-
gislative Council was established, the appointment of which,
though nominally in the Crown, was in reality, with the
Governor, but the House at the same time that it made this
change reserved to itself the power of altering and revoking
every Act of the Legislative Council, and also the right to
legislate for all persons and places to the same extent as if
such Legislative Council had never been formed. The words
were so plain that it was a clear and distinct pledge to all
persons going out that the House would retain and exercise
its power. The resolution of the Council, which was the
object of the petition, was complained of on two grounds—
first its want of legality, and next its inexpediency. He en-
tertained the highest respect for the House of Commons, as
the most awful assemblage in the world; but he did not think
it the tribunal best calculated to inquire into such a question.
It was an investigation which would open too wide a field,
and would perhaps do as much harm as good.

Mr. HOGG agreed in the animadversion of the Right
Hon. Baronet ( Sir J. C. Hobhouse) on the Hon. Member
who had brought forward this motion ; but he must express
his astonishment at the course which the Hon. Baronet had
pursued in the subsequent course of his speech. The Right
Hon. Baronet himself had adhered as little to the question as
the Hon. Gentleman whom he had censured for departing
from it. The petitioners asked if the Hindoo and Alahometan
law had been administered with common justice? Where were
the reports and opinions that had been alluded to ? If there
were any, they ought to he laid upon the table of the House
—and as they were not he had a right to suppose that there
had been none. He maintained that British subjects had ever
since 1723 been amenable to British laws administered in a
Mayor's Court until 1773, when a Supreme Court was esta-
blished, having power over British subjects, and he would re-
peat that by the letters patent of that law they were amenable
to no other tribunal that the King's Court. So it continued
till 1813, when the right of British subjects to resort to the in-
terior of the country was granted, and when it was deemed
expedient to render British subjects amenable to the Courts of
the country. The enactment of the 53d of George 111., sec.
106, 107, and 108, showed most clearly how the legal pro-
ceedings between British subjects and the other inhabitants
of the country were to be conducted. By it British subjects
had an appeal to the Supreme Court as well when plaintiffs
as the others had when defendants. This was the law, and
all parties were satisfied ssith it.—( Hear, hear.) Why then
change it ? There had not been a murmur against it, and
during seven years he was in India he only remembered one
single appeal. The Honourable Gentleman then called the
attention of the House to the petition of February, 1836,
which prayed that the law might be lea as it was, at least
until some uniform code could he passed.—( Hear, hear.) In
March following the Government reply was dated, and all it
did was to treat the petioners with utter contempt, containing
no answer whatever to what the petitioners prayed for. It
would have been well if the Right Honourable Baronet had
informed the House what the substantive law was which these
petitioners were to have from him.—( Hear, bear.) Mr.
Maeanlay's name had been often referred to in the course of
this debate; but it ought to be known that his office was that
of Legislative Assessor. Mr. Macaulay had no duty under
the Bill but that of Legislative Councillor ; but he was after-
wards appointed a member of the Law Commission.

Sir J. C ARNAC did not think that the natives of India
should be left in a worse condition than the natives of any
other of our colonies. He thought that the first object of the
Government ought to be to consult fur the interest of the na-
tives of India ; and that secondary to that should be the it,te-
rests of the British residents ; but that certainly after, those
interests had the fullest and most important claim to conside-
ration. These were the principles upon which he thought the
Government of India ought to be conducted.

Mr. B ROT HE RTON rose, and moved the adjournment
of the debate ; but the House having shown a wish to proceed
the Hon. Member acquiesced.
Mr. W YNN thought it would have been better had the sub-
ject been discussed before the Privy Council (as we under-
stood) rather than come forward in the shape of a discussion
of this kind. With respect to this particular motion, looking
to the state of the House, he would recommend the Honour-
able Member not to press it, but to accede to the amendment
of the Right Honourable the President of the Board of Con-
trol. He would not conclude without expressing his regret
at the course pursued by the Right Honourable Gentleman
opposite in producing a minute such as had been read to the
House. He (Mr. Wynn) did not think that any Legislative
Councillor should have stated in the language of rhetorical
declamation that " the Supreme Court had beggared every
native of property in Madras, and only ceased now because
there was no more left to beggar." Should a charge should
not be made without the strongest proof, nor should any Hon.
Member have given it publicity.
Mr. VERNON S milli would recommend the lion.
Member for Sheffield to withdraw his motion, and thus give
him (Mr. V. Smith) an opportunity for laying the ontiro
minutes on the table. lie congratulated him on the recep-
tion his motion had received. If the auditory was not numer-
ous the attention bad been most exemplary, and the question
had received the fullest discussion. But he had shown no
grounds for a Committee, and, as to his assertion that public
opinion in India was against the Act, it was certainly a mis-
take. Mr. Macaulay had, in his own beautiful language, de-
scribed the course he had followed. lie had, in fact, " bid
defiance to the clamourous censures of the few around him to
gain the approbation of the multitudes whose voices he would
never hear, and whose faces he would never know."—
(Cheers.) He ( Mr. V. Smith) did not see the use of a
Committee. If the Hon. Member disapproved of the Act let
him bring in a specific motion for its repeal ; but a Committee
could effect no useful object.
Mr. g LLIOT could bear testimony to the truth of the
words attributed to Mr. Macaulay, as Sir R. Palmer, the late
Chief Justice of Calcutta, had made precisely a similar ob-
servation with reference to the ruinous expense of the Supreme
Court.
Mr. JENKINS thought the conduct of the Government
had been fully vindicated.
Mr. WA Itp briefly replied, and said that with respect to
the grievances of which the Right Hon. Gentleman ( Sir J.
C. Hobhouse) complained there was a time when he would
be glad to have a good grievance in Westminster to complain
of.—( Laughter.) The lion. Gentleman concluded by with-
drawing his motion.
The other notices and orders were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned at half-past one.

The Earl of Dalhousie is so ill as to leave little
hope of recovery.
young man, named Garibaldy, was last week
drawn for the army at Marseilles, and his father and mother,
of whom he was the only son, were overwhelmed with despair.
At leuth the father, in a tone of resolution, declared that the
young reeri4t chould never depart for the army, and in a few
minutes went out and
trti.ng himself, leaving the young Gari-
baidy the only son of a widow, by_ he became, of course,
exernit fr94l, military service.—. French ikever;