The Sun.
London, England, 1841-09-23 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1841.

EAST INDIA HOUSE.-
_
(YESTERDAY.)
A Quarterly General Court of the Proprietors of East
India Stock, was held at their House in Leadenhall
street, which was also made special, for the purpose of
considering the by-law, and other purposes.
G. INALL, Esq., M.P., took the Chair at twelve o'clock,
accompanied by the greater part of the Directors.
The proceedings of the last Court having Leen read,
the papers which had been laid on the table of the Houses
Parliament since the last Court, were presented to
the Court of Proprietors ; also an account of the super=
annuations granted by the Court of Directors since the
last Court.

Mr. G. THOMPSON, before proceeding to the special
buSiness of the day, begged to ask the Chairman whe-
ther he had received a notice which he had thought it
his duty to send to him, of his intention of calling the
attention of the Court to the case of the late Raja of
Sattara ?

The CHAIRMAN said he had received the notice, but
that was not the proper time to mention it.
Mr. THOMPSON had asked the question, because he
had scan no mention made of his notice, in the adver-
tisement calling the Court,
The CHAIRMAN—OnIy those notices given in Court
appear in the. advertisement.

- Mr. M. MARTIN (who had a notice of motion on the
paper) objected in the. Court considering any business
made special, 'Ton the authority of the Directors, be-
fore ti-at of which notice ha.l been given by a Proprie-
toz, tong previous to any intimation of the special
ousiness.

After a conversation, in which the Chairman, Mr.
\Vigram, Director, and Mr. Weeding, contended for
the right to bring on all business made special by the
Directors, and Mr. Lewis supported Mr. I.ltonta-o!ncq's
viaws, which were not presd,
The CRAIRMIN said, the by-law, which the Direc-
, tors recommended that Court to give authority to the
Committee en By-laws to repeal, prohibiting any Direc•
tor, racer, or servant of the Company from trading
within the limits of the Charter, was ene that was passed
in 1795, when the Court were plfteed iri.eiret4/IstatideB
of a very different character from those hi whloh they
were now placed. (1-lear, hear, hear') At that
time they were deeily olvtged in trade, and were
the only individuals who. wore perrniqed lti
do so to India. Sines that the had tiAlt billy thrown
open the trade to inclividikab Fir ,S.'er3,- other description,
but they had given kip the right of trading at all ;
therefore the outset proposed to be obtained by the by 7.
law no longer existed. That object was to prevent any
Director, ()Meer, or servant of the Company rrntti in-
terfering with the trade which was ,carried rill tot° the
benefit of all. The Conkpaity Were now, in fact, the
et.ly parties who were prohibited from trading within
'he limits of the Charter. He and the Court of Direc-
tors saw no reason for the maintenance of the restrictioth
They thought it now worked prejudicially to The in-
terests of the Company, for it narrowed the choice of
the Proprietors of commercial men to seats Cs PiaW&
tor& As it now stood, hardly any general mer-
chant would be able to olter hiinsell for the direc-
tion, which all would acknowledge to be a very serious
evil. The Directors did not propose that any of the pro-
hibited classes should have the power of trattiv With
India, properly so called, or with uny or the nations on
the continent of India subjc3t to us, bat under the by-
law, as it now stood, they were prohibited frytti
trading with any of our Atottalbui blituilin, or with
South America, for the Charter embraced all parts, from
the Cape of Good Ilope to the Straits of Magellan,
which constituted a circle embracing nearly the whole
world. Under present circumstances there was no reason
for such a large disqualification, and, therefore, he would
propose a resolution to obtain Mt alteration of the by-
law, to w hich he could not anticipate any objection.
Col. Sir L. LtsitiN-MN (thq Deputy Chairman), se.
conded the motion.

Mr. WEEDING deeply regretted such an alteratitth
came recommended to that Court by the Cottrt of Direc-
tors.—(He:dt)
The reasons which formerly supported
laws applied with more force at the present
t.../ne than before. In his opinion it was inexpedient to
to comply with the recommendation, because our commer-
cial intercourse with the Straits of Malacca was large, and
over all the nations resident there the Government of
India had too much power to allow the Directors, their
officers, or servants, to trade without suspicion. in his
opinion it would be a violation of the Charter, and he
would propose an amendment in accordance with those
pinions. If the by-laws were altered in accordance
with the recommendation of the Directors, any member
of the Board might become a proprietor in some joint-
stock concern trading with the countries under their Go=7
vernment ; or they might become sugar planters, and
engage largely in the importation of Hill CoLlies.—
(Hear, hear.) The Directors would be placed in a false
position, and it would be impossible for them to come to
a safe conclusion, or one that would be respected on
many questions that must come before them, and he
would much fear such trading by the Directors would
bring the Court into disrepute, and the Government of
India into collision with the Government of this country%
Ile honoured the character of a merohatit, because he
believed that to commercial intercourse, more than any
other cause, was to be attributed the enlightenment and
civilisation of mankind ; and he would not abridge any
of the advantages to which they were fairly entitled
but he must say, that, in his opinion, the proposed alter-
ation was fraught with mischievous consequences ; that
the effect would be to bring their duty as commercial
men into collision with their interests. There was an-
other reason which led him to oppose the motion, namely,
the oath imposed by the Act of Parliament. The Act
contained that oath not only in 1794, but again in 1613,
when the whole eastern world was thrown open. Still
the Legislature imposed the same oath. Formerly it had
been proposed by gentlemen behind the bar that they
should be permitted to trade to Australia. If such opi-
nions prevailed, they could have establishments not only
in the Archipelago,. in Java, and at the Philippine Isles,
but also at Candia and Colombo. The proposition, was
contrary to the law of the land, and to the obligations
imposed upon the Company. He called upon the Court
to protect the Proprietors from themselves, by refusing
to accede to the motion.

Mr. LEwis, in rising to second the motion, said it ap-
peared to him that the alteration could not legally be
effected in the manner proposed. It was perfectly well
known that the power of making and consequently of '
altering by-laws, was vested by the statute of William,
in the Proprietors assembled in a general Court. On
this occasion the Proprietors were called upon to request
the Committee upon by-laws to amend a certain by-
law, calling upon the Committee upon by-raws to do
that which the Legislature said should be done only by
the assembled Court of Proprietors. If it had been pre-
viously determined by a distinct valuation that such an
alteration should be made in the by-laws, and had
then called upon the Committee of by-laws to frame
the alteration accordingly, such a course could have been
perfectly regular.
The CHAIRMAN said the amendment was to be sub-
mitted to the Court.
Mr. LEWIS said no limit lulu been specified. The
Committee were to alter tte section, so as to confine its
operations to the I?
the Committ, as
places on the Cor: Indian Continent, and to other
anent of India ; leaving it, in fact, to
should or to saywhat places on that Continent
should not be included in the prohibitory
ePac'.inent ; whereas it ought to be done with the sane-
t'.on and consent of two General Courts. The Hon. Pro-
prietor then referred to a motion made by Mr. Randall
Jackson in 1814, proposing an alteration in a by-law, in
which the mover called upon the Court at once to make
the alteration, and contended that that precedent ought
to guide the Court on this occasion. Having said thus
much on the manner in which it was proposed to make
the alteration, he would say one or two words on the al-
teration itself. The reason stated for the proposition
was, that the constitution of the East India Company
bad been changed since the law was passed.
The CHAIRMAN said the cause originally assigned for
enacting the by-law had then entirely ceased. A num-
ber of commercial men had entered into extensive trans-
actions with India, and in consequence of that it was
enacted that no Directer should be allowed to trade with
India.

Mr. LEwis said he believed it had originated in a
much inure satisfactory reason. Tt was not merely to
avoid the inconsistency and incongruity which must
arise from any one member of a Joint-Stock Company,
carrying on trade with India, and at the same time car-
rying on trade individually ; but to prevent a Diractor
from using that knowledge and influence which he might
possess in a sovereign capacity, fur the purpose of pro-
moting his own interests.—(Hear, hear.) It was to show
to the public that they deserved to exercise the Sove-
reign power. That was one reason, .if not the sole and
predominant one, which led the Court to pass that law.
He asked the Court of Proprietors, then, to prevent the
Court of Directors from injuring their characters as
Soverigns of India ; and by rejecting the resolution,
they would secure them against those suspicious conse-
quences, which he was cure would result from the al-
teration.

Mr. HOGG said it appeared to him that the main ques-
tion for consideration was whether or no the alteration
was, in fact, desirable. If the Court came to the conclu-
sion that it was desirable, of course the Directors would
see that it was made in legal form. He protested against
the line of argument which had been adopted by his friend
Mr. Weeding. The question had been argued as if the
Court of Proprietors and the public were on one side, and
the Court of Directors on the other. He protested against
such a line of argument. The suggestion from the Chair
was, whilst the East India Company was a trading body,
the Directors were prohibited from trading within the
limits of the Company's Charter, because their private
interests must come in collision with their duty as far as
interests of the Company were concerned. The words of
the by-law itself explained its meaning and the rea-
sons which led to its adoption. His friend last
Wednesday said that their functions of sovereignty
taight not to be mixed up with their functions as
traders. Now he (Mr. Hogg) thought that that
statement ought to be qualified somewhat, because
he hoped always to see amour, the Court of Di-
rectors members of the principal amen;
and mercan-
tile firms of this great city. Those gentle broug to the deliberations of the Court of Directorsm en
ht
most use-
fid knowled4e and inFormation. With respect to the
alteration of the law, he beged the attention of the Pro-
prietors to the manner in which their choice was at pre-
sent limited. There was sencely a commercial firm
in London that was not directly or indirectly connected
with the trade to the east of the Cape of Good Hope.
If the Proprietors thought proper to reject those persons,
why let them do so, and if they would reject them they
would thereby exclude Mr. Weeding himself, and the mem-
bers of the commercial firms of this city. The question
merely regarded their interest in the extent of
crittlo'''...;itics toc-c-
-sphere of their choice. If they thought proper ' -443
tend that sphere, why then let them concur
the's'er-
knowledge of the " secrets of the prison-house"
tion of Directors fro:11 Gie
(jou. if they thought that course Nadic..jou,, theta let
the law remain as it stands. As far
tis his
our.
Hogg's)
went, he knew of nothing which
gentLetnen

•••' !".7 ,

netted with a trading firm could, as a Director, become
acquainted, which he could turn to his own pri-
vate interest, as a commercial man. He trusted that the
• deliberation of the Directors would al wa3 s become known
to. the public, ih order that the salutary influence of
public opinion might be brought to bear on them
before the measures they involved were adopted
and became law.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He thought
that the reasons for excluding gentlemen connected with
the trade of India from the office of Director no longer
existed, The sole object ot the Directors in submitting
the matter to the consideration of .the Court was, that as
the reasons which formerly led to the passing of the law
ceased to•exist, it was for the Proprietors to say whether
or not they were willing to alter it. There was no desire
on the part of the Directors to urge the matter on them;
it was merely a stiggestion which, if it did not meet with
general approbation, gentlemen on that side of the bar
would, he was certain, be most happy to withdraw.
In answer to an observation of Mei Weeding.
The CIIAIRMAN said, that he wished to ascertain what
were the views of the Proprietors on the subject. Appli-
cations had been made to him regarding it, and he thought
it would be wise to extend the field of selectioia of Directors
Mr. LINDSAY thought that if it was the wish of the
Prom-Hun, the motion ought W be withdrawn,
Mr.. MI-m.B was of opinion that there was great
reason for altering the law, as he believed it to be a
dead letter,

Mr. Wri(lll:ii conceited that it would be better to
withdraw the motion, on the understanding that it be
re!erred to the Committee of By-laws, to consider the
subjretawl report thereon; as to whether it was expe-
dient thilt the law should stand as it at present was.
After a few words fr:im Mr. WEEDING,
The CitAiiptizt said he was entirely in the hands of
the Cthirt. If the Proprietorg vigre of opinion that the
Ihotion should be withdrawn, he was diercaed to second
the view taken by Mr. Wigram.
Mr. THOMPSON said they were obliged to the gentle-
men behind the bar for so distinctly stating their views,
breathe certainly the opportunities of choice that were
given to the Proprietors were few and far between.
Koine I.lon, Directors were of opinion that the heads of
commercial firms shculd become Directors. He (Mr.
Thompson) differed from that opinion. He thought
they ought not to become Directors. If they
fetifeSentlid find hurtortant firms. let them keep to
those transactions which belonged to those, finny!, The
Directors formed exclusively a political body. They
ruled over 150,000,000 of human beings, inhabiting a
country 500,000 square miles in extent. They had to
attend to the interests of a vast empire, and they ought,
therefore; to look narrowly to the persons whom they
geltleted its Direetdrs, The Directors were bound to de-
vote all their time to the affairs and the government of
the East Indies ; and he thought gentlemen would not
deny that, however broad their expanse of mind—nay,
were It krcii pbsSibiti that their intellects %lere rendered
larger thin they now midottbtedly were; and were it pos.-
Bible to extend the length of the day for theif delibera-
tions that increase of intellect, all that extent of
time, would be raptired for the proper discharge of their
duties. Then why engage in their counsels filen whose
time was much occupied in the affairs of commerce ?
Qqo of the meitilters Of the Cottrt advocated this propo-
ilioli out of a regard to India, yet employed_argunients
in another place fatal to those he used to-day. The con-
dition of Italia demanded the whole of the gentlemen
who pompocd the eventire body of this country. The
Hatiilig ttild eientitife biiSinCea of India ough7, in his
opinion, to be kept quite distinct. He should false the
present opportunity of expressing his thanks to the Com-
mittee of By-laws, for the position they took on this oc-
casion; As the motion was to be withdrawn, he would
hot say there than et{piess his thanks to the Court for
bringing it forward.
Mr. . TWINING begged to say a few words as a
Member of the Cononatee of By-laws. If the matter
was brought before that Committee he was sure it would
receive eter.y consideration it deserved: In reference to
the Cause of the subject at preSCot under diseussion, he
was, perhaps, able to say what was the objeet when it
was first brought forward by men whom he made the
guide of his own laotitinal and in proportion as he
followed theirs he found himself to be propotthmably
correct, .He believed the By-law was passed to prevent
East India Directots from trading in a 'private erpacity
--(Hear, hear)—and if that restraint was not inter-
posed; very serious and extensite evils would follow..
The cireumstatices, how-eVer, had changed, and the at-
tention of the Directors was changed to other objects,
which they executed with great benefit to themselves.
It Was :1 question dl' much importance how far that
barrier should be removed, If it came before the Cora-
mittee•of By-laws he could only say for himself and
the other members of that Committee, that the matter
would receive every consideration doe to its import-
ance. He considered the Court of Directors Was well
constituted; and the proportion of mercantile men in
it was productive of greet benefit and that such men
as Sir I. Read and Mr. Martineau were highly valuable
to the Court. He would conclude by again saying, that
the matter would ree,eitti 001 attention from the Coln-
With.% ti liy-laws.—(Near, hear.)
The CHAIRMAN entirely concurred in what hart {'alien
from the last speaker, as to the origin of the by-law
under discussion, and he was sure it would receive every
attention from him.

The motion was then withdrawn.
Mr. WEEDING inquired if it was withdrawn without
qualification ?
The CHAIRMAN was understood to answer in the
affirmative.

PERMANENT LAND-TAX.

Mr, M. MAttnN reqUested the attention of the Court
to the importance of the subject he was about to bring
before them, which had been brought under the con-
sideration of the Court at various periods during the
last half century, and had' been mooted Ly men of the
largest views and most philanthropic feeling—by some
of the most distinguished Governors of India—by some
of the ablest servants that were ever sent to that coun-
try—by
i men in the present Court, all of whom con-
curred n his opinion, and bud endeavoured, from time
to time, to draw the attention of the Court to this great
and momentous subject, and to bring it to a full and
final decision—he alluded to the fixing of the land-tax
in India. He had, moreover, the opinion of the present
enlightened Prime Minister of the country, that the
great evil of the Court was the leaving unsettled ques-
tens of an important character, or bringing them for-
ward without a prospect of a speedy
.decision. It was a
question relating to millions of British subjects ; it in-
volved the financial and commercial relations between
India and this country ; it embraced the elevation of
the people of India in the scale of humanity ; it in-
cluded an enlarged consumption of British manufactures
by India, and the well-being and prosperity of the Bri-
tish empire. Upon the first moment he visited India he
gave his anxious attention to this subject, which he
thought would be mutually beneficial to both countries.
In the year 1828 he entreated investigation
upon the subject. He might have done so at
inconvenient times, and with too much warmth,
but he trusted the observations he should make upon the
present occasion would be delivered with temper and
moderation, and, at least, he hoped the importance of
the subject would not be measured ,b the weakness of
the advocate.—(Cheers.) But there were many and dis-
tinguished advocates for what he was now contending,
and amongst them was one, once a member of this Court,
one of the ablest, and tit the same time most unpretend-
ing men that ever adorned the East India Company—
he alluded to the late Mr. Edmonston.—(Hear, hear.)
lle would not require more than acknowledgment of the
principle, for he knew if that was once recognised, the
mode of carrying it out and the time for its adoption
might be fairly left to the Executive Directors of India.
If the principle were adopted, they would soon come to
a final settlement of a fixed land-tax. The proposition
'he meant to propose was an abstract one, but it was fre-
quently,made the subject of discussion. It was, that the
British Government were not de facto or de jure pro-
prietors of the soil in British India•, and though it was
opposed by the Hon. Proprietor behind him, and the
Hon. Chairman in 1829, he was happy to find in des-
patches from the Court of Directors to the Court of
Bengal in 1815, the principle for which he was contend-
ing was advocated therein. It was carried out with refer-
ence to 40,000,000 of British subjects so long as forty
yerra ago. And they had proof of its good effects in
the prosperity of that portion of the country to
which it was applied, the increased security of the public
revenue throughout the Bengal territory. Why, then,
should not the same principle be applied with regard to
the other 60,000,000 of their population in India ? If
it was wise, just, humane, and politic, and proved to be
so by the experience of forty years, to adopt such a
principle towards 40,000,000 of their subjects, was it
not expedient to pursue a similar course with regard to
the remaining 60,000,000 ? His views were con-
curred
in by the best and wisest statesmen who
ever visited India, men of large and expanded views.
The Marquis of Wellesley, whose language to you in
one of his despatches was, that it was not desirable for
the interest of India that the Government should act as
proprietors of the soilo and collect rent from its cultiva-
tors. There could not he a doubt on the subject. But
the excuse was, that it was expedient to delay. The
language of their own body admitted the principle he
was contending for. It was admitted in a dispatch of
1792, that the principle of taxation between the Sove-
reign and cultivator was not sound. A member of the
Court, who had distinguished himself by writing one of
the ablest works on land taxation, he alluded to General
Briggs, said the right of the Sovereign to the soil never
existed in the 'Endo or .31aborneclau Governments. It
was true, from the time of Mahomet to Aurungzebe, the
Sovereign had certain rights of property in the land, but
not such as are now possessed. When they had such
authority, he thought it was time lee feive the people of
India a property in the soil which woad
i2thbenefit the
people of India and themselves. Again; hL: Thomas
Munroe, who was intimately acquainted with thb
k-
ingopriv;.a
ftletpe
land property canreseuts3•stenlinlndii, declares it impossei'le
thatexisti in India so long as
one-third of the gross produce of land was taken away
from thti. people. And, he would ask, was it desirable
to reduce India to a state in which it would have no pri-
vate property? It could not be the interest of any
person that such a state of things should exist. No
state could rise above barbarism as long as any
persons had the power at any time to take away
so large a portion of the produce of the soil.
Under such a system it was impeeeible that a permanent
landed proprietary could over exist, c r that the people
could be raised abo7e, the condition of day. labourers.
~
Such had never bee4l the practice in India until we had
adopted this Flee so ruinous to ourselves. If they re-
r erred to tlie;rßibles they would find it recorded in the
the 41st
r. Genesis that during the time of the
• chapter of ,
that they should giv,e the Sove-
reignwith food, he required _
..,Lne in Egypt, when Joseph supplied the Egyptians
the whole of their lands, and when they b ad done
so lie restored them their lands agaiu on condition that
they should pay one-fifth part of the produce to the
Kine while the remaining lour parts were. left for their
own use and for seed. Surely, then, when the Bible
-declared that four parts out of live were nec*ssary for
-the purposes of the cultivators of the soil it was not act-
ing the part of Christians to exact one-half, In

dostae, previous to its coming into the possession of the
British, the land tax actually levied amounted only to
one-sixth of the produce. In the South of India the
lend tax at the present moment amounted only to one-
sixth. In Ceylon it amounted only to one-tenth.
Merton, the great 'Endo° legislator, who thenrished
about six hundred end eighty-eight years before Christ,
said that one-sixth was a legitimate portion, but that in
tune of war or under special circumstances, one-fourth
might'be levied. Colonel Wilkes had shown that when-
ever the Mahometan rules of India had tried to raise a
larger amount of hind-tax, famine and rebellion had
been the invariable consequence, Shore Shaw, who heel
expelled Humaloon; had levied a land-tax equal, to one-
fourth. There was some difference between that and 43
percent. Arungzebe had only levied'one-tenth, and the
Emperor Akbar, in his instructions to the collectors of
his land revenue, had directed that two-fifths of the
amount of produce should be paid to the Government,
and three-fifths shoUld be left for the cultivators. Allow
Dein, who reigned between the years 1194 and 1215,
had attempted to levy a land-tax of the same amount an
that at present levied, and the result had been a famine.
The utmost amount that had ever been levied by the
Mahonnean Sovereigns amounted in money to about
one-fourth the produce. In fact, every precedent that
could be brought forward went to show that we had
adopted a system foe which there could be no justifica-
hear.) In the Mysore, Hyder Ally
had levied three-tenths as the land-tax, and there
had been two rebellions against Tippoo Sulteun
because he had attempted to buy more than one-third.
When the British Government became possessed of the
Government of India it had been deemed advisable, in
consequence of the diminution of the revenue in Bengal,
and of the destruction of the people by famine, to fix the
amount of the land -tax. He had already partly stated
the reasons which had induced those at that time in
mithority to adopt such a course—they had wisely de-
termined to cooperate cordially with Lord Corny, dills
for that purpose, and one of the reasons given for fixing
the land-tax wee, that it was impossible to give a
country in which there were only two classes, the Go-
venters and the cultivators, and that in order to do so it
was necessary to raise up a third class—a class of landed
Proprietors, who should stand between the Governors
and the cultivators, and to do that no scheme could be
so efiicacious as the establishment of a permanent land-
tax. He trusted he had stated sufficient to prove the
feeeonableness of the first portion of his resolution, and
he would therefore proceed to discuss the second -portion
of it, which wan to the effect that the assessment of the
produce of the land at the sole will of the Government,
tended to defeat the rights of the cultivator of' the soil,
and by preventing hereditary succession to lands, to ren-
der the British Isles insecure. In support of the prin-
ciple of that portion of his re:folution lie would also ap-
peal to their own documents. It was obvious that a fluc-
tuating assessment must deteriorate from the value of
the land. The statement made in a communication, dated
February, 1841, which he had received from a gentle-
men employed in the revenue department of time Madras
Government fuLy bore out the views which he enter-
tained. Ile stated, that in one district in which the Lend-
tax had been lowered, the Ryots were now doing
well, and had, in consequence, applied for Inure
hand ; and that, whereas formerly great difficuley
had ezisted in getting the assessment collected, tiro
Ryots, since the assessment had been lowered, came in
of their own accord and paid the money. That fact
proved that, wherever they gave a permanent value to
landed property, the people were impressed with the
irnproveneent which had taken place in their condition
in consequence, and paid the assessment cheerfully.
What an advantage it would be if such a system were
extended throughout India. One of the Governors-Ge-
neral had stated that one-third ofthe territory of British
India was waste laud. He (Mr. M. M.) thought •he
could produce authority to show that at least one-half of
that territory was waste land. Now, if' by giving a per-
manent value to landed property, they could bring
these waste lands into cultivation, how immensely
would they augment their revenue and commerce, and,
more than all, die happiness and prosperity of the inha-
bitants of that country. Mr. Fullerton, of Madras, had
demonstrated the impossibility, under the present system,
of there being any aristocracy (using the word in its best
sense) to connect the Government with the peo-
ple of the country, and he compared the present
state of India with what might be supposed to be the
condition of this country if the landlords and farmers
were all swept away, and all the population reduced to
one common level. Mr. Thomas, of Madras, had shown
that the natural result of such a course of proceeding as
that adopted by the Government had been to reduce the
people to the lowest possible scale of subsistence, to pro-
duce famines, and to prevent the increase of the revenue,
or of the advantageous subjects of the States. That gen-
tleman had drawn statements sheaving the statistics of
twelve villages in the Presidency of Madras, from 1801 to
1831, in which he had classified the inhabitants with re-
gard to property-, and the result of that statement
went to show, that while from 1816 to 1831 there had
been an increase among the occupiers of small holdings,
Chiefly pauper Ryots, the wealthy Ryots had diminished
km 78 to 28—that the majority of the occupiers were
Mad SAW than pauper labourers. In these statements
he (min 3L, f't,,i.:ad a remarkable confirmation of his views.
Why had it nut thought adviseable to extend the
permanent settlement to the whole of India? In Bengal,
Bahar, and Orissa, wize it was in operation, the tax
iiport land amounted to about 2s. Gd. an acre. It was
importance to nutiee, that when tLs assessment was first
laid on, it pressed so itenvily, that, beL
re ten years had
expired, the whole of the estates had passes tinder the
hammer of the auctioneer ; and the Bengal Goe:eintwnt
stated that never, in the history or the country, hart S:teh
a change taken place in the distribution of private pro-
perty. At that time one half of Bengal consisted of
waste lands, yet now those waste lances were all taken
into cultivation ; there were fewer sequeetrations of pro-
perty throughout that territory than in any other part of
India, and the revenue was more regularly coh,ected, and
more regularly found its way to the public treasm and
during the fifty years it had been in operation, the
.cus,-
toms, excise, stamp, and post-office revenues had trebleu,
and every branch lied been equally productive. Had
they adopted the same system in other parts of India,
the same results would have fhllowed ; but instead of 2s.
Gd. an acre, in some parts of India it was 10s. Gd., and
in the Gnzerat it reached to 225. Bd. an acre.
Mr. WARDEN (a Director)—Where is that stated ?
Mr. MARTIN—In the evidence given before a Com-
mittee of the House of Commons.

Mr. WARDEN—Probably it was meant to apply merely
to the sugar lands of Guzerat.
Mr. MARTIN-it had been stated by Mr. Rickards
that in the island of Salsette the assessment amounted to
a guinea an acre. The greater part of this fine island
was in consequence waste land ; and that line island,
which, from its situation with regard to Bombay, ought
to be one of the largest of our commercial emporiums,
had only very recently had the tigers expelled
from it, and was lying waste in consequence of the
enormous amount of the land-tax assessment.

He trusted he had not exaggerated any statement re-
garding the land-tax. He thought that where they levied
such a large amount of rate as one million, they would
have no landed proprietors. The land-tax in other
countries was nothing to what was levied in India. In
England it was only ls., and, in fact, in the time of Wil-
liam 111. it was almost nominal. In France it was one-
fifth of the net produce. In Tuscany it was one-fifth of
the net rental. In the Venetian States it was one-tenth,
and in the Veronese States it was one-tenth. In Parma
it was only 9d. an acre. In Bologne the taxes were only
2d. an acre. In China it was one-tenth of the produce,
but so lightly was it levied that in parts it was only about
one-liftieth.—(Hear.) In Peru it was one-tenth ; and
even in the time of the Romans, When they spread their
conquests over the whole world, they only levied a tax
of one-tenth, and according to Levy, in Spain, it was
only one-twentieth. No nation had ever levied such a
land-tax as that in India.—(Hear.) Until they adopted
a permanent system of revenue, their interests must be-
come deteriorated. Since the year 1829 the land revenue
had decreased five lacs of rupees ; and it would still con-
tinue to diminish unless they fixed the land-tax. It was
to the interest of their revenue to do so.—(Hear.) It
was remarkable how little they derived at the present
time from the present system of taxation. The amount
of taxes in British India only amounted to 2s. Gd. a head,
while in the United Kingdom it was 2/. ; in France,
1/. 4s. ; in Spain, I4s. Gd. ; in America, 15s. ; and so on
in other States. The land tax had been fixed in Ceylon,
and there was alteration in every branch in consequence.
That island was rising with extraordinary celerity, and
they had the means of making India the same. For
seven years the revenue of British India had amounted in
land tax to 70 millions of rupees, the salt tax to 54 millions,
The Post-office three millions, and the Excise fifty-two
millions. By the present system of the land-tax, they
would injure the whole of these.—(llear, hear.) He
hoped he had proved, as stated in the second part of his
resolution, that this system impoverished the people, and
he had shown how it deteriorated the revenue.—(Hear,
hear.) He had the statements before him of the Bengal
Commissioners, by which it appeared that this system
produced famine. It appeared from various sources that
this system was productive of famine, particularly in
Bengal. In 1661 a tax was levied of 50 per cent., and
the result was a famine. Shortly afterwards they came
into possession of Bengal, and adopted the same system
of taxation, and the result was that in 1770 the Governor
stated that famine hrd destroyed nearly the whole of the
country. Col. R. Pundits, who had been so distinguish-
ed in the city of Poonah, had stated a very striking
fact, viz. that he found no farmer who was worth • 50C1.,
out of a population of nearly 13,000,000—n0t a farmer
possessed of 5001. Jir John Monroe, after an expe-
rience of twenty-five years, declared that the
system • adopted by the East India Company, with
respect to the land-tax, was reducing the country,
its revenue, and its proprietary.—(Hear, hear.) The
third portion of his resolution with which he should
conclude was—" That the occupiers and cultivators of
, the soil of British India are entitled to obtain from the
i3r:,tish Government a fixed assessment, and a guarantee
of h„.siiititrY occupancy, unmolested by arbitrary de-
mends ai.."l periodical claims, either by annual or more
extended les-ses." He was aware it would be said tl.at
granting. new leases, but they
the Governnissjt was
were founded upon the old principle. It was his firm
impression that it was high time that something should
be done.—(Hear. hear.) There should be improvement
in their present system of revenue. He therefore urged
upon them the consideration of the land-tax. He did
one shilling of their present
not -ask them to give up
revenue, but he was convinced that in fixing the land-
tax they would be enabled not only to obtain more
readily their present revenue, but it would be the means
of augmenting it It was not by crossing
the Indus alone that would demonstrate to the country
a disposition towards their interests, but it was by wisely
governing. them and giving, stability to the Government,
by placing the happiness of the people in their own pos-
session. He regretted that some individual of longer
standing in that Court, and of more experience in the
subject, had not taken up this qusestion. There were
men who had devoted their minds to this subject ; he
regretted they bad not taken up this subject before ; for
then he should have been content to have followed at a

humble distance, for the purpose of giving them his sup-
port.--(Cheers.) He had brought the subject before the
Court beeause he felt that it should be no longer delayed.
He did not know any position of their Government, not
even e:teepting its Ministry, that had greater claims on
their consideration. He was sure they had the good
wishes of every man in the country. Their was not a
Christian heart that did not beat in their cause.—(Hear.)
The great good sense of the country was awake to the
subject. This consideration would conduce to the hap-
piness and prosperity of the people, and continued con-
pectin!' between that country and this kingdom.
Major BRIGGS rose to second the resolution. He-Wag
extremely sorry that some one of more consequence had
not been called upon to do so. The Court of Directors
hail assumed that they were the proprietors of the land
in India. He should confine himself to that question
alone. He was of the same opinion as the Hon. Gen-
tleman who had just sat down, that the land-tax, such ns
then established in India, was the most pernicious that
con!.l be imagined. The first authority he would re-
fer them to was Mr. Grant. The Hon. Gentleman here
read a long extract from the works of Mr. Grant in 1786
to prove that the Court of Directors had no right to the
property of the soil in India. The Hon. Gentleman con-
tinued—The Directors had said there was no harm in their
taking the whole surplus profit; and Mr. Mills. in his exa-
)nination before the House of Commons in 1832, said that a
country taxed in that way was not taxed at al!, and that
the Board of Directors had a right to do this, as they
were the proprietors of the soil. A similar opinion had
lately been put. forth in the Quarterly Reviiw, stating
that the very best mode of taxation was that of taking
the -Jamie surplus profit from the cultivation. :Now he
(Major Briggs) begged to ask who was to be the
-
;ulge, what was the whole surplus profit? The cultivator
of the land could not be the judge ; therefore it was left
with the Governor tohe the judge ; and, assuming that
to be the ease, the Governor would, of course, take to
the utmost extent. He would ask them if they kept in
their hands the right of taxing the people in this way,
how many colonies they would have left in Australasia?
Let a proclamation go forth, that the Governor would
nei; allow any land to be cultivated, without paying, as
taxes, the surplus profit—they would then see how
mat y ships would leave the river Thames to be freighted
fson those lands.—(Hear, hear.) Who would have
ever heard of the present America, if England had for-
merly- said, Give us the surplus profit of the laud ?
(Hears hear.) Australasia would not have been occu-
pied ; they would have had no colonies at all if they
had pursued such a principle as this.—(Hear, !mar.)
He was prepared to prove that the Directors had no
right. to the soil'of India. (The Hon. Gentleman then
peoeeeded to read a great number of extracts from
various works on India, and also from various dis-
pitches from servants of the Company, the ob-
ject of which was to prove that the present oc-
cupiers were the real owners of the soil, and
not the Board of Direction.) He would not go into the
question of how the revenue was collected. He was of
opinion, with the Hon. Mover of the motion, the most
just way to levy the land-tax would be to take a certain
number or years, and then the average of the produce,
and iix the tax at that rate for ever—(Hear, hear).—
leaving out the waste lands for them to cultivate if they
chose, thereby enabling them the better to pay their
taxes. They had tried the present system for half a
century ; they had advanced money for the purpose ;
but stall the lands were not cultivated. (The lion. Gen-
tleuia a again referred to statistical accounts at some
length.) He entreated them, both for the sake of the
people and the Government, to look to that question with
Enrol can eyes. A short anecdote occurred to him just
then ; while he was in Mysore, an old man, upwards of
sisveety years of age, who possessed a small estate, which
yi aided him 400 rupees, out of which, the Government
rec eived a tenth. In the time of Bulleir, this estate was
taken from him, and the old man said the curse of Go-
vele. merit had been on it ever since,-for it only yielded
forty rupees. He (Major Briggs) asked him how that
could .be, and the old man answered that as the Governor
took one-half of the produce, he could not think of cul-
tira:ing his land. He thanked them for having listened
to him, and the lion. Gentleman sat down amidst consi-
derable Applause.
The C; 'AIRMAN then rose, and said he did not think
the abstr. Ict question a proper one for that Court. He
deprecate :1 such a course, as it was impossible fur them
to enter in that Court into a calm discussion of the
question, so as to enable them to come to a just decision.
He would say that the Court was fully satisfied of the
truth of what had been stated, and that the Direction
had an an: dc-us desire to promote the welfare of the
people of In dia. He could only say that it was impos-
sible that any one could be more desirious of promoting,
the happiness of the people than those he had the honour
to call his colle agues. When anything was brought for-
ward it always received his utmost attention, and had
done for twelve years. But he should deprecate the in-
troduction of such a question into that Court. He con-
cluded by moving the original motion.

Mr. linow.g said he hold in his possession reeds that
he had obtai aed while in India from persons holding
estates, some of which reeds had been in the fwmilies
from whom he obtained them, of upwards of 200 years
old, which had been produced on the estates of the par-
ties now occupying the soil. Had there been such a
boo!: as Doomsday Book in India this would have been
proved. These facts were now open to proof, and these
were the persons who were sought to be dispossessed of
the soil. _ _ _

Mr. WE.F.DING would go back to the works of Col.
Weeks, front which it appeared that there was no private
property in India. ; it was all the property of the State.
So vast was the consideration of this question that he
(Mr. Weeding) Amid vote for the amendment of the
Chai►•man.

Mr. Sieoma.Ns said he thought the discussion itself
was useful, because the more the attention of the Court
of Directors was drawn to the subject the better, but he
thought the proposition of the Hon. Mover of the motion
was most inconvenient, and he therefore should support
the view taken by the Chairman.
After a few words from Colonel SYKES,
An HON. PROPRIETOR moved that the Court should ad-
'ourn, which being put was lost,
G. fl'llomPsoN rose and said—He did not think it
beearrisl one Hon. Proprietor to tell another that they
could►
no: discuss that question with calmness. Was it
not discuss.
,d somewhere out of doors ? He had been
gratified that
•lay with the knowledge that not one asser-
tion that lie et
made in reference to the injurious land-
e.ontradicted. For two years and
"'.l.
zt country luta been his study.
a-half the land-tax u.tax of India had L.,1.4,4?-I`l
.41..,
e:on with calmness ? If it was a
men them
Why not discuss this queN
n.,
it Ge
w ntlaes thei r let
duty to
question to be discussed bjs
discuss it. Were they prejneliced
remove this prejudice. Had they formed a bad opinion,
let them show that they were wt:.'n.g. It was a duty
they owed to the people of Englandand India. Nut
discuss it with calmness ! Was there a want of calm-
ness in his Hon. Friend ? It was too much to hear that
whtJi there was any opportunity before them ,:'.obtain
evidence on that question that the Chairman depreoated
the introduction of such a subject, because it could not
be discussed in calmness. There was calmness in his
Hon. Friend's face, and in all his-actions ; calmness even
to the very end of his very luminous speech. He would
appeal to their judgments and their sense, and ask was
there any want of calmness in the gentleman who sat
below him, who had given the result of his own expe-
' rience (Major Briggs) ? ana yet they were told that the
Court—the Chairman—deprecated that discussion, and
when any question vitally interested the people of India
it was deprecated. Now this we,'s a question coming
home not to him (the Chairman)—n: it to himself—they
were Directors still ; but for the man whose happiness
depended on their government. They had not increased
their revenue in the new found—the ,new,d'i.colonieed
country of Australasia. The little port of S:''-akton-
upon-Tees sent more tonnage than they did to all I.:‘•k'dia_;
Now there was a cause for this. His Hon. Friend 'OQ;
the Gallant Officer who sat below him, and who seconde.l.
his Hon. Friend's mo.ion, thought that the cause was to
be found in the vicious system of laud taxation. He
(Mr. T.) could say it was not in the principle of taxation
only, but also in the mode in which they collected it, by
which they made their servants instruments of crime
where they would rather be the administrators of justice.
—(Cheers.) This question was introduced. They had
their own Chairman to give information to that Court,
who was in a situation to go to the very fountain-head of
light on this metier, and who had searched all the works
of writers on the subject down to the Hon. Mount-
stewart Elphinstone. The Board came into that Court
us Directors ; they were bound to communicate all that
they knew. They were bound to inform them, and
they asked nothing unreasonable at their hands ; but in-
stead of that, sullen silence was observed, and the original
motion was moved. In eight short months in 1838
60,000 human beings died of famine, and were they not
to discuss that question ? He was prepared to go into the
principle of the land-tax, but all that could be
said, had been said by the gentlemen in the
debate. He put it to themselves and the country.
With respect .• to the land-tax,
;a
antiquities—(Hear,
iet (Mr.
HT he
aoin,iisbeoariari
a gentleman had
st me
nemodf find onfr
is•lL:(f)tarl kti4l toas IL?
)
—g o still further, and take him to the time of .
ham,—he that was an inhabitant of this little
and not an undistinguished one. What
said' the world,
testi-
mony of Abraham on the subject of the
land-tax
?
wanted to buy a burial-place for his •
wife How did he
get his ground ? "My Lord,
hearken unto me :—the
land is worth 400 shekels of silver. What is that be-
twixt me and thee ? Bury, therefore, thy dead." Let
them show him the shekels they bad given for India !
Ire asked them where were the shekels they had given
for India ? And yet those Gentlemen told them a
fact of their being proprietors of the sail—a fact they
would not attempt to support. But he had not done
with Timour.—(A laugh.) What if there were owners
to them ? Let them mark that. He would make the
Gentlemen a present of Timour, and he wished them
joy. " All the lands," said Timour, "if there be no
Owner to them, should be annexed to the Crown lands ;
hut it' there be an owner, and he be reduced to distress,
let him be supplied to retrieve him." Who was 110 W
the proprietor of the soil ? This was a aues-
tion vital to their honour, vital to their interests,
coming home to the poor wretch who lived upon rice, as
well as to those who rolled in the luxury obtained *dome
his labour.—(Cheers.) When would the quesiouebse
eided, if not then ? There they were at issue.
Whewho
uld
quote from an authority well versed in the j_
siated7 et, ' .
that of
said—" Although the British power sup? 1.11
Beireel, we did not, it is tine, adopt ,
the Mahomedan but from the impure
the sanguinary part of their creed ;
fountain of their financial system dietwe, to our shame,
claim the inheritance to a right tov,sebie7uv
Pc°rn half the gross
our
produce of the land as a tax and
i'roclaeimed thismss have
triumpoupling it at tihed, we have invariably
ante
f
right, coupling
w" h the savage
senseless doc-
s
ht to toose lands being also
trine of the proprietary g
vested in the Sovereign, in virtue of the right of conquest"
They saw it maintained that day. Either they were, or
they were not, the lords of the soil. It could be soon
settled, but it seemed they were not prepared to
settle it after 200 years of trade and 70 or 75 years of
conquest. The sense of justice contained in British
bosoms would settle it for them, and, that would settle