The Sun.
London, England, 1848-09-28 00:00:00

1114 E SUN. LONDON, 11111I11SDAY EVEN ENG, SEPTEMBER 28, 181st.

Mr. SULLIVAN—NO Only to re-establish the old
tax. _ .

Mr. POTNDER said that the observation of the
Honourable Director showed him that he (Mr.
Tucker) had not well considered the subject. Until
he heard some satisfactory answer from the chairman,
he could not conscientiously withdraw his motion.
An Hort. PROPRIETOR was understood to say t!-,•4
the question was, whether legalising this tax wt uld
be tantamount to re-establishing the Sayer duties.
Mr. SULLIVAN said that if the tax were legalized
the compensation might be fairly withdrawn.
Mr. LEWIS observed that the state of matters
seemed to be this—they were bound to pay certain
sums of money, but the mode of payment was such,
in the opinion of the Honourable Proprietor who had
brought forward the subject, as to place the Court in
an objectionable position—in a position of which the
Hon. Proprietor disapproved. Now, the Hon. Pro-
prietor proposed to dispense with the sum annually
paid, and to allow the priests to collect their tribute.
But that proposition had already been the subject
of deliberation on the part of the Supreme
Government, and by them it had been decided that
the practice of allowing the priests to collect their
fees would be inconvenient and objectionable. If so,
there was an answer to the honourable proprietor.
But, then again, if as the honourable proprietor
thought they were placed in a false position under the
present system, was there no mode by which the dif-
ficulty could be got rid of ? He would suggest the
apportionment of such a sum of money as would yield
23,000 rupees annually—thus, as it were, by one pay-
ment, cutting off all future connexion between this
country and the revenues of the temple.
The CHAIRMAN repeated the 23,000 rupees an-
nually paid had been given in compensation for what
had been taken away. It was a matter for the Court
to consider whether they would wish to vote such a
large sum of money as would produce 23,000 rupees
annually for the purpose in question.
The motion was then put, and carried almost unani-
mously in the negative.
Mr. POTNDER —Then I am beaten.—(A laugh.)
The CHAIRMAN—You are.—(Renewed laughter.)

LOCAL COURTS IN INDIA.
Mr. SuLuvats then rose to draw the attention of
the Court to the state of the Supreme Court at Cal-
cutta, and to the necessity for instituting local courts
—similar to our Courts of Request—generally
throughout the Presidencies, so that the inhabitants
of India might have what they have not yet enjoyed,
a system of economic and speedy justice—justice ad-
ministered in their own language and brought home
to their own doors. At the time of the establishment
of the Supreme Court, the Hindoo and Musselman
inhabitants of Calcutta were told that they were to
have a great boon, and so they rushed into it like
sheep into a good pasture; but, unfortunately, they
came out of it like sheep from a shearing house.
For the evils resulting from the administration of
justice by the Supreme Court no remedy had yet been
provided. Act after Act passed for the establishment
of local courts in Bombay and Madras had been dis-
allowed by the Court of Directors here, and the
Supreme Court of Calcutta was still the only tribunal
for the administration of justice. He wished to have
courts established on the model of our County Courts,
by means of which cheap and speedy justice should
be brought home to every man; and, also, to see
some check put to the unauthorised extension of the
powers of the Supreme Court of Calcutta.—(Hear,
hear.) The Honourable Proprietor concluded by
moving for papers and correspondence connected with
the subject.
The CHAIRMAN denied that there was any wish on
the part of the Directors to prevent the inhabitants of
India from enjoying speedy and economical justice,
and the delays which had occurred in carryiug out
that desirable object were assuredly not changeable
upon the Court of Directors.—(Hear, hear.) The
Court had received, in July last, a letter from the
Government of India, communicating the draft
of a Legislative Act, but which Act had been
considered so objectionable, that it had been or-
dered to be referred to this country, and another
draft to be prepared. The Court of Directors had
referred the subject to their law officers, who were of
opinion that, as a whole, the proposed Act would be
an objectionable measure, and who recommended the
adoption of a uniform system for all the presidencies,
founded, in essentials, upon the English County Court
Act. The Court of Directors were now, therefore,
waiting for the draft of the proposed Act, which
might be expected by the next mail.—(llear, hear.)
As to the extension of the Supreme Court, it was a
subject to which the attention of the Court of Di-
rectors and the Government had been directed, and
every effort would be made to prevent inconvenience
or expense in this respect to the native inhabitants of
India. He trusted that this explanation would satisfy
the Court.— (Hear, hear.) As to the papers moved
for, many of them had been already ordered to be
printed, and with respect to the others, he hoped that
the motion would be withdrawn.—(llear, hear.)
Withdrawn accordingly.
INSUBORDINATION IN THE 6TH INDIAN LIGHT CAVALRY.
Mr. MALcot in Lewis (formerly Judge of the
Suddr Court of Madras) then rose and addressed the
Court as follows :—Sir, I now rise to bring before
the Court a question which has long agitated the
public mind of India, and has also been discussed in
England to a considerable extent; I allude to the
case of the killing of two sepoys, belonging to the
6th Light Cavalry.
of is with
respect to a person of the name of Veneata Royaloo.
The CHAIRMAN—The notice I have g
Mr. LEwIN—If you will allow me, I will proceed
to that presently. This question was brought before
the attention of the Court of Proprietors, upon a
fernier atation, by Mr. Sergeant Cr aielee, and its
further consideration was then put off by the Court
of Directors.
The CHAIRMAN (with great warmth)—I have in-
timated to the Honourable Proprietor that the question
was not put off, but withdrawn by the consent and
wish of the Court generally ; and I must say that I
think the Honourable Proprietor is acting most im-
prudently in brorthind a subject of this nature Upon
the preient Occasion.
Mr. Lewin--If you will allow me to speak first
sir, you can reply to me afterwards.
The Cnantman-;-Imust -say that it is highly incon-
venient to diseuss any questions of this kind NM-
tieeted With the army. This case was discussed some
time ago, and it did cause considerable agitation in
the public mind. It was settled at that time, and I
mast say that I think it is very indiscreet on the part
of the honourable member to re-open the Aublect.
Mr. LRVVIN—I claim thy right eta bpbak first, sari
And pia can eXpress you opinion afterwards, or more
what amendment you please upon my motion.
The CHAIRMAN—I will hear anything
you may
wish to state upon the subject. It is not my desire
to prevent yoti speaking if you wish wdo so. "only
mean to tell you the fact, that hailing broached this
subject on a former occasion; Mr. Sergeant Gasielee
withdrew his motion; ate'.
a speech from the chair,
and one froth Mr. Twining and other members of
the Court, expressive of their opinion„thq it '4l° it
subject which ought not to be hrdathed.r---lgear.)
Mr. MAnatott When Mr. Sergeant Gagelee
brought forward this inotion ht Nit girl:l4lY the
force of the 0130011th:1M Made by the Chairman, that
he was perfectly satisfied with their reasonableness,
and consented to withdraw his motion:
Mr. LEwnt—l will simpW es)k 6hittiek
the inhabitcant4 ttf ii itt oe content to be told that
that the is an act of injustice which has been per-
petrated in India, and which is not to be exposed, be-
cause it may cause inconvenience td somebody. or
other ? Do yeti hot think itLifolild ihticli tettei§
when aggraVated charge are IV..94'aici against
your 0.11604, td itIICW the circumstances to be ex-
pomi What is the idea which will be created in
the minds of the people of India by this sort of con-
cealment ? They believe that ydii are hound to see
that justice takes plate' and that redregi than hu
afforded wheneyei brought under
your notibe:! I ttl.Y, Sir, that to refuse to inquire into
the lik,h of this case, upon the plea that it will
create disaffection in the army, is no argument at all t
it is mere absurdity to say so,
t, It is year husineta to
see that justice is dote; and twat redress is afforded,
whenetet of act of injustice has been perpe-
tiated —(lean)
Mr. MIRRIOTT—Sir, I rise to order.--(Great con.
'usion.)
The CHAIRMAN (with great vehemence)--I musi

say that I do think it is too bad to brineor ward a
question of such a nature in this manner. The pro-
ceeding has been approved of by the Commander-in-
Chief, approved by the authorities in this country,
and declared to be legal by the Crown officers. -
Mr. LEwIN—I am prepared to show that it was
illegal, by reference to authorities.
Mr. WurrEmArt (with great excitement)—lf you
allow such a matter to be discussed in this Court, the
proceedings of every court-martial in India may be
brought here for discussion. By so doing you will
sap the foundation of that body through whom you
have maintained your empire in India—the army.
Mr. LEWIN-1 disagree with the lion. Director.
maintain that you are more likely to destroy your
power in India py permitting injustice to be done,
and then refusing to listen to an application for
redress when the matter is brought before you.
Mr. POYNDER—I say that these charges of in-
justice have already been brought before the Court by
a motion, which motion was afterwards withdrawn
by its own proposer.
Mr. LEWIN-1 claim a right to take my own
course.
Mr. POYNDER (angrily)—Sir, I will not be in-
terrupted.
Mr. LEWIN—You have interrupted me ; I rose
and was in possession of the chair.
Mr. POYNDER—I am speaking to a point of order,
sir, and I am in possession of the chair, and you are
not. I wish to know who you are?—(Cries of " Oh,
oh.") I never heard of you before.—(Cries of " Oh,
t oh.") I say once more that I see no pretence wiAt.