The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-16 00:00:00

tention to the statements of the petitioners to avert a recur.

Fence of former evils. He ventured to say that there never
had been a greater system of oppression and tyranny than
that which was exercised over the natives by the Euro-
peans ; and in now bringing their case under the considera-
tion of their lordships, he hoped their lordships would de-
mand for them the protection to which they were entitled.
In matters of trade they were subjected by the factors to the
greatest injustice, and in no distriets were acts of injustice
exercised against them -more than in the indigo districts.
They had not the advantage of courts of law there to seek
redress of the wrongs to which they were subjected. Now, it
could not be denied that those poor peasants were entitled
to protection and redress. The nonfulfilment of contracts
by those poor people was punished not only with flogging,
but with the forfeiture of their lands, which were seized
and taken possession of by their tyrannical employers. The
noble lord here read a communication, stating that a factor
had actually had recourse to flogging those poor peasants
in his factory, and a native magistrate hearing of the out-
rage, caused an inquiry, and upon proof of the injustice,
sentenced the offenders to fine and imprisonment. Well,

but what did a higher European authority do in that case ?
Why he set the men who inflicted the gross injuries com-
plained of at liberty, thus encouraging brutal outrage and
gross injustice. The poor ryots refused to enter into con-
tracts to cultivate the land, as they had a right to do, if
they felt the remuneration to be insufficient, and ono of
them was flogged by a European contractor, from factory
to factory, until he was actuary flogged to death; and
what did their lordships suppose was the punishment in-
flicted upon the Englishman who was guilty of the murder
of that poor man? Why, no more than a fine of .£3O•
There was one Englishman thei e, Mr. Furlon7, who had
no less than 1,960 of those contracts which were pregnant
with so much injustice and oppression. The system of
tyranny practised by the English Europeans over the pea-
sants in India was in as full operation' now as it had ever
been. It was true that a riot had taken place there by the
natives, who made a descent upon and destroyed a village;
but although that could not be justified, it should not be
forgotten that the natives despaired of obtaining redress
by appeal to the courts of law. Their appeals for redress
to the authorities were not successful ; and the Govern •
ment were charged not only with conniving at the wrongs
complained of, but actually with suppressing documents
the production of which was necessary to the further-
ance of justice. The petition which he presented from
certain natives, praying for a reform of the law courts, was
one of great importance, and prayed their lordships to take
the case of those poor ryots into their consideration, and
obtain for them a redress of the wrongs inflicted upon them.
They were bound to know what were the opinions of the
Council of India, and of the Secretary of State for India, in
relation to the grave offences committed against those poor
peasants. lie was not new going to say anything prejudi-
cial to Sir C. Trovelyan, in reference to the very able paper
he had published in relation to Mr. Wilson's financial state-
ment, and proposal to levy new taxes upon the native popu-
lation of India; but ho must regret that the Government,
after the publication of that paper, had no other course and
no other alternative than to recal hint from his government.

Mr. Wilson in his speech rejoiced that there was a Dublie
press in India. Then why should Sir C. Trevelyan be
blamed for commenting on Mr. Wilson's speech ? lie was
acting merely as a European gentleman there, and freely
expressing his opinion about Mr. Wilson's plan, a plan
which Sir C. Trevelyan thought would interfere with im-
portant designs of his own. To recal this gentleman for
doing so was monstrous, and an occurrence that could only
happen in India. As to the principle on which th.e legis-
lative council was formed, it seemed as if India, a place of
such vast extent and variety of races, was regarded as a place
that might be legislated for as yen would legislate for the
Isle of Man. It was a great mistake to exclude the natives
from admission to the higher offices of the State. lie anti-
cipated that there would be no objection to receive the peti-
tion.

The petition was then ordered to lie on the table.
The Earl of ELLENBOItOUGH said the legislative
council of India consisted of the Governer-General of India,
a few gentlemen nominated by the Governor-General, an
Attorney-General and two other lawyers. If their lordahips'
house had the same propor t ion of lawyers they would have 100
noble and learned lords. He could not conceive that this
small body of men could enjoy the public confidence of the
people of India. Various propositions had been made for
-.,xtending the council. He thought tkere were two prin-
ciples which should be adopted ; first, that the Governor-
General should have the power of passing instanter any
act of Parliament which might be necessary for the time ;
and, secondly, that the Governor-General in council should
have consultative council to whom he should refer for dis-
cussion all measures affecting the laws, customs, and reli-
gion of the people. The members of the council would be
of course members of that consultative council, and it should
comprise 10 of 12 European gentlemen of distinction and
character in India, and an equal number of native gentle-
men. (Hear.) Now, when a great measure of taxation affect-
ing 120,000,000 of people was about to be enacted, ho thought
it but just that the natives should have some voice in the
niattsr, As to the differences between the planters and the