Слике страница
PDF
ePub

Court of Directors. Departure from India with intent to return to Europe was declared to vacate the office of governorgeneral, commander-in-chief, and certain other high offices. The procedure in the councils of the three presidencies was regulated, the powers of control exercisable by the governorgeneral were emphasized and explained, and the power of the governor-general to overrule the majority of his council was repeated and extended to the Governors of Madras and Bombay. The governor-general, whilst visiting another presidency, was to supersede the governor, and might appoint a vice-president to act for him in his absence. A series of elaborate provisions continued the exclusive privileges of trade for a further term of twenty years, subject to modifications. of detail. Another equally elaborate set of sections regulated the application of the Company's finances. Power was given to raise the dividend to 10 per cent., and provision was made for payment to the Exchequer of an annual sum of £500,000 out of the surplus revenue which might remain after meeting the necessary expenses, paying the interest on, and providing for reduction of capital of, the Company's debt, and payment of dividend. It is needless to say that this surplus was never realized. The mutual claims of the Company and the Crown in respect of military expenses were adjusted by wiping out all debts on either side up to the end of 1792, and providing that thenceforward the Company should defray the actual expenses incurred for the support and maintenance of the king's troops serving in India. Some supplementary provisions regulated matters of civil administration in India. The admiralty jurisdiction of the supreme court of Calcutta was expressly declared to extend to the high seas. Power was given to appoint covenanted servants of the Company or other British inhabitants to be justices of the peace in Bengal. Power was also given to appoint scavengers for the presidency towns, and to levy what would now be called a sanitary rate. And the sale of spirituous liquors was made subject to the grant of a licence.

tion

A few Parliamentary enactments of constitutional impor- Legislatance were passed during the interval between the Charter between Acts of 1793 and 1813.

The lending of money by European adventurers to native princes on exorbitant terms had long produced grave scandals, such as those which were associated with the name of Paul Benham, and were exposed by Burke in his speech on the Nabob of Arcot's debts. An Act of 17971 laid down an important provision (s. 28) which is still in force, and which prohibits, under heavy penalties, unauthorized loans by British subjects to native princes.

·

The same Act reduced the number of judges of the supreme court at Calcutta to three, a chief justice and two puisnes, and authorized the grant of charters for the constitution of a recorder's court instead of the mayor's court at Madras and Bombay. It reserved native laws and customs in terms similar to those contained in the Act of 1781. It also embodied an important provision giving an additional and express sanction to the exercise of a local power of legislation in the Presidency of Bengal. One of Lord Cornwallis' regulations of 1793 (Reg. 41) had provided for forming into a regular code all regulations that might be enacted for the internal government of the British territories of Bengal. The Act of 1797 (s. 8) recognized and confirmed this wise and salutary provision,' and directed that all regulations. which should be issued and framed by the Governor-General in Council at Fort William in Bengal, affecting the rights, persons, or property of the natives, or of any other individuals who might be amenable to the provincial courts of justice, should be registered in the judicial department, and formed into a regular code and printed, with translations in the country languages, and that all the grounds of each regulation should be prefixed to it. The provincial courts of judicature were directed to be bound by these regulations, and copies of the regulations of each year were 37 Geo. III, c. 142. See Digest, s. 118.

1

1793 and

1813.

Charter Act of 1813.

to be sent to the Court of Directors and to the Board of Control 1.

An Act of 17992 gave the Company further powers for raising European troops and maintaining discipline among them. Under this Act the Crown took the enlistment of men for serving in India into its own hands, and, on petition from the Company, transferred recruits to them at an agreed sum per head for the cost of recruiting. Authority was given to the Company to train and exercise recruits, not exceeding 2,000, and to appoint officers for that purpose (bearing also His Majesty's commission) at pay not exceeding the sums stated in the Act. The number which the Crown could hold for transfer to the Company was limited to 3,000 men, or such a number as the Mutiny Act for the time being should specify. All the men raised were liable to the Mutiny Act until embarked for India.

An Act of 1800 3 provided for the constitution of a supreme court at Madras, and extended the jurisdiction of the supreme court at Calcutta over the district of Benares (which had been ceded in 1775) and all other districts which had been or might thereafter be annexed to the Presidency of Bengal.

4

An Act of 1807 gave the governors and councils at Madras and Bombay the same powers of making regulations, subject to approval and registration by the supreme court and recorder's court, as had been previously vested in the Government of Bengal, and the same power of appointing justices of the peace.

The legislation of 1813 was of a very different character from that of 1793. It was preceded by the most searching investigation which had yet taken place into Indian affairs. The vigorous policy of annexation carried on by Lord

1 See Harington's Analysis, 1-9.

2 39 & 40 Geo. III, c. 109.

3

See Clode, Military Forces of the Crown, i. 289.

39 & 40 Geo. III, c. 79. The charter under this Act was granted in December, 1801. Bombay did not acquire a supreme court until 1823 (3 Geo. IV, c. 71).

[blocks in formation]

1

Wellesley during his seven years' tenure of office (1798-1805) had again involved the Company in financial difficulties, and in 1808 a committee of the House of Commons was appointed to inquire, amongst other things, into the conditions on which relief should be granted. It continued its sittings over the four following years, and the famous Fifth Report, which was published in July, 1812, is still a standard authority on Indian land tenures, and the best authority on the judicial and police arrangements of the time. When the time arrived for taking steps to renew the Company's charter, a Dundas was still at the Board of Control, but it was no longer found possible to avoid the questions which had been successfully shirked in 1793. Napoleon had closed the European ports, and British traders imperatively demanded admission to the ports of Asia. At the end of 1811 Lord Melville told the Court of Directors that His Majesty's ministers could not recommend to Parliament the continuance of the existing system unless they were prepared to agree that the ships, as well as goods, of private merchants should be admitted into the trade with India under such restrictions as might be deemed reasonable.

The Company struggled hard for their privileges. They began by arguing that their political authority and commercial privileges were inseparable, that their trade profits were dependent upon their monopoly, and that if their trade profits were taken away their revenues would not enable them to carry on the government of the country. But their accounts had been kept in such a fashion as to leave it very doubtful whether their trade profits, as distinguished from their territorial revenues, amounted to anything at all. And this ground of argument was finally cut from under their feet by the concession of a continued monopoly of the tea trade, from which it was admitted that the commercial profits of the Company were principally, if not wholly, derived.

Driven from this position the Company dwelt on the

1 Robert Dundas, who, on his father's death in 1811, became the second Viscount Melville.

political dangers which would arise from an unlimited resort of Europeans to India. The venerable Warren Hastings was called from his retreat to support on this point the views of the Company before the House of Commons, and it was on this occasion that the members testified their respect for him by rising as a body on his entrance into the House and standing until he had assumed his seat within the bar. His evidence confirmed the assertions of the Company as to the danger of unrestricted European immigration into India, and was supplemented by evidence to a similar effect from Lord Teignmouth (Sir J. Shore), Colonel (Sir John) Malcolm, and Colonel (Sir Thomas) Munro. Experience had proved, they affirmed, that it was difficult to impress even upon the servants of the Company, whilst in their noviciate, a due regard for the feelings and habits of the people, and Englishmen of classes less under the observation of the supreme authorities were notorious for the contempt with which, in their natural arrogance and ignorance, they contemplated the usages and institutions of the natives, and for their frequent disregard of the dictates of humanity and justice in their dealings with the people of India. The natives, although timid and feeble in some places, were not without strength and resolution in others, and instances had occurred where their resentment had proved formidable to their oppressors. It was difficult, if not impossible, to afford them protection, for the Englishman was amenable only to the courts of British law established at the presidencies, and although the local magistrate had the power of sending him further for trial, yet to impose upon the native complainant and witness the obligation of repairing many hundred miles to obtain redress was to subject them to delay, fatigue, and expense, which would be more intolerable than the injury they had suffered.

That their apprehensions were unfounded no one who is acquainted with the history or present conditions of British India would venture to deny. But they were expressed by

« ПретходнаНастави »