In 1746 the French occupied Madras and held it until the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle in 1848; thus the court there was dissolved for a time. Experience had shown that certain alterations in the Charter of 1726 would be desirable, and hence the Company in 1753 surrendered the Letters Patent of 1726 and 1727 and received new ones differing from those of 1726 in several important respects. The constitution of the municipality of Madras was as before, but the Governor and Council were to choose the aldermen on vacancies arising instead of the new members being co-opted. Should those nominated refuse to accept office they were to be fined. The jurisdiction of the court was as before, but it was stated that suits between Indian natives of Madras should be determined among themselves "unless both parties shall by consent submit the same to the determination of the Mayor's Court." Various other small improvements were made, such as, for instance, the confining the jurisdiction of the Mayor's Court to suits about matters of a higher value than five pagodas; the provision for evidence on oath by Christians, and in the case of Indians “in such manner as they according to their several castes shall esteem to be most binding on their consciences, to oblige them to speak the truth"; the dealing carefully with cases in which the mayor or one of the aldermen should be a party. Perhaps of even greater significance was the section providing for the procedure in case a suit was brought by or against the Company. The Mayor's Court was also to frame rules of practice and do what was necessary for the administration of justice, but subject to the control and interference where needful by the Company. Improvements were made, too, in the provisions as to appeals, the Governor and Council being authorized to put in execution a decision on appeal should the Mayor's Court neglect to do so. It was also provided that a Court of Requests, consisting of at least three commissioners out of a larger number, should be established to deal with suits where the matter in dispute did not exceed five pagodas in value; the commissioners were to be nominated by the Governor and Council. The Governor and all the Council (not merely five, as before) were to be justices of the peace. These provisions were repeated in the cases of Bombay and Calcutta, and the courts of all three places were to have power to grant probate and to see after the estates of intestates. Care was taken to provide for the removal of the presidency town or for a temporary interruption caused by conquest. Thus it has been pointed out that after 1753 there were at least the following courts in each of the presidency towns: I. The President and Council as justices of the peace and Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer and Gaol Delivery, holding quarter sessions. 2. The Mayor's Court. 3. The President and Council hearing appeals from the Mayor's Court 4. The Court of Requests. CHAPTER III THE ACQUISITION OF TERRITORY THE authors of the Imperial Gazetteer have pointed out that as the English settled in India under the licence of a native governor the natural consequences would have been for them to have been subject to Indian law. Of course this would not hold in the case of a territorial acquisition such as that of Bombay. And in general it was not what happened, for three important reasons: 1. The idea of a territorial law applicable to all who live in a particular place is European and modern. The Shastras and the Khoran are personal in their application, though no doubt, as the authors of the Montagu-Chelmsford Report say, there grew up bodies of customary law which varied with the locality. 2. The law of nations, which was just developing in the West, in the case of Europeans settled among men differing from them in religion, manners, and habits gave them the national character of the parent State. 3. Many of the provisions of the Hindu and Mohammedan systems were so different from the usages of the West, that it would have been impossible to have enforced them. They presuppose a definite religious organization. We have seen, and we shall have to return to the point, that many date the real introduction of English law into India from 1726, or even from 1661. The matter was not perhaps at first regarded as of much importance, as there were very few Englishmen in the Company's factories and of them but a small fraction would need the laws' aid or incur its punishments. The primary object of the Company, whatever a few far-seeing individuals might think, was trade, and hence it was of all things necessary to keep out of local difficulties and disputes. The time, however, was now come when the whole attitude of the Company was to be altered, and when its very nature was to be entirely changed. The centre of interest is now found in Bengal. In 1717 the Company had secured the right to purchase the rights of revenue over thirty-eight villages near Calcutta. This was definitely agreed in February 1757, and finally after the Battle of Plassey Mir Jaffar ceded to the Company the Zemindari of the twenty-four Parganas. The amount of the assessment was fixed the year after, and thus the revenue officers of a country more than 800 square miles in extent came under the Company's control. Dr. Firminger has shown clearly that whatever might be the appearance of things, the Nawabs' position in Bengal was weakened enormously long before the grant of the Diwani in 1765. The military power had gradually passed from the Mogul's representative to the Company. Before the Battle of Plassey we must also remember that the revenues of Burdwan, Midnapore, and Chittagong had been made over to the Company and that they supervised the criminal administration there as well as collected the revenues. But the main sign of change was the fact of military control which the Company was paid to exercise. There was also, of course, Calcutta, an English creation, and there were the Northern Circars near the Godavery, which had been taken from the French in 1758, and were formally ceded in 1765. The great organ for dealing with matters of importance in the Government of Bengal was the select committee. This was created by the order of the directors on December 15, 1756, the original idea being that it would be a temporary machine to be used during a period of great pressure when prompt decisions had to be made after brief debate. The Court of Directors, however, prolonged its powers in 1769 and defined them as follows: "They are to conduct everything that relates to the country government, either with respect to the Duannee or the Company's political interests with the neighbouring powers together with the military operations depending thereon. They are to negotiate with the soubah and the country powers, but to conclude no treaty of commerce or alliance without the approbation of the Council at large. They are to superintend the collection of the revenues arising from the Duannee, but without the power of disbursing them, nor do the revenues arising from the Company's other possessions fall under their jurisdiction. Their general superintending power ceased with the abuses that gave rise to that power with which they were entrusted; and all other branches of the Company's affairs fall under the general department. The members of this committee are to stand conformable to Lord Clive's appointment viz.: Harry Verelst, President. John Cartier, Second. Col. Richard Smith, Third but not to rise. Mr. Richard Becher, Fifth. We have in the foregoing paragraph directed that the military operations shall be conducted under the orders of the Select Committee but the supreme military power is vested in the Board at large conformable to the usual practice. We have already in our letter of 24th December para 54 expressed our sentiments on the nature of your power over the military, not only that it is supreme, but that you may delegate your authority to any civil servant you please, and that the highest officer in our army must obey that Civil Servant in the same manner he is bound to obey the orders of the President and Council; and upon any doubt or disobedience, or indeed for whatever cause may appear sufficient to the majority of the Council, they may dismiss any officer, be his rank what it will, without assigning such officer any other reason but your own pleasure, reserving the justification of your conduct to us, from whom you derive authority, and to whom alone you are accountable. Upon the decease or coming away of Colonel Smith, no other military officer is to succeed him in the Select Committee but the Commanding Officer for the time being is to be consulted upon military affairs only, at which time he is to have a seat and voice at the Board as the third in the Committee." [Printed by Firminger Fifth Report clxiij-clxiv.] The Select Committee afterwards came into conflict with the rest of the council, but had to give way. This question was finally settled in April 1771. The cession of the Diwani or revenue administration of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa-as they were then, Orissa |