duties of judge-advocate, without any facts to support it, could scarcely be true of one who had performed that office for twenty-eight years, and consequently at a time when age must have matured his judgment and repressed any warmth of temper evinced in early years; that it was not explained whether the defects in his character were brought to the notice of Government after Colonel Valiant's trial took place, or were previously recorded on the Minutes of Council; in the former case, they obviously deserved no attention, as they were so evidently adduced to support the Commander-in-chief's recommendation for his removal, and could not have escaped former Commanders-in-chief;* that Sir John Keane could have only formed his opinion on this subject from the information of others; "and common justice, therefore, required," observes Colonel Kennedy, "that he should have ascertained its correctness by communicating with me before he made use of it, unknown to me, for the purpose of depriving me of that situation."

The reasons assigned for passing over Colonel Kennedy in the brigade appointments, are founded upon his want of conversancy with regimental duty, and his backwardness in acquiring it; to which was subsequently added, “the indecent and disrespectful language " employed by Col. K. in one of his letters towards the Commander-in-chief,† and his "highly improper insinuation as to the motives which influenced Government" in the appointment to the second brigade command.

It is impossible, within the space we could allot to the subject, to enter into the minute details which would be necessary to lay the whole of this case before our readers, in all its parts. We give to the authorities, who originated the proceedings against Colonel Vans Kennedy, the benefit of the concession that they are strictly within the letter of the law; but we still think that a less pertinacious exhibition of military discipline would, under the peculiar circumstances, have been no violation of its spirit.

Whilst writing these observations, we observed a letter of Col. Kennedy, in one of the Calcutta papers, which contains the following paragraph:

"But even had I, in declining to comply with the order given to Brig. Kinnersley till a reference was made to higher authority, deviated from the line of strict obedience, it was perfectly evident from the papers transmitted to the Head Quarters of the Army, that I had acted under an erroneous impression; and there was, consequently, no necessity for bringing an officer of my rank, length of service, and long employment on the staff, to a general court-martial on a complaint which might have been equally well disposed of without having recourse to such a measure. The preceding extract, also, will show, that the grievances stated in my defence, were real and not imaginary; and to those grievances I have now to add, that on my trial being concluded, I applied for four months' leave of absence, on the ground that, during an actual service in this country of thirty-six years, I had never been absent from my duty on leave for a longer period than thirteen months; but this application was refused, and no reasons assigned for such refusal."

* Colonel Vans Kennedy states, that he performed the duties of the office to the satisfaction of no less than five successive Commanders-in-chief.

+" Nor can I avoid taking the liberty of adding that, if I am to be again passed over, and that principle to be again disregarded, it will most probably be expected that the qualifications of the officers by whom I am superseded, should be so unquestionably superior in all respects to mine, as to leave no doubt that this second supersession has been resolved upon by the Government on public grounds, and not in consequence of the personal dislike which is so evidently borne to me, but for what cause I am not aware, by his Excellency the Commander-in-chief."

: The proceedings of the court-martial are published, at length, in the Bombay Courier of 30th July and 2d August last.

ABOLITION OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT IN THE NATIVE ARMY.

To the Editor.

SIR; The letter in your number for this month, signed "A Commandant Retired," on the state of our army in India, consequent on the abrupt abolition of corporal punishment therein, has afforded to me, in common with many brother officers here for a while located, extreme satisfaction.

The importance of the matters therein discussed, no less than the able manner in which they are treated by your correspondent, renders it a communication worthy your pages; and it is the sincere hope of myself and very many others deeply interested in the continued honour and well-doing of our gallant Eastern legions, that the subject should obtain your notice and be made one of monthly discussion in your influential journal, until the attention of the Court of Directors be seriously drawn to it, and some plan entered on, other than dependence upon the local legislation of India, for a decided arrest of the evil consequences and dangers resulting from that premature act of the late Governor-general.

All private letters from regimental men in India, from each presidency, declare the native army to be proceeding headlong to ruin, from the effects of the invidious superiority given them by that order over their European brethren, and by their entire exemption from the only punishment the dread of which kept insubordinate and disorderly spirits in subjection. Every letter I have seen states the order to be complained of also as loudly by the native commissioned and non-commissioned as by the European officers; and affirms that some means or other must be promptly adopted by the HOME AUTHORITIES, to restore parity in this respect between the articles of war for Europeans and natives.

Among other reasons advanced by several writers, now serving with native regiments, why the HOME Powers should without delay act in this matter, is the startling fact, that the Indo-Britons serving with the native army as bandmen, drummers, fifers, hospital assistants, farriers, &c. who have hitherto professed Christianity, are now declaring themselves Mussulmans, to avoid the severer penalties of the English articles of war, and to claim the benefit of Lord Wm. Bentinck's order of exemption from corporal punishment.

After such a debate as your last number gives us against idol-worship in India, can the Court of Directors refrain from giving their prompt consideration to some remedy for this injudicious act of their late Governor-general, seeing that it is the means of causing the sons of Englishmen to fly from the faith of their fathers to embrace that of Mahomed?

How the evil is to corrected, it is for graver heads to consider. All with whom I have conferred on the subject think, however, that it must be by restoring to the army of India the penalty of corporal punishment.

That this will require great delicacy, there can be no doubt. But, Sir, I have no fear that a safer mode could be devised if the Court of Directors would appoint to meet in London, before the passing of the next King's Mutiny Act, a committee of officers of rank of their army, now at home, giving them power, as in the King's commisson on corporal punishment, to examine witnesses touching the present position of things, and the state of Indian military law generally, and to make report thereon.

To such a Committee, your correspondent, “ A Commandant Retired,” and fifty others, experienced like himself, would doubtless give valuable information and suggestions; and as the expense of such a Committee would be nothing, I see not a single good objection against it. It might be composed of three

men of each Presidency, two of field rank and one Captain; the senior officer to preside.

That there is information enough on the subject to be obtained at home, is shewn by the letter to which your correspondent refers, of April last, from Mr. Sprye, a late Judge Advocate of the Coast Army, to the Court of Directors, a printed copy of which letter is before me.

In referring to this paper, your correspondent must, I conceive, misunderstand the writer of it, when he states that he differs from him in thinking "that, by mere assimilation of the English and Native military codes, the punishment of flogging might be quietly re-introduced into the native ranks;" and " that the European troops do not concern themselves with the discipline and punishments of the Native regiments."

In reference to the first point, Mr. Sprye, like your able correspondent under reply, states an uniform system of adequate rewards to be among the leading wants of the native ranks of the army of India: and in reference to the second point, he expresses himself still more explicitly, as entertaining opinions similar to those of "A Commandant Retired;" his words being as follows:“In touching upon the delicate question, Whether it is safe and expedient to relieve the Native portion of the Indian army from liability to this punishment, while the British portion of the same army is continued subject to it, I cannot but be mindful, Sirs, of those parts of the evidence of his grace the Duke of Wellington, and of the right hon. the late Governor-general and Commander-in-chief of India, which express their belief that the European troops in India now feel and will continue to feel indifference to the matter. With the most profound deference for the opinions of these pre-eminent authorities, I must confess that my individual experience in India, extending from the years 1823 to 1834, and all that I have collected as the result of the observation of others who have recently returned from the armies of either Presidency, prepare me to apprehend a very different and serious result in so peculiar an empire of military opinion. And although it would not be consistent with the object of this paper to argue in opposition to the reasoning and conclusions of those high military characters, I may state that, having closely observed the combined duties and conduct of the European and Native soldiery, in garrisons, in field-cantonments, and in warfare, I consider that there now exists an intimacy between the two classes, which quickly communicates and explains to the one, whatever occurs affecting the other; especially as regards the European troops of India, both artillery and line and notwithstanding I may doubt the reports lately circulated in Indian and military circles about town, and to which I before referred as having appeared in some of the journals of the day, that demonstrations on this subject had already taken place in India, and had actually stayed the infliction of corporal puhishments; yet I must candidly express my belief that, if the degrading distinction be maintained, occurrences of more marked danger to our eastern supremacy must be naturally expected."

:

But by the assembly of a committee of inquiry, such as I venture to suggest, and as was proposed to the Court last year, in the conclusion of Mr. Sprye's letter, the home powers would have the benefit of the information and opinions of dozens, instead of individuals, and be thus enabled the better to judge for themselves the most prudent and eligible mode of correcting the evil, which has been already permitted, I fear, too lengthened an existence; and if such a committee be "forthwith" convened, their report might be had before the King's Mutiny Act for the year is brought under the consideration of Parliament. Hoping that we shall be favoured through your pages with some further addresses on the subject, from "A Commandant Retired," and others competent like him to debate it, I remain, Sir, your faithful reader,

Edinburgh, Jan. 15, 1837.

Asiat. Journ. N.S. VOL.22. No.86.

QUIHI-MULL-DUCK.

U

APPEALS FROM THE MOFUSSIL TO THE SUPREME COURTS OF INDIA.

TO THE EDITOR.

SIR: I observe in your Journal for December, that a meeting was convened by the sheriff at Calcutta, on the 18th of June last, for the purpose of petitioning Parliament to grant British subjects, residing in the interior of our Indian possessions, the right of appealing to the Supreme Court at the presidency against the decisions of the provincial tribunals established by government; and also to give to all natives of India, subjects of the Crown, an equal right with Europeans, of appeal to the Supreme Court, from the same tribunals. This meeting is said to have consisted of about 600 persons, Europeans and East-Indians in about equal numbers, with about twenty Armenians, and a very few, not a dozen, natives.

On a cursory view of the resolutions passed at the above meeting, those unacquainted with the local interests of a large and influential class of the community at Calcutta, might be led to suppose, that British subjects residing in the interior were subjected to the most degrading and manifest injustice, by being made amenable to the jurisdiction of the Mofussil Courts, in cases of civil process with the natives, without the right of appeal from their decisions to that of the Supreme Court at the presidency; and that the natives of our vast possessions are equally victims of tyranny and oppression, by being debarred the like privilege which, it is stated, would place them on an equal footing with Europeans. The resolutions are evidently prepared with the view of awakening the sympathies of Englishmen, in the hope that the Commons of England, who granted freedom to the slave in the West-Indies, would, without hesitation, agree to give our countrymen in the East all the privileges, whilst residing in the interior, far removed from our courts, which they could claim as Englishmen, if living within their immediate jurisdiction.

On a more serious investigation of these resolutions, I trust it will be evident that the rendering of the Supreme Court, at our different presidencies, a court of appeal from our provincial courts, would, by giving them the power of setting aside the regulations of the government, weaken, and ultimately destroy, its authority, which the natives would soon be taught to despise; and that it would be giving a most unjust preference to the European over the native, to whom it would prove oppressive and ruinous, in the same ratio that it would become a source of profit and emolument to the gentlemen of the Supreme Court and their dependents.

Previous to examining the merits of the resolutions, and the consequences to be apprehended from their receiving the sanction of the Legislature, I will quote the opinion of the late Sir Thomas Munro (a high authority on every thing that relates to India), as delivered by him in consultation at Madras, on the 15th March 1822, on the Supreme Court at Madras assuming jurisdiction over a jagheer situated 100 miles beyond its limits, and reducing to beggary Kullum Oolla Khan, the chief of the first private family in the Carnatic. The minute will be found at length, marked X, in the Appendix to his Life :*

* The case is a remarkable one, and at the present moment deserving of particular attention. Kullum Oolla Khan had received from the Madras Government the jagheer which had formerly been granted to his father, Asim Khan, dewan of the Nabob Wallajah, prince of the Carnatic, and this grant was confirmed to him by the Court of Directors. The possession of this jagheer his brothers disputed with him; and, at the instigation of certain Europeans, they filed a bill against him and the Company in the Supreme Court at Madras, in which they prayed that Kullum Oolla Khan might be compelled to account for the revenue of the jagheer, amounting to eleven lacs of pagodas £440,000), and that the Company should

"Although government, at the commencement of the trial in the Supreme Court, were not fully aware of the important political considerations which it involved, they soon saw them; and, on the 8th of January 1819, they tell the Advocate-general, that they attach a high degree of importance to the princi ples in dispute,-the right of the Supreme Court to take cognizance of the matter; and, secondly, the denial of the authority of Government to revoke grants of the nature of that now called in question.' It is absolutely necessary, both for the good government of the country, and the security of the revenue, that the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court should be more strictly limited and more clearly defined; and that it should be completely debarred from all cognizance, in any shape, of the acts of Government. If the Supreme Court are permitted to set aside, by their decrees, the orders of government, we shall weaken, and at last perhaps destroy, that authority, which our own safety demands should in this country be strengthened by every possible means. The proceedings of the court, on the present occasion, have ruined the first private family in the Carnatic, and lowered the Government in the eyes of the people; and if measures of prevention be not adopted, the evil will increase every day. Most of the old wealthy families of Madras have already been impoverished by their litigations in the court. The attorneys and law dubashes now look to the provinces; and if the doctrine maintained by the Court continues to be acted upon, its jurisdiction will in time reach to every zemindar, jagheerdar, and official landholder, under this presidency. The powers of the Supreme Court and of the Government should never be suffered to come into collision; and both the Court and the government will thus be enabled the more efficiently to discharge their respective duties, and to command the respect of the natives. But, in order to attain these objects, it will be necessary to exclude from the jurisdiction of the Court all lands situated beyond the limits of the court; and to exclude from the jurisdiction of the Court all acts done by the Government, as a Government, and making such acts cognizable only by the superior authorities in England."

Such were the opinions of the late Sir Thomas Munro, regarding the extension of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court; and, fortified by them, we will now proceed to examine some of the resolutions agreed to at the meeting.

The first resolution was moved by Mr. Turton,* an advocate in the Supreme Court, who very properly began his address by endeavouring to remove the objection to his supporting the object for which they were assembled, on the ground that he was an advocate in the Supreme Court, and had, therefore, an interest in maintaining its appellate jurisdiction. He then states that the number of Englishmen in India might be computed at 500,000. He observed that this question was not a mere contest between the Supreme and the Mofussil Courts; the right of appeal having only been exercised in two instances since 1813; but it was not the exercise but the existence of the power that was useful. And then, in a strain of lofty independence, he declares that he considers English law to be his birthright; and that he would not consent to live under a despotism whatever were the emoluments, or whatever advantage a residence under it could hold forth. With this preamble, Mr. Turton proposed the first resolution: "That, in consequence of the passing of Act XI. should be compelled to issue a new grant of the jagheer to all the brothers and sisters jointly; on which judgment was passed by the Supreme Court against the defendants, whereby they involved Kullum Oolla Khan in utter ruin, and obliged him to fly for refuge to Pondicherry.

It ought to be particularly noticed, that of the principal speakers in favour of the right of appeal, four are advocates in the Supreme Court; viz. Messrs. Turton, Clarke, Dickens, and W. P. Grant. † A number much, very much, over-rated.