J. C. Melvill, Esq. months; and that if rejected by the Crown, a fresh period of two months would reckon from the date of the rejection.

6th May 1852.

209. What would be the legal result of this difference with respect to the appointment?

It might lead to an indefinite postponement of the filling up of the appointment; but, practically, it has never done so. In the meanwhile the government by law would devolve on the senior ordinary member of the Council in India, in the case of the Governor-general; and in the case of the governments of Madras and Bombay, upon the senior civil member of the Council.

210. How is it in the case of the army?

In the case of a military appointment not being filled up, the command of the army devolves upon the senior officer.

211. That being the law, will you state what is the practice in this matter?

I think all difficulty as to filling up vacancies in these high offices is obviated by friendly communication between the Chairman and Deputy Chairman and the President of the Board.

212. Has it ever come to your knowledge that there has been any inconvenience resulting from this state of things?

I am not aware of any inconvenience.

213. Do you think that the power of the Secret Committee is merely a ministerial one, which could with advantage be dispensed with?

No; I think that whilst the government of India is with the Company, it is essential that the secret orders should go through members of the direction, who ought to know all that is passing connected with the government of India; besides which, it is important to have the means of knowing that the limits of the Secret Committee are observed; and, further, as the powers of the Secret Committee are occasionally used to direct external operations not immediately affecting the territory of India, such as those connected with the China war, they should have the opportunity of protecting the purse of India by making arrangements with the Queen's Government for a reimbursement of the expense.

214. In the event of any circumstances arising in India, which, in the opinion of the government of India, make it necessary that a letter should be written secretly to the authorities in England, may not the Government in India address such a letter to the Secret Committee?

They have the power, by distinct enactment (33 Geo. 3, c. 52, s. 22) to address despatches to the Secret Committee upon any subjects connected with the government of India that they think right; and the Secret Committee, when they receive such despatches, are bound to send them to the Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India; but the obligation to secrecy does not extend to any subject not relating to peace or war, or treating or negotiating with native states and princes (vide 53 Geo. 3, c. 155, s. 73).

215. Although the Secret Committee cannot, without the consent of the Commissioners, communicate any matter relating to making treaties, or peace or war, may they not communicate, without such consent, any letters relating to any other subject which they think fit?

I think they may do so by law.

216. Are you aware whether such a disclosure, although it might be legally made, ever did take place?

I am not.

217. Can you state, practically, what proportion of the patronage is given to persons who have public claims?

Since the year 1834, more than one-half of the civil appointments have been given to the sons of Indian officers, civil and military. The return for military appointments I have as yet only made out for the last 11 years-that shows a proportion of one-third so given. The remainder have gone to the sons of officers of the royal army and navy, to sons of the clergy, and, generally speaking, to the middle classes in this country.

218. Is any part of the patronage by law reserved to meet such claims?
There is not.

219. Is

219. Is this patronage exercised under certain regulations?

It is.

J. C. Melvill, Esq.

220. Could you put in a copy of the regulations under which the patronage is distributed?

I will do so.

221. Has not an appeal been made to the authorities here to reserve a portion of the patronage to meet such claims?

Yes; an application has been made to the Company, that a portion of the patronage should be annually allotted as of right to belong to the army, to meet public claims.

222. Do you think that would be advantageous to the service or to the individuals?

Nothing, I think, could be more unreasonable than that any class of Her Majesty's subjects should claim, as of right, to receive certain appointments. It seems to me, also, that it would be very disadvantageous to the service as a body, because any such apportionment would be hardly so great as the proportion now given to the service by the exercise of individual patronage. Directors who now feel a moral obligation to provide for those claims would consider themselves relieved from any such obligation if a portion of the patronage were reserved for the purpose. Besides which, the difficulty of allotting the reserved patronage among the claimants would, I fear, give rise to great jealousies and heartburnings.

223. Do you think it essential that the patronage should remain as at present?

Yes, I think so. It strikes me that a body like the Court of Directors, acting in this country, requires all the aids that can be given to it, to enable it to maintain its position in the eye of the public, and in that point of view the possession of the patronage seems to me to be indispensable. Besides which, it keeps up sympathy between the persons entrusted with a share in the government of India, and the persons in India who are discharging important duties there, and that sympathy and communication seems to me to be calculated to be of great service to the Court of Directors.

224. Are you of opinion that some such appointments should be attached to certain high degrees of scholarship at the Indian Colleges as prizes?

That has been tried occasionally. Individuals having appointments have, I believe, offered them as prizes.

225. With any beneficial result?

I think the result must be beneficial.

دو

226. The servants of the Company are divided into two classes, "covenanted " and "uncovenanted;" will you have the goodness to state the distinction between those two classes?

Civil servants, upon their first appointment, enter into covenants with the East India Company; it is an old practice. The conditions of those covenants are very general: that they shall obey all orders; that they shall discharge all debts; and that they shall treat the natives of India well. That gives the title "covenanted" to the regular civil servants of the Company. The duties entrusted to those servants are of a high character generally. Other offices in India, including those of clerks, are filled by other persons nominated by local authority, and those persons are called "uncovenanted." They are taken either from Europeans not already in the service, from the half-caste population, or from natives. That is the distinction between "covenanted" and "uncovenanted."

227. Is there any disqualification on the part of the uncovenanted servants from holding those higher offices?

Since 1834, many important duties which had previously been confided to covenanted civilians, especially in the Judicial Department, have been confided to natives.

228. Are those appointments under Clause 87 of the last Act?

I am not aware that there was anything in the former Act which would have (88.2.)

6th May 1852.

J. C. Melvill, Esq. precluded those appointments. Clause 87 prohibits any disabilities in respect of religion, colour, or place of birth.

6th May 1852.

229. Can you give some instances of those appointments of natives?

A list of them can be laid before the Committee.

230. The military do not enter into the class of covenanted servants?
They do not.

231. Does any disqualification exist for their holding those higher appointments?

The government of India may select military officers to hold civil appointments; and political offices are frequently so held.

232. Are the uncovenanted servants appointed by the home government, or by the local government?

They are appointed by the local government.

233. In all cases?

In all cases.

234. You spoke of there having been, within the last few years, only one Director elected who was not connected with India; will you state how many Directors have been elected who have not resided in India?

I can give your Lordships an analysis of the Court of Directors in 1833 and in 1852 :

1833.

1852.

235. How are bankers connected with India?

I never stated them as connected with India. The analysis which I have made is not of the Court as elected since 1833, but as then and now constituted.

236. You stated that no question in dispute as to the law between the Court and the Board had ever been referred, according to the Act, to three Judges: have any questions as to the law been referred to the legal officers of the respective authorities?

There have been repeated references of that kind.

237. And the Court and the Board have agreed to accept a joint opinion? That has been the case occasionally.

238. For instance, as to the power of the Board over payments made out of the Home Treasury, has any question been put upon that point to the law officers?

I am not aware that any such question has arisen. There never has been a doubt raised of the power of the Board to control the Court in making payments from the Home Treasury. There was a question as to the power of the Board to expend money through the Secret Committee, without the concurrence of the Court.

239. What is the usual number of persons present at meetings of the Court of Proprietors?

Generally speaking, the attendance has been very small. There is no quorum. of the Court of Proprietors; I wish there was.

240. If they divide, can proxies be immediately called for?

Proxies are not available, except in voting for the election of Directors.

241. Not upon any other question?

Νο.

242. How are the three Committees which you have mentioned formed? They are formed at the first Court of Directors after every annual election. There are three Committees; the three senior Directors are taken and appointed

one

one to each; and the whole Court is gone through in the same way; and when J. C. Melvili, Esq. the Committee is so struck, it is open to the Court of Directors, among themselves, to effect exchanges from one Committee to another, provided they do so 6th May 1852. within a week.

243. So that, according to that rule, it might happen that persons might be put upon the Military and Political Committee, for instance, who knew nothing about politics or war?

It never does so happen, because a disposition to exchange is manifested by the individual Directors conversant with particular departments. A political man will like to get into the Political, and a financial man into the Financial Committee; and so the system of exchange works to bring about Committees conversant with the business.

244. Are the Committees practically formed, at the present time, of persons generally conversant with the subjects that come before the Committees to which they belong?

I think they are.

245. May the three Directors who are put at the head of the three Committees exchange also?

They may.

246. What is the manner in which the letters received from those several Committees are written; do the Committee elect one of their number to write the letter:

No; the letters are generally written by an officer of the Home Establishment in charge of the department to which the subject relates.

247. Then, in point of fact, the clerks have the initiative of writing the letters?

No, they have not the initiative; it is the duty of the officers to go to the Chairman, and take his instructions as to what the tenor of the letter should be, and then to draft it.

248. To the Chairman of each Committee?

The Chairman of the Court, who is the Chairman of all Committees.

249. Is there any record kept of the person who has actually drafted the letter?

There is no record kept, but it is always known.

250. Is there any initial put at the bottom of the draft to show the officer who has prepared it?

No; the writer of the draft generally puts his name in pencil upon it, in order that the Chairman, in looking over papers, may know to whom to send for explanation.

251. Do you mean to say that, in point of fact, the Chairman gives verbal or written instructions to the clerk in what sense he shall draw the letter?

Upon all important questions he does so; às to mere routine questions, of

course not.

252. Are the memoranda preserved as the authority for writing the letter in the particular sense in which it was written?

The communication between the Chairman and the officer is generally oral. 253. Would it be possible to have satisfactory oral communication as to the substance of letters relating, as many of them do, to a great many very important and extensive subjects?

Yes, perfectly possible: the officer goes to the Chairman with the memorandum upon the subject, and says, "What do you think of it; will you tell me the view I am to take of this matter?"

254. Does the memorandum state only the facts of the case?

The memorandum states only the facts of the case.

255. It is a short memorandum, stating all the facts of the case? All the facts.

256. And thereupon the clerk writes the letter?

Having received the Chairman's instructions, he writes the letter.

J. C. Melvill, Esq.

6th May 1852.

1

257. And he submits that letter to the Chairman, and the Chairman makes what alterations he pleases; and when so altered, it is submitted to the Board in previous communication"?

That is the case with respect to drafts for India, and, generally speaking, to all important matters in " previous communications."

258. The previous communications do not go to the respective Committees before going to the Board, do they?

No; they are known only to the Chairman and Deputy Chairman, and the "President of the Board.

259. Was it not formerly generally understood, that when the Chairman and Deputy Chairman had agreed upon any point, it was expedient that the Court should support the Chairs?

No, I think not. I have ahd the experience of 40 years now in that Court, being present at all the meetings, and during that time I have witnessed innumerable instances in which the Chairs have not been supported by the members of the Court. 260. After communication with the Board?

The Court know nothing of the previous communication with the Board.

261. But when a matter is laid before the Court by the Chairman, must not the Court pretty well understand that he has communicated with the Board of Control upon the subject?

But the Court exercise their own judgment.

262. Do not you think that, of late years, the Court have exercised their own judgment much more extensively in contradiction to the Chairs than they used to do?

I think that they have paid infinitely more attention to the administration of India than they used to do, when they were encumbered with a great trade.

263. It has, in point of fact, made a great revolution in the conduct of the business?

I think it has effected a visible improvement.

264. You have given some evidence as to the legal power of protest which is possessed by the Court; do you happen to know whether the Court ever protested against the Afghan war?

No, they never did; but they have applied to the government of the country for reimbursement of a portion of the expenses of that war, upon the ground that its objects were at least partially European.

265. But not upon the ground that they entertained or stated any objection

to it?

They have not so said.

266. Then, when you observed the other day that the Company would have had 30,000,000 7. more if they had not gone to war, you did not mean to infer that they had gone to war contrary to their own wishes?

I did not mean to make any statement upon the subject.

267. But merely to record a fact?

Merely to record a financial fact.

268. Are you able to state where any prohibition is to be found against the Court of Directors making any appointments in India, except the first? I refer to the Act of the 53 Geo. 3, c. 155, s. 81.

269. There was some evidence given before the former Committee as to the number of despatches in which the opinion of the Court of Directors had been finally overruled by directions from the Board of Control, as compared with a great number of despatches issued which were not altered under the direction of the Board; can you give that information now, so as to show how far, practically, the opinion of the Court of Directors is overruled by the Board of Control?

I have ascertained that of the "P. C." drafts, the drafts which go through previous communication, more than one-half are returned unaltered, and a very large proportion of the remainder is returned with alterations, generally only verbal, or with corrections of facts and figures..

270. Can