not by the magistrates in sessions, but, from time to time, by the chief magistrate under the permission of government. Neither are the allowances of the collection, nor the salaries of the assessors or inspectors fixed by the magistrates in sessions, but by government, and their salary bills are all audited and passed by the civil auditor of government, in the same way as the salary bills of the magistrates themselves.

For many years past the magistrates, who are now called division magistrates, have been relieved from all duties of "repairing and cleaning" the streets, or conservancy; and during the last six years, they have been further relieved from the duties of" watch and ward," the only remaining duties imposed upon them by the above named act of Parliament, and directed to confine their attention to the judicial business within their respective

divisions.

Upon the whole, therefore, the division magistrates think it must be obvious to the memorialists that the magistrates can afford them no relief in their present application, and, that government must be appealed to before they can expect any.

"These," said Mr. McFarlan," are the sentiments of the division magistrates, and I can only say that they embrace an accurate view of the state of matters as they now stand. As far as I am concerned, the most full and complete information will be afforded to all tax payers in regard to the manner in which the tax is received and disposed of.

"In regard to the specific charges of mismanagement in the assessment, the fullest inquiry will be made when charges are specifically preferred.

"The charges made on the assessment fund are closely confined to the items specified in the act of Parliament; it is deficient by about 70,000 Rs. every year. There may be different opinions on the strength of the collector's establishment; a well considered opinion from a committee of tax payers would pave the way for some deduction. Items which might be charged to the assessment are now thrown upon government."

Mr. McFarlan added that the honorary magistrates concur in the foregoing statements so far as they are informed.

Mr. Justice O'Hanlon begged to say for his own part he was as ignorant of the manner in which the assessment was collected and expended as any gentleman to whom he might be then speaking. But with regard to the memorial, he was very glad to hear that the inhabitants of Calcutta were taking an interest in a matter which so particularly concerned them; and he would take this opportunity of pressing on their attention an act passed during the reign of the late king, and to which indeed he might not be the less partial, because it was an offspring of his own. It was an act passed by the legislature for a particular part of Ireland where the value of daily labour was not less than, as he might call it, twelve annas; it assessed houses of the first description at five per cent., of the second at three and a half per cent., and of the third, at two and a half per cent. and this was found to be sufficient for the purpose. Here, however, where the assessment was five per cent. it was said to be insufficient; but without in the slightest degree imputing blame to the present management, he begged leave to say that he thought the rate, placed under the direction of those most interested in its economical expenditure, would be found sufficient for all purposes. The act to which he alluded had been enquir ed for by Lord William Bentinck a few days ago, when municipal matters were brought to his notice, but whether his lordship had thought this community not ripe for self-government, or whether he had considered the then existing state of things best adapted to the wants of the community, he (Mr. O'H.) did not know. However, there had since been a great improvement in the state of things in this town, and he did not suppose but that the inhabitants were capable of managing their own affairs, and that if they were placed in their own hands, the collection of the assessment and the expenditure of it would be conducted properly and effectually.

The Chief Magistrate said he also would be glad to see the inhabitants of Calcutta bestiriing themselves in their own affairs. They should have his best assistance, and, with reference to the expenditure, he begged to say that the accounts were open for inspection as were the diiferent items to enquiry.

Mr. Stocqueler, addressing himself to Mr. McFarlan, remarked that it was very true the accounts were open to the public-it was very true that certain sums were Some conversation here ensued between the magis-entered as paid on such an account and for such an trates and Mr. Stocqueler in respect to this reply to object; but what the tax payers desired to know was the memorial, Mr. S. remarked that he thought it was whether such and such payments were necessary? and very unsatisfactory. The whole responsibility of the this could only be ascertained by a thorough investigation collection and disposal of the assessment appeared to be of the accounts. most comfortably disposed of. Nobody seemed to know any thing about it-nobody would give an opinion about it, and the memorialists were, therefore, told to go up to government.

Under the circumstances Mr. S. perhaps was not sorry for this, as Lord Auckland had manifested the strongest disposition to support and sanction a system of local taxation and to give to the bearers of burdens the power of managing their own affairs. It was his (Mr. S.'s) intention to forward to the Fever Hospital committee the reply of the magistracy, as that Committee was now about to apply itself, with the assistance of other intelligent inhabitants, to a consideration of the best means of giving effect to Lord Auckland's suggestion. He (Mr. S.) therefore wished the magistracy to sign a paper to the effect of what the chief magistrate had stated to

be their views.

The Chief Magistrate answered that he would readily assent to the publication of any thing, and every thing, if no expense were to ensue therefrom.

Mr. Stocqueler undertook to publish the accounts without charge, and Mr. T. B. Scott said he would do the same.

After a little more conversation, Mr. Justice Robison denied for himself having any power to interfere with the arrangement of the assessment or the charges for collect ing it: he had once had that power, but it had been taken from him. If, however, he might be allowed to express an opinion, he thought the arrangement with government was "comfortable" that the public received two rupees worth of attention for every one rupee that they contributed. At the same time he did not wish it to be considered that he approved of the management of the assessment: that he could not do for he was entirely

The magistrates declined to do this. What Mr. Stoc-ignorant of it. queler had heard he might report.

Mr. Blacquiere with reference to what had fallen from Mr. S. then asked the bench if they would pass an Mr. Robison denied that the power belonging to the order for the publication of the assessment accounts. magistrates in regard to the assessment had been taken The magistracy replied that it rested with the chief from them. He wished to know where any evidence of magistrate to do this.

the withdrawal was to be found.

Hereupon a brochure was produced, which turned out to be a " Report of the select committee appointed by government in 1829 to enquire into the state of the police of Calcutta ;" and appended to it, in MSS was a resolution of government regarding the future management of the assesment. Mr. Justice Robison read from this latter document in order to establish the fact of the

magistrates relief from responsibility. It was the opinion of Messrs. Blacquiere and O'Hanlon, however, that the case of "relief" was not made out. Much discussion ensued, but as it was not very relevant to the matter in hand, the memorialists retired, intimating their intention of referring the whole matter to the government through the committee adverted to above.-Englishman.

THE CURRENCY-WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.

valent for Company's Rupees, in the currency of other countries) at 2s. British currency per Company's Rupee, this meeting do adopt the same, and declare this rate to be the Commercial par of Company's Rupees.

9. Resolved, That in order to make the foregoing Resolutions as effective as possible, and to render the in fact operative as a bye-law, for the better regulation of trade and commerce, all persons interested and now present do affix their names to these Resolutions, and that they do lay on the table of the Exchange Rooms for further signatures for 15 days.

3. Resolved,-That the Indian maund or mun of 40 10. Resolved, That copies of the above Resolutions seers of 80 tolas, equal to 822 avoirdupois weight, being in English, and in Bengalee and Hindoostanee, be the weight established by Government, and approximat- published in the Presidency and Mofussil newspapers, ing as it does so nearly to the present Calcutta bazar and circulated in the Bazar, and in the great marts of maund, be the standard employed in all our transactions. Mirzapore, Futtyghur, Benares, &c. &c. 4. Resolved, That the imperial gallon be used as the standard of liquid measure.

11. Resolved, That the proceedings of this Meeting be submitted to Government, and that they be requested to take such measures as may seem to them best for producing the desired uniformity, and for enforcing the use of the new weights and currency as soon as sufficient time shall have elapsed for their full proclamation throughout the country.

SIXTH ANNUAL EXAMINATION AT THE ORIENTAL SEMINARY.

We had the gratification of attending the Sixth Annual Examination at the Oriental Seminary in Bow Bazar, on the 20th May, for a short time while Mr. Rushforth was examining the third class-and certainly never have witnessed any thing more creditable to those by whom the school is conducted. It is about eight years, we are informed, since this Seminary was established, which

The following simple Rules serve for the conversion of the

Indian maund weight into avoirdupois and vice versa.

Rule. To convert Indian weight into avoirdupois weight. 1-Multiply the weight in seers by 72, and divide by 35: the re suit will be the weight in lbs. avoirdupois. 2-Or, multiply the weight in muns by 35 and divide by 49: result will be the weight in cwt. avoirdupois.

the

is now the joint property of Baboo Gour Mohun Audy and Mr. E. I. Turnbull. The instruction given embraces every grade from the first rudiments of the English Language up to History, Algebra, Natural Philosophy, Geometry, Political Economy and English Composition. There are eleven classes in the school of every age, from five or six to that of manhood, the number of pupils being in all about 250, of whom there were 235 sitting out at the examination-all natives, and some of them richly and very tastefully attired. The answers given to the questions put in geography and history shewed that the lads were neither deficient in memory nor intelligence; but a better test of their being well taught was their manner of reading, which was really much better in respect to the pauses and emphasis, in verse as well as prose, than that of nineteen out of twenty educated Englishmen, and their pronunciation too was a very near approximation to that of persons bred up in England. Before we came away, two fine boys, each of eleven years, were brought forward to recite as Brutus and Cassius. Their appear

ance was sufficiently interesting. Our little Brutus, Issore Chundra Chunder, was singularly handsome and of a very elegant figure and address, richly attired in purple (in that respect more like a satrap of Persia than a Roman patriot); while the little Cassius, Bhubanyprosud Dutto, was a smaller delicate looking boy, but with a very intelligent countenance. The manner of, both was excee lingly graceful, and, young as they were, i The fete is to close with an exhibition of Fire-works they spoke as if they felt the sentiments they expressed, in Wellington Square.-Calcutta Courier.

without the common defect of overdoing the part with too much action. It was without exception the prettiest recitation we yet witnessed among the many good things of this kind in Calcutta, and the room rung with plaudits when it was over. These two boys had been only three years in the school, and had a more perfect English accent than many of the older scholars.

SUPREME COURT,—MAY 10, 1836.

ceive, that the sovereignty is in the Crown of England, whether it be to be exercised through the medium of Parliament or without it.

it but I can more clearly explain my views on the by conquest, the King of England becomes in such question now before us, by stating that as my opinion, territory the elective, and probably temporary chief than by merely treating the point as one decided. The magistrate of a republic: or that if he found a co-ordiquestion in Calcutta seems to me a clear one, resting not nate legislative authority existing, he could only inonly on the King's sovereignty, but the undoubted in- troduce a new form of government or of law through troduction of the general English laws by the different their instrumentality. Of none of these positions can charters of justice. The King's sovereignty seems to there be any doubt since the great case of the island of me, I confess, just as clear and undisputed in the Mo- Grenada, nor indeed I apprehend before it. That case fussil as in Calcutta. I am fully aware of the argu- indeed has been the subject of much discussion, but the ments by which this conclusion was impugned on the only question has been as to the mode in which the sove former occasion; but I cannot myself feel any serious reignty was to be exercised, whether by the King's prodoubts that the view of the question which was taken clamation, or by Act of Parliament, and whether the by Mr. Justice Ryan was the only one that can be sup- territory became strictly the territory of the Crown, or ported. Even the statute 53, Geo. 3, c. 155, sec. 95, the territory of the state: there has been no doubt of which was relied on as the first promulgation of the so- the complete and absolute sovereignty of the conqueror, vereignty of the Crown in the Mofussil, is so far from but only to whom that character was to be ascribed, or bearing this character, that it declares it to be "un- rather through what channel the sovereign was to exdoubted" and independently of this legislative decla-ercise his power: for there is no doubt again. I conration of a sovereignty to which it is impossible to assign any commencement after the introduction of the British power, the whole course of legislation for many years preceding seems to me equally conclusive on the subject. The King's wit runs over the whole of the country reignty seems to be that of preventing aliens from holdNow, one of the clearest incidents to this right of sovethe King's Judges administer just ce in cases arising every where within it, though only to particular decreesing lands. The reason given in Blackstone's Commenof his subjects, and the same charter which empowered taries 371, is conclusive on this head: them to do it in some, could have been equally com- would acquire a personal property in lands, he must petent to empower them generally: it was just as owe an allegiance, equally permanent with that propercomplete an exercise of sovereignty as it would have ty, to the King of England; which would probably be been if unlimited in its operation the highest local autho-inconsistent with that which he owes to his own natural rity of the country, the Governor-General himself, is a liege lord, besides, that thereby the nation might in Parliament's officer: and his whole powers and privileges time be subject to foreign influence, and feel many other from the commencement have been derived from Acts of inconveniences." It is to be observed that this reasonParliament, and those acts, it is to be observed, noting is general, and independent of the particular law of citing mediately through the East India Company, England. It is independent also of any particular locaand binding them to assign certain functions and pres-ity, though it refers in terms to the immediate realm of cribe certain rules to their officers, but directly confirm ing the authority and determining the duties. The whole frame therefore, of India government, at least from 1773, has depended on Acts of Parliament directly operative on this country; and this direct operation cannot be supported in any way that I know, except it be deriv-deduction of authorities, where all authority is one way, ed out of the sovereignty of the Crown.

If an alien

England, but the same mischief would alike apply to its colonies. If, however, authority is requisite on a matter where the reason of the case seems clear, it is to be found in abundance, in all the cases which have reason on the subject, and without entering into any

I will merely refer to the opinion of Sir Fletcher Norton in 1764, 2, Chalm. 366, as conveying in the strongest To this extent, therefore, I treat the question in Cal- terms the general result of all the cases, "that no aliens, cutta and in the Mofussil as identical; but in Calcutta except such as can claim the benefit of the definitive there is the further fact of the introduction of English treaty, or being themselves within the sovereignty of his laws by the charters. In the Mofussil, on the other late majesty, are by law entitled to purchase lands for hand, it is still the great undetermined question, whether their own benefit and transmit them on others, either this law has been introduced at all, except with refer- from the crown, or from private persons, in any of his ence to British subjects in the sense of the term. On Majesty's dominions in North America or the West this question I do not wish unnecessarily to give an Indies." The laws of these settlements were various; opinion and I wish to be fully understood as intimating the opinion, therefore, general, for all must rest on the no inclination of opinion when I say, that when intro-general ground of sovereignty, and not on the particular duced or not, the question there stands on grounds quite law of each settlement. There are abundance of other different from those applying to Calcutta. The result may be the same: but the argument is different.

opinions to the same effect, in all of which the only question has been, who were aliens and who were subjects, not I do not, however, think it necessary to discuss this what the rights or disabilities of aliens were, which have question on the present occasion. There is no doubt of been considered too clear for decision. But I know none the general rule that in the case of a conquered or ceded in which the doctrine is more clearly or explicitly concountry, the laws of the country remain in force until tained than in that which I have cited, and which I the by proper authority the conqueror has introduced others. rather quote, because I think that Mr. Chalmers in his The position may be liable to modifications to meet par- very valuable argument which follows it, and which ticular cases and the case of the British possessions in support the same views, has not done justice to the India may or may not be one where the general rule distinctness and strength of Sir Fletcher Norton's opidoes not fully apply. But assuming it to apply fully and nion, when he says (ib. p. 388,)" the bill which he completely, it must in all cases be taken, I apprehend, advised for quieting doubts was never passed, perhaps, with a reservation of every thing necessary to secure the never proposed as wiser men than Norton probably sovereignty of the Crown. The Crown in taking by considered such advice as weak, the law being clear." conquest or by cession, except as far as the terms of a I confess I cannot read Sir Fletcher Norton's opinion particular capitulation or treaty may affect the question, and recommendation as conveying any doubt as to the acquires the absolute and complete right of sovereignty, point of question; it is clear to me that the bill to be and every thing incidental thereto : it does not merely recommended was a bill for the benefit of aliens, who step into the place of the supreme authority previously existing, nor is it bound by the constitutional or other checks imposed on such authority. It would be idle to contend that on acquiring territory from a republic

did not come within the protection of the treaty or statute referred to, supported entirely on grounds of justice or policy, and quite free from any consideration of existing doubts in law. It refers, as I understand it, entirely to

aliens who had resorted or were about to resort to the settlements, after their acquisition by the crown of England.

sition of the Dewanny, acquired all the laws and rights of Government, they could only as British subjects, acquire them, as far as the rights of sovereignty were concerned, for the benefit of the Crown, and to the Crown their rights and powers would pass with all their and the means of deriving it as their own; the Crown incidents. The Company would retain the revenue, would take the sovereignty, and the means of render

Treating it then as clear, that it is inconsistent with the sovereignty of the crown that an alien should hold land in its dominions, it must follow that the crown must have the means of preventing him from doing so. The only remaining question on this part of the case, and I confess it is the only one which seems to me toing it available. If on the other hand, the Dewanny have much of difficulty, is to ascertain, how this pre- Crown and Company would remain the same; those of was a mere collectorate, the comparative rights of the vention is to take place. The right to prevent depends the Crown indeed would no longer be denied through on the sovereignty and is general: that the mode of preventing may depend upon particular law, and it is the Company, but this would be the only distinction. accordingly different under the civil law of England. There might, indeed, in that case be a speculative and This Black-tone says in the sentence immediately fol- fanciful question between the rights of the King of England and of the Mogul sovereign: but that is not a lowing the already cited "wherefore" (that is by reason of inconsistency with the sovereignty)" by the civil question which could ever be entertained by a Court law such contracts were also made void, but the prince acting under a Government erected by the authority of either under the King's charter, or the functionaries, had no such advantage of forfeiture thereby as with us in England."

Parliament.

This question has been so fully discussed in the forsirable to express my opinion upon it; on the principle, mer decisions upon this case, that I have thought it dehowever, already adopted, with respect to the land in Calcutta, the above will not ascertain any right of the Crown, in a cause where it has been avowed not to be fully represented, but will merely declare General Martin's incompetence to devise land which he was incapable of holding.

It is difficult to conceive any manner in which the disability of an alien to hold lands could be enforced, except one of those mentioned in the above passage; the avoiding the contract for their purchase, or the declaring their forfeiture when purchased. Now it seems to me impossible to hold that the contract is avoided by the sovereignty of the crown: to do so would be to introduce a material alteration in the law of contracts between parties, which I have already stated to remain unaffected by mere conquest, and an There remain the questions as to the allowance of alteration going beyond the evil it seeks to remedy, for it interest or the sum appropriated to the building of Conacts on the land-holder as well as the purchaser; it forces stantia house, and as to the application of the money him to retain his lands and return the purchase money intended for the void or impossible legacy in favor of instead of merely preventing the alien from holding. prisoners at Lucknow :On the other hand, by holding the doctrine of forfeiture,

Or 1st. No reason for allowing interest, which might by asserting that the alien can purchase only for the far exceed all that is necessary. benefit of the crown, the remedy is confined to the evil. The conclusion might, perhaps, be sufficiently sup

Or 2d. Lecke v. Robinson, and Skeysher v. Northported by treating the remedy as merely incidental to cote is conclusive to me, as to its falling into the residue. the right, by saying where the crown for the protection Mr. JUSTICE GRANT.-Those who heard what fell from of its sovereignty had a right to prevent the holding of me when these causes were last before the court, will be land by an alien, it must introduce, in the absence of prepared to expect that I should find difficulty in conothers, its own means of prevention, and thus that in- curring in any order to be made in them in the state and dependently of any general introduction of the English condition in which they at present stand,—and that they law, this particular head of it would be introduced. But must necessarily have received my best attention. I there are other arguments on which, as it appears to me, cannot agree that the question here is one of mere regu the same conclusion may be satisfactorily sustained. If larity or irregularity which might be waived by the the contract is not to be declared void, there must be a consent or acquiescence of parties, or that it turns upon declaration of forfeiture to secure the rights of the technicalities. It concerns most materially the essential crown, and the only question is to whom that forfeiture principles of equity and justice. It is no light matis to accrue? Now the forfeiture must surely accrue to ter to subject this unfortunate estate to further proceedthe party aggrieved by its cause: and a forfeiture by ings at an enormous expense-it is no light matter subtraction of allegiance, as in the case of alien tenure, when I see the array of counsel at the bar before me, must go to the crown from whom that allegiance is to permit these causes to proceed under circumstances subtracted, just as a forfeiture by non-payment of the wherein no object can be answered but to the costs to land revenue goes to the Company from whom the reve- which it has been already subjected, when it is certain nue is subtracted. The two cases seem exactly analo- that no decree can be pronounced in these causes which gous, for according to the doctrine of Freeman v. Fairlie, will have any validity. the Company or the Government have only a power of seizure for the non-payment of a tribute, not a right to resume a possession originally vested in them for the nonpayment of a rent, and in conformity with this distinction, the great question has always been, not whether the land belonged to the Government, who have been admitted to have only this tributary right and the powers incident to it, but whether it belonged to the zemindar or to the ryut.

The learned Judge then gave a brief abstract of the proceedings in the causes from the commencement in 1816 to the 26th of January last, when they were set down for hearing. As this detail of the proceedings is embodied in the judgment of the Chief Justice, we have not thought it necessary to insert it here.

Mr. Justice Grant continued. When they came on, the Advocate-General, with whom was Mr. Cochrane, appeared for himself as I understood, as informant in I treat the question, therefore, as clear of any conflict the first cause (entered as third) and defendant in the between rights of the King and of the Company. If third cause; Mr. Prinsep for Godinot, Mayor of Lyons, any such conflict is ever likely te arise, it would pro- plaintiff in the second cause; Mr. Osborne and Mr. bably be on an escheat by failure of heirs, on which I Grant for Christopher Martin and others plaintiffs in the intimate no opinion when I say it is intermediate be- third cause, and defendants in the fourth or cross cause tween the two cases of alienage and non-payment. brought by the executors against the plaintiff in the third With respect to the present case of alienage, even if, cause. There was no appearance for the two executors, as has been often contended, the Company by the acqui- Palmer and Deverine, sole defendants in the first and