Council; and several more, in addition to those already mentioned, of the provisions of the English Law Amendment Act: still leaving some parts of it not yet adopted. The recent parliamentary alteration in the law concerning imprisonment for contempts of decrees or orders made by courts of equity, was this year adopted. Lastly, in the English collection we have to notice three different English acts, and two sections of another Act, adopted and comprized in one Act (24) of our Legislative Council, but in a manner wholly, we believe, unprecedented, and which we trust, will never be followed as a precedent. Each statute is designated simply by chapter and title, and then extended to the territories of the East India Company, so far as it is applicable to the same. e.g.

"I. It is hereby enacted that the Statute XI. George IV, and I William IV. Chap. 40, entitled an Act for making better provision for the disposal of the undisposed of residues of the effects of Testators shall be extended to the Territories of the East India Company as far as it is applicable to the same; provided that this Act shall take effect from the first day of January next, which day is substituted for the first day of September mentioned in the statute."

In like manner the "Statute XI. George IV. and I. William IV. C. 46 entitled An Act to alter and amend the Law relating, to Illusory appointments"; and the Statute XI. George IV. and I. William IV. Chap. 60 entitled "an Act for amending the Law respecting conveyances and transfer of estates and funds vested in Trustees and Mortgagees, and for enabling Courts of Equity to give effect to their decrees and orders in certain cases, except so much thereof as provides that it shall not extend to cases of partition ;" and Sections 10 and 11 of the XI. George IV. and I. William IV. Chap. 47 entitled, &c., are enacted to be extended to the territories of the East India Company, as far as they are applicable to the same. Obviously this implies that the enactments alluded to are but partially applicable, and required alteration; and obviously, thus to extend the law without making the necessary modification, is to leave an important part of the legislative duty to be performed at judicial discretion. By this manner of legislating part of the law is unwritten; and moreover, what is written, is not contained in the Act book of our Legislative Council; but to know what it is, the public must refer to the Acts of parliament contained only in the Statute book of Great Britain. There has therefore never been that promulgation of the law in India, which probably the constitutional jurist would hold essential under the Charter Act to the validity of all Acts of the Legislative Council. We have yet another remark to offer.

One of the statutes here extended, relating to conveyances, excepts from its operation cases of partition: this Act, excepts the exception, but does not carry out its object by enacting that cases of partition shall be considered as within the statutory provisions. Acts 19 and 20 of this year deserve to be specially described for their useful and beneficent aim and object. The former is for the appointment of Curators to take charge of the personal effects of deceased persons, and is entitled, "an Act for the protection of moveable and immoveable property against wrongful possession in cases of succession." Individually, we are the more sensible of the importance of this measure, from having heard from an officer whose duties bring him much into contact with families on the visitation of sudden death,* a description, of the waste, pillage, contest and domestic confusion which often occur from the want of a public officer to protect property in case of need at this distressing moment. The Act provides, that on the application of persons claiming a right by succession; or, in the case of absent persons, minors, and disqualified persons, on the application of an agent, relative, near friend, or of the Court of Wards, the district judge,either after actual possession has been taken, or when a forcible seizure of possession is apprehended, may cite the party complained of and summarily determine the right of possession, and deliver possession accordingly. The judge may also immediately on receiving the application appoint an officer to take an inventory of the effects, and seal or otherwise secure the same: and where there is risk of misappropriation or waste, before the summary suit can be determined, the judge may appoint one or more Curators, with power, either to take possession of the property generally, or until security be given, or until inventories shall have been made, or for any other purpose necessary for securing the property from misappropriation or waste by the party in possession. Power is also given to the Presidency Governments to appoint public curators for any district or number of districts.

The other Act above alluded to is an act for facilitating the collection of debts on successions, and for the security of parties paying debts to the representatives of deceased persons: and the chief provision which it makes for these objects is, that a probate or letters of administration, or a certificate is required to complete the title of a representative to maintain a suit or action. The act was not extended to British subjects, for a better reason, however, than usually can be alleged in favor of these personal exceptions, viz. that British subjects, being under the

* The present coroner for Middlesex,

law of the Supreme Court, were already required to take out probate or letters of administration.

The law relating to sales of land for arrears of land revenue, in the districts under the permanent settlement, was altered this year, and made less severe in some respects, but the amendments stopped short of the claims of the intelligent representatives of the Zemindar class, in the Calcutta Landholders Society; and the Indian Government has since again yielded one step more towards justice and equity. This act is entitled an act for amending the Bengal Code in regard to sales of land for arrears of revenue." It abolishes the charge of interest or a penalty, upon arrears of land revenue. It defines what shall be deemed an arrear; and in effect gives as a day of grace, the first of the month following that on which the revenue fell due. It requires fixed days of sale to be annually appointed and notified in the Gazette to the Board of Revenue; and directs that all estates in arrear at sunset of the day previous to any sale-day shall be sold by the Collector to the highest bidder. The sale cannot be prevented by the defaulter tendering payment on the sale day, and he can re-acquire his estate, only by becoming the highest bidder. It is obvious therefore that the tenure of the Bengal Zemindar is conditional; the condition being the regular payment of the revenue; and that the land absolutely reverts to the state, if the revenue be unpaid: but still only for the purpose of being sold; for, according to this act, the state cannot continue to hold it. It was a strong ground of complaint against this act, that it gave no sufficient notice of what properties would be sold, and consequently the distant Zemindar was in danger of losing his estate, without knowing that his agents had neglected to pay the revenue; and this was true; and has since been

remedied.

The purchaser of an estate forfeited for revenue must immediately, or as soon after the sale as the Collector may require, deposit 25 per cent of the purchase money, either in cash, bank of Bengal notes or post Bills, or government Securities; and make good his purchase on or before the thirtieth day after the sale, or forfeit his deposit, and moreover be liable for any loss at a second sale, by a smaller sum being bid than he had bought it for. Benami purchases, that is, purchases by one person in the name of another, or by one person in his own name for another, are forbidden sub modo; that is, the intended purchaser is not allowed to maintain a suit for the recovery of the property against the nominal or certified purchaser. We have never been able to discover what interest government has in preventing benami purchases. It's interest is, to get the highest price for the for

feited property if those persons who are unwilling to bid in their own names, may bid or buy benami, the obvious tendency of allowing benami purchases, is to increase competition and so enhance the price, and the converse is true of the above enact

ment.

But the prohibition of benamee is open also to another objection it places the capitalist who cannot attend personally, at the mercy of his agent: for if the latter buys in his own name, though he pays the deposit with his employer's money, the latter is left without remedy for the recovery of the property.

The Act contains some special provisions respecting the rights of purchasers. One very remarkable one is, that the "purchaser shall acquire the estate free from all incumbrances, which may have been imposed upon it after the time of settlement." The permanent settlement having been enacted in 1793, and then begun to be brought into operation, the mesne encumbrances of half a century are here avoided. We are entitled to put an extreme case: but our objection is, to avoiding any honest and fair mesne encumbrances. But this is not all. The purchaser is entitled, after giving a specified notice, to enhance at discretion, (any thing in the existing Regulations notwithstanding) the rents of all under-tenures in the said estate, and to eject all tenants thereof with the following exceptions. Our pen had written: twice have we scratched it out; but we write it again: let it stand: why should not the undoubted truth be plainly spoken: A more unjustifiable, abominable law in principle: one more forbidding to the investment of capital, or more adapted to perpetuate the extreme relations of lord and serf (for we cannot more briefly express them), and to destroy all the elements for the formation of a class of small proprietors, never was enacted. These provisions are a Pandora's box of social evils; and, as education advances, they can only alienate the minds of the people from the government. But our readers observe that there are some exceptions; that is, some tenures, some interests, some incumbrances, which are protected against new purchasers. They are:

1st." Tenures which were held as Istamorari or Mokurrari, at a fixed rent more than twelve years before the permanent settlement." The permanent settlement was enacted in 1793; the claimant of the benefit of this exception, must therefore carry his proof back to the year 1780, or seventy years ago; a requirement which makes this exception merely nominal; and besides, we believe it would be difficult to explain what are Istamorari and Mokurrari tenures. Individually, we have enquired, and have not been able to get an intelligible

explanation. The second exception is of tenures existing at the time of the permanent settlement, which have not been or may not be proved liable to increase of assessment on certain specified grounds. The decennial settlement preceded the permanent; and supposing this difficulty arising from lapse of time and loss of evidence surmounted, what proof would be sufficient to bring the case within the second member of the exception ? Thirdly, the lands of Khúd Kasht ryots having rights of occupancy at fixed rents, &c., are excepted. The poor Khúd Khasht ryot with all his right and his poverty about him, would have little chance against the Zemindar who put him to proof of his exceptional title. The fourth exception is remarkable : "Lands held under bona-fide leases at fair rents, &c., for the erection of dwelling houses or manufactories, or for mines, &c., or like beneficial purposes, such land continuing to be used for the specified purposes." Now, why are not all bona fide leases excepted? What mentionable interest has the state in confiscating any bona-fide lease, either to itself (the state) or to the person who purchases of the state upon a forfeiture for land revenue? Next, let us see what are the conditions on which bona fide leases are held good and not confiscated. They must be at fair rents. The Act therefore assumes that a bona-fide rent, or a rent bonafide agreed, may be not a fair rent: which is an assumption against common sense, and opens a question which ought to be considered as closed by the supposed agreement. But the exception further imposes the condition, that the land shall continue to be used for the purposes specified in the leases. But why so? Why should the legislature convert into a condition what may not have been intended to be conditional: a legislative and arbitrary construction is thus put on private agreements; irrespective either of the apparent meaning or real intention of them. But there is a fifth exception, and it is like the four preceding ones; it is of farms granted at fair rents, and for specified areas, by a former proprietor, for terms not exceeding twenty years, under written leases, registered within a month from their date;"-and then follow half a page of other qualifications: this exception therefore may be regarded as a mere nominal one. The case has happened of a Zemindarí being forfeited for the mere purpose of obtaining the advantage given by the sale law of avoiding mesne incumbrances and destroying all the valuable under tenures; an object not difficult to be accomplished, in the lower courts by a wealthy Zemindar, who, after succeeding at law increases the value of his property and his annual income at the expence of those whose title ought to have been as indefeasible as his own.

U