CUSTOMS DUTIES—EAST-INDIA RUM. (Hansard, 15 February 1841)

Mr. O' Connell
wished to observe, that this measure was calculated to do much more good to England than to India. It was calculated to diminish the price of 627 sugar, and also the price of rum to the British consumer. It was very important, therefore, to the British consumer, seeing that the price of sugar was now so very high. It was also calculated to be of much benefit to the British manufacturer. By opening a market for the produce of India in England, a wider market would be obtained for the manufactures of England in India. So that in both of these respects, the measure would be particularly useful. He was, therefore, glad that it had been undertaken; and having intimated some opposition to it upon its introduction, he now readily waived that opposition upon the ground he had just stated; and also, because he agreed with the right hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board of Control, that the question of slavery in India was of too much importance to be entertained or discussed incidentally. Undoubtedly a matter of that kind demanded to be brought forward in a distinct and separate form; and he should be glad to have an early opportunity of discussing it upon its own merits. He might, perhaps, have been induced to enter somewhat more at length into the subject upon the present occasion, except that he thought the papers moved for by the right hon. and learned civilian, the Member for the Tower Hamlets (Dr. Lushington), were calculated to throw much additional light upon the matter, and it was desirable that the question, whenever it was discussed, should be approached with all the information that could be obtained regarding it. For, although slavery in India was qualified by the slaves having rights which they had not in other countries where slavery was admitted, yet its influence upon society, particularly in the intercourse between the sexes, and the imprisonment of females, not as wives, but as concubines, was of so much importance to the well-being of India, to the advance of civilization, and to the probable introduction of Christianity into those extensive possessions of the British Crown, that the House could not have too much information before it prior to its entering into any discussion upon the subject. He trusted, however, that the present Session would not be allowed to go over without a more ample consideration of this topic than had been accorded to it in previous years. There was another point of great importance connected with this subject—he alluded to the landed tenures in India, or rather to 628 the want of landed tenures in the greater portion of India. There were portions of India under what was termed the permanent settlement. That was a subject of extreme magnitude, and one which he would, if no other Member did, bring under the notice of the House before the present Session closed. There were immense districts not permanently settled. The landed revenue was assessed either on communities, in something of the nature of corporations, or of individuals under the denomination of ryots. It was not denied that the natives had rights to the soil. It was said, the India Company had no right to the soil; but they claimed the right of assessing what they termed land revenue, which in reality was rent. He did not think the right of any man to land could be valuable when another man had the right and the power to impose whatever rent he pleased, followed by the sale of the interest of the individual, if the rent were not sufficient, and accompanied by all the evils which must necessarily attend so unsettled a state of things. The general rule in India was, that no man was proprietor of the land. In many districts in which men laid out their capital this thing only was certain, that decreased produce brought with it increased rent; and, he believed, it would be found that this system was universally followed by the increase of the jungle. As cultivation decreased the jungle increased, and was inhabited by wild beasts of every description, which almost forbade the residence of men in its vicinity. He believed the people of England were not apprised of the horrible consequences of this total insecurity and absence of all title for the land. He happened to have in his hand a list of the periodical famines in India, calculated from the year 1760 and 1761, the period in which Lord Clive might be said to have established our empire in that country. In the year 1766 there was a famine, another in the year 1777, another in 1780, another in 1782, another in 1792, and another in 1803—thus giving a famine in each cycle of tea years. But let the House mark how they had increased of late years. In the year 1804, there was a famine, in 1819, there was a famine, in 1824 there was a famine, in 1829 there was a famine, in 1832 there was a famine, in 1833 there was a famine, in 1836 there was a famine, and lastly, in 1837 there was a famine, which extended to 1838, existed in 1839, and which it was 629 doubtful whether it was even now terminated. These increasing periodical famines were also increasing more horribly in extent. During that of 1837 and 1838, it was necessary to employ men to shove the dead bodies into the rapid part of the stream of the Ganges. Nothing could exceed the horror of the scene. The air was polluted—the land covered with carcases—the average destruction was 10,000 per month. He attributed many of those famines to the state of the landed tenure there. He was sure that the East-India Company were not acting wisely or prudently, even in reference to their own revenues. They would obtain infinitely more if they adopted a more liberal policy. He did not mean to say, that the famines to which he had referred were general, and universal over the whole face of our possessions in India. He admitted, that they were most of them local; but in many instances they extended over vast districts, and, as he had stated, were attended with the most horrible consequences. Within the last thirty years, there had been seventeen or eighteen years of famine, during which English sentinels or sepoys were placed along the banks of the rivers to prevent mothers from drowning their infants. A more terrible proof of the extent of the famine could not be offered. He had thought it necessary not to allow the question now before the House to pass over without saying so much on behalf of the people of India. But as regarded the measure itself, he gave it his most cordial support.

§ Mr. Hogg
observed, that if a discussion were opened upon the subject to which the hon. and learned Gentleman alluded, it would occupy more time than could be afforded on that occasion. With respect to the permanent tenure, it could not be doubted that the Marquess of Cornwallis established it from the best of motives. But it had not been productive of the good that was expected. Its effect was to constitute the Zemindars absolute proprietors, and to deprive the rest of the population of the rights which they had from time immemorial enjoyed. Though that settlement had some advantages, it was also attended with inconveniences, which induced the Indian government to be cautious in extending it to other parts of the country. He would also observe to the hon. and learned Gentleman that he should not hastily adopt every statement connected with India that might be 630 found either in the newspapers or in pamphlets. There had been, it was true, local famines in India, but every one acquainted with India must be aware that the assertions of the hon. and learned Gentleman were altogether exaggerated.

§ Mr. Hume
looked upon the matter as one of great importance both to England and to India; and would urge his hon. and learned Friend to select a day on which the subject should be brought before the House. He believed, that any one who paid attention to the affairs of India must have heard, with great regret, of the statements made at different meetings respecting the proceedings in that country, and which statements he believed to be in many instances altogether groundless. It was not true that so many famines had taken place in India as his hon. and learned Friend had mentioned. There might have been much distress in certain districts, but such cases could not be considered as general famines. With regard to the creation of the tenure in India, it was a subject of great difficulty, and one which the House might more conveniently discuss at another moment.

Mr. O'Connell
had been misunderstood by his hon. Friend. He (Mr. O'Connell) had expressly said, he did not believe that these famines had been universal. He had spoken of them as local evils, but still evils of vast magnitude.

§ Mr. Ewart
rose, on account of an observation which had fallen from the hon. and learned Gentleman, to the effect that the measure would be of greater benefit to England than to India. Now, from the evidence taken before the committee of last Session, it was manifest that the measure would be very beneficial to India, because, in the manufacture of rum and sugar, they must employ the natives of India. It was the most economical plan to do so. This would be also beneficial to England, because it would increase the market for British manufacture; he thought, therefore, that they must admit that the measure was a great boon to India as well as to England.

§ Mr. Goulburn
wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman, the President of the Board of Trade, whether, in this proposed equalization of the duties on East and West India rum, it was intended to reduce the duty on rum imported into Scotland and Ireland to the same amount as the duty paid on rum imported into England. The right hon. Gentleman must 631 be aware that, as regarded the two former countries, the high duty at present levied amounted to an actual prohibition.

§ Mr. Labouchere
replied, that the sole object contemplated by the present bill was to place the rum of the East Indies on precisely the same footing as that on which the rum of the West Indies had previously stood.

§ Mr. Goulburn
And leaving the same prohibition upon the importation of rum into Ireland and Scotland.

§ Mr. Labouchere
That question is not touched by the present bill.