§ SIR W. WEDDERBURN (Banffshire)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that dissatisfaction exists among the Bengal community at the apparent favour shown to European Public Bodies in Calcutta in the Rules for representation upon the Bengal Legislative Council, both the European Chamber of Commerce and the European Trades Association having 1561 been authorised to elect representatives, a privilege denied to the National Chamber of Commerce (a larger body than the European Chamber), consisting of Indian merchants, the British Indian Association, which includes all the foremost landholders of the Province, and the Indian Association, which represents the ryots and middle classes; and whether, after looking into the matter, he will arrange for the removal of this ground of complaint; and whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that (as shown at page 6 of the Return of April 26 last, relating to the Legislative Councils in India) one of the two appointments of Europeans, Nos. 9 and 11, recommended by the Calcutta Trades Association and the Bengal Chamber of Commerce, appears to be in contravention of Rule II., Clause D, and final Proviso of the Regulations printed at page 19 of the same Return?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Mr. H. H. FOWLER,) Wolverhampton, E.I am not aware that dissatisfaction exists among the Bengal community at the apparent favour shown to European Public Bodies in Calcutta in the Rules for representation upon the Bengal Legislative Council. Under the existing Rules the Bengal Chamber of Commerce, which is not an exclusively European Association, is the only Commercial Body entitled to recommend a member of the Bengal Legislative Council. The Trades Association was informally consulted by the Lieutenant Governor as to one of the appointments which he recently had to make; but he was in no way bound to consult them or to act on their advice. Eight of the ten non-official members are native gentlemen, and I see no reason for intervening in this matter, which, under the Act, is left to the discretion of the Lieutenant Governor. The hon. Member will see from what I have stated that there is no contravention of Rule II. (D) and the final Proviso of the Regulations printed at page 19 of the same Return. Mr. Womask was appointed by the Lieutenant Governor under Rule III.