§ SIR W. WEDDERBURN (Banffshire)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India will he explain why, although Mr. N. Subramaniem, Barrister-at-Law and Judge of the Small Cause Court at Madras, has acted as Chief Judge of that Court for the last 13 months, and during that period has given complete satisfaction to the Government and to the public, on the permanent appointment becoming vacant, he has now been superseded by the nomination of Mr. R. B. Michell, from outside the Court, to be the Chief Judge; whether the Law requires that the Chief Judge should be a European; and, if not, whether the Secretary of State will state the grounds on which Mr. Subramaniem has been superseded; and whether the Secretary of State will lay upon the Table of the House the opinions of the Judges of the Madras High Court and the Correspondence between the Madras Government and the Government of India regarding this appointment?
§ MR. H. H. FOWLERThe temporary discharge of the duties of a judicial post, even though they may be performed in a perfectly satisfactory manner, does not either in Great Britain 550 or India give any claim to succeed to the post on the occurrence of a vacancy. The appointment to which my hon. Friend refers rests exclusively with the Government of Madras, and I am informed that after the most careful inquiry they were of opinion that Mr. Michell was the fittest person available for the post. I do not propose to lay on the Table any Papers on the subject.
§ SIR W. WEDDERBURNI should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is the case that the only objection to Mr. Subramaniem was that he was not a European?
§ MR. H. H. FOWLERThat is not so. It was not a question of objection but of selection. I have seen sufficient of the correspondence to show me that the Madras Government took great pains in the matter, and the decision they arrived at is a decision which entirely meets the justice of the case.