Sir Fitzjames Stephen writes to the Times, protesting against the
new attempt in India to subject Europeans to the direct jurisdiction of native magistrates. He says the Code of Pro- cedure, which guarantees the European privilege, after working satisfactorily for ten years, was re-enacted in 1882, and should not be modified so soon; that the privilege was specially dis- cussed and resanctioned by a Committee; and that no cause has since arisen for a new departure. He further objects to the principle of the change, arguing with truth that personal privilege is the basis of all Indian law—for example, if native ladies could be summoned into court as witnesses, all India would be in insurrection—and that absolute equality between Native and European is a dream. If a foundation exists for it, the European Government, whose only moral claim is its inherent superiority of morale, ought to depart. We doubt if any of these arguments are so strong as the one we advanced, that it is essential to keep up European confidence in the law; but they are pleaded by a strong Judge, intimately acquainted with the working of the Indian code. The Europeans in India, we perceive, are holding unanimous meetings against the Act, and threatening to dissolve all Volunteer Corps ; but, as Lord Hartington has refused to ask for the previous sanction of Par- liament, they have no lever.
Previous page
