« AnteriorContinuar »
lars, with all the enhancement of the monopoly, and that now given for the larger quantity about eight millions. If Englishmen were at liberty to settle at pleasure in the country, and to invest their capital, and apply their skill and industry to this important branch of cultivation, the author contends, upon grounds that do appear irresistible, that the quality of opium would be as signally improved, and its sale in the general market as widely extended, as in the analogous case of indigo already mentioned.
He applies the same reasoning to the two other great staples of Cotton and Sugar. The inferiority of both these articles in India, where, from the restrictions on the settlement and occupancy of the ground, they are still entirely in the hands of the poor, unscientific, and slovenly natives, to the same articles, when reared even in less propitious climates, under the benignant influence of European wealth, skill, and energy, he ascribes, with much apparent reason, to the effect of these restrictions ; and shows, by a variety of examples, that the produce has, even in these Eastern regions, been prodigiously improved and enlarged wherever those restraints have been relaxed. In the article of sugar, for example, he states, that though the quantity imported from the East has been considerably increased since 1814, still a much larger part of this increase has come from the small and comparatively barren island of Mauritius, where Englishmen are at liberty to settle, than from the whole vast regions of British India, in which they have no such liberty. Previous to this period, and down indeed to 1820, the cultivation of sugar at the Mauritius was exceedingly trifling. But it has since increased tenfold; and, from being of a very inferior quality, has now become superior to the best Bengal, by between five and six per cent-an event which seems pretty well explained by the fact, that, within the last eight years, no fewer than twenty sugar-mills, most of them with steam-engines attached to them, have been forwarded from England to that remote island, while not one single engine of the kind has been introduced into the protected territory of the East India Company, where the manufacture is still conducted in the most unskilful, wasteful, and imperfect manner. The case is the same, it is alleged, as to cotton. The very finest qualities might be raised, in unlimited abundance, ou the infinite variety of soils and exposures which our Eastern Empire affords : but the culture being left entirely in the hands of the ignorant and slovenly natives, and conducted without capital, science, or machinery, the consequence is, that it is miserably inferior to all that is raised elsewhere under European superintendence--being less valuable in the markets by fifty per cent, than that from the Spanish Main-by at least 100 per cent, than that from Pernambuco-and by a still greater amount than that from Manilla and the sea islands. As the culture of sugar and cotton is not absolutely monopolised, like that of opium in Bengal, and cinnamon in Ceylon, by the Company,
· Why, it may be asked, do not British-born subjects engage in the culture of cotton in the same manner in which they engage in the culture and manufacture of indigo ? The answer is easy. The quantity of British capital which is allowed, under existing regulations, to benefit the agriculture of India, is comparatively trifling; and it is more advantageously employed in producing indigo than in improving cotton. A few hundred acres of land are sufficient to invest a large capital in indigo, and a very small number of Europeans is sufficient for superintendence. Thousands of acres would not be sufficient for the same investment of cotton. From the small number of Europeans, there could be no adequate superintendence over so wide an extent of country; and there could be no security against depredation, in a commodity far more liable to it than the other. Moreover, to improve the cotton of India, the present annual and coarse varieties must be supplanted by perennial and finer ones—a circumstance which would occasion a complete revolution in this branch of husbandry, a revolution which could only be effected by European proprietors or their tenants : besides all this, the introduction of expensive machinery, both for cleaning and packing, would be necessary. What European in his senses, holding land at high rent from a native proprietor, from year to year, in a country where no civil suit is brought to trial under three years from its institution, and often not under seven, and where, by law, he may be removed from his property for ever, with or without offence, would enter upon so precarious a speculation ?'
And in answer to the same question as to sugar, he makes nearly the same reply.
• The culture of the indigo plant is simple, and the returns rapid; that of the sugar.cane complex and tedious. An indigo crop is reaped in three months from the time of sowing; a crop of sugar-cane takes four times as long to come to maturity. A crop of sugar-cane is liable to depredation in an open, unfenced, and unprotected country; one of indigo to hardly any at all. Indigo works, capable of producing yearly L.10,000 worth of the dye, may be constructed for about the sum of L.700; sugar works, capable of yielding a produce of equal value, would require an investment of capital to the amount of L.24,000. Who would invest such a capital in a country where he can neither buy nor sell land, nor receive security upon it; where the judge and the magistrate are hostile, because labouring under the usual prejudice and delusion of their caste; and where the administration of justice is in such a state, that an appeal to it is nearly hopeless'
It is chiefly for these objects—the extension of the trade, and the investment of the capital of English subjects, in the first instance and for the gradual improvement of the industry, know
ledge, and moral and social energies of the natives, in the secondthat the author before us urges so warmly the propriety of allowing the free settlement of our countrymen in the Asiatic part of our empire. Though the word Colonisation stands on his title-page, it is but fair to say, that it is not for colonisation, in its usual or popular sense, that he is here contending. He knows very well that, in a country already full of people, colonisation in that sense is impossible. He does not mean that the present population of India shall be supplanted by English emigration, or even that the blanks in it shall be filled up by such a proceeding. The distance and expense of such a transportation would be enough to render such a project chimerical ; even if we bad people enough willing to realise it, and if it were not true, as Adam Smith long ago remarked, that, of all kinds of luggage that could be suggested, human beings were the most immovable. That this is not his meaning, however, will best appear from his own words.
- The colonisation of India, as may be seen from this statement, is impracticable; but, although there may be no room for colonisation, there is ample room for settlement, in a country of fertile soil, far more thinly peopled, after all, than any part of Europe, and a country without capital, knowledge, morals, or enterprise. Mere labourers of course there is, generally speaking, no room for ; but there is ample room for skilful mechanics, for agricultural, for commercial, and even for manufacturing capitalists. The free settlement of all these classes, under equal and suitable laws, will prove the only means of civilizing and humani. zing the inhabitants of India. Our countrymen, living amongst them, will instruct them in arts, in science, and in morals; the wealth and resources of the country will be improved; the Hindus will rise in the scale of civilization, for they have sufficiently evinced that they possess both the capacity and inclination to do so. We leave it to the abettors of restriction to point out what evils are to spring from such changes !'
The following brief summary of the usual objections to the free settlement of Europeans, will show how well the author is acquainted with the whole battle of his opponents, and how fairly and fearlessly he has surveyed it. These reasons, he says,
'1. The Hindus are a peculiar and timid race; and if Europeans were permitted to hold lands, they would soon dispossess the native inhabitants.
62. If Europeans were permitted to settle, their offences against native usages and institutions would disgust the inhabitants of the country, who would rebel, and expel us from India.
3. If Europeans were to settle in India they would soon colonise the country, and Great Britain would lose her Indian possessions, in the exact same manner in which she lost her American colonies.
64. If we civilize the Hindus, or, in other words, if we govern them
is to be something of y remarks, valuable porives in
well, they will become enlightened, rebel against us, expel us from the country, and establish a Native Government.'
In answer to the first objection, he refers to the fact, tha after seven centuries of a far less temperate or indulgent domination, the Mahomedan rulers of India left the natives in possession of by far the largest and most valuable portion of the land. This, the author justly remarks, is rather a strong case ; and asks, with something of an allowable air of triumph, whether it is to be imagined that one of the most civilized and hụmane of European nations—the native land of the apprehensive philanthropists he is answering-should act a worse or a weaker part, in this civilized age, than the semi-barbarians of Persia and Tartary, in a period of darkness and ferocity? But he has facts bearing still more directly upon the question, to which we do not immediately see an answer. Englishmen are entitled to hold lands in the towns of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay, and in Prince of Wales's Island, in Singapore, and Malacca; and as these are the only spots in all our vast domains where their capital can now be invested in the soil, it is natural to think, that if their eagerness to make such investments, and to dispossess the natives, were at all as it has been represented, the effects of its concentrated operation could not fail to be very conspicuous in these particular situations. What, however, is at this moment the state of the fact? The Indians, our author assures us, are the holders of all the buildings occupied by natives in Calcutta -of all the markets—and of the great majority of houses occupied by Europeans. This is the case still more remarkably at Madras : at Bombay, the greater portion of the island belongs to the Persees-and at the other settlements, the Chinese and Malabars share at least equally with Europeans in the property of the soil.
The second objection is that, we think, to which most weight has been attached, both by ancient residents in India, and by men of candour at home ; and we are not quite sure, that our author has entirely dispelled our own apprehensions on the subject of it. But he has fought a stout battle with them; and it would be mere affectation to say, that he has not made an impression. It is but fair, therefore, that our readers should have a glimpse of his argument. The objection is, that if illiterate, uncontrolled individuals were to be allowed to settle among a people so sensitive and excitable as to their religious prejudices as the Hindus, they would give such offence and disgust as to lead, in all probability, to a general rebellion, which, with their vast numerical superiority, could only end in the total subversion of our rule. To this the author answers, that even admit
ting the likelihood of some multiplication of such offences by detached individuals, nothing can be so chimerical as the apprehension of their leading to such consequences. The Hindus, be assures us, are not a ferocious or resentful, but, generally speaking, a timid and submissive race; and, where they saw no reason to suppose that the Government abetted the authors of such outrages, would appeal to that Government for redress, and be satisfied with the punishment which would be inflicted. But his great argument is, that no such outrages are likely to be committed by the settlers he would encourage.
Who, it may be asked, are most likely to offend the prejudices of the natives of India ? The flights of raw aspirants for place and power pour. ed annually by the East India Company into India ; persons invested with the name or authority of Government ; or merchants and traders, who have no connexion whatever with it, and whose success, safety, and comfort, depend upon prudence, forbearance, and conciliation ? We pronounce, from long experience, that for one trader that violates the prejudices or usages of the natives, there will be found twenty civil and military employés who will do so; but by whatever party such offences are given, they are but trivial, and of very little moment. As the number of settlers and colonists increase, the number of such offences must diminish, because information on both sides will have improved. After the first few months even in the most desperate cases, after the first few years—no European offends native prejudices, nor do the natives offend his: a very limited period indeed is sufficient to reconcile them to each other. If this be the case with the original settlers, where is to be the danger from their posterity, born and bred in the country?
'Those portions of our dominions in India in which the greatest num. ber of European settlers exist, are invariably found to be the most orderly, tranquil, wealthy, and prosperous. Those in which they are carefully excluded are not only the poorest, but the most subject to insurrection. The acts of the Government and their Servants have occasioned a good many tumults, a good many insurrections, and a good many military mutinies ; but the advocates of restriction have never ventured to assert that a merchant or trader has been implicated in any act of public disorder. The mutiny and massacre at Vellore were produced by the impertinent and ill-judged interference of the public officers of government, with the dress and pay of the troops. The tumult at Benares was produced by an attempt to impose an unpopular tax. The more serious insurrection in Rohilcund was produced by the same cause. The mutiny of the native troops at Barackpore, and the massacre which followed it, were notoriously occasioned by the Government or its officers refusing to listen to some palpable, and afterwards acknowledged and redressed, grievances. No private individual, black or white, had any share in the transaction. The general rising of the province of Cuttack, which took the Calcutta authorities by surprise, was produced by the misconduct of a public officer. There was not a merchant or trader in this extensive, but poor province, at whose door the blame might be laid. One