which the authority is assumed to be founded, has probably been diligently and attentively read by thousands of persons, and we do not think it likely that a single individual of the number ever put any other construction upon the words of the act which are now in dispute, than that put by the government, till the present question arose.

The 98th section of the act just quoted, gives authority to the local government of India to impose duties and taxes in the following terms:

And whereas it is expedient that the governments of the said Company established at Fort William, Fort Saint George, Bombay, and Prince of Wales Island respectively, should have authority to impose duties and taxes to be levied within the several towns of Calcutta and Madras, the town and island of Bombay and Prince of Wales Island, and also duties and taxes to be paid by persons subject to the jurisdictions of the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal, the Supreme Court of Judicature at Madras, the court of the Recorder of Bombay, and the Court of Judicature at Prince of Wales Island respectively; be it therefore enacted, that it shall and may be lawful to and for the Governor General in Council of Fort William in Bengal, and to and for the Governor in Council of Fort Saint George, and to and for the Governor in Council of Bombay, and to and for the Governor in Council of Prince of Wales Island, within the respective presidencies of Fort William, Fort Saint George, Bombay, and Prince of Wales Island, to impose all such duties of customs and other taxes, to be levied, raised, and paid within the said towns of Calcutta and Madras, the said town and island of Bombay and Prince of Wales Island, and upon and by all persons whomsoever, resident or being therein respectively, and in respect of all goods, wares, merchandizes, commodities and property whatsoever also being therein respectively; and also upon and by all persons whomsoever, whether British born or foreigners, resident or being in any country or place within the authority of the said governments respectively; and in respect of all goods, wares, merchandizes, commodities and property whatsoever, being in any such country or place, in as full, large and ample man. ner as such Governor General in Council, or Governors in Council respectively may now lawfully impose any duties or taxes to be levied, raised, or paid, upon or by any persons whomsoever, or in any place whatsoever, within the authority of the said governments respectively: provided always, that no imposition of any such duty or tax, or any increase of any such duty or tax, within the said towns of Calcutta or Madras, the said town and island of Bombay or Prince of Wales Island, shall be valid or effectual, until the same shall have been sanctioned by the said Court of Directors, with the approbation of the said Board of Commissioners, in manner herein-before prescribed respecting duties and taxes of export, import, and transit on goods, wares, or merchandize.

The 99th section gives to the local governments the power of making laws and regulations respecting such duties and taxes, and of imposing fines and forfeitures for non-payment thereof.

Now, it appears to us to be impossible that the power of taxing generally (subject to the control of the home government) could be conveyed to the Indian authorities in fuller and more explicit terms. They are authorized to impose duties of customs and "other taxes" generally, not merely on goods, wares, merchandizes and commodities, but upon property," a term of the most general and comprehensive import; and this power of taxing every description of property whatsoever is given "in as full, large, and ample manner as was then possessed in respect to " any duties or taxes to be levied, raised, or paid, upon or by any persons whomsoever, or in any place whatsoever, within the authority of the said governments respectively."

The attempt to refer this section to the 25th, and to construe them conjointly, is a very poor expedient to get rid of the general and comprehensive

terms

terms contained in the 98th section. The 25th section enacts that " no new or additional imposition of any duty or tax upon the export, import, or transit of any goods, wares, or merchandize whatsoever," shall be valid until sanctioned and approved by the Court of Directors and the Board of Control, Had these sections been correlative, in the sense contended for, they would have been expressed in the same terms, and would have referred directly or impliedly to each other.

Then the act of the 54th Geo. III. c. 105, passed to legalize certain duties imposed in India previous to the passing of the act of the 53d, or rather to remove all doubts as to their legality, is not expressed in the circumscribed language of the 25th section of the last recited act, but in the ample terms of the 98th section: all duties of customs and other taxes heretofore made or imposed upon all persons whomsoever resident in British India, and in respect to all goods, wares, merchandizes, commodities, and property whatsoever being therein, are confirmed, and to be deemed as valid and effectual as if made under the act of the 53d.

The limitations in the acts quoted, it will be observed, are imposed upon the local authorities in India, not upon the home government. The former are restrained from imposing taxes without the sanction of the Court of Directors and the Board of Control; but this very restriction seems to imply an acknowledgment of unlimited right in the latter to impose taxes in India. It is a manifest absurdity to contend that the Court of Directors and the Board of Control, constituting the supreme home government, if desirous that any duty whatsoever should be imposed in India, can effect their object only with the consent of their own servants and by the authority of their own delegates. According to this principle, the local governor of a presidency is, in this respect at least, possessed of greater power than the authority by which all his power is conferred,

But it is said that it could not have been the intention of Parliament to entrust the Indian government with the power of unlimited taxation :--why not? The Company are treated by Parliament as the territorial sovereigns of India (saving the King's paramount rights) and they are invested by law with sundry powers belonging to kingly prerogative, as well as with that of summary conviction and punishment; and in short, from the very nature of their character they must be the objects of large trust is it then extraordinary that they should be permitted to exercise the undoubted right which belongs to a government without a representative legislature, to tax their subjects, considering that this right is only granted for a limited period (the duration of their charter), and that it is incapable of exercise without the concurrence of his Majesty's executive government, and of course subject to the superintending control of Parliament? We think not; and it is a circumstance not calculated to disturb the tranquillity of our conviction, that lawyers, and those who are called upon to pay the tax, pretend to think differently.

The legal objection is, indeed, disposed of in so satisfactory a manner in the reply of the Vice-President in Council to the petition of the British and native inhabitants of Calcutta,* that we might have dispensed with any remarks upon this point. "The fair, natural and obvious interpretation of the words of the statute can only be, that any tax, which the necessities of the Indian government may compel it to levy on the inhabitants of the country generally

*See last vol. pp. 489, 663.

generally, may similarly be imposed by a regulation passed as directed, within the limits of the special jurisdiction of the King's courts;" and " if this tax were, indeed, illegal, the means of enforcing it would be wanting to the government."

The other question in the case, namely, the expediency of the measure, is not capable of being so satisfactorily demonstrated. Instead of taking ground upon so untenable a position as that of the illegality of the tax, the opposers of it would have acted more discreetly had they confined themselves exclusively to pointing out the impolicy and inexpediency of this imposition. The local government seems to have been sensible of weakness on this point, from the remark that " the Vice-President in Council was prepared to expect, from the intelligent and practical men whose names are subscribed to the petition, such a representation as might assist government in judging of the probable effect of the stamp regulation on the various interests affected by it; and he looked naturally for a statement of the particular transactions on which the duty would bear with undue severity." And again: "the VicePresident in Council did not anticipate from the petitioners an application for the abolition of the enactment on the ground of its illegality, though he was prepared for an expression of dissatisfaction on the part of those affected, and for the exposition of some partial inconvenience from the operation of particular provisions of the law."

To express our sentiments candidly and frankly, this measure appears to us most ill-advised and injudicious. The financial benefit which will result from the enforcement of the tax will be far from counterbalancing the moral inconveniences which the government will incur through the distrust, jealousy, and dissatisfaction thereby engendered in the minds of the Calcutta community. These consequences might have been so easily foreseen, that no excuse can be claimed by the originators of the scheme, on the ground that they were unexpected indeed the last passage quoted from the government reply shows the contrary.

There is something so odious in the very name of a stamp tax, it raises recollections so painful, that this consideration alone should have prepared government for the opposition which has been encountered. The clamour and discontent produced by the recent promulgation of a partial stamp tax at New South Wales induced the government of that colony to desist from enforcing it.

The government reply defends the tax on the principle that it is less objectionable than any others. Taxation," it is observed, " is at best a choice of evils; but if additional revenue is necessary, and that is a point that must be taken on the credit of government, a stamp duty on money-transactions seems among the least exceptionable of the taxes to which a government can have recourse." From this doctrine we wholly dissent. We have understood it to be a maxim in political economy which did not now admit of dispute, that every impost which directly diminished capital was highly objectionable and injurious. "On the mischievousness of all taxes which impede production," says the historian of British India,* “it is needless to enlarge. It is only necessary to make them known, or rather acknowledged. Of this sort are all taxes which take away any part of that property which has been already employed as capital; because there is always more or less of difficulty

Mill's India, vol. i., p. 251.

in

in replacing it from the fund destined for immediate consumption:" and he particularizes, as specially injurious, "taxes upon law proceedings," constituting " a premium upon the practice of every species of iniquity."

A stamp tax is recommended by the facility with which it is collected, at least in this country, whereby taxation really falls lighter upon the people, who pay the costs attending the collection of taxes. But this recommendation, or rather palliative, is not justly applicable to a stamp tax in India, which is collected in a different manner from that in England, by expensive establishments of persons who sign and issue paper, which in this country receives its conventional value by a mechanical process. Hence the charges for collecting the stamp duties in Bengal, upon an average of the two last years shewn in the official accounts,* viz. 1823-24 and 1824-25, amounted to upwards of 42 per cent. upon the gross produce; whereas the stamp revenue in England is collected at the cost of less than three per cent. upon the gross receipt!

So far from a stamp tax being less exceptionable than any other, to us it appears that no tax, not excluding a direct tax on property, could have been more so. The unpopularity of a stamp duty arises not so much from its directness (whereby the diminution of his property is made obvious to the taxpayer), as from the vexatious system which is necessary to secure its punctual payment. The opportunities and the temptations to evasion are so numerous, that it is absolutely requisite to give encouragement to informers, and in fact to offer a premium to treachery: a vicious expedient, which acts with peculiar energy upon the Hindu character.

The experiment made in the imposition of this tax is extremely unfortunate, because the resistance to it has placed both parties in a very awkward dilemma. If this tax is persevered in, the inhabitants of India will consider themselves completely surrendered to the mercy of their government, and liable to an extent of taxation limited only by the wants and the moderation of their rulers; on the other hand, if it be abandoned, whatever salvo may accompany the relinquishment of this tax, it will be considered as a virtual acknowledgment that the Indian government does not possess the right of taxation for which it now contends, and any future attempt to exert it will excite a fiercer flame of resentment.

It would be invidious to speculate upon the source from whence the suggestion of a stamp duty in Calcutta originated. Both branches of the home government are answerable for the measure, whether it be good or bad. One could hardly suspect that the East-India Company, on the eve of the expiration of their charter, would spontaneously suggest a measure calculated to spread an unfavourable opinion of their moderation through the country, and call forth charges of rapacity and oppression from those who have sufficient inclination to raise an outcry against their conduct, and wait only a plausible pretext for so doing. It is conceivable that his Majesty's government may be desirous of expediting the improvement of the East-India finances; and, being convinced of the legality of this measure, and of the justice of taxing those opulent classes of the Indian community," who have hitherto contributed little or nothing to the support of the government," by which they are equally protected with the inhabitants of the interior, may have urged the Court of Directors to its adoption. The Board of Control can incur little unpopularity

* See vol. xxiv., pp. 58, 59.

unpopularity from such a measure; they sanction it, indeed, but the odium must, and ought to be, borne by those who adopt it and carry it into execution.

The argument contained in the petition to the British Parliament from the inhabitants of Calcutta against the alleged equity of equalizing this duty throughout India, though it is not strictly maintainable before the tribunal to which it is addressed, ought to be considered by the government. They say justly, that although they may not contribute directly, they indirectly pay the taxes imposed in the interior; and that the British principle of equal taxation is unfairly applied to a country where a system of government prevails so wholly different from that of Great Britain. The British residents of Calcutta are scarcely to be considered otherwise than as transient visitors, not naturalized to the soil; the several capitals of British India are therefore regarded as distinct from the Mofussil, and their inhabitants as not liable to the same claims as the natives on the part of the government. Whilst we state these considerations we do not pretend to be convinced of their justness; yet they ought not to have been disregarded.

The interruption of the harmony which has hitherto subsisted between the local government of Calcutta and the British and native community of that city, is a mischievous effect of this measure which will probably be some time before it disappears.

EUROPEAN ORTHOGRAPHY OF ORIENTAL TONGUES.

To the Editor of the Asiatic Journal.

SIR: Being desirous to submit the following system of orthography to orientalists generally, I request the favour of your giving it a place in your

pages.

From being engaged in establishing an institution for the cultivation of oriental languages, particularly those of India, I have had many opportunities of observing the great advantage, if not necessity, of applying to them a consistent and uniform system of European orthography. 1st. In order to facilitate the entrance upon the study of those tongues, from which many are deterred by the supposed difficulty of acquiring a strange character, an obstacle which strikes their attention at the very outset, and though a difficulty more apparent than real, is not on that account the less calculated to discourage a beginner. 2dly. That the learned may have a general key equally available to all for the explanation of oriental writings, and that all writers on oriental subjects, particularly travellers, may thus be enabled to record the names of persons and places with perfect correctness and precision. 3dly. That oriental works, or extracts from them, may, whenever required, be printed with greater facility and exactness than is often practicable in the original character: this being little adapted for typography, and still less understood by the practitioners of this valuable art in Europe. Hence accuracy is hardly attainable, notwithstanding great labour and expense incurred by the author. My chief object, however, is not to supplant the use of the oriental character, but rather to extend and facilitate its acquisition, by introducing an exact counterpart of it, as a key for its attainment, founded on the basis of the European alphabets already known to the student. The principles on which the proposed system is constructed are as follows:

Principles.