History 145: Early Developments (1600-1836) PDF

History 145 Early Developments(1600- 1836) Dr. RESHMA UMAIR ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AMITY LAW SCHOOL https://coinweek.com/dealers-companies/the-east-india-company/the- east-india-company-video  EMERGENCE OF EAST INDIA COMPANY  English people came to India in 1601 as a body of...

History 145 Early Developments(1600- 1836) Dr. RESHMA UMAIR ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AMITY LAW SCHOOL https://coinweek.com/dealers-companies/the-east-india-company/the- east-india-company-video  EMERGENCE OF EAST INDIA COMPANY  English people came to India in 1601 as a body of trading merchants  On 31st December, 1600 Queen Elizabeth I granted a Charter to the Company which incorporated the London East India Company to trade with the East Indies for a period of 15 years  Charter of 1600  The provision of the Charter of 1600 were only in connection with the trade and were not intended for acquisition of dominion in India  Legislative Authority  On 31st May, 1609, James I granted a fresh Charter to the Company which continued its privileges and the Company was also authorized to continue the enjoyment of power and rights which were granted to them by Queen Elizabeth under the Charter of 1600 https://www.ft.com/content/0f1ec9da-c9a6-11e9- af46-b09e8bfe60c0  TREATY BETWEEN THE ENGLISH AND MUGHAL EMPEROR  In 1618, Thomas Rey, Ambassador of James I succeeded in gaining the Emperor favour and the English Company entered into a Treaty with the Mughal Emperor  The Mughal Emperor granted the permission by issuing a farman which proved a turning point in the legal history of India  It provided:-  The disputes amongst the Company servants will be regulated by their own Tribunals  The English people will enjoy their own religion and laws in the administration of the Company  The local authorities will settle the disputed cases in which Englishmen and Indians were the parties  The Mughal Governor or Kazi of the place will protect the English people from all sorts of oppression and injury THE FACTORY OR SETTLEMENT AT SURAT  Surat was a famous international port in those days and Muslim in thousands sailed every year from Surat to Arabia for Hajj pilgrimage purposes the place from where ships sailed was called Makkai Darwaza.  In those days in India the law was personal and religious in a character and the english did not liked to be governed by that law and the local courts.  The criminal law was entirely Muslim this was the only reason that the English men tried to secure from the Mughal emperor the privilege of being governed in their factory by their own laws.  Wherever the Englishmen settled in India they administered justice to themselves according to the english law  Its importance was reduced because of the transfer of establishment from Surat to Bombay in 1687. https://www.dtnext.in/News/City/2017/11/19015525/1052616/The-White-and-Black- Town-of-Madras.vpf  MADRAS SETTLEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE  On 22nd July 1639 an English man, Francis Day acquired a piece of land from a Hindu Raja of Chandragiri for the East India Company  It was known as Madraspatnam.  Francis Day built St George factory in 1640 and also for the residence of english people employed in the service of the company.  This fort was later on known as “White House”, while the village nearby inherited by native Indians was known as “Black Town”.  Thus, Francis Day founded the whole city of Madras. PHASES OF EAST INDIA COMPANY  1st Phase (1639-1678)  The Agent and the Council were authorized to decide both civil and criminal cases of English people residing at St. George  Case 1: In 1641, a native Indian women was murdered by another native man. A Trial was held and the Indian was found guilty. The English authorities reported the matter to local Naik who ruled that Justice must be done according to English laws. The offender was found guilty and duly hanged.  Case 2: In 1642, a British soldier was murdered by a Portuguese. The Agent and Council were hesitating to punish the European. The local Naik ordered that they must not hesitate in giving the punishment and the offender was shot dead  Case 3: In 1644, a English caused the death of an India, The Agent and the Council referred the matter to the local PHASES OF EAST INDIA COMPANY  1st Phase (1639-1678)  Choultry Court It was administering justice in the village area of MadrasPatnam This court was presided over by village headman called Adigar Due to some charges of bribery and corruption , he was arrested and placed behind bars The Europeans were appointed judges to preside over the Choultry Court  2nd Phase (1678-1683)  Streynsham Master was appointed as Governor of Madras in 1678  The whole judicial system was reorganized  PHASES OF EAST INDIA COMPANY  2nd Phase (1678-1683)  The next step was to reorganize the Old Choultry Court  The Indian Officer of the court was replaced by English Officer of the Company  The Court was empowered to try civil cases up to 50 Pagodas( was a gold coin where 1 Pagoda was equivalent to Rs 3) and petty criminal cases  The High Court was Judicature consisting of the Governor and Council were authorized to hear appeals from the Choultry Court  Governor replace the 3 languages- Portuguese, Tamil and Malayalam and declared English as the only court language  3rd Phase (1683-1726)  Admiralty Court PHASES OF EAST INDIA COMPANY  3rd Phase (1683-1726) The Court was empowered to hear all cases concerning maritime and mercantile transactions, piracy, injuries and wrongs etc. On July 1686, the Court of Admiralty was established at Madras and John Grey was appointed as its Judge In 1687, John Bigg who was a learned lawyer was appointed as Judge Advocate of the Court In 1692, John Dolben, an Englishman well versed in law was appointed Judge Advocate He was independent in his decision and refused to decide cases under any pressure or influence. He even gave judgement against the employee of the Company The Governor was not happy and he made Dolben victim of a bribe giver and dismissed him In 1694, the Company again offered him appointment but PHASES OF EAST INDIA COMPANY  Mayor’s Court The Company issued a Charter in December 1687 which authorized it to create a corporation of Madras and establish a Mayor’s Court The Mayor’s Court was part of the Corporation of Madras and was also empowered to carry out judicial functions In 1688, the Company created a Corporation of madras consisting of a Mayor 12 Aldermen and 60 Burgesses and the Company’s Charter nominated the person who would occupy this position in the Corporation Englishman would be elected every year as Mayor by the Aldermen and Aldermen were appointed for their lifetime or during their residence in Madras Out of 12 Aldermen 3 were required to be Englishmen compulsory The quorum fixed for sitting of the court was Mayor and 2  CHARTER OF 1661  Charles II granted a very important Charter in 1661  It played a historical rule in improving the existing judicial system of the Company’s Settlement at Madras  The Charter empowered the Company to appoint a Governor and Council in each of its settlement in India  Under this, the Company appointed Foxcroft as the 1st Governor of Madras  English law was applicable https://www.pinterest.com/pin/837599230680839360/  ESTABLISHMENT OF BOMBAY  The King of Portugal gave Bombay in Dowry to the King of England Charles II  He transferred Bombay to the Company in 1668 for a very nominal rent  Judicial Reform of 1670  The 1st important legislative work of the Company was done by Aungier in 1670  He reorganized the old Judicial setup of Bombay  The laws were classified into 6 sections:- 1) Related to the Freedom of Worship and Religious Beliefs 2) The Law dealt with the Impartial Administration of Justice 3) It provided for the establishment of a Court of Judicature to decide all criminal cases 4) Dealt with the registration of transactions concerning sale of land and houses 5) It contained miscellaneous provisions dealing with  ESTABLISHMENT OF BOMBAY Island of Bombay DIVISION 1 DIVISION 2  Bombay  Mahim  Mazagaon  Parel  Girgaon  Sion  Worli  COURT OF JUDICATURE  COURT OF (with 5 Judges) JUDICATURE  Custom (with 5 Judges) Officer  Custom presided Officer over it presided  Indians were appointed to assist the English Judge in the Court over it  The Court authorized to gear cases up to 200 xeraphines( A Portuguese coin 20 Zerafin equals Rs 150)  JUDICIAL PLAN OF 1672  A New Central Court known as the Court of Judicature was established  The Court was empowered to exercise its Jurisdiction over Civil, Criminal and cases  George Willcox was appointed as Judge of the Court  Justice of Peace was appointed to administer Criminal Justice and Bombay was divided into 4 divisions  Bombay  Mahim Justice  Sion of Peace  Mazagaon  They acted as Magistrate to arrest and accused and to examine the witnesses  The record was then placed before the Court of Judicature which met once a month to decide criminal cases with all the  COURT ESTABLISHMENT  Court of Conscience  The Court was created to decide petty civil cases under 20 Xeraphins  This court sat once a week  The decision of the Court was final an no further appeal was allowed  No Court fee was charged from poor persons  It was also knows a ‘Poor Man’s Court’  George Willcox, Judge of the Court of Judicature presided over this too  Court of Admiralty at Bombay  The Charter of 1683 provided for the establishment of Admiralty Court at Bombay  This Court was established in 1684  COURT ESTABLISHMENT  John Child, the Governor of Bombay was not in favour of the Judicial Independence and it started a conflict between Governor and Chief Justice  In 1685, the Governor got an opportunity and the power of St. John as a Chief Justice of the Court of Judicature were withdrawn  Vaux was appointed Judge to preside over this Court  The relationship between the Governor and the Judge became strained which resulted in the dismissal of St John in 1687 from the post of the Judge of the Court of Admiralty  This incident made the Company reluctant to appoint any https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Bengal_Presidency ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN CALCUTTA.  On 1690, the English East India Company constructed Fort William for its factory by the side of the river Hoogly in Bengal.  In1698 prince Azim-Us-Shan Subedar of Bengal and grandson of Aurangzeb granted zamindari rights for three villages-  Calcutta  Sutanati  Govindpur  The company appointed a collector to control the administration of all three viallages.  In 1699 the status of Calcutta was raised to the presidency and the governor and council was appointed. Justice in civil and criminal cases  Faujdary court presided by an English collector was established to decide criminal cases.  Capital punishment was not inflicted unless the sentence was confirmed by the governor or council of Calcutta.  Death sentence was executed by wipping to death and not by hanging to death.  The collector decided cases on the basis of the prevailing customs and usages of the country.  In the absence of native custom the case was decided according to natural justice and equity.  In important cases the appeals were allowed to the governor and council.  The collector was also responsible for collecting the revenue. Concentration of powers in collector  It was dealing with civil criminal and revenue matters  It was also authorized to decide civil and criminal cases concerning europeans in india.  All judical and executive powers were exercised by the collector and governor in council Charter of 1726  Establishment of corporation  The charter of 1726 provided for the establishment of corporation in each presidency term for eg. Bombay ,Calcutta and Madras  Each consisted of Mayor and nine aldermen  The mayor would be elected every year by 9 Alderman  Alderman was appointed either for lifetime or for the term of his residence in the presidency town  The governor in council was empowered to dismiss or remove any of the alderman on reasonable cause  Mayor’s Court  The Charter of 1726 constituted a Mayor’s Court for each of the presidency town  It consisted of Mayor and 9 aldermen  The Mayor and two senior alderman were required to form the The mayor and two senior alderman form the quorum of the court  The mayors court was declared to be the court of record and were authorised to hear and determine all civil actions  The court was also granted jurisdiction and power to issue letters of Adminsitration. PROCEDURE The sheriff and officer of the court was to serve the processes of the court The court issues summons directing the sheriff to bring defendant before the court In case he failed a warrant was issued by the court to arrest the defendant and presnt him before the court  RIGHT OF APPEAL  The charter for the first time allowed the provisions for the Ist and 2 nd appeal  The first was allowed to the Governor and council from the decision of the mayors court in each Presidency.  A period of 14 days was given to file an appeal.  The decision of the GIC was final in all cases involving a sum less than 1000 pagodas  In case of 1000 pagodas or above the further appeal was allowed to the king in council from the decision of the GIC JUSTICE OF PEACE  The charter provided that in each Presidency the Governor and five senior members of the council will have criminal jurisdiction and would act as a justice of peace  They were empowered to punish and persons for petty criminal cases  The charter of 1726 made the beginning of importing English idesa technical forms and procedures of criminal justice into India Conflict Case 1-Shimpy Case (Bombay)  Hindu woman of Shimpy caste changed her religion and became Roman Catholic  She had of a son of 12 years of age who left her and decided to stay with his Hindu relatives  The mother filed a case in the Mayor court against her hindu relative for unlawfully detaining some jewel and her son  The court ordered the relatives to hand over the boy to his mother  The head of the Shimpy caste complained the governor in council  The governor in council asked the Mayors’ court not to interfere in the religious matter of Indians and issued a warning Case 2-PAGODA OATH CASE  The Mayor’s court also came into conflict with a local inhabitants of madras  The court insisted that the hindu witnesses must take “Pagoda Oath” instead of Gita oath.  The Gita is a holy book of hindus  A gujrati merchant was fined by the court for refusing to take Pagoda Oath  When the matter came before the Governor In Council they remitted the fine In 1736 two hindus were imprisoned on their refusal to take Pagoda Oath  This incident excited the Hindus emotionally.  The governor intervened and released them on payroll under his order  This incident and the roll of the governor further added to the already tensed relations with the Mayor’s court. CALCUTTA  At Calcutta the Mayor’s court was established in 1728 under the charter of 1726.  In its actual working and dealing with the governor in council the condition was not much better at Calcutta compared to Bombay and Madras  Similar conflicts arose between the Mayor’s court and governor in council POLITICAL CHANGES IN MADRAS  On 14th September 1746 the French captured the city of Madras  It gave a death blow to the Mayor’s court at Madras  In 1749 the city of Madras was recaptured by the English from the French  The Mayor’s court was re established in Madras by the charter of 1753  The directors of the company removed the defects of the charter of 1726  CHARTER OF 1753  The new charted re-established the mayors court at Madras, Calcutta and Bombay  IConsequently the Mayor’s court lost its independence  Regarding “taking of oath”, the charter made it clear the main purpose was to oblige the witness to speak the truth before a court  It provided a particular oath for Christians for Hindus it was stated that he oath must be taken in a manner which is considered most binding on their conscience according to their castes  The charter also created a Court of Request at each  COURTS ESTABLISHED BY THE CHARTER  THE COURT OF REQUEST  It was established by the charter of 1753  It was established to hear civil suits up to five pagodas,one for each presidency town.  THE MAYOR’S COURT  The Charter of 1726 constituted a Mayor’s Court for each of the presidency town.  It was established hear civil suits for five or more than five pagodas, one for each presidency town  COURTS ESTABLISHED BY THE CHARTER  T THE KING-IN-COUNCIL(THE PRIVICY COUNCIL)  It was the highest order of appeal  It heard appeals from the court of the President and the Council in all civil cases involving a sum of 1000pagodas (Rs 3000) or more.  CRITICISM OF THE CHARTER  Executive upper hand  The charter of 1753 made the judicial machinery more or less subordinate to executive government and it failed to provide just administration of justice.  They were inexperience and ignorant of law  Judges ignorant of law  The governor in council were quite ignorant about the technicalities of English criminal law on which basis they have to decide cases in India  Indefinite jurisdiction   CRITICISM OF THE CHARTER  Expensive appeals  Provision was there for the king and council but it can be said that for a long period of time hardly any appeal was taken to England as it was highly expensive task to go to London for an appeal  Exclusion of Indians  The mayor’s court practically excluded Indians for having any share in the administration for justice in India  ABOLITION OF MAYOR’S COURT  CALCUTTA  The regulating act 1773 abolished the mayor’s court at Calcutta and in its place a supreme court was established in 1774  MADRAS  At Madras the mayor’s court continued to function till 1797.  Consequently the company decided to abolish the mayors court at madras and under the charter of 1798 the recorders court was established in its place.  BOMBAY  At Bombay the mayor’s court was abolished in 1798 and in the same year the recorders court was established in its place