Universitätsbibliothek HeidelbergUniversitätsbibliothek Heidelberg
Metadaten

Minutes of evidence taken before the Royal Commission upon Decentralization in Bengal of witnesses serving directly under the Government of India, volume 10 — [London?]: [House of Commons?], 1908

DOI Page / Citation link: 
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.68026#0018
Overview
Facsimile
0.5
1 cm
facsimile
Scroll
OCR fulltext
12

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE :

Colonel
J. r. if.
Leslie.
4 Jan., 1908.

Mr. S.
EarUley-
Wilmot.
1 Feb., 1908.

42720. Have any orders been issued on it ?—The
Home Department and the Finance Department con-
sidered it went too far in the direction of centralization.
42721. There was a letter recently issued by the
Home Department on the question of sanitation. Was
that the outcome of this scheme ?—-Yes.
42722. Has not this question of the recruitment of
Sanitary Commissioners and Deputy Sanitary Com-
missioners been dropped ?—No, it has not been
dropped; the Government of India said that the
Local Government must appoint a man with not less
than seven years’ service, who was qualified for the
department generally.
42723. That is a very different thing from taking
the patronage away from the Local Government ?—It
comes to exactly the same thing.
42724. Anyhow, the Government of India now
simply say to the Local Governments, “We consider
that the man you appoint must not have less than
seven years’ service ” ?—Yes, and, particularly, quali-
fied ; they say, if you cannot get that, come to the
Government of India ; that is all they want.
42725. You say that as long as you have your say,
or the Government of India through you, in the
selection of Deputy Sanitary Commissioners of the
province, you would not care whether the Local
Government appointed the Sanitary Commissioner or
not ?—I should like to have the Government of India
appoint both, but, if I had to give up one, I prefer to
bring in the man at the bottom.
42726. In that case the Government of India and
you would simply be concerned with the initial recruit-
ment of the department ?—Yes.

42727. And all the subsequent control of the
personnel of the department would rest with the Local
Government ?—So far as possible.
42728. As to the question whether the Sanitary
Commissioner should, or should not, be subordinate to
the Surgeon General or the Inspector General of Civil
Hospitals, is there any necessity for uniformity in a
matter of that sort ?—No.
42729. It might perfectly well be done in one
province and not in another, as the Local Government
thought best ?—I do not think you would get it
efficiently done ; of course it is a matter for the
Local Government to make up their minds about ; it
is their affair.
42730. You would give the Local Governments their
own way?—Not if I could help it, in this matter.
42731. You spoke about the Sanitary Commissioner
being able to deal with recalcitrant municipalities ;
you do not mean that the Sanitary Commissioner
should have power then and there to order a munici-
pality to take specific action ?—No.
42732. You say that it is very unsatisfactory that
the Sanitary Commissioner should be able to do
nothing but complain ?—It is not that ; what I said
was that it was very unsatisfactory that the Sanitary
Commissioner had no ear given to his complaints.
42733. He is a voice crying in the wilderness ; you
want him to remain a voice, but to be listened to ?—■
That is it.
(The witness withdrew.)
Adjourned.

THIRTY-SEVENTH DAY.

Calcutta, Saturday, IsZ February, 1908.

PRESENT :
C. E. II. Hobhouse, Esq., M.P., Under-Secretary of State for India, Chairman.
Sir Frederic Lely, K.O.I.E., C.S.I. W. S. Meyer, Esq., C.I.E., I.C.S.
Sir Steyning Edgerley, K.C.V.O., C.I.E., I.C.S. W. L. Hichens, Esq.
R. C. Dutt, Esq., C.I.E.
Mr. S. Eardley-Wilmot was called and examined.

42734. (Chairman.) You are Inspector-General of
Forests to the Government of India ?—I am.
At the present time about 22 per cent, of the area
of British India is under the professional management
of forest officers although continuing absolutely under
the control of the Local Governments concerned.
Of my 34 years’ service, 16 were passed in executive,
13 in administrative work, and the remaining five as
adviser to the Government of India. During the first
period there was much to contend against. The
Government of India, although expressions of their
forest policy may have issued in various circulars and
letters, had not published any special definition of it,
and there were many obstacles to progress which, as
the aims and results of forestry have become better
understood, have been, and are still being, removed.
But the one original rule still exists in its entirety, and
must continue to be upheld, namely, that the district
forest officer is the assistant of the Collector as regards
local forest matters, and that he can issue no orders
which in any way affect the welfare of the population
without the Collector’s agreement. This embodies an
unalterable policy, and I need therefore, perhaps, say
no more of the work of the district forest officer save
that the system which has gradually been built up in
detail has been found to work so satisfactorily that,
from time to time, and particularly during the past
year, proposals to enhance the financial and adminis-
trative powers of these officers very considerably have
been readily accepted.

The administrative officers of the department are
and always have been, responsible for the silviculture
and finance of their circles. But here, again, the Com-
missioner and the Local Government stand between
the Conservators and the people, and every detail of
work affecting them must be endorsed by the approval
of the Commissioner, and, in important cases, by that
of the Board of Revenue, before passing into practice.
Many proofs may be adduced in justification of this
system, which has stood the test of years. That
Government is satisfied is shown by the enhanced
financial and administrative powers lately granted to
Conservators ; that the Revenue Officers are contented
is proved by the absence of friction, and the frequency
of collaboration, between officers of the two depart-
ments ; that the people, as a whole, are satisfied is
proved in practice by the phenomenal success which
has been attained in forest operations, a success which
would be impossible save for the co-operation of the
population who are now interested in the protection
and exploitation of the State reserves as affording
them a lucrative employment near their homes, while
they share to a very large extent in that portion of the
forest yield which is utilized in their daily lives.
Individual cases of discontent must continue to occur;
but when they do, they are now held to prove that
there is something wrong either in the application
of the forest rules or in the spirit in which they are
received, and .enquiry is at once set on foot with
a view to the removal of the friction. There is in
 
Annotationen