in 1726 and such other English Acts subsequent to that date as were expressly extended to particular parts of the country.
The work of administering such a diverse body of laws proved so embarrassing that it was the view of the supreme Court of Calcutta that
"no one person can pronounce an opinion or form a judgment … upon any disputed right of persons, respecting which doubt and confusion may not be raised by those who may choose to call it in question; for very few of the public or persons in office at home, not even the Law Officers, can be expected to have so comprehensive and clear a view of the Indian system of law, as to know readily and familiarly the bearings of each part of it on the rest."[1]
The other motive was to create a strong central government to deal effectively with the European settlers in the country. It is to be noted that if the native population suffered under the uncertainties of law, the British population lived under the most galling restrictions. The revelations of oppressions by Englishmen practised, in the early days of British rule, contained in the report of the Secret Committee of the House of Commons appointed in 1771 to inquire into the affairs of the East India Company, were followed by very stringent laws governing the entry and residence of private British subjects in India. No British subject of European birth was allowed to reside in India beyond 10 miles from any one of the principal settlements without having previously obtained a special license from the Company or the Governor-General of India or the Governor of the principal settlement in question.[2] The Court of Directors of the Company, subject to revision of the Board of Control,[3] were empowered to refuse such licenses[4] and the Governments in India were strictly enjoined not to sanction the residence of British subjects on their own authorities except under special circumstances[5]
