Which one of the following provisions was NOT made in the Charter Act of 1833?

1. The question asks which provision was NOT made in the Charter Act of 1833. 2. Option (A) The trading activities of the East India Company were to be abolished. This was a key provision. The Act ended the Company's monopoly on trade with China and the tea trade, effectively abolishing its commercial functions and making it a purely administrative body. 3. Option (B) The designation of the supreme authority was to be changed as the Governor General of India in Council. This was a key provision. The Act designated the Governor-General of Bengal as the Governor General of India, centralizing administration. 4. Option (C) All law-making powers to be conferred on Governor General in Council. This was largely true. The Act centralized legislative power, depriving the Governors of Bombay and Madras of their legislative powers and vesting them in the Governor General in Council for the whole of British India. 5. Option (D) An Indian was to be appointed as a Law Member in the Governor-General's Council. This is incorrect. The Charter Act of 1833 added a fourth member to the Governor-General's Council, the Law Member (Lord Macaulay was the first), but there was no provision stipulating that an Indian should be appointed. In fact, Indians were not appointed to such high positions at that time. Section 87 of the Act stated that Indians shouldn't be barred from office based on religion, place of birth, descent, or colour, but this didn't mandate appointment to the Council. 6. Therefore, the provision NOT made in the Act was (D).