Option 1 states that the Ilbert Bill (1883) proposed to grant limited criminal jurisdiction to native officials. This statement is correct. The Ilbert Bill aimed to empower Indian magistrates to preside over cases involving British subjects in certain circumstances. This was seen as a step towards the Indianization of the legal system.

Option 2 states that the Ilbert Bill proposed to grant complete civil and criminal jurisdiction to native officials. This statement is incorrect. The bill did not propose to grant complete jurisdiction but rather limited jurisdiction in criminal cases.

Option 3 states that the proposed Ilbert Bill generated opposition from England`s European subjects in India. This statement is correct. Many British officials and European settlers in India opposed the idea of Indian magistrates having jurisdiction over British subjects. They felt that this would undermine their status and privileges.

Option 4 states that despite the opposition, the Ilbert Bill was passed without any modifications. This statement is incorrect. The Ilbert Bill did face significant opposition and was modified before it was eventually passed. The final version of the bill had limitations on the jurisdiction of Indian magistrates.

In conclusion, options 1 and 3 are correct statements about the Ilbert Bill (1883). The correct answer is option 3.