The Press.
London, England, 1853-07-30 00:00:00

JULY 30, 1853.

provision of certain powers, to take the shape of re•
monstrance or protest, and to be lodged in the mem-
bers of the secr.•t committee, as regarded the orders
of the PreSident of the Board of Control. His object
was to restrain the practice of waging war in India,
and lie contended that, without some precautionary
cheeks, the President would possess powers, under
the new system, more practically despotic even than

those he held before.
Mr. HruE approved of this amendment, antici-
pating that it would restrain the increase of debt, as
well as the undertaking of war. He enlarged upon the
injustice and anomaly of holding the Leadenhall-
street directors responsible for acts regarding which
they were not asked even for their opinions.
Sir J. W. Hoot; contended that every order, let
what might be its source or authority on this side,
should be promulgated throughout India solely in
the name of the directors. Under the existing sys-
tem, the secret committee had the power of inter-
fering, should orders be issued which were not in
accordance with law. He advanced, however, various
reasons for not agreeing with the proposition now
made by Sir R. Willoughby. The Government was
responsible for the tranquillity of India, and he could
not consent that the secret committee should have the
power of remonstrance. Power and responsibility
must always rest in the same hands. As matters
stood, there was nothing to impede the President of
the Board of Control in availing himself of the ex-
perienee and information of the secret committee.
Mr. DISRAELI, referring to the assertion that the
home Government was responsible for the 'peace of
India, inquired whether the Court of Directors were
to retain the power of recalling the Governors-
General ?
Sir .1. W. Hoot; offered sonic explanations, and Sir
C. Wool) stated that the arrangements tinder which
the directors held the power to recal a Governor-
General would not be disturbed.
Mr. Misoi.Es coincided with the amendment, so
far as to think it advisable that the secret committee
should express some opinion respecting the orders
which they were compelled to sign and send out to
India. _ _ .

•T
The amendment, after some more debating, was
negatived by 72 votes to 30.
An amendment, moved by Mr. HUME, who wished
to extend the electoral privileges to all holders of
India Stock to the amount of 500!. or upwards, was
also negatived by a majority of 74 to 54.
Mr. RICH moved a clause providing for the more
certain employment of qualified natives.
Sir H. Mannoca adverted to the great inc; ease
which of late years had taken place in the employ-
ment of natives, and was for proceeding with caution,
lest the service should become deteriorated.
Mr. Batton' described the natives as becoming
discontented with the present difficulties in the way
of their employment, and with the inadequacy of
their remuneration when employed.
Sir C. Woon condemned these statements of Mr.
Bright es being much exaggerated. He maintained
that the duly qualified native had, and would continue
to have, every opportunity for employment.
On a division the clause was negatived by 173
to 47.
At Tuesday's sitting of the committee,
Mr. J. l'ittwitotte moved the insertion of a clause,
the effect of which was the establishment of a tri-
bunal in India for the purpose of deciding upon and
taking cognisance of any disputes that might arise be-
tween the Government of British India and any na-
tive prince not a British subject, and to interpret dis-
puted treaties. He declared such a clause necessary
for the protection of the native princes against the
cold-blooded tyranny of the Company.
Mr. Lowe believed that such a tribunal, if created,
would prove, highly prejudicial, and even dangerous,
to the British rule in India. He contended, moreover,
that its establishment would be found impracticable.
In the following debate much was said respecting
past instances of oppression with which the Company
had been charged towards the Rajahs of Sattara and
Coorg, and the Ameers of Scinde.
The motion was finally negatived without a division.
Mr. BRIGHT moved a clause providing that the
business of the Board of Control and the Court of
Directors should be transacted in one anti the same
building. He dwelt upon the enormous expense at-
tending the home establishments, which the adoption
of his proposal would diminish, by facilitating the
reduction of the staffs, while, by affording the means
of carrying on the business of the two departments by
word of mouth, it would curtail the amount of " stu-
pid" einTespondence between them.
Sir C. Woon said if the establishment of the Board
of Control were altogether retrenched the saving
would not exceed 20,000/. ; but, as the principle of
the double government had been sanctioned by the
house, there must be two establishments. He denied
that any inconvenience or practical delay resulted
from their separation, and thought the matter would
be better left to the authorities themselves.
The clause was rejected, upon a division, by 74
against 61.