The Express.
London, England, 1853-07-09 00:00:00

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THE BOARD OF

CONTROL AND THE COURT OF DIRECTORS.
sir H. MADDOCK begged, before going into committee
on the India Bill, to ask the President of the Board of

Control, whether it is proposed, after the passing of the bill,

to retain the practice of P. C., or previous communication,
in the transaction of business and correspondence between

t►e Board of Control and the Court of Directors; also,

whether it is proposed to adopt any measures to improve

and render lets i7oluntiaous the system of correspondence

which is now carried on between the Court of Directors and

the authorities in India ?

Sir C. WOOD, in answer to the tint question, begged to
say that he did not propose to discontinue the practice of

P.

as it was found greatly to facilitate

the business of his department. With regard to the second

question, he would only say that ho should endeavour, as
much as he could, to reduce the correspondence between
this country and India. It must, however, be remembered,

that some Of the witnesses before the Indian committee bad

stated that the carrying on of that correspondence was ab-
solutely necessary to the good government of India.

RUSSIA AND TURKEY.—MR. LAYARD'S MOTION.
Lord PALkIERSTON—Seeing the hon. gentleman the
member for Aylesbury in his place, I rise to make an appeal
to him on the subject of a notice of motion which stands
in the orders for Monday next, and to requast him, on the
part of her Majesty's government, to consider whether it
would not, in all respects, altogether be more advisable for
him to follow the ex►mple set by those persons in the other

. .. .. ..
house of parliament who had a similar notice on the
books, and postpone, without naming any particular day,
his notice of motion. (Hear, hear.) It is obvious that the
discussion to which that motion must inevitably

---- .- _
lead, —must in the present state of affAirs, be
attended with inconvenience to the public service. Not

that her blaicaty's government or any member of her
Majesty's government would be led to swerve from his
duty by abandoning that prudent merry, which it is their
obligation to follow, but it might be expected and most
—• •

likely would happen that in the course of the discussion
things would be said by otherpenons which would neces-

wad y cause irritation and tend to thwart the aorta which

might be made to bring about a peaceful termination of the
present state of affairs. (Hear, hear.) It cannot, I appre-
hend, be necessary for any purpose which the hon. gentle-
.

man has in Mew. If I understand the objects of his
motion those objects must be three. Firstly, to obtain in-
formation, if information can be given ; next to
maitre the government of support, if in the event
unfortunately support should be required; and, thirdly, to
hold the government to their duty, if, in the opinion of the
hon. gentleman, they were like to swerve from it. With
regard to information, none could be given consistently
with the duty of the government, beyond that which is
already in the possession of the whole world. Nothing,
therefore, would be gained in that respect. With regard
to affording support to the government, I can assure the
hon. gentleman that her Msjesty's government need no
assurance, that if, unfortunately, events should lead
them to have to appeal to the house and the
country in a just cause, that support would be
cheerfully afforded. (Cheer.) We need no other
assurance than that we are sitting in a British
parliament. (Cheers.) With respect to the last topic, if
there is any idea that her Majesty's government refuse
any stimulus to the performance of their duty, I think it
is sufficient to observe that when two great countries like

(Hear, hear.) I will state in a few words why. lie all
know that it is very easy in this house or in this eo2ntrie
where people are ordinarily of a pugnacious diaposition•—
(hear, hear)—to get up a feeling, which appears to be Jur
tilled by a wish to protect the weak against the strong ;
a feeling which may be pressed, however patriotic, to that
eztent that (Hurts made by a government for the preserva-
tion of peace may be frustrated. If I thought
we had a government pressing the country to war, and
to a war which would be odious to this house and the
people, then 1 think we might be justified in entering upon 11
a discussion, that its power might be brought to bear upon
the government. But in the occasion before us—l speak
particularly of the I'rime Minister—l have the greatest
confidence in the course which the government will pursue.
I take it far granted that the first minister of the crown I
will maintain peace if it be possible, consistently with the
character and position of this country. 1 think, therefore,
that the discussion of a question like this in a popular
assembly would have the effect of damaging the objects
which he has so much at heart.

Sir G. GREY merely rose to express his total dissent
from the opinion of the right hon. member for Bucking-
hamshire (Mr. Disraeli). The right bon. gentleman had
said that the course taken by government argued that
within the last week something bad occurred to render the
position of affai.s less favourable than they were. Such
a statement from the right hon. gentleman was oilers-
lated to pthduce most unnecessary alarm. The inference
which he (Sir G. Grey) drew, end he had no particular in-
formation, was this, that within the last week matters had
progressed so favourably that the government were desirous
not to put them in may jeopardy, by running the risk of an
angry discussion.

Mr. lIUJdE said that perhaps the hon. gentleman (Mr.
Layard) would allow him to ask him to withdraw his mo-
Lion on the ground of his mane= in that house. Ile
recollected an appeal like that of the noble lord
(Lord Palmerston) having been refused by any hon.
member. He thought the hon. member for Aylesbury
would do well to leave it with her Majesty's ministers to
determine when the discussion could be brought on.
Lord D. STUART was somewhat surprised, considering
the antecedents of the noble lord the member for Tiverton,
that he should have asked the hon. member to postpone this
motion. Under all circumstances, however, he thought his

hon. friend could only accede to the wishes of the govern-
ment. (Hear, hear.)

Mr. LAYARD—After what has fallen from the noble
lord the member for Marylebone (Lord Dudley Stuart), I,
of course, feel less difficulty in acting; haling taken the
motion from the noble lord, I naturally felt some difficulty
in regard to his ♦iews upon the subject. After the merry
appeals made to me, I have no hesitation is saying that I
shall, with the permission of the house, withdraw the

motion. I hope, however, that circumstances will enable
me to bring the matter on again ; and I trust that tl'e go•
vernment and the house will permit me to do so as early as
possible. (Cheers.)

England and France are united in a common course of
policy, are aiming at a common object, are guided by a
common interest, and inspired by a perfect and unreserved
confidence in each other—(loud cheer.)—it cannot, I am
sure, enter into the mind of any man to suppose that any
temporary forbearacce which the two governments of two
such countries may show arises from a want of determine-
tion, or that the most conciliatory course which they'
can pursue is a symptom of timidity or weakness. (Loud
cheers.) I trust that, without any exhortation from the
hon. gentleman or from any other quarter, the interests
and honour of England and France are in safe keeping, and
that those interests end that honour are inseparably bound
up with the great and important interests of the world.
(Hear, hear,) I hope the hon. gentleman, yielding to the
appeal which I now make to him, will consent to panne
the same course as has been followed in the other homes
confident that when the moment arrives at which the go-
vernment think information can be given, it will be given,
•aecording to the circumstances of the case, to the fullest
extent which those circumstances and those interests may
render necessary. (Cheers.) I beg leave to move that the
house, at its rising, do adjourn to Monday next.
Mr. LAYARD—In rising to answer the question which
bas been put to me, I trust the house will permit me to
my a word with regard to what occurred yesterday on the
occasion of my deferring my motion ; as I do not appear
to have been rightly understood. I distinctly stated that I
had proposed that motion unconnected with any party
question, but as an independent member acting on my
conscientious convictions. An appeal was made to me
yesterday which I could not have resisted. It having been
stated that the noble lord the member for London could
not be present to-day, I did not hesitate to defer my motion
until Monday. A much more serious question has now
arisen, for I am requested to defer my motion without any
limit. I must remind the house that I did not myself
fix the day on which my motion was to be
brought on ; the noble lord the member for
London in my absence stated that he would give to-day for
bringing it on, and it was a member of the government who
thought fit to fix Monday, and I had nothing to do with fix-
ing it for this day or Monday. lam labouring under great
difficulty and under a heavy responsibility. My conviction
is that if a discussion took place, so far from producing
dangerous results, it would be of importance in bringing
this momentous question to • satisfactory result. Feel-
ing, as I do, that unless the government will take the
responsibility on their own shoulders of delaying my
motion, I should be guilty of a dereliction of public duty, I
I ask the noble lord to rise and say whether it would be at-
tended with danger to the public service ; and if so, I shall
not hesitate to postpone it.
Lord PALMERSTON—I think I have stated as plainly
as words can convey it, that it would be attended with in-
convenience and injury to the public service.
Mr. DISRAELI —No doubt where an independent
member of the house bad given notice of a motion upon
an important subject, a discussion upon which would be
attended with inconvenient results to the public service, a
Minister of the Crown, appealing to the sense of the house,
would be supported in asking that the discussion should be
postponed. But I must remind the house that this ie not
the case with the hose member for Aylesbury (Mr. Layard),
It is only a week since the First Minister of the Crown in
this house wished that this subject should be brought for
ward, and himself fixed a day for its discussion. Very
injurious effects upon public opinion may follow
from what has taken place to-night, unless they be
removed by her Majesty's ministers for if the noble lord
(J. Russell) was anxious that this subject should be Itirmigki
forward a week ago, and to bring it forward would now be
injurious to the public service, it would seem that in one
week circumstances have occurred which have changed the
'Maim of her Majesty's ministers upon this subject. I do
met my that such circumstances have really occurred. I
baps that they have not; bat the only inference to be
drawn from the fact which I have stated is, that matters in
Waren ce to this question era in a more critical position
lima they were a week since. ("No, no," from the minis-
terial benches) I brat a murmur of " No." It is lot
by murmuring " Nu, no" that this impression can
be removed ; the house and the country ought to be better
informed on the subject. (Hear, hear.) We ought to
know what circumstances have occurred of such gravity
that her Majisty's government had altered the resolu-
tion which they expressed such a short time since. If these
circumstances have not occurred, then I think the hon.
member (Mr. Layard) will incur a grievous responsibility
if be omits to do his duty to his constituents in bringing
forward the important subject which the noble lord invited
him to do.
Mr. BRIGHT—With regard to this question no one can
find fault with the hon. member for Aylesbury (Mr. Lay-
aril) if he consents to the proposition of the noble lord (Lord
Palmerston), for every member of this how.e is at liberty to
bring forward a motion upon the earliest day he can find
for the question, and a day was soon found if one was de-
termined upon the matter. I, however, am one of those
who think the hon. member (Mr. Layard) will exercise •
wise discretion if he does not bring this matter forward

THE EXPRESS, SATURDAY EVENING, JULY 9, 1853.

After a few words from Sir C. Wool), on a point of
order,
Mr. PHINN said he was willing to take any cane which
would disembarnu the discussion.

After aconversationtietaaneniMent was withdrawn.
Lord JOCELYN then moved an amendment, of wh;,rh
he had given notice, to continue the act till the 30th April,
INC
Mr. H. MILNES opposed the amendment. He trusted
that Indian questions would not frequently come before the
house. (Hear, hear.) It, however, there were grounds of
complaint against the Indian government, he had no doubt
the matter would be brought under the notice of parlia-
ment by individual members. He believed that the govern.
ment about to be established would be a good govern-
ment, as it had been a good government, and that the
affsin of that country would be well administered.
Mr. HUME thought it unnecessary to fix any period.
He would leave the matter entirely open, to be dealt with
by parliament at any time.
Mr. BLACKETT supported the amendment. He dis-
sented from Mr. Milnes as to its being undesirable that
Indian questions should frequently come before parliament.
The President of the Board of Control surely did not enter-
tain that idea, as he had promised to bring forward an
Indian budget regularly.
After a few words from Sir IL HADDOCK, in favour of
the amendment,
. . .

_
Mr. RICH said the bill wu a mere experiment, and they
ought to ensure the subject being again brought before par-
liament.

Par. V. SMITH said the inevitable result of the russend•
ment would be to bar all discussion until the end of the 10
years.
file. T. I3ARING remarked that if the bill was good
the system of government would be, as far as it well could
be, permanent ; if it was defective, the government would
be uncertain, and it was for that very ground that he felt
strongly in favour of the clause as it stood, and was opposed
to the amendment.
Mr. HANBY SEYMOUR quite agreed with the hon.
gentleman who last addressed the house, that it would be
most undesirable to insert any term of years in the
bill, because if any defects were found to ezi.t in the
government, it would be open to immediate removal, and
would be a great inducement for capitalists to invest in In-
dian property. (Hear, hear.)
Lord STANLEY said, for his own part, he was so little
satisfied with the bill as a whole, that he could not consent
to give up any opportunity for altering or amending it.
Now, if this amendment were adopted, it would be used as
an argument against any future motions for improving the
goverment of India, since whenever any motion of that
sort was brought on it would be met with an observation
something like this :—" Oh, what is the use of debating
the subject now when the whole question will have to be
considered at the end of five or six years," as the case
might be. For these reasons, he could not give his support
to the amendment.
Viscount JOCELYN declined to press the amendment,
and it was ultimately withdrawn.
Mr. I'HINN proposed to insert in the third line, after
the word " shall," the words "be governed by and in the
name of her Majesty, her heirs, and successors.'
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY thought it would be much bet-
ter to leave the clause as it stood. The natives were accuse
tomed to the present style and title in the government, and
any other perhaps would not be so acceptable to them.
The committee then divided, when there appeared,
For the amendment 3

Against it
The clause was then agreed to.
On clause 2,
It was agreed to fill up the date when the IS directors
should come into power thus, "second Wednesday in the
month of April, 1854 "
Viscount JOCELYN had given notice of an amendment
which was to increase the number of directors from 18 to
24, as he thought the former number would be wholly in-
sufficient to manage the functions of the board. As the
bill stood it wee proposed to have 12 directors elocted by
the proprietors, and six nominated by the Crown ; but if
his amendment was carried he should move that sixteen be
elected by the Court of Proprietors and eight nominated by
the Crown.
Mr. HUME said this appeared to him to be the most im-
portant
part of the bill. Ile, for one, thought the whole of
the directors ought tr remain elective, and entirely free
from political influence. They saw enough of the ill effects
of self-elections in the Scotch burghs, and he trusted this
attempt to introduce the system into the Court of Directors
would not be persevered in.
Sir C. WOOD said it was no doubt difficult to prove the
necessity of 18, or 24, or any precise number, but judging
from experience they came to the conclusion that 24 was a
large and inconvenient number.
Mr. T. BARING thought that it was not wise to dis-
turb an existing arrangement, unless it was found to bo
inconvenient, or unless some good was to be effected by the
change. He should therefore support the amendment of
the noble lord.
Mr. BRIGHT said his own experience with regard to
committees of that house had led him to the con-
clusion that eighteen was • much better number than
twenty-four ; and he thought that India would be better
governed by a council of seven members chosen judiciously
—able men, clearly responsible, and having the power of
recording their dissent from the Board of Control—than
twenty-four or eighteen men chosen in the incongruous and
inconsistent manner that the court had been hitherto.
Mr. C. BRUCE thought that considering the variety and
importance of the duties to be discharged the number of
directors should be increased rather than diminished.
Captain MANGLES said—ln considering the question
before the committee it should be borne in mind that
India was not one and indivisible, but • country
which presented as great varieties as those which ex-
isted between England and Germany ; and it was
absolutely essential that the Court of Directors should be
personally conversant with the habits, manners, and
character of the whole people of India. The hon. member
for Manchester had drawn an analogy between the Court of
Directors end a committee of that house ; but surely there
was no analogy between a tribunal which had to deal with
only one question, and one which had to deal with hun-
dreds of questions. At present the court was composed of
three committees, each consisting of seven or eight mem-
bers. Ender the government plan the committee would
consist Manly five or six members. The Court of Directors
had no vacation ; under their charter and bye-laws the
sat every week. Negroes must have holidays. (Laughter.)
The right hon. baronet had laid no grounds far the altera-
tion proposed, nor had shown that any inconvenience had
arisen from the present number of the court. He seemed
to found himself on a mere speculative notion that eighteen
was • better number than twenty-four.
Lord STANLEY approved of the redaction, 'and consi-
dered that the court would still be the largest executive
council in the world. As to the quantity of business, one
ef the reforms expected was a considerable diminution in
the amount of formal business and in the number of de-
speshes, which would be sent home for approval.
Mr. J. PHILLIMORE approved of the reduction, and
would vote for the clause as it stood.
Sir R. INGLIS had heard no sufficient reason for
altering the number of directors. He should therefore sup-
port the proposition of the noble lord for inserting 24
instead of 18.
Mr. RICH supported the clause.
Sir U. MADDOCK also was of opinion that 18 was quite
a sufficient number.
Mr. J. M'OItEOOR, amid general signs of impatience,
announced his intention of supporting the clause.
Mr. NEWDEGATE was surprised at hon. gentlemen
connected with the Colonial Association, who were so much
in favour of the principle of representation, seeking to break
down the only system of representation that India had.
Without any complaint of the number of the directors being
too large—without any charge that they had neglected the
interests intrusted to them—they were about to reduce
them from 24 to 18, and of that number to giro the crown
the power of nominating six; thus destroying the indepen-
dent character of the governing body of ludia. lie should
vote for the amendment.
Mr. OTWAY considered that 18 directors would form a
mere efficient body than 24, and therefore he should sup-
port the clause as it stood.
The committee then divided :
For the number " 18," as in the clause lB6
For the amendment B5-101
Tho clause, as amended, was ordered to stand part of the
bill.
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and obtained
leave to sit again on Monday, at six o'clock, on the house re-
suming after the morning sitting.
Lord PALMERSTON stated that the home would sit
on Monday, at two o'clock, to take the Landlord and
Tenant (Ireland) Bill.
Mr. BOUVERIE intimated that there was little chance
of their getting through that bill in two hours.
CUSTOMS ACTS.
The house then went into committee on the Customs
Acts.
On the resolution relating to the duties to be les:ed
the Isle of Man,
Sir J. WALMSLEY hoped that after the petition he had
that day presented from the Isle of Mao, the hon. gen-
tleman, the Secretary to the Treasury, would not proceed
with the resolutions.
Mr. WILSON said that by the present customs regula-
tions in the Isle of Man the duties levied were lower than
than those in England, and, in consequence of a system of
licences, a monopoly had been created which diminished,
the imports of some articles into the island. The
Treasury had received constant applications from the
Isle of Man for an alteration which would allow
the free importation of all the articles that were
required, and the r.'ason of the proposed change
was with a view to that object. In order to attain that, it
had been found necessary slightly to raise the duties. He I
had received resolutions from the House of Keys,
which did not offer any objection to the gen--
rat principle of the alterations, although objections '
were made to some of the details ; but se a whole the au-
thorities of the island were in favour of the change. The
effect would be,that for the first time the Isle of Man would
have the privilege of the entire coasting trade of the
United Kingdom, and hove an export and import trade such
as it never possessed before. If there was any surplus re-
venue, it would be appropriated to the improvement of the
harbours of the Wend.
Lord STANLEY wished to know if he understood, tar.
rectly that no objection was taken to the substance of the
resolutions in the island, but only to separate parts ;at it.
Mr. WILSON—There was certainly some diffetence of
opinion, hut the authorities of the island, on the whole,
were of opinior. that in order to effect the de aired object
some increase of duties was necessary.
Mr. G. HAMILTON could confirm the•statement of the
hon. gentleman with regard to the applications which hail
been made to the Treasury from the Isle of Man ; but he
hoped the house would cautiously, consider any chrosee