The Sun.
London, England, 1855-05-11 00:00:00

' after a committee had been sitting moflth after--month, re-
- porting to the houSe, and discussing the conduct of the
warilarsotheecominiottbe ought to bo appointed to inquire
how far the Indian army might be rendered, not effectual
for general purposes, but actually available for the-pre-
sent war.. He would, however, tell his hon. friend that
that was not the question which ought to be considered.
The real question was, whether the Indian army, or
any part of it, could be spared from India consistently
with the safety of our Indian possessions. (Hear, hear.)
That was not a question for a committee of the House, of
Commons to determine. Nay, it was not a question to be
determined by the Government of this country. It was a
question to be decided by the Gavernor-General of India
alone. The Governor-General, if he were the man he ought
to be, and if he were a man of such experience and talent
as he ever bad been, was alone competent to say whether a
soldier could leaVe India with due regard to the safety and
security of that mighty empire. This question, with regard
to the Indian army being available, was not one of specula-
tion ; it was a question of fact. The experience of half a
century showed that the Indian army had always been
available. Had there been any, difficulty in rendering that
army available for the expeditions to Egypt, Ceylon, Java.
the Mauritius, the Eastern Archipelago, China, and
_Althanistan ? He must, in passing, express his opinion
that the Affghan war, though fought by the Indian army,
and paid for by the Indian treasury, was essentially a
European war. His hon. and learned friend might say that
ho referred rather to the Indian offi:ers than to the Indian
army ; and that was not so much a matter of speculation
as of fact. Tier M,,jesty's Government had Stated that
they wanted the services of Indian officers, and what was
the result ? Within a few dais, almost with in a few hours,
hundreds of IndiAn officers volunteered, and at this mo-
ment there were many Indian officers serving this
country under Generals Williams and Cannon. His hon.
and learned friend had thought fit to constitute himself a
judge as to whether the proper officers had or had not
been selected. His hon, friend had named men whose
distinction was recognised throughout India, and he (Sir
J. Hogg) would be glad to see those gallant officers em-
ployed in the service ; but he must say that the officers
who had already been selected were men of high distinc-
tion, and he was satisfied they would show themselves
deserving of the confidence that had been reposed in
them. His hen. friend proposed, by his motion, to in-
quire into the steps which it might be necessary to take
if it should be deemed advisable to constitute the In-

dian army a Royal army. He thought his, hon. friend
would have been a little more logical if he had established
the condition precedent, instead of proposing to enter into
an inquiry which was consequent upon a condition that
did not exist. His hon. friend had told the house that he
had nothing definite to suggest. It appeared to him (Sir
J. Hogg) that the hon. gentleman was enamoured of some
change, and that if he could only obtain some change he
did not care what it was. The hon. gentleman first put

upon the paper a notice of motion for a kind of roving
commission to inquire and see what Heaven would send
them. The hon. gentleman, however, now asked for a
committee.- He (Sir J. Hogg) was sure that if the hon.
and learned gentleman was sitting on the bench where he
had 80 long presided with honour to himself and advan-
tage to his country, and if any one were to make him
such a
.proposal as he had now submitted to the house,
he would regard it as a kind of political bill of discovery,
to see if anything could be discovered upon which some-
thing could be founded. (A. laugh.) His honourable
friend had directed attention to three prominent points
—the amalgamation of the two armies ; whether there
should or should not be a distinct, separate, local army for
India ; and, if there were to be a separate, distinct, local
army for India, whether or not that army should be a
Royal army. The hoc. gentleman said he felt a little diffi-
culty with respect to the subject of amalgamation, and ha
(Sir J. Hogg) wag not surprised that he did se. Indeed
his only surprise was that his hon. friend had not been
more sensible of the difficulty, for he (Sir J. Hogg) re-
garded such an amalgamation as not merely a matter of
of difficulty,but of impracticability. The two armies were,
indeed, absolutely antagonistic the one to the other. In
the Queen's army they had the system of purchase and
exchange, and they had continual reliefs to different parts
of the British empire, bat in the Company's army there
was no purchase. In that army officers were gratuitously
nominated to commissions; they did not rise by purchase,
but solely by seniority ; and so rigid was that rule of
seniority that exchange was precluded. In the Indian
army, the junior lieutenant not only had a right to have
the stipulated number of lieutenants above him, but
by the rules of the service he was entitled to have thesame
identical individual officers above him, and the rules of the
service did not permit of any exchange under any circum-
stances. Then, with regard to the system of reliefs, the
Indian army was a local army, and not only were its ser-
vices confined to India except under circumstances of pe-
culiar emergency, but, as a general rule, the ariny-ofeach
presidency was confined to that presidency. He thought,
then, he was justified in saying that the constitutions and
arrangement of the two armies were not only different, but
that they were actually opposed the one to the other There
were, however, some other matters which his hon. friend
had slurred over, but to which he (Sir J. Hogg) would
ask the attention of the house. In the Indian army every
officer, after a certain number of years' service, was entitled
to retire upon the pay of his rank. There were also dif-
ferent funds—as, for instance, funds for widows and
orphans, the contribution to id' was compulsory—pe-
culiar to the Indian army. How, then, was an amalgama-
tion to be effected? Would they assimilate the Queen's
army to the Company's army, and give the former these
boons, or would they, assimilate the Company's army to
the Queen's and deprive them of their vested rights and.
interests ? He asserted most confidently that amalgama-
tion was absolutely impracticable. What he bad said so
far applied to the English officers and men ; but how
would the suggested change affect the sepoys ? He would
ask the house to listen to what Mr. Macaulay said of the
sepoys. He said I---
"A hostile monarch may promise mountains of gold to
our sepoys, on condition that they will desert the standard
of the Company. The Company promises only a moderate
pension after a lon -4 service. But every sepoy knows that
the promise of the Company will be kept, he knows that if
ho lives 100 years his rice and salt are as secure as the
salary of the Governor-General, and he knows that there
is not another State in India which would not, in spite of
the most solemn vows, leave him to die of hunger in a
ditch as soon as ha ceased to be useful."

•
That was a true description of the sepoy at the present
time. Now, the sepoy had failings, and hii prominent fail-
ing was suspicion, dislike, and fear of innovation. He (Sir
J. Hogg) did not exceed the bounds of fact when he said
thatany innovation excited and alarmed the distrust of the
sepoy, even though ft were for his own benefit. He would
read to the house the opinion of an officer of the Indian
army, the historian of the Affgban war, with respect to the
danger of tampering with the Sepoys, in consequence of
their dread of innovation. Mr. Kaye said—

"The people of India will bear a great deal, so long as
they are used to it. They are very intolerant of change.
They do not understand it. They are timid and suspicious.
Benevolence and wisdom may go hand in hand in our mea-
sures, but the people are not easily persuaded that what
wo are doing is for their good."

This apprehension of change was peculiar to the people of
India, and every man who had ruled that country had
acted upon the principle of altering as little as possible the
condition of the sepoys for fear of exciting some misap-
prehension. He (Sir J. Hogg) thought he had shown that
the amalgamation of the two armies was impracticable,
and he contended that, as they could not have such amal-
gamation, the army of India must be a separate, local,
distinct army. At this moment 9-10ths of the army were
natives. It must not only be a separate and distinct local
army, bu'l it must be a native army.. We could not hold
India by an exclusively European force. This country
could not stand the drain of money and treasure the two
treasuries of England and India could not stand the drain
that would be necessary to hold India exclusively by a
European force. If they could do so it would be perilous
in the extreme, fatal to India, and fatal to our hold on
that country, from the disaffection and jealousies which it
would excite in the native mind. The army, then, must
be local and native, but it must be officered by British
officers in order to be effective. These officers must be
familiar with the language, the religion, the usages, and
the prejudices of the sepoys; and, if such were their quali-
fications, they could not fail to conciliate them and
command their affections. (Hear, hear.) Without such
qualificatio: s, instead of conciliation, we would have.
alienation ; and this brought him to a remark of his hon.
friend, As ho spoke of Indian officers as if it were an advan-
tage to be always looking to his native country. Now he
(Sir J. W. Hogg) contended for exactly the reverse. The
Indian officer, to be effective and useful in the capacities
he had indicated, must go out young—he must go out not
too old to be transplanted. He must take root in India,
and feel and look at India as his home; and not only must
he remain in India, but remain in the same regiment, that
he might know the peculiarities of the natives at large, as
well as every man individually in the regiment. The result
showed that this was the fact. At the present moment there
were I,ICO officers in the Indian army who, if they pleased,
might retire on pensions, but who were so much attached to
the country and so devoted to their profession and their
men that they did not avail themselves of the privilege.
(Hear, hear.) A European force could not be in itself a
local force in any sense similar to that of the native army.
It ought to be identified with the native army. If it was
so, it would be a source of strength and confidence; if it
was not it would fail to be either. (Hear, hear.) Then
there were about 30,000 Queen's troops for the defence .of
the Indian empire ; but these were only auxiliaries to the
native army. They went out as auxiliaries, and remained
such, their stay being usually short. In 1827 the Duke of
Wellington said with reference to this very topic, " The
queen's army are and must always be regarded as auxi-
liaries, and auxiliaries only, to the Indian army." Now,
was this the effect of mere speculation ? Was this army in
its present condition the work of any theory? No; like the
best institutions of the country, it grew up and was altered
as the exigency of circumstances required. It commenced
from small beginnings, gradually increased, and slight
changes were made in its constitution till at last it arrived
at its present state of efficiency. (Hear.) It was a fabric
reared by the wisdom of a hundred years. With it was
associated mighty names and mighty interests. That fabric
might be pulled down and destroyed by the imprudence
and folly of an hour. (Hear, hear.) In the early periods
of the Indian empire we had no army—there were jealousies
and appreheneious in the way. The first soldiers we had
were few in number, and they were Europeans: We had
then no natives, and to show the jealousy that existed, he
might state that the first we employed were the descendants
of Portuguese, who were called topasses." About the
middle of the last century, however, we got into disputes
with the native princes, and then commenced the organisa-
tion of a native army. At first there were only three Bri-
tish officers to a regiment, and the Indian army had no
officer holding the King's commission till 1780. The first
regiment was formed, he believed in 1750, and was at the
Battle of Plassy, under Lord Ciive. Such was the origin
and constitution of the army as it now existed in India—
, a separate and distinct local army, having the aid of her
Majesty's troops, which wore changed after particular
periods of service. It might be said, why could we not
have a local Indian army which would at the same time
be a royal army ? This raised the question, Sought the
army to be transferred to the Crown ? His honourable
friend said he would change it from being a local army, and
thereby add to its honour, dignity, and consequence. He
contended that the effect would be exactly the reverse. As
an Indian army it had acquired glory and distinction such
as no other army could exceed. Instead of having the dis-
tinction of being a separate army, if we Ounsferred it to
the Crown it would become a kind of local army—it might
become a sort of Ceylon regiment, or a West India regi•
ment, but we would do away with all its prestige and its
glory. (Hear, hear.) In 1832 Mountstewart Elphinstone,
in reply to questions put to him on this subject by the Pre-
sident of the Board of Control, first spoke of the separation
of the two governments, the civil from the military, as
follows :

"The separation of the civil government from the mili•
tary would probably not answer in any country, but let at
of all in India. The grgat problem there has always leen
to maintain the subordffiation of the military power to the
civil, and to preveut clashing between the governors and
commanderg-in-chief. In this we have nqt always beery

successful even when both drew their authority fafir the
Same source."
Then, epeakinglif the transfer of th; ain:iyen the Crown,
he said :
" In that case, if the pride of officers was fora moment
flattered by a more immediate connection with the King,
that feeling would probably be altered when they disco-
vered that, from a separate service, which had a reputation
and pretension of its own, and was the sole object of atten-
tion to the military department of its Government, they
even sank into an inferior branch of another army, and
scarcely known to the Commander-in-Chief."
(Hear, hear.) That would be the fate of the Indian army
•if it was transferred to the Crown, the "civil government
being left with the East India Company. His hon. friend
seemed to assume that he was fighting the battle of the
Indian army and Indian officers, and as a foundation for
`the assumption, ho read a single extract from a letter of a
distinguished author. He (Sir J. W. Hogg) denied that
his hon, friend spoke the wishes of the Indian army. He
did not pretend to speak for the Indian army on this sub-
ject, but he had at least as good means as his hon. friend
of knowing its sentiments, and be believed that nine-
tenths or ninoteen-twentieths of that army would strenu-
ously resist an amalgamation or transfer to the Crown.
(Hear, hear.) His honourable friend referred to the opi-
nions of Lord 0 omwallis on this subject, and gave a short
statement of what had passed at that time; but, as he did
whole
not give the statement, be would supply the defi-
ciency. It was truethat before Lord Cornwallis left Indialie
entertained the idea of
en amalgamation of the Indian
'army with the Queen's, and that on his way hdme ho
matured a plan which, on his arrival, he submitted to
the Government. But the moment the intentioa of Lord
Cornwallis to recommend such an amalgamation became
known iu India, the greatest ferment was created in the
army, committees were formed and sat in London and
different parts of the kingdom, and delegates were sent
from the army in India. His honourable friend stated
that the East India Company collected evidence. Now,
he denied that the East India Company had collected evi-
dence; what was done was the spontaneous act-of the offi-
cers themselves, alarmed at the change contemplated. As
far as his recollection of the facts served him, the " dele-
gates" sent over here by the Indian army were requested
to change their names to agents, and they were received
~y the Chairman of the Court of Directors and the Presi-
tent of the Board of Control as individual officers. He
would now simply read them a portion of one report made
by these delegates while the matter was pending, and
another when it was concluded ; and the house then might
draw their own inference as to the value of the argument
founded on the opinions of Lord Cornwallis. Here was the
report of the delegates—their own account of one of their
verbal communications to the chairman :-
- -- -

"That we felt it our inclinatio;;;;;ell as our duty, to
treat the Court of Directors with every respect; that our
situation was unprecedented, as was the cause which had
principally induced it. In all other cases, as public ser-
vants, we could look with confidence towards them alone
as the channel of redress ' • but in the.present instance,
where we had every reason to believe a change of masters
was intended without deigning to consult us, we conceived
that our being officers did not deprive us of the liberty en-
oyed by every other description of British subjects, namely
the asserting, by every legal means, our natural rights as
men. We were not slaves, to be transferred at the will or
caprice of a master ! No Power had a right to convey its
armies to another. That the officers in India had con-
tracted to serve the Company; if they were to be trans-
ferred to the King, it must be with thar own consent, and
on such terms as they chose to stipulate."
That was the case which his hon. friend coolly and delibe-
rately cited as a precedent for the change now sug-
gested, and represented as likely to be acceptable to the
Indian army. When it was all over, and these same dele-
gates made their report to the various committees consti-
tuted in India—a nice state of things-truly for an army to
be forming committees, and sending delegates home to re-
present them—they said :
"It is with the sincerest gratification that we are at
length able to congratulate you on the final adjustment
and transmission of the new military arrangement
Our brother officers will, we tryst, need no assurance from
us, that we have not been deficient in zeal and exertion to
obtain for them the solid advantages of rank, respectability,
and ultimate independence, at the price of as few pecuniary
sacrifices as possible. They will recollect that at the opening
of the negotiation the subject was novel and the result
hazardous ; that a system had been formed and supported
by the highest authority and the most overbearing influence,
which threatenej the subversion, root andjbranch, of those
establishments to which; from long habit and from convic-
tion of their peculiar adaptation to our situation, we are
firmly attached. We have happily succeeded in obtaining
an arrangement constituted in most parts on the principles,
which our constituents have themselves recommended.
The reform has been temperate and cautious, and promises
in time to be effectual. The principal causes of complaint
have been removed, improvements have been introduced,
and room left for further ameliorations when the system
shall have stood the test of experience."
Now, that was the course which the Indian army adopted
in 1793 and 1794. What was, the state of that army in
1793 and '94 ? He meant as to the advantages they en-
joyed. They resisted the transfer to the Crown at a period
when they did not enjoy any one of the advantages which
had singe been conceded to them. At the period he had
mentioned there were upwards of 1,500 English officers in
*ho Company's service. Would not the house be astonished
when ho told them that the highest rank to which those
officers could attain was that of colonel ; that there were
only I'2 colonels, 23 lieutenant-colonels, and 23 majors;
that there was no retiring pension, no privilege of furlough
to Europe, none of the advantages which they now en-
joyed? But yet, in spite of the position in which they
were then placed, they resisted, as he had shown, the pro-
posed amalgamation. (Hear.) Mr. Dundas, then Presi-
dent of the Board of Control, was not an advocate for the
amalgamation. Heproposed not amalgamation, but a trans-
fer to the Crown. However, Mr. Dnndas and Lord Corn-
wallis both saw what his hon. friend had not seen—namely,
the difficulties of the case. They both consulted—which his
hon. friend, be feared, had not done—the wishes of the In-
dian army. They were practical men, and they abandoned
the scheme, which until this moment had never since been
deliberately revived. His hon. friend had alluded to Lord
Grenville. Now, there was a very distinguished officer who
took a part in these very discussions, and who, when he had
attained a mature age, was again, in 1332, interrogated on
the subject of amalgamation, or transfer to the Crown.
7k.is was what Colonel Sherwood said in reply :

-
" "VA period of nearly 37 years has now passed over since
the Bengal, and indeed tho whole of the Indian Artillery
were informed that Lord Cornwallis had proposed to the
home authorities to ' incorporate them with the Royal
Artillery, and to relieve them regularly from Woolwich.'
I have a lively, mad I may say a painful, recollection of the
sensation produced by this promulgation. The major part
of the regiment was then at Dum-Dum, at their annual
practice. A meeting was held upon the occasion, where
the proposition was looked upon with absolute horror, as
destructive of all those hopes, rights, and prospects with
which we had entered the service and had remained with
every disadvantage for years. The road to Woolwich' was
pointed out as the road to ruin and despair. We thank
God that this calamity was averted from us, and we for-

vently pray it may so continue."
That was the opinion of Col. Sherwood, looking back to
the transactions of past times and answering the question
put to him deliberately in writing. But, upon general
principles, could it answer that the civil authority in India
should be vested in one body, and the military in another ?
His hon. friend was conversant with Indian history-. He
would ask him whether such an arrangement answered in
the early periods of that history, and whether he remem-
bered the endless differences which existed between the
Queen's and the Company's officers before the harmonious
union now established ? At that period the Queen's officers
Went out with a great idea of their own importance. They
held their commissions from the Crown, and did not serve
a company of traders ; and the result of such ideas was that
constant collisions occurred. But let the House look not,
alone to the military, let them look at the peaceful pro-
fession to which his hon. friend belonged. Look to the
Supreme Couit of Calcutta—to their arrogance when first
constituted—to the injuries they did inflict and the ruin
they would have inflicted upon India if their career had
not been stopped by an act of Parliament. (Hear.) Why,
it had been the aim and object of Parliament ever since to
try, as far as lay in their power, to remove these ano-
malies, and they had at last succeeded in rendering the
authorities, civil and military, subservient to the civil
Government. His honourable friend had spoken as if ho
would give the Company's officers the advantage enjoyed
by the Queen's officers—namely, of coming home here
and of getting commands ; but ho had not adverted,
to the subject of reciprocity. (Hear, hear.) If you'
gave the Indian officers commands here, the necessary con-
sequence was that the Queen's officers must be eligible to
all the civil and military staff appointments in India, from
which they were now entirely excluded. Bat it would
be impbssible to employ the Queen's officers for the pur-
pose of filling such appointments. No person could fill
those appointments without passing some kind of examina-
tion. At the present moment there were 5,000 officers in
the Indian army, 1,000 of whom were upon detached civil
or military service. His hon. friend would allow that
this at present formed some sort of vested interest, and
were they to withdraw from the Indian army the whole
of these advantages and let in the whole of the Queen's
officers ? Could those officers be severed from their regi-
ments, and had they the necessary knowledge of the coun-
try, the language, and the prejudices of the natives? It
was quite impossible that the Queen's officers, going out to
India for a short time, could be so qualified, and this was
quite inconsistent, moreover, with what he considered a
requisite for India—namely, that you should have a local
army. He did not think he was addressing a single indi-
vidual who did not wish to do justice to the Indian army,
and whe did not recogfaise the glorious deeds of that army.
(Hear.) But his hon. friend had read a most unfair °ate-
logue of victories, and had told the house they were fought
under Queen's officers. Now, why were they so fought?
Because the company's officers had been carefully excluded
from such commands. (Hear.) So, those officers were not
only to have their pride wounded and their interests de-
stroyed, but were afterwards to see held up, in a kind of
juxtaposition injurious to them, the exploits which the
Queen's officers had achieved. During the last 15 or 16
taarrmyy occasion, had a eigwhthen to
itcowmapalvaoin ue?hsAafeeddtweheat poy officers of
m as a
tb the d
n soilain-
o
years there had been eight great occasions on which the
Indian army had taken the field ; namely, in the cam-
tl
paigns of Affghanistan, Scinde, Gwalior, the Sutlej, the
l
Punjaub, and China; and only on one of those occasions
was the chief command given to an officer of the Indian
army. Was not that an injustice of which the Indian
the Indian army in chief command ? It was when Generals
Pollock ls
Pollock and Nott were employed to retrieve the disasters
of Affghanistan. He could not, then, be told that the
officersr effia es oe
rne wowfhetyrhe
einferiorthey w e r
Queen'se
to
army;
rnotms
nyd so;
fc
oeo
rmu without
onyo t employed
compete
pretending to say
they were superior to the latter, he need not hesitate to
assert that they were in every respect on a par with them.
But it might be said that when there was a mixed army of
Queen's and Company's troops that might be a reason for
giving the chief command to a Queen's officer. Admitting
that it was so, he then asked, what did they do with their
divisional commands? For those divisional commands
officers were required with a knowledge of the localities,
languages, and population, which none but Company's
officers were likely to possess. How did they divide the
the divisional commands in the eight great campaigns to
Which he had referred? Fourteen were given to Queen's
officers, and nine to Company's officers. Was that fair.?
Was it fair, mot in reference to individuals, but to the
public service, to keep these divisional commands
rive lndia
for •
Queen's officers, who might perhaps have ar • din
only just before obtaining these appointment d
s, an who were
placed over the heads of the Company's officers, who had
carved their way to distinction by their swords? (Hear.)
e Indian But there were other employments in th I •
an army
from which Indian officers were practically excluded. Hada,
an Indian officer ever had the chief command at Cale t
Madras, or Bombay? Perhaps the house would be astonished ta,
when he told them that in Indian history, from the days
Plessey to the glories of the Sutlej and Punjaub, they "Lod,
never had an Indian officer fitted for any of those
chief
commands, if, indeed, such an inference were to be drawn
frOM cue feet,44o ao i iaa (deer had (Ter be
en peleeted

THE SUN, LONDON., FRIDAY EVENING, -MAY il. 1855.

to fill any of 'them. This matter bad been urged -again'and
again on the Government by the ,India,n. authorities, and
had been urged by himsaf as strenuously as he could
urge any suit, but uniuccessfully. Daring the time
he had mentioned, there had been twenty appoint-
ments to chief command, four of them being appoint-
ments to the command of the whole Indian army. The
latter he gave up, for. when there were 30,000 Queen's
troops in India it might be fair to give the -gene' al com-
mand to a Queen's officer. But the other 16 vacancies had
also been filled up by Queen's officers, despite the anxious
remonstrances of the Indian officers. There was an excuse
for this course during a certain period. An illustrious
Duke then at the head of the army had a strong opinion
on the subject, and he (Sir J. Hogg) was not ashamed to
say that he respected even the prejudices' of such a man.
He therefore did not blame the Government for yielding
to the strong feeling of that great man on the point. He
was bound to say that on one occasion the noble lord the
member for London did use his efforts to obtain a subor-
dinate command for an Indian officer, but they were un-
auccessful. The illustrious duke had so strong an im-
pression of the necessity of employing a Queen's officer
that it was painful to press him to take a step in opposi-
tion to it. But since his death there had been three com-
mands vacant at Madras and Bombay, and in May last he
(Sir J. Hogg), when ho heard the rumour of the appoint-
ment of General Anson, whom he admitted to be a diAin-
guished offiJer and an honour to his country, came down
to the house and asked the light hon.,e-entleman (Sir C.
Woo;l) whether the Government intended' to recommend
an Indian officer for the command? He waS met by a
vely curt, and in manner not very courteous, reply, being
cut short by the answer that her Majesty's Govern-
ment had not taken the subject into consi aeration. (Hear,
hear.) That might be the case, but the rumour that Gen.
Anson was to be the man turue 1 out to be true, and he
(Sir J. Hogg) made up his mind to adopt a different course
in future ; and, on the occasion of the next vacancy, he
gave notice of a. resolution, rather a strong one, in their
little Parliament in Lombard-street, with respect to the
conduct pursued towards the Indian army. The result
was that a letter was written by the Chairman of the
Company in accordance with the resolution, and to that a
brief ready reply was written by the same right hon. gen-
tleman, giving, on behalf of the Government, an assurance
that in future the claims of the Indian officers should be
considered ; and of the sincerity of that assurance he had
no doubt. (Hear.) The present motion was, in fact, the
renewal of the charter discussion. Hitherto the Indian
Government had always possessed and exercised the privi-
lege of levying, organising, and disbanding troops. That
was an essential privilege, function, and attribute of the
ruling power. Without a Company's army they could
have no Company's government. A civil authority sup-
ported by an army not their own might aspire to the name
of agents, and might be potent for mischief ; but they could
not aspire to the name, dignity, or utility of a Government.
This, which was true in respect to every Government, was
more especially true with respect to India. If his hon. and
learned friend thought it would conduce to the public in-
terest to review and reverse the settlement for the govern-
ment of India, so lately arrived at, let him say so. Let
him make the attempt openly and avow his object, but he
(Sir J. Hogg) prayed the house not to tamper with such a
subject, and not to trifle with such topics as the Indian
army and empire. Let them not give their ,support to a
motion which would strip the existing Government of al"
substantial power, and degrade it in the eyes of the coon
try, while it would continue and even increase every evi
said to be found in the existing system. (Hear, hear.)
Sir DE LACY EVANS said, as he understood the ob.

ject of his hon. and learned friend in proposing the ap-
pointment of a committee was to carry out the very object
which he had himself more than once advocated, he had no
option but to support the motion, without, however, bind-
ing himself to any proceeding which such a committee
might think proper to adopt beyond that of giving power
to the Government to employ the officers of the Indian
army in Europe, as they were employed in India. He did
not think the actual terms of the motion justified some of
the arguments which had been advanced by the hon. gen-
tleman who had just sat down. The hon. gentleman sup-
posed that a question was to be submitted to a select com-
mittee as to the propriety of sending an expedition to the
Persian Gulf—

Sir J. HOGG intimated that the hon. and learned mem-
ber had used that argument in his speech.
Sir DE L. EVAN 3 was not quite sure that the hon. and
learned gentleman had introduced such an argument judi-
ciously—(a laugh)—but, after all, it was a mere argument.
There was one part of the speech of the hon. gentleman in
which he perfectly concurred—namely, that portion of his
remarks which related to the injustice done to the eminent
and distinguished officers of the Indian army. Rut while
admiring the good feeling of the hon. gentleman on that
point, he was rather surprised to find that his arguments
completely supported the motion now under discussion.
The hon. gentleman objected to tilt). introduction of such a
motion at this particular time. Now he (Sir de Lacy Evans)
thought there could not be a more fitting time than when
the Government were looking for support from all quarters.
The hon. gentleman was anxious to preserve everything in
India in statu quo. Hon. members representing the Court
of Directors had opposed every change, declaring that each
one which had been proposed would subject the Indian em-
pire to ruin and perdition. Now, considerable alterations
had been made in the Government of India within a
very recent period'. The honourable gentleman at that
time predicted the most serious results, but he still
remained a member of the distinguished body with
which he had been so long connected, and had not pointed
out any serious results from the steps then taken.
There was another part of the hon. gentleman's argument
which tended to support the present motion. The hon.
gentleman had intimated that, under the company, the
Indian army had shown a considerable propensity to mu-
tiny. That surely was an argument in favour of some
change in the existing system. One of the causes of predis-
position to mutiny was the want of a supreme authority in
thearmy. There had been mutinies amongst the officers as
well as amongst the men, but if they were recognised as
officers belonging to this vast empire they would not be so
ready to throw off the bonds of authority. (Hear.) In sup.
porting this motion he did not advocate any serious altera-
tion in the organisation of the native regiments, because be
considered their organisation essentially good. But the Go-
vernment had formerly made use of the Indian army in re-
gions beyond those to which they were limited by enlistment
and in the present state of public affairs he thought it would
be very desirable for a select committae to be appointed to
investigate whether there should or should not be a change
made with respect to the availableness of Indian officers, and
especially of officers connected with the European part of
the Indian force, for European and general imperial •pur.
poses. He considered the proposition a perfectly reason-
able one under present cir,lumstances. (Hear.) If it should
be found that the authorities in India could give almost an
assurance that no internal convulsion or foreign aggression
was likely to take place for a considerable period, why
should the Government be deprived by any technical or

legal difficulties from employing some pOrtie'n of the army,
especially the European part cf the army, in the interme-
diate territory, to co-operate in the present contest ? lie
did not think the employment of the sepoys in the Crimea
wuuld be at all desirable, for there they would be quite out
of their place. But there were European troops, and he
did not know whether it would not be useful for these troops
to be a little brushed up in the warfare in the Crimea, by
which they would gain experience and confidence. He
knew there were impediments in the way of the employment
of the East India. Company's troops in the present European
contest. In order to induce Indian officers to enter upon that
service additional rank must be given,and ifGovernment were

to make it known that they would rank equally in Europe,
and that their services would be available in Europe as well
as the services of the Queen's army, it would be a great ad-
vantage to the country. With respect to the statement of
the hon. member as to the non-appointment of Indian
officers to high commands, he (Sir De Lacy Evans) con-
sidered it a most scandalous thing that the officers in the
Indian army should be deprived of these high commands,
and see officers who knew nothing of India appointed in
their stead. He was glad to hear that a promise had been
given that another system should be adopted. Bat he
should like to see something more definite, for another
Minister might say, " My predecessor made a mistake."
(Hear, hear.) As a Queen's officer, -he would say this,
that if a selection had to be made, he should be ashamed to
accept an appointment over the heads of men who, in the
knowledge of the public, had proper claims to such appoint-
ment. (Cheers.) The state of the Indian army was most
anomalous. The Indian officers enjoyed a number of ap-
pointments, but not honourable ones; aid if an Indian
officer distinguished himself, he only acquired a sort of
social acquaintance. He should like very much to know
whether any plan had been devised by which it was in-
tended practically to render these officers available for the
Queen's service in England. It was most desirable to un-
derstand whether it was intended to remove all the legal
difficulties to the employment of these officers in European
warfare. (Hear.) He thought the motion of his hon. and
learned friend a modest one, and that no dangerous conse-
quences were to be apprehended from its adoption. He con-
sidered it, extremely inconvenient and injurious to the
public service of the country that ably and distinguished
officers should not be liable to be employed upon every'ser-
vice in which they might be found useful • and believing
it most desirable that the services of such' resin should be
available to the Government, ho heartily supported the
motion of his hon, and learned friend. (Cheers.)
Mr. ' V. SMITH said the hon. and learned member
who had submitted this motion to the house seemed at the
end of his speech to shrink from his own proposal. The
opinion of the hon. and gallant gentleman whohad seconded
the motion was most valuable, but he did not seem to have
looked at the result. Now it was to the resultthatthe house
was bound to look, and he thought he should be able to
show that a committee to inquire into this matter would
be a very improper tribunal. The real point before the
house was this—" Is this a question for a committee of the
House of Commons ?" And, in considering that question,
he entreated the house not. to be led away by any anxiety
as to the warfare in which the country was engaged. He
was prepared to say that it was the duty of the house and
the Government to search in every direction for assistance,
whether in India or any other quarter,in which it could be
obtained. The late Government bad brought officers who
had distinguished themselves at the Cape of Good Hope
immediately to bear upon the Crimean expedition, and he
saw no reason why the services of India officers might not
be sought for the same purpose. (Hear, hear.) He agreed
with the hon. and gallant general who had just sat down
that Indian officers ought to be promoted to commands in
India, but he did not think that would be the necessary re-
sult of the inquiries of a committee. The hon. member for
Honiten (Sir J. Hogg) had referred to some inquiry which
hehad on one occasionmade of the President of the Board of
Control. Now, if the Lon. gentleman ever asked such a
question again, he should receive as long 'an answer as he
liked. (Laughter.) But he could not promise that an In-
dian officer should be preferred to a Queen's officer, if the
Queen's officer should be a man of greater merit. The rule
ought to be that the best man should be put into the situ-
ation, whether he belonged to the Indian or the Queen's
troops. (Hear.) In drawing Indian officers to serve in
the Crimea, that was the rule to be abided by. Whilst the
country was absorbed in the consideration of the war le
the Crimea, other portions of tho empire ought not to be
neglected. Now, was nut India an important part of the
empire ? Now, so far as that country was concerned, with
what power wore we at war ? Why, with Russia. Fur the
last half century, repeated warnings had been given of
Rus,ian aggression in India. Now, if we were to strip
India of her best officers, we might lose our prestige in
India and give a positive invitation to Russian aggression.
(Hear.) (Hear.) That was a question that ought not to be
now
out of sight. (Hear.) In considering the!
harem the house, he assured the hon. and
rather in favour
man that, if ho had any prejudice, it was gallantma gentle-
of the Indian ar. He admitted that wrdeamoui
and
those ties which wore beneficial in lessa
and times,gehtlayaside
discipline
he admitted that the etiquette ofaeroutine
might be very useful in time of tees.
h dttest men for every
throw them aside, and select in war we must
. His hon. and learned friend
place in. the Queen
seemed to hold ver'ys scellevaipcethbeymtehmeorandumire
rank which had been issued
suggestion,
Commander-in-Chiefgao
and which officers of the
at his (Mr. Smith's)
Indian army Evans) had said that.
did not consider
Lacypiite so insignificant a boon.
The gallant general (Sir
this was s only question of social rank. He (Mr. Smith)
apprehended that the Cent of theialtioiladlibl would be

- •
I ; to give to Indian-officers by right the social rank which
hid hitherto only been given by courtesy,,Aied to pre-
v_eit their being considered as inferioi in point of
precedence to officers of the same standing in the Queen's
army, as he believed they had hitherto been •conei-
dered. Besides this, he believed that its effect would be
that if an officer had becOme say a major-general in the
company's service, he might be sent to the Crimea or else-
where without requiring a new commission, and would
rank according to the date of his original commission, and
not according to the date of such appointment. At
„pre-
sent, when in India a company's and a Queen's regiment
were serving together, the officers commanding them
ranked according to the dates of their commissions, anti
the effect of this memorandum would be to apply the same
rule in Europe. Therefore, to a certain degree, it did con-
fer military as well as social rank. Though he should
have objected to the proposal first made by his hon. and
upon this; learned friend, that an address should be voted to her Ma-
jesty praying her to appoint a eommission
sub-
ject, he thought that an inquiry before such a commission
would have been preferable to that now proposed. The
best course which the hon. and learned member could
have taken would have been to have called the attention, of
the house to the subject without asking eitherfor a commissien
or a committee. Under all the circumstances he hoped the
hon. and learned member would see the expediency of not
pressing his motion to a division.
Mr. OTWAY thought the present was a most appropri-
ate time for the discussion of this subject, because we now
required assistance from all quarters. Indian officers were
just the men whom we should be disposed to select for ser-
vice in this war. It was a very important consideration,
that in consequence of the casualties which had occurred
iu the Crimea, there were really very few officers who had
served Et sufficient length of time to enable them to supply
the vacancies with efficiency, and it was therefore neces-
sary that they should open the door to the entrance into
the army of the Indian officers. He found upon looking over
the regiments of the Guards that the junior captain iu the
Grenadiers had only seen three years' service, and in the
Fusilier s there were 18 officers who had only seen 13 years
service among them. He was aware that it had been
urged that they ought not to tamper with the native troops
of India, but he could not understand how the Crown
would be more likely to tamper with the natives than the
East India Company were. In giving his vote for the
committee he was mainly influenced, however, by one con-
sideration, and that was a desire, in the terms of the
motion, that the house shoUld consider and inquire how the
army of India might be made available for the war in
Europe, and to inquire into the steps necessary to be taken
if it should be deemed expedient to constitute the army of
the East India Company a Royal army. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. PHILLIMORE considered that many dangers might
result from transferriug to this country so large a force as
that of the Indian army without the checks and restraints
with which the government of the army of this country
was surrounded.

Mr. DANBY SEYMOUR expressed considerable doubts
as to the propriety of bringing forward so important a
question as this at the present time. A very short time
had elapsed since great changes had been effected in the
Government of India, and the result of these changes had
not yet been sufficiently tested. He thought that the
question of the amalgamation of the two armies might well
be deferred until the transference of the Indian empire to
illhe Crown and the abolition of the East India Board.
Mr. M'GREGOR considered the question before the
house as one of grave importance, and one which ought
not to be lightly dealt with by the House of Commons.
He felt deeply that there never existed a House of Com-
mons which treated grave subjects with so much levity ;
but a time was coming when hon. members would be called
to a strict and severe account for their conduct. (Hear.)
That night's debate would, he warned the Government, be
the first of a series of debates on these questions, and they
were mistaken if they thought they could get rid of them
in the manner they seemed disposed to adopt.
Sir E. PERRY replied—He regretted the determination
the Government had come to on this question, which they
had not treated with the gravity due to it, while they had
evaded to meet the practical point of, the *motion altoge-
ther. The Government said that the committee was un-
necessary, for they had the power, by the exercise of the
Queen's prerogative, to employ the Indian army inEurope;
but that was not so facile as they seemed to imagine. As
to the practical point, how our forces in the Crimea could
be increased in the most effective manner, that they had
a voided to discuss. Under these circumstances, ho should
certainly press the motion to a division.
The house then divided,
For the motion
Against it
Majority against the motion --109
MR. LAYARD'S MOTION.
Mr. LAYARD said—Before proceeding with the orders
of the day, I wish to say a word or two in order that there
may be a clear understanding with regard to my motion.
I think the noble lord at the head of the Government mis-
understood my intentions when he stated that I was about
to force my motion on the house on Monday next. I had
certainly no such intention. When I requested the noble
lord to give me a night, he declined, and said I must find
one for myself, and I then intimated that I would bring
my motion forward on going into Committee of Supply.
I understand that on Monday night there will be an impor-
tant motion in another place, and perhaps it would be for
the convenience of the house if my motion were postponed
till a later day. (Cheers.) I think, therefore, I had bet-
ter avail myself of the kind permission given me by the
noble lord the other night, and find a day for myself.
(Laughter and .heers.)
EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL.
On the motion for going into committee on this bill,
Mr. CUMMING BRUCE said that, considering the late
hour of the night (half-past ten), and the short discussion
which had been had on the bill, and that many gentlemen
desired to have an opportunity of delivering their sentiments
on the measure, he would object to go on with the debate,
and he should, therefore, move that the Speaker do not
leave tho chair till some future day. (Peals of laughter.)
As that would be an inconvenient motion, he should move
that the debate be adjourned.
Lord PALMERSTON hoped that the hon. gentleman
would not persevere. This was a question of great itn-
portance, and at that hour the house generally began to
till. He could not consent to the motion for adjournment,
and he hoped the house would feel that it was trifling with
a great question to pretend that at that hour of the night
they were not capable of giving consideration to the bill.
If hon. members would condense their speeches, all who
wished to speak on this question would have ample time
to do so that night.
Mr. lIADFIELD trusted that the house would a.,ljoitz n
the debate. There were six other bills down for discussion
that night, so that the public time would not be Jost by
the postponement of the debate on this bill

r Alter 'a. few words from Mr. BLAUKEURN, who con-
trasted the course taken by the C,'overninont with respect
to a bill concerning the whole people of Scotland with
that which they had pursued with respect to one inefely
affecting the local management of the metropolis,
Mr. DISRAELI appealed to the noble lord at the bead
of the Government to consent to the adjournment of the
debate. It was perfectly clear that the discussion must be
a lengthened one, that it could not be concluded that even-
ing but must be adjourned, and nothing would therefore
be gained to the public service by commencing it at the
late hour of the evening at which they had then arrived.
Lord ELCHO said that he .felt there was the greatest
desire on the part of the people of Scotland that this bill
would be proceeded with without delay. The principle of
the bill had been fully discussed on the second reading,
and he therefore regarded the tactics of the hon. gentle-
men opposite as directed to postpone and eventually defeat
a measure on which they had already sustained a defeat
in a fair stand-up fight. In deference to the real feeling
of the people of Scotland on this question, he hoped the
noble lord at the head of the Government would not con-
sent to. he adjournment of the debate. •
The Earl of MARCH could not allow the noble lord
opposite to assume to himself to represent the feelings of
the people of Scotland, which he believed were hostile to
the present measure. This bill was one of vital importance
to the people'of Scotland, and it was therefOre the duty of
hon. members from that part of the country to secure its
full and adequate. discussion. As he believed this was im-
possible at that late hour, he should vote for the adjourn-
ment.

Mr. E. ELLICE, jun., expressed a hope that the noble
lord at the head of the Government would not consent to
the postponement of the debate. There was now a much
fuller attendance to discuss the bill than (from the dryness
of th• subject to English members) there was likely to be
if the debate was brought forward at an earlier hour in the
evening. The opinion of the people of Scotland on this
question was sufficiently shown by the fact that there was
a majority of three to one of the Scotsh members of the
house in favour of the bill of the noble and learnd lord.
Mr. FRANCIS SCOTT hoped that his hon. friend would
press his motion for adjournment, as there had been an
understanding that the debate on this bill should not come
on after half-past ten o'clock in, the evening; Such under-
standings between the leaders of parties should be kept
even if they were made in the lobby.
The LORD-ADVOCATE denied that there bad been
any such understanding. So far was that from being the
case, that he positively refused to agree to such an arrange-
ment

Mr. SCOTT said, that at all events it was his impression,
and that of those who were with him, that there was such
an understanding. He could not, however, rest his case on
such a trivial ground. It was trifling with the people of
Scotland to bring forward a debate of so much importance
at an hour of the evening when it was imro sible that it
could be fully and adequately discussed. So far from the
opinion of the people of Scotland being in favour of this
measure, it was clear from the petitions that it was
directly the reverse ' • for while the petitions in favour of
the bill were signed by only 1,400 persons, those against it
received the signatures of 20,000 persons. honeying that it
was impossible to finish the discussion that night, and that
the debate must, therefore, be adjourned, he should cer-
tainly oppose their going on any further at that time.
Mr. V. SCULLY obierved that Irish members were ac-
cused of obstructing the-progress of public business if they
objected to proceed with any Irish bill, however important,
at one o'clock in the morning. (A laugh). They were
never able to bring on their business at the hour at which
the house had thea arrived, and if it was to be settled as a
rule that no Irish measure of importance should be brought
on after eleven in the evening, he believed that not even
one would be discussed in the course of the session.

Mr. STIRLING said that if infustice had often been
done to the people of Ireland, that was no reason why in-
justice should, on this occasion, be done to the people of
Scotland. He should certainly vote for the adjournment,
believing that it was impossible for them then to give the
subject the attention which its importance deserved. The
petitions that had been presented . upon this bill showed
quite clearly that the opinion of the Scotch people was net
in its favour; for while there were only 34 petitions, with
1,412 signatures, in its favour, there were 3.. W, with 2_4M:
against it; and 309, with 16,873 signatures, praying for !te
alteration and amendment. Under these cireunist/o house
rh
felt himselflully justified in protesting against th
proceeding with it at that hour in the evening.
The house then divided—
•. 119
For the adjournment ................. 165
......
Against ... i
j..a.
j. ............ .................................
.............. ........
—46
Mr. C. BRUCE then moved that it be au
instruction to
ot otht
ewrot
ob itl lhse,
nt he
we os
onhe 0 roel
s-
lt!tei Tier t omt hi tte
epeatroo cdhiivaildsec hthoeo lbs,i lthl ion
contemplated by the bill. The bill involved two principles—.
expressi ustru c t itohno
thou approval hi c h h aeox proposedel
additionalnodt i
lew d pael
moans
itneoecamaainlvve principles,
the first, the association ofretigious with secular instruction,
and the second, the extension of the means of education.
hTohne.ombjeemeth
oerrsthtoe
What he wanted was to maintain the parish schools".
their existing connection with the Church,.whil
educationthe supporters
in
thoseof districtsth e bill two providehere such
were
.
j
LORD ADVOCATE assenjted to the motion.
of
the
debate.
The
After a few words from Mr.
mng Bruce, Mr. Dunlop, and M Macgregor, Mr. Cum-
adjourned to Monday next. r• Cowan, the debate was
The Infants Marriage BM
The tite asjo, 21 Rai '''v" reuttleanaliiiii:
*NA Was 0.4
-- ' —_ _ 6 1•9,44 tin..