The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-01 00:00:00

' teed so thoroughly as was expected, or give better ser-
vants to India than the present system had done. The
jurisprudence of India he regarded as defective, and he
thought Parliament ought to carry out the spirit of the
act of 1833 with regard to the employment of the na-
tives, and that they ought to have all the benefit of the
covenanted service. The power of levying war in India
was a most dangerous power to give the President of the
Board of Control and the Secret Committee, and the
wonder to him was, that it had been exercised with so
little precipitation and injustice. He did not consider
that the natives of India were sufficiently prepared for a
decisive change ; when they were so he would be pre-
pared to go as far as any practical man could go ; and he
must confess that he believed the time not to be far dis-
tant when the government of India must be invested in
the Crown. He was willing to admit that the government
of India had worked wonderfully well, considering the
manner in which it was constituted. The body of men
who were to form the Government of India were elected
by about 2,000 electors, who took no interest whatever
in India, and the company had long ceased to be a
trading company and had become territorial lords. On
the other hand, they had been connected with the govern-
ment of India for many years, and, that being so, he
considered the course proposed to be pursued by the
Government the most safe and practicable. He himself,
in thinking or speaking on this subject, was actuated by
a spirit of independence, and looked neither to the Go-
vernment nor to any party, but, considering the matter
impartially, he spoke as he felt it to be his duty, as the
representative of a large commercial constituency.

Mr. DIGBY SEYMOUR always felt considerable
diffidence in intruding himself upon the attention of the
house upon any question, but he felt it the more in ad-
dressing them on the present occasion on a question not
only affecting the interests of his constituents, but of
several millions of his fellow-creatures. He had had the
honour of presenting a petition from Sunderland, pray-
ing that the house would pause before legislating for
India, and that it would not pass any measure altering
the existing system of government before taking evidence
upon the subject from the best sources, including the
natives of India themselves. If, indeed, shipping
were the child of commerce, and commerce depended
upon prosperity, and prosperity was an attendant
upon good government, then there was nothing sur-
prising that his constituents, themselves intimately
connected with the shipping interests, should take
a deep interest in the issue of this debate. (Hear.)
He had himself, after well considering the matter,
arrived at the conclusion that the amendment proposed
by the noble lord ought to receive the support of the
house, and that some time should be given to enable the
house to come to a conclusion on this important subject
from the elements which might come to their hands.
The right hon. gentleman the First Lord of the Admi-
ralty had stated that the tree ought to be judged by its
fruits, and he believed that the fruits of the tree upon
examination would not be found agreeable. Looking to
the question of peace and war, he would ask the house
to consider what had been gained by the wars which had
been undertaken in India, and of which four were ag-
gressive wars, made upon the independence of neigh-
bouring powers, and for the sake of aggrandisement ?
What advantage had been gained by the war against the
Affghans, against the Beloochees in Scinde, the Mah-
rattas in Gwalior, the Sikhs in the Punjaub, and now, for
the second time, against the Burmese. The Affghan
war was simply an attack upon the independence, and
an attempt to overthrow the dynasty, of a friendly neigh-
bour, and which resulted in the sacrifice of a gallant
army. What, again, was the real nature of the war in
Scinde ? The excuse made was, that it was for the pur-
pose of obtaining the command over the navigation of
the Indus, and thus to promote commerce with the cen-
tral part of Asia, but the result was that the Ameers of
Scinde were cajoled, conditions imposed upon them
which it was impossible to comply with, and, finally,
they were deposed and their territories annexed. In the
Punjaub, taking advantage of civil dissensions, an army
was marched to the Sutlej, and, after four pitched battles
on that, it succeeded in gaining possession of the coun-
try ; but, from misgovernment, it became once more
necessary to march an army of 35,000 men to the banks
of the same river. But had the means of support-
ing the Government been increased by that expe-
dition ? On the conarary, it added glory to the
British arms, but did little service to the commer-
cial interests of the country. The assumed revenues
of the Punjab were about 1,300,0001., and the civil
charges amounted to 1,120,0001., thus leaving a surplus
of 180,000/. ; that charge did not, however, include
military charges, which might probably amount to a
burden of 800,0001. per annum. In Sattara the case
had been almost similar, and in 1852, in a communica-
tion from the Court of Directors to Lord Dalhousie, it
was stated we were not prepared to find that the annexa-
tion of Sattara would entail a charge on the general re-
sources of India. The hon. member for Montrose had
attempted to vindicate the Court of Directors from the
Affghan war, and letters had been published, written
by some of the directors, deprecating the war, but Sir
John Hobhouse, then President of the Board of Con-
trol, avowed that he was the author of the system under
which that war was commenced. The system had been
weighed in the balance, and ought to be condemned by
the house. He would now call the attention of the
house to a few statistics, which he would read. The
public debt of India, bearing interest, as it stood before
we commenced our career of conquest and annexation,
was, in 1792, 7,129,9341. After commencing that
career, it stood as follows :—ln 1814, 26,970,7861. To
which last-mentioned sum must be added 5,000,0001.
supplied from the commercial treasury of the company
in aid of the Indian finances during the currency of the
charter, which ended in 1834. The average annual de-
ficiency in the last five years of the charter—years of
peace—which terminated in 1814 was 134,6621. ; in the
next five years, principally war, which ended in 1818-19,
736,853/. ; in the five years of peace which ended in
1823-4, 27,5311. ; in the five years ending in 1828-29,
three of war, 2,878,031/. ; in the ten years ending
1849-50, 1,474,1951. The estimated deficiency for
1851-52 was 780,0001. This, then, was the financial
condition of India under the present system, which, he
maintained, had brought the exchequer of India almost
to a state of insolvency. The opium trade had been the
means of keeping up the revenue of the country, pre-
carious as that trade was. With regard to the revenue
derived from salt, there had been a reduction of the re-
ceipts from the Government monopoly in Bengal
of 23 lacs ; Madras, 2 lacs ; Bombay, 2 lass. The
Customs' duties had also, on the whole, fallen
off, comparing the four years ending 1849-50
with 1845-6. In Bombay there had been an in-
crease of 12,34,153 rupees ; in Agra, of 10,90,532 ; in
Madras the falling off had been 18,36,695 rupees, and in
Bombay it had been 6,95,586 rupees ; thus making a
total falling off of 2,05,596 rupees. These were some
more of the fruits by which the tree was to be judged.
Those figures, which he believed to be perfectly correct,
showed that the Indian exchequer was in a deplorable
state. It did not remain for him, at this advanced pe-
riod of the discussion, to show how shamefully public
works in India had been neglected. The first duty of the
Government should have been to subdue the great water
power of the country, and to direct it, by means of irri-
gation, reservoirs, and other artificial means, to purposes
beneficial to the population and advantageous to the per-
manent resources of the empire ; but no works of that
kind had been executed. (Hear, from Sir J. Hogg.)
The hon. baronet cheered him, but he was informed that
Colonel Outram and Major Franks, who were now in
London, joined issue with the hon. baronet on that point,
as well as Mr. Chapman. The prosperity of Madras
mainly depended on irrigation ; yet it would hardly be
believed that it was only in 1848 that the Indian Govern-
ment first began to direct attention to the public works
of that presidency. Mark the consequences of this ne-
glect. In 1803 the revenue of Madras was 206,0001. ;
in 1844 it was only 1071. In 1828 the population was
700,000 • while in 1848 it was reduced to 400,000. Mr.
Marshall's book showed it to be a statistical law that the
consumption of manufactures in a country is in propor-
tion to its means of internal communication. The con-
sumption of our manufactures in the British West Indies
was 14s. per head of the population ; in Chili it was 9s.
3d. ; in Cuba, 6s. 2d. ; in Peru, ss. 7d. ; in Central
America, 10s. ; and in India only 9d. (Hear, hear.)
Our importation of Indian cotton had been nearly sta-
tionary for the last 11 years, while that from America
the matter
tri miles
sai
slrei
os
had increased from 1,018,361 bales to 1,784,388 bales.
How was this to be accounted for ? Why, while Ame-
ricao had 11,000 miles of railway open, India had only
nia.yntsoftoetrrahmesation. After all that had been said about
'Pi:a:mot:et of law and justice in India, it was unnecessary
for him
tohetnroupbrolecetehdeedhotuosedeonnouthnacte
the point.
ze tii
iTn
dh
tie r hon.
and
l'aihrtte
to the case of
nasattivhee p opfruitfululat souses
na n
de, fn cruelty
t d re andct
ed
ticheterrseit°ri•
a treaty signed in the Carnatic stipendiaries. By
of money ts,
of the eareat. 1801 the company obtained possession
es, on condition of paying The company embers to their S ' f
overeign s am y.
Carnatic
, but the novv revellin the of the
reduced revenues
money due to
stet©'
refused t pay the stipendiaries the
reduced to a state--',4'-il the°
to the home 0-,:54 ruin. ~s.? unfortunate pStsons were
woldri say,with respect
V
which the ast India that the only two powers
could fixercise, were the I,4l„DallY, accord 4 totwM.er
SOY!, the power of conmzeu-it of
,s Ong measures,
had been resolved upon ; measures after they
with the admission Made by 1457.18iva1i quite my harim
the labour and thought that isAght°Lea, r' after all
on Indian affairslndia mu'seft, e been bestowed
governed in India. He could use 1;1, ;nevertheless, be
against thit Aouble agency at horn " °
theetter argument
Which VOn)d be to keep up a mask and I'7 ef4tit Of
'slat From the proper shoulders the load of re, and to
'which they ought to bear. (Hear, hear.) ~,e
onsibil4y
the Secret Committee, Lord Hardinge had „re?. to
as "a mystery not understood by the Public, whyefvit
Board of Control should give an order to the sett
Committee." And he adduced as an instance or this at;
officer of high position and ability in India having writ_
ten a letter couched in somewhat indignant terms to the
President of the Board of Control, complaining of the
conduct of the Seoret Committee, and it was not until
named by Lord Hardinge, that the President was in fact
the Secret Committee, that the writer of the letter was
made aware of the fact. (Hear, hear.) This was only
another illustration of the mask and the sham which
was kept up to hide from public view the real source of
responsibility. But if the power of commenting on mea-
sures was a nullity, and if the present bill t d the
East stripped
East India Company of the whole of the patronage, then,
he asked, what was left to the Company but interference
without influence and rights without responsibilities 7
(Hear, hear.) In conclusion, he would say that, if we
were true to ourselves and the trust that had been re-
posed in us, and if India were true to herself, self-confi-
dent, and self-sustained, she would not lag behind in the
path of progress that lay before her, but would be seen
coming up from, the wilderness leaning on the arm of

' British sympathy and guided by the genius of British
reform. (Cheers.)
Sir C. WOOD hoped the house would excuse him if he
asked them to descend from the elevation to which they
had been led by the poetic imagination of the hon. gentle-
man, and to turn away from that sight in the wilderness
of India, " leaning on the arm of British sympathy," to
the more practical question whether they were, or whether
they were not, to read a second time the bill for the go-
vernment of India. (Hear.) They were drawing, he
hoped, to the close of this discussion, in which, looking to
the state of the house, not only that night, but on previ-
ous evenings, it would appear that a majority of the house
took but a small interest. (Hear.) He hoped, therefore,
they would be able, before that evening closed, to come
to a division on this most important question. He would
trespass on the patience of the house for a very short time ;
but, holding the position which he had the honour to fill,
there were some observations which he felt it incumbent
upon him to make in answer to statements that had been
brought forward in the course of the debate. (Hear.) It
was remarkable that in the course of this discussion very
little indeed had been said in favour of the motion of the
noble lord the member for Lynn, and still more remarkable
were the diversities of opinion and the contradictory argu-
ments that had been urged in its support. (Hear.) Pro-
bably it was foreseeing this would be the case that led the
noble lord to say the onus of proof lay with the promoters
of the bill ; for, if his motion were to depend upon the
arguments brought forward in its favour, one set of these
arguments might be made to pair off against the other.
(Hear.) He denied that the onus of proof lay with the
promoters of the bill. It was incumbent on the house to
provide for the future government of India, seeing the
present system of government would come to an end next
year, and the onus of proof, therefore, obviously lay with
those who opposed the natural and ordinary course of pro-
ceeding. (Hear.) The noble lord said that in former
times, when the charter expired, a Suspension Act was
passed—that previously to the expiry of the charter the
Government came forward and provided for the future go-
vernment of India by a temporary measure—[Lord Stan-
ley—l did not say so.] He had only to say that he took
down the words used by the noble lord at the time, and he
added that there was no insurrection in India in conse-
quence. If he did not make this statement, then he must
say that he had grievously misapprehended what fell from
the noble lord on that occasion. The argument of the hon.
member for Montrose was that there ought to be delay in
order that communications should be received from the
Board of Directors. He complained that the Court of
Directors had only very recently been informed of the
nature of this bill, whereas in 1833 a long correspondence
took place previous to the bill being introduced. But the
question was now very different from what it was in 1833.
The act passed in that year involved an interference with
the privileges of the East India Company as a commercial
body, and with their interests as traders, and a consider-
able time was required to enable them to wind up the
commercial concern. But now there was nothing of that
kind. They were merely trustees for the government -of
India, and it rested with the house to say in whose hands
the government of India should be placed for the future,
and what the nature of that government should be. The
hon. member for Montrose said, he considered it of im-
portance to wait for evidence from India, whereas the
noble lord, on the contrary, said he attached little or no
weight to the evidence that might be derived from India.
(Hear.) He had listened with the greatest attention to the
speeches which had been delivered in the course of that
evening as well as on previous occasions, and had heard a
great deal of detail, and many opinions given, as to the
various modes in which the government of India should be
conducted, both at home and abroad. Among others, the
right hon. gentleman, the President of the Board of Con-
trol, went into considerable detail with regard to the mode
in which he would govern India ; but not a single word
had been urged as a reason why they should delay proceed-
ing with this bill. (Hear.) There had been proposed
various amendments to clauses of the bill, but little or no
argument had been adduced in favour of delaying the bill
itself. The only real argument he had heard urged in
favour of delay was that brought forward the other evening
by the hon. member for Manchester, who gave a reason,
which, whether good or bad, was at least intelligible, and
he was supported in it by the hon. member for Richmond.
The argument amounted to this,—" Give us two years'
delay that we may agitate to pull down the East India
Company. (Hear, hear.) Now, this might be a reasonable
enough argument on the part of those who wished to pull
down the East India Company, but the hon. member for
Montrose, who wished to keep up the company, neverthe-
less joined the hon. member for Manchester in asking for
delay—the object of the one being to pull down, and of
the other to keep up the East India Company, (Hear,
hear.) Now, that those who thought the government of
India nearly perfect, and wished to perpetuate it, and
those who attributed to that government every abuse
that occurred in India, should both unite in wishing
for delay, teemed to him to be the most contradictory
kind of support that could be given to any pro-
position. (Hear, hear.) It did not seem to him
that agitation was the proper mode of settling a question
of this importance. To decide what the future govern-
ment of India should be was a question second to none
that could be brought forward, and it was one that re-
quired the calm and deliberate consideration of that house.
(Hear, hear.) He trusted, therefore, the house would not
be led away from the fair and full consideration of this
question on the ground of an appeal to public opinion.
(Hear.) Such was not the proper mode of obtaining the
calm and deliberate judgment of that house, and he hoped
they would not jeopordize those important interests that
were at stake by refusing to deal with the question as it
now came before them. (Hear, hear.) The Richmond
on
which the hon. members for anchester and Richmond
desired delay was, that the subject might be submitted to
public opinion, and they seemed to consider that that
public opinion, agitated by such speeches as had been de-
livered on this question, would be the best mode of settling
the whole controversy. He did not think, however, that
that would be the wisest mode of determining a question
of such importance as the future government of India;
and he believed a majority of that house would see the
propriety of not giving in to such a proposal merely in
order that the system of governing India might be pulled
down by agitation. (Hear, hear.) Reference had been
made to an expression which he quoted from Mr. Mill,
that enlightened public opinion was the best security for
good government. To that opinion he subscribed, but he
believed that unenlightened public opinion was the worst
authority to which they could appeal ; and he must say
that if public opinion was to be enlightened by such state-
ments as were made in that house on this subject, it would
be very greatly misled indeed. (Hear, hear.) He must
say that the misstatements that had been made, embracing,
as they did, every prejudice that could be excited against
those who administered the government of India, exceeded
anything that he ever remembered to have been made in
that house. (Hear.) The hon. member for Manchester
told them, the other night, that a report on public works,
which had been received in this country, had not been laid
on the table of the house, and then he imputed to the East
India Company the most unworthy motives for withhold-
ing such a report from the house. Now, he thought the
hon. gentleman might have had the charity to suppose
that the company were not actuated by any improper
motives ; and, if he had referred to the votes of the
house, he would have found that the report in question
was laid on the table in August last, and that his
complaint was entirely without foundation. (Hear, hear.)
Then the hon. gentleman (Mr. Blackett), on a former oc-
casion, stated that a report on territorial aggrandisement
(as we understood) had not been laid on the table of the
house. [Mr. Blackett here gave an explanation of his
statement.] The hon. gentleman was bound to ascertain
from the best possible authority what the fact was, and if
he had referred to the votes he would have found that on
the 14th of May that report was laid on the table of the
house. (Hear, hear.) Then, in taking his information
from the appendix to the committee's report, his hon. friend
had made what he must call as ludicrous a mistake as it
was possible to make. In giving an account of the out-
standing arrears of rent for 20 years the amount of arrears
was stated at the end of each year ; but his hon. friend
had added the outstanding balance at the end of each con-
secutive year, and then came down to the house and said
the sum of the whole was the amount due from the land
revenue of India that had failed to be collected. (A laugh.)
They had heard a great deal about the salt duty, and more
than one gentleman had referred to the diminished con-
sumption of salt as a proof of the miserable condition of
the people of India. An hon. gentleman quoted from an
Indian newspaper a statement to the effect that there had
been a great falling off in the consumption of salt, but he
did not take the trouble to refer to the next number of
the same newspaper, which stated that an unwitting mis-
take had been made to the extent of 40,000 tons. (Hear,
hear.) But the great mistake committed was taking the
revenue as a criterion of the falling off of the consumption,
totally forgetting in the comparison which had been made
of one period with another, the fact that in the meantime
the duty had, been reduced. In Madras, where there was
no reduction of duty, the revenue had increased ; in Bom-
bay it had also increased; but in Bengal there had been a
reduction of 6 per cent. in the duty, and the amount of
revenue showed a diminution. (Hear.) The hon. member
for Sunderland spoke of the miserable condition of India
and of the consequent impossibility
.of the people taking
gsoenintle
nmyanoffoolirgrogtoetdhsatastolitrorwcoausentnconessiddider.abßleutdtohmeehsotnic.
manufacture in India, and that if we sent wanufactured
goods there we displaced, to a great &dent, the domestic
man-ufaetitte of that country. To suppose, therefore, that
our itaiiiithdttirds should go there and increase, es in Bra -
zil and elsewhere, was to sheet § total disregard of that
which must necessarily be the state of the exchanges.
Notwithstauding this however, within the last 10 Of 20
years bur exports to India had increased far more in Pro-
portion than the total exports of this eetintry. To India
they had increased about 112, per cent., while the total
exports had increased itt tioiiirig like proportion. Then
tile lion. gentleman referred to a quarrel between a couple
of zemindars which was fought out with spirit, and a
policeman who was looking on never interfered to prevent
it: _This the hew gentlpeden quoted as a proof of the won-
derful deterioration Which* liad Wien place under our rule
in India. Well, he was sorry that that should have taken
place, but he had heard in this country of the inefficiency
of parish constables and of faction fights in Ireland which
had not been interrupted, yet he had never heard such
things alleged as reasons for altering the whole of our con-
stitution, and abolishing the system of King, Lords, and
commons, mit. to be true, even to a greater
z d was it or was it
extent than the 'hon. gentleman I:ll.l.eje • 1..4
not an improvement on that state of
were exposed to ii troop of Sikh horsemen dashing
-Tuzs when they
b`--- • ever the
Tnintry and hinclering everyvillage? Ile =tat-
felt justified saying that ketternal, war thte.!3
might have boen, internal war and dissengidti if entirely
given way under the dominion of British rule in fritter
which
ehsiccrlheheleo
oraut3(Hear.)B, The hon, gentleman had read some account of the
miserable state of the trots in Bengal from, he believed,
turn tot!: &Vett). 131tt if the Itottld
vi„d pages of the Quarterlp Review, or to Plcvile
'24(1 a very stron iißprc§siOrt he would find
oss
,the miseries of this cpuntry—of deserted
the abolite "'Kt fin the rest of it—owing to free trade and
more thanll°Aof the corn laws, quite as harrowing as any
speeches of the If he went no further even than the
misery in this country ago, he would find accounts of
had read of t
all, too, that wise
shize
alitlerjoarnd learned member for Suffolk, not
of the ryots in Bengal. (Hear.)
hon. member for man:eisteteiss andstah.atTwhhaitchh:ehner.
17 existed and or the system which the
member always confined his ins aI gn tio their not esta-
blishing a system of landowners Inlndnia similar to that
which existed unkir the
Perpant nt s ystem of Bengal. Yet
it was under thr,t permawnt alystom'so created, that
the misery existied of wiudli Jae' 'led read an account,
and which was tcl be attrilmat 0, not to the exB4.-