The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-24 00:00:00

patronage- of the company, in maintaining the present
number of the directors, and other particulars. In this
hope he should support the second reading.
Mr..H. J. BAILLIE said it was impossible to overrate
the importance of the question the house was called upon
to decide, or the interest which it had excited in the public
tniud ; and he trusted that they would therefore approach
it without reference to party feelings. (Cheers.) He
would not enter into the controversy which had raged so
fercely on both sides respecting the past administration of
the East India Company—which, on the one hand, had
been painted by the President of the Board of Control in
such glowing colours ; but which had been denounced as
powerfully by the honourable member for Manchester. The
truth was, that the right hen. gentleman had carefully
omitted all the evils of the present system and that the
hon. member had as carefully suppressed all, its good. The
house was aware that in 1833 very important changes had
been introduced into the administration of India. The bill
of that year was evidently an experimental one • and was
to remain in force for 20 years only. The time for that re-
consideration had now arrived; and it was due to the vast
population of India that all doubt and uncertainty as to
their future destiny should cease, and that Parliament
should at once proceed to legislate. It was most desirable
that they should do so this session, but no less so that their
legislation should have something of a permanent charac-
ter. (Hear, hear.) The bill before the house had not that
character ; Mr. Lowe had admitted that it might be
amended from time to time, and said that India would be
placed on the same footing as the colonies. (Hear.)
Mr. LOWE explained.
Mr. HERRIES, who spoke in so low a tone as to
be almost inaudible during the whole of his remarks,
said that the noble lord who proposed the amendment
(Lord Stanley) had not sufficiently set forth his ulterior
views upon this subject, and he (Mr. Herries) was there-
fore unable to give him his support. The amendment
seemed only calculated to embarrass Government without

promoting any practical result. The passing of the second
reading of this bill was also a matter involving great
difficulty, and, as it stood, he could not say that he de-
sired to see it become law. Nevertheless, he was of

opinion the most judicious course would lie to assent to
the second reading, and then endeavour to amend the bill
as it passed through committee. The right hon. gentle-
man was understood to urge that there had been a pro-
gressive increase in the exports of India ; and that progress
had been made in providing the means of education of the
natives ; that the Government had done all they could to
encourage the construction of railways and public works ;
and that a proposal to establish the electric telegraph had
been entertained. He concluded by expressing his incli-
nation to agree with her Majesty's Government as to the

expediency of immediate legislation, but he had strong
objections to parts of the bill proposed. He should, how-
ever postpone such amendments as he thought would
render the bill effectual for the government of India
(among which would be one for expunging all the parts of
the bill relating to the new constitution of the Board of

Directors) until the committee ; and he should not oppose
the second reading.
On the motion of Mr. HUME the debate was adjourned
till this day.

CUSTOMS, &c., ACTS.
The report on these acts was brought up and received.
EXCISE DUTIES ON SPIRITS BILL.

----
The order of the day was then read for further proceed-
ings_ on the third reading of this bill.
Mr. BOWYER rose to move a clause of which he had
given notice relative to the wastage of spirits in bond.
What he asked was, that the same principle that was
applied to the 17th clause Should be made applicable to the
.28th. The 17th clause related to the wastage of spirits
during the process of distillation, and the 28th clause re-
late(' to the wastage of spirits in bond ; and he wished the
same principle to be adopted in the latter as in the former
case. He proposed that an, allowance should be made for
wastage in bcild, the Chancellor of the Exchequer fixing a
maximum, if lie chose, beyond which no allowance should
be made. The hon. gentle; nan then moved a clause em-
boThdyie ng his viewE s upon tho subject.
CEIANCLLOR of the EXCHEOUER ob • 1
that the details of this met ~,iir'
e had - observed,
that
been carefully consi-
dered in conjunction with the distillers of spirits; and he
was warranted in saying that the allowances in thebill
were satisfactory to them.
Mr. BOWYER.said that, though the distillers might be
satisfied, the dealers who wore obliged to keep the
spirits
some time before they sold them, were not.
After a few words in supp ort of the clause from Mr. P.
O'BRIEN and Mr. GRoGAN,
The clause was negatived.
Some new clauses were addeddto the bill.
On the question that the lbifi
Mr. CONOLLY said, that
wheonpoassn a, former evening he
progress of this bill, he had been
hatioppositcl Iherfuther
i;iii"" c.tatrte.d with fa Crs motives,
was clue
he had been actuated
to the constituents
11:hleorInY bhy'ea rfeePell'iellBeil'w an'dbletoforthheinlec
tuontaryllowto
to
thwehibilhl lie
4 belonged. It wa& Pc'sF.'l
i'-' pass without en
iittt......
• r. his protestemphatically
the whole measuro,, uponentire
-
lit ni el the spirit in which
4. t w An 4; , fram" d
li against
He did not upon the,

had cost a million sterling, and contrast that with the
279,0001. spent by the company over a period of years.
It was of no use to say that they had been prevented by
wars. They boasted of their public roads, and instanced
the road from Calcutta to the frontier' but the natives
looked upon that as a great military road, and not made
for the people. But there was one subject which had not
been touched upon, and that was the condition of the bulk
of the people of India. The notion of a native of India in
this country was a half-dressed savage, with a little cotton
round his loins, labouring for his bread in the broiling sun ;
but the people forgot that they had here the debris of a
great monarchy, that they hadfor their subjects people who
had wrestled with them for empire, great aristocracies, who
had ruled the country, and great officials who had adminis-
tered provinces before we took possession of them. The peo-
ple in Scinde, in the Punjaub, and in the annexed districts,
felt that they were condemned to a life of inactivity in favour
of a body of men who, as Burke said, had no connexion
with the country, and went there merely to make their for-
tunes. Look at the way in which they had dealt withthe In-
dian princes. They had a number of associated and subsidiary
princes who had treaties with them ; and if they differed
with them on the subject of these treaties, to w
they have recourse ? If the princes came to England,
could
gland,rre-
and
_ him
they at the India House, they were referred
_to.
the
sideut of the Board of Control, and if they applied to him
they were referred to the Governor-General of India. He
thought if there was a tribunal of arbitration under the
authority of the sovereign of this country, the natives
would gladly pay implicit obedience to it. Why, from the
first night of this discussion there had been in this house
great Parsee merchants, who had come to this country for
justice which had been denied them in India, and there
had been the Vakeel of the Rajah of Sattarah, who com-
plained that his principality had been taken from him by
injustice, and that ho could gain no redress. (Hear.) Did
they think that those things did not sink deep into the
minds of the people of India? His hon. friend the member
for Kidderminster alluded to the events which were taking
place in Eastern Europe. There were possible contingen-
cies which would vibrate through the whole of India. It
might be that a change of government at Constantinople
might strangely affect the whole Mussulman population of
the world, and if the Indian people found that their native
princes had justice denied them, that their nobles were
deprived of their privileges, and that they themselves
were oppressed, the consequences might be dangerous.
The persons nominated by the crown must have served 10
years in India. Why, this would exclude the Governors-
General, the Commanders of the Forces, every man
who had been governor of an inferior presidency, and
the legal members of the legislative council. He trusted
if the house rejected the motion of the noble lord, it would
reject the motion for the second reading of the bill. He
thought that the bill which they should pass would pro-
vide that in future the administration should be carried
on in the name of the crown, and that in future the
people of India should know they were the subjects of
the crown, and that the army and navy of India should
know they were serving the crown, and that they were
invested with all the state authority and influence of
the crown. Her Majesty had recently added to her ac-
quisitions that illustrious jewel which once adorned
the crown of the greatest potentate in India. He hoped
that her possession of that jewel would be a pledge to the
people of India that in future their prosperity would be
promoted, their comforts provided for, their advancement
secured, not by a company which had interposed between
them and the crown, but by the weight and authority and
influence of her ajesty and her successors, who, he
trusted, would long reign over that great dependency as
sovereigns of the people of India. (Cheers.)
Sir R. INGLIS said he objected both to the bill and to
the amendment, and had no reason, therefore, to expect
sympathy from either side of the house. This was not the
only instance in which the attention given by the house
was in inverse ratio to the importance of the subject. It
was a matter of history that even in the days of Burke
India was the dinner bell of the House of Commons. There
were but five members on the opposition side of the house
when the noble lord moved his amendment, and only one
cheer was given on that side of the house, while only seven
cheers were given on the other side. He (Sir R. Inglis)
objected to the indefiniteness of the period for the dura-
tion of this bill. He could not understand how a house
which was so jealous of the influence of Government that
it would not tolerate a third Secretary of State on its
benches, should yet be ready to transfer to the Minister of
the day the patronage of India—a patronage so vast that
the whole of that at present in the hands of Government
was but a mere fraction compared with it. (Hear, hear.)
He must say, too, that after having heard the President
of the Board of Control in one of the longest speeches ever
delivered in the house, panegyrise the administration of
the East India Company, he was much surprised that the
right hon. baronet during the last half hour of his address
should have proposed a measure to destroy that machinery
on the working of which he had commented with so much
satisfaction. But the motion of the noble lord was still
more objectionable; for though there was no "public" in
India, it was impossible to doubt that whenever there was
a free press and the moans of representing public opinion,
ranch agitation would be carried on during the whole du-
ration of the continuing act which the noble lord had•pro-
posed. India was pre-eminently an empire of opinion. It
had been formed and consolidated by the superiority of
the Anglo-Saxon race in intellect, in arms, and in moral
character; and he viewed with alarm the effect which two
or three years of agitation must have upon the confidence
of the natives in the general superiority of our institutions
—(hear, bear)—the manifestoes of the gentlemen who met
in Charles-street and of the Manchester school were suffi-
cient demonstration that delay was unnecessary. Those
gentlemen declared that sufficient evidence had been taken
to justify them in condemning the present system; but if
that was so, there was also evidence enough already taken
to justify other persons in coming to an opposite conclu-
sion. He could refer to the testimony of at least twenty
witnesses to disprove the assertion of the Manchester school,
that " the people of India had been left in a condition of
misery disgraceful to their rulers." He had recently re-
ceived a letter from a missionary in the Punjaub, who de-
scribed the exertions of both the civil and military authori-
ties as most praiseworthy ; and the condition of the people,
-under the protection and justice of British rule, is most
gratifying ; in fact, said the writer, " the work of gene-
rations had been done in the Punjaub in a few years."
(Cheers.) Re-echoing the sentiments of this missionary,
the hon baronet expressed a hope that more would be done
for the spiritual good of the natives. When they heard
of a bishopric which extended 2,000 miles from the north-
west to the south-east, he felt sure that they would agree
the task was too much for any one man, though he felt
bound to pay the warmest tribute to the 17 years' labours
of Bishop Wilson. (Hear.) He did not wish to do any-
thing against idolatry, but he wished to do nothing for it ;
:and above all, to prevent that support being given to it
which resulted from the confiscation of a man's goods if he
were converted to the Christian faith. (Hear, hear.) It
had been argued that the position of the Indian question
was different now from what it was in 1833. That he de-
nied. The only difference was, that in 1833 the China
trade, which had up to that time been exclusively in the
;hands of the company, had been thrown open. He should
certainly oppose the amendment, but he trusted that the
bill would be greatly improved in committee, particularly
in severing the_ connection of the Government with the