The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-28 00:00:00

Mr.
ment.
The

house then divided, when the numbers were—
For the recommittal of the bill 136
Against it 96

Majority
The bill to be recommitted accordingly.
The Llynvi Valley Railway ; London and North
Western and Buckinghamshire Railways ; London and
North Western Railway ; Newcastle-upon-Tyne Im-
provement ; Pendleton, Swinton, &c., Road ; Swansea
Valley Railway ; Birkenhead Dock Company ; Birken-
head Dock Trustees ; and Londonderry, Enniskillen,
and Sligo Railway Bills were considered and read a
third time.

The Baroness de Villars' Estate, and the Crewe's Dis•
abilities Removal Bills were read a second time.

NEW MEMBERS.
Mr. Whalley took the oaths and his seat for Peter-
borough, and Captain Vernon for Chatham.

NOTICE OF MOTIONS.
Lord J. MANNERS gave notice that, on the second
reading of the Education Bill, he should move that it
be read a second time that day six months.
Mr. KEATING gave notice that, on the sth of July,
he should move the following resolution, viz., that, re-
ferring- to the report of the select committee on dock-
yard promotions, and the evidence upon which
it is founded, this house is of opinion that
during the administration of the late Board of
Admiralty dockyard promotions, and the influence of
the Admiralty were used and exercised for political pur-
poses to an extent and in a manner calculated to throw
discredit on that department of the Government, and
impair the efficiency of the service.

THE INDIAN COMMITTEE.
Mr. HINDLEY wished to ask the President of the
Board or Control, whether it is the intention of the
Government, in the event of the passing of the India
Bill that the committee on India shall be terminated,
or whether they shall be continued until the committee
agree to a final report.
Sir C. WOOD said he had no intention to interrupt
the proceedings of the committee ?
THE INDIA BILL.—(ADJOURNED DEBATE.)
The motion for reading the order of the day having been
put and agreed to, this debate was resumed by
Mr. COBDEN, who said ho should probably not have
addressed th 3 house, had he not formed part of the com-
mittee ; and he wished to offer an observation on the ques-

tion asked by Mr. Hindley. Allusion had been made to
the sittings of the committee during the last Parliament.
They might speak of the last Parliament as they did of the
long Parliament—as something passed and gone, and mere
matter of history; and the conduct of that committee
ought not to be cited as any authority in that house. It
was such as to disentitle them to all confidence. That
committee was appointed to inquire into the important
question of the government of India. It divided its in-
quiry into eight heads, the first being the machinery by
which the government of India was carried on. After
examining 18 witnesses on that head, every one of whom
had been either an official in the employment of the Court
of Directors or the Board of Control, or had been in some
manner connected with one or other of those services, the
committee came to a kind of qualified resolution, approv-
ing of the conduct of the Government of India. At some
future time, when some dusky agitator on the banks of the
Ganges should want to find a grievance with which to
appeal to a Hindoo 'population as against the conduct of
the Government of India, he would cite that fact, and it
would be a most potent one to raise their indignation ; for
a more unfair proceeding was never committed by any tri-
bunal calling itself impartial. Two members voted
against that resolution, and they were in a minority of two.
With regard to the committee of this year, before they had
proceeded half through the inquiry they had laid down
for themselves it was announced in that house that the
Government measure for the government of India was
preparing. From that time he had not attended that com-
mittee. No member of the house was more assiduous than
himself in attending committees ; but from the moment
that announcement was made, he considered that the
question had passed out of the hands of the committee.
He saw no good they could do in collecting facts and in-
formation for the government of India, seeing that they
were generally obtained from persons who came from
India, or who had been employed there, and who wore
more accessible to the Indian authorities. The whole case
was prejudged; they had brought in their verdict without
going through the ordeal of a trial ; and he must decline,
unless by the Speaker's peremptory command, or at the
order of the house, attending any more to sanction such a
proceeding. (Hear.) They were now called on to vote for
an amendment which virtually postponed the whole ques-
tion for two years, leaving in the interim the government
of India as it was. If that were decided affirmatively,
ho should be happy to return to his duties in the com-
mittee, and give his constant attention to the inquiry,
which would then be of great importance in deciding
the question. (Hear, hear.) He did not at all regard
this in the light of a party question. (Hear, hear.)
It had been imputed to the people of Manchester,
who had certainly given interest and prominence
to tho question, that they had taken rather too material
a view of the subject, and had looked at is as a question
affecting too much the interests of Lancashire. If that were
true, at all events it could not bo said to have been taken
up in a political party spirit. So far as he was acquainted
with the state of parties in Lancashire and Yorkshire, he
believed they were generally in favour of postponement,
with a view to further inquiry. (Hear.) More inquiry
was wanted. The question before them was the whole go-
vernment of India ; and the problem to solve was, whe-
ther they should have what was called a single or a double
government. In discussing that qiestion he was met with
this difficulty—he did not see and could not understand
that it was a double government. He had sought in vain
to find what power the Court of Directors had to entitle
them to bo called a government at all. Looking through
the act of 1834 to find what irresponsible power was given
to them, he found they had none whatever, except the•dis-
posal of the patronage. The act left the whole controlling
power to the board of commissioners for managing the
affairs of India ; therefore he looked upon the Court of Di-
rectors, not as a government, but as nothing but as a screen,
behind which the real government was hid. It was
because he wished to get rid of that screen, and that the
real government might stand before the house and the
world in its proper character, and take upon its shoulders
the responsibility of the misgovernment of India—if there
were any—that he wanted to have this matter simplified,
and do away with the double government—i.e., to bring
into one office the government of India. (Hear, hear.)
There had been much misapprehension with regard to this
double government. Till the last year or two he did not
believe anybody understood it at all. Lord Harding() spoke
of it as a mystery, and said it was looked upon as a mystery
in India ; and he mentioned the instance of an officer of
rank in India, who had written an indignant letter to the
President of the Board of Control in reference to a commu-
nication of the secret committee of the Court of Directors,
expressing his indignation at the conduct of that oom-
mittee__; and he was only restrained from sending it, by
Lord Harding() telling him that the secret committee was
the President of the Board of Control himself. (Hear,
hear.) Those who were most authoritative in that
house on the question of double government, when
pressed in examination before the committee, showed fthat
they had never understood what the meaning of double
government was. Ono gentleman who had been often
cited (Mr. Marshman, the conductor of the Friel-mil of
India, a strong advocate of "things as they are,") When
fairly probed and pushed on the subject, showed that he,
who was instructing them all, and sending pamphlets to
all the members of the Legislature, had very little funda-
mental knowledge of what this Government was. He
was asked—" In seeking to acquaint yourself with the
form of government for India, you would resort ex elu-
sively to the act of Parliament under which the present
government of India is constituted ?—Yes. Do you find
that by this act of Parliament any discretionary powers
are vested in the Court of Directors, except with reference
to the disposal of the patronages ?—I should think they
are responsible to the Board of Control. Admitting that
the Court of Directors have no uncontrolled power in the
government of India, how can you make them responsible
either to Parliament or to the people of India ?—YoA it
was the intention of the act to confer certain powers upon
them, and to give a control over the exercise of those
powers to the Board of Control. You admit that unless a
party has power intrusted it, it cannot be responsible for
the exercise of its power ?—No, I can, therefore, only say
that they are responsible for the exercise of all the powers
given to them in that act. You still say that this act was
intended to vest a certain power in the East India Com-
pany ?—There must have been some object in view in
creating the present Government of the East India Com-
pany.
You say you believe that the intention of Parliament
was to give certain powers to the East India Company ;
having admitted that no such powers exist except in the
disposal of patronage, you would admit that, if Parlia-
ment had such object, it has failed to accomplish it ?
That very much depends upon the working of the sys-
tem. Although Parliament may have exempted nothing
from the control of the President of the Board of Control,
yet it is certain that the Court of Directors were intended
to be a body employed in the administration of the affairs
of India. To the extent of the disposal of patronage?—
Not merely to the extent of the disposal of the patronage,
because the patronage of the Court of Directors consists
only in appointment to service, and not in appointment to
office. The great patronage lays in the hands of the Go-
vernor-General and the governors of the various presiden-
cies. All the patronage which the Court has to dispose of
is the appointment to writerships and cadetships. Will you
explain to the committee what power the Court of Direc-
tors have under this Charter Act beyond the disposal of the
patronage ?—I cannot exactly speak to that, because I have
not seen the interior working of the system of either the
Court of Directors or the Board of Control. I only wish
for an answer founded upon this Act of Parliament for the
government of India ?—All I can say is, if this Act of Par-
liament was intended to give them no power whatever,
except the disposal of patronage, it could not be considered
an act for vesting the administration of affairs in the hands
of the East India Company." He admitted that if there
was no power vested in the Court of Directors but the dis-
posal of the patronage, that it was no government at all ;
and that was all the power they possessed. The evil of
this mystery was, that where the responsibility of the
government existed could hardly be pointed out by any in-
telligent person. (Hear, hear.) There could be nothing
worse than mystery in the forms and proceedings of an
administration except it were mystery as to the source
whence those proceedings emanated. We had been lately
simplifying our courts of law, and getting rid of fictitious
forms of proceeding : we had abolished " John Doe" and
" Richard Roe." (Hear.) Here was " John Doe" and
" Richard Roe" in the form of an Indian government ;
and for whose benefit ? (Hear, hear.) Was it for the be-
nefit of the people of India ? Upon that he would cite
the authority of a gentleman who was brought before the
committee by the Court of Directors, who had filledtvoery
high offices in India, and was destined Pr2act,bilys i n
fill
higher—certainly one of the most remarkable o
the
ceislilcisveiliveiemep—loMymneinitaliinidalYndia. oanwdash he 'Tao in
in the'
t. heh taco
igh-
aonandoporyeesraen.cenoef
htahs cuoseurtiolef
eDxep(ir th
ereocsstoiorns,, Itihisatmtahsetecrisiatatne(ri
(oliioaxtri,vhesea(r)f.)lndHi India,
as beingfar
min :Ot
iyears,om
outw afso
rc otnhsai
td e
pr
h etvhoe
the e x pr
peopleess o n
of`
India fanningth
itnhke
tgho
e-
vwg
eoarvsne asked,—"
sukemne etd.nC 3'
‘o
foY loynuoduiusa is farmed to the Comp any in the
same sense that the taxes were farmed at the period you
allude to? They use precisely the same word in speaking
of the renewal of the charter. They will talk with you as
to the probability of the jarch,' or ' farm,' being renewed,
and, as far as I know, they have no other term to express
it. Is that not merely through the infirmity of their lan-

guage ; have they any word which signifies ' delegation ?'
—They may have ; I speak of the fact, and their use of
the term carries with it a corresponding idea. How would
ycu translate `delegation' into Hindustanee ; might not
`larch' be a fair translation of the term?—lt would
rather signify farm or lease. You said that, in fact,
the government was that of the crown, and that
the natives, as they become more enlightened, will
more and more understand it to be so ?—lt is the case. As
they become more and more enlightened will not the mis-
chief which you consider arises from their notion of a
farm disappear of itself?—lt may in that sense, no doubt,
and does ; and yet there arises a proportionate weakness to
the Government, from their seeing that the body held up
as their apparent governors are not their real governors.
Without wishing to speak irreverently, it has somewhat
the appearance of a sham." (Hear, hear.) Throughout
his examination the changes were rung continuously on
the word " sham;" but it gave an idea of what he thought
of the government of his employers or masters, in whose
presence ho was speaking. He disposed of the whole ques-
tion as regarded the interests of India, and of this country
also, if we wished to govern India cheaply and beneficially.
He seil—" If you were to change the system, and to
govern India in the name of the Crown, yon would im-
mensely add to the reverence which the people of India
would have for your government, and increase the stability
of your empire in the eastern world." (Hear, hoar.) Mr.
Marshman himself, though ho did not speak of carrying on
the government of India under the Crown, distinctly and
repeatedly laid it down that the government of India
should be carried on in one office, that the President of
the Board of Control, or whoever was the responsible
minister of India, should sit in the same room with those
who constituted the council, now the Court of Directors
in Leadenhall-street, and should communicate with them
orally, instead of by correspondence as at present. But
what were tho evils of this delusive form of government ?
The first and greatest of all was this, that public opinion
was diverted from the subject, that that enlightened
public opinion was not brought to bear on Indian ques-
tions, which would be the case if India were governed in
the name of the Crown, just the same as the colonies had
been. It might be answered that if India were governed
as the colonies had been it would be governed badly ; .but
if any good had arisen from our government of the colonies,
it had come from enlightened public opinion emanating
from this country, and chiefly brought to bear on our colo-
nial empire in that house. (Hear, hear.) If there were
any hope for the amelioration of India, it must come from
the same source ; and he wanted the Indian government to
have such a tangible, visible form, that the public opinion
of this country might be able to reach it, and that there
might be no mask or screen before it as now. (Hear,
hear.) With an enlightened public opinion brought to •
bear more directly on the affairs of India, there would bo
a better chance of avoiding that source of all fiscal embar-
rassment, constant wars and constant annexations of terri-
tory. (Hear, hear.) In other parts of the world, no mini-
ster of the crown would take credit for offering to annex
territory anywhere. On the west coast of Africa it might
not be less profitable to extend our territory than in Bur-
paah ; yet a resolution of a committee of that house, many
years ago, forbad the extension of our territory in tropical
countries, When an adventurous gentleman, Sir James
Brooke, went out and took possession of some territory on
the coast of Borneo, the enlightened government of Sir R.
Peel and his colleagues resolutely resisted all attempts to
induce them to occupy any territory there. Recently,
when it was announced in the house that orders had been
given to the admiral on that station that on no account
should any fresh territory be acquired, the announcement
was received with loud cheering. (Hear, hear.) We had
arrived at a point when public opinion in the house and the
dh e
resolutely b e ies, e d
tchoantuttrYhe lweandnindgPstraetevesnmteannoynsubcohthtshiindeTwaonuld
set themselves against any extension of our territory in
tropical countries. Then how was it that this went on
constantly in India, to the loss and dilapidation of the
finances? With a declaration in the journals of that house
and in an act of parliament never repealed, that the honour
and interest of this country was concerned in not extend-
ing its territory in the east, still these continual annexa-
tions went on in India. Why did these things happen ?
It was because at the present time all the authority in
these matters was left in the hands of the Governor-Gene-
ral of India. He said virtually, because he believed they
rested in point of law with the President of the Board of
Control. Nothing could be more conclusive than the dis-
tinctness of the avowal of Lord Broughton that he was re-
sponsible for the war in Affghanistan, and Lord Ellenbo-
rough declared that when he was president of that board,
he knew that he governed India. He was therefore, asto-
nished when he heard the right hon. gentleman opposito
(Mr. Hex-lies) state that neither he nor his predeces-
sors in office were responsible for the wars in India, but
that the Governor-General was the person responsible for
them. When there existed such differences of opinion on
such an important question, a question which involved not
only the fate of India, but of England, was it not high
Limo to come to some definite understanding on the subject?
Was it not right when such differences of opinion existed
between men of the highest authority, that there should be
a little delay, in order that they might all come to an un-
derstanding on so vital a point ? Practically he believed
that these things were carried on in India where the Go-
vernor-General was surrounded by an atmosphere of a war-
like tendency—where the mere rumour of war was received
with favour by all that constituted public opinion in that
country. Even Lord Dalhousie himself says on this sub-
ject, that it was his deliberate opinion that in the exercise
of a wise policy nothing could be said against acquiring
new territory-or revenue. (Hear, hear.) Yet this was
said in the teeth of an act of Parliament which declared
that it was contrary to sound policy to annex any more
territory to our dominions. (Hear, hear.) And this de-
claration of Lord Dalhousie came out before tho declara-
tion of the President of the United States, General Pierce,
who made a qualified declaration that the United
States would annex territory by every just and lawful
means, and which declaration of the President of the
United States was received with great disfavour in this
country. The English people and Parliament were apt to
regard the government of India as something apart from
their own interests, as something for which they were not
responsible—from which they were to gather fruits with-
out the responsibilities that should accompany" them ;
and it was his firm opinion that nothing would awaken
the people of England to a full sense of the responsibility
and peril which attached to them in this matter, but a
duo appreciation of the state and prospects of the
revenue of India. (Hear.) Here was the declaration made
by Mr. Marsham, one of the great organs of public opinion
in that country, and one of its most influential men.
" Every one out of England is now ready to acknowledge
that the whole of Asia, from the Indus to the sea of
Ochotzk, is destined to become the patrimony of that race
which the Normans thought, six centuries ago, they had
finally crushed, but which now stands at the head of Euro-
pean civilization. We are placed, it is said, by the mys-
terious but unmistakable designs of Providence in comman cl
of Asia ; and the people of England must not lay the flat-
tering unction to their souls that they can escape from th e
responsibility of this lofty and important position by Him pl y
denouncing the means by which England has attained it. "
When asked if Calcutta was a good central station for
the metropolis of India, he said, " it may not be at pre-
sent, but it will be a good central station when we extend
our dominion eastward." This showed the projects
which the most influential men in India had in view. He
would now refer to the secret committees of the India
House. Did they know what the secret committee of the
Court of Directors was ? He (Mr. Cobden) would tell
them. Why, there were three gentlemen at the India
House, through whom all communications were made from
the President of the Board of Control that affected peace
or war, or annexation of territory. It was in the power
nf the President of the Board of Control to sit down and
write an order to annex China, and send that order to
these throe gentlemen, who formed what was called the
Secret Committee at the India-house ; and they would be
obliged to send the order to India for prosecution by the
Governor-General. They might altogether disapprove of
the order, but nevertheless they would be compelled to
send it to India. Mr. Melvill, Secretary to the East
India Company, stated that in all cases of declaration of
war it is within the power of the Board of Control to act
through the Secret Committee, without the concurrence of
Court of Directors—that orders might be sent out by the
President of the Board, through the Secret Committee, to
annex the Burman or the Chinese. empire to India without
the English people knowing anything about the order.
The Court of Directors could not knew it. On the ques-
tion being asked—" How are the English people to know
it, if the Court of Directors do not know it ?" his reply was
—" Till it comes back from India, till it is a fait accompli,
or the result of the orders is ascertained, they cannot know
it." (Hear.) Now, what was the practical effect of this
state of things ? The Court of Directors were often at-
tacked for not making railways and works of irrigation ;
and he thought they deserved the charges brought against
them so long as they submitted to the humiliation of their
present condition. How could they be expected to make
railways and other public works when they could not pre-
vent the President of the Board of Control, or the Governor
General, at any time wasting the substance which should
be applied to those improvements? Why a Government
so situated did not deserve the name of Government.
(Hear, hear.) He wanted to know what would be the
motives of 24 honourable men who submitted to be taunted
with those evils, and had not the spirit to resist the
cause of it. (Hear, hear.) But, beside the impossibility
of making these improvements, there was another evil
arising from what was called the double government. The
reward these gentlemen got for submitting to this humilia-
tion was the patronage. Now, one of the great evils of
the present government in India was, that the patronage
was disposed of to Europeans in a great many instances
where it ought to have been given to the natives. (Hear,
hear.) As the Court of Directors were paid for their
services by patronage, and not by stipends, they of course
made use of that patronage by bestowing it chiefly
on their friends and relatives in this country. Now,
he wanted to see a great number of natives of India
brought into the service of the Government. If they
abolished this so-called double government—if they abo-
lished the Court of Directors, and brought the Govern-
ment into one office, under the responsibility and control
of a Minister for India, then public opinion would in-
sist upon the natives of India getting some of this
patronage. (Hear, hear.) On this subject there was a vast
deal of misapprehension in the public mind. Nothing came
out clearer before the committee than this, that the natives
were well fitted to hold the higher class of offices. Indeed,
in a judicial capacity, they already executed 97 per cent.
of the cases disposed of. Let the natives be employed in
so,ooomelo.fa tyheearh.igThhoeffincaetsi—vets would be glad to do the workhose with salaries of 2,0001. or
3
for less than half those stipends, and that would be to
eato inall Thethe
higher officers was overwhelming.
wthhoelecapacity
n to
fofnEatuivroeps
All the great au-
tehvefienacsemi
uc
s
n
o
thorities in Indian matters- • -Monroe, Malcolm, Elphin-
fha a u ther
of
stone—concurred in opinion on this point. Sir George
Clerk, of Bombay, and Mr. Halliday, in his evidence, took
the same view of the question. The only way of
insuring the employment of natives in the higher offices
was to take away the patronage from the Court of Direc-
tors. He would now call the attention of the house to a
point of considerable importance, which was strikingly
illustrated by the facts attending the commencement of
the Burmese war in which we were now engaged. The
hon. member here gave a detailed statement of the cir-
cumstances connected with the origin of the war, with
the view of showing, that Commodore Lambert com-
menced hostilities in defiance of Lord Dalhousie's express
instructions that he was to avoid doing so until ho had
communicated with his lordship, and received further
orders. Two-months after the Marquis of Lansdowne was
speaking in high terms of the conduct of the King of Ava ;
but at that time Rangoon had been devastated, and the
war was going on. (Hear, hear.) Nay, before Lod Dal-
housie at Calcutta had received the King of Ava's . answer
to a letter which his lordship had written to him, he was
committed to acts of hostilities performed in the face of
his own orders. This brought him to the point to which
he was desirous ef calling the attention of the house.
Lord Dalhousie had no power to give orders to Commodore
Lambert in that station : he could merely request and
solicit the co-operation of the commanders of the Queen's
forces, just as we might solicit the co-operation of a friendly
foreign Power, See what the effect of this system was. If
Commodore Lambert had been sent out with orders fro