The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-25 00:00:00

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. WILLIAMS wished to bring under the notice of
the house the manner in which the affairs of the country
were carried on. He had had some experience in the
house, and he could say that he had never seen public
business carried on so disgracefully as at present. They
had been sitting continually until three o'clock in the
morning, and at most unseasonable hours bills of the
greatest importance had been hurried through, although
all members, except those over whom Government exer-
cised direct control, were absent. Nor was this all. A
large section of the house had to be in attendance upon
committees at 11 and 12 o'clock in the morning, and
now, to crown all, morning sittings were commencing.
Business carried on under these circumstances became a
mere farce, and unless the Government devised some
plan to expedite matters, he should not hold the Minis-
try blameless for the evil consequences which must of
necessity follow.
Lord J. RUSSELL said the hon. member for Lam-
beth was not taking the best means to promote the
dispatch of business in occupying a portion of the
public time in this manner, just as they were about to
enter upon the consideration of a most important ques-
tion. (Hear, hear.) The house did in fact perform far
more business than any other legislative assembly in the
world. (Cheers.) If the hon. gentleman asked why
they did not proceed more rapidly, he (Lord J. Russell)
could only reply, that they had business—as the hon.
member might tell for himself if he would go over the
list of the various bills which had been before them that
session—that they had business of very great import.
ance, and that there were many members in the house
who took a great interest in the different questions,
and were quite competent to state their opinions upon
them. (Hear.) That was the cause why the time of
the house was taken up so many hours in every week.
There was in fact only one alternative. The house
might transact no business after twelve, but if they did
they would have to sit through the whole of the year.
(Hear, hear.) Still, however irksome and fatiguing it
might be to meet at twelve o'clock and sit till two or
three the next morning, he thought that the house would
much prefer that mode of doing business to having a
permanent session. (Hear, hear.) He (Lord J. Rus-
sell) did not believe that bills of any great importance
had been passed without receiving due attention from
the house. (Cheers.) The fact was, that when a bill
had been much discussed upon the second reading, and
the sense of the house had been decidedly pro-
nounced, then the subsequent stages were passed
through without much further debate. So likewise, if a
bill had been fully discussed in committee, there was
very little debate on the third reading. (Hear, hear.)
He really did not think, therefore, that it could be fairly
said that the business of the house had been neglected.
The motion for the adjournment was then agreed to.
IMPRISONMENT OF BRITISH SUBJECTS IN
SOUTH CAROLINA.
Mr. FRENCH gave notice that next Friday he
would put a question with regard to the opinion of the
law officers of the crown upon this question.
Mr. BUTT gave notice that, on going into committee
of supply, he would move that it was the duty of the
Government to bring in a measure with reference to
arms in Ireland.

Mr. HUME rose to resume the debate, amid cries of
" oh, oh," from a few members, impatient, doubtless, to
hear the right nonourable member for Edinburgh (Mr.
Macaulay) speak, a rumour having been prevalent through-
out the day that the right honourable gentleman intended
to address the house. He said thabwas a somewhat novel
interruption, considering that by the rules of debate he
(Mr. Hume) had possession of the house. It was all very
well for those hon. members who were deterininod to sup-
port the bill of the Government to call for their friend ;
but it did not seem at all fair to take a course so unusual
as to call up a member of that house in opposition to one
who had moved the adjournment of the debate on the pre-
vious evening. He (Mr. Hume) would relieve those gentle-
men who were so impatient by stating that ho should not
occupy the attention of the house for any great length of
time. Having been so long connected with India, and
having directed much of his attention to the subject of ad-
, ministering its affairs, ho could not allow the present occa-
sion to pass without offering his opinion upon the question
before the house. He would submit that it was a mere
mockery, and contrary to all the ordinary usage of the
house, to proceed with this bill until they had before them
the report of the committee now investigating the affairs
of India up stairs. They were now called upon to legislate
for no less than 150,000,000 of people, and yet, notwith-
standing the petitions that had been presented to the house
in reference to that contemplated legislation, the committee
sitting up stairs, long as they had already sat, had not as
yet had one native petitioner examined before them. How
was it possible to know to what extent the grievances set

•
forth in those petitions were well founded or otherwise,
unless they had before them the testimony of native wit-
nesses ? Looking at the bill brought forward by the Go-
vernment, ho contended, if there was one thing more than
another calculated to produce and keep up agitation and
disquiet among the people of India, it was the hanging of
a provisional measure of that kind over their heads, accom-
panied by the understanding that it was to be altered and
amended as time and circumstances might require. (Hear,
hear.) Ho was against proceeding with a bill of that de-
scription until, according to the past practice of the house,
every party had had an opportunity of being heard who
ought to be heard. For those reasons chiefly it was his
intention to support the amendment of the noble lord
opposite (Lord Stanley). We could never have raised
India to its present position by conquest only, but for the
aid of the industry and capital furnished by a commercial
company begun a century ago. The honourable gentle-
man the member for Kidderminster (Mr. Lowe) stated
on the previous night that the Government was now pro-
ceeding in a course agreeable to precedent. But what wera
the facts ? The heads of the present bill were only submit.
ted by the Government to the Court of Directors on the Ist
June last ; whereas on the last renewal of the charter, in
1833, the scheme of legislation of the Government of that
day had been under the consideration of " the chairs.' from
October, 1830, and the bill itself was submitted to the Court
of Directors in March of the following year. With those
facts before him, he thought he was perfectly warranted in
stating that sufficient time had not been given to do justice
to the matter under consideration. His own opinion was
that one great defect 9f the existing system was that none of
the natives of India were included in the Legislative Council.
Did hon. gentlemen believe that India was to continue for
ever, as now, under the management of a few hundred
Europeans, and that in the administration of its affairs we
were not to take advantage of the existing means of civili-
sation ? The complaint ho had to make was, that during
the last 20 years the resources of India had been wasted,
and wasted in uncalled-for wars, which would never have
been carried out if the Court of Directors had had that power
and control which the act of 1833 -was intended to leave in
their hands. In 1833 the home and foreign debt amounted
to 38,000,0001., but through the persevering exertions of
the directors from year to year, it was reduced in 1839 to
31,000,0001. Then came the Affghan war, and their expen-
diture exceeded their receipts. There were also the wars
in Scinde and the Punjanb. Would the house believe that
the enormous sum of 28,737,0001. had been spent on those
three wars alone, all of which had happened since the last
renewal of the charter ? The question might be asked,
who caused the wars ? Ho contended that it was more a
European than an Indian question ; and that it was di-
rected by a Secretary of State hero in conjunction with
the .Board of Control. What he wanted was that they
should have a security against the continuance of such pro-
ceedings. If there was, as he was anxious there should be,
a responsible Minister for India, such a Minister ought to
have a council to consult and advise with, and there could
be no better council than a Court of Directors, properly
constituted. He considered that they ought to make Vie
Court of Directors more efficient, and the way to do that
was to prevent any man entering that court who had any
other business to occupy his attention, and to infuse into it
a larger proportion of members conversant with the affairs
of India. 'With respect to the question of the double go-
vernment, he wished to see the administrationpf India as it
now was carried on by the Court of Directors—called by the
name of a council, if they pleased—to see that system con-
tinued,
rc
ioeudl do
nn,o
or
believer raised
thattinu etdh,ei mGovernmentproved,andwio)curipaethryteebde.
been Heca
to its present extraordinary position of power and import-
ance, if they had not had that body appointing its own
servants, and taking care of, and controlling, the whole
revenue of the country. The present bill disgraced the
directors, for it positively placed them under the clerks
whose masters they were. lie objected to leaving the
power in the President of the Board of Control of doing
the evil he had hitherto done without any check, and with-
out any means of Parliament knowing when important
measures were taken by him. At present, according to the
Minister, no one could tell where responsibility really
rested. One said it was in the Board of Control ; another
in the directors ; whilst a third said it was in India. Parlia-
ment ought to know where lay the responsibility ; and for
effecting this object he suggested that the secret committee
should be obliged to keep minutes of their proceedings. He
objected to the proposed alterations in the distribution of
patronage, on the ground that it had not been abused, as
was shown by the efficiency of the public servants in India.
On these several grounds he entreated the house not to be
led away by hasty or rash proposals, but to insist that the
inquiry now proceeding should be closed before they legis-
lated.

Mr. MACAULAY— I shall vote for the second reading
of this bill. But even if I thought I could not vote for it,
I should not deem it right to give my vote for the amend-
ment proposed by the noble lord. That amendment does
not appear to me to have been very greatly supported by
the arguments in the speech of my honourable friend (Mr.
Hume). He at least cannot plead that he has not had suf-
ficient information before him to enable him to decide on
this question. He has made up his mind, not only that
the present bill is a bad bill, but he has made up his mind
also upon the most minute details of that plan of govern-
ment which he himself recommends. He has sketched out
the complete plan of another bill, altering the relations
between the Board of Control and the Board of Directors,
and disposing of the patronage of India in a manner cer-
tainly very different from the manner proposed by this
bill. Now, that he should, after having given us a com-
plete sketch of another plan for the government of India,
have called upon us to pass a resolution asserting that the
information is not accessible which will alone enable us to
legislate for India, does appear to me, I confess, so strange
as to be almost improbable. (Hear.) Nor can I agree
with the noble lord opposite In condetaninz, this bill upon
the ground that it changes the existing system, and yet
is not final. (Hear, hear). The noble lord has condemned
the -bill, for being what any bill proposed for the
government of India, either this year or next year, or
three years hence, or ten years hence, must necessarily be.
Such a bill out to make alterations, and yet it ought not
to be final. Tfie bill which we pass—be it what it may—
ought to be a large yet cautious step in the path of pro-
gress. That which we have a right to ask from the Go-
vernment is not a bill which should leave everything that
exists unchanged—it is not a bill which should make such
reforms that no other Reform Bill would ever hereafter be
necessary—it is a bill that shall introduce improvements
and leave us free agents to effect future improvements ;
and such a bill has been proposed by the right hon.
baronet the President of the Board of Control. (Hear.)
One reason which, perhaps, leads me to look on this bill
more favourably than some gentlemen for whose ability I
have great respect may be this—that the parts of the bill
which to them seem the most important are precisely
those which, to me, seem least important. We have heard
very much—we hare read very much, about the changes
which it is proposed to make in the home Government.
That the home Government ought to be constitued with
care, that it should be as well constituted as possible, is
perfectly true ; but I do not conceive that the points in
dispute touching the constitution of the home Government
are by any means the most important points we have to
decide. (Hear, hear.) The truth is, that vicinity, as we
well know, acts on the mind as it does on the eye. A
small object near will hide a large object at a distance.
India is a great way off, but we all know the India-
house ; and India-house politics may hide from some,
and cause more to see imperfectly, Indian politics. We
all know something about India-house politics. A man
must have led a very secluded life indeed who has not come
across a canvass for a seat in the direction. (A laugh.) I
think that many men would find it very difficult to state
whether the people of the Mysore or of the Nizam's
territory are Mahomedans or 'Undoes, or to explain the
difference between the Ryotwar and Zemindary settle-
ments, who, nevertheless, would take exceeding interest,
in the questicn who will be the person next elected direc-
tor. (Hear.) If not stockholders ourselves, at all events
we may be asked to speak to another gentleman to ask
him to speak to a lady to ask her to speak to a proprietor
to secure the promise of his vote, if not for this or the
next time, at least for the time after. (Laughter, and
Hear.) When a director is elected—he having solicited us
for our "veto and interest" during his canvass—we begin
to solicit him for writerships. Some of ns he obliges and
some he disobliges ' • but it is on account of these circum-
stances that we all know something of the home Govern-
ment—we watch all its operation, and therefore the pro-
posed change excites a strong feeling, and has given rise to
a controversy which really seems to zee to be altogether
disproportionate to the magnitude of the subject. (Hear.)
For what, after all—when we come to examine it—is the
vague idea entertained about the home Government ?
Much has been said against a double government, and yet,
when we come to examine any plan which may be pro-
posed by any gentleman, we always find that it always
does propose a plan which deserves the name of double
government exactly as much as that contained in this bill.
No human being proposes that the Crown should have
nothing to do with the government of India. No human
being proposes that dominions containing a population
more than half as large as that of Europe, and where a
greater military force is kept up than in all the rest of the
Queen's territories, should be placed under an authority
distinct from that which governs the rest of the British
empire. But, if you have the Indian Government under
the control of the Crown, the Minister for India must go
out of office with the other Ministers of the Crown—that
is to say, he must come in and go out on grounds which
have nothing whatever to do with the merits or demerits
of Indian administration. In fact, since the Board of
Control began to exist in 1781, I believe no single instance
can be found of a President of the Board of Control taking
or leaving office on account of any difference of opinion on
Indian affairs. One may have gone out on the question
of Catholic emancipation, and another because he would
not agree to a Bill of Pains and Penalties against Queen
Caroline, but the last President but one of the Board of
Control went out because his colleagues were in a minority
on a militia bill, and the last, because the Cabinet was in a
minority on their budget. During the last quarter of a
century there have been ten changes in the Board of Control
—thattesheyel,dthe average which the Indian
31inist
haser
of India—the vast extent and num-
ber of the various subjects which demand attention, and the
small amount of attention which those subjects generally
office i s about
twoe during
years and a half. When
we consider the nature
receive from the English public, whose peculiar duty it is
not to study them—you must be forced to admit that the
Minister for India often wants the experience it is
desirable he should possess, and then it seems to me
necessarily to follow that you must give him some
more permanent body, which shall, to a certain degree.
operate as a .
check If this be admitted—and no person, I
think, will deny it—then I say you have a double govern-
ment. (Hear.) It seems to me idle to say it is a double
government if the Crown appoints the Minister and the
proprietors elect the council; but that it is not double go-
vernment if the Crown should appoint both Minister and
counciL Surely it is just as much double government as if
the Minister holds office by one tenure and the council by
another. (Hear, hear.) You will have the same incon-
venience whether the council be appointed by the Crown
or by the Court of Directors. It is utterly impossible to
attach' to any Minister a council or body of men whose
business it is to look on—to restrain and advise him—it is
utterly impossible to give any Minister such a council with-
out at the same time relieving him to a certain extentfrom
his responsibility, and without in some degree causing
delay in the transactions of the department. It seems to
me, however, that under the plan of the Governmentithere
will be found rather a better council to assist the Minister
than we have had before. I think it a great advantage
that it is a smaller council, and that I think will, on the
whole, cause its proceedings to be marked with more vigour
and ability. I accept it as an improvement, but still Ido
not conceive that the improved constitution of this council
is to settle the government of India. I hear ono hon. gen-
tleman say that the Board of Control really governs India ;
while another says that that is not so, but that the Board
of Directors are the governors of that empire. Now, I
conceive it to be very incorrect to say that either the Board
of Control or the Board of Directors really exercises the
chief authority in this respect, India is, and must be,