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

discussed in committee. There was another very important
portion of this question which was the changes that were
proposed to be made in the Government—not at home, but
in India. He entirely concurred in the statement that
India must be governed in India, and that what we did at
home was of far less importance than what was done
there. The hon. member for the county of Elgin said that
ho would confine the changes to the home Government,
because with that they were acquainted, while they knew
nothing of the Government in India.
Mr. C. BRUCE.—I did not say that we knew nothing
of the Government of India, but that we should have the
opinion of the Governor-General, and of the local gover-
nors, before altering the system there.
Sir C. WOOD continued—He had already stated that
he had the opinion of the Earl of Dalhousie, and that
the bill had been framed in accordance with that opinion.
He had had also the opinion of persons connected with the
Government of India, and he did not know that they
should gain anything by sending the bill back again. The
changes which they proposed were in entire accordance
with the whole of the evidence. The bill had now been in

the hands of members a considerable time, and he had not
heard any material objection made to one single change
that was proposed in the government of India. With re-
gard to a complete code of laws, none had been drawn up
in a complete shape. One had been prepared by his right
hon. friend the member for Edinburgh, which was now
under the consideration of the Legislative Council in India,
who were trying whether they could pass it into a law.
The hon. gentleman had found great fault with the Govern-
ment for disregording the opinion of Sir E. Ryan and other
great law reformers ; but if the hon. gentleman had entered
into the subject with his usual care, or had listened to his
(Sir C. Wood's) opening statement, lie would have known
that the commission to be appointed in India was at the
suggestion of those very gentlemen ; and the most ardent
Indian law reformers were to be upon that commission,.
and that it was in deference to their (Omen that
he had been obliged to postpone the bill for im-
proving the judicature in India. (Cries of Divide.)
The great evil of having one legislative system for one part
of India, and a different system for another part of the
same country, could only be obviated by constituting one
legislative body for the whole of India. He would not go
further into these matters, though he must say they were
questions of a most important nature. (Hear, hear.) He
would only say, that no objection having been raised to the
measure which might not fairly and properly be discussed
in committee, it did not appear to him that any sound
argument had been urged against the second reading of the
bill. He thought if they were to deal with the question
as the noble lord opposite proposed, they would be merely
trifling with a most important subject—with the welfare,
and possibly with the security, of the empire in India.
That empire was of a most anomalous and extraordinary
description. If well governed it might be ono of the
strongest empires in existence ; while, if ill-governed, no
one could deny that its position might be most critical.
Now, what were the measures taken by her Majesty's
Ministers for promoting the good government of India ?
They had adopted, with regard to Indian government, all
the suggestions of the most experienced Indian servants,
which they thought calculated to provide for the security
of our Indian empire. Lord Ellenborough had told them
that they held the empire of India by the superiority of
mind and intellect possessed by the persons whom they
sent out to govern that empire, and Her Majesty's Govern-
ment endeavoured, by their proposals with regard to the
system of education, to improve still further the mental
superiority of the persons employed in the public service
in India. They had also been told that their power in
India depended in a great measure upon the conviction of
the people that they were better governed under the sway
of the British than they would be under native rulers.
That there were defects in the system of Indian govern-
ment he was willing to admit. These defects Her Majesty's
Ministers had taken the best means in their power to deal
with, and he did not know any defect for which this bill
did not endeavour to provide a remedy. The questions re-
lating to land tenures, improvements in public works, and
other matters, were subjects which could not be dealt with
here, but which must be dealt with in India • and Her
Majesty's Government had, in this bill, proposed esta-
blishment of machinery which they thought best calculated
to promote in this respect the welfare of that important
empire. (Cheers.)
Mr. DISRAELI—The right hon. gentleman who has just
sat down has complained of the imaginative powers of the
hon. member who preceded him, but he has himself shown
that even in that respect he can successfully complete with
the hon. member for Sunderland—(a laugh), for the right
hon. gentleman seems to me in his reply to have answered
several speeches which have not been delivered—(hear, and
a laugh), and the consequence has been that hon. gentle-
men on both sides of the house have interrupted him in
the course of his statements. It will be my lot, in the
observations I shall presume to offer to the house, to have
to comment upon some statements which have been pre-
viously made, but I shall endeavour to make those remarks
in so fair a spirit, that I trust at least I shall not call for
the interference of any hon. gentleman until i have re-
sumed my seat. I can assure the house that, in endea-
vouring to consider the all-important subject before us, I
hope to imitate that temperate spirit which characterised
the statesmanlike speech in which the amendment now
before us was introduced to our notice by the noble lord.
(Hear, hear.) I agree with the First Lord of the Admi-
ralty, in remarking with satisfaction the many intimations
that have been given during this debate of a desire on
both sides of the house to come to the consideration of
this subject in a calm and unimpassioned spirit— (hear,
hear) ; but at the same time I must take the liberty of
observing that I cannot but feel that hon. gentlemen, in
intending to express so laudable a disposition, have, I
think, been somewhat inadvertently betrayed into re-
marks which may lead to very inconvenient, very disagree-
able, and even very dangerous misconceptions. We have
been told frequently during the debate that this is not a
party question, as if a party question were necessarily
an improper question. (Hear, hear.) We have been told
frequently' during the debate that this subject is not
considered in a party spirit, as if a subject considered
in a party spirit were necessarily considered in a partial
and unjust spirit. (Hear, hear.) Now, Sir, as we are
all of us members of that which is a house of party, and
which, if it were not a house of party, you may depend
upon it would not long exist in this country, I think this
is a point upon which there should be clearer conceptions
than at present appear to prevail in this assembly. I con-
sider purely party questions are questions which concern
the distinctive principles of the two great parties into
which a popular assembly is necessarily divided. Aristo-
cracy or democracy—protection or unrestricted competi-

tion—an endowed and established church, or complete
dependence on the voluntary system—these are principles
perfectly distinct : they are professed by different parties,
they are are party principles, and, if brought into discus-
sion, such discussions are debates upon purely party
questions. But it is taking a very limited view of a party
question to bound it merely by the description upon which
I have ventured. Hitherto it has been supposed that
when any great legislative difficulty has been brought
under the consideration of Parliament, there has been
a noble and generous emulation between the two par-
ties of the country which should solve the difficulty
in the most satisfactory manner, and—when a question of
controverted policy arises—which should recommend the
course most for the honour of the country and most for
the advantage and welfare of the people. (Hear, hear.)
Sharing these views, I confess that I cannot under-
stand how a great party in this house can take refuge
in some neutrality upon a subject like that now before
us, and shrink from expressing without the slightest
equivocation the views which they entertain. (Hear, hear.)
If we approve the proposition of her Majesty's Ministers,
we are bound, in my mind, to give to that proposition not
only our support, but our cordial and complete support.
If, on the other hand, we believe that it is a course of a
very questionable character,—if, further, we believe that
it may lead to disastrous results, I deny that it is in our
power to refrain from expressing our opinion. I say that
we owe it to our constituents—to those who sent us
here—(loud cheers from the Opposition benches)—we owe
it to the country, we owe it even to ourselves, fairly
to place before Parliament and the country the rea-
sons why we differ from the course recommended
by the Government, and to give Parliament and the
country an opportunity of expressing an opinion upon the
two policies submitted for their consideration. (Cheers.)
I know I may be told that a party government leads to
great excesses. It is my opinion that the excesses of party
government are not greater—perhaps not so great as the
excesses which are experienced under despotic govern.
ments ; but, for my own part, I prefer the excesses cf
even of party government to the excesses of despotic go-
vernments—(cheers)—and I believe we shall find in this
country that the more enlightened it becomes, the greater
and more powerful will be the check of party excess in the
' common sense of this house, and in the influence of that
omnipotent opinion, the power of which we all recognize.
Well, I say, then, entertaining these views, that I feel it
is absolutely necessary that I should frankly express my
opinions upon the subject now under consideration. I
have made these observations because I have the mis-
fortune to differ on this question from many gentlemen
whom I greatly respect, with whom I act in political con-
nexion, and for many of whom I entertain great personal
regard ; but, for my own part, I cannot incur the respon-
sibility of giving my approbation to the measure which
the right hon. gentleman has submitted to our notice. The
consequences of that measure will sooner or later be before
us. Even if this government which we are now planning
lasts for that space of 20 years which has been so often
adverted to, there are many now present who will pro-
bably be present when that period has terminated. I
may probably not be here ; it is not impossible I may be
here ; but there are many gentlemen on this side the
house—young men, who are devoting their time and
talents to the service of their country—who at that period
will probably still be taking an active part in public trans-
actions ; and when that time comes I should be very sorry
that they should refer to the debates of the year 1853
(hear, hear)—and regret that they were so wanting in
sagacity or moral courage that, because party incon-
venience might accrue - (cheers from the Opposition)—
they shrank from expressing an opinion upon one of
the most important subjects that can engage the at-
tention of Parliament. (Loud cheers.) There has been
some controversy during this debate as to the
exact subject which is under discussion. The Secre-
trary of the Board of Control accused my noble friend
(Lord Stanley) of introducing a second subject into our
debate. Now, it appears to me that that was an observa-
tion—a criticism on the part of the Secretary of the Board
of Control, which was not well founded. It seems to me
that there can be no mistake whatever as to the question
which is before us. It appears to me that the question is
accurately, completely, and precisely expressed in the title
of the bill on the table of the house. What is the title of
that bill ? It is, " A Bill to Provide for the Government
of India ;" and an amendment has been moved, which, in
fact, says that this plan to provide for the government of
India, while it disturbs much, really settles nothing—
(cheers from the Opposition benches)—and that, if such
be the case, considering that a Parliamentary committee
1 has been sitting for years to investigate the condition of
India, but has not at this moment half fulfilled its duties
—(cheers and laughter)—it is expedient that we should
11/ ,:ait for the increased information to be gained from the
itoiries of that committee, and that, considering the late
9n-0,1 of the session, we should continue the existing act
fr the oovernment of India, and hesitate before we pass a
~...