The Sun.
London, England, 1871-02-18 00:00:00

Government ; all he wished to ensure was that the scope
of their inquiries should be ample. He did not desire
the committee to inquire simply into the finance of India,
but into the general administration of affairs
in that country, and he desired that, amongst
other topics, they should inquire into the present
position and future prospects of the revenue, the
administration of the law, the relation of the Government
with the higher and prim.try education of the country,
the cost of the transport service, and, above all, into the
expenditure of Indian money in England, where one-
fourth of the entire revenue was absorbed. The necessity
for the committee had been admitted by all sides of the
House, and the Prime Minister himself had laid down the
doctrine that it was most important that the
various departments of the 'State should be pe-
riodically revised by select committees, and
particularly with regard to India, in conse-
quence of the little attention Parliament had been
able to devote to Indian Affairs. There had been no com-
mittee on Indian Affairs since Parliament had taken upon
itself the responsibility of governing them, and if one
were not now appointed it would give rise to serious dis-
content. (Hear.) It had been supposed that he brought
forward this motion as a censure upon the present ad-
ministrators of aflairs in India, but nothing was further
from his thoughts. His object was not in the slightest
degree to investigate the conduct of Ministers,
but to investigate the system which they had
to administer. He had no desire whatever
to oppose the Government .more than was
necessary—(laughter) ; if therefore they thought they
would gain anything as to their credit—(renewed laughter)
by postponing the question for a fortnight he would assent
to it on the distinct understanding that the committee
moved for should be as wide in its scope as he had
indicated.

Mr. R. N. FOWLER seconded the motion, and expressed
a hope that the questions of opium and salt duties would
be considered by the committee, as a large proportion of
the revenue of India was derived from those sources.
After a few words from Colonel Sykes,
Mr. GRANT DUFF said that the last thing this Govern-
ment, or any English Government, would do, was to keep
the promise to the ear and break it to the hope. (Hear.)
It was proposed to examine into the whole system of
Indian Finance, but if all the matters alluded to by the
hon. member for Brighton were to be brought before the
Committee, it would probably have to sit until doomsday.
He believed that all persons who understood what ques-
tions would be opened, would be perfectly satisfied with
the committee which it was the intention of the Govern-
ment to propose.
Mr. WINGFIELD announced that an inquiry into the
general finances of India, would embrace every subject
that it was desirable to deal with under that heading?
(Hear hear.)
Mr. FAwcErr consented to remove the word " general"
from his motion.

Mr. GLADSTONE appealed to the hon. member to with-
draw his motion., The Government had no desire to post-
pone the matter, and would probably be in a position to
move for a committee at the commencement of next week.
(Hear, hear.)

Mr. Fawcett then consented to withdraw his motion.

THE GOVERNMENT AND TERMS OF PEACE.

Mr. AIIBERON HERBERT rose for ithe purpose of calling
attention to the papers relating to the Franco-German
war and to move " That this House is of opinion that it
is the duty of Her Majesty's Government to act in con-
cert with the neutral powers to obtain moderate terms of
peace, and to withhold all acquiesence in terms which
might impair the independence of France, or threaten
the future tranquility of Europe." He said that, deeply as
he felt in the matter, there was something painful to
him in it, for after reading the papers which had been
presented to the House he could not help regretting the
tone of the despatches from the Foreign Office. The
public opinion of this country and of the neutral
Powers, had, during the war, counted for abso-
lutely nothing. Several strange things had been
done, and a new doctrine started called benevolent neu-
trality. Our Foreign Minister in one document, however,
destroyed that, but he in his turn invented another,
which, he said, must be modern neutrality. The
papers shewed that there had been a want of powerful
speaking on our part. The Foreign Office appears to
entertain a distrust of itself, and a determination not to
act in concert with other nations. He regretted that
theth e
bGegoivrtnigernnment had refused to act with Italy at
of the war, when the French Emperor
made further demands after the Prince had retired from
the candidature of the Spanish throne. It was true that
Lord Lyons had spoken, and that Lord Granville after-
wards remonstrated, but that remonstrance was not equal
to the enormous gravity of the occasion. He felt that
this country had not done its duty in not speaking much
more plainly and more strongly than it had done. Since
then the Neutral Powers had been created into a sort of
league, and bound together, but after that league was
created it was reduced to a complete state of inactivity.
There was not a single thing done by this league to bring
about a reconciliation between the two belligerents,
though out of it might have grown a new sense *of inter-
national obligation, a new power against the violence of
nations. It might have, further, been found a great
defence for all, and in saying so he did not think
he was expressing his opinion alone. He must
confess he did not always like what Russia liked ;
but she had a keen insight into matters, and early in the
War she wrote that that league ought greatly to increase
the moral influence in any conference which might take
Place to restore peace. (Hear.) He should not make
the charge that this country had prevented other countries
from taking a more active part to bring about peace.
It might be so, but he would not make that charge. A
friend of his told him that we had played the part of a
detrimental. Now this, in the language of a well-known
journal, was brought about by a man who paid great atten-
tion to a young lady, and had no serious intention—(a laugh)
—but thereby discouraged the attention of others.
Laughter.) His friend thought that we had not only not
exercised an influence, but had prevented others from
doing so. He believed that other neutrals would have
acted if England had taken the lead, and anyone who read
the printed papers could not fail to be struck with the
constant appeals made to us. It must be a matter of
regret that we did not give up that stoical attitude
Which we had assumed. (Hear, hear). He was not talk-
ing of war, but he considered we ought to have exercised
a grave, a firm, and an unfaltering influence against the
violence and against the excesses which were practised
either by France or by Germany. (Hear, hear).
The hon. member then proceeded to call atten-
tion to the various appeals which had been
made to us from time to time to exert our influence,
and said that while other nations had freely expressed
their opinions upon the points of the question as they had
arisen, England refused to join in concerted
action, and the Foreign Office refused to have
,any opinion in the matter. The Foreign Minister
had always shewn incompetency to form or express an
°Pinion, and only said he thought both parties had been
extreme. (A laugh.) If the neutral Powers had been
strong enough to express an opinion, peace might readily
have been obtained on several occasions during the war.
Itmas the duty of the Government not to wait for a basis
of peace, but to find it, and the course of events had
shewn that they were wrong in waiting.

Sir ROBERT PREL said it was suggested that they
Bnould act in concert with the neutral Powers,
but where were the neutral Powers that would
act with the Government ? He was sure the
Public opinion of the country did not endorse
the policy of the Government. France was at that
foment drinking the cup of humiliation, and Prussia not
t:,..111Y despised our Government, but laughed it to scorn.
2e maintained that the conduct of Lord Lyons in leaving
'aria deserved the gravest censure, and was most unbe-
e°llling. He contended that this country had become
~:)re unpopular during the last two years than it had
"'lcier any Government during the last thirty or forty
3'eare• When he saw the way the Government had acted,
what they had ventured to do, and what they had not
N'eutured to do, he considered the country had cause to
115n1Plaill that the Government had not acted in the ress-
- and earnest manner which might have been expected.
Position of our Foreign Minister was one of
selfish isolation, for though he had promised in the first
14aeo that if either side asked for our good offices, when
Pavre invited them, in September, he was told the
hehoteraference of the Government would be more likely to
the 1133- than good. The unification of Germany was at
de Present moment being carried on under a military
lsl3°tiBra Which was a matter of the greatest peril to
War, r2e... The French had shewn noble heroism in the
ve4_ and the Germans frightful atrocity, and he was sur-
-"eu at the possibility of any country watching all these
.ts unmoved
1,,
Ir. ea •
anthe , RTWRIGHT fully sympathised with France, but
, gat the resolution of the hon. member ill-timed,
that it could have no other effect than to mislead.
,tr • GOLDSMID maintained that neutrality was the pro-
Per Position for the Government to take, for if they had