The Sun.
London, England, 1869-04-10 00:00:00

INDIAN FINANCES

Mr. G. DUFF in reply to Mr. Mitchell, said the Secre•
tary of State would, on as early a day as possible recom•
menu) drawing bills for India.
CIVIL AND DIPLOMATIC SERVICES.

Mr. FAWCETT rose to move that, in the opinion of '
the house, all appointments to the civil and diplomatic
services ought to be obtained by open competition. He
contended that open competition for Government appoint-
ments would lead to the best results, and entirely abolish
the demoralising effect of giving appointments for political
services rendered. The system at present in practice was
that a member of Parliament was waited on by an influen-
tial member of his constituency, and this person solicited an
appointment for his son ;the member at once proceeded to the
Patronage Secretary of the Treasury, and told him it was
important for him to secure the support of such and such
a person, and that if he was not obliged more than likely
he would go over to the other side, and the seat would be
imperilled at the next election. The Patronage Secre-
tary, who was always very obliging, on being appealed
to in such terms, eventually said he shall be too happy to
put the name down for the appointment, which, of
course followed at no distant day. Now, when the less
influential of the voters saw that Mr. So-and-so had got
a good appointment for his son or nephew for his exertions
at the last election, and they had got nothing, how could
it be expected that these poorer voters would refuse a £5
note when it was offered them ? (Hear, hear.) To such
an extent had the nomination system been carried that it
was on record that Sir William Hay ter publicly boasted at
one of his electioneering campaigns that he had been .a
good working member for the borough he represented,
and that he had succeeded in getting no less than 300
appointments for his constituents. (Loud laughter.)
Another case which showed the advantages of open com-
petition was that which had occurred at Cambridge,
where a person of high connection had been publicly
expelled from his college for falsely filling
up an examination paper, and committing other disreput-
able acts. But that was the result of the nomination sys-
tem, and that person, on the strength of his family con-
nection, had obtained a Government appointment, and
now he was representing his country at a foreign court.
Such a circumstance never could have occurred had open
competition been the rule. (Hear, hear.) He thought the
most beneficial results would follow the adoption of the
system he advocated, and he concluded by moving the
resolution.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
saject was one of great importance and difficulty, and he
for one could not be classed amongst those who were op-
posed to open competition, but to say that all appointments
for the future should be by open competition alone was an
arrangement to which he could not consent. Ho thought
that great hardship would result from the passing of such
a resolution as that now submitted, and further he thought
it would be unjust to the Government, because they had
not even had time to consider the subject. They had been
overwhelmed with work since they bad been in office—
(hear, hear)—and knowing that there were some of the
warmest advocates of open competition in the Govern-
ment, he did hope the honourable gentleman
would feel satisfied the subject would not escape
consideration, and that under the circumstances he would
withdraw his rosolution. If pressed to a division he
could not give hie vote for the reasons he had stated in
favour of the motion.

Lord STANLEY also urged the withdrawal of the
motion, as the pressing it to a division on the present oc-
casion would place many of the warmest advocates of the
system is a false position. If a division was taken he
should not oppose the hon. gentleman, but he should not
give his motion his support.
The house divided. when there appeared—
For the motion .
Agair.st it
Majority

281
-251

The house then went into Committee of Supply, and a
sum of £1,586,000 was voted on account of the Civil S.- r-
vice Estimates, 'which would be equal to a supply for two

months.
Mr. AYItTON said the first intention of the Government
had been to take a vote for four months.
Mr. W. HUNT took exception to the original proposal
for taking a vote for four months, and reminded Mr. Glad-
stone that last year, when in opposition, be had objected
to the Government taking votes for more than six weeks.
Mr. GLADSTONE retorted that Mr. Hunt had omitted
altogether the cardinal point upon which the Opposition
last session had resisted the attempt of the Government to
take votes on account for more than six weeks. That was
the circumstance that the Government stood condemned
by a vote of the House of Commons on a question which
the late Premier declared to be productive of consequences
more formidable than foreign conquest. The objection
now taken was frivolous.
Mr. DISRAELI defended the course pursued by the late
Government, and said the explanation given by Mr. Glad-
stone was not fair and candid. It was quite evident that
the right hon. gentleman, when he made his rash and
reckless accusation against the late Government was in
perfect ignorance of the fact that they had introduced and
passed a bill which remedied the very grievance of which
he complained.
After some further conversation the vote was agreed to,
and the house resumed.

After a considerable discussion Royal Commissions were
issued to inquire into corrupt practices in the boroughs of
Sligo and Beverley.
The house then adjourned.