The Sun.
London, England, 1858-07-30 00:00:00

THE SITN, LONDON, FRIDAY EV ENING, JULY f3O, 1858,

IMPERIAL I 'ARLIAMENT.

- _
)
HOUSE OF LORD a ..ee(YESTBRDA.Y.
The LORD CHANOZLLon took Iris seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.
Lord CAMPBELL presented a petition against the
bill for legalising marriage w.lth a deceased wire
sister.
The Earl of MINTO said it was' bill which
il Agains,ostt the rules of
any
the house to present petitions agt
had been already rejected.
Lord CAMPBELL apologised for ;presenting the pe-
.be allowed to ex-
tition but at the same time he net :be
not been read a
press his satisfaction that the bill
second time. BILL.
UNIVERSITIES (SCOTLAN-9)
:Crpeu the order of the
us for disagreeing to some
day being read for the conside-
ration of the Commons'
tfile Commons
of the amendments madez..ebally°the Lords to this bill,
The Duke of MONTROTE regrett
nendments that had been
objected to many of the as. lose the mea•
ether thou
mede by their lordships, but r.
ertant should be passed this
sure, which it was so imp
session, be thought upon the 'whole the' Vest course
would be not to persist in those amendments.
After a few words from the Earl of Haddington, Lord
Campbell, and the Earl Of Minto, the amendmenti:' were
withdrawn.
FRIENDLY SOCIETIES' ACT AMENDMENT
BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
GOVERNMENT OF NEW CALEDONIA. BILL,
This bill was read a third time and passed.
MILITIA PAY BILL.
This bill passed-through committee,and was reported.
The Consolidated Fund Appropriation Bill passed
through committee, and was reported, without amend-
ments.
The Mowing bills also passed through committee :
Militia (Services Abroad), Militia Acts Continuance,
No. 2, Judgments (Ireland) Act Continuance, and
Drafts on Bankers Law Amendment.
CORRUPT PRACTICES PREVENTION BILL.
This bill having passed through committee,
Lord EMMY, on the bringing up of the :report,
moved the omission of the clause which leealises
the payment of the travelling expenses of vot,vg-
The noble earl (Hardwicke) in explaining the object ,1f
this bill the other night, said the object of this clause
was to enable poor voters to exercise their right to vote
without incurring loss in so doing, but on examining the
(dense, he (Lord Ebury) did not find one word about
poor voters. The clause, if agreed to, would enable
every person voting at an election of a member of Par-
liament to claim his expenses, and the result would be
that enormous expense would be entailed upon the can-
didate, and that which had hitherto been looked upon as
bribery would receive the sanction of Parliament.
The Earl of HARDWICKE said, the single object of
the bill was to remedy the present unsettled state of the
law on this question of the carriage of voters. No one
knew exactly now what to do. The consequence was that
the greatest inequality and unfairness was produced in
election contests. It was for the advantage of all parties
that some strict defined rule should be laid down on
which all might act alike.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY entertained in-
superable objections to this clause, and if it passed the
bill ought to be called a measure for the " promotion,"
not the " prevention," of corrupt practices. It would
open the door to all sorts of corruption and bribery and
would give the advantage in every case to the wealthiest
candidate. He recommended that the question should
be deferred until it could be dealt with in the large mea-
sure of Parliamentary Reform which the Government
had undertaken to introduce next session„
The Earl of WICKLOW thought that the question
ought to be decided whether or not a voter could be
legally carried to the poll. The object was either to
bring the poll to every voter, or every voter to the poll.
The former proposition was not practicable, and there-
fore he supported the clause.
Lord CAMPBELL complained of the late period of
the session at which so important a measure bad been
brought before their lordships. It was read a second
time, he believed, on the very day fixed by the noble
lord the Chairman of Committees as the last day on
which their lordships would read any bill a second time,
and therefore, if not contrary to the letter, it was con-
trary to the spirit of the noble lord's resolution. Ar-
guments might be urged on both sides of the question,
and he was not prepared to give any positive opinion
upon them. It was very important that the honest and
poor voter should exeroise the franchise ; but to give
him facilities might open the door to bribery and cor-
ruption. Instead of removing doubts in the law the
clause would give rise to many difficult questions. The
necessity for legislation was not urgent, and it bad
been announced in the other house that a Reform
Bill was to be introduced next session, when the
whole subject would be discussed. It was impos'ible to
doubt that the clause would add greatly to the expense
of elections. Non-resident electors would be brought
from remote parts of the country, from the continent,
and possibly from Australia. The expenses not being
payable to the voter himself could only be paid by an
agent, and a special messenger might be sent to accom-
pany enaim non-resident vntAr. Then would arise the
question which he had no doubt would soon be discussed
in Westminster-hall, whether conveyance did not include
refreshment and ocnveyance back again—whether all
the consequences of what was enacted were not enacted.
Those were specimens of the questions which would
arise, and as no evil could result from postponement he
entreated their lordships not to agree to the clause.
Lord REDESDALE reminded their lordships that
thle Corr Egtefilyd'ektUßfterrvzin-L`n
second time, and was read a second time as a bill of ur-
gency. This bill had received the approval of Lord Pal-
merston and Lord John Russell, and he thought they
were justified in acceding to a proposition-which came
to them with such authority, and which peculiarly af-
fected the privileges of the ether house.
Earl GRANVILLE said there was this very essential
difference between the dates of reading this bill and the
bill'of 1854 a second time. In this case, the last day on
which they would read bills a second time happened to
be fixed five days before the end of the session, and in
MI it was 18 days before the end of the session. He
did not think that too much stress ought to be laid.upon
the supposed acquiescence of Lord Palmerston and Lord
J. Russell in this clause, because the former noble lord
distinctly stated that there were arguments on both
sides, and Lord J. Russell expressed a strong opinion
that this ought to be merely a continuance bill. He
concurred with the noble and learned lord in his objec-
tion to the period at which their lordships were called
upon to pass a measure which was only read
a second time on Tuesday at the tail of twenty-eight
other orders of the day. Lord Lyndhurst thought
the bill in its present shape so objectionable that he had
authorised him to obtain a pair for him against the clause
if their lordships should divide upon it. (Hear.) When
their lordships remembered that the Secretary of State
had expressed an opinion that this bill ought to be re-
ferred to a select committee, and that it was the intention
of the Government to bring in a general measure in the
early part of next session, there could be no pretext for
hurrying their lordships into the adoption of a premature
and ill-considered alteration of the law. He had, there-
fore, great pleasure in supporting the motion of his noble
friend.
Their lordships then divided--
Contents
Non-Contents ...
Majority for the clause
The report was then received.
JUDGMENTS (IRELAND) ACT AMENDMENT
BILL.
This ' bill, with amendments, went through committee.
DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES ACT
_ AMENDMENT BILL.
•

The Commons' amendments to this bill were eons
dered.

Lord REDESDALE proposed that clause 5, enabling
persons abroad to institute proceedings, which had been
struck out by the Commons, should be restored. He had
no wish to take any step which might endanger the bill;
but he thought the Commons should have an opportunity
of reconsidering their decision.
Atter a few words from Lord CBANWORTH,
The Commons' amendment was disagreed with, and
the clause restored to the bill.
Clause As sent up from the Commons, was agreed to
with an amendment by their lordships and the other
Commons' amendments were also agreed to.
PROBATE AND LETTERS OF ADMINISTRA-
TION ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

The Commons' amendments in this bill were agreed to,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. BILL.

The order of the day for the consideration of the Com-
mons' reasons for disagreeing with the amendments made
by the Lords in this bill having been read,
Lord DERBY said—lt could hardly be expected that
on a question of so much importance, and involving so
many varied considerations as this, there should not be
differences of opinion between the members of each House
of Parliament, and also between the two houses them-
tielvee. Your lordships made several amendments in this
bill, to the greater number, though perhaps not the most
important, of which the Commons do not object. There
are, however, five amendments which were made by
your lordships to which that house has objected, and for
objecting to which they have sent reasons to your lord-
ship. Perhaps it may he convenient that, instead of
dealing entirely separately with each of these amend-
ments, I should at once state the course which the Go-
vernment are prepared to take with regard to them all,
leavinr, the decision upon each for subsequent. discussion
and consideration.b The fir-,t amendmenti with which the
House of Commons have disagreed wi,l
.ba found in the
seventh line of the ninth page of the hill. th bill
came from the House of Commons it was provided. that,
with regard to all despatches which might requiire se-
crecy—and that there were some that did require
was
not denied by any one—the Secretary of State should
exEroise the fanctions formerly performed ,oy the secret
committee of the Court of Directors. It was objected by
my noble friend (Lord Ellen borough) that that provision
gave to the Secretary of State not only a power which
was. not absolutely necessary, but a much greater authc
ray than is now pcsweed•bythe President of the Board
of Control, because, although the President may insist
upon sending out any secret orders, he must communi-
cate them to the Chairman and Du t Ch man of the
East India Company, and, therefore,e
although yalr
he is not
bound to follow their advice, he must necessarily have a
a
consultation with them before taking step which ma-c
lead to very important consequence,. My noble friene
argued with very great force that the Secretary of State
would now be placed in a position of more complete inde-
pendence, and might upon his own responsibility, and
without bearing the opinion or advice of any of the

councillors mighthom aw surrounds him, take a
step which ghave moat important and most preju-
dicial effects. In compliance with these representations
of my noble friend it was agreed to introduce into this
clause words requiring the Secretary of State before
sending out secret orders to communicate them to the
Vice-President of the Council and one other member, to
be selected by himself. I think that that was a wise and
judicious arrangement, and one which, without too much
cramping the authority of the Secretary of State,secured
to him the same means of obtaining assistance and ad-
vice as are possessed by the President of the Board of
Control under the existing system. It is, however, the
opinion of the House Commons, that the provision
which we introduced "tends to divide the responsibility
of the Minister, and create a new secret committee,
which, under the new Government, will be no longer
necessary." There is no question that, to a certain, but
very limited extent—because the Secretary of State has
the power of overruling the councillors whom he consults
—it does relieve him from responsibility. If the House
of Commons are of opinion that that responsibility
should be so whole and undivided as not to require that
he should consult any person whatever before he takes
so important a step as sending secret orders out to
the il
as it was sent down by your lordships. What the House
of Commons means by saying that the Secret Commit-
tee will under the new Government no longer be neces-
easel they do not explain, and of course I cannot ex-
plain it for them. I cannot say that I think the amend-
ment lots an injudieons one, or that its rejection by the
Common.; is a desirable alteration of the bill. At
rat
et
same time, 3. do not think that,considering the very grea
1 interests which are involved in the passing of this bill,
the amendment suede dy your lordships is of sufficient im-
iortance to justify you in adhering to it against the wish of
t
See House of Commone, and therefore I shall propose
List your lordships do not persist in that amendment.
For the same reason, because I think that the q
involved in them, though not an inconsiderable
lord-
one,
is only of subordinate importance, I shall ask your
burps not to insist upon the amendme taken by nts made in pa
thgee
9, Iries 27, 39, and 40. The objections
Commons to these amendments appear to me to be ra-
ther incemeistent with that to which I have just referred.
In that inotwnce they objected that the amendment in-
troduced by Var lordships tended` o divide t
whichhe respour
n-
sibility of the mister. In this insance, in yo
Win
lordships proposed to give to the Secretary of State un-
divided responsibility with regard to the appointment of
the members of the Council of the Governor-General,
meta of the different Presidencies in India,
sibi the Hlity ought
ouse of
Cox:talons gay that that undivided re4pon
not t rest with the Minister, and that "it is undesir-
ablel to increase the patronage of the Minister without
providing' a check upon its' exercise." The distinction
between ti:e views of the two houses is this. According
to your lorcleships' amendment the Secretary of State was
ca .to make these appointments in Council,
lled
which rendered t necessary for him in every case to lay
the proposed 0131-sointment before the Council, and to
listen tol any objections which might be raised to it.
The House of Commons have rejected that amend-
ment and restorer...l the clause to the form in which it
originally stood—eeiz., that the Secretary of State
tments, not onl we
shall make these al
epoin but also with the y concithurrethnce
knowledge of the Couneile
of the councillors. As the
of the votes of a majoritY
to the Secretary of State
previous alteration leaves.
,that this unduly restrains
too large a discretion, I think
go' in the hands of the
his powers and places too mu
Council as a body the appointms'nt to very important
noble friend (Lord
offices, thereby encouraging what ts'Y
Ellenborough) particularly deprecate. ‘—canva9sing and
`lO Council rather
the looking to individual members of te
otry and to the
than to the Secretary of State in this cod. elteration,
Governor General in India. I object to th! 3 .
but I am not prepared to ask your lordship' tie peoresriset.
in an amendment which has been deliberately and
fully considered and rejected by the House of Ctsenmoele-
The next two amendments to which the C mmons ebjeci
are in pages 10 and 11, and involve the principle c..f ap-
pointment by competition. Now, I alai to draw your
lordships' attention to the exact state of the case, and to
the questions which are raised by the bill as it was sent
up from the House of Commons, by your lordships'
amendment, and by the rejection of that amendment by
the other house. As the bill originally stood, it was i
proposed to substitute the Secretary of State and Coun-
cil for the President of the Board of Control and the
Court of Directors of the East India Company. With
these authorities have hitherto rested the appointments
to the civil and military services of the Company ; but
candidates have been required to undergo a very severe
and, to a certain extent, competitive examination. The
particulars of that examination, and the amount of com-
petition which was to be introduced into it, have been
regulated, net by an Act of Parliament, but by instru-
ments proceeding from the competent authorities, and
in substituting the Secretary of State and Council for
those authorities the bill, as originally introduced, gave
to the Secretary of State power of making regulations, to
be confirmed by order in Council, as was formerly exer-
cised by the Court of Directors and the President of the
Board of Control. The "Louie of Commons, however,
went a step further, in the direction of a com-
petitive examination, and proposed not only that
all candidates should be subjected to such an exa-
mination, but that the result of that competition
should, without reference to any other circumstances
or any other conditions, regulate 0,0 ord., of ~,,,
cession in which candidates should receive their appoint-
ments. Ido not wish to enter now into the general
question of the principle of competitive examination for
admission to the civil or military service ; but I think
there are two grounds on which your lordships' amend-
ments may be fairly vindicated, and their rejection by
~—.4—;..a 4,v.
The one is, that the principle of competition was exactly
as much secured, subject to the consent of Parliament,
by the bill, as it stood in the first instance, and by the
system as it existed under the East India Company, in-
asmuch as the regulations being made and confirmed by
order in council, that order in council, or any other order
varying those regulations, having to be laid before the
House of Commons, that house had an opportunity of
expressing its opinion as to the expediency of such va-
riations. And seeing how much the print plc of compe-
tition is on its trial, perhaps its successful trial, at this
moment, I think it was not judicious absolutely to tie
the hands of the Executive Government as by an Act of
Parliament to lay down such stringent rules as to the
necessity of appointing the most successful competitor.
Another objection is, that bitherto the regulation of ap-
pointments to the civil and military service of this country
has not been under Act of Parliament, but by the direct
authority of the Crown, of course under the responsibility
of its advisers. This clause might therefore be regarded
as to a certain extent infringing on the prerogative of the
Crown in respect to these appointments. I must, how-
ever, fairly admit that there is a partial answer to this
objection as far as the civil service is concerned ; for,
though undoubtedly such a regulation as to the civil
service of this country would be an infrivgarnent on the
prerogative of the Crown, it is not so clear that that in-
fraction would extend to the case of India, because it is
not a prerogative which the Crown has hitherto exercised
there. It is a power and a prerogative which the House
of Commons and Parliament are for the first time vest-
ing in the Crown— viz , the administration of Indian
affairs by direct management, and by patronage
—which is the most important point—connected
with the services of India. Therefore it is
competent for Parliament to hand over that power and
authority to the Crown sub mode—that is to say, sub-
ject to such conditions as at the time of the transfer it
may deem fit. Though Ido not assent to the principle
adopted by the House of Commons, though I think it an
unwise course so to fetter the hands of the Executive
and of the Indian Minister as well as to limit the discre-
tion of Parliament itself, yet in regard to the civil ser-
vice I am not prepared to advise your lordships to insist
on your amendment. But I must say there is another
branch of the service which appears to me to stand on
quite a different footing. You are now handing over to
the Crown the supreme authority over the army of
India ; but, by the 33d clause of this bill, it is provided
that all appointments to cadetships shall be vested in
her Majesty. And if you provide, as I think you must
do, that with regard to the military service of India, as
well as with regard to the military service of this coun-
try, all appointments of this description should be vested
in the Crown, it is almost a contradiction in terms to
say, in the first instance, that all cadetships in the scien-
tific branch shall be vested in her Majesty, and to follow
that up by saying that no persons shall be recommended
except in the precise order as they cease out of a com-
petitive examination, and that the Crown shall be com-
pelled to exercise its authority according to the result of
that competition. With respect to the civil service, it
may be argued that practically speaking, the Crown does
not exercise that authority over appointments which are
perhaps by the strict theory of the constitution
vetvsted
in it. But, in reference to the army, whether is
country or of India, it is of great importance that
we should!not loselsight of the principle that the Crown,
and not Parliament, is the true source of appoint-
ment and of promotion. (Hear, hear.) That is a con-
stitutional principle which I confess I should see aban-
doned
with very great regret and I think this point
has not been maturely considered by the House of C,ma-
mons. As to admission to thtehceivilservice, the question
Was raised in that assembly,
cussed, and a division taken upon
whenhf oiu house, was dis -!
t 'enomaemtion ueridttre:
Govern-
must, no doubt in a thin hose
This being so, and the other house having
liberate decision on this subject, thatviins'• anotherwith reason
why we should not insist on our amendmentregard
to to it. But the power of the Crown in theor
practice over appointments arid promotions in Lana in
I hold to be a matter of very considerable constitutionalrmy
importance. The House of Commons, however, appears
rather hastily to have inferred that the same necessity
applied to the military as to the civil service ; and, c.
cordingly, it introduced into this clause amendments re-
lating to cadetships in the scientific branches °erre-
pending to those applicable to the civil service. This
was done without taking into serious consideration and
i s tdiscussingin t ionbetween whether
thethere
is
power of
h
not a broadte c r
: nover
constitutionalthe
d
civil and the military departments respectively. This is
a point of such great moment that, without saying that,
even if the other house should adhere to its opinion, 1
-hould think it preferable that this important r u
7:1:r
tooeutnrl
a(di
ei
:tending
t eg d ltoes
sucht, and
another
snad that he
interim
session,t a long d
with
gove
government
discussions cteuhnsest io
inconvenience
fs should
anneemare
.ri lee
re
like India, still it vc ould be unwise for your lordships
hastily and at once to adopt the decision of the House
of Commons in rejection of your amendments. And s
respects V:e provision that the Crown shall be bound to
grant
cadetships precisely in accordance with the suc-
cess of the candidates in a competitive examination, it is
I believe due to the prerogative of the Crown, due to
your lordships' own position, due to the great interests
involved, as well as respectful to the other house itself, that
it should be invited to consider the marked distinctionf
between the two cases, and that as the formal mode o
attaining that end your lordships should be advised to

insist on your ate tendment, which strikes out that abso-
lute and imperati. ve condition imposed on the Crown of
selecting for cade tships in the scientific branches of the
army those perste ns who may have most distinguished
themselves at the examination, and that, too, in the ex-
act order in whit h they have so distinguished them-
selves. (Hear.) There is another clause as to which
the House of Conswons seems to have shared the misaps
prehension% entert'ained by some of your lordships. I
allude to clause 54, which was much discussed here, and
which requires that whenever any order directing actual
hostilities to be commenced shall be issued, the fact of
its issue shall be coon uunicated to both Houses of Par-
liament. In the origin Al provision the communication
to Parliament was to be made within one month from
the date of sending out Vie order ; but your lordships
amended it to three moni‘hs if Parliament should be sit-
ting, adding at the same time the words "unless such
order shall be revoked or suspended." If Parliament
was not sitting, then the communication was to be made
within a month after its next meeting. Perhaps the
clause is not sufficiently explicit, because the intention
is that if at the end of three months Parliament should
not be sitting, then within three months after the re-
sumption of its deliberations the notice in question
should be given. But the House of Commons seems to
have thought the first and second conditions inconsistent
with each other, and it says that the period of three
months does not harmonise with the one month after
the meeting of Parliament, which meeting may take
place immediately after the issue of the order contem-
plated by the clause. That misconstruction existed in
this house, and I regret that words were not inserted
to make the meaning clearer ; but the grounds stated
for allowing an interval of three months after the
declaration of hostilities were really such as it
would be impossible for the House of Commons to
resist or overlook. These grounds were that the or-
ders might be sent out to India—and recollect it is
with India you are dealing for the commence-
ment of hostilities. They could not be received within
a month in that country, and after their receipt circum-
stances might possibly arise which would prevent the
Governor-General, either from reasons of discretion or
actual inability, from carrying those orders into effect.
He might send home word, "It is quite clear we shall
have to engage in warlike operations, but it is necessary
to temporise ; I have not at command sufficient military
resources, and I shall not be prepared to execute your
orders within the next two months." In the meantime,
however, before it was possible to send back this answer
to this country—nay, even before the order itself could
reach India—the clause as it first stood required the fact
that such an order bad been issued to be promulgated
and laid before Parliament. The consequence of that
would be that the next mail would take out to India
news that directions had been given to commence hostili-
ties, and every country against which such hostilities had
been ordered would have ample notice of your intention
to make war upon them, although your own Governor-
General might have told you that for two or three months
he would not be prepared to act upon your instructions.
Thus, you would be actually giving your enemy, or
rather your intended enemy, full warning of what you
were going to do, while at the same time your own instru-
ments had not the means of giving immediate effect to
your directions. No one, therefore, can, I think, doubt
the propriety of the alteration made by your lordships
to cause the fact of such an order having been sent out to
be announced to Parliament not within one month, but
within three months after its issue, so as to afford time
for communicating with India, and learning whether or
not there would be any difficulty in promulgating the
order. Your lordships, as I have already said, have also
inserted in this clause words providing that if such orders
were suspended or revoked, then it would be unneces-
sary to lay them before Parliament at all. Clearly, if
they are not to be acted upon, it would be unwise to in-
form the peruns with whom you have to deal that you
ever intended to declare war against them. The clause
then enacts that these orders shall be communicated to
Parliament, if it is then sitting, within three months.
This will give the Government three months grace, at
I the expiration of which they will be bound to lay the
orders they have issued before Parliament. If, however,
after that interval has elapsed Parliament should not be
sitting.!hen the Government will have had the advan •
tage of the three months already given them for the
issue and promulgation of the order, and as sson as the
Legislature re-assembles, or within one month after
its
re-assembling, it will be incumbent on them to com-
ar;li'p3r e been had
that
omr nal'
da e to .
I p
ot p tohs ee factthat
ct
lhaeu
sl o te
b*
the order shall be communicated to both Houses of Par.
liament within three months after the sending of
i such
order if Parliament is sitting, and if Parliament s not
sitting at the end of such three months, then within one
month next after the meeting of Parliament. That, I
think, would carry out what were your lordships' inten-
tions. (Hear, bear.) It removes the obvious miscon-
struction which the House of Commons has put upon
the clause. With that alteration I think they would be
of opinion that the clause is reasonable and just. I
shall, therefore, my lords, propose, with regard to clause
54, that we do insist upon your lordships' amendments
as altered by the amendment which I propose to insert
in it. My lords, these are all the objections which the
House of Commons have made to the amendments made
by your lordships in the India Bill, and I thought
it more convenient that I should make a general state-
ment with regard to them rather than make a separate
statement on each. My propeeition, therefore, is
not so .r.- yn,,,•.mpodment3 with regard to
the first aed second of these amendments, and also
with regard to the third, so far as it relates to the civil
• service, but to insist upon your lordships' amendment,
and to submit it again to the further and more delibe
rate consideration of the House of Commons with re-
gard to oadotahipa io the scientific branches of the mili-
tary service ; and also to insist upon your lordships'
amendment with another amendment of a clause which
I cannot but think has been mi-apprehended and mis-
understood by the House of Commons. (Hear, hear.)
Earl GRANVILLE—I do not rise for the purpose of
objecting to the course proposed by the noble earl. In
the first place, I entirely agree to the very judicious
course which, under the present circumstances, he has
proposed that we shall take ; and in the second place,
the session is so nearly at an end that I agree with the
noble earl it would be perfectly idle to insist upon all
our amendments. At the same time I cannot help ad-
verting to the strange conduct of the Government with
regard to this bill. The noble earl, by the fact of his
being Prime Minister and leader of this house, by the
exercise of that influence which a Government always
exercises at the end of a session, is virtually master of
the proceedings of this house, and in that capacity I
think he is necessarily bound to watch over the dignity
and propriety of the proceedings of this house. Ido
not wish to wander from the question before the house,
but to illustrate my meaning I must allude to another
question, which was very recently discussed by this
house—l allude to the Jewish question. In that case
we followed implicitly what was laid down by the noble
earl as the most proper course to be adopted. We on
this side of the house remonstrated strongly against
certain proceedings connected with the Jewish question
as likely to throw ridicule and a certain amount
of discredit on this house. As soon as the pros
ceedings were closed here public opinion certainly
was expressed in • every possible way in the
sense that we expected. Of course there was no
help for that. But when the matter came before the
House of Commons we found in the report of their pro-
ceedings that every side of the house agreed in the ob-
jection we had made, and I think this house, as a body,
had a right to expect that some of the members of that
Government which induced us to take the course we
did should have vindicated that course in some manner,
instead of which two of the noble earl's colleagues in the
other house remained perfectly silent, and one of the
Secretaries of State expressed his regret tha'a the House
of Lords having taken a course which they thought
wrong, did not, at least, act in a straightforward manner.
With regard to that clause to which the third amend-
ment refers, and which relates to competitive examina-
tion, an amendment was proposed to which I strongly
objected. The noble earl said the House of Commons
had adopted on that subject a course which he did not
think judicious. But it was not a private member of
the House of Commons who proposed that course. That,
clause was proposed by one of the members of her -
Ma-
jesty's Government, the President of the Board of Con-
trol, and, therefore, by one who was bound to be in
accord with the opinions of the Government on the sub-
ject. When the amendment was proposed I objected
strongly, on the first blush, that it was an amendment
which appeared to me to take away the whole security
which was thought necessary by the President of the
Board cf Control. But I was met by what ap-
peared to me a very fair argument a: the time—
that while practically it would not interfere with open
competition as to admission to the civil service it would
at the same time save a great constitutional principle
and prevent an encroachment on the prerogative of the
Crown. And to that this house yielded. I
strongly objected to the amendment with regard
to the re-censtitation of what will practically be
a secret cemmittee ; but
.I felt that the noble
earl's authori y on the opposite side was strongly in fa-
vour of the amendment, and I urged every reason which
appeared to me why it was most desirable not to fetter.
the Secretary of State. The amen -Invent, however,
. being
nnyatthuirhagllpietazaieadt.!aNhoawve,
been xpected that her Majesty s Goverr.iment wcu,d have
ipErtohpi)ssaerad
ebaydttnheenntowblaes
made some effort to complete that w.hich.was the work
earl,
arlworthw a sa,
of the Pliine Minister. But not a bit of it. If lam to
believe the reports of the proceedings of the other House
the President of the Board of Control voted against this
amendment, and stated that in his opinion the amend-
ment was perfectly indefensible. (Hear, hear ) Well,
then, I come to the next clause. What the House of
C nnaions have done with regard to it, I for k, rather
bears me out in what I took the liberty of pointing out
on each successive c'ause connected with patronage—
that whereas a great outcry was raised against the late
Government as to the iinagir ary amount of patronage
%bleb they were about to tran,fer to t'nerneelvee, every
single change that has taken place under the direct o 0 of
her Majesty's present Government h been to increase
the patronage cocferred upon the Secretary of State ;
and, therefore, I am not surprised that the Home of
Commons should have insisted on some check being re-
tained upon the exercise of patronage. If your lord-
ships had adopted the course which we on this side of
respectively.
ee y. you o
a think
the House suggested, and which was so strongly sup-
I
ported by the noble earl the late President of the Board
of Control,tta not
en m a
nowoo House has
ba obliged
ta
the Councils of the Governor-General and Governors
espamendmentciv
aso
mo rthe
ereasonmembersabandon
t o o
o
m
your f.
plain that that confident communication which they
should for their own sake have maintained has not, at
all events, been maintained between the members of the

Government sitting in each lions° in order to keep
up that consistency between the proceedings of the
two Houses which, I think, is most important to the
dignity and honour of both Houses of Parliament. With
respect to the amendment proposed by the noble earl as
to competitive examination, I must say that I feel some
pride that the noble earl, after having opposed my
amendment, should now be theoperson to oppose one
portion of the amendment of the House of Commons.
With regard to the last amendments, I can only say I
feel very grateful to the noble earl for having so very
clearly stated the reasons why we during two stages of
the bill pressed upon him those alterations, and which I
am glad to say, except with a.verbal amendment, he in•
tends now to insist upon. I have stated why we on this
side of the house think we have good reason to complain
of the conduct of the Government with respect to this
bill, but at the same time it is far from my intention to
object to the course proposed by the noble earl.
Lord CAMPBELL was perfectly astonished at the
passionate affection which the House of Commons had
recently shown for competitive examination. They had
actually gone wild on that subject. (Laughter.) Com-
petitive examination might most usefully be applied to
the House of Commons itself. (Renewed laughter ) He
thought discriminating examination was far preferable to
competitive examination. The former system was
applied even to the judges of the supreme court of
justice in Scotland. He should propose a sort of dis-
criminating examination for the House of Commons ;
and, instead of hon. members in that house pushing their
passion for competitive examination to such au extrava-
gant degree as even to interfere with the prerogative of
the Crown in the appointment to military commands, he
recommended that they should direct their minds to con-
sidering whether a discriminating examination in their
own cases might not be desirable. (Hear, and a laugh.)
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH—AIthough I per-
ceive with the greatest possible concern and regret the
amendments which have been made by the House of
Commons, I do not feel disposed to comment upon what
took place in that house with respect to them. I admit
that on all great questions the largest amount of ability
is displayed by the gentlemen who lead the debates in
that house, and, although I most deeply regret the opi-
nion which appears to be generally entertained there
with respect to competitive examinations, yet I should
be sorry:to attribute to the members of the other house
any but the most conscientious convictions of duty in
adhering to their opinion. I shall not trouble your lord-
ships with any general observations, but shall proceed
at once to the questions at issue. If it be true, as the
House of Commons state, with regard to the first point,
that it is impossible to defend the amendment which
your lordships have made, I can only regret that the
House of Commons did not give better reasons for in-
sisting on the bill as it stood when they sent it up to
your lordships ; for I find that they declare, in the first
place, that the submitting of the secret despatches to
two members of the Council would tend to divide the
responsibility of the Minister. My lords, it could not
by possibility have that effect, because the members of
the secret committee are constituted only for the purpose
of inspecting the secret despatches, and they would have
no power of objecting to those despatches or of pre-
vent'ng their being sent Tbey would have no other
power, in fact, than that of offering in a copious and
confidential manner their opinions with respect to them
if they happened to differ from the Minister. I will
give you an example, the application of which I am
sure you will admit. The other day I wrote a
despatch with regard to Lord Canning's
andproclama-
tion.hdlhti
hur,aef
adsevvtpsopeesionn:
fcli
htoolgteleramhhreotdkehtonpo
ehpwalunssecradoeithtoevtrwegeshuyi
,1
stated
yanoigewdutnor ealabdnulmrteadtri
eteoty,
wtinntosoathoershgtwasdl
uuefetttslac
nanhdtrusi
neueiej
That despatch was in the hands of the secret
o
w
committee for six days. No objection was taken to it,
ua made
reasonto me f
for
rn
mt hye
responsi-
bilitysubject
being considered to be divided—if I had endea-
vourednhrtips
tdacauseuil
have
drl
tpryeeb
ottuoubtenhf:
ton:et circumstance
esshlthntuhe akacasnshviataceeomi
aedwarnyoect
of the
hxetadhcat
responsibilityeut
Insdeboeasasf
mhpd Committee,otaihg nut spiriteahol should
having been submitted to the Secret Committee in -no
way relieved me of that responsibility. (Hear.) It is said
that the bill wilt e net° re wbieb,
under the new form of government will not be necessary.
But, my lords, the real change effected by this hilt in the
practical government of India is not great. With the ex-
ception of the use of the Queen's name, which I deem
very valuable, and the nomination by the Crown of the
Governor-General and Governors, there is no great prac
tical alteration in the mode of governing India, especially
since it has been determined to continue in the Council
half of the existing Court. How, then, can it be said
that the slight change winch has taken place affords any
reason for discontinuing the Secret Committee ? In my
opinion, there is no change, however great, in the go-
vernment of India which could have dispensed with tie
necessity for submitting the secret despatches to some
second mind. This is the real value cf the committee.
It is advisable in the course of human nature fur any
man, be he whom he may, to submit everything of great
importance that he writes to some one other mind. Be
that mind an inferior mind, let the person possessing it
have no power whatever over his proceedings, still there
is an advantage in being compelled no to communicate;
and that advantage I desire to maintain. (Hear.) Re-
member, thy emus, wee gene ine-roren
mittee was inserted in the original law for the govern.
isoent of India by no common men; but that it was put
there by Mr. Pitt and the first Mr. Dundas, two of the
ablest men who ever swayed the councils of this country.
Be assured that they did not do it without good reason.
The Preeidout of the Board of Control bad then, as
now, colleagues to whom he could refer ; but it was
thought advisable that persons connected with India,
and who could understand the real bearings of the case,
should at all times have despatches of importance sub-
mitted to them, and should have the power of expressing
an opinion with regard to them. These were my rea-
sons for desiring the introduction of that amendment.
However, I agree with my noble friend that it is not of
so much importance as that it would be desirable to risk
the passing of this measure by insisting upon it in oppo-
sition to the opinion of the other house. But then comes
another amendment of far greater importance, which, in
reality, goes to the whole constitution of the Indian
government, and I confess that it is with very great
regret that I find thao my noble friend does not intend
to insist upon it. The House of Commons say that it is
undesirable to increase the patronage of the Minister
without providing a check upon its exercise; but in
this .bill they have greatly increased the patronage of
the Minister without any check whatever. Tnoy have
given him the power of creating the Governor-General,
the Governors, and the members of the Council also.
They have given him a great increase of patronage in
the disposition of the establishment of the India House
and likewise in the Domination to cadetships, without
any check at all. But that on which I insisted is not
patronage. Appointments to the Council in India are
not appointments which a Government would ei.er ven-
ture to look on in the light of patronage. They will only
be made in the exercise of the highest function of the
executive Government—that of providing the very beat
persona to assist in carrying on the most inepor•
tent branches of administration in India. No Go-
vernment would ever venture in the way of a job, upon
appointments of that description. Bat this I know,
that it is most desirable that there should not be a
double government in India. Under the bill as it stands
now the Government name the Governor-General, while
Vie Council will name the councillors of the Governor-
General. The Council may take totally different views
with respect to the mast important matters from those
taken by the Governor-General. Beaten here, by the
po over of the Secretary of State in the Council, they may,
through their appointments to the Council in India,
very materially affect the conduct of public affairs ; for,
recollect that the Governor-General, though he has the
power of overruling his Council in extreme cases affecting
the highest interests and safety of the State, has not the
power which is given to the Secretary of tate by this
bill of overruling his Council on all occasions. It is only
in extreme cases that he can do so, and there might be
in his Council gentlemen opposed to the Governor-
General who might reduce his authority to contempt by
,ntinually thwarting him ; yet the power of appoint
ing those gentlemen you leave to the Council here. I
think this a most material error. I have always deemed
it necessary that all persons in India should I,ok
head of the Government alone, or. if not to him, to the
head of the Government here. What would be the poei-
teen of my noble friend near me if the principle proposed
to be applied to the Governor-General we-e carried out
in my noble friend's caee—and if he, placed by favour
of her Majesty's confidence in the position of First Mi-
ni,ter of the Crown, were to have all his colleagues
chosen by the noble lords who now sit opposite? (" Hear,
hear," and a laugh.) Yet that is exactly the position in
which you place the Governor-General of India, who has
to conduct matters as important as those which fall to
the lot of my noble friend. I think, therefore, that this
isG eavmerousmt
esuertiuouf slnedriaro,ranind the co
l
vices of the old administration. You re-appoint to the
c o
itn s tpi
et
rupt ieot nu a
toefs t hael ntehwe
Council half of the existing Court of Directors, with
all their traditional policy, and you enable them to
appoint the councillors of the Governor-General although
it is notorious that according to their old prejudices
every Governer-General is regarded as an enemy nn-
lees he adopts a course of subserviency to the
Court. I cannot agree, therefore, with the Commons in
their objection to this clause. It would be idle to think
of dividing the house upon the subject, but I cannot give
my assent to it because I believe that it will lead to great
evils. Then comes a very iniportant question with re-
spect to which my noble friend concedes one-half, and
insists upon his own amendment as to the other half.
When he makes a distinction between the military and
civil services I think he has good ground to stand upon.
There is a materiel difference between them. When corn-
p aitive examination was flint established for the Civil
Service, I admitted that there was considerable advan-
th":l3 10 disconnecting the Civil Service from the Court of
Directors, and that advantage still will continue to exi-t
to a certain extent although the Court will have Lecome
a ()Tanen. Feeling, therefore, that a great political as
well as social revolution is thereby accomplished in
India, I do not object to my noble friend's determina-
tion not t i insist on hie amendment on this point, but I
rejoice that he insists upon it in the other. My lords, I
cannot but regret that the House of Commons has fallen
into what appears to me a dangerous error with respect
to open competitive examination as the only road by
which for the funtre achnie,;on is t i be obldned into the
military see vice of India. (Rear.) lam quite sure that
there is not only in the House of Commons, but also out
of doors, a great error as to the classes which are to be
benefited and injured by this poet innovation. The
Establiehment of compaitive examination does not in the
smallest degree affect your lordships' house—it does not
affect your relatives or connections, nor the connections
of the great landed gentry of the country, I regret to

say that members of your lordships' house and of the
other house, and the first gentry in the country, have
not endeavoured—except in very rare cases—to obtain
for their sons situations in the service of the Indian Go-
vernment. I regret it deeply, because I know it is by far
the best field which any man can have for the exercise of
his abilities, and it affords the highest rewards for the
display of the highest virtues. I regret that this
house has not participated in the glory which has been
reflected by late events on the servants of the Indian
Government. But I desire, my lords, to retain these ap-
pointments in the class which has hitherto held them.
That class is the class of educated gentlemen which oc-
cupies the centre of society, which extends on the one
side to the confines of the class which lives by buying and
selling, and on the other to the class of which your lord-
ships are members—persons who have the means of pro-
viding for their eons otherwise than by professions of a
lucrative description, of doing that for them which I
think is the greatest misfortune than can befall any wan
—enabling them to live in idleness. (Hear.) This class
embraces clergymen, country gentlemen of small incomes,
lawyers and all the learned professions, officers in the
army and navy, and all that great class of persons hav-
ing a mediocrity of fortune, but of the highest and most
cultivated intellec`. It is from that class which it is in-
tended by this clause to take away these appointments
In sanctioning this principle Parliament has introduced
a property qualification for appointments in the public
service, because there is no doubt that it is by paying
highly those who cram candidates for these appointments
that they will be obtained. It is only by the expenditure
of large sums in this way that it will be possible for the
future to enter the service, and the gentlemen who have
hitherto obtained appointments have not the means of
incurring this expenditure. But the education obtained
in these cramming colleges is not the highest species of
education—that which is obtained at home by the exam.
ple and conversation of good parents is by far the highest.
You cannot compare for a moment the education which
the a ms of elergymen and officers get with the education
obtained by the sons of rich grocers or linendrapere,
who will be successful in these competitive examina-
tions. Depend upon it this is a great and most in-
jurious social revolution. I cannot view it in any
other light. I look upon it as fraught with the
greatest danger, and I do trust that the House of
Commons, on reconsidering its present opinion, will
be induced to acquiesce in this amendment. I rejoice
that for the present my noble friend will insist upon
the amendment which he made in committee, though
that amendment is not altogether satisfactory to me. I
vote against the whole clause. I desire to maintain the
Indian army as it ie, to draw it altogether from the same
sources, which are perennial founts of everything that is
noble, and everything that is virtuous. (Hear, hear.)
Can we desire to have men in the public service superior
to those who have been derived from that source ?
(Hear, hear.) It is now, tea, when the scientific branches
of these services have in the highest degree distin-
guished themselves and performed the greatest public
service, that we are to change altogether the system
by- which appointments are made, to deprive them of the
hope of being followed in the same noble career by their
sons, to destroy their prospects of being able to provide
for their families, and not only thus to injure them,
but, as they must understand it, to inflict on them a
great offence. These, my lords, have always been my
opinions, and it is impossible for me to refrain from ex-
pressing them. (Hear, hear.)
Their lordships then resolved not to insist on their
amendments on clauses 27, 28, 29, 30, and 32 ; but to
insist on their amendment on clause 34 (relating to the
admission to the scientific branches).
On consideration of the Commons' reasons for dis-
agreeing with their lordships' amendments on the Turn-
pike Trusts Arrangement Bill, and the Vaccination (Ire-
land) Bill, it was resolved not to insist upon the amend-
ments.
The Art-Unions' Indemnity Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The Reformatory Scho Is (Ireland) Bill was read a
third time.
The report of amendments on the Metropolitan Local
Management Bill was received.
The Draughts on Bankers Act Amendment Bill was
read a third time and passed.
On bringing up the report, without amendments, on
the Civil Bills, &c. (Ireland), Act Amendment Bill. ft
short discussion took piece, but ultimately tue amend-
ments were agreed to, and the report was received.
NEW WRITS BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed, with two
amendments proposed by Lord EvERsLEY.
VACANT SPACE AT ST. PAUL'S.
The Earl of lIARRINGTON, who had a notice on
the paper to put a question to the Government respect-
ing the plot of ground on the east side of St. Paul's,
which was advertised to be built on, said he would
postpone his question in the meantime, when
The Earl of DERBY said it was no use putting
any such question, as the Government had no infor-
mation whatever on the subject. (A. laugh.)
PASSING TOLLS.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY, having presented
a petition from merchants, shipowners, &c., of South
Shields, relating to passing tolls and local dues, asked
whether it was the intention of the Government to intro-
dune any measure upon the subject during next session ?
The Earl of DONOUGHMORE, without pledging
himself upon the subject, hoped to be able to introduce
such a measure in the ensuing session of Parliament,
Their lordships then adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at 4 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Lords' arnendm'ents to the following bills were
considered and agreed to :—Atlantic Telegraph Com-
pany ; Clyde Navigation ; Warrington and Stockport
Railway (Capital).
VOTE OF THANKS TO MAJOR-GENERAL SIR J.