The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-26 00:00:00

185 g.

because the principle that be desired to carry out was that
of undivided responsibility. If they aihered to, the prin-
ciple of undivided responsibility they must have undivided
authority. The council proposed by the noble lord was
ono of nominees—the council proposed by the present, bill
was ono that was to hold office for life. To impose such a

check as was proposed would be to impose a double re-
sponsibility on the Minister—first, to his council, and,
secondly, to Parliament. He felt the necessity for making
the responsibility of the Minister actual, but if the house
acted on the principle laid down during the present sessi,n
they must m tke that a responsibility to Parliament. He
had been asked if the clause did not give the Minister
authority over the patronage of India as well as over the
expenditure ? It would be a sufficient answer to point to
clauses 31 and 34, which provided for the disposal of the
patronage. What he would press on the committee was
this, that any restraint they wished to impose on the
Minister was covered by the words in the clause : but by
introducing the words "and council," you introduced a
divided authority, andtook from the Minister more power
than you intended, and you would introduce that double
responsibility which it had bsen the universal wish to avoid.

Mr. V. SMlT.Elagreed that this clause must be considered
in connection with others in the bill; although the right
hon. 13..ronet (Sir J. Gra.hana) was Trite right in saying,
that if the clause stood alone it would give unlitnitel
power to the Secretary for India. With regard to patron-
age the objection hail been answered, but as regarded ex-
penditure there was no provision. He considered that the
present council was more obstructive than that proposed
by his noble friend (Lord Palmerston). He was sure that
the committee would think that there must be some check
ip this respect on the Minister for India, for if not he
would posses the most enormous power ever given to any
minister, and with regard to expenditure he could do as
be pleased. The only check the noble lord proposed was
that the accounts should be laid before Parliament ; but
this was wholly illusory. He had expressed that opinion,
last night, and he should repeat it on every occasion. The
hon. and learned member for Devonport said he should
propose that a vote should be taken in Parliament when a
pension above a certain amount was to be granted. But
this was also illusory. There was no such action in mem-
bers of Parliament
.with regard to matters of that •kind re-
lating to India as was created by the influence of consti-
tuencies in this country. The hon. member for the Tower
Hamlets proposed that there should be an Appropriation
Act for India, but he (Mr. V. Smith) thought such a bill
would share the fate of the Indian budget, and it would
not in the mouth of August excite much attention, or cause
payments to 133 looked into which ought to have been made
by the Minister. Either by means of the council or other-
wise there must be some check on the Minister with regard
to expenditure, and he would suggest to the noble lord the
creation of some check on a minister invested with such
extraordinary powers.
Sir F. BARING begged to add his request to the noble
lord, that he would consider the power which he was about
to grant to the minister with regard to the finances of Eldia.
He admitted that in considering the question of the go-
vernment of India they must put aside their notions of
freedom, and proceed as if they were enacting an arbitrary
measure. But there must be some security for expendi-
ture. There was no security that the council would act as
a chock, for the whole power of the President of the Board
' of Control was handed over to the Minister for India with-
out even the intervention of the secret committee, and he
might order any expenditure he chose. Was that a power
to give to any man ? He would ask if the Minister was to
have the power of raising loans without even the know-
ledge of the council? Might it not be enacted that no
order for the payment of money should he given without,
its going through the council and being known to them ?
That might act as a check. As to the check proposed, of
laying the accounts before Parliament, that would not be
of the I( ast use.

Lord STANLEY said that the right hon. gentleman had
evidently not read the whole bill; for, when he put his
question with regard to tho power of raising loans, which
he supposed was vested in the Minister, he had pot looked
at clause 45, by which the powers of borrowing, now pro-
posed by the East India Company, was transferred to the
council to be exercised under the direction of the Secretary
of State ; so that 'there could lea no loan without their
knowledge. By the 39th clause it was provided that all
moneys to be paid out by drafts or orders were to ba signed
by three members of the council.
Sir H. RA.WLINS.ON said that the 39th clause did
give a power over expenditure to the council, and the power
of the Secretary of State remainedas it was. This appeared
to him to be an efficient control.
Sir F. BARING'. said he was aware of the clause in
question, but it was so inconsistent with the argument of
the uoblo lord with regard to the responsibility of the
Minister, that he thought it provided for a mere formal
signature, just as three Lords of the Treasury signed cer-
tain warrants. If he was to understand that the members
of council did not merely sign, but had placed on them the
responsibility of their signature, he had a got a great deal
of that he was anxious to obtain.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said he understood that the effect
of the 39th clause was, that when the Secretary of State
by his authority ordered money to be paid out of the home
Treasury, and it was pail by draft, it was signed by three
members of tho council; but the Secretary of State had
the power to order money to be paid.
Sir C. WOOD agreed with his right hon. friend as to the
effect of the clause. It did give the council some power,
so far as home expenditure was concerned. But there wags
nothing that he saw is the clause which rendered the con-
sent of the council necessary to any order for payment out
of the home Treasury. Tnere ought to be words in the
clause which made something more necessary for payment
out of the Treasury than the order of the Secretary of
State. The clause, however, went only to home expendi-
ture, whereas there was a large amount of expenditure
which was not provided for—namely, the expenditure in
Doti', itself.
Mr. C. FORTE3CUE said that if money was to be voted
by the council, what was the meaning of the 23d clause,
which provided, that in case of any difference of opinion in
the council, the determination of the Secretary of State
sheuld be tinsl. If the Secretary of State had not the
power to order the payment of money, that exception
ough to be included in the claim.
The SOLICIUOR-GENER.A.L said that it was
what pre.nature to discuss clause 39, which was intended
to impose checks un the powers given by the clause then
under discussion. When they came to that clause they
would decide on the extent to which these checks were to
go. If he were to give en opinion with regard to clause
39, he should say that the money to bo spent was to be de-
termined by the Secretary of State and the council in the
same manner as they determined any other matter. Rolla
that was to be dens was to be provided for hereafter, and
he thought it would be better to defer the discussion till
theY came to the clauses in question.
Col. SYKES said that clause 39 referred to money re-
mitted from India, but clause 3 put the whole of the re-
venues of India at the disposal of the minister.
Sir C. WOOD would be contended to take the discussion
on this point on the sub iequent clauses. But the nob!e
lord bad not stated that those clauses were sufficient for
the purp se, and he thought he could see that they were
not. He was satisfied to let this clause pass after what
had been said.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that if there had been any dis-
cussion on clause 3, the blame rested with him, for it ap-
peared to him that it transferred all 'sewers relating to ex-
pen'liture, and entrusted all the patronage to the Minister
for India. The words or otherwise provided" had out
escaped him, and ho had asked what were the enactments
in the bill which restricted those powers ? The noble lord
referred to clause 39. It was not desirable to carry the
discussion on that clause any further then, but as at pre-
sent advised, he did not think the checks in it were satli-
cLut. He diclenot find in the bill any such restraint as
tho secret committee, which was an efficient restraint.
The Secretary of India had larger powers than the Presi-
dent of the Beard of Control now had over expenditure,
which he could exercise without the knowledge of the
council or of Parliament, except that at a distant period
accounts be rendered to Parliament. Then with respect to
patronage the noble lord referred to clauses 31 and 34.
With regard to military patronage there was a limit placed
to the power of the Minister, but he did not find thatthere
was any limit with regard to civil patronage. That was
vested to the Minister alone. He thought some efficient
restraint ought to be imposed upon the expenditure.
Mr. GREGSON trusted that the clause would be so
• modified as to impose a proper check upon the Secretary
of State.
Sir H. RAWLINSON said that the President of the
Board of Control, had now no power of ordering any ex-
penditure of money,, but he might require the Court of
• Directors to do so.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that,
under the bill, no communication could be sent to India
by the Secretary of State without the knowledge of the
Council. and that would give the restriction which the
committee required.
Mr. PULLER said that, according to the interpretation
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the power of the Pre-
sident could not be exercised without the knowledge of
the council, but still they would possess no control over
him. On the other, if a veto was given to them, it would
take out of the Secretary's hands the newer vested in him
by the bill. If the council could prevent the Secretary from
ordering any expenditure, they could prevent him from
making any alteration of policy which would involve an
increase of expenditure.
Mr. V. SMIrII said, if the President of the Board of
Control desired to effect any purpose he must send a letter
to the Court of Directors, who had the power of remon-
strating, and could not be compelled to obey the direction
of the President without a mandamus from a court of jus-
tice. It was clear that under the present bill the Secretary
of State would have no greater power over the Indian re-
venues than that which now existed.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY thought the Chancellor of the
Exchequer had overlooked the 27th clause. Suppose a
minister chose to expend half a million- on steamers in a
war with China, the council would not be able to interfere
in the matter. 'lt was clear that 'he power of the minister
would be most arbitrary and despotic. He wished to know
from the Government whether the minister would be al-
lowed to expend any sum ho might please without the
knowledge of the council or the knowledge of Parliament.
Mr. BARROW said it would be much the more conve-
nient course to discuss the clauses in their proper order,
and if hon. members were'not satisfied with the checks
imposed they ought to give notice of amendments.
Mr. FORTESCUE moved the insertion of the words
"in council" after the words " Secretary of State." Tho
effect of that amendment would be that in all ordinaiy
matters the council would, as a matter of right, have cog-
nisance of all matters relating to the government of India
before they were finally decided upon by the Secretary of
State.

Sir G. LEWIS said that if the government would adopt
the plan recommended by the late government they would
solve the difficulty. The former bill contained a clause pro-
viding that no grant for any increase should be made with-
out the concurrence of the president and foir of the ordi-
nary members of the council, that being a majority. If it
was the intention of the Government that no new grant or
charge should be made out of the revenue of India without
the consent of the majority of the council, he would suggest
the insertion'of a clause defining the powers of the council,
and thus removing- the difficulty which had arisen.
Lord V. TEMPEST said the present clause was a mere
sequitur of the provision that the Government of India
should be handed over to the Crown. If the amendment
should be adopted- the minister would be completely con-
trolled by the council. He did not see anything to delay
the committee until they arrived at the 7th clauie, on
which he had gifven notice of 'his intention to move an
amendment.'
Lord J. RUSSELL said ho could not vote for the amend-
ment of the hen. member for Louth (Mr. Fortescue), and
hoped the Government would pay some attention to the
suggestion of hisiight-lion. friend (Sir G. Lewis).
Mr. MANY.I-12'S 'said that nothing•more was required
with reap: t the new council than esistfd with regard
to the council and Vie Gelvrnor-General cf ' Alt the
official bUsiness must Jae done by the Governer-General in
Council, and-hie thought the new minister ought to hear
'his council MO tae their advice. That system had acted
admirably in the Indian branch of the Government, and he
did not see whyit should nut do adequately well in the
English branch.
gr,':C;BARIZKI ou'rporteil the ap4eo44erit. of. the 49n,

member for Louth, because he believed it would be the
best check against tho misuse of money and the misuse of
patronage.
The committee then divided. The numbers were—
For the amendment 77
Against it
Majority ' —ll4

On the qne3tion that clause 3 stand part of the bill,
Sir C. WOOD suggested a verbal amendment of the
latter part of the clause, to make it consistent with the
subsequent clauses.
Mr. WALPOLE gave some explanation, and the clause
was then agreed to.

On clause 4,
Sir J. GRAHAM said that by the present law three
Secretaries ~f State undone President of the Board of Con-
trol might sit in the House of Commons. There was there-
fore no objection to the new Secretary of State being em-
powered to sit.
The clause was then agreed to, as were clauses 5 and 6.
Oa clause 7, which fixes the number of the council,
Lord PALMERSTON said he thought that 15 was an
inconveniently large number. He did not fear that the ap-
pointment of tlat number of officers by the Government
would affect the liberties of the country; but he believed
that the numbSr would be too largo for the convenient
transaction of business. There would not be that constant
transmission of documents to and from India which had
hitherto taken place. The voluminous correspondence had
to be read; and it generally resulted in nothing being done,
or being referred to the clerk of the committee. tie did
not think that it would be necessary to sub-divide the
council into committees of three. He suggested that they
should adopt that number which Lord Stanley himself had
been in favour of, 12--giving power to the Government to
reduce that number afterward:. The bill seemed to have
been framed on the idea that the new Government should
resemble the old one as much as possible. They seemed to
have had the old Court of Directors of 18 in their mind.
He moved to omit "13," and insert "12."
Mr. MANGLES said it was an entire mistake of the
noble lord to suppose that the correspondence with India
would diminish. On the contrary it was likely to increase,
owing to the railways and other new public works ; and
that increase would probably go on for years to come. The
noble lord seemed to forget that India was a country of
raw produce chiefly, and must for a long time to come
draw its'supply of manufactured articles from this country.
He hoped the committee would not consent to any reduc-
tion of the number of the council.

Mr. GLADSTONE intended to support the number of
15, and would state why he preferred it to 12. The coun-
cil might either be s body only occasionally consulted by
the Indian Minister, as his convenience dictated, and in
that case the smaller number would be sufficient ; or they
might be parties to the Whole Of the Indian business from
its inception to its close, and such was his idea of the coun-
cil. (sear, hear.) The number of 15 contemplated the
council being divided into committees; and Lord Stanley
had stated that the business would be conducted in that
way. He thought this arrangement so important that it
was desirable to have provisions inserted in the bill for
carrying it out; and he hoped the Government would in-
troduce some clauses to that effect. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. D. SEYMOUR said that only 5 per cent. of the
business had been' initiated or transacted by committees

under the old system. There would not be the eame
amount ,of.business thrown on the council with regard to
railway and public works as n)w pressed on the Court of
Director.. It was only the clerks who would ever read
through all the papers. The committee could only look
over them afterwards in a dilettante manner. He would
vote for the number 12 as a nearer approximation to the
number 4—( ' hear, hear," and a laugh) - which he thought
the proper number. All the real business was done in
India by a council which only comprised four members,
and the same number .would be qui, enough for the Eng-
lish council. They ought not to have more men thin were
required fer the' work. (Cries of " Divide.") He would
vote for 12 as nearer the smaller number, or for no council
at all.
Lord STANLEY said they had travelled over the
ground so often that he would not detain the committee
long. He. agreed with the right hon. gentleman (Mr.
Gladstone) that the numbers of the council depended very
much on the nature of the functions to be performed.
With regard to the division into committees—if he looked
to clause 20 he would find a provision to that effect,
although it was not obligatory. It was said the amount
of businesswould be greatly reduced; that might be the
case eventually, but no such reduction could take place for
some time. Ho was ready to bow to the decision of the
committee, but he must any that the more he saw of the
amount of business the less be liked the reduction from
fifteen to twelve. (Hear, hear )
Mr. LOWE could not imagine what these fifteen gent7e-
men would have to dO. ("Ob, oh," and " Hear, hear.' )
The present Court of Directors read all the papers that
came from India, and yet they found time to do a good
many other things. The late chairman held the same
position in several other companies, and many of them
were bankers. One gentleman, Capt. Shepherd, appeared
to be the prop of all decayed corporations. He was the
prop of the India House, the support of the Hudson's Bay
Company; and every thing at the Trinity House. When
he considered the importance of 1,0001. to the revenue, he
could not wish to pay the larger number. The Board of
Control was now divided into six departments with a chief
clerk at the head of each. The secretary read over the
papers relating to all six. Fe had done it himself, and
yet his health had not suffered, nor was his time fully
occupied. If they had a council composed of six heads of
departments, they would have a council which would be
consulted by the Minister, and be a valuable assistance to
him. (Hear, hear.) Now, they wool I have tinsel gentle-
men whose time was not fully occupied to deliberate in
council. Was the Minister to be present at these deli-
berations or not ? If not, they were merely reconstruct-
ing the double government. If he did attend it would be
impossible for, him to get through his duties. The result
of the proposed plan would be this—if the President
wanted to send aalespltch ha would direct the clerk of the
department to prepare one; it would then be laid before
the council ; but if they altered it, the Minister would take
care to alter it back again. It would not be a council, be-
cause it would never be consulted. (Hear, hear.) It would
go on for two or three years and then be abolished, and
the people would be surprised they had ever accepted it.
Sir a RAWLINSON, who was interrupted by cries for
a division, said he would on abstract principles be inclined
to support the smaller number. From his experience he
believed 12 would be sufficient. (Hear, hear.) There were
three committees at the India-house, ut as three formed
a quorum nine were equal to the entire work. This, how-
ever, was not a mere question of £ s. d. ' • it was desirable
at the inauguration of a new system to have as much
weight and authority in the council as possible ; ho would
therefore vote for the number 15. (Cries of "Divide.")
Col. SYKES rose, but was usable to obtain a hearing.
The committee then divided on the question that, the
word " fifteen" pitand part of the clause :
Ayes....
Noes

.. 227
.. 165
Majority -62
Viscount PALMERSTON then proposed to insert after
the word " members" the words " to be appointed by her
Majesty by warrant under her royal sigu manual," the
object of his motion being to provide that the whole fifteen
members of the council should be nominated by the crown.
The object of the bill was to transfer the Government of
India to the Queen, and he considered that it would be
contrary to the principles of the constitution to allow any
portion of the council to be appointed otherwise than by
her Majesty.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that it
would be unnecessary to enter into any lengthened discus-
sion upon this point, the house having already decided
that the council should be partially electd. The argument
of the noble lord was quite tallazious, for it was based upon
the erroneous assumption that the council was merely an
executive body,
Viscount DUNKELLIN, amidst loud expressions of
impitience, supported the amendment.
Mr. S. WORTLEY said that though it was, tech-.
nice ly speaking, quite true that members of the executive
were all appointed by the sovereign, tee element of elec-
tion did nevertheless enter 'very materially into the fact of
their appointment. Taus Sir. R. Peel, on one occasion,
wished to avail himself of the services of his friend, Sir G.
Murray, in whom he had the greatest confidence ; but Sir
George having lost his election for Perthshire, both Sir R.
Peel and the Crown were deprived of his assistance. (Hear,
hear.) Again, it was generally understood that the only
reason why the right hoe. baronet (Sir E. B. Lytton) had
not been appointed to the Colonial-office, on the formation
of Lord Derby's cabinet, was the alarm, which had since
happened turned out to be a false one, that there would be
some difficulty in his re-election. (Hear.) Once more, did
anybody suppose that Mr. Fox would ever have been a
Minister of the Crown, if his appointment had depended
entirely upon the will of the sovereign ? In point of fact,
it was the elected House of Commons which had forced
him into the Premiership. (Hear, hear.)
The house then divided=
For the amendment
Agaiest it 24
Majority against it -93
This result was received with loud cheers.
Mr. GLADSTONE said he had a proposal to make to
the committee, which, though it had been mentioned on
one or two occasiene, had not yet been discussed; it was
that the first Members of the council should be named in
the bill. As it wai'notdesirable, however, to proceed any
further then, he would move that the chairman report
progress, what he he bad said being intended as a notice.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
there were very grave objections to the right hon. gentle-
man's proposal. The Government did, on one occasion,
propose that the names should be inserted. (Laughter.)
After that proposition was madeehowever, they saw reason
to believe that it would be very inconvenient and injurious
to the public service to carry it out, and at the proper time
he should state the objections which he entertained. As
there were urgent reasons why supply should be taken on
Monday, he proposed that they should not proceed with
the committee until next Thursday, and he hoped that by
taking the committee on that day and on Friday conse-
cutively, they would be able to get through that stage
of the measure. He proposed that on Monday they
should first take the Funded Debt Bill and then go on to
supply. He thought it desirable that they Omuta have a
morning sitting on Monday, in order to get through the
Scotch Universities Bill. (Elear.) It was of great im-
pertance to Scotch members that that bill should be pro-
ceeded with as soon as possible. (Hear, hear.)
The CHAIRMAN then reported progress.
SALE AND TRANSFER OF LAND (IRELAND)
13ILL.
The house having gone into committee on this bill,
Mr. B. OS E ORNE protested against the bill being pro-
ceeded with at that late hour (half-past twelve), and com-
plained of clause 51, which he said was one of the most
important clauses of the bill, having been disposed of at
such a late hour on a previous evening.
The CHAIRMA.N. reminded the hon, member that he
WAS out of order in referring t o a clause which had been
passed.
Mr..B. OSBORNE moved that the chairman report pro-
gress, and gave notice that on the bringing up of the re-
port he should move that clause 51 be expunged.
Mr. WHITESIDE said the remaining clauses were of
little importance, and it was very desirable that the bill
should pass through committee.
'Mr. WALPOLE hoped that the house would go on with
those clauses which were- unopposed, to save time on a
future occasion. ' •
Mr. MONSELL trusted fie Government would persist
in going on with the bill, for if they did not there was a
danger of its failieg through altogether.
billM sr4eirf be postponed,
t DEASY thought it reasonable that the
postponed, instead of a discussion taking
place at half-past twelve. •
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER should not
think of proceeding with any discussion of importance at
that late bour;'if it were not the wish of the committee.
It was said that there was some objection to the mode in
which clause 51 had been passed, but he knew of nothing
more fair then•the manner in which that clause was oar-
reed ; it was discussed at some length, and was then carried
by ae 9YOZ‘litclatieia majority, If they went into eem.