The Sun.
London, England, 1858-07-02 00:00:00

that he was a member of the Government. If it should
be found that a member of the Council did not
devote sufficient time to the Council the Govern-
ment could take steps to move him for misbehaviour.
Thee, agaiii, it was always in the. power of Parliament
to address the Crown for the removal of any councillsr
who did not perform his duties, so that there was a
double check—one in the hands of the Executive, and
the other ha the bands of Parliament. Every one must
desire to see the Council formed of men of the greatest
experience and practical ability, and it might in some
cases be that their very connection with some other
pursuit was a guarantee for the possession of those
qualities, and he could not therefore consent to the pro-
pose'.

Sir J. GRAHAM could not understand the applica-
tion of a principle to members of the Council which it
bad not been considered necessary to apply to Ministers
of State. (Hear, hear.) Speaking with accurate know-
ledge, he had known Cabinet Ministers in both Houses
of Parliament, and members holding high position, who
were partners in breweries or insurance companies, or
who were connected with some commercial pursuit.
He saw no reason for introducing any such principle as
absolutely to prohibit members of the Council from being
engaged in any other occupation. They would be al.
ways under the review of that house, and they would
be actuated by a sense of duty, and any such restriction
would probably interfere to prevent persons of the
highest qualification from undertaking the duties of
councillor. The duties of the office need certainly not
occupy the whole of a man's time, and he should cer-
tainly deprecate the insertion in the bill of any such
provision as that members of the Council should be ab-
solutely bound down not to follow any other occupation.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER wished
to point out that the hon. member for Devonport had
placed a very strange construction upon what had been
said by his noble friend. His noble friend. had slated,
what was the unanimous opinion of his colleagues,
that those members of the Council appointed by
her Majesty would be expected to place their whole
time at the disposal of the Secretary of State, but he did
not at all intend to say that the whole of their time
should be devoted to the duties of their office, or that
they should not be allowed to do anything else. (Hear.)
As regarded those members of the Council appointed by
election, his noble friend would not for a moment lay
down the principle, that they should be required to
spend the whole cf their time in the fulfilment of their
duty as councillors. It was very possible that persons
might be elected from their connection with the Court of
Directors, who at the same time would be occupied with
public or private interests, but he did not think that any
disadvantage would result from that; but, on the con-
trary, the election of such men might be the means of
introducing into the Council a great deal cf practical
knowledge and experience. In effecting a transition from
a Government of an anomalous character to one which
in time would assume a more regular form, it would not
be wise to adopt a principle which would negative a prac
tice which bad in the Government that was about to be
abolished been productive of beneficial result., and it
would be highly impolitic, in. his opinion, to define, by a
clause in an act of Parliament, what time the members
of the Council, who would of course be bound by their
own sense of duty, should devote to the duties of their
office. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. RICH objected to the expense which would be
incurred for the payment of the salaries of couecillors
and their retiring pensions, and gave notice that he
would propose an amendment relating to the subject.
Mr. FITZROY intimated, from the chair, that the
discussion which was going on was most irregular, the
real question before the house being whether tenor seven
members should be appointed by Election. •
S;r H. WILLOUGHBY considered that with a view to
the appointment of men in whom persons connected
with India would have confidence, it would be advisable
that the number of councillors elected should be ten.
Col. SYKES concurred in that opinion. He thought
also that when a person accepted an office, who himself
intended to do his duty, he would not engage in
multifarious occupation which would interfere with the
performance of those duties, but at the same time he
would not bind persona by a strict rule in an act of Par-
liament. It was absurd to say that men engaged in lite-
rary
or scientific pursuit.; should not be eligible for the
Council. Seep a rule might exelucle some of the best
inen.

Mr. D. SEYMOUR was decidediy opposed to ren-
dering persons eligible to be on the C:mucil who at the
same time were engaged in large contracts. What would
the country think of the First L.-in! of the Admiralty
being a timber merchant as well ? (Hear, hear.)
Mr. G. HUDSON hoped the committee would con-
fine the discussion t the real question before them, viz ,
whether the number should be seven or ten.
The amendment was then negatived without a divi-
don,

It was then proposed by Lord STANLEY to add
words to the clause, enabling her Mojesty to fill up va-
cancies in the Council in the event of their no.', being
filled up within a specified time by the Court of Direc-
tors. Teo proviso was added after a brief discassioa.
Cate e 8 was then agreed to.
On clause 9,
Lord A. V. TEMPE-S•T moved, in line 4, after "filled
up," to leave out the remainder of the clause, and add,
"by persons, to be elected as hereinafter mentioned,
from among persons who have been ten years at least in
India, in the service of her Majesty, or of the Govern-
ment cf India, in any department, whether legal, civil,
naval, or military, or who have been 15 years resident in
India; and the persons qualified to vote in the election
of such members shall be proprietors of capital m Indian
stock, or of paid-up capital in railways or other public
works in India, of the amount of one thowand pounds ;
or of persons who have been ten years in the military,
naval, nr civil service of the East India Company, or of
her Majesty, provided always that no person shall be
entitled to vote in the election of such members as afore-
said unless he shall have been qualified a4":iforesaid foi
six months loforo the election, and be registered
according to the regulations hereinafter to be men-
tioned." Tne noble kr] contended that his proposal was
in strict accordance with a principle which had already
been sanctioned by the committee, and also in conformity
with the sixth resolution.
Lord STANLEY thought the house bad alrehdy de-
termined that such a constituency as that implied in the
amendment could not be found—(hear)—and without
detaining the committee, he should simply confine him-
self to stating that the Government would adhere to
their original intention, (bear.)
Mr. AYRTO2,t quite concurred in the resolution of
the Govern Ont.
Sir H. WltidsOUG HEY believed that by the intro•
duction of the 9ecessary safeguards such a constituency
might be obtained.
The amendment was negatived without a division, and
the clause was agreed to.
Oa clause 10,
Mr. V. S MIT a reminded the noble lord the President
of the Board of Control that he had, promised to consider
the question of constituting two-thirds of the members
from persons who had been ten years in India.
La.' STANLEY said the subject had been carefully
considered, and the G ,veracnent proposed that the
"major part" of the members should be chesea from
persons who had bad this indian experience.
The words " tnajoor part" were then inserted.
Tee clause as amended wan then agreed to.
On clause 11,
Mr. GREG'SON proposed to leave out the words
"good behaviour," and insert " five yearn, and to bo re-
eligible for r lection."
Lord STANLEY sail this question had already been
debated at length, buy the c ,In nittee had deterinieed
that tenure for life would be the most advantageous
arrangement.
Mr. LINDSAY believed that ultimately India would
be be better governed without a council at all. Elect
members for life, and they would naturally vote in favour
of vested interests. If the hon. member pressed his
amendment, he should assuredly vote with biro,
Mr. D. SEYMOUR asked `whether in the event of
the Government desiring at aluture period to diminish
the number of the council, the retiring councillors were
to receive life pensions ?
Sir H. CAIRNS said the question of the Govern-
ment was that the council w ,uld be the permanent
mode of governing India, and if hereafter the number
was found ter) great, it would be open to the Secretary
of Sate for India to come down to the house, aed say
that he did not think it necessary to fill up the vacancy.
Lord PALMERSTON said that this point was of
great ineporeauce. lie laetented that the house had de-
termined to make the council so numerous, it being his
decided opinion that several of thorn would turn out
sinecures with retiring pensions. What was the ohj-ct
of the committee in regard to the formation of the coun-
ci —that they should be independent—n, t for action,
for the Chancelice of the Exchequer had denied that they
were an executive council. The fundamental principle
established was that it should be a council for advice,
and that it should be rendered independent in order to
give sound advice. It was thought that the members of
the council should hold office for life, and if rendered
unable to perform their duties they were to have retiring
pensions of 6001. or 8001. a year. He (Lord .Pelmerston)
proposed a much shorter way of making them indepen-
dent, namely, that they should hold office for ten years.
Tory would then be quite independent, for it was her Ily
to be expected that they could hope for favour from a
Government in ten years. In addition to that he pro-
posed that they should not be re appointed or re-elected.
(Rear.) Could anything be more objec,ion able than that
they should be appointed for life ? if Indian experience
was to be of value, it must be the experieece of this day.
Any other experience would be worse than useless, be-
cause it would only lead to error. Tee experience of 15
or 16 years, censideriag the rapid advances making in
India, would be of little use. He was met by an objec•
tion that the councillor vsonld gain more knowledge of
India in the council-room at home than if be were
in India. If that were ro, why its up the choice of men
passing their lives in India ? Why not have a series of
Secretaries of State ? Tney would get in ail probability
men of advancing years—losing activity of mind and
body. They would thus have an effete council. He
should support the amendment now proposed, and should
afterwards prepese the amendment of which he had
given notice.

Mr. MILLS said the 'case of the noble lord himself
was one of those who was a proof in his own person that
the coun'ry should retain the services of those who in
early life had served it well.
Sir E. COLEBROOKE supported the amendment.
He admitted that by an expensive system of pensions
they might get rid of the difficulty with respect to the
inctividual3 f)raiing the council, but there was another
question more diMcnlt nonn,cted with the patronage, ai d
they would find tbat the families of the councillors would
be very unwilling that they should retire.
Mr. AYEZTON thought it would be highly inexpe-
dient to be constantly shifting the council, The executive
council was a phantom that had f!it,toil before the eyes of
the noble lord, and had ;,calved him. With regard 4o