The Sun.
London, England, 1858-04-27 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON,
w. TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL 27, 1858

giving the Government leave to bring in their bill, did
not affirm any of the detailed conditions of either mea-
sure, nevertheless that there did appear to be a general
assent to the principle that the Government of India was
to be transferred from the Company to the Crown. The
right hon. gentleman laid that down on the basis on
which both his bill and our own were founded. But if
that were acquiesed in by the house when we introduced
our bill, and if it were taken for granted by the Govern-
ment when they introduced their's, why are we now to
go into committee to rediscuss and reaffirm a principle
which both sides of the house have admitted to be the
principle upon which legislation should be based ? I
merely mention this in passing ; but it appears to me
that the first resolution is the repetition of a doctrine
which is generally recognised, and which only few
persons dissent from. (Hear.) Without adverting to
the resolutions, I shall confine my ebservetions to one
or two points arising out of the elaborate defenoe which
the right hon. gentleman has made of
.his bill. He has
argued with great perseverance and with great ability
thin gte Council,—infavo andur of
thehe
principleas he
alwaysof
membersey e r for h
has particularly dilated upon the propriety of having
in the Council persons elected by Parliamentary consti-
tuencies. Now, if that be so strongly his opinion, may
I be allowed to ask him whether he intends to reinsert
that provision in the bill which I presume would be
the consequence of the resolutions being adopted ?
(dear) Does he look upon that provision as bring only,
like Juliet, in a trance from a potion given by the Go-
vernment for a temporary lull, or does he acquiesce in
the general verdict of the public by which that part of
his measure has been condemned I presume that his
praises did not imply any intenti in of reviving that pro-
vision, and while we pardon the paternal affection,
therefore, which was displayed by the right hon. gentle-
man over the tomb of the deceased, we may st,eume that
there will be no attempt to restore that most objection-
able feature of the measure. (Hear, hear.) The right
hon. gentleman argued at great length in favour of some
portion of the council being elected ; and, referring to
the example of this house, he said, " We never hear any
objection to members of this house being elected ?" But
it seems to me that the whole of that argument is
founded upon a false analogy. Is that council to per.
form the functions of this house ? If so, let all the mem-
bers be elected, and by Parliamentary constituencies if
you will. If you intend it to be a little Parliament to ad-
minister the affairs of India, welt and good ; but, then,
what becomes of your principle of transferring the go-
vernment of India to a responsible Minister of the Crown
who, as stated in the resolution, is to perform all the
functions and to possess all the power and all the re-
sponsibility of a Secretary of State, and who is to admi-
nister the affairs of India in this country in the same
manner and to the same extent as the Secretary of State
for the Colonies or the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs administers the business of his department ? Tne
two things are perfectly incompatible. I will not dwell
upon the principle which is admitted by every constitu-
tional lawyer and by every man who is versed in the
subject, that it is not in accordance with a fendaniental
doctrine of our. constitution, that any person who forms
part of an executive government should owe his appoint-
ment to any other source than the Crown acting through
its responsible advisers. What we want is that the In-
dian Minister should be accountable to Pailiament
for his conduct and that he should not be shielded
from responsibility by a Council owing its appointment
to independent sources, and not amenable to the Crown,
the effect of which would be to oppose, to thwart, and
to impede the action of the Minister. if it be thought
so essential to have elected members in the Council—if
you mean that a man is necessarily a better councillor
for Wag elected than if he were nominated by the Crown,
why are not all to be elected, and why should any be
nominated (Hear.) The right hon. gentleman said
that people had ridiculed the idea of giving the appoint-
ment of councillors to the freemen of Liverpool ; but he
said, " Did not the freemen of Liverpool elect Mr. Can-
ning, and did not this house appoint Mr. Canning to be
President of the Board of Control ? " Why no ; this
house never made any such appointment. Mr. Canning
was elected by the freemen of Liverpool because he was
an eminekt public man, a great orator, a great states-
man, a most able and distinguished man. They chose
him, not on account of any particular knowledge which
they believed him to possess of the affairs of India, but
because they believed him to be a good man to manage
the affairs of England. (Hear.) It was not this house
that elected Mr. Canning to office, but the Crown in the
exercise of that constitutional discretion which vest in
the Crown the appointment and selection of public ser-
vants who possess the confidence of this house. In the
same manner Mr. Huskisson was not chosen by the free-
men of Liverpool that he might be President of the
Board of Control, but because he was eminently conver-
sant with matters of trade, and had studied the prin-
ciples of commerce, and because the people of Liverpool,
being mainly interested in the commercial prosperity
of the country, thought Mr. Huskisson would be a
useful member of the Legislature, and a supporter of
sound commercial principles. Therefore I say that the
analogy vs hich the right hon. gentleman has endeavoured
to establish has entirely failed. (Cheers.) I own it
appears to me that the council in the bill of the late
Government was too numerous. (Hear, hear.) I do
not profess to have that knowledge of the working of In-
dian business which should make me competent to express
an opinion, but it seems to me that 18 is an incon-
•enient number, and that, so far from aiding, if they all
take part in the discussions, you will have " too many
cooks ; " and although " in the multitudeof counsellors
there is safety " is a good general axiom, you may over-
do it, and the number may be too great. (Hear.) But
what were intended to be the functions of this council /
It was not that the council were to be the responsible
governors of India. It was not intended that they should
be a council to originate, direct, and decide, but a coun-
cil to be merely those advisers which the right hon. gen-
t!eman so well described as an essential part of the de-
partment which has the management of Indian affairs,
The right hon. gentleman well said that public men who
have devoted their attention to Parliamentary wa fare,
national interests, and European concerns, naturally
come into office without that detailed knowledge of the
affairs of India which is necessary to enable the Govern
went well to administer the affairs of India. The right
hon. gentleman also truly said that India is not like
one of our other possessions abroad—that it does not
contain a single population—that India is not all under
our away—that the Indian Government involves rela-
tions with independent princes, with men of different re-
ligions, laws, habits, and institutions ; Nand that unless
you have a practical knowledge founded upon local ex,
perience, you are likely, in your ignorance, to go wrong
and do great mischief. (Hear.) Well, sir, we felt that
as well as the present Government. We felt that it was
necessary to give counsel and support to the Govern-
meet of which the Minister for India is only the or lan
—because the Cabinet is the quarter from whence comes
the decision on all matters, and it is that the Cabinet
may be furnished. through the Indian Minister, with
local knowledge that you propose to give him a council
to advise and 4-sist him, but not to control and overrule
him, because the moment you do that the responsibility
of the Government ceases—(loud cheers)—and then
you have a double Governeaent re-established for In-
dia. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) These matters wll
be a'g'ed at grever length on a future occasion, but
I could not allow the observations cf the right hon.
gentleman to pass without notice, because I think
that the more men come to reflect upon that which was
intended to be the principle of the change we pr. posed
-,namely, the transfer of the GOvernment and the re-
sponsibility from the Company to the responsible advisers
of the Crown—before we consent that this shall be the
fundamental prineiplo upon which we are going to act—
the more convinced we roust be that the council ought
to be a council of advisers, and not of controllers. (Hear.)
You do not want to establish a new Board of Control,
but to transfer the Government is such a manner that
the Ministers of the Crown shall be responsible to this
house for the entire direction of Indian affairs. (Cheers

There seems a fatality in Indian affairs by which an in:
veterate principle of duality clings to everything. (Hear.)
We have had for a long time a double Government. That
was felt to be an evil which we were called upon to car-
recL. We were tarred out, and thus there came to be the
two Administrations and two bills. The present Govern-
ment were not satisfied with that, but adopted two me-
thods of proceeding—a bill a❑d a resolution. I only hope
that they will push that principle a little further, and
make it necessary, fur the purpose of completing the
measure, that we should have two sessions—(a laugh)—

certainly, the course they adopt is likely to lead to that
result ; but I will say nothing more on that subject for
the present. That which induced me to rise was to vindi-

_ -----
Cate our measure from the charges of the right hon. gen -
tlemen—to show the principal points upon which their
measure differed from ours and from the principle laid
down by others representing the more simple measure—
and to convince the house that many of these points of
difference are not consistent with the fundamental prin-
ciples of the British Constitution, and are inconsi-tent
with the fundamental principle on which it is proposed
that the transfer of Indian government ahoull be made
to the Crown. (Loud cheers )

Mr. GLADSTONE—The house has listened to a most
interesting discussion upon a subject of paramount im-
portance, and in that discussion we have heard expressed
the views of those who are friendly to one plan of deal-
ing with Indian affairs before the house, and in some
degree to the views of those who are friendly to the
other. I quite agree with my noble friend who has just
sat down that we could hardly have expected the state-
ment that we have heard to-night from the right hon.
gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer—(hear)
and my object in rising is to say a few words upon what
I conceive to be a point now properly to be decided by
the Muse of Commons. That point did not form the

gist of his speech n which the right hon. gentleman de-
fended the wisdom of the measure of the Government,

nor was it one that formed the gist of the speech of my
noble friend, who endeavoured to set up his own bill in
opposition to that of the Government. What is the ques-
tion before ns ! We are invited to vote that on Friday

next this house will resolve itself into committee to con-

eider the acts of Parliament relative to the government

of India. Nov, sir, I for one, cannot join in the censure
which has been bestowed upon the suggestion of my
noble friend the member for the city of London (Lord J.
Russell), that the best method of proceeding will be by

resolutions. (Hear,) I believe that it might have been
a happy circumstance—it would certainly have been so
in the view of those who think that this is the best mo-
ment for legislating for India—if our original mode of
proceeding had been by resolution; and I am certain,
krona Parliamentary recollections and traditions, to t
there are abundant precedents to justify and recommend
such a course. (Hear, hear.) The proposition of my
noble friend has at last had this effect, whatever other

effect it may have, that we are now practically in fie
position in which we stood on the night of ',the discus-
sion on the motion of my hon. friend the member for
Huntingdon. (Hear-) We are called upon now, not to
act upon any vote which we may have previously given,
but to make a completely new commencement of the
government of India. (Hear.) I was one of those who
originally felt that the moment was not opportune for
undertaking so formidable a task ; and so long as the
flames of war remain unextinguished in India, I, for one,
am yet to be convinced that it is not rash and ill-advised
to legislate for that country, (Cheers.) But I do not
seek to revive the argument that was advanced by my
hon. friend the member for Huntingdon and by others,
and contested with equal ability by those upon the oppo-
site side. The decision of the house is upon record, and
it is to be held good and sound while the circumstances
remain unchanged. But do they remain unchanged ?
(Cheese.) Was not the hope held out to us at that time
that before we proceeded far with Indian legislation we
might have to congratulate ourselves upon the complee
tion of military operations in India ? Was it not the
hope that by the end of April, when that intelligence
was expected to arrive, we should have made conside-
rable progress in the passing of a bill ? We have lost be-
tween two or three months, and I do not think there is
a man among all those who hear me, however sorry he
may be for the fact, who will deny the proposition that
if we have moved at all in the matter of legislation for
India since the motion of my hon. friend the member for
Huntingdon, we have moved backwards. (Hear.) Take
the promoters and authors of the first bill. The noble
viscount in his very amusing and interesting speech ad-
verted to the dualism which he says has unhappily
marked all these proceedings. There is a double Go-
vernment to be abolished, he says, we have had two bills
and two Governments have tried their hands at it, and he
hopes that it won't go a little further and that we shah
not have two sessions. It is sometimes difficult to dis-
tinguish between the ironical and the earnest, tut I cer-
tainly did cot think that the vein of irony was wrong in
the noble viscount's declarations. (Hear, hear.) I thought
he both anticipated that the termination of this session
might not see the settlement of the India Bills, and while
anticipating that as probable he did not deprecate the
delay as a great misfortune. (Hear.) The noble lord
observed with great force on a former occasion that the
evil of postponing legislation was secondary in its cha-
racter, but that the evil of rash, ill considered, and ill-di-
gested legislation would be of immeasurable importance.
And, has not the Chancellor of the Exchequer—to be
equal with the noble lord—made in significant terms a
Mender suggestion ? Has he not warned the house that
unless we can appoint a council equal in knowledge
and experience to the present Court of Directors, we
should do well altogether to pes•pone this question ?
(Hear.) I look then not only to the time that has
elapsed, not only to the validity of the original reasons
for delay, because that is a plea upon which I admit I
can hardly be permitted to dwell ; I look to the misgiv-
ings of tue authors of the two measures, to the state of
public affairs, to the period of the session at which we
have arrived, and combining these considerations toge-
ther I cannot permit the motion which you hold, sir, in
your hand to be put from the chair without protesting
against an affirmative answer being given to it, But I
have other reasons besides these. If we had before us
what appeared to me to be the elements of a good and
efficient plan for the eovernment of India, or if we had
before us a plan to which this house could wisely give
its assent, with only certain amen Intents in detail, then
under the authority of our vote of February we might,
consistently at least, go forward with the work of legis-
lation. But is that the state of the case ? We have heard
to-night, from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, an in-
genious and elaborate defence of his bill as he originally
introduced it. I don't know what effect that defence has
made on the minds of members, but I must confess that
if I had felt any scruples or any objections to the prin-
ciples of that bill they have not been removed by the
right hon, gentleman's speech. (Hear.) But lain bound,
in fairness and in equity, without censuring any one, and
I trust without offending any one, to say that in neither
of these bills can I see the elements iif a good and sound
measure, (Hear.) Aad let me here make this remark on
the bill of the late Government as illustrated by the
speech of the noble viscount :—When he was arguing
against the application of the elective principle to the
framing of a council fer India, and when he was speak-
ing of the sole and undivided responsibility of the Secre-
tary of State, I thought I traced in his speech, as in his
former declarations on the same subject, an inadequate
sense of the difficulty of legislation on this matter. I, for
my part, cordially subscribe to the principle which was
laid down by the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the close
of his speech, that if we are to add a council to the orga-
nisation of the future Home Government of India, it
ought to be a council equal in knowledge and experience
to the Court of Directors; and most reluctantly should I
see any bill go up from this to the other House of Par-
liament which substituted for the Court of Directors any
body—call it what you will, or appoint it how you choose
—which was not fully equal fir every purpose.of advice,
suggestion, and, speaking morally, I will even say of
control, to the present Court. (Cheers.) But what is the
great difficulty that we have to encounter in this matter?.
It is that you are attempting to govern by means of a
people another people, separated from us not by distance
only, but by language, by blood, by tradition, by history
by institutions, and by all that can draw a line of de-
markation between man and man. Is it not the greatest
problem in politics how to govern a nation by another
nation ? Is it not by far the greatest difficulty which we
have before us—how to provide duly, in our system of
government, for the protection of the interests and feel-
ings of the people of India I With the greatest faith in
Parliamentary institutions for the discussion and settle-
natmt of public affairs in England, I frankly own that I
have net equal faith in their operation for defending the
interests and feelings of the people of India, The ques-
tion which we are bound to ask ourselves before all others,
with all others, and above all others, is—what protec-
tion can we provide by thelaw not only for the maiete-
nano° of those interests, but like wise for respect, care,
and tolera'ion to wards the feelings of the people of India?
I will say this of the Court of Directors, that it has
practically been a body protective of the people of India.
I am not friendly to its maintenance, far lees am I
friendly to that state of severance which exists at present
between the Executive and the independaut element of
the Indian Government ; but this I do .ay, that we ought
not to assent to any plan which makes less efficient pro •
vision for the protection of Indian interests and Indian
feelings. And I look in vain to the plan of her Majesty's
Government and still more in vain, I think, to the plan
of the noble ci-count the member for Tiverton, for any
protective power that can be compared in point of effi •
cia
anothercy to t the et
topic
a
rtitoogfeDthirceretnoet'wB;
8(
orifeaarr,a
sh etahri.?
discussionß utth ere
i
is concerned, which nevertheless weighs upon my mind
almost oppressively with, regard to legislating this
on
question. The first great point to which we have to look
is to provide protection for the people of India against
the ienoraece, indiscretion, and errors either of the Exe-
cutive, or cf Parliament, or of the Government of this
country. But besides that there is a second qnestion
which I am afraid has hardly been named since these de-
bates began. I know not what the feelings of others may
he in regard to it, but I myself entertain so strong an
opinion upon it that lam bound to notice it, It appears
to me that there has grown up, partly from circumstances
beyond our control, and partly by cur own legi4atian, a
system fraught with danger, not only to India, but also
to the privileges of Parliament, and even to liberty as
well as the public interests at home, by the undue, and,
had not the Chancellor of the Excht quer frightened me,
I would have said the unconstitutional exercise of power
by the Executive Government through the means of the
Indian army and treasury. (Hear, hear.) I cannot look
back upon the history of wars, more than one, which
have been waged in India during the last 20 years, with-
out saying that the power lodged in the hands of the
Queen's advisers, as it has been exercised in these in
stances, has been wholly at variance with the interests ef
the country, and with the rights and privileges of the
House of Commons. (Hear, hear.) I am obliged to take
th thelast
ri p
instancenci
etoaswthhiechonle
ammosntowstaridlevinergt!iyn.l
illustrative
of the p
take
the case of the Persian war. (Hear, hear ) I am not
now about to discuss its policy, nor shall I enter upon
the reasons for which it was made, nor the terms on
which it was concluded; but this I ray, that if wars are
to be made by the Executive Government, through the
means, in the first instance, of those ,esources which
the Indian army and the Indian finances afford, without
the knowledge and coueent of Parliament, and if we
are to be apprised of those wars for the first time
when military operations have commenced, and if
we are never to be consulted until the moment has I
come when it is absolutely necessary to draw funds for
the support of them from the British Exchequer, then
these two consequences follow. In the first place, that
s 3 stem is destructive in the last degree to the interests
of the people of India, because it is in that way that a
great part of our financial difficulties in India have arisen.
(Hear, hear.) To take India into your own hands, to
govern from a distance by means of strangers and
foreigners a nation which has a history and traditions of
its own, is a difficulty saris us enough. It is a problem
fur which perhaps you may in vain seek a permanent
and satisfactory solution. But over and above this
difficulty you have been accumulating upon India a debt
which, though some have attempted to make light of it,
appears to me to be far heavier in proportion than the
crushing and gigantic debt of England. When we talk
of our own heavy debt we have this consolation, that we
have been mortgaging our own estate ; but when we
speak of the debt of India we are speaking of a debt
charged upon a country whose revenues we are drawing
in this country by virtue of the power of the sword.
But apart from that I say it is most unjust that the
Executive Government should have, for any purpose of
its own, or for any purpose of the people of England, the
power of entailing these tremendous charges upon the
people of India. (Cheers.) The consequence as regards
the people of India are not more striking or more con-
clusive than the objections to this policy which arise out
cf its bearing on the rights of this hous3. As regards
the liberties of Parliament, it seems to me to make little
difference whether a war made without our assent is a
war with Persia, or a war with Russia. (Hear.) I can-
not recognise any such Idistinction. And bow do we
stand with reference to the plans before the house as
they bear upon this vital question ? I frankly own I
want to limit the power of the Queen's advisers—it is
better to speak it out—for I do not think we are safe,
I do not think we are secure, I do not think we meet

the dictates of prudence and circumspection, unless
we place limitations upon the power of the Crown
with respect to the use of the Indian treasury and
army. (Hear, hear.) Do I find any such limitation,' in
these plans On the contrary, the plan of the right hen.
gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer is entirely
silent with regard to it. The plan of my noble friend the
member for Tiverton is not silent, but the provisions which
he has introduad into his bill—drawing a distinction be-
twLen war in Asia and war out of Asia, and enacting that
when military operations are actually begun A commuui•

cation of the fact shall be made to Parliament within one
month, or within a month after Parliament has met—l do
not hesitate to say are far worse than no provisions at all
(cheers) ; for they amount substantially to a legislative
sanction of a system with respect to which we are at least
entitled to say that, up to the present moment, it has never
had the countenance or approval of Parliament. (Cheers.)
I do not intend to enter at length into a discussion on these
matters, but I mention them now because, in my opinion,
the main conditions and object of our legislation for India
are protection for the Indian people against the errors of
England, and protection for the British people and the Bri-
tish Parliament against an undue exercise of power by the
executive Government. In neither of these plans can I
find any provisions at all, or any provisions worth naming,
for these vital purposes. The objections of detail are, I
am afraid,in themselves so numerous that they would make
almost unlimited demands upon the time and patience of
the house to solve them. I complain that Ido not find in
these plans the spirit and intention whichseem to me to be
essential for satisfactory legislation. Upon that ground,
and still more upon the general grounds that have been
previously urged, 1 must respectfully remonstrate against
the resolution that is about to be put from the chair. (Loud
cheers.) And although I know not whether that remon-
strance is at the present moment more than an idle sound,
yet I confess I do anticipate that as the session advances,
as weeks the satisfaction of those who
have concurred
glide y
in it
twill become stronger and more
decided, and the disposition of those who have not
concurred in it will likewise gradually develope itself
to regrets that they had not, while there was yet
time, taken their stand upon the very same ground that I
presume to occupy in protesting against attempts at legis-
lation which, under the circumstances of the moment, we
do not believe can possibly reach a satisfactory result.
(Cheers.) I close what I have to say by quoting those still
more memorable words of the right boo. gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer I hope I do not misrepresent
them :—`• Although we now advise the house to enter on
the question of Indian legislation, yet during the lest two
months—since I have become a member of the Government
—every day of my experience has more and more convinced
me that there does not at present exist among us that ma-
turity of op nion which is requisite on questions of the first
difficultywcooumdlm and importance." (Cheers.)
upon the resolutions. He
veserve any observations until
to
hr deceorhlneoitinseepi point
went
of
into committee E s
could not help, however, expressing his entire concurrence
in everything which hat fallen from Mr. Gladstone. Fur-
ther consideration had convinced him the more strongly
that the present was not the time for legislation. He
would ask whether the present government of India had
failed or broken down ? Had it failed to do all it had been
called upon to perform ? On the contrary, he maintained
that the Indian government hadproved itself most efficient.
Various grounds had been urged why they should proceed
to legislate upon this question is the course of the present
session. The first ground was, that the House of Com-
mons had determined by a large majority that it would
legislate. Now, he was sure that no one knew better
than the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli)
that the majority of 115 which voted in favour of the
introduction of the bill of the noble lord the member for
Tiverton, did not in the slightest degree pledge the
house to proceed. It was a mere matter of courtesy which
the house usually accorded nut only to Prime Ministers,
but to private members who asked leave to introduce a
bill. The next ground was that a double Government
existed ; ergo that double Government ought to be abo-
lished. But surely it ought first to be proved that the double
Government, as it was called, had failed, and was injurious
to India and the people of this country. That had never yet
been done. Even the noble lord, when proposing to abolish
the
working. In fact, he had never heard so much of what
eb
bt
existingused system, had highly eulogised its practical
C
to call " bosh" talked as upon this question.
etThe next ground they were celled upon to legislate was de-
ference to public opinion. His inquiries on that point led
him to the conclusion that the "public opinion" referred
to very much resemble' tho " we, the people of England"
perhaps, amazed to
of the three tailors of Tooleysstreet, the house would be,
learn what the public opinion upon
the subject was. As far as the public opinion in favour of a
change in the Government of India was indicated by the
petitions to that house. It was as follows The total num-
ber of petitions connected with Indian questions was 303.
How many did the house suppose, out of that member, were
in favour of transferring the Government if India from the
East India Company to the Crown ? Only three. (Hear.)
So much for public opinion, then, and the voice of the
country on this matter. Another reason was that the House
of Commons having, by a majority of 115, voted in favour
of a bill being brought in, the Government in India would
be paralysed if it were not proceeded with. There was no
tempest passed awn
ground whatever for such a supposition. Two of the com-
monest words in India with respect to the " Company's raj"
signified "fortune" awl "prosperity," and after the present
ever. At theiiresent time it would be a most imprudent, im-
politic course to introduce any organic changes into the go-
that "rah" would be stronger than
y
vernment of India; bat when the pacification of the country
was completed, it might be right to turn attention to prac-
tical plans by which the Government of India might be con-
centrated. For his own part, he thought that if they ad-
ministered the Government in the Queen's name, and put
a Minister of State at the head of the present Court of
Directors, the thing would be done, and that the Queen's
name would come like an angel of mercy, healing the
wounds we lamented to inflict, and heralding a long career
of peace and progressive prosperity to the people of India.
(Divide, divide.)
Sir H. VERNEY—(divide, divide) —believed that a
great change had come over the house and the country also
upon this subject, since it was last under discussion, and
the opinions of a great number of hon. members who had
voted for the introduction of the bill of the noble lord were
—that the proposed change was not expedient at the pre-
sent time. (Hear.) The noble lord hal proposed a great
change in the Government of ludia--1 change by which
all the checks upon the Board of Control would be taken
away, without proving that these cheeks were either un-
necessary or injurious. So far from being of opinion that
these checks were not required, he held that Parliament
ought to increase the powers of the Court of Directors;
and, had they possessed greater power over the Board of
Control during the last quarter of a century, they wool 1.
have been able to prevent many of those wars which had
absorbed the revenues of India and t revented the Govern-
ment from proceeding wishpriblio works and internal im-
provements in the country. (Hear.) He regretted that
the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of
Oxford (Ur. Gladstone) did not terminate a speech Which
spoke the sentiments of a large number of members in that
house, by a znotiou which would have tested whether the
house was prepared to proceed farther at the present time,
and might have brought the matter to a conclusion at
once. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. GREGO KY said he entirely concurred in the ob-
servations of the boo. baronet (Sir 11. Verney) that it was
most desirable to ascertain the opinion of the house at that
stage, and that somebody should move that they should
not go into committee. After ths speech of the right
hen. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone), in which opinions were
expressed identical with those of a large number of
members, he believed that the effect of a division at that
stage, instead of going into committee on Friday, would
Joe, if not to show a majority—as least such a minority of
eminent men of all parties—as would have the effect of in-
ducing the country at large to postpone legislation to a
more fitting period. (Hear.) At present the house were
working in the dark. They had not sufficient light thrown
on the path in which they were walking. The course pro-
posed was encumbered with every species of danger, and
under these circumstances he would have wished that the
right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Gladstone) had brought
forward a motion against going into committee on these
resolutions. But as the right hon. gentleman had not done
so, he (Ur. Gregory), believing that the course proposed
Was dangerous, would, as an humble member of the house,
take on himself the responsibility of moving a 3 an amend-
ment, "That it is not expedient to pass any resolution for
the future government of India."
Mr. W. E WART, in seconding the motion, said there
was a diversity of opinion on the subject of 'the council,
The noble lord the member for Tiverton proposed one
species of council, and the right hon. gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer a more extended council.
third party, of which he (Mr. Ew art) was one, disap-
provedtThhheeepublic
er
pn
oep
owe
Isstpcpaohpnaeemr stbsheteir. ooinnfge lcaysonamdr
of any council at all. The Manchester Chamber of
ne:ecuraCtlene dhe jactdeh apa ten petitioned t pinion.linoannoyil o
the f
till next session, and then to appoint a committee of in-
qniry. He thought that to proceed at present would be
only wasting the time of the house, and therefore ho would
support the amendment.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL. —The hon. gentleman who
moved the amendment proposes that there should be no
legislation during the present year with regard to India.
If an hon. member of this house is ready to take upon him-
self the responsibility of rejecting what this house by a
large majority has resolved upon, h© ought to have taken
on himself the additional responsibility of g.ving notice to
the house of the amendment he intended to move—(hear,
hear)—in order that his proposition might be discussed in
in a full house, In any early period of the session, and in
an unusually full house, after full deliberation an I much
argument, the house came, by a majority of 141, to a re-
solution to allow the head of the Government to introduce
a bill, the purport of which was to transfer the a 'minis-
tration of the government of India to the Crown. Now, if
we are to depart from that resolution we ought to do so only
after full deliberation and due notice, (Hear, hear.) I
own that with regard to the question itself I should be
sorry to see the house reverse its decision. I think the
present Government were perfectly justified in saying that
" although we have thought the time inopportune —.l
though we thought the introduction of the measure pre-
mature, yet we see the evils that must ensue, if, after the
resolution of a full house,
the government of India is con-
demned, no resolution is taken to found auy other au. ho-
rity instead." I think that the government were justified
under those circumstances in patios. in abeyance their pre-
vious opinions, anti in end,avouring to legislate for India.
My hon. friend who
,
has spoken says it is late in the
session, but in 1813 1833,
and 1853, bills were proceeded
with in this house up to a much later period in the ssssion
(Hear, hear.) And what is the obstacle to prevent us
from considering this great subject ? Subjects of equal
if not greater importance are entertained every year at
later periods, and, therefore, there does not seem to me
to be any reason why this subject should not be proceeded
with. I know there is a disadvantae in considering a
question of this kind when
our Indiang establishments are
surrounded with dangers, but the resolution of the house
had been come to when we were in the hands of our enemy,
and without those advantages which victories since
achieved afford us. Although-st may be some impeach-
ment of the wisdom of Parliament, yet it has generally
happened that no very great attention is paid to any sub-
ject until circumstances of a very serious nature demand it.
My opinion is, that in 1853, had the Earl of Aberdeen
proposed a change of this kind the majority
would have refused to adopt it, on the ground that India,
was in a quiet and undisturbed state. But now our at-
tention is rivetted to the subject, there is hardly an hon.
gentleman who has not since A
ril last year paid great at-
tention to the subject. Well, suppose that the mutiny was
suppressed, and that nothing occurred beyond little
skirmishes with small bodies of mutineers, do you think
the public interest on the subject would continue ? I think
it would very much abate, and that other subjects would
arise to occupy our attention. I doubt very much whether
in the beginning of 1859 there would be so much know-
ledge and deliberatioa given to the subject as can be given
to it at the present time. Ido not, therefore, see why we
should not now, in this the very beginning of our delibera-
tions, proceed to consider the resolutions of the Govern-
ment. No question has been raised to-night as to whether
we should proceed by resolution or by
Disraeli) was that
bill. The proposi-
tion of the right hon. gentleman (Mr.
we should go into committee to consider resolutions. Most
unfortunately, I think, he gave us a long defence of his own
bill which ho has already murdered with his own hands.
Of that bill we will now bay nothing—
De mortuis nil nisi bonum.
--(Laughter)—butt think we shall be, after some days' con-
sideration able to come to some conclusion on the subject.

Look at the great subject of slavery which Lord Darby pro-
posed to be considered in committee, and the consideration
of which occupied seven or eight days. We may require as
many for the consideration of this bill. I think, however,
the points of consideration are not numerous. The first
point is that you are asked to transfer the whole authority
of the East India Company to the Crown. The next
question is, whether the the Secretary of State or the oil:1(r
minister you are asked to set up, is to have a council to
assist him. This will not require very long argument.
The arguments lie on the surface one way or the other. The
next thing is to consider what is to be the nature of the
council. Upon that subject I entirely agree with the ob-
servations of my noble friend the member for Tiverton. I
think it wise to have a council for the purpose of assisting
the Secretary of State. I think it wise that he should be
informed by persons of Indian experience of their opinion
with respect to any measure concerning India, for however
lausible it might seem without such advice, it might
have the effect of creating discontent and even rebellion in
India. I think it advisable to have a council to enable the
minister himself to know what are the opinions of men of
knowledge and official experience, but I 4 hink it would be
a great mistake if we attempted to give an independent
authority to such a council as that would divide the resporte
sibility, the unity of which is the great object of the whole
measure. Surround him with able men. Do not shrink
from giving salaries that will enable you to obtain the ser-
vices of the best men who return from their important
functions in India, but let the minister himself have the
responsibility—and unless he is supreme he cannot have
that responsibility—let him be supreme in his council, and
stand up in Parliament and defend the policy of which he
is the author. (Hear.) Another point has been referred
to, namely, the appointment of a portion of the council by
the electors of certain towns. If I could satisfy myself
that there was any body of electors that could select mem-
bers of the council better than the Crown could do, Ishould
give the power to do so to that body, but I own I am not
able to satisfy myself that such would be the case; for
either a body of electors would be exceedingly numerous,
and consisting of persons having little or no interest in the
good government of India, or they would be so few as
to give rise to cabeti. I think that, with certain restric-
tions, the wiser course would be to give the power
of nomination to the Crown ; and certainly no
man can be better qualified by ability and experience
of Indian matters to make a proper selection
than Lord Ellenborough, the present President of the
Board of Control. I believe that any Government would
endeavour to select the best men that coule be procured,
and those who would endeavour to promote the best in-
terests of India. It is well known that men in India teke
little interest in the politics of this country, and it has
been stated of Lord Harding° that he had had an aide-de-
camp for three years without knowing that he was a Ra,
dical. After spending some years in India, whether in a
military or civil capacity, a man gets gradually wearied
from those habits and partialities which divide politicians
in this country ; and, therefore, I think there is every
chance that it will not bo difficult to obtain able and im-
pertial advisers of the Crown from that quarter. If this
house does not think fit to consider the question relating to
the Government of India in the present year, I should not
agree in their decision ; but, if that is their decision, I
think the matter should be deliberately weighed. We
should consider what will be the effect on India of this
sudden change of opinion on the part of the house. I
think the hon. member for Buckingham is one of those who
are in the habit of sliding from one argument into another.
He says, " Why legislate this year? Why not wait till
next year? There is surely ro hurry. The Government
of the Esst India Company is as perfect as any other, and
there is no reason for changing it." (Hear, hear.) Well,
if there be no reason for changing it, say so plainly, bat
do not hold out the hope of such a change when you have
no intention that it should be made. If the present sys-
tem of government be so perfect as has been maintained,
it will be better to uphold it; but the majority at both
sides of the house have come to the conclusion that a
change ought to be mat's. Ido not think the immediate
change will be either so vast or so striking as some persons
expect, though no doubt groat changes may afterwards be
expected. The Board of Control now possesses a power
which can overrule the Court of Directors, so that there
cannot be any very great increase in the power of the
Crown, while there would be a different mode of trans-
acting Indian business, but which will lead, I believe,
to the future consideration of the finaucial system of
India; and that consideration will lead, in the
course of years, to many changes, which I believe will be
for the benefit of India, which is the main consi-
deration. If any change would be for the benefit of the
millions of India over whom we now hold rule, that would
be a sufficient reason for it. I hope, under all the circum-
stances of the case, that the house will vote in favour of
the resolutions proposed by the right hon. gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr. MANGLES said he should vote against any measure
which had for its object to take from the East India Com-
pany that power and authority which he believed they had
used for the welfare of India. If the directors were over-
powered in their opposition, be would still do all in his
power to render the measure as psi feet as possible.
Mr. MILLIE said that the amendment of the hon.
member for Galway seemed to him to say that they ought
to proceed to legislate for India by way of bill rather than
by resolutions. (Cries of no, no, and real ) The words of
the amendment were, " That at this moment it is not de-
sirable to pass any resolution," &o. That did not say how-
ever, that they were not to proceed by way of bill. But the
question before them was as to their mode of proceeding,
and he thought it wools be more convenient to preceed by
way of resolutions, which was better than if they were to
bring in a bill.
Sir G. GREY said he did not understand that the issue
which they were called upon to decide was whether they
were to proceed by bill or by resolutions. If he under-
stood the observations of the hon. member for Galway his
arguments were against the present mode of proceedure,
and that, in fact, we ought notnow to attempt to legislate
for the government of India. And understanding this to
be the oject of the hon. gentleman in moving this amend-
ment he (Sir G. Grey) was disposed to vote with the Go-
vernment against it. But if the question was, as was
urged by the hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Bailtie),
merely whether they should legislate for India by bill or
by revolutions, then he must reconsider the vote which he
should give on that subject; but as the question raised by
the amendment was whether they should legislate at this
moment, then he should vote for the Gevernment. The
right hon. gentleman the member for the University of
Oxford had certainly shown that there wore precedents
for proceeding to legislate on this question by way of reso-
lutions; still his (Sir G. Grey's) opinion was in favour
of proceeding by bill, but he was not disposed to press his
opinion to a division, as he would not take the responsi-
bility on himself of causing delay on this subject.
Mr. Walpole then rose, but was met by cries of " tho
member for Galway," whereupon the right hon. gentleman
sat down.
Mr. GREGORY said that the object of his amendment
was to induce the house to get rid of all legislation respect-
ing India this session. (Hear, hear.) Awl if he succeeded
in inducing the house to assent to his amendment, and by
doing so, get rid of the resolutions now before it, then the
house could proceed to consider the bill of the noble lord
the member for Tiverton.
Mr. W ALPOrhE said that if such was the intention of
the hon. gentleman, it would have been as well if his
amendment had been so worded as to enable the house
precisely to t.ndorstand it. The question really before them
was, was it desirable now to legislate for the Home Go-
vernment of India? He was one of those who voted with
the hon. member for Huntingdon, in February last, against
altering the Home Government of India at a time when a
mutiny was raging in that country, and, having so voted,
if the question were now in the same position in which it
then stood, he would have concurred in the amendment
proposed by the hon. mernbsr for Galway; but let the
house considee the state which the question was now in. A
large majority affirmed in February last that they ought
to proceed to legislate for the Home Government of India
this session ; but if they were now in April disposed to
rescind the motion come to in February, then clue notice
ought to be given of a motion on the subject, so that the
house might be prepared to give a direct vote respecting it.
It, , then, the hon. member give notice of a motion for
Fridayonight, when the resolutions were to be brought for-
ward, ant then the question raised by the amendment
could
(Hear, hear.) Under the preheat
be fully discussed.
circumstances of the case he would not enter into the ques•
tion as opened by the noble lord the member for London,
but he would be prepared to do so on a future occasion
when the whole question was before the house.
Sir F. BARING said ho voted on a former occasion for
a postponement of legislation, and he should still support
that opinion. But, at the same time, if they were to
change their course, some notice of a motion to that effect
should be given. (Hear, hoar.) He did not attach much
weight to changing the resolution come to by the house in
February last, because if they did not do so now they
would in July. (A laugh.) At the same time, notice
should be glees, and then however small the minority, he
would not be ashamed to form one of that minority.
Lord GODERICH said that he voted in February last
in favour of legislation, but after the speech of the right
hoe. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, it was
most important, he thought, that no hon member should
him any decided course till Friday next, when
pledge hi
the whole subject would be considered.
l‘lr. HORS said that it appeared a change had
taken place in the feeling of tha house, and that it had
spread very far beyond it. This house had made a great
mistake iu entangling itself in Indian legislation before it
had made itself acquainted with Indian requirements.
\Vera net all important acts of legislation preceded by
inquiry ? Were they agreed as to the basis of legislation I
Did any of the schemes proposed meet the general appro-
bation of the house, or would any one of them, if c triit d,
raise the character of the house ? In neither of the bills
were to be found the elements of what was required as
the existence of a council, and the nature of the Govern-
ment in India itself was evaded rather than dealt with.
The difficulties were so great that it was not likely they
could legislate satisfactorily on so important a subject this
year. That feeling was growing in the house, and he
thought the Government would exhibit the greatest moral
courage in declaring openly, and acting upon, this opinion
which they really entertained. They could not he so san-
guine as to hope for success this year. The expression of
feeling in the house that, there should be a transfer of the
government of India from the Company to the Crown was
general, and therefore on Friday next the first of the
series of resolutions to that effect sight be agreed to ;
but as for the second and following resolutions, it might
be eesy to adopt a eourse to withdraw them for the present
session, and a motion for their postponement would, he
thought, meet with general sympathy and support. He
believed the feeling of the house was so strong on this
point, that, although he did not wish to initiate any 'no-
tion himself on the subject, if no other hon. member would
come forward and move that these resolutions be deferred
he would himself do it. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. VERNON SMITH said he did not believe the opi-
nions of the Liberal members in favour of legislation were
altered, although the opinions of the members of the pre-
sent Government were changed. He thought the conduct
of the Government extraordinary in proposing legislation,
when they were individually opposed to it. The Govern-
ment of which he was a member did not propose to touch
the Government of India. They only proposed to remodel
the home government of India, about which, as he was in-
formed by experienced Indians, the natives of India did
not care at all. Therefore, after what had passed in that
house, he strongly deprecated the proposal for the appfdnt-
went of a committee. Neither did he approve of proceed-
ing by way of resolution. The business of the India House
during the existing uncertainty could not proceed satisfac-
torily, and if this great subject were postponed for another
year the consequences might be most serious. They had,
he thought, sufficiently considered the main propositions of
an Indian bill, and he could not conceive what could bo
gained by the postponement of legislation for another year.
(Hear, from Lord J. Russell.) When his noble friend pro-
posed the resolutions it was intended that they should con-
tain a wider range of principle than those which were now
proposed by the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of
the Exchequer. The result of the resolutions now pro-
f o,ed would eimply be that they would have the debate
twice instead of once. As to the question of nominatiou,
he agreed.that if a suitable system of election could have
been devised it would have been preferable; but he as-

sured the house that when in office he had gone over every
possible scheme of election which could be suggested, but
he could not find one which was compatible with a corn-
; mon sense view of the question. When the right hon.
gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) talked of
election and representation—
Tile CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER—I did not
talk of them. (Laughter.)
Mr. V. SMITH said he thought that the right hon.
gentleman had certainly referred to the subject when he
spoke of the 101. householders, for instance. However,
the fact was, that they could have no representation of
Indi t, because they could not face the real difficulty—they
must represent the natives, which no man of common
sense would think of proposing. They, therefore, threw
election, not on the tax-payers, but on the tax consumers.
These p, neionere of the military and civil services were
pereons who were interested simply in deriving their re-
venues from India. He would take one of the nominees on
the right hon. gentleman's proposed council, for example ;
that gentleman, early in his life, bad been ten years in
In lie, but had Lever beers there since. (Hear, and a laugh.)
Such being the difficulties connected with election and re-
, preseetation, they had reverted to nomination. But it
seemed now to be presumed that a nominated person must
necessarily be dependent, and it was the fashion to call
them " nominees." One hon. gentleman who had spoken
had gone se far as to call them " the miserable tools of a
corrupt. Government." (Heir, and laughter.) He (Mr.
V. Smii h) did not, however, see why nominees should be
considered as being necessarily dependent. Such had not
been the ease. Surely they could not deny the indepen-
dence of the hon. gentleman the member for Leominster
(Mr. Willoughby). (Hear.) He coat not be called a
‘• berren nomuree"—(laughter) -or, as the hon. and
learned gentleman the member for Enniskillen (Mr. White-
side) had slid, " the miserable tool of a corrupt Ministry."
(Hear, and laughter.) Nominees for a certain term of
years would be found as independent of the Crown as the
elected members he ruselveA. The member for the Univer-
sity of Oxford had said that there was noshing in the bill
to limit the powers of the secret committee ; but there was
a clause which compelled the Minister of the Crown to
bring before Parliament, after a certain period, the means
by se tech he bad incurred any war in the East. The fact
was, the seyet committee was a sham. The President of
the Beard of Control was the secret committee in fact,
and he could issue orders through the secret committee
without consulting or informing Parliament at all. The
superiority of their bill (Lord Pelmersten's) was, that it
did away with the secret committee. There, however,
were questions which they would have ample opportunity
of discussing in committee. He thought these resolutions
a cumbrous and inconvenient moee of proceeding; but
rather than oppose any obstacle to the settlement of the
question this session, he would assent to ehear.
Mr. P. O'I3IeIHN. contended that no groureis had
been showh for altering the verdict which a majority of
145 of them had given on the subject some two or three
months ago.
Mr. WHITESIDE said the difficulties of this question
would increase as they progressed, but if the right hon.
gentleman opposite always dealt with it in the same pleas-
ing manner as he hat treated it that evening, it could not
be in more pleasing hands. (Laughter.)
Sir E. COLEBROOKE thought the house ought not to
come lo a division on such a subject as this without a full
debate. There ought to be a clear understanding that a
division should be taken on Friday night.
After a few' words from Mr. COSSLEY,
Mr. GREGORY withdrew his amendment, saying that
he could not inisuederst aid the feeling of the house on the
question, and claiming, on behalf of any more prominent
member of the house, the power of renewing the motion,
if it should appear necessary hereafter, in the further pro-
gress of this question.
The motion was then agreed to.
SUPPLY.

On the motion for receiving the report of the Committee
of Supply,
Sir G. C. LEWIS wished to ask the right hon. gentle-
man the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he would
have any objection to postpone the bill relative to the Ex-
chequer Bonds, as he wished to call the attention of the
house to the subject.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
a question of urgency that the exchequer Bonds Bill
should be advanced further that night. aid he should be
obliged to the right hon. gentleman if he could reserve hie
observations till the War Sinking Fund Bill was brought
forward.
Sir G. C.. LEWIS said he should certainly acquiesce in
the wish of the right hon. gentleman, though he should
have preferred making his statement when the Exchequer
Bonds Bill was moved.
Ou the question that the report of the Committee of
Supply be received,
Mr. BENTINCK, after reminding the house of the dis-
cussion which had taken place with reference to the gun-
boats at Heger, said he wished to ask the right hon.
baronet the late First Lord of the Admiralty a question
on the subject, the answer to which, if it accorded
with his anticipations, would show the public money was
squandered, and at, the same time the necessity of some
more competent management in the Admiralty. The ques-
tion he had to put was, whether the right hon. baronet
was piej.ared to state to the house whether the arrange-
ments for hoisting up the gunboats at Haslar were entered
on with the sanction of the naval officers of the Board of
Admiralty, or at his own direction.
Si, C. OOD said he had given an answer to the Len.
gentleman's question on a former occasion, which he sup-
pose' would have sufficed. He would now, however, state
that the question was merely one of hauling up vessels,
art a, theretore, one which a person of mechanical skill
might be competent to settle, even if he had never been to
sea at all. Various plans for the purpose had been pre-
pared from time to time in the office of the Director of
Works, with whom, he might say, rested the engineering
works of the Admiralty. A report was prepared on the
subject, end the plan being carried out, he was bound
to say he thought it was a very convenient mode of getting
the beats op. It was so considered by every member of
the Board of Admiralty. Further than that, he must state
that he was never iu the habit of giving orders himself
without consul,iog his colleaenes. In this case he had cer-
tainly not consulted any officers at Por smouth or Haslar,
but he never r ..ny objection taken to the system.
Sir C. NAPIER s.id th ,t, haviug promised to make an
inqutt y into this subject at H ,slar, he had done so, and he
would first remark that, a first objection to what hat been
done would be this—that the b.e were hauled up in the
wrong place. The selection of the place was decidedly had,
but more than that, the first bw.t of the 40 hauled up had
to go a disteece of 70 feet, the next 40 more, the next 80,
and so on ; so that he supposed it would take a month to
lauech them. He would take that oppirtunity of saying
that Portsmouth harbour, being very much cie curnscribed,
the Government would do well to purchase land for en-
larging it, and if that were delayed much longer the pur-
chase might become more difficult. At Malta, too, the
laud should be bought. lie would also mention that he had
received a, letter, stating that some Ships had been sent to
the coast of Africa with a abort supply of coals.
Mr. CORRY remarked that the vote for the purchase
of hart at Malta had not been struck out, and the laud
would be purchased. He could say nothing about the
co.tls.

The several votes were then agreed to, and the repor
received.
THE ARTILLERY AND ENGINEERS.

On the order of the day forgoing into committee of
supply on the army estimates,
Mr. MONSELL moved that an bumble address be pre-
sented to her Majesty, praying her Majesty that no altera-
tion may be made in the existing arr nevinents which re-
gulate the admission to cadetships in the Royal Artillery
and Royal Engineers. The right hon. gentleman sail he
had not the least fault to fin t with the right hon. gentle-
man opposite, the Minister for War, who had done all in
his power to prevent the existing system from being dis-
continued. He had continued it for two years longer, and
be (Hr. Monsell) was therefore not without hope that it
would still be preserved. It lAnd been remarked, that as so
many of his countrymen succeeded at these examinations
it was really al Irish question, but to that he would only
say, that disclaiming such an idea, if even the maxim
detur digniori meant " let it be given to an Irishman," he
was sure English and Scotch gentlemen would not for that
reason wish for the abolition of the present system, but
would rather seek to improve their own schools and col-
leges, to enable their own candidates to compete more suc-
cessfully with those from Dublin. At present, all natural
born subjects of her Majesty, between the ages of 17 and
20, were allowed to compete at Woolwich for these cadet-
ships. The examinations were conducted by men of emi-
nence in the several departments of science, and it had
been admitted that the system had worked well It was
now s .ught to introd ice a qualification, to be obtained at
the Royal Military College, Sandhurst. 'So far as the prin-
ciple of open competition went, it hatilbeen conceded by the
Horse Guerds, an I the board was composed of military offi-
cers, presided by H.R.E. the C onmander-in-Chief. The
bon. member then stated that in the Ecole Polyteclin•que, in
France. the successful competitors were of the ages from 18
to 20. Did the house, he would ask, consider it expedient to
give a monopolytoSandhurst,and to abandon as) stem which
works I tolerably well. The great military Powers edu-
cated the students separately intended for the Artillery
and Engineers and the Line. To educate the students iu
one common school who were intended for the different
branches would be exceedingly objectionable. There was
no doubt that at Addiscombe the students intended for
the Artillery' and Engineers were educated along with the
officers intended for the Line in India. He thought there
were serious objections to educating the students in the
different branches at One common seitool. The only altera-
tion he would wish would be to follow the advice of Col.
Wilford, to allow theoretical and practical education to go
on together, to raise the ages of the boys, so that they
would stand at 17 to 20, and to allow the pupils at the
school at Woolwich to "ompete with Sandhurst. The
young men now admitted at Woolwich were of superior
attainments. The effect which the present system had
produced throughout the country was this—there were se-
veral schools which prepared their students to compete at
Woolwich, and if there was a certainty of the system
being continued other public schools would give similar
education. The hon. member then contrasted the system
of military education given in France with that which was
given in England, and he entreated the eight hon. gentle-
man (General Peel) not to alter a system which was work-
ing tolerably well. (Hear, hear.) He concluded by mov-

iug his motion
Mr. LE FROY would feel he did not perform his duty if
he did not press upon the right non. gentleman's attention
the necessity of attending to the request whicn had been
made by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Monsen.)
Sir F. SMITH had had an opportunity of judging of the
education given at Addiscombe. The whole time spent in
acquiring mathematics was only two years, about five
months in each. He hoped his hon. and gallant friend
would net break up the present system, for if he did so he
would reduce the standard much too low.
Sir W. WILLIAMS agreed with his bon. and gallant
friend, and hoped no change would take place In the pre-
sent system. He was himself an officer belonging to
Woolwich, but he might say that that place produced
officers second to none in Europe for scientific attainments.
He had given the entire subject his consideration, and
hoped the hon. and gallant general the Secretary for War
would not make the proposed change.
General PEEL assured the house that he made no
changes whatever in the system. Lord Panmure, when
socretaay for War, established a plan by which a certain
number of commissions were to be given to those who com-
peted for them, but that was put an end to at the close of
the war. The general impression was that the admission
to Sandhurst was not as free as that of Woolwich ; but,
since he came into office, that had been altered by his
Royal Highness the Commander-in-Chief, and young men
were now enabled to enter for as many examieatione as
'hey thought proper. He believed that competition would
now be opened to a greater number of. persons than hereto.
fore ; and certainly the final competitive examination for
the scientific branches would be higher; and he believed
more satisfactory. He found that was, the system esta-
blished by Lord Panmure, who paid the reatest attention
to the subject, who sent a commission abroad to inquire
into the systems at foreign colleges, and he certainly
thought that the alterations he made were most beneficial.
He thought, however, that an inquiry might be of use ;
and, though he could not agree to the motion of the hoe.