The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-30 00:00:00

SCOTCH REFORM BILL,

In reply to an HON. MEMBER,
The LORD ADVOCATE said that he proposed to pos)
pone the bill until the 2d proximo.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER. moved
that the notices of motions be postponed until after the
orders of the day for consideration of the Income Tax Bill,
as amended, anti the committee on the Stamp Duties Bill.
He made this motion in consequence of an arrangement
that had been made to enable the other house to adjourn
for the Easter holidays at an earlier day than they could
possibly do, unless he progressed with two financial bills,
before the house. Ile understood it was not intended at
present,to raise a general discussion on the income tax, or he
would not propose the displacement of other motions.
Mr. LINDSAY had acceded to the appeal of the noble
lord (Palmerston) when the commercial treaty was brought
Thrward, and postponed his motion 'relative to the shipping
interest. He did so on the promise that a day would
be given him to bring it before the house, and by the ballot
that day had been obtained for the purpose. He thought,
therefore, that he would be treated hardly if any further
delay Was thrown in his way.
Lord PALMERSTON said there was no intention on
the part of the Government to offer any opposition to the
lion—member bringing forward his motion. He hoped,
however, that hon. members would allow the two bills of
his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to
be proceeded with.
Mr. DISRAELI was not prepared to agree with the
assumption of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that there
would be no discussion on the income-tax. (Hear, hear.)
Ile hoped that Government would make some
communication with respect to paper, so far as it related to
interested present. He th
foreign rags, a subject in whichouo.thtetphb • uat laisc were
Governmentryve
Monday to bring forward these bills, the house shouldln hadunemuch
relinquish their privileges. (Hear, hear.)
After -some remarks from Mr. BOUVERIE,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
not his intention to press his motion in the face of the re-
luctant consent of the house. He, hoped, however, that
he would be allowed to bring forward three bills at a later
hour that evening than usual.
Ultimately the motion was withdrawn, and the subject
dropped.

EAST INDIA ARMY REORGANIZATION.
Col. SYKES moved an address for copies of the report
of the military committee of the council of India to the
council upon the re-organization of the army of India. The
hon. and gallant gentleman said that as he had served in
the three armies of India in the field, ho was probably
justified in forming his own opinion upon the subject, but
as he might be considered to have taken a prejudiced view,
he moved for these returns, in order to enable the house to
determine whether his opinion was well founded. Although
his motion was headed " The organisation of the Indian
army," that, in truth, was a misnomer, for the Bengal
army had already disappeared, with the exception of 13 or
15 regiments. The armies of Bombay and Madras, how-
ever, stood intact, and were now as loyal and effective as
they ever were. The question he brought before the house
was simply whether there should be an army in India
under the control exclusively of the Governor-General of
India, or whether there should be one under the control
of the Secretary of State for War in England and the
Horse Guards ? The Secretary of State for India, however,
seemed already to have made up his mind upon the subject.,
because he had passed a bill through that house for the
maintenance of 30,000 European troops in India as a
local army ; but he would ask whether he had found that
the Indian service had ever been wanting in cases of
emergency or been unequal to any crisis, or whether there
had i been such a disaster as the loss of an army under
an Indian officer? Most undoubtedly not. As regarded
its commanders, had the Indian service not pro-
duced its Clive, its Goddard, who marched 6,000 Bengal
Sepoys throdiuetevgssehtiirruaboctetthi,eoogstii
attisGl
leoutcoouz
et
ral duringfrnaanynatt,rm,yaaissnfwod reitluas a monsoon, ar d
aistar7nsvPeydo,lvflroootticmkd, aeHswa itshvie el
hooc cl
Havelock
?t
Yo lose of an army in India had ever occurred under Indian

officers, because they had local experience, and knew the
characters and temper of the men under their command, and
were enabled to go through difficulties which would over-
whelm others. It had been asserted that the seniority
system in the Indian army produced only old men whe
physically and mentally were unsuited to the elevated posi-
tions cast upon them, but some of the most distinguished
commanders were men advanced ix life. Had they not a
Napier, and a Gough, and other celebrated officers, all
septuagenarians Therefore he contended that the argu-
ment as to seniority was utterly groundless. There would
also be a great saving in having native troops, because the
mortality among European soldiers, unless they were accli-
matised was very great indeed. In Whitelock's force, which
consisted of about an equal number of troops of the line
and local troops, the mortality while they were recently
operating in the field was three and a quarter per cent.
among the latter, and as much as 111 per cent. among the
Europeans. Upon one morning, 21 men of the 71st regi-
ment of the line, when under Sir Hugh Rose, at Cutch,
were struck down by sun-stroke, and many of these died,
while there was not a single man belonging to the Madras
regiments struck down. That the Indian army could not
be relied upon was utterly disproved by the fact that they
had taken a distinguished part in most of the great battles
in that country. He agreed with a distinguished public
servant now in India, that whenever any such cases was
concealed the Government itself was damaged by that con-
cealment, and he would warn the right hon. baronet
the Secretary for India that a great feeling of dis-
trust was now growing up in the minds of
thousands of officers in India, And a suspicion of
the inefficacy of that clause of' the late act which
ensured to every civil and military servant of the
East India Company on their transfer to the Crown, that
the smile rights, privileges, promotions, pensions, and other
prospects that they had before enjoyed, should be main-
tained and continued to them under the Crown. There was
a growing fear amongst the officers in India that this clause
would not have the efficacy it was inteaded to have. He
therefore moved the resolution of which he had given
notice.

Mr. BUXTON said the question was whether, hence-
forth, instead of the European force in India being in a
great measure a local one for India alone, and belonging, so
to speak, to the Governor-General, it should consist wholly
of ordinary regiments, taking India in their rota, as they
might take any other colony. At first sight it seemed very
natural, now that the East India Company was gone, to
abolish their separate European force and defend India as
we defended any other part of her Majesty's dominions,
with a portion of her regular army. At first sight that pro-
posal commended itself by its simplicity, and the witnesses
who were examined before the commission which inquired
into this subject brought forward several arguments in
favour of the scheme, which he would repeat as fairly as he
could. One of their arguments was, that if regiments were
permanently stationed in India they were apt to be dete-
riorated in discipline. That, however, was stoutly denied by
others, and was hardly borne out by Indian history, which
teemed with their achievements, showing no less good con-
duct than valour of the local European force. They further
urged that it would be a good thing for the regular army to
have had its share in the credit and experience that might
be derived from Indian wars. But now that we had no
longer a single warlike neighbour to contend with,
,we
might fairly look forward to a long period of peace, so
that our soldiers would be more likely to be enervated by
the Indian climate than invigorated by Indian campaigns.
It was further said that a mutiny among the European
troops would be more easily put down if they belonged
to the regular army than if they belonged to a local
force, an argument which he did net think worth discuss-
ing. These three were the only arguments in favour of
the scheme which seemed to hhn worth notice, except the
grand argument, which ho allowed to be a powerful one,
that surely it must be far best in a single country to have
but a single army under a single head ; that by blending
them into one we should render the whole force a more
effective instrument, and should escape those jealousies that
must arise between two services running in couples. It
might be replied that what some called jealousy was re-
garded by others as a wholesome and stimulating emula
tion ; and, again, that actual experience had not shown any
ill effects from the combination of the local with the impe-
rial forces. Waiving this, however, and allowing that the
army of India should be one army under one head, still it
was an open question whether the sound inference would
not be to make the whole'European army a local one under
the Governor-General instead of making it altogether a part
of the regular army under the Horse Guards. He earnestly
hoped the Government might be induced to pause before it
gave its sanction to this scheme.

Col. P. HERBERT said the real qttestien to be decided

was what would lead most to the efficiency of the army in
India. As far as his experience in India went, and as far
as he could learn from others, the discipline of the Euro-
pean force in India was not equal to that of her Majesty's
army. There was one great point, that if disaffection
should arise in the royal army, the Indian Government had
the power of moving those forces to the coast and sending
them away to any other colony, thereby eradicating the
evil, whereas if there were a local force there would be no
such power. .
Gen. Sir DE Is. EVANS expressed his astonishmen
that this discussion should have been necessary at all, see-
ing that last year there was a discussion as to whether there
should or should not be a European local force in/ India, and
upon that occasion the Secretary for India (Sir C. Wood)
went beyond those who were in favour of a local force,
and not only emphatically expressed his opinion in favour
of a local force, but he said he would bring in a bill to esta-
blish one, and Lord Stanley, the Secretary for India under
a former Government, said it was his bounden duty to place
on record his opinion that a local force was indispensable
for the good government of India. The noble viscount, then
Prime Minister of this country, had stated when the bill
for the abolition of the East India Company was before the
house, that if the bill passed the European local force would
be entitled to their discharge. Not only was that known all
over India, but it was generally understood that the Com-
mander-in .Chief was of the same opinion. When such
statements were circulated among the troops it was impossi-
ble to suppose that they would not be inclined to take Ad-
vantage of them. But the Government of India sadly mis-
managed the matter. He believed that if the Government
had admitted that the men were entitled to their discharge,
and offered them a fair bounty to re-enlist, most of the men
would have re-enlisted. Instead of that the Government
published a document, writteh by a person who was much
more of a lawyer than a soldier, stating that the soldiers
were entitled to no sues thing. The soldiers got out of
humour; the Government behaved in a dogged and unin-
telligible manner, and in the end declared that the men were
entitled to their discharge. What has been the result? Ho
believed that 10,000 accepted the offer of the Government,
and that 11,000 remained. That did not show that they
acted as one man, as it was declared the local force would.
A Royal commission was appointed to consider the matter.
The commission sat in this country, and three of the prin-
cipal members of it, including the Secretary fur 'War and
the Commander-in-Chief, had never been in India, and
knew nothing about it. He believed there were 17 persons
of the highest consideration in India, who had given an opi7
nion contrary to that.of the commission, and orneriest those
17 persons were .the Govofnor-General himself, the Gover-
nor of Madras, Sir John Lawrence, and Sir James Outram.
Sir C. WOOD said he should not follow his hon. and
gallant friend who had moved for these papers into a dis-
cussion of the general question. Ile (Sir C. Wood) stated
some time ago, in answer to a question which was put to
him, that the Government had not made up its mind on this
subject. It was not a question for the decision of the Se-
cretary of State for India; it was not a question which
could be decided on Indian grounds alone, but it mud be de-
cided on imperial grounds. If the decision of the Govern -
ment were in favour of a local army it would not be neces-
sary for hint to produce' those papers, but if it were in
favour of a European force in India, it would be necessary
for him to bring the question formally before the house, and
that would be the occasion for discussing the question. The
circumstances which led 10,000 men to claim their discharge
could not be lightly passed over. Those circumstances had
changed the opinion of many eminent persons in India Ile
assured his hon. friend that, anxious as they were to satisfy
the minds of the officers in India, it was not without good
reason that the Government had hesitated. It was impos-
sible for him (Sir C. Wood) to enter a discussion on the
main question without giving some opinion on one side or
the other, and he did not think it right to do that till the
Government had decided on the course they should pursue.
Nor did he think it right to produce the papers at present,
but when the question was brought before the house it
would be his duty, not only to produce those papers, but
others of the same kind. But if the hon. member really
wished to have the papers which the last portion of his mo-
tion referred to, the correspondence between the military
authorities, he had no objection to produce them. When
the Government had made up its mind, and the question
was to be brought before the house, the house should have
all the papers on the subject.
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE had nev6er heard a syllable
breathed against the loyalty of the European troops; and
as for the discontent (far it had never amounted to mutiny)
that had prevailed amongst them, it arose from an amount
of indiscretion on the part of the Government which could
not be censured in too strong terms ; for it had broken up
one of the finest corps in the service, and had ended in
scenes of cruelty and misery that were disgraceful to the
authorities.

Mr. BRIGHT said the answer of the right hon. gentle-
man appeared to him-to be far from -satisfactory. (Hear.)
The right hon. gentltman professed the greatest anxiety to
give the house all the information in his power, and even
more than the hon. gentleman (Colonel Sykes) had asked
for; and then he coolly declined to produce the papers for
which his hon. friend had moved. Tho house should con-
sider what sort of question this was. There was in fact in-
volved hi the motion one of the most important questions
that could come before the house in connexion with the
future government of India. He (Mr. Blight) had
paid some attention to Indian matters, though much
more to other branches' of the subject than
to this, but he nevertheless thought the house
would commit a great error, if, without the most
serious deliberation, they permitted the Government to
place 50,000, 60,000, 70,000, or 80,000 European troops under
the management of the Horse Guards. If that were done,