The Sun.
London, England, 1858-07-03 00:00:00

council, and their compulsory residence would entail
upon them great expense.
Mr. V. SMITH said if first-rate men were to be ap-
pointed members of the council, 1,2001. or even 2,0001.
a year would not be too large a sum for them, as they
would be equal to privy councillors and men holding
high office in the State. But he did not think
that would ho the condition of the oouncil. The
Directors of the East India Company were in possession
of 5001. a year with patronage ; and he never heard that
those gentlemen complained of the inadequacy of their
salaries. If the East India Directors elected four of the
gentlemen already Directors who would not attend more
than once a week from their other pursuite, 5001. a year
would be enough for them ; while for the nominees
of the Crown he admitted 1,2001. a year would not be
too much.

Lirfl STANLEY thought two scales of salary objec-
tionable. lc v.:As Lur, i.ttaltion of the hill to bind the
persons appointed on the council to give up the whose
of their time and to abandon every other support ; but
it would be expected of them that they should give
up as much time as the performance of the duties would
require.

Mr. LOWE said the only difficulty the committee
was in was that they were called upon to assess the
salary for duties on the nature of which they had no in-
formation. If the duties were to be those of the Court
of Directors he thought 5001. a-year would be sufficient,
but if the duties were to be those of a permanent
secretary in a public office he considered that 1,200/.
a-year would be by no means exorbitant. He deplored
the reckleils manner in which money was squandered
away in that house—money that would spread education
over whole districts and mitigate the horrors of
a perverse religion, and all this to be wrung out of
the sweat and blood of a miserably oppressed people.
(Hear, hear.)
Colonel SYKES (Director) spoke of the vast amount
of business the Directors of the East India Company had
to discharge. He considered 8001. or 1,0001. a year
would be sufficient, and that it should be considered an
honorarium.

Mr. M. MILNES considered 1,2001. a year not too
much for the members of the council.

Mr. WHITE thought the work would be as well done
by men at 5001. a year as at 1,2001. a year.
Mr. WILLIAMS considered 5001. a year salary suf-
ficient, especially as the patronage was valued in 1853 as
worth 6,0001. a-year. (Oh, Oh !) The finances of
India were in that embarrassed state that, if they con-
tinued this profligate system of expenditure, the re-
sources of England would be called upon to meet it, and
they would have to tax the people of England to make
up the deficiency of India,
Lord JOHN RUSSELL considered the decision of
the committee, giving patronage to the council, and de-
priving them from seats in that house, had greatly in•
creased the difficulties of the subject. If the opinion of
the hon. member for Lambeth was correct in reference
to the patronage, he (Lord J. Russell) feared it would
result injuriously to India. On the whole, he thought
1,200/. a-year was not too much if they were to have
the best men, and guard against the misapplication of
the patronage.
Sir J. GRAHAM said, that the bill and the amend-
ments, coupled with the statements of the members of
her Majesty's Government, he presumed the council
would have daily duties to discharge. (Hear.) It ap•
peared to him that it was the intention of her Her Ma.
jesty's Government to divide the work into committees
subject to the direction of the President of the Council.
The impression on the minds of hon. members with re-
ference to the bill was that if elected to the council they
must devote their whole time to the duties of their office,
and he had been informed by Captain Sheppard, at pre-
sent a director, chairman of the Hudson's Bay Company
and deputy chairman of the Trinity Board, that if he were
elected a memberof the council he should consider himself
bound to 'resign those two offices. (Hear, hear.) He
had no desire to spend one rupee more than was neces-
sary, to advance the happiness of the people of
India, and he thought nothing would conduce more
towards the attainment of that object than by having
a well constituted Government in this country. On the
whole, he considered the sum named in the bill not too
much for the members of the council, understanding
that the devotion of time meant such reasonable attend.
ance as the President of the Council might require.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
was not desirable to introduce into the bill words
rigidly preventing the members of the council from per-
forming other duties, but to leave it to the President of
the Council to define their duties and attendance, ac-
cording to the necessities of the case. The disposal of
their time to the duties of the office would not preclude
the members of the council from attending to other
duties. It would, however, bo a matter of election,
whether gentlemen would place their time at the disposal
of the office, or adhere to their counting-houses
duties in a rigid manner. He thought, however, the
members of the council, although called on to place
their time at the disposal cf their offices, would
permit them to maintain, in a modified form, their
relation with the pursuits that had heretofore
entirely absorbed their lives. He considered a salary cf
1,2001. a-year by no means too much. The subject was
a very difficult one. They bad heard many sums men-
tioned, and the hon. member for Aberdeen had said that
whilst 8001. a-year would be an honorarium, 1,2001.
a-year would be an insult. (Hear, hear, and laughter.)
He considered the members of the council ought not to
be paid less than the Lords of the Treasury. (Divide.)
Sir G. C. LEWIS considered the difficulty of fixing
the amount of salary arose from the large number of
councillors, He supported the sum named by the Go-
vernment in the bill, but suggested a modification of
the clause, to the effect that the sum should not exceed
1,2001., which would enable the Government at any
future time to adapt the salary to the actual duties
hereafter t) be discharged by the members of the
council.

Lord STANLEY said it was better to fix the sum,

and if it was found hereafter there was a diminution of
duties, he thought it would be bettor for the Govern-
ment of the day to come to Parliament for a bill to re-
duce the members of the council rather than provide in
the bill for a reduction of salary.

After some further conversation, Mr. COLLIER ex-
pressed his wish to withdraw his amendment, but it was
objected to by the committee.
After a few words from Mr. Coningham, Sir E. Perry,
Sir J. Elphinstone, Mr. Lowe, Mr. Cox, and Mr.
Elliott,
The committee divided. The numbers were—
For the amendment
Against it
Majority —167
The clause, after some further discussion fixing the
salary at 1,2001. a-year, was agreed to.
On clause 14, which provides retiring pensions after
10 years' service,
Sir F. BARING urged there should be a uniformity
of retiring pensions. A man should not be induced to
continue in office longer than he was capable of effi-
ciently discharging the duties, with a view of obtaining
a large pension.
Mr. RICH moved, as an amendment, that the period
of retirement should be at the end of 15 years instead
of 10 years.
Lord STANLEY defended the clause. Many men
might be practically incapable of discharging the duties
at the end of 10 years ; whilst others might be able to
do so at the end of 15 years. It was to meet the former
case that the clause had been drawn and the distinction
in amount made. There was as much objection and
abuse in getting men to resign, as there was in inducing
them to hold office for the higher pension ; but he
thought the proposal in the clause was one that the com-
mittee might agree to.
Mr. GLADSTONE objected to pensions, except in
cages where the country had had the benefit of the
whole of a man's services. He objected to men coming
back from India in the enjoyment of pensions in respect
of services rendered in that country being put into offices,
giving them ne;v titles, and after a short period of ser-
vice giving them claim to accumulation pensions.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
was not the intention of her Majesty's Government to
appoint men at present in the enjoyment of pensions for
services in India. The object of the clause was to pre-
vent men who were disabled after a certain period, and
were unable to perform their duties, from hanging on to
their situations and their salaries to the detriment of the
government of India.
Lord STANLEY said if the committee would take
the clause as it stood, down to 5001. after 10 years' ser-
vice, he was ready to consent to the omission from the
bill of the remainder of the clause.:
After some further discussion, in which Mr. Ayrton,
ryy! Me. Mangles took part,
The clause, aulei4ueu sug;ested he Lord Stanley,
was agreed to, a proviso being added relation
Lo tie
reduction of the number of the council when Parliament
might think fit.

On the motion that dame 14, as amended, stand part
of the bill,

Mr. GLADSTONE said that at present, in reference
to the directors of the East India Company, her Ma-
jest's Government had power to compel the resignation
of a director from physical incapacity, and he was not
disposed to surrender that principle. He thought some
provision should be introduced into the bill, retaining
that power relative to the number of the council.
Lord STANLEY said it was provided for in the bill,
by an address from both Houses of Parliament to the
Crown for that purpose.
Mr. GLADSTONE thought it objectionable.
After some further conversation,
Mr. RICH said he would take the sense of the com-
mittee on the clause.
The committee divided. The numbers were—
Fur the clau,e as amended 199
Against it lOl
Majority
The clause, as amended, was agreed to.
Clause 15, regulating the administrative establishments
of the Home Government, gave rise to some discussion,
and the clause, after some verbal amendments, was
agreed to.

Clauses 16, 17, and 13, were agreed to with verbal
amendments.

Clause 19 was under consideration, when
The Committee suspended its sitting at 4 o'clock,
The house resumed at six o'clock.
THE UNIVERSITY OF SCOTLAND BILL,

Col. SYKES (=aye notice that On the bringing up of the
report on the University of Scotland Bill, be would move
that the Provost and Council of Aberdeen have leave to be
heard by council against the bill.
MILITARY AND CRIMINAL LAW.
Mr. WARREN gave notice that early next session he
would call attention to the subject of criminal law, and
would move for leave to bring in a bill to amend the
criminal law at quarter sessions.
THE BRITISH MUSEUM.
Mr. TURNER moved for a copy of any communications
to the trustees, from the heads of departments in the Bri-
tish museum, with reference to the memorial of certain
assistants on the subject of salaries of the 11th day of