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

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EV EATING, APRIL

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 observations to one
or two points arising out of the elaborate defence which
the right hon. gentleman has made of his bill. He has
argued with great perseverance and with great ability
—as he always argues everything—in favour of the
principle of elective members for the Council, and he
has particularly dilated upon the propriety of having
in the Council persons elected by Parliamentary consti-
tuencies. New, 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 ?
(Hear.) Does he look upon that provision as being only,
like Juliet, in a trance from a potion given by the Go-
vernment for a temporary 1011, or does he acquiesce in
the general verdict of the public by which that part of
his measure has been condemned I I presume that his

praises did not imply any intention 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 assume 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 1 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 atfaiis of India, well 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 1 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 fundamental
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 Parliament
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 CroWD,
the effect of which would be to oppose, to thwart, and
to impede the action of the Minister. 11 it be thought
so essential to have elected members in the Council— f
you mean that a man is necessarily a better councillor
for being 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 1" Wby no ; this
house never made any such appointment, Mr. Canning
was elected by the freemen of Liverpool because he was
an eminent 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 its
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 be might be President of the
Beard 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 cf 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 which 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-
venient 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 councillors
there is safety " is a good general axiom, you may ove.-
do it, and the number may be too great. (Hear.) But
wh A were intended to be the functions of this conceit 1
It was not that the council were to be the responsible
governors of India. It was not intended that they shou:d
be a council to originate, direct, and decide, but a coun-
c 1 to be merely those advisers which the right hon. gen-
tleman 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 at ention to Parliamentary wa fare,
1 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-
ment 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 sway—that the Indian Government involves rela-
tions with independent princes, with men of different re-
ligions, laws, habits, and institutions ; 'and that untess
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-
ment of which the Minister for India is only the organ
—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 assist 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 Governeneut re-established for In-
dia. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) These matters wll
be argued at greater length on a future occasion, but
I could not allow the observations of 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 preps ed
—.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 must 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 in 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 cor-
rect. We were turned 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 and a resolution. I only hope
that they will push that principle a little further, and
make it necessary, for 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 may of these points of
difference are not cunsistent 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 should be made
to the ew n. (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 (leaf-
ing with Indian affairs before the house, and in some
degree to the views of those who are friendly to the
other. I suite 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.
agnendt
Intel; aonb j
,tchte
inC Chancellor of the
givatosaya Exchequer—(hear)fewwordsupon
what
I conceive to be a point now properly to be decided by
the 11, use of Commons. That point did not form the
gist of his speech in which the right hon. gentleman de-
fended the wisdom of the measure of the Governmen,,
/
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 quer-
tion before us ! We are invited to vote that on Friday
next this house will resolve itself into committee to con-
sider the acts of Parliament relative to the government
of India. Now, sir, I for one, cannot j )in in
estion tho, c(
;r:sure
which has been bestowed lepon the sugg y
noble friend the member for the city of London (Lord J
f m
Russell), that the best method of proceeding will be by
resolutions. (Hear.) I believe that it might have beer,
a happy circumstance—it would certainly have been so
is 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,
from Parliamentary recollections and traditions, tii 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 the
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 ?
(Cheers.) Was not the hope held out t• us at that time
that before we proceeded far with Indian legislation we
might have to congratulate ourselves upon the comple•
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-
rabhs progress in the passing of a bill ? We have lost be-
tween two or three months, add I do not think there is
a man among all those who hear me, however sorry he
may be for the facet, 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 shall
not have two sessions. It is sometimes difficult to dis-
tinguish between the ironical and the earnest, but I cer-
tainly did not 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 significpt terms a
similar suggestion ? Hes be 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 pea 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 the authors of the two measui es, to the state of
public effairs, 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
I against an affirmative answer being given to it, But I
1 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 government of India, or if we had
before us a plan to which this house could wisely give
its assent, with only certain amen :meets in detail, tlin
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 hilt 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 aty objections to the prin-
ciples of that bill they have not been removed by tee
right hon. gentleman's speech. (Elear.) But I am bound,
in fairness and in equity, without censuring any one, and
I trust without t ffendieg any one, to say that in neither
of these bills can I see the elements • f a good and sound
measure, (Hear.) Arid let nee here make this remark on
the bill of the late Government as illustrated by the
speech of the noble viscount:—When he was arguing
agaieet the application of the elective principle to the
framing of a council for India, and when he was speak-
i g 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 legislati on on this matter. 1, for
my part, cordially subscribe to the principle which was
laid down by the Chancellor of the Exchequer at the cl rse
of his speech, that if we are to add a council to the orge-
nimition 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 appointit how you choose
—which was not fully equal for every purpose of advice,
suggestion, and, speaking moraly, I will even say of
control, to the present Court. (Cheers.) But what is the
great difficulty that we have to enc muter 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 tr edition, 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 I I. it not by far the greatest difficulty which we
have 13,fote us—how to provide only, io our systetn of
government, fn. the protection of the interests and feel-
ings of the people of India ? With the greatest faith in
Parliamentary institutions for the discussion and settle-
ment of public affairs in England, I frankly own that I
have not equ faith in their operation for defending the
interests and feel rigs of the people of India. The ques-
tion which we are bound to ask ouradves before all others,
with all others, and above all °triers, is—what protec-
tion can we provide by the law not only for the mainte-
nance of hose interest', but likewise for respect, care,
and tolera-ion tooards the feelings • f the people of India?
I will ray this of the Court of Directors, that it has
practically been a body protective of the people of India.
I aria not friendly to its maintenance, far lees am I
friendly to that state of severance which exists at present
between the Executive and the iudependaut element
.of
the Indian Government ; but this I dosay, 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 vi .count the member fur Tiverton, for any
protective power that can be compared in point of effi•
cacy to the Court of Directors. (Hear, hear.) But there
is another topic a'together new, so far as this discussion
is concerned, which nevertheless weighs upon my mind
almost oppressively with regard to legislating on this
question. The first great point to which we have to loos
is to provide protectiou for the people of India against
the ignorance, indiscretion, and errors either of the Exe-
cutive, or of Parliament, or of the Government of this
country. But besides that there is a second question
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 nee that there has grown up, partly from circumstances
beyond our control, and partly by our Own legidatiee, a
system fraught with danger, not only to India, but ako
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 Exeht 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 f
the country, and with the rights and privileges of the
House of Colllololls. (Hear, hear.) I ern obliged to take
the last instance as the one most strikingly idustrative
of the princip'e to which lam now adverting. I take
the case of the Persian war. (Hear, hear) I am not
now about to discuss its pal cy, nor shall I enter upon
the reasons fur which it was made, nor the terms on
which it was concluded ; but this I say, that if wars are
to be made by the Executive Government, through the
means, in the first instance, of those resources which
the Indian army and the Indian finances afford, without
the knowledge and consent 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
come wh• n it is absolutely neces-ary to draw funds for
the supp rt of them from the British Exchequer, then
these two consequences follow. In the first place, tba:,
system is destructive in the last degree to the interests
of the people of India, because it is in that nay that a
great part of our financial difficulties in India have arisen.
(Hear, bear.) To take India into your own hands, to
govern from a distance by means of strangers and
foreigners a nation which has a hint pry and traditions of
its own, is a difficulty seri us enough. it is a problem
for which perhaps you may in vain seek a permanent
and satisfactory solution. But over and above thi -
difficulty you have been accumulating upon India a deb
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 Lean mortgaging our own estate ; but when as
speak of the debt of India we are speaking of a debt
charged up n a country whose revenues we are drawing
in this country by virtue of the power of the sword.
Rut 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 riot pore striking or more coe-
elusive than the objections to this policy which arise out
• f its bearing on the rights of this hoes'. A, regarcie
oftnhoetlirbeecrotgiensiseany
P.irliament, it seems to rue t make little
oiffereece whether a war made without our assent is a
war with Persia, er a war with Russia. Wear.) I car;-
tihii:tpilacntisunbefoArendthheowhoduosewet
stand with reference i:
twti7heeaeet
etdprbli
otactoa relti
estaspuponlimitationsietoatik tei hti
power
o wout—fore vitalprudence
uponr o
i questionlthde o Qn o,D t?
think
ri frankly
t,ie wsear
rs
safe,l
j
I do not think we are secure, I do not think we meet
h
a the powerndcireumspomftitohne Crownunless
with respect to the use of the Indian treasury and
array. (Hear, hear.) Do I find any such limitations in
these plans ? On the contrary, the plan of the right bon.
gentlemen the Chancellor of the Exchequer is entirely
silent with regard to it. The plan of my noble friend the
WOW ber for Tiverton is not silent, bat the provisions which
he has introduced into his bill—drawing a distinction be-
tween war in Asia and war out of Asiaeand enacting that
when military operations are actually begun a come:mai-

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
.o now
(cheers) ; for they amount substantially to a legislative
sanction of a system with respect to which we are at leeee
entitled to say that, up to the present moment, it 1-
had the countenance or approval of Parl;- oas never
I do not intend to enter at length nament. (Cheers.)
pcs
enl
es
plansainond o
thei a
ct eßne
re
matters, but m opinion
the main conditions
England,executive
n protectionm mentionen tt the
thenei
neither
object of our legislation for India
are protection ft,: the Indian people against the errors of
tish Parliament against an undue exercise of power by the
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 which seena 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 glide away, the satisfaction of those who
have concurred in it' will become stronger and more
decided, and the disposition of those who have not
concurred in it will likewise gradually develops 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 hon. gedtleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer - I hope I do not misrepresent
them :—" Althoagh we now advise the house to enter on
the question of Indian legislation, yet during the last 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
order in point of difficulty and importance." (Cheers.)
C. lone! S 1 ICES would Reserve any observations until
the house went into committee upon the resolutions. He
could not help, however, expressing his entire concurrence
in everything which hal 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
caled upon to perform? On the contrary, he maintained
that the Indian government had proved itself most efficient.
Various grounds Lad been urged why they should proceed
to legislate upon tide question in the course of the present
session. The first ground was, that the House of Com-
mons bad 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 145 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 propo.Fia; to abolish
the existing system, had highly eulogised its practical
working. In fact, he had never heard so much of what
Cobbett used to call "bosh" talked as upon this question.
Tha next ground they were called 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 I the " we, the people of England"
of the three tailors of Tooley-street, the house would be,
perhaps, amazed to 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 asfollowe:—The total num-
ber of petitions connected with Indian questions was 30i.
How many did the house suppose, out of that ecrenber, were
in favour of transferring the Government f India from the
East Indio. Company to the Crown ? Only three. (Hear.)
So much for public opinion, then, and the voice of the
country on this matter. Another reason wasthat the House
of Commons having, by a majority of 145, voted in favour
of a bill being brought in, the Government in India would
be paralysed if it were not proceeded with. There was nu
ground whatever for such a supposition. Two of the com-
monest wo, ds in India with respect to the " Company's raj"
signified " fortune" and "prosperity," and after thepreaent
tempest passed away that "raj" would be stronger than
over. At the present time it would be a most imprudent, im-
politic course to introduce any organic changes into the go-
vernment of India; but 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-
mini4erei 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 hail
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 had proposed a great
change in the Government of India—a 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 Parlianunat
ought to increase the powers of the Court of Directors s
and, had they possessed greater power over the Beard of
Coutrel during the last qua'ter of a century, they wool
have been able to prevent many of those wars which had
absorbed the revenues of India, and revented the Govern-
ment from proceeding with public works and internal im-
provements in the country. (Bear.) Ho regretted that
the right hon. gentleman the member for the University of
Oxford (Mr. Gladstone) did nut terminate a speech winch
spoke the sentiments of a large number of members in that
house, by a motion 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. (Haar, he-tr.)
Mr. GIIEGO AY said he entirely concurred in the ob-
servations of the hon. baronet (Sir H. Verney) that it was
roost desirable to ascertain the opinion of the house at that
stage, and that somebody should move that they should
not go into committee. After the speech of the right
hon. gentleman (Hr. 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
be, if not to show a majority—at least such a minority of
eminent mon of all parties--as would have the effect of in-
ducing tho country at large to postpone legislation to a
mere fitting period. (Hear.) At present the house were
working in the dark. They had not sufficient light thrown
ou the path in which they were walking. The course pro-
posee was encumbered with every species of danger, and
under these circumstances he would have wished that the
right hon. gentleman opposite (Hr. Gladstone) had brought
forward a motion against going into committee on these
resolutions. But as the right hun, gentleman had not done
so, he (Mr. Gregory), believing that the course proposed
was dangerous, would, as an humble member of the house,
take on himself the responsibility of moving as an amend-
ment, " That it is not expedient to pass any resolution fur
the future government of India."
Mr. W. E WAR.T, 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 hoe. gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer a more extended council. A
third party, of which he (Mr. Ewtrt) was one, disap-
proved of rally council at all, The Manchester Chamber of
Commerce and many of the public newspapers strongly ad-
vocated that opinion. The Liverpool Chamber of Corn-
merce had petitioned the house to postpone the measure
till next session, and then to appoint a committee of in-
quiry. He thought that to proceed at present would be
only wasting the time of the house, and therefore he 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, he 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 hie proposition might be discussed in
in a full house, In any early period of the session, and in
au unusually full house, after full deliberation and 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 adminis-
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 Gevermuent were perfectly justified in saying that
• although we have thought the time inopportune —al-
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 any other au. ho-
rity instead." I think that the government wore justified
under those circumstances in putting in abeyance their pre-
vious opinions, and in endeavouring to legislate fur India.
lily hon. friend who has spoken says it is late in the
session, but in 1813, 1333, and 1853, bills were proceeded
with in this house up to a much later period in the session
(Hear, hear.) And what is the obstacle to prevent us
from considering this greet subject ? Subjects of equal
if not greater imp,,rtanee are entertained every year at
later periods, and, therefore, there does not seem to me
to be any mason why this subject should not be proceeded
with. I know tiler, is a disadvantage in considering a
question of this kind when our Indian establishments are
surrounded with dasgere, 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 aff)rd us. Although it may be some impeach-
ment Of the wisdom of Parliament, yet it has generally
happened that no eery great attention is paid to any sub-
ject until circumstances of a very serious nature demand it.
My opinion is, that in 1833, had the Earl of Aberdeen
proposed a cbs.ngeof this kind, the majority of the house
would have refused to adopt it, on the ground that India
was in a quiet awl undisturbed state. But now our a'-
teution is tivottect to the subject, there is hardly an hon.
gentl !roan who hie not since April last year phi groat at-
tention to the snijeci. Wolf, suppose that the mutiny was
sopprasseti, and that n 'thing occurred beyond little
skirmishes with small Indies of mutineers, do you think
the public interest on the subject would continue ? I think
it would vet y much abate, and that other subjects would
orbs to occupy stir attention. I doulit, very much whether
its the b,ginitin; of 1859 there would be so much know-
lell,so and elolib.ration given to the subject as can be given
to it at the present time. Ido not, therefore, see why we
shNeltl not now, in tide the very beginning of our delibera-
tions, proceed :,o consider the resolutions of the Govern-
ment. No question has been raised to-night as to whether
we should proceed by resolution or by bill. The proposi-
tion of this right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) was that.
we should go :nto committee to consider resolutions. Most
unfortunately, I think, ho gave us a long defence of his own
bill which he has already murdered with his own hands.
Of that bill we will now say nothing—
De mortuis sail nisi bonum.

- -
—(Laughter)—but 1 think we shall ba, after some days' con-
ii.teration a'A to come to some conclusion on the subject.

Look at the great subject of slayer- - -
posed to be considered i,- -
of which mow.' - -
many "