The Sun.
London, England, 1858-03-27 00:00:00

(From the Morning Post.)

The difference between this bill and the more simple
scheme propounded in the bill of Lord Palmerston consistsin
this, that in the plan of the latter the Council created for the
aid of the Minister is constituted, in accordance with ancient
constitutional principles and usages, by the nomination of the
Crown, while, in the scheme of the Cabinet of Lord Derby,
it is constituted for the first time, as far as we know, in the
history of the country, upon the same principle as the Hones
of Commons itself, namely, that of representation.
It is at this point that we find ourselves opposed to the
scheme of the Government. We admit that it is conceived
with great imagination and framed with elaborate care. W.
admit that the names presented for the sanction of Parliament
are not only unobjectionable, but that there are comprised in
the nine nominated members and in the first four of the elec.
tive members, the most distinguished and the most experi-
enced of the many able men who have been concerned of late
years in the administration of Indian affair's. We admit that
it is pos4ble that the proprietors of East India stock, and of
shares in corporate undertakings, and the constituencies of
London, of Manchester, of Liverpool, of Glasgow, and of
Belfast, may possibly replace, at the conclusion of their tern
of office, Mr. Mangles, Capt. Shepherd, Sir James Weir Hogg,
and Mr. Prinsep,by men equally distinguished and equally fit
for the discharge of the functions entrusted to them. But
we should still, be the conduct of the electing bodies created
by the bill what it may, entertain unshaken and unmodified
the objections which we entertain, upon constitutional
grounds, to the concession to popular constituencies, however
constituted, whether .of ten pound householders of our
towns, or of shareholders in joint stock companies, of a direct
voice in the nomination of the servants of the Crown. We
are aware that this provision of the elaborate bill which Mr.
Disraeli has laid upon the table of the house is quite in ac-
cordan e with tne evident tendency of the.public mind at
this noment, but we warn him that he is embarking upon a
most hazardous course and launching an innovation which
may bring iu peril the very foundation upon which, accord.
ing to constitutional theory, our form of government has
been constructed. We trust that some member of influence,
who understands and reveres that theory ancient usages be-
gotten, will raise his voice for its conversation, and not
suffer the principle which it involves to be swept away for the
satisfaction of popular fancies or radical schemes.
We approve of the intention which the Government have
announced of sending out to India a commission to inquire
into the condition and management of Indian revenue. We
entertain a strong opinion that it may be considerably in.
creased, with less pressure upon the soil and upon the re-
sources of the population than is at present exercised, and
that a largo and productive saving may be effected in the
management and application of the income of the Indian
empire.

(Prom the Morning Chronicle.)
The Ministerial Bill for the future Government of India is
now before the public. Although to Lord Ellenborough is
supposed to belong the responsibility of having conceived
and arranged the measure, he would be among the first
to accord to Mr. Disraeli his meed of praise for the admirably
lucid manner in which he has displayed its leading features to
the House of Commons. The Bill itself must be pronounced
a decided improvement upon its predecessor, notwithstanding
that subsequent discussion may lead to modification of s ,me
of its provisions. Into the details of the measure we shall
find opportunity to enter. Of its general scope and, bearing
we are bound to express approval. While not neglecting the
necessary influences which ensure " popularity," the framers
of this Bill appear to have sought the mewls of placing the
future Government of India on a solid foundation, aid of ob.
taining the assistance of all the experience available among
those who have spent their lives in India, and who are gene•
rally the best judges of the wants of the country.
The reception of the Bill by the House must be regarded
as favourable. It may be assumed, as a matter of coarse,
that the new measure will be the object of much severe
criticism, when Parliament reassembles. It involves some
bold innovations on established custom, whi,h might not
have been expected from a " Conservative" Ministry, but
which indicates a disposition to go still farther, on subjects
of more domestic interest. The chief merit of the Bill is de-
rived from the frankness with which the framers expose their
objects.- Mr. Roebuck may object to anything that can inter-
fere with that despoti3 centralisatio❑ which Liberals of his
class so affect ; but the public at large will recognise in the
proposals of the Ministry, at least an attempt to preserve
some of that popular control over arbitrary power, which is
the essential spirit and ruling influence of our free Insti-
tutions.