The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-26 00:00:00

has taken piece beyond the walls of the house. I shall
tot touch in detail upon those allusions which are con-
tained in the inquiry of the hon. gentlemen, because I
understand he himself row admits that be has elisc)vered
that they are founded on incorrect information. [lir.
P. O'Brien--L is only the first part of my notice that
is incorrect.] The first part is incorrect, and the other
is not very accurate. (Laughter.) Now, with regard.
to the intent:on of the Government on the suject to
which the hon. gentleman referred—namely, teat of
landlord and tenant in Irelae d, I may say this, that it is a
great many years - some five or six—since that question
was introduced into the discussions c-f this house, and
it has been frequently, and almost constantly, debated
since its introduction. I think and hope teat all of us
—gentlemen on both sides of the house—have profited
by those frequent discuodone. F, certainly is the inten-
tion of her Mej-sty's Government during the recess to
give their most earnest consideration to that question.
(Cheers.) My right honourable friend the Attorney•
General has alt,ady directed his a' tention to it, and I
shall be happy if he may be able at the reassembling
of Parliamert to introduce a measure upon the ques-
tion of landlord and tenant in Ireland which may prove
a satisf iceory and conclusive settlement of the question.
(Cheer..)
114 r. AIAGUIRE defended himself against the obser-
vations of the hon. member for the King's County. He
(Mr. Maguire) had been before the house since 1852,
and he thought he might say that he had acted through-
out the part of an independent member. It was not
owing to his vote that the present Government was in
power. He had voted for the noble lord the member
for Tiverton, against the motion of the right hon. mem-
ber for Ashton, but the present Government being in
office, he conceived it only right, as an Irish member,
and as an independent member, that he should give them
fair play. (Ministerial cheers.) He believed that, so
far as they bad gone, they bad done more for the Cause
of progress than had been done by their predecessors in
ten years, and therefore he had not joined in any of the
miserable faction equabbles tai .h which they bad been
assailed. With respect to the tenant right question, he
was not going to pin himself to a measure which was a
mockery and a sham. It was not his fault if the tenant
right question was not carried. It was not he who had
sold a party and exposed a came to ridicule. He had
introduced a bill containing a retrospective clause, and
it had been defeated by a majority of three to one.
Thinking, then, that the independent Irish party had
some claim upon the Government as having given them
fair p'ay, and not being in search of some potty lordship
of the Trea,ury, such as was thrown to minor politicians
—(a laugh)—waiting nothing for himself but sornothieg
for his country, he and the gentlemen with whom be
acted went to the present Government to see whether
a settlement .f the question could not be procured. They
did not ask fur a retrospective clause, but they asked
for some measure which might be satisfactory to the
country. As to his being a newspaper proprietor, he
admitted the fact, and he was not ashamed of it, and to
whatever he wrote in his paper he attached his name, so
that he was always responsible. Hear, hear.) He was
not one of those liberals who stabbed in the dark
and slandered in anonymous articlee. The reason he
had not asked the hon. member for the Queen's county
was that the present Government were scarcely warm in
their seats when the hon. member on the part of all Ire-
land made a tremendous attack. He (Mr. Magu re) ad
witted that the hon. member had nut quite destroyed
them, but he bad established his own character for poli-
tical eccentricity. He treated all the hon. member's in-
sinuations as he would a mere puff of the Thames nuis-
ance. (A laugh.) He trusted that right hon. gentlemen
opposite would be able to introduce to Parliament a sa-
tisfactory solution of the tenant-right question.
Mr. O'BRIEN (much excited) would toll the hon. mem-
ber for Dangarvon, ashehad told him in another place—
(Order.) The hon, member insinuated that he had sent
anonymous contributions to a newspaper.
Mr. M A GUIRE —No, no.
Mr. O'BRIEN—Then do you withdraw everything?
The SPEAKER—The question is, that this house, on its
rising, adjourn to Monday next. (Cheers and laughter.)
Mr. O'Brien here suddenly left the house, and the mo-
tion was agreed to.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (No. 3) BILL.
On the order of the day for going into committee on this
bill,

Mr. SLANEY proceeded to make some observations on
the past and present government of India. The East India
Company had, during the 60 years they had held rule in
India, confined their attention to raising revenue, without
caring for the welfare of the people, and the consequence
was that they were worse paid and more oppressed than
any other people perhaps on -the face on the earth. He
agreed with much that had been said by the hon. member
for Birmingham, and ho trusted, now that the, government
of India was about to be transferred from the East India
Company to the Crown, the moral and physical elevation
of the people of India would be the first object of the go-
verning power.
The house then went into committee on the bill.
Clauses 1 and 2 were agreed to without comment.
On clause 3,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY complained of the power this
clause would place in the hands of the Secretary of State.
If he understood the clause correctly it placed the whole
power of dealing with the Indian revenue in the hands of
the Secretary of State, and that without check or control.
In fact, it placed iu his hands all the powers in respect to
finance which were now exercise I by the Court of Direc-
tors under the check of the Board of Control and the Court
of Proprietors. He wanted to know whether that was in-
tended, and whether there would be any objection to in-
sert the word " and council" after "secretary of st.te ?"
Mr. C.'FORTESCUE would movie to insert the words
" and council of India" after the words Secretary of Stats.
In this respect he thought the bill of the late Government
was much better than the present one. If they wore to
have a council at all, it ought to be a reality, and it should
take -a vital and active part iu the note ti a isaetion of
India business—not to consider with the Secretary of
State, but to consider and advise with him on all matters
of importance, he being responsible for either, acting upon
or rejecting their advice. He did not agree with the consti-
tution of the council as proposed by the bill now under
consideration.
Sir J. GRAHAM remarked that as the bill had only
been read a second time last night, and as the noble lent
(Stanley) then intimated that ho proposed to introduce
many important alterations, it would perhaps have been
more convenient if they had only gore into committee pro
forma, in order that these alterations might be inserted be-
fore they were called upon to discuss these clause% This was
an important clause. It transferred to the miuister, and the
minister only, all the power now exercised by the President
of the Board of Control, and a'l the powers exercised by the
Court of Directors. In agreeing to that they ought to know
ureter what limits those powers were to be exercised. At
present the President of the Board of Contrbl had not the
power to expend a single shilling of the revenues of India in
England. He could not grant a pension or order any ex-
penditure to beincurredhere without the concurrence of the
Court of Directors ; and it was only through the medium of
the secret committee that it could order any exp?.aditure in
India. But this clause gave to the minister unlimited
powers of ordering any amount of expenditure in India
without the concurrence of any member of his council, and
it conferred on him power to grant pensions in thie coun try,
or to order any expenditure at home without any limitation
or check whatsoever. Then what were the limits to this
power conferred in other parts of the bill? As far as he
could discover there were no limits in regard to expendi-
ture unless it were in chose 58, which was somewhat equi-
vocally worded, but which did not appear to him to contain
any sufficient restraint. ( flear.) Again, with regent to
petrenage. This clause placed unlimited powers of patron-
age in the hands of the minister. All the appointments,
save the first nominetim to commissions and the tint no-
initiation to clerkships, were to rest with the minister.
Those were the only limitations (Hear.) In the twelfth
clause of the bill of the noble lord opposite (L Palmer-
stoei there was a limit imposed. It was there provided that
no expenditure should ho incerred in England without the
concurrence of at last four members of the council--that
was one-half of the whole 'rely, as the nob'e lord proposed
the constitution of the council. The noble lord (Stanley)
glanced, he thought, iu his speech of the previous evening
at some limitation to the power of the minister in regard
to expenditure as checked by the existing regulations, and
he also glanced at the provisions of the bill of the noble
lord the member for Tiverton to which he (Sir J. Graham)
had referred ; bat the noble lord, he believed, thought the
limit suggested in that provision inexpedient ; that it was
better there should be no limitation, and that the Indian
Minister should have unlimited power, subject only to the
moral control of his responsibility to the House of
Commons. Now he (Sir J. Grisham) thought the
check of the control of the House of Commons over ac

counts rendered at a very long date after the expen-
diture had boon incurred, was not so efficient as the
control proposed by the noble lord the member for Ti-
verton--(hear, hens)—and he should ba glal to hear, be-
fore they went further with the bill, what were the checks
the noble lord (tatilee.) proposed to create, first, with re-
gard to the matter of expenditure is India, next, with
regard to expenditure at home, in lieu of the concurrence
of a considerable portion of the Board of Directors, with-
out which the Boatel of Control ha, I no such powers of
expenditure ; he also wished to know what wore the checks
the noble lord proposed to introduce with regard to patron-
ages other than those to which he had referred. (Hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK, observed that the council, as proposed
by this biil, was constituted for life ; whereas the council
propcsed in the bill by the noble lord (Pell nerston) was
constituted for a limited period. That made all the dif-
ference ; and practically, if they gave the power to such
a council, they would give it to an irresponsible body.
Sir J. GRAH.-Vri reminded the hon. and learned
gentleman that they were now discussing the 3rd clause,
which conveyed the power as it appeared to him (Sir J.
Graham) without limit;
and it would be inexpedient, in
considering that, to enter into the question of the con-
stitution of the council.
Colonel SYKES explained that at present the Presi-
dent of the Board of C iirtrol had no power to expend a
shilling in England, but be might expend any amount
ho pleased through the secret o rmmittee, as bad been
done in cne case, where 120,000/. bad been expended in
new war steamers. The Court of Directors could ex-
pend no mosey at . home without the consent of the
Board of Control ; and only then to the ex'ent of 500/.
in individual grants, or pensions not exceeding 2001.
a.year in any case. For any grant or pension of a
larger amount they must have the consent of the Court
of Proprietors, and that consent must be confirmed at a
subsequent meeting.
Sir E. PERRY stated that the limit imposed upon
the Court of Directors in the case of grants was 6001.
He agreed that there should be some such checks over
the expenditure as now existed, and with that view he
proposed that no grant beyond 600/ , or pension exceed.
ing 2001. a year, should be granted by the Secretary of
State without the sanction of the Reuse of Commons.
( Dear.)

Mr. AYRTON suggested that the only constitutional
check over the expemlitura was to insist upon an annual
aPProlniaticn act, as was the ease with the public expen-
diture in this country.
Lord STANLEY stated that the words "or as herein
otherwise provided," would include any check now in the
bill, or which might be hereafter introduced, so that by
passing this clause the house would not be prevented from

enacting any further checks it might think neces,aty. The
first thing they had to do was to decide upon the-theory
and principle of their legislation. The hon. gentleman
opposite proposed to add the words "and council ;" that
wag, to divide the power between the Secretary of State
and the council. That was a fair proposition ; but if it
wore accepted, it entirely did away with the whole pro-
fesaed object of the noble lord's (Lord Falruersto,n'P) bill ;