The Sun.
London, England, 1858-03-20 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PAR LIAMEN T,

HOUSE OF LORDS.-(YurEEDA.T.)

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at five o'clock.

Lurd FAVERSHAM presented a p-tition from a
place in Yorkshire against the admission of the Jews
into Parliament.
Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition from Brad
ford praying that an inquiry might be instituted into
the proceedings by which a change in the mode in the
government of India might be made. The noble
lord also presented a petition from Conway, in North
Wales, praying for extension of county court•.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Earl GRANVILLE begged to inquire of the noble
lord opposite whether he would on Monday state the
order in which he intended to proceed with public bu -
norm, and also whether he would state when it was in-
tended to adjourn for the Easter recess ?

The Rai Of DERBY said he would state the coarse
he intended to pursue on Monday next.
CHURCH OF ENGLAND SPECIAL
SERVICES BILL.

Oa the motion of the Archbishop of CANTERBURY,
the report on this bill was received.
EDUCATION IN IRELAND.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE rose to put a
question to the noble earl with respect to the course the
lx everumeat intended to pursue with regard to educa-
tion in I eland. The noble marquis said that, from
certain circumstances that had occurred, he was led to
believe that it wa., the intention of Government to inter-
fere in the system of national education now pursued in
Ireland. He hoped such was not the case, as the rysterci as
at present cirried out bad been oonducive of the most
beneficial results. He should, therefore, like to know
whether the Government intended to alter the system,
and if so, to what extent.

The Earl of DERBY said that whatever difference (.f
opinion prevailed, with respect to the merits or demerits
of the present system of education, which had now
been established for nearly a quarter of a century,
the most eager of its oppenents must admit
that it had greatly improved the character of the educa-
tion in that country. He regretted that, as a system of
united education, it had failed, inasmuch as it had kie!en
unaccompanied by any facilities by which the children
could obtain religious instruction. Nevertheless, this
he could state, that the Government had come to no
decision on the subj,:ct. Tuey would do nothing to imperil
the present system, and he could assure the noble marquis
and the house that nothing would be done without the
previous assent and concurrence of Parliament. (Hear,
hear.)

TRUSTEES' RELIEF BILL.
The report upon this b:11, with amendments, wee
brought up and agreed to.

"INDIA LOAN BILL.
Lord ELLENBOILOUGEI moved the third reading of
;hie bill.

Lord MONTEAGLE complained that there was noth-
ing in the bill to show by whom or on what objects this
money was to be expended. It was not even stated that
it was to be spent on the public service of India, and it
might be applied to any other purpose without violating
the provisions of the bill. In former loan bills—in those
of 1793 and 1794, for instance—the purposes for which
the money was raised were specifically stated. He was
glad to hear the Pzesident of the India Board speak in
suer, cheering terms of our military prospects in India,
but the financial prospects were most gloomy. Of 22
year 3 ending 1855-6, seven years only had been years of
surplus, and 15 years of deficiencies. The surplus in that
seven years amounted to 5,100,0001., but the 15 year:
deficiencies amounted to 20.340,0001. The revenue of
India was in a most uncertain state, and there was no
chance of its being increased. The three great branches
of Indian revenue were opium, land, and salt ; and the
first branch might be destroyed at any time by the Chi-
nese Government removing the restrictions on its culti-
vation at home. He had no wish to throw any obstacles
in the way of the passing of the bill, but, if there was a
responsibility impending on this country for Indian
debt, it was high time that the state of the Indian re-
venue should be thoroughly understood hero. In 1842,
when Sir R. Peel proposed the Income-tax Bill, be did
not overlook the relations between the finances of India
and those of this country. Sir R. Pe el then said :
" I refer to a subject which has of late occupied but lit-
tle attention in the house. I refer to the state of Indian
finance. lam quite aware that there may appear no di-
rect or immediate connection between the finances of India
aid those of this country, but that would be a superficial
view of our relations with India which should omit the
consideration of this subject, Depend upon it if the credit
of India should become disordered—if some great exertion
should become necessary—then the credit of England must
be brought forward towards its support, and the collateral
and indirect effects of disorders in Indian finances would
be felt extensively in this country."
It might be said that the revenue of India was alone
pledged for the debt of India, and that as India was go •
yarned by its own Company the crecht3rs of India had no
claim whatever on the mother country. But in the event
of a disorganisation of the finances of India Parliament
would be compelled, both on the ground of direct duty
and implied faith, to come forward. Upon two or three
f ,ritner occasions—namely, in 1794, 1810, and 1812
the Government and Legislature had recognised this
claim. The 50th Geo. 111. authorised a grant of Ex-
chequer-bills, which were charged upon British revenue,
upon the express plea that, " Whereas the Company
labour under difficulties, it is necessary to provide means
for paying creditors." In 1812 a loan of 22,500,0001.
was raised, 2,500,0001. of which was applied "for the
reli,-f of the East India Company under present circum-
stances." If Parliament should now pass abi 1 putting
an end to the East India Company, and vesting the
whole of the revenue of India in the Crown itself—in
feet, undertaking all the responsibility of government
how should we then stand in relation to tte obligations
arising from India ? If the obligation did not rest upon
the Parliament of this country, upon whom would it
rest Not upon the East India Company, for that