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

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (No. 3) BILL.

Oa the order of the day for going into committee oa this
bill,

Mr. SLANEY proceeded to make some observations on
the past and present government of India. The East India
Company h: d, 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 oppr eased 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 he 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 c]ause 3,
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY cmaplained 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 paced in his hands all the powers in respect to
finance which were now exercise t 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?"
Ur. C. FORTESCUS would move to inset the words
" and council of India" after the words Secretary of Stagg.
In this respect ho thought the bill of the late Government
was much better than the present one. If they were to
have a council at all, it ought to be a reality, and it should
tako a vital and active part in the whole transaction 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
ex- jecti ug 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 real a second time last night, and as the noble lord
(Stanley) then intimated that he proposed to introduce
many important alterations, it would perhaps have been
more convenient if they had only gone into committee pro
forma, in order that theso'alterations might be inserted be-
fore they were called upon to discuss these clauses, This was
an important clause. It transferred to the minister, and the
minister only, all the power now exercised by the President
of the Board of Cent; 01, and al the powers exercised by the
Court of Directors. In agreeing to that they ()ugh t to know
un ler what limits those powers were to be exercised. At
present the President of the Board of Control had not the
power to expend a single shilling of the revenues of India in
Eugland. He could not grant a pension or order any ex-
peuditure to be iucurredhere without the concurrence of the
Court of Directors ; and it was only through the medium of
the secrt committee that it could order any exp.n,liture in
India. But this clause gave to the minister unlimited
powers of ordering any amount of expenditure is India
without the concurrence of any member of his council, and
it conferred on him power to grant pensions in this counti y,
or to order any expenditure athome 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 exlaendi-
ture unless it were in clause SS, which was somewhat equi-
vocally worded, but which did not appear to him to contain
any sufficient restraint. (Hear.) with regard to
patronage. This clause placed unlimited powers of patron-
age in the hands of the minister. All the appointments,
save the first nomination to commissions and the first no-
mination 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 (Lord Palmer-
ston) there was a limit imposed. It was there provided that
no expenditure should be incurred in England without the
concurrence of at least four members of the council—that
was one-half of the whole body, as the nob!e lord proposed
the constitution of the council. The noble lord (Stanley)
glanced, he thought, in 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 ; but 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. Graham) thought that
check of the control of the House of Commons over ac-
counts rendered at a very long date after the expen-
diture had been incurred, was not so efficient as the
control proposed by the noble lord the member for Ti-
verton—(hear, hear)—and he should be glad to hear, be-
fore they went furtfier with the bill, what were the checks
the noble lord (Stanley) proposed to create, first, with re-
gard to the matter of expenditure in 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 Board of Control hal 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 bill, was constituted for life ; whereas the council
proposed in the bill by the noble lord (Pelinerston) 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. GRAHAM 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 Beard of Control had no power to expend a
shilling in England, but he might expend any amount
he pleased through the secret committee, as had been
done in one case, where 120,0001. had been expended in
new war steamers. The Court of Directors could ex-
pend no money at home without the consent of the
Board of Control ; and only then to the extent of 5001.
in individual grants, or pensions not exoeeding 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 House of Commons.
(Hear.)
Mr. AYRTON suggested that the only constitutional
check over the expenditure was to iasist upon an annual
appropriation act, as was the case with the public expen-
diture in this country.
Lord STANLEY stated that the words "or as herein
oe this clause the house would not be prevented front
„
enacting any further checks it might think nacos: Day. The
bill, otherwise
r w t
mightletL" would
hereafterld includeintroduced, any
check
now
s o theby
first thing they had to do was to decide upon the theory
but
ltSitfa State
and principle of their legislation. The hon. gentleman
opposite proposed to add the words " and council ," that
way,and ttho6 divide
council.the T
hpaotw
waserb oat wfcleiirl
the
proposition Secretary
were accepted, it entirely did away with the whole pro-
fessed object of the noble lord'o (Lord Faammtoll'o) bill ;