The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-20 00:00:00

been received from the Government of France on the sub-
ject of the peace.
LORD J. RUSSELL'S DESPATCH TO THE COURT
OF BERLIN.
Mr. S. FITZGERALD asked whether a document which
had appeared in the public journals, as a copy of the noble
lord's despatch, and was stated to have been translated and
retranslated, was authentic, and whether a copy of it would
be laid before the house ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said that there were some errors in
the translation, and he should have no objection to give
the despatch in an authentic shape, if the hon. gentleman
would move an address for it in the usual form.
Mr. FITZGERALD said he understood that a reply to
that despatch had been received from the Government of
Prussia, and that the noble lord had thought it his duty to
answer that reply. Would there be any objection to lay
those two documents on the table of the house at the same
time ?

Lord J. RUSSELL said the correspondence was not
exactly complete. He must take a day two to consider
whether that further correspondence should be given.
ORGANISATION OF THE INDIAN ARMY.
Mr. BUXTON called attention to the report of the com-,
missioners on this subject, which recommended that the
force to be employed in India in future.should be 80,000 Eu-
ropeans, and 190,000 sepoys—in all 270,000 men. The mili-
tary police would raise the total to nearly. 400,000. He did
not question the propriety of the commissioners' recommen-
dation, but thought it essential that it should be discussed.
The financial part of the question was a serious one ; no
statesman looked without alarm at the financial condition of
India ; and every authority concurred in stating that in
Southern India in particular the occupiers of land were most
grievously oppressed. It was most essential that our expendi-
ture in India should be reduced, in order to reduce the taxa-
tion. With an army of nearly 400,000 men this would be
impossible ; such a force could only be maintained by means
of loans. Besides, it would be a most dangerous experiment
to put arms into the hands of 300,000 natives. It was said
this danger was provided against by 80,000 European troops,
but he doubted whether that was sufficient in the event of a
mutiny. He believed they were increasing and not dimi-
nishing the risk of mutiny by putting arms into the hands
of 300,000 trained natives. He challenged the noble lord
the Secretary of State for India and the late Secretary of
War to give him some information as to the reason for
employing such an immense force in India. He rejoiced
that he had to put the question to the noble lord, because if
the noble lord differed in opinion from the commissioners,
he would not shrink from saying so. As the case stood in
the blue book, the proposition of the commission was con-
demned by the greater number of witnesses, and those
of the greater weight ; it would lead to the ruin of the
finances, and the misery of the rayas of Southern India,
it would check education and public works, sacrifice
the lives of English soldiers, weaken the strength of their
home defence, and prepare the materials for another mutiny
such as filled India with misery and ruin in 1857 and 1858.
Lord STANLEY rose to reply, but
The SPEAKER intimated that there was no motion be-
fore the house.
Mr. BUXTON moved that the report of the commission
be laid on the table.
The SPEAKER—There is no motion before the house.
Sir E. COLEBROOKE—I move that the hon.se adjourn.
(Laughter.)
Lord STANLEY said the hon. gentleman challenged
him to state whether his opinion agreed with or differed
from that of the commission on the subject of the amount
of force to be employed in India. Upon that subject he
did not think it possible for any one set of men in this coun-
try, whether civilians or military men, to lay down not
merely what was the distinct and precise amount of force
which at this moment was required to secure tranquillity in
India, but what amount of force would be required when the
tranquillity of that country was perfectly restored. (Hear.)
He should not attempt to give a precise answer to the ques-
tion. When the hon. gentleman said that no argument
had been adduced to show why 80,000 European troops
were required, he did not know how they were to argue
such a question, or how it could possibly be proved -that
60,000, 70,000, or 80,000 was the right number of troops to
be employed otherwise than by taking the opinion of the
most competent witnesses as to the amount. (Hear, hear.)
But when the hon. gentleman said that the commissioners
had gone against the evidence, he thought he could best
satisfy the house on that point by reading a summary of
the evidence. The noble lord read the opinions of the wit-
nesses, from which it appeared that with respect to Bengal
they varied between 40,000 and 50,000, and for the whole
of India they;varied between 60,000 and 80,000. No man
in India or in England appeared to be more strongly im-
pressed with the necessity of maintaining a large prepon-
derating European force in India than Sir J. Lawrence.
(Hear, hear.) No doubt a considerable reduction might
and ought to be made hereafter when certain results
had been obtained. When they had connected all their
principal military stations in India by railway, when the
comparatively newly-acquired territories had been consoli-
dated and accustomed to our rule, when that disarmament
which was now taking place had been more extensively
and effectually carried out, then, no doubt, so large a mili-
tary force would not be required. But if he took the actual
population of India, the proportion of military men to that
population was not so great as in the majority of European
states. No doubt, in considering this subject,' the question
of finance ought not to be left out of sight, and urgent in-
structions had been sent out to effect a reduction in the ac-
tual amount of native force, which was larger in amount
than when the mutiny broke out. (Hear.) Those instruc-
tions were not sent out in consequence of any preconceived.
plan. During the mutiny they were obliged to employ sol-
diers wherever they could find them, but he had reason
to believe that a considerable reduction was now taking
place in the number of Sikhs and other native troops.
With regard to the expense, he ought to say that one
European soldier was calculated to cost more than three
native soldiers. The house would not expect him to enter
further into the question which had been raised by the hon.
gentleman. (Hear, hear.)
Sir E. PERRY said the present force in India con-
sisted of 111,000 Europeans and 280,000 natives, being a
force little short of 400,000 men. His opinion was, that
the resources of India could not support such a force,
and that the resources of England could not supply it.
In the present state of the finances of India, instead of aug-
menting the force their course ought to be to bring it
within what the country could bear. How was that to be
done? By adopting such a course of policy as would engage
the sympathies of the people of India on their side. His im-
pression, after an experience of eleven or twelve years' resi-
dence in India, was that their system of government could
never succeed as long as it excluded so religiously from places
of honour and profit the natives of India. (Hear, hear.)
They gave to the rank and file of the native army more than
double the pay of the Indian labourer, and provided for them
excellent pensions, whilst they excluded every gentleman of
rank and education. (Hear, hear.) Yet in those corps to
which they admitted native gentlemen, there was greater
efficiency combined with far greater cheapness. Native
cavalry, drilled and disciplined after the European model,
cost £lO2 per man. Native irregular regiments of cavalry
cost only £35. Now, he said boldly, the native irregular
cavalry were far more efficient than the highly-drilled and
tight-laced regulars. Lieutenant Merreweather, General
Jacob's force, and the ten regiments raised by Sir J. Law-
rence in the Punjaub proved that this was the fact. Other
countries did not refuse to employ as officers the natives of
conquered countries. He trusted the right hon. baronet
would follow that course with regard to the army which he
had indicated in reference to the civil service when in office
before, and give a fair field to the legitimate ambition of the
native gentlemen. (Hear, hear.)
Col. SYKES said that the noble lord the late Secretary
for India had declared himself at a loss for any basis on which
to form an opinion as to the amount at which the force in
India ought to be maintained. If the noble lord wanted a
basis for an opinion he need only refer to the traditional
policy of the East India Company, and he would find what
the amount of force ought to be. The year before the
Affghan war broke out there were in India 16,040 infantry
and 3,711 cavalry of the royal army, a total of less than
20,030; the force was afterwards raised to 25,000 infantry
and somewhere under 4,000 cavalry, still a total of less than
30,000. The Company's Europeans varied from 15,000 to
25,000, averaging about 20,000 ; so that the Affghan war

was commenced and carried on with less than 50,660 Euro-
peans in India. In 1857, when the mutiny broke out, there
were 25,098 infantry and 2,955 cavalry, a total of less than
30,000 of the royal army, and only 20,000 Company's Euro-
peans in India, yet that force crushed the mutiny, and took
Delhi Cawnpore, and Lucknow before a single company
arrived to their assistance. If 50,000 Europeans were
enough to carry on the Affghan war and crush the mutiny,
surely such a force was sufficient now, when than was not
a single fortress standing that could hold out against
half a-dozen battalions of any native prince with an
army on foot. There were now, it appeared, 110,000
European troops in India and 21,000 at the depots here,
chargeable on the Indian Government. Was the mainte-
nance of such a force reasonable or just to India or to this
country ? He did not hesitate to say that India could not
support more than 50,000 ; any increase above that amount
would produce a corresponding deficiency in the revenue.
Mr. SMOLLETT considered that the amount of force
required in India would depend entirely op. the course
taken by the India Government itself.
Mr. BRIGHT would not detain the house many minutes.
The debate was rather irregular, but it 'was one of the most
important that they had had for a lor,g time. They were
much indebted to the hon. member wiro introduced the sub-
ject and to the hon. member for r/evonport, for the manner
in which they had addressed them. (Hear, hear.) He
feared the right hon. baronet would think him pertinacious
in pressing him on this matter, but the debate that
evening must have shover, him there was only one feeling in
and outside the house. He thought Parliamentary Re-
form was impc;rtant ' • he thought the home budget
was important; but he did not know that either of them
could match, in pressing and immediate importance with
the subjezt which had that evening been introduced to their
notice. (Hear.) For his own part, he never turned his
attention to the affairs of India without sorrow and alarm.
Ile begged to ask the right hon. baronet when he would
bring the subject of Indian finance before the house. It was
an unpleasant subject for a Minister, but the hon. baronet
would best consult his own future renown and best consult
the interest of England and of India by inviting the House
of Commons in the most frank manner to the lest confi-
dence in all respects as to the difficult and almost insolvable
problem with which he had to deal. The noble lord who
had preceded him in office must well know that none of the
offices filled by his colleagues could compare in difficulty
with that which he had occupied for some twelve
months. They all knew the intelligence he possessed,
the industry he displayed, and the absence of pre-
judice which characterised him—(hear, hear)—but they
must admit he had met with difficulties which he'
could not entirely overcome. (Hear.) He warned the
right hon. baronet not as a political opponent, but as a poli-
tical friend, to ask the opinion and the judgment of the
House of Commons on the important subject with which he
had to deal. He hoped the right hon baronet would not
consider ho pressed this matter from any desire to worry
him (hear, hear) ; he was only anxious that while so many
members were in town, and while there appeared such a
disposition to consider the suNect, they might have an
opportunity of giving the Government the benefit of all the
faculties they possessed. (Hear, hear.)
Sir C. WOOD did not tlame the hon. gentleman for
pressing him. He knew the interest he took in the affairs
of India. He could aware him he was perfectly ready
to take his advice, and to deal frankly with the house ;
it was only from hir, desire to do so that he had so
long postponed making his statement. He did' not wish
to make it until the; house was in possession of full
information. It w ould be easy for him to make a con-
cise statement on. Indian finance, which hon. members
ethe
could not controvert for want of information, but he had
postponed his state meat until the house was in possession of
fialnlanthcoei.nHfoermhaatdi,oisnidhoenctohueldtablaee all before
financial
them
n'lndian
despatches
he had received ; the only document he was waiting for was
the last annual :return of expenditure and revenue. That
would be laid on. the table on Thursday, and as soon as it was
presented he would lose no time in 'making his statement.
(Hear, hear.) With regard to the questiOn immediately be-
fore the house h c did not think it advisable then to enter into
it, as he would have occasion hereafter to bring before them
the great ques'don of the Indian army, and ho would be able
to do so more effectually when he was in a position to state
what the vig•ors of the Government were on the subject.
The sub;ject was intimately connected with the question of