The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-14 00:00:00

Now if that was likely to be done at present, 'When the Se-
cretary of State was not called upon to interfere actively, it
would be much more likely to be done when the confirma-
tion by the Home Government would be required and when
the Secretary of State would feel as much as the Governor-
General his responsibility. (Hear, hear.) As to any inter-
ference by the council being a check, he did not think it
could be relied upon. He knew no set of men than the
council who could give opinions upon cases of this kind
more independently, for they had nothing to hope and
nothing to fear, and they would naturally act in harmony
with the Secretary of State. He had seen enough of those
gentlemen to know that they would have no feeling of ten-
derness for any Secretary of State or Governor-General if
they were inclined to disfavour the subsequent appointments.
He believed the council would be al all times ready to in-
terfere if necessary. Further he remembered that in 1858—
the time when the new arrangements were made for India
—the popular theory was that Parliament would not take
any interest in Indian matters ; but those who had watched
the state of the house as to what had taken place within
the last two years or 18 months would probably have formed
a judgment as to the soundness of those opinions. (Hear.)
Well, what were the objections taken to the principle of the
bill P His hon. friend (Mr. ansittart) told his right hon.
friend (Sir C. Wood) that this attempt to do away with the
competitive system of 1853 would lead indirectly to the re-
introduction of the system of patronage which he so much
deprecated, but he did not attempt to oppose it. (Hear,
hear.) His hon. friend further said if this bill passed they
would have the old abuses over again, and the Governor-
General would be taking out his relations and friends with
a view of providing for them in India. (Hear, hear.)
Now, inasmuch as it was a rule that no Governor-General
remained in India for seven years, he thought it would be
impossible to provide for friends in this manner, and he
thought that no person would follow a Governor-General
to India for the mere chance of being able to obtain from
another Governor-General an appointment to office. He
did not think that any man would follow that course.

Mr. VAN SITTART—The noble lord has misunderstood
what I said. I merely quoted the last speech delivered in
this house by.the late Lord Macaulay on this subject.
Lord STANLEY had supposed it was part of the speech
of his hon. friend. He (Lord Stanley) had not referred to
Lord Macaulay's speech, and knew not under what circum-
stances it was delivered by him, but he had no doubt if
Lord Macaulay had had an opportunity of examining this
bill he would have expressed a different opinion. He had
no doubt if the old system of the civil service prior to the
act of 1853 was renewed, they would have the old abuses
which were connected with it. Then his hon. friend said
be believed the natives would object to this new system,
and look upon it as an injury to them, because men of an
inferior class would be appointed to higher offices. But one
of the objects of the bill was to admit natives to higher
offices than they had hitherto been allowed to hold ; and he
was therefore surprised to hear such an objection to the bill
from his hon. friend. He thought that no man could at pre-
sent say what opinions the natives would hold with regard
to this measure. (Hear.) He had seen some of the papers
published in India, though written in England, and he had
never seen one which did not express a feeling that the
civil service ought to be opened up to natives. (Hear.) He
thought that under the provisions of this bill no man
would be tempted to go out to India with a view of getting
one of these appointments. No doubt the bill would admit
a large quantity of officers in the army who were now ex-
cluded from civil employment, and it would also provide
for those uncovenanted servants to whom now the higher
offices were not open. It would not be likely that here or
in India barristers who were successful in practice would
accept of those offices, and those who were unsuccessful
would not be likely to be appointed on account of any spe-
cial merit. They were all agreed that the appointments of
natives to the civil service should be made in a sparing
manner, seeing that it was an experiment. (Hear.) Look-
ing at all the circumstances he did not think that the pre-
sent system of training for the civil service would be greatly
interfered with. Young men would go out to India, and
their whole life would be one of preparation for the higher
offices; and he believed they wculd hold their ground
against all competitors or outsiders, or they would be much
inferior in energy and capacity than he had supposed them
to be. (Hear.) He thought the provisions of this measure
would effectually remove that feeling which existed in India
very strongly—viz., jealousy on the part of unofficial Euro-
peans, which was one of the social difficulties with which
they had to deal in India. (Hear.) He believed the bill
would prove a valuable measure, and he was bound to say
that he confirmed the opinion of those hon. members who
recommended that the authority to appoint to offices should
be inserted in the bill, and not left to the regulations of the
Secretary of State, and therefore he should be prepared to
support that proposition, if proposed by any hon. member,
and to take the sense of the house upon it. (Hear.)

Mr. PULLER believed that the second clause was not
intended to have a general effect, but was merely to enable
the authorities in India, with the concurrence of the Secre-
tary of State, to make exceptional appointments in excep-
tional cases. Under whatever aspect he viewed thebill, he
thought it most huportant that a certainty should be estab.
lished as to what offices were and what offices were not to
be thrown open in India to the uncovenanted servant.

Sir E. COLEBROOKE thought there could be no ob-
jection to the principle of the bill in the abstract. The
house ought not, however, to be called upon to decide the
question until they were put in possession of the opinions
of the public servants in India upon it. With regard to the
native service, he was ready to give the Government a
carte blanche to do what they liked. The real difficulty re-
garded those who were not of the covenanted service. The
true mode of serving the public well in India was to esta-
blish some system of competition like that which we had in
this country.

Sir AI. FARQUHAR thought the right hon. gentleman
need not be surprised if this bill excited great alarm in the
minds of the civil servants in India. If this bill were car-
ried he thought that all uncovenanted servants who should
receive appointments under the bill should undergo all
those tests which the covenanted servants were at present
liable to.

Mr. ADAM thought this bill was one of the greatest im-
portance, dealing with the whole question of the civil ad-
ministration of India, and he was afraid that if it was hur-
ried through the house great evil would result. Great
safeguards ought to be provided to secure that there should
be no jobbing in these appointments.
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE appealed to the Government to
consent to the adjournment of the debate. (No, no.) They
had.now (11 o'clock) been discussing Indian questions since
half-past 4. The bill did not contain proper provisions, and
they wanted proper information.
Mr. H. D. SEYMOUR hoped the hon. gentleman would
not press the motion for adjournment, but would allow the
bill to be read a second time, if only pro forma. The second
reading only affirmed the principle of the bill, and it was
admitted on all hands that some such measure was neces-
sary, and he did not see how any Secretary of State could
have done otherwise than to bring in a bill generally
similar to this. All the improvements suggested, such as
the introduction of restrict ions, could be introduced in com-
mittee. He had long thought that some means should be
taken to throw open to the uncovenanted service some higher
appointments. He did not think that the bill would injure
the civil service so much as was imagined. He thought
the civil servants of India showed too great a distrust of
Government. Restrictions could easily be inserted in com-
mittee. Government had already agreed to the test of
seven years' service, and, as he understood, to the test of
knowledge of the language. At all events, that was a rea-
sonable test which ought to be agreed to. Any man of ordi-
nary intelligence could learn the language in a year. It
would be advisable to have publicity, which was the best
possible check against jobbery. Here was a public necessity
which must be met, and he did not think anyone could show
a better way of meeting it than that proposed.
Mr. HENLEY did not see why the debate should be ad-
journed, or why the several measures should not be brought
on together. The state of the house was not such as showed
gleat interest in Indian questions, and if there had only
been one, the house might not have divided. As for the
distrust of Government shown by the civil servants, they
could only judge of the instructions of Government by their
acts. He thought this measure would be injurious to the
interests of the civil servants. He hoped that the right
hon. baronet would consent to introduce into the bill such
regulations as were considered necessary for the security of
the service, and those regulations could not be introduced
until the bill went into committee. There was, therefore,
no necessity for postponing the second reading of the bill,
and he considered that the best course would be to allow
the bill to be read, if only pro forma, in order that the re-
gulations should be printed and made known, and fair time
given for their consideration.

Mr. CRAUFURD hoped that the house would not cone
sent to the adjournment of the debate, and was bound to
say that, having heard the arguments on both sides of the
question, he had come to the conclusion that the public of
India were not less interested in this question than the
members of the civil service. In his opinion it would be
advisable to have the regulations introduced into the bill.
(Hear, hear.)

Sir J. FERGUSSON thought that the house ought to
have the report of the Commission and the dissents of the
Council of India, and if the right hon. baronet, the Secre-
tary of State for India, would consent to produce those
documents, the hon. baronet the member for Portsmouth
would probably not think it necessary to persevere with his
motion for the adjournment.

Col. SYKES considered the bill as one which, in many
important respects, broke faith with the Indian civil ser-
vice. The Court of Directors of the East India Company
had passed a resolution condemnatory of this bill.
Sir C. WOOD hoped the house would not agree to the
motion for the adjournment of the debate, and contended
that the course he had adopted in bringing in the four bills
in one evening was the best and most convenient that he
could have adopted. Ile could only say that he did not
think the interests of the civil service would be injured by
the bill. On the contrary, he believed that that service
would be filled by persons well qualified for the office. Lord
Canning and other prvctical authorities in India had all
made strong representations in favour of the principle of
the measure. Ho was willing to insert in it a clause
containing a restriction as to the seven years' residence in
India, but with regard to the test of language, it was diffi-
cult to define such a regulation, Ho would, however, con.