The Sun.
London, England, 1861-06-21 00:00:00

their fair share of offices, and perhaps there would be no
objection to this amendment.
After a few words from Mr. TORRENS,
Sir C. WOOD reiterated his wish that the natives of
India should receive confidential employment. His principle
was that there should be no distinction between any suUtjects
of her Majesty, no matter what might be their cow atry,
colour, or race. (Hear, hear.) For this reason he had made
no special mention of natives in the bill. In the other bills
the natives were not mentioned, and he thought it would
be absurd specially to mention them in this. His intention
was that there should be neither exclusion nor privilege,
but that all subjects of hes Majesty should be equally eligi-
ble for places of trust. (Hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT said that there was great force in what the
right hon. baronet said, but still he thought there were un-
answerable arguments in favour of his hon. friend's amend,
went. Perhaps the right hon. baronet would express an
opinion as to the proportion of native members there should
be in the council. If the right hon. baronet would make a
recommendation embodying his opinion. to Lord Canning,
and it was acted upon by that nobleman, a precedent would
be established which would perhaps be better than to insert
a special provision in the bill.
Sir C. WOOD said that when the bill passed a despatch
would, of course, be sent out to the Governor-General, and
in that despatch he should take care to express his views
as to the expediency of appointing natives to the council
without mentioning any particular number. That course,
he thought, would be much better than mentioning the
matter in the bill.
Lord STANLEY hoped that the amendment would be
withdrawn, and that the matter would be left to the discre-
tion of the Secretary of State and the Governor-General.
Mr. LAYARD said that although he did not agree with
many of the arguments he had heard urged against his
motion, yet after the appeal made by the right hon. gentle-
man he should not press it to a division, on the distinct
understanding that the right hon. gentleman would write a
despatch to the Governor-General and the governors of the
different presidencies to appoint these members of council.
The amendment was then withdrawn, and the clause
agreed to.
On clause 11,
Mr. VANSITTART moved in page 6, line 24, to leave
out "one year," and insert "five years." He did not be-
lieve the council as about to be constructed would give any
satisfaction to India. It appeared the non-officials were to
have a seat only for one year. In the hope that they might
be made effective he proposed that they should have a seat
for five years,
Mr. BRIGHT said that in looking over the bill no clause
surprised him more than this. He thought the hon. gentle-
man who moved the amendment had not stated one-half of
the arguments that might be used against the proposition
in the bill. It seemed these additional members were to be
nominated by the Governor-General, and they were to be
appointed only for one year, and were to have no salary,
although their expenses would be paid. Every element of
independence as regarded these members was taken away.
If a man came into office for a twelvemonth he would know
at the end of that time who could leave him out when his
term of office expired. He did not think it necessary to go
the length of five years, but he thought three) ears the very
smallest term for which they should be appointed.
Mr. TORRENS trusted the right hon. gentleman would
agree to adopt the amendment.
Mr. CRAWFORD thought that three years would meet
the circumstances of the case, but that one year would not
allow any person to obtain a sufficient knowledge of the
office.

Lord STANLEY believed there was only one feeling
among the committee on this matter. They wanted to have
independence, experience, and zeal and interest for the pub-
lic service. Under this clause as it now stood it would be
utterly impossible to have any one of these things. (Hear.)
Sir C. 'A OOD felt that it would be incurring a great re-
sponsibility to run counter to the views of Lord Canning.
Lord Canning said distinctly that the non-efficient persons
should not serve for more than three years, and that one
year would be much better. He would not take upon him-
self to go further than two years.
Mr. H. SEYMOUR was willing to accept two years,
which was a common colonial period, and hoped that hon.
gentlemen would not divide.
The clause was accordingly altered to two years, and was
then agreed to.
On clause 19,
Mr. FORSTER drew attention to the despatch of Lord
Canning on the subject of publishing the debates. He con-
sidered it of the utmost importance that the debates should
be regularly reported.
Sir C. WOOD agreed that it would be well to make pub-
licity the rule; but if natives who could not speak English
were to be members of the Indian councils, there was danger
of the reports being one-sided. To prevent that, there would
be frequent official reports.
The clause was then agreed to, as were also the clauses
to 29 inclusive.
On clause 30,
Mr. VAN SITTART proposed to alter the term of office of
members of the local councils from one year to three. The
local councils would be stationary, and would therefore be in
a very -different position from the general council ; and one
or two years' service would not be sufficient to secure that
interest and independence which he was anxious to see.
Sir C. WOOD said he proposed to make the time two
years instead of one.
Mr. D. SEYMOUR thought the better plan would be to
appoint two for one year, two for two years, two for three
years, and so on according to the number.
The committee then divided—
For the amendment.. 6O
Against it 66
Majority —6
The clause was then agreed to, with the insertion of two
years.

The other clauses up to 43 were agreed to.
The succeeding clauses, to clause 50, were agreed to.
Sir C. WOOD then moved an additional clause, provid-
ing that the senior member of council, or the governor of
the other presidencies, should succeed the Governor-General
in the event of his removal by death, or of any sudden
emergency.
The clause was agreed to, together with the remaining
clauses and the preamble, and the house resumed.
EAST INDIA (HIGH COURTS OF JUDICATURE)
BILL.
Sir C. WOOD moved that the house go into committee
on this bill.
Mr. BRIGHT said that the house had now been engaged
on the bill just disposed of seven hours. The few members
who had attended were now completely exhausted, and the
hon. baronet himself must have an insatiable appetite if he
wished at that time to proceed with an important measure
of this kind. For himself he was not hostile to the bill, but
if the motion was persisted in he would go away, in justice
to his own powers of human endurance.
Sir C. WOOD said that he was extremely anxious to pro-
ceed with the bill, and seeing that the hon. members who
took an interest in these matters were all present, and very
few amendments were given notice of on the paper, he
hoped that the objection to proceed with the bill would not
be persisted in.
After some discussion, in which several members strongly
objected to going into committee,
Sir C. WOOD said that if it was the general wish of the
house--(hear, hear)—that the committee should be post-
poned, he would assent to the postponement, and he would
place the bill on the list of orders for to-morrow, in order
that he might then fix the day when it would come on.
INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS BILL.
The house then went into committee, resuming at clause
16, which was agreed to, as was clause 17.
On clause 18,
Mr. BARROW objected that it gave a single magistrate
the power of taking a certain class of persons from the
control of the poor-law guardians, and placing them in
positions where their maintenance would cost double, while
the guardians would have to pay for it. That was a re-
volution in our present system which deserved the atten-
tion of the committee. He complained of the unjust
operation of this clause in making a child chargeable on a
parish by the fact of its having slept in the parish but a
single night.
Mr. HENLEY having said a few words,
Sir G. C. LEWIS said he was prepared to admit that a
difficulty might arise as to the chargeability.
After some further discussion the clause was negatived,
to be introduced on the bringing up of the report.
Clauses 20 to 34 inclusive were agreed to after some
conversation, in which Mr. Henley, Colonel Stuart, Mr.
Garnett, and Sir G. C. Lewis took part.
On clause 35,
Mr. WHALLEY (who was much interrupted) said he
had been informed that schools which now existed of a
reformatory character bad been made use of for the pur-
poses of Roman Catholic monasteries, and he even under.
stood nunneries. (Hear, hear, laughter, and cries of "Go
on.") He was informed that 7s. a. week were given for
the support of each of the children. (Hear, hear.) Now
a system such as that acted as an inducement to parents to
withdraw their children from the schools—(hear, hear)--
and to hand them over to Roman Catholics, and that sys-
tem would be extended by this bill to an alarming extent.
(Hear, hear, and loud cheers.) He could quite understand
the meaning of those cheers. (Hear, hear, laughter, re-
newed cheers, and cries of Go on.) That grants of
money, which had been given ostensibly for the education
of children, should be diverted from their legitimate object,
and given in aid of institutions which were directly con-
trary to law. (Hear, hear, cheers, cries of "No, no," "Go
on," an% much laughter) Ho thought that such a state-
ment as that ought to entitle him to attention. (Hear, hear,
ironical cheers, and cries of " Go en," "Hear him, hear
him.") He had sufficient experience to understand those
ironical cheers. (Hear, hear, Go on, go on.) He sup-
posed he would be prevented in future from bringing those
matters before the house. (No, no, Hear, hear, Laughter,
and Gb on.) The bill ought to be restricted to existing
certified schools.
The clause, and the remaining ones were then agreed to.
Mr. BUXTON, in the absence of Sir Stafford Northcote,
moved the following clause :—" On the application of the
parent, or of the managers, or of the guardians who may
be liable to make any repayment as aforesaid on account of
any child, any justices of the county in which the school is
situate, if satisfied that a suitable employment in life has
bees provided for the child, or that there is otherwise suf..