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

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENINO, JUNE: 21, 1861.

of India, and should be able to devote his attention more
exclusively to those general questions in which there was
ample scope for any amount of exertion and ability he
might possess, but that also was an object which would be
served lby this bill. With the general view of the hon.
gentleman he entirely agreed, but he was not prepared to
take upon himself at present to re-establish in Bengal and
the north-western provinces governors upon the same foot-
ing as the presidencies of Madras and Bombay. He did not
mean to say that the time might not come when such a mea-
sure would be expedient, but there had been a good deal of
reference in these discussions to the finances of India, and
he was not prepared at present to impose any new charge
upon the revenue of India which was not necessary for the
due administration of its affairs. The staff of a governor
would necessarily be more expensive than that of a lieute-
nant-governor. And this question could not be considered
without reference to the more important question of the
transfer of the Government from Calcutta to some other
part of India. He wrote to the Governor-General to suggest
to him whether the course now recommended by the hon.
gentleman would be desirable, and his reply was this :—He
said he was not prepared to say that it was a proposal to be
at all times negatived, but that we should not at present go
beyond what was proposed in the bill, namely, to give the
Government of Bengal power to summon natives to aid in
the administration. If the Governor-General were to sit
with his Council in Calcutta, and the Governor of the Pre-
sidency to sit with his council also, there would be two in-
dependent authorities; jealousies would arise, and that he
' thought was a great objection to the proposition. But if
the seat of Government were taken away from Calcutta, he
thought it should be fixed in some central place where there
was no governor. (Hear.) He did not think they were ripe
for that yet. Concurring with the hon. gentleman in the
expediency of having a separate executive and legislative
authority in Bengal, which was provided for in the bill ;
concurring with him also in the expediency of a separate
government for the north-western provinces, he was not
prepared to go the length of repealing these clauses, which
suspended the power of creating separate presidencies in
Bengal and Agra, the effect of which would be to constitute
these in the same manner as the presidencies of Bombay
and Madras were constituted. Having consulted with the
Council he came to the conclusion that for financial and po-
litical reasons it was not desirable to take a step of so much
importance at present. He hoped the hon. gentlemanwould
not press his motion to a division.
Mr. DANBY SEYMOUR said he agreed in much that
had been said by the hon. member for the Tower Hamlets,
but his amendment would more properly come on when the
44th clause was under discussion. He believed it would be
of great advantage to have more councils in India. Both
Malcolm and Metcalfe recommended that there should be a
governor of Central India, It would accustom the natives
to our rule if councils existed composed of half natives and
half Europeans, where matters relating to the improvement
of India could be discussed in common. He believed that
by the 15th and 16th sections of the act of 1853 the Secre.
tary of State for India, who succeeded to the authority of
the Court of Directors, had the power of making agovernor
at present.
Sir C. WOOD said his impression was that he had power
under the 16th clause to appoint a person who was not a
member of the civil service; but if the Governor-General
appointed a lieutenant-governor, he should be a member of
that service.
Load STANLEY said it seemed to him that the question
as between a governor and a lieutenant-governor turnedvery
much on whether there was a European population resident
in the district. Where there was only a native population
he thought that a lieutenant-governor was the best. There-
fore in the Punjaub and the North-Western Provinces he
believed it was best to have a person that had been trained
up in the Indian service. But where there was a European
population the case was different. The habit of dealing
with the native population was not the best school for teach-
ing persons how to deal with a European population.
(Hear, hear.) He should vote against the amendment, but
he wished to guard himself by saying that he agreed in
much that had been said by the hon. member with regard to
the expediency of creating two new presidencies. He thought
however, that a change of such importance should not de-
pend on a chance vote in a thin house, but should be the re-
sult of deliberation and full discussion.
Mr. BRIGHT said they seemed to be in the position they
were in yesterday, when they all were agreed, but differed
as to the mode of carrying out the object. All those who
had spoken seemed to agree with the hon. member for the
Tower Hamlets, and he (Mr. Bright) had not the least in-
tention of differing from any one. He only rose for the
purpose of suggesting a different mode of doing what was
proposed. The right hon. gentleman said it would not do
to have a governor-general and a lieutenant-general in the
same city, for they would be like the two kings of Brent-
ford, and would come into sudden and unpleasant collision.
He agreed with him in that. He was not in favour of go-
vernors-general at all, and believed they were, generally
speaking, a nuisance. (Laughter.) If the governor-general
ware in a more central position he would not be so likely to
interfere with the 36,000,000 of people in the Bengal presi-
dency. His suggestion was that a slight change should be
made in clause 44, and a new clause added giving the go-
vernor-general the power to establish in Bengal the same
kind of government which existed in Bombay and Madras,
leaving the time when he was to do this open. It would
not be necessary then to have a new act of Parliament.
Sir C. WOOD said he wished it to be understood that he
was not opposed to the proposition before the house, but he
did not think that was the precise time for it. With regard
to publicity, he did not think it should be made imperative
in the bill, but should be left to be dealt with by the local
governments.
Mr. AYRTON withdrew his amendment.
Clause 2 was then agreed to.
On clause 3,
Mr. ADAM said the clause provided that appointment
should be made by the Governor-General, with the assent
of the council present at a meeting. He moved that the
words "present at a meeting" be omitted, and that the
words "of the said council" be inserted.
Mr. D. SEYMOUR said he had a previous amendment
to make. The time was fast approaching when a financial
secretary would not be necessary for India, and he moved
an amendment to leave out the words "there shall be,"
and to insert the words, "it shall be lawful to appoint."
If they could save £B,OOO a year they ought to do so.
Col. SYKES supported the amendment.
Sir C. WOOD defended the clause, on the ground that it
was desirable that the number should be fixed by act of
Parliament rather than be left to the Secretary of State,
and that five members of the council were not too many for
the duties.
Mr. BRIGHT hoped that the hon. member would not
divide the house upon the amendment. It appeared to him
that five was not too large a number.
Lord STANLEY objected to the amendment, and said
the council attended to their duties very punctually.
After a few words from Mr. Gregson, Col. Sykes, and
Sir C. Wood,
Mr. ADAM consented to withdraw his amendment.
Amendment withdrawn accordingly.
Mr. TORRENS proposed an amendment to leave out all
the words after "manual" to the end of the clause.
Sir C. WOOD could not agree to the amendment, as the
object of it was to exclude the Commander-in-Chief in India
from the council of the Governor-General.
After a brief conversation the amendment was with-
drawn.

Mr. H. SEYMOUR then proposed in clause 3, page 2,
line 37, after "manual," to insert, " Provided that one of
such remaining :two shall at the time of such appoint-
ment be a practising barrister-at-law of not less than ten
years' standing at the bar of England or Ireland, or a prac-
tising member of the Faculty of Advocates in Scotland of
Rot less than ten years' standing at the bar of Scotland, to
assist by his legal advice the said council of the Governor-
General, to superintend and control the preparation of laws
and regulations, and to discharge all other duties incident to
the office of an ordinary member of the said council." His
object in making this proposal was to secure as far as pos-
sible a sound lawyer to aid the Governor-General in the
office in question.
Sir C. WOOD said he did not want to have a mere prac-
tical barrister for the office in question. What he wanted
was a practical lawyer, who was acquainted with the prin-
ciples of the law, and was also acquainted with Indian law
in particular. A merely technical acquaintance with law
might be a desirable thing in reference to the ordinary prac-
tice at the bar; but they wanted rather a person who could
be looked up to for his real knowledge of law. The late
Lord Macaulay was not a practising lawyer ; but his know-
ledge of the principles of law was generally admitted; and
his appointment to a high legal office in India was the con-
sequence of that knowledge. It would therefore be unwise
to tie up the hands of Government on this matter. The
great difficulty of the Government was to find a person
suited to the office in question, and it was therefore desir-
able that the matter should be left entirely in the hands of
the Government.
I oughtr.
onlyl I .tBAIL b eLelvEe ht thought
etrhs
oe
na p
wellp oin t
ameegnuta
nn
othn
Indian law.tqedueswtti
Mr. BRIGHT thought that the proposal of the hon.
member for Poole (Mr. H. Seymour)
consideration. It might be tha was well deserving of
to oblige a person to be a member
ten years" were too long
entitled to the appointment to theeroomf the. bar before he was
Sir C. WOOD said if the amendmecentin question.
should contrtro fins other words which
withdrawn he
satisfactory, and insert them on bringing u' pvtClrde be more
Mr. 'H. SE YMOUIt withdrew his amendment. He
thought no man woulA be able to draw an act of Parliament
properly unless he had had some practical working of the
courts of law.
The clause was agreed to.
Clause 4 was agreed to after some discussion.
Clauses 5 to 9 inclusive were agreed to.
On clause 10,
Mr. LAYARD moved an amendment to the effect that
not less than one .fourth of the additional members of
council should be natives of India. He desired to see no
distinction made in these appointments, whether the per-
sons were different in race, colour, or creed. Lord Canning
had stated that he had received valuable advice from native
gentlemen in India. He knew the righthon. gentleman thet
Secretary of State was anxious that uatiyes should have