The Sun.
London, England, 1859-03-08 00:00:00

CHURCH R4TEs,

In reply to Mr. HUTT,
Mr. WALPOLE said he proposed to move the second
reading of this bill on Wednesday next.

EAST INDIA LOAN BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Sir G. C. LE WIS said that, in dealing with India, they
should act in the same way as they did with their other
c°limbes, and preserve the separateness of the colonial
from the imperial treasury. The great difficulty in
which Indian finance found itself arose from the
great military expenditure. For the year before the
mutiny in India the expense of the military and navy
in this country and India, exclusive of police, was
£13,400,000 ; and for the year 1858 it was
increased by R 21,850,000, making a total of £35,250,000.
while the expenditure of France for her military and naval
departments amounted only to £19,781,000 in 1859.
As he understood from the gallant Secretary for War,
there was to be a reduction in the military force, and if
they could extend that reduction to India with safety they
would be
promoting materially the interests of that portion
of the British empire. It hadbeenused as an argument against
the reduction of the native army that the frontiers were
open to invasion, and that they had to apprehend attacks
from the small princes in the country. He considered,
however, that as the frontiers of the British Empire in India
extended from Cape Comoriti to the Himalayas, any fears
of such invasion were not well founded. Now, what he
wished to impress on the Government was that theywere in
positionnto effect a reduction of native troops, for the body of
t-h;1) e7)ple in that country were not armed; the insurgents
had been scattered, and the principal garrisons were in the
possession of European troops. He thought the best
course to be pursued was for this country to
raise a loan on the credit of India,lnd wasa
wantonndthey
should bear in mind that the mutiny in
and unprovoked by any act of Government in that country.
Mr. BRIGHT said he was not about to follow the right
hon. gentleman, or to attempt to answer some points in his
speech which he thought were not very sound, buthe
would say generally that he thought he rather contradicted
himself in what he had been saying,
because he wished
from the
that the revenue of India should be kept separate o
revenue of England, and yet he proposed that under certain
circumstances certain expenditure which had been hitherto
borne by the Indian revenue should be borne by the Eng-
lish exchequer. It appeared to him that there was very
little difference with regard to the future between the plan
which was launched, he thought rather unfortunately, by
the noble lord a few nights ago, and the plan laid down by
the right hon. gentleman. But he was anxious to address
a few words to the house on this question, which they were
forced at last to consider was one Of great magnitnde., The
noble lord (Lord Stanley) made a long and able speech in
introducing this bill. He explained with great fairness the
condition of the Indian Jinn-ices, and, except a little colour-
ing which his lordship's position compelled him to give to
the statement, he had nothing to complain of respecting it.
He read the speech with great care, and he confessed that
when he came to the end of it he felt great anxiety, and he
thought the case the noble lord had laid before the house
and the country was enlculated to excite their alarm. The
noble lord showed them that it was impossible to conceive
anything in a worse condition than the finances of India.
The finances of a country were almost everything to that
country ; they meant public order, the industry of the
people. Through that single department of finance he
thought that there was no government in Europe or the
world that was more deserving of an emphatic condemna-
tion than the government of India. The facts were in so
mufti a compass that he-would-wouldsre-state_ some et them
The debt of India wags about £80,000,000. . He excluded
the sum that was to be paid at some remote day to the
proprato
• roi of East I.udia §t9cac, awl tit 9;0114(104 also thy

guarantee of public works in India, which stood of course
altogether on another basis. The noble lord showed them
at the same time that the expenses of the Government were
constantly increasing, and to make that which as so bad
much worse, he showed them that the revenue was diminish-
ing. Now a Government with a constantly incr :sing debt,
a constantly increasing expenditure, and a constantly dimi-
nishing revenue, was in a position of great d w ger, and was
going on rapidly to an abyss which he shou not attempt
to describe. And it was an unfortunate thin r that the Go-
vernment of India, owing to its excessive borrowing and its
excessive want of faith towards those from whom it had
borrowed, had almost lost its credit, and it would require
all the management and honesty of the noble lord to reform
it in one particular. At that moment the noble lord was
asking from them powers to borrow seven millions in this
country, and at the same time there was open in India a
loan at the rate of not less than 51 per cent., and the Go-
vernment, he believed, undertook the repayment of that
loan at a period when there was not the remotest chance
that the money could be repaid. The noble lord made use of
an argument which was very common, that the debt only
amounteckto two years' revenue, while that of England
amounted to 10 or 12 years' revenue. But it was not a states-
manlike view to compare India with a country which had
got into debt more than any other country in Europe. The
argument would be bad if the comparison was just. But the
comparison was not just. We knew very well that through
the increase of machinery, of productive power and of capi-
tal, the debt of England was much less onerous on the people
of England now than it was some years ago. But that was
not the case in India. The noble lord admitted that there
was no elasticity in the revenue of India, and the increase of
its debt must necessarily result in a greater deficit. They
came then to the expense, which the noble lord admitted
was increasing; and ho (Mr. Bright) was prepared to assert
to the house tat there did not exist at this moment in the
hands of the noble lord or his council any control—he had
almost said any check, whatever over the increased expendi-
ture of the revenues of India. If the noble lord would tell them
all that he thought about it, he would tell them that at this
moment the funds of the Indian government were being
poured out like water in every part of India, and that there
was no responsibility and no check whatever; while, at the
same time the landed revenue, which was the most perma-
nent of any of the sources of revenue in India, was declin •
ing, and the revenue from opium was in great danger of
falling off almost altogether; that it was just possible, nay
it was probable, that the Chinese government, having been
compelled to admit opium, would permit it to be cultivated
in that country. The state of things he was describing had
not arisen from the recent rebellion; it had existed before
the rebellion. For 13 years out of 14, in the lifetime of any-
body in that house, there had been a deficit, and the rebel-
lion had only produced an aggravation of that state of
things. The right hon. gentleman said the government was
changed in form. The fact was that the government wss
leastchan changegedonl inyin name. He believed there had not been the
principle. An hon. gentleman, who was re-
cently a member of that house, but who was now a member
of the Indian Council—he alluded to Mr. Mangles—was
examined the other day before a committee sitting upstairs,
and he was asked if he approved of the present government
of India. He answered with great frankness that of course
he did ; that it was composed of the same men, and it was
conducted on the same principles, as before. The noble lord
would understand that he was not condemning him in any-
thing he was saying. 'One of his objects was to point out to
him that however honest and enlightened was the minister
who might be at the head of Indian affairs in this country,
under the organisation that now existed in India it was ut-
terly impossible that he should bring about changes in that
country which were absolutely necessary to restore Indian
finance to a condition of soundness. He should like the house
to consider for a moment whether it was possible to apply a
remedy to this state of things. This India Loan Bill was
not the last they would have. Let them compare themselves
for a moment with nathe states. It was said we had conferred
untold—no doubt they were untold—advantages on the na-
tives of India, but was it not a remarkable fact that while
the government of India was in the hands of 20 or 30 native
princes, every one of them, without exception, was able to
carry on his government without debt, and they had gene-
rally a surplus. Indeed, one of the great temptations to
the British authorities in India had been to secure the sur-
plus. He believed the noble lord could state that when the
kingdom of Oude was annexed, it was found that there was
a considerable sum in the exchequer, and that the revenue
of Oude amounted to nearly double the expenses necessary
to govern Oude. Well, we had abolished all these govern-
ments, and had spent all their revenues, and had borrowed
eighty millions sterling, and spent that also, and they had
had increasing year by year a deficit till it had become so
appalling that on both sides of the house they had been
discussing whether it would be necessary to bring in, not
only the authority but the security, the guarantee of Eng-
land to raise a sufficient sum of money to enable them to
carry on the government of India. Now, there was not
the smallest thing like a remedy proposed. It was more
debt, more taxes, no better government, and as far as he
could see, very little of that description of public works
which was necessary to develop with any success their dustry
of the people of India. The noble lord was not in fault at
all. He knew long before he held his present office what his
opinions were, but being in office he was now responsible
for providing a remedy. The right hon. member for Radnor
thought that we should pay a part of the Indian army, and
that that would balance the Indian finances. But it would
not balance the English finances, and if the right hon. gen-
tleman was looking forward to again being Chancellor of
the Exchequer, he was rather surprised that he should
have made such a suggestion as that. He (the hon. mem-
ber) was aware that a diminution in the rate of salaries
would form but a limited resource ; but still it was ad-
mittedthat there was no service in the world that was so
highly—he might say extravagantly—paid as the civil ser-
vice of India. The principle of that service was never how
to economise, but how best to plant upon the people of
India the largest number of our countrymen, who might live
there very comfortably for not a very long period and then
return home to occupy a very respectable if not high posi-
tion in English society. But was there any reason why the
officials of India should thus be paid ? Fifty or a hundred
years ago it was said that our eastern possessions were so
far away that men who went there seldom returned till
they had grey hairs and bad livers. (A laugh.) But the
distance lied of late been much shortened, and he (Mr.
Bright) did not believe one-tenth of what was said aboutthe
climate. Several years ago, when he had a committee on
the supply of cotton, he bad an opportunity of seeing many
gentlemen who had been in India for 15 or 20 years. Since
then he had seen scores, he might almost say hundreds, of
the same class, and they appeared to enjoy just as good
health as if they had been spending one-half of the year in
London, and the other half in the Highlands of Scotland.
(Hear.) He dismissed, therefore, all idea that there was
anything in the nature of the service or in the climate of
India which rendered it necessary to pay such extravagant
salaries. If there was, why did they not pay their military
officers or their chaplains on a similar scale ? They did not
pay those gentlemen any unreasonable sums, nor did those
who were engaged in agriculture or commerce in India—a
class which he regretted to say was a very small one—reap
profits that were so much in excess of the ordinary remune-
ration enjoyed by those who were engaged in similar pur-
suits. (Hear.) Or, again, compare the salaries received
in India with those paid in Ceylon, and it would be found
they were enormously larger ; some being as large again,
and others 50 per cent. greater; and yet the conditions of
service in India were at least as good as those in Ceylon,
and the climate at least as favourable to European life.
(Hear, hear.) If the noble lord saved anything out of the
civil salaries he would be able to do one of the three things,
any of which would be very advantageous. He might em-
ploy a much larger number of Europeans, or he might em-
ploy a much better class of officials (and of native officials
there were 10 for every European), or lastly, whatever was
saved would go into the Indian treasury, and render it less
requisite for the noble lord to borrow at 6 per cent. in India
or to come here for leave to borrow money from year
to year. (Hear, hear.) But it was quite true that the
great source of expense was, after all, the military establish-
ments ; and he was glad to hear what had fallen from the
right hon. gentleman (Sir G. Lewis). It was right that the
moral and Christian people of this country should know
that, with all our civilisation, all our boasting, all our mis-
sionaries, and all our talk about the Bible—it was right that
the people should know that there was every year wrung
from the toiling millions of this country and of
India no less a sum than 35 millions sterling for
purely military purposes. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord
told them that we had 91;000 European soldiers in India ;
in addition to a native force of 243,000, making thus an army
of 334,000 men. (Hear, hear.) Every historian of India
and every Englishman who had resided in India, was agreed
that in the whole world there was no people more industri-
ous, mere docile, or more submissive to authority, by nature
and habit, than the people of British India. Governedwith
ordinary wisdom and justice they would require to keep them
in subjection, not an army of 334,000 men, but simply a well
organised police. (Hear, hear.) It would be better, and the
right hon. gentleman (Sir G. Lewis) was very near saying,
the same thing, it would be far better for the honour of
England, for the good of India and for the credit of humadi n,
nature, that we should leave Ina altogether if we could
not maintain our power without this immense cost, and if
these great calamities were to look us in the face from year
to year, as they would do unless some great change were
made. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord could. not save enough
from the civil salaries to make his finances balance ; but he
might save enough by diminishing the armed force. Such a
step must, however, be combined with other changes, or it
would meet with no complete success. In the first place,
everybody who had written about India said there was no
country in the world in which there was such a combination
of soil and climate, of people and industry, and even of
water, if they would but garner it up at the proper se.ison:—
every one admitted that there was no country where there
were the elements of such abundance and prosperity than
were to be found in British India. (Hear, hear.) • Every-
thing that nature could give she had bestowed with no
scanty hand ; but the whole system of the. Government had
been to thwart the benevolence and the goodness of God to
His creatures. At the present time the industries of India
were almost nothing ; and all the public works put toge-
ther. did not approach what had had been done in any mo-
derate sized English county. The noble lord knew that with
an insecure ownership of land the industry of every country
was garotted and could not properly extend itself. He knew
also that there were districts in which from want of roads
it was utterly impossible for the natives to send their pro-
duce down to the coast ; and he knew, further, that there
were districts in which any amount he might choose to lay
rot in constructing works to store water in the rainy sea-
yerai,rsand to disperse it over the soil in the dry, would in two
failing
le repaid twentyfold. and would continue to be a never
Bbeofalth. Was the house willing that the
should
which had always Government, like some old lumbering waggon,
dragged along its old ruts with the same slowness
peril to all that were
8 characterised its pace, and with the same
ltehnirgdthrehiadsinvgiewofsthonetbhilelp concerned( in itie, Last year, on the
(Mr. Bright) stated at great
in his
opinion, subject of government. He told the
solute simplicity;
that,
of
f a
the government at home should
decentralisation.
should be pursued
bliemoisen
ein India itself a process of He argued that
it would be obviously impossible for ary governor-general
to rule with success a populationwhich was variously
reckoned at from 150 to 200 millions ; and hq would now
read an extract from a letter written from the Native Asso-
ciation at Calcutta to that
.at Bombay, with regard to this
very
committee can con-
ceive of no system of administration.
very question of centralisation :—" The co •
e prejudicial to tho
India, and more
pregnant with mischief to the • essential
• interests
improvement of the various races inhabiting Ind'
of govern_
Acentral
power, howevernient, than the deep-laid, wide-spread, and elaborate
centrali-
sation which now prevails.
and enlightened, cannot, of itself, embrace all the skil-
fuldetails
of the existence of so vast a nation—or rather of so many
nations—as those of India. Such vigilance exceeds the
powers of man. The tendency of centralisati?.n.as you are
aware, is unif)rrnity ; but the distinguisbingl
may thrive the
Indian communities is variety. A single nation
under centralisation, for then the rinciple
action has a wide field for play. But centralisation tor a
p ofthe unity of
number of nations, each at a different stage of progre!s/?lyi
with various degrees of intelligence, can have no principle
for its basis, for it is the practical confusion of all principles
imaginable." .He (Mr. Night) quite agreed with the
opinion expressed by. these Indian gentlemen—intelligent
and respectable gentlemen they were—for it was impossible
for any governor-general at Calcutta, whatever the power
they might choose to giveiim, to bring the Governmental
ey %Wawa. 014;471)94p otazi4 TarOt 4134131041

proposition which he (Mr. Bright) suggested was that they
should revert to the ancient plan, and establish something
like municipal presidencies in India. (Hear, hear.) There
was another point not less essential. They must seek to draw
into those councils and incorporate into the Government the
best and most intelligent natives. (Hear, hear.) The noble
lord told them the other night that to raise the revenue so as
to balance the expenditure would be extremely difficult. The
noble lord could not do like his colleague the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, in the country—he could not lay new taxes
Upon the people. He might easily commit some blunder
that would create a feeling of alarm amongst millions, and
a disbelief in the good faith of the government, even if it did
not actually stimulate revolt. But if there were in each
local council two or three, or four natives—he was not
pleading for a native majority—he believed that they might
suggest taxes that would fall upon the rich and spare the
vast body of the poor. He believed, too, that if the Indian
people were satisfied as to the justice of their rulers and the
necessity of the demand upon them, they would submit to
new imposts like any other people. (Hear, hear.) The
noble lord committed a fatal error last year, when in
obedience to his colleagues he consented to leave India in the
hands of those who had been the instruments of its ancient
misgovernment. The noble lord might not have had any votes
of want of confidence passed upon him by the council ; but
it was possible for men sitting at the same board to throw at
every step difficulties in his way that he might find himself
utterly unable to overcome. From the correspondence which
came*y every mail from India to an association with which
he had for many years been connected, he (Mr. Bright)
knew. perfectly well that not even the shadow of a change
had been brought about by the act of last year. (Hear,
hear.) For instance, he had some time ago asked a ques-
tion respecting Dhar. Dhar was a principality with a
revenue of £50,000 a-year, and was governed by a rajah 13
years of age. No charge had ever been made against the
rajah himself, but on the pretext that some one connected
with him had not been sufficiently zealous on behalf of the
British Government, his principality had been "annexed."
It had been the custom to sneer at the use of that word across
the Atlantic ; but it had become a perfectly English word,
so far, at least, as our conduct in India was concerned. It
was understood that the noble lord did not approve of the
annexation of Dhar, and that instructions had been sent out
to India with respect to it. But the annexation had not been
relinquished ; and it was said that no papers or explanations
on the subject had been sent home. In fact, it was clear that
the Indian government at home knew no more of the affair
than if no despatch had been sent out. The Government in
India did not care one straw for what the Government in
England might choose to do. (Cheers.) It would not be
polite in any society, and it would certainly not be suitable
in that house, to quote the language in which some of the
officials in India endeavoured to describe how very little they
cared for what had been done. Now, unless they were made
to care' they would soon drag this country into greater cala-
mities than ever. (Cheers.) It was the duty of the noble lord
to let those men know that if they neglected the orders sent
to them from this country they would be instantly recalled.
It was his dutyto impress upon our great pro-consuls in India
that there was a power which, though distant, could pull
them up and check them in their career of wrong. (Cheers.)
Look at the proclamation which the noble lord had sent out.
What could be more admirable than its tone and intention ?
Did anybody suppose that the noble lord was dishonest in
issuing that proclamation, or that the Queen did not mean
what she said when she put her name to that.new charter of
India? Of course nobody doubted either the noble lord or
the Queen. That proclamation was a reversal of all our
past policy ; but its execution was left in the hands of
those, who had been instruments of the old policy ; and un-
less there was a Minister in this country who would not
allow it to be set at nought, unless that Minister was well
backed up by his colleagues, and supported lay that house,
not five years would elapse before his proclamation would
be no better than waste paper. (Cheers.) With regard to
the question of the debt, he did not think that any person
who had lent his money to the Indian Government had a
shadow of a claim, either moral or legal, upon the taxes
of England. (Hear, hear.) He knew his security ;he
had bargained for his rate of interest ; and that rate had
been double what he would have received if he had lent his
money to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Hear,
hear.) At the same time he (Mr. Bright) was bound to say,
that there was no real justice in the people of England
fixing this burden upon the inhabitants of India. (Hear,
hear.) Did anybody mean to say, for instance, that it
was right to tax the people of India for the debt incurred
in the Affghan war, which had beenundertaken in further-
ance of a policy adopted by the cabinet at home ? (Hear,
hear.) So, with regard to the late revolt, which he (Mr.
Bright) ventured to say would cost not less than forty
millions sterling, and which he was surprised to hear the
right hon. baronet (Sir G. C. Lewis) say was an unjustifiable
one. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord the member for the City
(Lord J. Russell) bad just published a work in which he ex-
pressed a strong opinion as to the justifiableness of the
American. War of Independence ; and when he recollected
how the right hon. baronet had last year pointed out the
atrocities of the Indian Government, he thought it was
rather inconsistent in him now to say that there had been
neither cause nor excuse for the conduct of the people of
India during the last two years. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr.
Bright) did not want to enter into any defence of that con-
duct; but he wished to see the Government of India based
upon a justice which the people of that country themselves
could feel and see, and which would secure our power without
the necessity of keeping up an army of 334,000 men.
(Cheers.) In the meantime, he thought that £40,000,000
would be a grievous burden to place upon the taxes of a
people, seeing that the revolt had been caused by our mis-
management. (No, no.) An hon. gentleman said " No."
Well, he (Mr. Bright) would not dispute the point with
him ; but if the hon. gentleman was neither an Englishman
nor a native of India, but was writing a history of our
transactions during the last hundred or even twenty years,
he would come to the conclusion that it would be more just
that we should ourselves pay the expenses of the war we
had undertaken, in order to re-subjugate the country.
(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. Bright) was sorry to speak so long
in derogation of his countrymen, but he was convinced
that the course we had pursued had only led to the
logical and inevitable consequences ; and that unless some-
body undertook to reverse the system which had hitherto
been followed, we might in ten years have another great
revolt, the results of which might be much more disas-
trous than anything that happened within the last two
years. (Hear, hear.) If the Government could only see
how much more we might profit by a just and wise policy
he might hope that the principle of pure selfishness would
lead them to reverse the helm. He knew how greatly the
trade of Manchester had lately been increased by the de-
mand which had sprung up for cotton goods for India. No
doubt much of that demand arose from the mode in which
the local government was squandering its money ; but he
also knew that we could not advance one mile into the
country without finding a customer waiting for us; and he
knew that the extension of our market amongst a popula-
tion of 150,000,000 to 200,000,090 could practically have no
limit for at least a long time to come, if we would only give
our subjects a chance by securing to them the free enjoy-
ment of that which they produced. (Hear, hear.) He
hoped the noble lord would believe that he (Mr. Bright)
had not made a single observation with a view of finding
fault with anything he had done since he came into office,
but he besought him to deliberate well upon the experience
he had gained during the twelve months lie had been in
his present position, and if he shohld come to the con-
clusion that changes were necessary, he hoped that
he would be prepared either as Minister for India or in
an unofficial situation, to declare to the house what his ex-
perience had taught him. He hoped he would declare that
the present arrangement was a provisional and experimental
one only, and that the Indian Government must be entirely
reconstructed, not only in England, but in India itself.

Mr. AYRTON thought it would be most unfortunate if
the speech of his hon. friend went forth to the public as an
authoritative declaration that the finances of India were at
all in a desperate condition. India had, in fact, been in a
position tenfold worse than her present one ; and the govern-
ment had in vain before now to offer not six, but 12 per
cent. There was no doubt much more confidence felt in,
India itself as to the strength and efficiency of its new ad-
ministration than appeared to exist in this country. For his
own part, he (Mr. Ayrton) expected to see a considerable
improvement in the revenue, and especially that arising from
the land tax. He believed that with a wise and judicious
administration, the increase would more than cover
the additional charges which had been thrown upon the
country by the recent disturbances. What was wanted was
that the tenure of land should be put upon a better
footing. Some of the officials in India had gone as far as to
say that the Government was the absolute owner of the
soil; and he hoped that the noble !lord would make it clear
that the Government did not in reality claim any more than
a mere right to levy taxes upon it. The land tax under the
Hindoos had been 30 per cent. The Mahommedans in-
creased that amount ; and in some cases we had raised it
still higher. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord would com-
mit a fatal error if he remitted the tax from any portion of
the land on the ground that it was waste land. It would
be a mere bonus to the neighbouring occupiers, and the re-
sult would be to arrest the growth of the land revenue.
With the formation of roads the unoccupied lands would
be taken up, and would yield additional revenue. The
noble lord spoke of the progress of India, but his facts did
not reach down to the present time. Ho said that 18 miles
of the Bombay railway had been constructed, and that
it paid 41 per cent. But there had since been opened
130 miles of that line, and the return was 6i- per
cent. Other 50 miles were now open, and the return was
equally great. When these means of communication were
complete, as they would be in about four years, he believed
that the returns of the land revenue would be equal to all
the claims upon them. In some cases the blunder had been
committed which was made with respect to the land tax at
home—the revenue had been capitalised ; but this was an
eperation which ought only to be performed when interest
was very low. Ho considered the proposition of Sir G.
Lewis, that there must be an entire separation between the
Indian and the Imperial treasuries wrong in principle and
impracticable. He recommended the Government of this
country to borrow money in this country at 31 per cent.,
and to lend it to India at a rate of interest that would
insure the repayment of the principal in 15 or 20 years. He
suggested various reforms in the details of the Indian Go-
vernment ; and gave a qualified assent to Mr. Bright's pro-
posal to admit the natives of India to a participation. in the
Government, and, with him, in order to keep down expen-
diture, recommended the reduction of the salaries of
civilians. _ _

-111T.—EWAILT differed from Mr. Bright in respect to the
financial prospects of India ; he expected from the improve-
ment of the means of intercommunication a great develop-
ment of the resources of that country.
Mr. WILSON had not only no apprehensions as to the
financial prospects of India, but he had the greatest hope of
them. Almost every increase of the Indian debt had arisen
from wars, and from expenditure upon public works which
would be reproductive. If the increased interest upon the
Indian debt were taken at £2,000,000, and the expenditure
upon public works at £1,000,000, and there should be a de-
ficiency of £3,000,000, he should not despair of seeingin the
next three or four years such an increase of the revenue
from existing sources as would enable the Government
of India to bear this charge. He disputed some of the
conclusions of Mr. Bright regarding the land revenue
of India : he condemned the policy of alienating in
perpetuity waste or jungle lands, as repeating the error
committed by Lord Cornwallis in his permanent settlement ;
and he justified the views of the late and former Govern-
ments in relation to railways in India and to certain branches
of the Indian revenue. He did not anticipate a falling off
in the revenue derived from either salt or opium. He dis-
approved an Imperial guarantee of an Indian loan; he be-
lieved that the future rule of England over India was more
secure than ever, and did not fear for the resources of the
latter country.
Lord STANLEY—One, and not the least, difficulty ex-
perienced in addressing the house after a discussion such as
has now taken place is that the debate has ranged over such
a variety of topics that it is next to impossible to enter with
nn
any practical advantage into the majority of the subjects
that have been discussed. Many suggestions have been
consideration.
value—whichOeho.
thrown out for the better government of India—some of
them fmuch
willriecheasiveto,
ladsusthtehay
that among
gentleman tieintu
the principal requirements of Indian administration was the
admission o. f a certain number of natives into the Leg,isla-
OTO Cimnelle 144ith quite agree that it is very iwPgra

taut to obtain as far as possible a genuine expression of
native opinion upon matters which are discussed in India;
but the objection to the plan of proceeding suggested is this
—that you cannot find any one, two, or three natives who
could be said in any sense to represent the native population
as a -whole. (Hear.) So again, the question of judicial
reform has been mooted. That is a question of the deepest
interest and the greatest importance. It is one that must
and does call for immediate and careful consideration ; and
I shall only repeat to-night, what I said on a former occa-
sion, that I am quite satisfied—the Government here is
quits satisfied—that any partial, fragmentary, and incom•
plete mode of dealing with this subject would introduce
greater complication than it would remove, and that when
the question comes to be dealt with it must be in a compre-
hensive manner. (Hear, hear.) As to the subject of Enam
at Madras, I may remind the house that this question will
be reported upon by the new Governor of Madras, and that
pending the receipt of his opinion no definite step that can
commit the Government will be taken. ' Now, the hon.
gentleman opposite, with much of whose speech I agree,
said it was a fatal error to sell uncultivated lands in India
to private persons ; that you would be merely making a
present to them of that which was the property of the State,
and that a 30 years' lease was sufficient for all practical
purposes. I apprehend that that is not found practically to
be the case; because both in India and the colonies the one
point on which all those agree who apply for lands of this
description* is that they desire to have them in perpetuity,
to pay a sum down and have done with the matter, and
then to hold them as lands are held in England. But when
I am told that a 30 years' lease, or a lease for a term of
years at a fixed rent, subject to be raised at the end of the
term, is sufficient for all practical purposes, I answer, there
is no analogy between the case put and that of a tenant
who holds lands in this country. With regard to the debt
of India, I have to say, in reply to the hon. member for
Birmingham, that I never thought of making light of the
Indian debt by comparing it with that of England. I never
made light of the injury which is inflicted on India by the
burden of that debt. I admit that it is a great drawback
and a great inconvenience ; but my argument was and is
this—that as England has enjoyed an immense amount of
material prosperity even under an enormous pressure of
debt, there is no reason why India should not be equally
prosperous under a similar state of things. But the hon.
member for Birmingham answered his own argument when
he admitted that he saw no limit to the development of the
future resources of India. That is what I fully believe,
and believing that the trade of India will increase to an in-
credible extent, I contend, and that is all I have contended,
that the amount of this permanent burden, even taking it
at £90,000,000—looking at what the resources of the coun-
try will be when properly and fully developed—will not be
greaten' than those resources will bear. (Hear.) Frequent
remarks have been made on the deficit in the Indian re-
venue. It is said there has been a continual deficit, and
that the debt has constantly increased. It is true the debt
has constantly increased, but I have not heard any contra-
diction of the statement I made on a former occasion—
namely, that although there has been a considerable in-
crease to the debt absolutely, yet previous to the mutiny
there had been no increase in the amount of the debt rela-
tively to the amount of the revenue on which it was charged
since the beginning of the century. A question largely
touched on to-night, and on a former occasion, iethat of
the salaries of the civil service. I have stated, and I state
again, that I do not mean to pledge myself that those sala-
ries are incapable of considerable reduction, but this I will
assert that the whole amount. of retrenchment which it
would be possible at any future time to make in that
branch of the public expenditure is absolutely insignifi-
cant when compared with the outlay which takes place
in the military department. (Hear, hear.) It is to that
enormous excess of military expenditure that the present
financial embarrassments are owing. With respect to the
civil service, a comparison had been made between the civil
services of Ceylon and Madras. I remember seeing that
comparison drawn up in considerable detail in a journal not
long ago. It is quite true that in point of climate there is not
much difference between the two places, but it is fair to re-
member that the whole administration of Madras is on a
scale incalculably larger than that of Ceylon. Again, we
are told that the clerical and military services do not receive
the same enormous rate of pay as the civil service. As re-
gards the clerical service, that was rather an unfortunate
assertion, because it so happens that the salaries paid to
chaplains in India do very greatly exceed the rate of salary
given for corresponding duty at home. It is reckoned that,
taking the whole of the ecclesiastical appointments in this
country, the average income of each clergyman would not
amount to £3OO a-year ; while, in the Indian service the
chaplains are paid £6OO a-year, with a prospect of rising to
£9OO a-year. Then again, with regard to the military pay
and allowances, it isimpossible to forget that they are much
higher in India than in any other part of the globe.
(Hear, hear.) I stated the other night the case .of those
employed on railways, and the high rate of salary paid to
them as a proof that the Government did not stand alone
in finding it necessary to give a high rate of remuneration
for services in India. We are told to-night that it is the
amount which the Government pays that fixes the rate of
remuneration ; but [ doubt whether that can be made out
to be the case. When the option is offered to a railway
engineer to serve or a line in India or to be employed in
England, he does not consider what is paid to civil or
military servants it India, but he considers whether it
would answer his purpose to submit to late various
inconveniences of a protracted residence abroad, and
whether increased pay would compensate him for other
disadvantages. I have fully admitted that in fixing future
salaries, it should be borne in mind that the inconvenience
attendant on a residence in India resultin6 from distance is
an inconvenience that every hour is tending to diminish—
(hear, hear)—but that inconvenience which arises from
climate is not so imaginary as some hon. gentlemen are
inclined to suppose, because it is well known that invalids
are sent to England, or if not to England, they are sent to
the hills. With regard to the salaries of the civil service,
I have a report drawn up and printed in India, occupyir g
five considerable folio volumes. (Hear, and a laugh.) I
do not pretend to have mastered its contents, but the general
result is that an increase rather than a diminution of the
total expense is recommended. It is fair, however, to ex-
plain that that increase is produced by the recommendation
that an increased amount of European labour and superin-
tendence should be had recourse to. There are some pro-
posals for reductions in existing offices and also for the
creation. of new departments or the extension of existing
departments. It may be possible to separate one from the
other, and to adopt, I hope, some of the proposals for re-
duction without adopting those for increased expenditure
in other respects. (Hear, hear.) The Government will
be ready to take this subject into consideration, but I must
repeat that if the total amount of retrenchment were larger
than I believe it will be, still a very small saving would be
available for existing purposes, because you cannot cut down
the salaries of the present possessors of office. Therefore it
would be only misleading the house if we were to hold out
the prospect of a considerable reduction in this matter.
It is to the reduction of the military expenditure almost
exclusivelythat we umstlook—(hear, hear)—and I agree that
when India is restored to its normal state, there will no
longer be any need for so large a native army as has
hitherto been maintained. (Hear, hear.) The house will
' have an opportunity very shortly of seeing a good deal of
evidence taken on this subject here and in India, but until
the report of the commission to inquire respecting the re-
organisation of the Indian army, and the evidence taken
by that commission were received it would be desirable to
avoid any discussion on this subject. With respect to the
Imperial guarantee, I have been told that the act of last
year makes no difference in that respect, and in that state-
ment I fully concur. I fully allow that the Indian
creditor has no claim whatever except on the Indian re-
venue—(hear, hear)—nor have I ever held language to a
different effect. What I have stated; and what Ido not
hesitate to state again, is, that the Indian creditors have
the first charge on the Indian revenue. If that revenue,
after paying the interest of the debt, were to be found not
to suffice for carrying on the civil and military adminis-
tration, then the question would arise as to who would be
responsible. (Hear, hear.) It is in that way that the
question of responsibility will turn up. With respect to
the proposal of the hon. member opposite (Mr. Wilson), I
was not aware that there was any difference between the
act of last year and the present bill. The omission of the
word " only" is, I apprehend, not material, but I have no
objection to its insertion. We have been told that the
change made in the government of India is one of form,
and has produced no practical result to the country. I ven-
ture to doubt whether that is a correct statement. It is
quite true that before the change there was an Indian
Minister responsible to Parliament for the conduct of Indian
affairs, but the first and most practical difference which I
will venture to say the measure of last year has made is
this, that two departments, formerly in perpetual conflict, are
now working in harmony. There has been some, not very
considerable, saving of expense, and in the transaption of
business at home there has been experienced a very consi-
derable saving of time. In India it is considered that that
delay in forwarding answers to questions sent home, which
was so much complained of before, is very materially
diminished since the Act of last year; and when it is as-
serted that no alteration has been made, and that every-
thing remains as it was, it will be worth while to recollect
that different parties, from precisely opposite motives, hold
the same language. Those who had maintained that no
improvement in the government of India' was required are
naturally unwilling to admit that a great improvement has
taken place ; and those who believed that much more ex-
tensive reforms were needed, likewise hold the same lan-
guage, and deny that anything has been effected worth
mentioning. As to the influence which the change would
have on the government of India, I apprehend that it is
quite possible that expectations may have been formed on
that point which it was impossible to satisfy. Practically
the government in India is carried on as it was before. In-
structions are sent from home, but a large amount of dis-
cretion is necessarily vested in those who administer the
affairs of that country on the spot—a discretion which is
as large as the responsibility devolving upon them is
heavy. We hear it said sometimes that the administra-
tion of Indian affairs is falling into the old routine, and
that it is guided by the advice of those who are called " Old
Indians.', I believe that all persons, whether possessed of
Indian experience or not, have been led in many respects
greatly to modify their ideas upon Indian affairs by the
events of the last two years. (Hear.) No doubt those who
have been connected with the civil or military services in
India form peculiar notions, just as members of those ser-
vices at home look at matters connected with themselves in
a peculiar and professional light ; but I do not admit that
they alone guide us. I believe that in India, as in Eng-
land, the best security for a proper Indian administration
is a due admixture of those who bring Indian ideas and ex-
perience to bear upon Indian subjects and of these who
bring English ideas to bear upon the same subject. (Hear.
hear.) lam far from admitting that it would be well, whe-
ther in London or Calcutta, to entrust the Indian adminis-
tration exclusively to those who take an Indian view of such
matters, but neither can I consent to hold, what is now a
common doctrine in some quarters, that Indian experience
is a disqualification—(hear, hear) —that the best way of
administering the complicated affairs of a great empire is to
come to their consideration without any previous knowledge.
(Hear, hear.) I have always felt, and I repeat it now, that
there haveen in our system of Indian administration
ninny abuses that required weeding out—that there were
many reforms necessary—but I cannot forget that that ad-
ministration as a whole has produced some of the ablest
men and called forth some of the finest qualities which have
been exhibited in our history. I cannot avoid protesting
against a doctrine that has become somewhat common, that
our administration of Indian affairs has been nothing but a
blunder and fault. (Hear, hear.)
Sir E. PERRY observed that all the best authorities
now agreed that, under present circumstances and present
prospects, the finances of India presented an alarming as-
pect. Was India able to bear the burdens cast upon her ?
If not, and if this country would be ultimately responsible,
it would be wiser and more economical to raise the money
at once upon the credit of England.
Mr. C. BRUCE said, upon the question of the liability
of this country for the Indian debt he coneurred.in the
9144911exprogied by the late Sir Robert Peel ira, 18423 tUats