The Sun.
London, England, 1868-06-23 00:00:00

has now gone into committee. Lord W. HAY took

some exceptions to the proposed amendments, or
rather to the limits placed to them, for he considered
that they did not go far enough. lie believed that
other changes were essential, and more especially a
change which should take away from the Council
the power of vetoing by the Secretary of State in
all matters connected with Indian revenue. That
is to say, while the Secretary of State is supreme on
many points of importance, as far as the expenditure
goes he is in the hands of the Council, who, through
him, rule India. As Lard W. HAY put it, " The
Secretary of State has power to give away Mysore,
a district as large as Scotland, without any one to
overrule him ; but in the matter of an expenditure
of a few thousand pounds he is entirely in the hands
of his Council." A natural consequence of this,
according to the noble lord, is that the Secretary
of State is chosen more with regard to his
power of managing the Council than to his
capability of governing India. He affirmed, too,
that another mischievous effect of the system is to
weaken the hands of the Governor-General by un-
necessary interference, which was rendered more
frequent by the increased facilities of communica-
tion between England and India. Lord MACAULAY
and other authorities, who had spent much time in
the country, were of opinion that India should be
governed in India. Lord W. HAY, after entering
into more detailed arguments on behalf of his pro-
posal, concluded by expressing his desire to see the
Council of India become a purely consultative
body, and the power of the Governor-General in
India considerably strengthened.
The noble lord's views were not, how-
ever, participated in by the majority of
the House. Mr. MILL and Colonel SYKES, both of
whom are well versed in Indian affairs, were strongly
opposed to the change so ardently desired by Lord
W. HAY. Mr. MILL, while admitting that there
was a tendency to unnecessary interference with
the Indian Executive, said very justly that after all
we must exercise a controlling power, and he did
not see that it could be more advantageously vested
in the Secretary of State alone than in the Secretary
of State and his Council jointly. It is more in
accordance with the spirit of English legislation
that wisdom should be sought in the multitude of
councillors than in the decision, however excellent,
, of one man. No doubt the Indian Government
must be on many questions the most com-

petent to judge, and unnecessary interference

from a distance is always to be deprecated ; but at
the same time it is better to run the risk of ill-
,`imed meddling occasionally than to abandon that
supetvision which this country is called upon to
exercise over her Eastern dominions. India and

England, it may be said, are so far apart that it
is difficult for the statesmen and politicians of the
one to enter into the views and requirements of
the other ; but while this absence of sympathy and
compr►'hension is often a drawback, there is another
side to the question. Anglo Indians, we know,
are apt to fall into a routine existence, to yield
to the lethargic influences of the climate,
and the enervating customs of an ancient
despotism. The paople whom they are sent
to govern as free, dependent, an I respon-
sible agents, have never been accustomed
to civil and political liberty, to religious equality,
or to the free current of English thought and
speech. They are used to be trampled on, to be I
oppressed and restrained, and are so much in the
hibit of meeting force with fraud, and oppression
with cunning, that it is difficult to deal with them
on the plain ground of straightforward honesty.
Again, they have never been accustomed to vigorous
, reforms, to rapid progress, to great and continuous