On this page
-
Text (1)
-
JSfo. 423, Mat 1, 1858.] THE LEADE B. 41...
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Isfonday, April 26th. Government Op Indi...
eighty , all of whom would occupy the highest posit ion with respect to their competency . He might be told that his proposition involved the representation of class interest . ; but he would ask the House if the legislation there was not . founded entirely upon class representation . 'ihe premises upon which the objections were founded were false . Viewed fairly , the Government measure would secure for the council that most , desirable constitution ¦ which , would combine local experience and knowledge ¦ with English opinion . If they had a merely Englisb . element ,, they might perhaps bo endangering , reckless , and speculative legislation . " Unless an efficient council ¦ were appointed , equal in knowledge and experience to the . present Court of Directors , it would be better not to renounce the existing machinery ; for , if the suggestions of the " simplicity -school" were adopted , the fate of our Indian empire would be sealed ,, and deservedly so .
Lord Palmekstox observed that any one who entered the House during Mr . Disraeli ' s speech without being aware of the question before it , would have concluded that he was moving , the second reading of the Indian Bill No . 2 . " That measure , upon which he ha < l pronounced so unbounded a funeral panegyric , had been murdered by himself . If he thought so well of the merits of the bill ,-why did he kill it ? " His Lordship then threw the House into roars of laughter by comparing the speech of Mr . Disraeli to an . Irish " wake , " and by other personal observations on the right-hon . gentleman . " He had asked 'What could be so absurd '
— -and . lie spoke from , experience— - ' what could be so absurd as the constitution of the British Cabiuet ? ' ( Hear , hear , aiul loml laughter . } "What could be so absurd as putting a man into the Cabinet because lie was acquainted with commerce' ? or what could be so absurd as putting a man in the Cabinet because he could luakoa ^ good speech ? " ( The noble Lord here pointed towards the Chancellor of the Exchequer , and the action was received with loud and continued laughter . ) " But , if the right hon . gentleman were not trammelled by office — -if lrisn . ioivth . were unclosed , and he were on the other side of the House—then he could tell them how absurd it was . "
When two men met each other in the street , one would say to the'other , " What are you laughing at ? " and the other would say , " WI 13 ' , what are you laughing at ? " and both would then exclaim , " Why , at the India Bill , to be sure . " Mr . Disraeli had said that both the bills had the defect of simplicity , which he considered a political sin . His argument in favour of tho elective principle was . founded upon a fallacious analogy . "It is a fundamental principle of the English Constitution , that no part of the Executive shall hold its appointment from any otlier right than'the Crown . Then they should not let the council be composed of any elective bodies , to oppose and thwart tlie Minister vrlio was to be held responsible by that House . If the councillors were better
when elected than when nominated by the Crown , why not elect them all ? The right lion , gentleman would give tlie election of one of the council to the freemen of Liverpool ; and he said ,. ' Did they not ' elect Ml * . Canning , and was he not made President of the Board of Control ? ' Mr . Canning was elected by the Crown , not because he was elected by the freemen of Liverpool , nor because ; he was a great orator , but because he was a great statesman , and was iitted for that most important position . lie might sny the same of Mr . lluskisson . Mr . Huskisson was a great man , and it was because oi his great knowledge of matters of trade , that ho . was elevated to the high position lie afterwards held . He
( Lord Palmerston ) did not profess to have complete knowledge of Indian business . IIo must liavc some assistance , and , if the Council all took part in it , it would be a case of ' too many cooks . ' It seemed to him that eighteen were too many ; and though , generally , 'in tlie multitude of councillors there is wisdom , ' there was , in this case , great danger in it . " The council ought to be convinced that tliey should bo a council of advisers , and not a . council of rulers—that they wcro not to consider themselves a board of control appointed to overrule the Sue rotary of State . In that case , the responsibility of tlie Exccutivo would cease , nud there would be , in fact , a double Government .
Mr . Gladstokk disagreed with the proposed discussion of the question by resolutions , and protested * against the House alHrmiug the present motion . Mr . Disraeli had certainly not removed the scruples he had folt against tha Government measure . Indeed , he could not sec niiv elements of a good scheme . Then ; would always bo great difliculty in ono people attempting to govern another people separated , not only by distance , but by blood and by institutions . " The question , " said Mr . hub-tone , " winch wo are bound to ask ourselves before all others with nil others , and above nil others , is—vlint pro-, tection can wo provide by law not only for tho maintenance of
those interests , but likewise for respect , caro , and toleration towards the . feelings of the people of Tudia ? I will say this of tlie Court , of Directors , that it luis practic-illy been a body protective ) of the people of India . ( . Neat ' . ) I am not friendly to its maintenance , far leas am 1 friendly to that state of severance whicli exists at present between the , Executive and the independent element of the Indian Government ; but this 1 do say , that wo ought not . to assent to any plan which makes less efficient provision for the protection of Indian interests nnd Indian l ' ucUnga . And I look in vain to the plan of | ier Majosly'n Government , and still more in vain , 1 tlnuls , to tho plan of the noble Viscount , the member for
Tiverton , for any protective power that can be compared in point of efficacy- to the Court of Directors . ( JJ . ear . ~ ) But there is another topic altogether new , so far as this discixssiou is concerned , which nevertheless / weighs upon my mind almost oppressively ¦ with , regard to legislating on this question . The first great point to > which wo have to look is to provide protection for the- people of India , against the ignorance , indiscretion , and errors either of the Executive , or of Parliament , or of the . Government of this country . But , besides that , there is a . second question which I am afraid has hardly been named since these debates began . I know not what the feeling of others may be in regard to it , but I myself entertain so strong-an opinion upon , it that I am bound
to notice it . It appears- to me that there has grown up —partly from circumstances beyond our control , and partly by our own legislation—a system fraught with danger , not only to India , but also to the privileges of Parliament , and even to liberty as well as the public interest at home , by the undue , and , had not the Chancellor of the Exchequer frightened me , I ^ vould have said the unconstitutional , exercise of power by the Executive Government through the means of the Indian army and treasury . (_ Heai ; , hear . ' ) I cannot look back upon the history of wars , more than one , whicli have
been waged in India during the last twenty years with ? - out saying , that the power lodged in the . hands of tho Queen ' s advisers , as it has been exercised in these instances , has been wholly at variance with the interests of the country and with the rights and privileges of the House of Commons . " { Hear , hear . } Mr . Gladstone instanced the Persian war in support of tliis opinion , and added that what he wanted was to have a limitation of power placed on the Queen ' s advisers . He wanted a limitation in the Crown with respect to the use of the Indian treasure and the Indian arrriv . He found no
such principle in the Chancellor of the Exchequer ' s bill ; and he concluded by quoting the opiuion of the riglit hon . gentlemen , who had said that , since he had been , in power , every day's experience convinced him that there do not exist in this country , ¦ men of that maturity of knowledge which , is requisite to deal with , difficulties of such a magnitude . Colonel-Syk . es agreed with , the obsei * vaiions of Mr . Gladstone , and affirmed that the East India Company had not broken down . —Sir ' -Harry Vehney also defended the Company . —Sir . Gregory considered that the House had not sufficient information to legislate
upon the subject , and moved , as an amendment , a resolution , " That at this moment it was not expedient to pass any resolutions for the future . go-verument of India . "—This amendment yvas seconded Ly M ' r . William Ewa-rt . —Lord Joiix Russell thought that notice ought to have been given of the amendment , since its object was to reverse a previous decision of the House . He should be sorry if the House did reverse its decision , and , in his opinion , the best mode of constituting a council would be to make the Crown—witli certain restrictions and qualifications—responsible fox the nomination of the members . —M ' r . Ross Donkelly
Masgies said he felt it to be his duty to oppose any measure . which would do away with the influence of the East India House . Still , he preferred the council proposed by Mr . Disraeli to that proposed by Lord Palmerston . In the name of common sense , if they bad a council at all , let it he a reality , and not a sham . Let it not be dictated to by a Secretary of State , but let it have a power of appeal to that House . —Mr . Baillie concurred in the . desire of the House to proceed by resolution rather than by bill . — Sir GiiOUOK Gkey said that in the present position of the question , the Government bill being -withdrawn , he must vote for the motion , although he differed from the scheme proposed in the resolutions . The amendment appeared to negative an } ' legislation upon the subject at all this session . —Mr . Gkhgory admitted that this
was the object of his amendment . —Mr . Vau'OI . e said lie had supported the amendment moved liy Mr . Baring when Lord Palmerston obtained leave to introduce his bill ; but the House , having thereby nffirimcd by a large majority that it was expedient to legislate for the government of India , it would , by adopting Mr . Gregory ' s motion , aflirin a resolution in April diametrically opposed to one in February . This should not bo done without < lue notice . —Sir Fkanc ' . s Baking likewise thought it advisable that there should bo somd notice . —Lord Go-UKiticii spoke in opposition to the amendment . —Mr . IIoksman thought that the House ought not to legislate on the subject of Indian government without previous Inquiry ; and Unit might be tho result of the ensuing Friday ' s discussion .
Mr . Vkunon Smith did not beliuve thai tho opinions ' of the Liberal party or of tho country lmd altered with rcRiird to the licooMsity of legislation ; but , even if so , the proposal of Mr : Horsnutn would be tliw most inconvenient fur that House to adopt , wince , idler ninrnihig the expediency of t ran . slurring tho government of India to the Cmwn , tbo 11 ou . no would then stop . short ,, and nothing would really b « done for tho present . Ho did not believe the people of India care anything about the Company , and the whole evil of tho form of government now is Mint , it is curried on in tho name of tho Court of Directors and the . Hoard of Control . ^ V'ith regard to tho constitution of tho council , ho admitted that tho elective principle is n very proper one ., if practicable ; but he had considered the subject whilo in oflice , and had
found it impracticable . The only fair principle of . representation would be the representation ; of the . natives- ; but such a representation that House dared not ventura on . Therefore the only principle left to be adopted wasthe principle of domination ; and that had beea properly introduced into the bill of the late Government . That bill was also su perior to its successor in doing away -with the Secret Committee . lie was opposed to the tendency of the resolutions ; but would support them rather than an amendment which would postpone all legislation on the subject for the session . -
Jlr . Pktek O'Brien strenuously protested against the assertion of Mr . Horsman , that the Liberal party generally had changed their opinion with regard to the necessit } - of immediate legislation , as that opinion ¦ was assented by a majority of 145 last February . —Mr ; "VVmTESiDE said there was a great distinction between the representative principle and the elective principle , and Mr . Vernon Smith had completely mistaken the tenor of the bill No . 2 , when he said , it embodied the representative principle in the constitution of the council ; It was the elective principle only which was there embodied . —Sir Edward Colkbrooke recommended the withdrawal of . the amendment .: —Mr . Crosslet said they
had already been told that there could be no legislation on church rates that session ; and also that there wottld be-no legislation on reform . Now they were further told that there could be no satisfactory legislation for India * , and he demanded to know what they really meant to d » , for , if they suffered the session to pass without legislating in some way for India , that House would be alaughing-stock for the whole country . —Mr . GKEGomr , irt deference to the obvious feeling of the House , withdrew his ainendinent , reserving to himself the right of again bringing it forward on a future occasion . The motion , was then unanimously agreed to . The report of the Committee of Supply was brought up and agreed to .
THE IIASLAR GCSBOAT SLIP . On the report of the committee of Ways and Means being brought up , Mr . Bestixck . put a question as to ¦ whether the method of hauling up gunboats attheHaslar Slip had been devised by the civil Lords of the late Board of Admiralty , or whether . 'it . was done with , tlie concurrence of naval officers . —Sir Charles Wood said tlie question vas neither a new one nor a naval one . It had long been under consideration , and he , with every member of the Board of Admiralty , thought it a verygood plan to protect the gunboats from the weather . — Sir Charles Napier thought that the boats were not hauled up in a proper place . —Mr . CoRivx said there was no intention upon the part of the Admiralty of applying any portion of tlie 5000 ^ . voted on the previous Friday night for the Haslar Slip in any other way than for the launchijig of the ships .- —The report was then agreed to .
MILITARY CADETSHIP & . On the orderfor going into Committee of Supply ,. Mr . Mok 6 Ell moved an address praying her Majesty that no alteration may be made in the existing arrangements wiiich regulate the admission to cadetships in the Royal Artillery and Royal Engineers .- —Mr . Lkpkov , Sir Eredetmck Smith , and Sir William Williams spoke against ¦ any alteration . —General Pkel , premising that he had made no alteration in the system , and that the principle of competitive examination would continue , dissuaded the House from adopting the motion , although lie suggested'an inquiry as to the best method of educating the scientific braaches of the army—The motion was supported by Mr . IJuxtos and Mr . Dkasy / . —Mr . Sidwisy Hbkuerx observed that , although the nomination
system was gone , that of competition had been put back . He deprecated any further inquiry as superfluous . —Tho discussion was continued by Mr . II . G . Vansmtajix ( -who supported tlie motion ) , Mr . Pisxkr C 13 hiun , and Lord A . Vank Tbmi * bsx ( both of whom objected to tho present system ) . —Mr . Kokbuck . said that the motion , in its present form , would prevent any improvement , and that the House ought to know what is the actual state of things . —Mr . MoNSKr . L made a verbal alteration in his motion , to meet Mr . lloebuck ' s objection ; Mr . "Wal-1 'oiah recommended that the matter should be left to the Secretary for War and Captain "Vivian urged the , necessity of immediately settling the question . —The House tlien divided , when tho motion of M _ r . Monskljl was virtually carried by 217 to 177 . icxci . sk duties nir / r ,. On the order for tho second reuding of tins bill , Mr . Dkasy pleaded for the removal of certain loeal burdens in Ireland to tin ; Imperial Exchequer as it sotoff to this tux . —Mr . Pktkh O'Hiura moved to defer the second loading for six : month * , and this amendment was seconded by Mr . J ! hmoni > b . —The Svomcjitok-Gk-Ni-JKAL , oksurved that the grounds upon whicli the increase of the dnty upon Irish spirits had hithorto been resisted had been practically allow n to be illusory . — Objections to the equalization of thu Spirit Duties wore olfered by Mr . Guooan , Mr . M'Cann , Mr . Cociah , Mr . Kmiv , Mr . M'livoY , and Mr . M'Caktiiy ; and sonic of those objections wero miHwcrcd by Lord Naas . —Upon a division , tho second reading wnw curried by 227 to HC > . Tho ClIKI , HKA Ifo . Sl-l'L ' . VL Jill . I ., Ull < l till ! IOxOIIIMjI / KU Ifit , i-s liiiiij wero rortpootivcly read a third thno , and i masod . l . ONUON COIU'OKATJON 3 ULL . Mj-. BAiMina moved , tlmtleaviv bix tdvou for tUa ; CV ) rp . o-
Jsfo. 423, Mat 1, 1858.] The Leade B. 41...
JSfo . 423 , Mat 1 , 1858 . ] THE LEADE B . 411
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), May 1, 1858, page 411, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/ldr_01051858/page/3/
-