ers.

or native, and one-half of whom at least shall not be office-holdThe Indian debt, the customs of the country, the army of India, and other matters, into the details of which it is not necessary that I should enter, belong to a class of subjects which the local Legislatures will be prohibited from entering upon without the sanction of the GovernorGeneral. I propose that Councils rather differently constituted should be established at Bengal; and, if the Governor-General thinks right—as he obviously does from his despatches-that he shall be empowered hereafter but not without the sanction of the Secretary of State - to create a Council for the new provinces of the Punjaub, or any other part of India which he may think desirable. . . . It is quite clear that the public works will be better dealt with by local bodies than by a central authority; but as each district might be disposed to repudiate liability to maintain its share of the army, on the ground that it would not be first exposed to danger, and as it is highly desirable that the distribution of troops should be in the hands of the central authority, I think that among others is a subject which should be left to the general Council. The Bill also gives power to the GovernorGeneral, in cases of emergency, to pass an ordinance having the force of law for a limited period. Questions might arise about the Arms Act, or the press, as to which it would be very injudicious that delay should occur, and we, therefore, propose to empower the Governor-General, on his own authority, to pass an ordinance having the force of

law, to continué for a period of six months, unless disallowed by an Act of the Legislature. The main provisions of the Bill have been carefully considered by the members of the Indian Council, men drawn from every part o India, of every profession, and with the most varied experience. The measure has been drawn with their entire concurrence, and it has the approval of most of the persons with whom I have conversed on the subject. All I can say is, that every precaution has been taken in the framing of the Bill to make it effectual for the accomplishment of the object which it is designed to achieve. Every one has been consulted whose opinion I thought ought to be taken. It has been carefully considered by the Government in India and the Government at Home. I venture, therefore, to submit it to the House in the hope that, with such amendments as may be made in it in its progress through Parlia ment, it may tend to the happiness of India, and the prosperity of the Queen's subjects in that portion of Her Majesty's dominions."

After a few words from Mr. H. Seymour, Col. Sykes, and Mr. V. Ewart, leave was given to bring in the Bill.

The next measure proposed, was one for establishing high Courts of Judicature in India. The effect of the Bill, as explained by the Minister, was the consolidation, or fusion, of the Supreme Courts, now consisting of judges supplied from the English Bar, with the Sudder Courts, which were Courts of Appeal from the Courts in the provinces. Sir C. Wood proposed that the new

Courts should consist of a certain proportion of English bar, risters, a certain number of civil servants, and that native judges should be admissible as members. The Governor-General would be authorized to send English judges of the Supreme Court on circuit through the provinces.

Leave was given to bring in this Bill. The third Bill, Sir C. Wood said, was designed to confirm and legalize certain appointments in India, which had been made contrary to law, and to amend the law concerning the Civil Service there, by providing that, with certain exceptions, such appointments might be made, notwithstanding the restrictions of the old law. He enumerated a variety of cases in which the letter of the law had been violated by the appointment of uncovenanted servants to offices which could be legally filled only by covenanted servants. These appointments, he observed, did not call for censure, but rather merited approbation; and he read the opinions of a series of Governors of India, who had strongly urged the admission of natives to offices of higher responsibility, and a larger employment of uncovenanted agency in India. This Bill, therefore, after confirming the appointments already made, would remove the practical bar which prevented the admission of the uncovenanted service to certain offices, by authorizing, under special circumstances, and with restrictions and precautions, the employment of uncovenanted servants in the high offices now confined by law to covenanted offices. His reasons, he added, had met with the general concurrence of the Council. This

Bill underwent some discussion on its introduction. Mr. Whiteside and Mr. Ayrton forcibly urged the claims of the covenanted Civil Service.

Lord Stanley said, as to the first part of the Bill, the House, he thought, had hardly any choice. The only question was, whether they should maintain the existing exclusive right of the Civil Service. He had come to the conclusion that this was impossible. There were two dangers incident to the proposed change; one, that of diminishing the value of the Civil Service appointments; the other, the opportunity it would afford to the authorities in India to introduce into the service their own private connections. He believed that the restrictions and safeguards would obviate the last, and that compensations would be found to countervail the former risk.

Mr. H. Seymour said, that our empire in the East had increased without a corresponding increase in the number of civil servants. He believed that in each of the three Presidencies, the Government had been in great straits at times for legally-qualified persons to fill certain appointments when they became vacant. Some measure like that proposed was necessary to keep up the efficiency of the public service in India. There was always a large deficiency of public servants in India, and there was 'always a large number of uncovenanted servants. Mr. Ayrton had called those adventurers who went out to India to fill the situations which were vacant there, but surely they were perfectly justified in offering their services.

The hardship was, that this large number of civil servants, who had shown themselves equal in merit to the covenanted service, were debarred from filling the high offices to which their merits entitled them. The Bill only enacted that a man who had distinguished himself in the public service should be eligible for the high appointments to which his merits gave him a claim to aspire. Mr. Seymour mentioned the case of a gentleman which had come under his notice, as an instance of the injustice of the present system.

After some further observations, leave was given to bring in this Bill also.

The three measures were proposed for a second reading on the 13th of June. On the East India Council Bill, Mr. Vansittart objected to the expenses which the creation of three separate Councils would occasion. He objected to the multiplication of local Boards or Councils.

Mr. Layard looked at the Bill with much favour. In two respects, he thought, it would do good to India; it would make our Government more respected, and give an opportunity for the employment of natives in the way he wished to see them employed. He approved local Councils, which, among other advantages, he said, would prepare the way for separate Governments; and he strongly urged the policy of allowing natives a voice in the legislation, instead of their being, as at present, ignored. If the proceedings of the Councils were published, care should be taken to secure the accuracy of the reports.

Mr. Ayrton objected to the

complex machinery of the Bill, and recommended Sir C. Wood to withdraw it, and to introduce another more simple in its character. Sir J. Elphinstone also criticized the measure in an unfavourable spirit. Sir E. Colebrooke approved of the general scope of the Bill, and Mr. H. D. Seymour warmly vindicated it against the hostile criticisms of preceding speeches. Sir Charles Wood expressed his satisfaction at the reception the Bill had met with, and replied to some of the objections. The Bill was then read a second time.

In Committee it underwent much discussion, and several amendments were proposed. One of the most important of these was moved by Mr. Layard, who proposed to insert words providing that not less than onefourth of the additional Members of Council should be natives of India.

Sir C. Wood repeated that he had said on introducing the Bill that he believed it to be essential that the natives of India should be more largely admitted into the Government, but as there was at present no legal distinction between one class and another of Her Majesty's subjects in India, he believed it was inexpedient to draw any, by mentioning a particular class in the Bill, that said nothing either as to exclusion or non-exclusion.

Mr. Bright agreed that it was not desirable to define the proportion of power to be given to either race. He should be quite satisfied if the Secretary of State for India would intimate his opinion to the Government there as to the employment of natives. Sir Charles Wood assented to

this proposal, and Lord Stanley recommended that the amendment should be withdrawn, to which Mr. Layard accceded.

Considerable debate took place as to whether the term of office of the non-official members should be one year, as proposed by the Bill, or a longer period. Mr. Vansittart moved that the term should be five years.

Mr. Bright said that every element of independence appeared to be carefully excluded from the Council. The clause, he believed, would impair the independence and efficiency of non-official members, while it would render it difficult to get good men for the situation, and still more to retain them. He thought, however, that five years would be somewhat too long a term of office, and that it would be better to fix it at three years. He suggested that Mr. Vansittart should alter amendment accordingly.

his

Lord Stanley said that three things were required in a member of any legislative body-independence, experience, and zeal and interest in the public service. Under this clause none of these qualifications would be obtained. Who would take a seat in that House for only twelve months? If they wanted Europeans, men of wealth and position, to give up their occupations and devote themselves to the transaction of public business, they must hold out to them some better prospect than that of a year's seat in this Council, with the chance of the almost ignominy of a removal at the end of that period. It was also worth considering whether the Government might not find it more difficult to get rid of a member of Council appointed for

this short period, than they would do if the appointment was extended. If the members were appointed for only one year, it would probably become the practice to re-appoint them, while if they sat for five, four, or three years, it would be understood that they had no claim to be appointed again.

Sir C. Wood said that this clause had been founded upon an opinion expressed by Lord Canning, that this Council ought to be capable of being assembled for business in places other than Calcutta, and that to obtain that object the appointment of members, not ex officio members, should be for a period of not more than two years; perhaps, he added, that a single year would be better. The European members of the Council would, probably, be great merchants or great planters in the neighbourhood of Calcutta, such men as the chairman of the Chamber of Commerce at Calcutta, or of the Planters' Association. It could not be expected that persons so engaged in business would sacrifice any very large portion of their time to the public service, and he was therefore afraid that if these appointments were made for so long a period as five or three years, many men who were well fitted to be members of this Council would be deterred from accepting seats in it.

After a lengthened discussion, the period of two years was agreed to. The same term was fixed, after much difference of opinion, for the duration in office of the additional members of the Bombay and Madras Councils. The remaining clauses being agreed to, the Bill passed through

The Bill came on for a second reading in the House of Lords on the 9th of July, upon the motion of Lord De Grey, who explained the objects and provisions of the measure, and the necessity which existed for its adoption.

Lord Ellenborough, declining to enter into details, confined himself to the principle of the Bill, which he believed to be a great alteration in the mode of passing laws for India. Having pointed out the changes which he deemed necessary in the Legislative Council, he said that, although he approved many provisions in the Bill, he condemned the power which Parliament proposed to give the GovernorGeneral, of adding six or twelve members to the Executive Council, in order to form a Legislature, for between these two numbers lay the whole difference between the Governor-General being placed in a majority or a minority. There would be no advantage, he thought, in adding more than six members to the Council, but he himself should prefer leaving the Council as at present, but without the judicial element. A great omission, however, in the Bill was, that it did not give the Governor-General the power of dissolving the Council. The responsibility of the GovernorGeneral for the legislation of the minor Presidencies would be no whit diminished by the changes proposed, while his labours would be rather increased by the establishment of local Councils in those Presidencies. He feared this would lead to a laxity of practice which could not be

and would be especially attended with an increase of local taxation. The Government, he thought, had gone beyond the necessity of the case, and had provided for matters on which there was no need for legislation.

The Duke of Argyll said that Lord Ellenborough had greatly exaggerated the effect which the changes proposed in the Bill were likely to produce. He assured him there was little danger, even if the GovernorGeneral were sometimes placed in a minority in the increased Council, of there not being an ample majority of those who wished to see India governed in the spirit of the Queen's proclamation. The independent members, representing the commercial community, would always be in a small minority. He entirely agreed that it would be a most dangerous thing if there was any possibility of the Governor-General being overmatched by the class which represented the spirit of the commercial community. A clause in the Bill, however, gave the Governor-General power to overrule the decisions of the Council, and pass an ordinance which would have the force of law for six months.

Lord Lyveden, admitting the necessity of taking steps to improve the working of the Legislative Council, thought it would have been sufficient to pass a declaratory Act, defining the Council's powers, without altering its constitution. By this Bill, both representation and publicity would be done away with. There was nothing in the Bill to compel the GovernorGeneral to take representatives