HC Deb 08 June 1860 vol 159 cc186-8
SIR DE LACY EVANS

said, he wished to ask the Secretary of State for India, Whether the Bill respecting the Local Army in India had not better be introduced on some other than a Motion day, Tuesday, the 12th June? The hon. and gallant Member said that perhaps the despatch received last night from Lord Canning might have changed the mind of the right hon. Gentleman and the intention of the Government upon this subject of the local army in India. But if it had not, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would select some other day for the discussion of the question instead of Tuesday next. As to the despatch itself, he should like to have the whole document laid upon the table, rather than extracts from it. He had also to ask whether the Council of India had been consulted by the right hon. Gentleman upon the subject, and, if so, whether they had acquiesced in or dissented from the policy proposed to be adopted. He believed it was very questionable whether the law would admit of the proposed alterations being made without first having the opinion of the Council in India in favour of the propositions.

MR. W. EWART

said, he desired to express a hope that the services of the civilians on the Bengal establishment would be remembered by the Government, and that the services of the non-civilians, or those not in the pay of the Government, would not be forgotten.

MR. ADAM

thought every opportunity should be taken to point out to the Government the duty of honouring, not only the living, but the dead. He had no wish to decry the Civil Service of Bengal, but in the distribution of honours he thought sufficient consideration had not been shown to the minor Presidencies of Bombay and Madras. It was the lax discipline of the Native army of Bengal that did much to produce the mutiny, and make it formidable; yet it was Bengal that had reaped most of the rewards. The cause of this injustice to Bombay and Madras was, he believed, the system of centralization that had been the curse of India.

SIR CHARLES WOOD

said, he would answer the several Questions, on the affairs of India, in the order in which they had been asked.

In answer to the Question of the hon. Member for Windsor (Mr. Vansittart), the right hon. Gentleman stated that the then Chairman of the Court of Directors had announced an intention of erecting a tablet in the chapel of Hailey bury to the memory of the civil servants of the Company who were killed during the mutiny. Nothing could be more appropriate than such a monument in the chapel of the seminary of the Civil Service; but, as Hailey bury had ceased to be kept up, a doubt occurred as to the intention being carried out, and when other sites were under consideration, it seemed difficult to confine the memorial to Civil servants only. The question had thus assumed much larger dimensions than when the original announcement was made, and nothing had been done. This occurred, however, before the change to the present form of Government, and he himself had never heard the subject spoken of till it was mentioned to him by his hon. Friend.

To the second Question, put by the hon. and gallant Member for Westminster (Sir De L. Evans), his reply was that an extract from the despatch referred to would be given, but not the whole of it, as the other parts only related to military arrangements not relevant to the subject.

As to the Question of the hon. Member for Hull (Mr. Somes), he was not aware that any American ship had been employed by the Government in India, and could not give any reasons for what he was not aware bad been done.

To the fourth Question, put by the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight (Mr. Kennard), he had to answer that whether the officers had belonged to Native regiments or not, they were not placed on the Staff as a reward for their services; the Government had rewarded those who were recommended in the best way it could, whether they belong to the regiments that had mutinied or not.

To the fifth Question, asked by the hon. and gallant Member for Westminster (Sir De L. Evans), the answer was, that he wished to make the statement on the Bill referring to the local army of India as soon as possible; but it was very difficult, in the present state of public business, to obtain a day for it. He had named Tuesday because he thought that he should on that evening have a chance of bringing it on at an early hour. The opinion of the Council of India had been taken on the subject of the amalgamation of the Indian army; that opinion was adverse to the plan; but it would defer to the opinion of the Government if confirmed by Parliament, and what they resolved on, the Council of India would do its best to carry out.