SELECT COMMITTEE MOVED FOR.

HC Deb 03 July 1863 vol 172 cc178-237

MR. CAIRD

Sir, I regret that the indisposition of the Secretary for India, about a month ago, prevented me at that time bringing before the House the question of cotton supply. The delay will probably render it necessary for me to modify the terms of my Motion, for at so late a period of the Session we could not hope to enter upon so large a question, before a Committee, with any probability of gaining much information. But the subject itself is so important that a discussion upon it, before the recess, may be useful to show the prospects we have of supplies of cotton, and the certainty that from one source or another the increasing price will be gradually and not tardily followed by increased production. Events in America should convince us that it would be most unwise again to permit an almost exclusive reliance to be placed on that country. Already in every zone where cotton can be cultivated, and where there is a supply of labour, that labour has been raised in value by the absence of slave competition. Should the turn of events lead to a greater cost in the production of cotton, and consequently to a higher future range of price, it would still be by far the cheapest article of clothing. The trade may for some short period continue to be curtailed for want of a sufficient supply of the raw material, but we have only to look at the Returns of the imports in the first three months of this year to be satisfied of the early prospect of considerable supplies. Compared with the same period of 1861 the imports, exclusive of the United States, have increased fourfold, and have already gone far to make up the total cessation from America. For thirty years, India has given us somewhat less than a fifth of our supply, and has kept her ground against America, varying a little under the influence of price, but maintaining, since 1850, a steadily increasing proportion of the whole cotton supply. And it is worthy of remark, that in India alone free labour has been able to sustain a competition with that of slaves. For the West Indies, which, previous to emancipation, gave from 5 to 8 per cent of our supply, since 1835 have almost ceased to export cotton. Brazil, which, previous to 1830, gave 10 to 15 per cent, had, under her modified system of slavery, fallen to 1 per cent in 1860. And the same rule may be traced in the decreasing proportion of imports from all other countries. But mar- vellous has already been the change produced by the cessation of American supplies. From 80 per cent of our imports of cotton in 1860, American cotton fell to 5½ of the small supply of 1862, while Indian rose from 14 to 71 per cent; Brazil, from 1 to 10 per cent; Mediterranean, from 3 to 11 per cent; and the West Indies again took its place as a source of our cotton supply. When we find that from India we received more cotton last year than the entire annual supply from all quarters previous to 1840, and when, moreover, we find that supply growing, within the last eight years, gradually but steadily, from 300,000 bales to 400,000, 500,000, 600,000, 900,000, to 1,073,000 bales, we can have no reason to despair of an early and sufficient supply, even though America remain partially closed against us. The increase of price has had its natural effect in immensely stimulating production; and the facility with which that can be done, in countries where cotton has been already grown, is far greater than is usually supposed. I referred to this last year, but will venture to repeat it. In agriculture, it is difficult, and a work of time, to introduce a new article of culture; but it is a very easy and simple matter to extend the culture of an article at present produced. That is the true explanation of the rapidity with which, in certain quarters already, the increased price has been met with a doubled supply.

As I have recently had an opportunity of visiting some of the cotton-growing countries of the Mediterranean, and made cotton cultivation the object of my special attention, I will venture to offer to the House the results of what I saw and heard. And first with regard to Egypt, which, from the vast fertility of its soil and its abundant supply of labour, has been, and is likely to continue to be, the largest cotton producer in the Mediterranean. The produce of an acre of cotton, which, previous to 1860, was not worth more in that country than about £5, yielded upwards of £20 in 1862. The cotton crop of 1862 gave thirteen millions sterling to Egypt, six of which were clear profit above the ordinary cost of production. Now Egypt possesses immense capacity for a rapid extension of cotton culture, and the greatest exertions which enormous profits can prompt are at this moment being made. With a favourable season, it is not improbable that Egypt may yield 250,000 bales in 1863.

In Smyrna the same energy to take advantage of the present prices has been displayed. A few years ago no cotton was exported from Smyrna, which last year sent out 60,000 bales, and is expected to more than double that quantity in the present year. In Sicily and Italy (which has for ages been a cotton country) every little or large farmer who has ever before grown a plot of cotton is this year planting it on every acre of land where they think it can be grown. The value of the last crop in many instances was not merely a matter of largely increased profit, but exceeded the fee-simple of the land. With the Sicilian farmer, it is not a question of doubling the usual cotton culture—it will be increased tenfold. In many places the pressure of an increased demand for labour is being anticipated, and the wages promised for the picking season have advanced 50 per cent. There can be little doubt that the same cause is operating in Spain and Algeria, and it will probably be found a moderate estimate to put the total production of the Mediterranean in 1863 at 500,000 bales.

In Italy the most sanguine expectations are entertained of the future production of cotton. A commission, ably presided over by Signor De Vincenzi, who last year represented the Italian cotton interest at the Great Exhibition, has been appointed by the Government, with the express object of clearing away every impediment and opening every facility for its extended culture. Hundreds of thousands of acres of land are believed to be suited to it, and admit of irrigation. Seed is supplied in every quarter to those who apply for it, and printed instructions for planting and management are everywhere circulated. The quality of the cotton is equal to average American; and as a winter crop of beans or barley, or potatoes, can be taken before the cotton crop is planted, it is argued that with the advantage of a double crop and the abundant supply of labour, the Italian will be able hereafter to hold his ground against future competition from the Slave States. From Brazil this increase has been very rapid, and 200,000 bales are expected from the present year's crop in that country; while the West Indies and our other Colonies will contribute in a small degree to the general supply. The Egyptian and the Mediterranean cottons being of superior quality, and labour cheap and abundant, there is every probability that the increased culture of cotton there will be continued, and that these countries will be found capable of contributing not less than one-fourth of the whole future cotton supply. But for the remaining three-fourths we shall probably have to look to America and India. The future supply from America depends altogether upon the terms upon which the war may be concluded. The Southern States possess advantages for the growth of cotton greater than those of any other country. They have a fertile soil, intersected by railways and navigable rivers, and a climate peculiarly adapted to the production of a large crop of fine quality, without, as in most other cotton countries, being compelled to resort to irrigation. Their slave system admits of the most perfect organization of labour, and it is a delusion to imagine that it is more costly than free labour. I have carefully studied this part of the question, for it is the key to the whole system, and I assert, that with unrestricted limits of expansion, and a victorious slave constitution, no country will be able to grow cotton so cheaply and plentifully as America. A Southern cotton estate may be almost self-supporting. The whole food and clothing of the negroes is produced on the estate by their own labour, or is bought by the sale of their surplus produce, other than cotton. The interest of the invested capital in the negroes is more than compensated by the increase in their numbers. The cotton crop is nearly all profit, for there is no rent to be paid for the land, as in Europe, or land tax to the Government, as in India. The skill displayed in the culture of the crop is not equalled, on a great scale, in any other country. Combined capital and sagacity have done their utmost to increase the production and thus lessen the cost.

The growth of the Southern States in 1840 was 1,600,000 bales, when the price here was 9d. a pound. In 1860 it had increased to 4,600,000 bales, while the price had gradually fallen to less than 6d. a pound. That fact ought to settle the question of the cheapness of slave labour, in a country vast enough to admit of constant expansion. Then, again, the combined energy and intelligence of the planters was devoted to facilitating the means of exporting their great staple. The cotton is ginned on the estate, and baled and pressed before being sent away. Fraudulent admixture is never thought of in a country where buyer and seller are alike intelligent, and where the courts admit of a ready remedy. But all this prosperity was founded on the basis of slavery, and cannot, in the opinion of the planters, be maintained without it. Besides slavery, however, it required the constant power of expansion to new and fresh land. The slave system has been a quick, moneymaking system, without reference to its permanence. As soon as the old land was exhausted, new land was broken up. Old cotton lands, when worn out by successive cropping, become and wastes. Immense tracts, amounting to perhaps one-third of the best cotton lands in the older States, are now reduced by this exhaustive system to desolate, sunburned, uninhabited regions, upon which even weeds refuse to grow. The power of moving to the territories west of the Mississippi, where fresh land was to be had, was becoming an every day necessity to hundred of planters; and should the entrance to these territories be shut up, they must either abandon cotton planting, or adopt a system of careful tilling and manuring. The effect of this would at once cause a rapid rise in the cost of production, and place the Southern cotton planter more on a par with those of other countries. From this, I think, it will be clearly seen that the pre-eminence of the American cotton-grower is mainly due to the double system of slavery and wasteful cultivation. What, then, are the probabilities that this may continue? If the South should be everywhere victorious, cotton will very soon be as largely cultivated as ever, though the cost of production will be increased by the planter's proportion of the interest of the war debt. If she is shut up from the territories west of the Mississippi, the cost of production will be greatly increased, and the produce diminished; and if the final issue should be the entire subjugation of the South, and the gradual emancipation of the slave, there will be an enhancement for years in the cost of production of American cotton. The extent planted this year is not expected to yield more than 250,000 bales; and between what has been destroyed, and what has been lost and rotted for want of the means of baling and storing, it is believed that there do not remain more than two and a half million bales available for export. Come when it may, this will be immediately absorbed; and it must be perfectly obvious that we must for some time to come look to other countries as well as America for cotton. And no conclusion of the war seems now to be pos- sible which would admit of cotton being produced with the same abundance and cheapness as before. But already the system has been introduced of a gradual transformation from slavery, through serfdom, to freedom. General Banks, in Louisiana, and General Payne, in Tennessee, have instituted a plan which enforces labour on the plantations, and regular monthly payment for that labour; and both parties find it to work advantageously. If the North prevail, this system will be substituted for slavery; and it can hardly be doubted that the Southern States will thus gradually re-extend their cotton culture, and again take their place in the first rank of cotton supply. Whether, therefore, the issue of the war is for the North or South, we may safely anticipate that it cannot last much longer, and that, with a moderate increase of price, we may confidently look to America for at least one-half of her former average supply.

If we suppose that the future range of prices shall be 50 per cent beyond that of the past few years, we may hereafter expect 1,000,000 bales yearly from the Mediterranean, Brazil, and other quarters, and at least 1,500,000 bales from the Southern States. With what India can yield, there would thus seem to be no need for alarm about a possible extinction of our great cotton industry. For a time the present check may continue, but every month is bringing increased supplies, and the stock at present in America may any day be thrown open to the markets of the world. I confess that I feel some satisfaction in thus coming to the conclusion that we are not likely to be forced to rely mainly on India; for, after a careful study of the blue-books and Indian Reports on cotton culture, I am bewildered by the contradictions and varieties of opinion and the confusion and collision of authority, and the want of any guiding mind to unravel the difficulties and give direction to well-considered plans for developing the growth of cotton. The only thing that comes clearly out from the 500 pages of blue-book is the constant readiness of the Secretary of State to discourage every attempt made by the Indian Government with that object.

I have consulted not only recent Returns but Reports of Committees of former years—Mr. Bright's Committee of 1848, and a Committee of 1846, appointed in Bombay from the resident merchants, of whom the hon. Member for the City was one. That Committee found that very little de- cline had taken place in the export of cotton from Bombay during a period of twelve years (the average annual export being 306,000 bales), although the price had during that time fallen from 3¾d. to 2d. a pound at Bombay. They found that an increase of price of a halfpenny a pound restored the trade to healthy action; and that this increase had been the result of a slight loss of production by an unfavourable cotton season in America. What, then, may we not anticipate from India, from the stimulus of an increase of price almost fabulous? and that increase, not the result of a temporary failure of crop, but from such a total disorganization of labour as will, in all probability, lead to a steady continuance of a higher range of price for many years to come. In the first three months of this year the imports from India have increased from 213,000 cwt. in 1861 to 652,000 cwt. in 1863. From Calcutta, which did not send us a pound in 1860, there have been exported to England 133,000 bales in 1862. The facts, therefore, are against the Secretary of State, who discourages the hope of any great increase of Indian cotton. And in discussing the Indian question, it is necessary to distinguish between what are the legitimate functions of an Indian Government, as compared with our own. The Indian Government is not only a despotic Government, but it is a great absentee landlord, managing its estates by resident agents. It is the duty of such a Government to initiate and carry out all those local improvements, such as roads and means of irrigation, which in this country would properly be left to individual landowners.

It seems that great exertions were made by the various Governments in India to meet the prospective cotton famine in England. On 28th February 1861 the Governor General transmitted a well-considered Regulation on the subject to the various Indian Dependencies. In this he laid down clearly what the Government ought not to attempt to do, and what they could do with advantage. It is distinguished by practical good sense, and, if it had been permitted to be carried out without interruption, it was, so far, all that could be desired.

On the 25th July the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for India disapproves of the Governor General's offer to pay the travelling expenses of gentlemen deputed by commercial bodies to accompany the Government officials into the cotton districts. "It was objectionable, and ought not to be repeated." A whole page is devoted to a discussion of the principle of paying such travelling expenses. And the Governor General is obliged to justify his offer of travelling expenses by showing that the result of that offer had been the mission and report of Mr. Saunders on the cotton districts of the North West Provinces—one of the ablest documents in the blue-book. The Governor General then proposes to offer prizes for the growth of superior qualities of cotton, to test the possibility of improving the quality. The Secretary of State throws cold water upon this also. The right hon. Gentleman makes light of prizes for the improvement of agriculture in India. Is he not aware that immense advantages have attended the prize system of the three National Agricultural Societies of these kingdoms? Improved breeds of cattle, improved processes of husbandry, improved agricultural implements, and the general diffusion of knowledge on these subjects, fostered by the spirit of competition, have been the consequence of the prize system. The stimulus of private interest, which the right hon. Gentleman regards so lightly, is often dormant until roused by the much stronger stimulus of honour and the desire to excel. Other countries as well as ours have recognised this powerful motive, and have wisely made use of it for the improvement of agriculture. The French Government, under the Emperor, expends annually £25,000 in money, and about 5,000 medals of honour, for this special object. The beneficial effects are found in the diffusion of agricultural knowledge and improved processes in every district of France.

Again, in Madras, the governor proposes to remit the rent on certain small tracts of land to be used by the ryots in experiments for improving the quality of native cotton. This is sanctioned by the Governor General; but the Secretary of State, the moment he hears of it, disapproves and directs that the offer be withdrawn, and the Governor General's Council, thus snubbed, withdraws the order, with a hint to the Secretary of State that he has failed to appreciate their object in making the original offer. This repeated interference in trifles could have no other effect than to damp the efforts of the officials in India. But to turn to matters involving much larger results. The Governor General transmits Mr. Saunders' Report on the Doab, to the importance of which he calls the attention of the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State, passing over the great questions treated of in that Report, the tenure of land and perpetual settlement, and the subject of a contract law, devotes himself to the vigorous condemnation of the objectionable system of seizing loaded cotton carts when required for government transport. And again, in reference to a Report upon Oude, he contents himself by saying that the particular points will, of course, be considered in the departments to which they respectively belong. In the whole compass of the 500 pages of blue-book, I do not find one intelligent suggestion offered by the Secretary of State to the Indian Government. In several instances, as I have shown, he disapproves of trifling orders, which, even if erroneous in principle, were hardly worthy of notice; but he initiates nothing himself. With regard to the question of land tenure, which was so ably handled on a previous debate by the hon. Member for Poole, why did not the Secretary of State send out his instructions for Lord Canning's guidance, instead of waiting for eight months to criticise and set them aside?

Then, with regard to a Law of Contract, why did he not instruct the Indian Government on the course they should follow, rather than discredit them afterwards by disallowing their proceedings? It is impossible, upon a perusal of the Indian papers, to come to any other conclusion than that, if there is to be an increased supply of cotton from India, it will not be through the aid of the Secretary of State.

Mr. Saunders, the Government Commissioner, shows clearly, that by superior cultivation alone both the quality and the quantity of cotton is improved, and by no other subsequent process can this be accomplished. But without going into great detail, and for the moment placing out of consideration the great cotton districts in Bombay and Madras, I will ask your attention to a single tract of country, where for many years there has been no export of cotton—the Doab, lying between the Jumna and Ganges, on which a careful and full Report has been made by the Government Cotton Commissioner, Mr. Saunders. This tract contains upwards of 12,000,000 acres of good land, which is three times the extent of the cultivated land in Egypt. It has a population of 9,000,000, or over 350 persons to the square mile, an average in excess of the population of China. It has a deep porous soil of great fertility, well adapted to the growth of cotton. It is crossed and traversed by numerous canals which run nearly its whole length, and furnish the power of irrigation. The roads everywhere are good, and the railroad to Calcutta runs through its centre. Fifty years ago there was a large export of cotton from the Doab to England and China, but during the last thirty years it has been grown only for home consumption. Now this tract of country, in every way so admirably suited to cotton, seems to be only one out of a great number which are mentioned or referred to in this blue-book. The railway, for about 300 miles, is still incomplete, so that hitherto it has afforded no means of conveyance for the cotton. It is clear, however, that there is abundance of land in India most favourably situated in every way for irrigation where necessary, which will soon be opened up by railways, and with a native population of farmers and labourers through whom any extension of cotton culture may be made with the utmost facility. "It may almost be said that the supply would only be limited by the demand, so large is the field of production." Such is the conclusion of Mr. Saunders' Report. So much for the power of India to increase the supply. Can the quality be improved? The general testimony of the Indian officials is in the negative, as their general belief in the uniformity of the yield at 60 lbs. an acre is positive. But in some parts of India the introduction of American and Egyptian seed has been followed by increased produce and better quality; and the uniform experience of other countries is that careful culture and intelligent management have the same effect. And while much may be done in the improvement of the staple, and greater freedom from adulteration, much is at the same time being done at home to adapt the existing machinery to the use of Indian cotton.

The present circumstances of India are most favourable for cotton enterprise. The great cotton region of Dharwar is about to be tapped by the railway from Bombay. This will reduce the cost of inland transport by one-half, and enable the produce of the Dharwar Cotton Fields to be laid down at Liverpool, at a total cost for carriage of little more than a penny a pound. The ryots are said to be rapidly improving their condition, and becoming independent of the native bankers and traders, and thus capable of selling their cotton to the European merchant without such intervention. But if they cannot be moved to a vast increase of production by the stimulus of an increase in price from 3d. to 1s. 6d. a pound, no facilities of railway, road, or harbour, can be expected to tempt them. If the enormous wealth which has been poured into India for cotton last year, amounting to nearly twenty-five millions sterling, fails to set in motion every means of meeting the demands of this country which enterprise or rapacity can devise, then we must come to the conclusion that it is hopeless to look to India for more than a million bales of cotton. If the yield per acre cannot be increased beyond the average of 63 lb.—as stated in the Government Reports—it cannot be for the interests of India to grow so meagre a crop. For no conceivable advantage in the cost of labour could, in that case, enable her to compete permanently with Europe or America. To produce one million bales, India must have six million acres under cotton; while Egypt, Italy, or America could produce the same quantity on one. Possessing, as India does, a suitable soil, and abundance of labour, it seemed to me that farther inquiry might have tested this important point.

I feel it impossible to conclude without some reference to the circumstances under which Mr. Laing was forced to resign his position as Indian Finance Minister. He gave up his seat in this House, and a high office in the Government, to proceed to the unhealthy climate of Calcutta. He there, by great ability and industry, carried forward towards completion the plans initiated by Mr. Wilson. He foresaw the successful issue of these plans in a rapidly-filling exchequer; and, at a critical time for this country, he felt himself justified in advising large outlays on those works for opening up the communication of the country, which have been dwelt upon by all authorities for the last twenty years as most beneficial for India. The Secretary of State, living comfortably at home, with no similar opportunity of acquiring knowledge, corrects Mr. Laing in such a strain as no honourable man could submit to, and Mr. Laing resigned his post. But what is now the result? Mr. Laing's successor, in his financial speech of 30th of April last tells us, that instead of the surplus which Mr. Laing estimated, £179,814, the amount had actually been £936,925. And this after allowing all the omissions and deductions which Sir Charles Wood expected would result in a deficit of £284,086. It is impossible not to feel that so grave an error, and so great an injustice, on the part of the Secretary of State, must lessen his authority in this country upon Indian questions. At this moment, with the welfare of 180 millions on the one hand, and the wants of our manufacturing people on the other, there is no office under Government which demands higher talent and more scrupulous conscientiousness than that of Indian Minister. Turning to the Motion on the paper, I feel that the lateness of the Session may be pleaded for refusing a Committee; but I hope that this discussion may help to re-assure the country regarding the probability of an increased supply of cotton, and to show the extreme rapidity with which other countries have already contributed to fill up the gap caused by the unhappy war in America.

Amendment proposed, To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "a Select Committee be appointed to inquire whether any further measures can be taken, within the legitimate functions of the Indian Government, for increasing the supply of Cotton from that country,"—(Mr. Caird,) —instead thereof.

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."

MR. BAZLEY

said, he agreed with his hon. Friend in many of his observations, though he did not hold the sanguine views which he entertained. He agreed with him in his general conclusions as to the resources of India being so large, that if this country did not in a short time receive large augmentations of its cotton supply from India, the Indian policy of the Government would be very much to blame. Looking at the state of the manufacturing districts, he submitted that it was the duty of the House to inquire into the capabilities not only of their East Indian Empire, but of their whole colonial possessions for the production of cotton. Since the breaking out of the war in America, the great cotton districts in the North had been afflicted with an amount of distress beyond anything ever heard of or known in this country. Capital had been lying waste; labour had been pauperized and banished from its home, and the prospects of the manufacturing districts of the country were very gloomy. Formerly this country con- summed 50,000 bags of cotton per week—42,000 of which were derived from the Southern States of America. That was to say, 85 per cent, of the whole quantity imported came from America; of the remainder, 8 per cent came from Egypt and other foreign countries, and 7 per cent only from India. In the last few years, indeed, the supply from India had increased, not however because cotton was more extensively cultivated there, but because England drew away the stocks intended for the use of the natives of that country. There was no reason to suppose that much more cotton was produced in India now than there was three or four years ago. With great discretion Lord Russell, when the unfortunate convulsion took place in America, addressed a communication to his friend the Chairman of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce, expressing his opinion that the trade of Lancashire was about to be embarrassed by being deprived of a large supply of American cotton. His Lordship stated, that he had felt it to be his duty to instruct British consuls in all parts of the world to direct their attention to the supply of cotton. That was a laudable service rendered by the noble Lord; and the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs had displayed considerable alacrity in following the same course; but while they had been urging foreign countries to send us more cotton, the Government had been neglecting to stimulate the cultivation of that article in their own Colonies and dependencies. He wished to know whether it had not occurred to Her Majesty's Government to instruct the governors of the various Colonies to exert themselves in this matter. The House had been passing Acts to provide extraordinary employment for the people in the north of England, but the Government had neglected to do their duty, and the consequence was that they had withheld from the people that material which would have supplied them with labour, comfort, and abundance. He hoped the debate would stimulate the Government in their arrangements for the cultivation of cotton in India. They had lately seen in the lobby of the House a beautiful specimen of cotton from Jamaica. Now, there were hon. Members in the House who possessed estates in the West Indies; but he was not aware that any communications had been made by the Government to the officials in those islands to stimulate them to grow cotton. The efforts made by Earl Russell had been exceedingly successful. Turkey, Italy, and Spain were beginning to grow cotton. They were getting an increasing supply from Egypt. Even from Morocco there was a prospect of obtaining a supply, and China had sent some very beautiful and excellent cotton to our relief. It surely could not be expected that cotton-spinners should become growers of the raw material as well as manufacturers of it. To expect that would be most unreasonable; but if facilities were afforded, many of their own Colonies were in a position to furnish an adequate supply. Look at what America was doing. 160 acres of land were offered to able-bodied emigrants; but Australia only made the paltry offer of fourteen acres, the value of which was not equal to the cost of the emigrant's passage. In India there were also difficulties which retarded the cultivation of cotton. The French Government were doing a great deal to increase the supply of cotton. About this time last year an offer had been made by the French Government of 60,000 acres of land in Algeria, through himself, to an Anglo-French company for the cultivation of cotton. The hon. Member for Stirling district and others immediately determined to send out competent inspectors, with the view of surveying the land, and a considerable sum of money as well as a considerable amount of labour had been spent in provisional arrangements. At length, when it was thought the experiment of cultivating cotton in Algeria was about to produce satisfactory results, the red-tapery of France put difficulties in the way—military difficulties they were said to be; and although the Emperor of the French would have been glad to see the project carried out, it had to be abandoned. The French Government were doing much at the present moment, draining the land and establishing reservoirs for purposes of irrigation, with a view to the cultivation of cotton in Algeria. He wished he could say that our own Government were offering inducements at all comparable to those held out by the French Government. It had been said that the cotton trade itself had not exerted itself in this matter. But for thirty years the Manchester Chamber of Commerce had been enforcing on the Government the necessity of diminishing their dependence on America for the supply of cotton; and within the last three or four years they had sent no less than 300,000 tons of cotton seed to various parts of the world. He himself had, along with some other gentlemen, joined an Australian cotton speculation, which promised to be attended with success. In Queensland cotton was being successfully grown, and it was found that one acre in cotton-crop yielded £40. A supply of ten bags had been received in this country from Queensland which had been grown on ten acres, and which had been sold for upwards of £400. They must also turn to Natal and other places for supplies of cotton, and especially to their Indian possessions. It was said that the Indian Department did not wish to interfere with the great economical laws of commerce, but he would be glad to know if the growing of opium was included in the policy that was said to guide the Indian Department. When it was said that in the Southern States of America cotton could be grown at a small cost, it should be recollected that they were likewise informed that excellent cotton could be grown in India at three farthings per pound, and there was no question about the power of India to supply them with all they required. Some time ago the hon. Member for Birmingham endeavoured to provide for the contingency that had since arisen. If the policy then suggested by the hon. Member had been adopted by Lancashire, they would have been spared this calamity, which had almost overwhelmed the most industrious people in Great Britain. He was not aware that any Committee of Inquiry would materially develop the resources of India in a manner that would be immediately useful. They had information before them, and what they now wanted was energetic action. He had received an important communication from Calcutta which contained the following statement— I am convinced that India could compete with America in the growing of cotton, and render England independent of foreign countries, and save you from the fear of a repetition of the present calamity. No great undertaking can be carried on in India with a prospect of success without Government support. The Government of India is well disposed to develop the resources of India, but cannot control the subordinates. It was really very annoying that Europeans in India should be considered as interlopers, and that subordinates should be allowed to thwart the policy of the higher Members of the Government. The people in Lancashire had waited patiently for the supply of cotton, and there should not be either apathy or negligence on the part of the Department that could assist to obtain it. He would conclude by expressing his sober conviction that they need not look to America at all for future supplies of cotton. They had abundant means in their own possessions to supply them with all they wanted, and with more than they wanted; but, at the same time, they ought to do all they could to develop the resources of the country from which they could obtain a supply.

MR. SMOLLETT

said, he could hardly suppose that the hon. Member for Stirling wished a Committee to sit in the dog days, and he therefore presumed that the Motion was merely made as a peg on which to hang an Indian debate, in order that hon. Gentlemen might discourse on what was called the apathy of the Indian Government in the development of the resources of India. Although good might come from ventilating the subject, there could be no practical result from the Motion, as the hon. Member for Stirling had not made a single practical suggestion. Last year the hon. Member for Stockport (Mr. Smith), who brought forward the subject, had a practical suggestion to make; he supposed that Lancashire would be flooded with cotton if the Godavery could be opened to navigation. The right hon. Member, though he might have known it was a delusion, promised the hon. Gentleman that his pet scheme should be carried out without further inquiry, in order to conciliate hon. Members on the Liberal side of the House, who, although they vituperated the Indian Secretary's policy behind his back, were discreetly silent in the House, and were the stanchest supporters of a Liberal administration. Somewhere about the same time Lord Shaftesbury stated, in another place, that because that project had not been carried out before, 6,000,000 bales were rotting for want of a market; and a more complete illustration of the stupendous ignorance in high places on these subjects could not be conceived. He himself had taken the opportunity of warning the House against placing any reliance on the scheme for opening the Godavery, which he was convinced would turn out to be a delusion, and information which had been received since that time completely confirmed the justice of his views. The Calcutta correspondent of The Times in a recent letter, stated that Colonel Bruce, the Inspector General of Police, happening to be at Nagpore in the discharge of his duties, had returned to Calcutta by the Godavery route. He reported to the Governor General what he had seen, and in his report that gentleman, who was an intelligent and disinterested, although an official witness, stated that at the height of the monsoons he embarked in a canoe and a raft, the raft drawing twelve inches of water, at the spot where the navigation was expected to commence, and, proceeding down the river, it took him thirty hours to go the first twenty miles, the canoe and raft requiring in many places to be drawn over the shallows by main force. Colonel Bruce recommended the abandonment of the upper part of the navigation, and the concentration of effort upon the lower sections of the river, us what he had seen and heard convinced him that the upper portion of the river could be made navigable for only two or three months in the year. He said, too, that when the river was opened, no cotton would ever come to it for transport down, because the cotton grown in Berar was plucked and pressed in February, and people would not keep their cotton in the district until it would be exported by the river. Even if they did bring it to the river, it would have to break bulk two or three times, which would be fatal to the scheme. Various other suggestions had been made on this subject. At a meeting which took place last year in one of the manufacturing towns, the hon. Member for Birmingham had recommended that the Government should exempt from the payment of rent for two years all land within their territories on which cotton was grown. That was a suggestion which a Committee of that House would hardly occupy a quarter of an hour in discussing. Its obvious effect would be to deprive the Government of India of a revenue of half a million sterling, which under the circumstances they could very ill spare. Another suggestion had been made by the hon. Member for Stockport, which had been often discussed both in that House and out of it—namely, that at the commencement of the cotton crisis the Government should have caused notice to be given in the various cotton-growing districts that they would receive any quantity of cotton from the ryots, and guarantee a price of 3d. a pound, which was 1½d. more than the ordinary payment for the article. It was his opinion, that if such a proclamation had been issued, it would have been received by the people of India with the utmost distrust; and an obvious reason why it would have been a failure was, that in all the places under their sway in India cotton had fetch- ed two or three times that price during the last two or three years. Mr. Temple, the Chief Commissioner in the Nagpore territories, reported that during 1862 the price had been 7¼ d. per pound, and that on the 1st of January in the present year it had risen to 11d., when the produce of the crop was known. If prices like those did not lead to increased production, was it reasonable to suppose that any Government guarantee of the kind suggested would be of the slightest good? They had been told that the ryots were entirely eaten up by usurers, that the cotton grown was grown under contracts, and that the ryots were so ground down that they could hardly keep body and soul together. If that were true, would it be mended by the proclamation of a Government guarantee of 3d. a pound; or were they to set the example of putting aside the contract system just after they had made the breach of civil contracts in India a penal offence, subjecting those guilty of it to fines, to imprisonment, to stripes, and to hard labour? He denied that the ryot was in the state in which he was represented to be. He had lived for years in the agricultural parts of India, and mixed with the ryots in almost every district, and he totally denied that they were eaten up by usurers. On the contrary, he had found that the supposed victims were a docile, industrious, and prudent race. In India cotton was grown as a matter of business. The people there knew their own interests, and they attended markets and fairs much more regularly than the people of England. But the fact was, that during the last two years crops of every kind fetched three or four times as much as they did formerly, and the consequence had been, that whenever there was an upward tendency in the cotton market, more land was put into cultivation; and that when prices sank, cotton cultivation, following the natural laws of supply and demand, diminished. All that the ryots wanted was to be let alone, and that there should be no government interference with prices. The Cotton Supply Association of Manchester had sent up a Petition in which they had stated a number of mere truisms on the advantages to India of the speedy construction of railroads, canals, and other means of conveyance. Had hon. Members forgotten the speech of the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for India at Halifax, when he stated that the Government, urgently pressed on that point, had borrowed money, and were prepared to send it out to Lord Canning, when they were stopped by Lord Canning, who told them that there was actually more money in India borrowed for such purposes than could be expended without reckless waste, in consequence of the impossibility of sufficient inspection? The right hon. Baronet stated, that for the last five or six years they had been borrowing at the rate of £7,000,000 sterling on the credit of the Indian revenue for railways alone, and that no less a sum than £11,000,000 was being annually spent on public works under Government inspection. He (Mr. Smollett) doubted very much the expediency of giving credit for £50,000,000 or £60,000,000, as had been done on the single responsibility of the Secretary of State. Transactions of such magnitude ought to come under the supervision and control of Parliament. The statements that the sums of money already available for improvements in India could not be used was received with a shout of incredulity and derision in Manchester. They said that it was strong language to be used by the Secretary of State; that he had dismissed the great financier, Mr. Laing, from the service with ignominy, because he proposed to take a million sterling annually from the surplus to spend on useful roads; and yet a few months after he had proposed to spend the whole surplus of £4,000,000 created by the ingenuity of Mr. Laing. The fact was, there was no surplus at all. The money proposed to be spent was in reality borrowed on the Stock Exchange in England where the money market was easy. The railway associations were not associations of capitalists who ran any risks, but gentlemen who had no money to spare when discounts were high; but when discounts were at 2½ per cent, they lent money at 5 per cent, and when the pressure came they repudiated their transactions, and said that they could not carry on the work without assistance. That happened in 1861–2. In July 1861, the money market being very stringent, and discounts £6 or £7 per cent, the railway associations informed the Minister that they could not go on unless he supplemented them with cash. The right hon. Baronet, to prevent a crisis, borrowed £4,000,000 on the London Stock Exchange, and took authority from the House to borrow as much more. But in July 1862 the rate of discount had fallen to £210s. and £3 per cent, and the railway association flooded the market with bonds, debentures, and stock. They raised £7,000,000 or £8,000,000, and put a handsome profit into their pockets; they repaid the loan at 5 per cent, and the consequence was that there was an accumulation of £4,000,000 or £5,000,000 in the Secretary of State's office, which was devoted to paying the expenses of the Government of India; and consequently, when the Indian accounts were gone into, they having paid nothing out of the Indian revenue for the expense of carrying on the Government, there appeared to be a surplus of £4,000,000, which was dilated upon as showing the elasticity of Indian finances and the prosperity of the country, whereas it was, in fact, nothing more than borrowed money. There was one more question. The Cotton Supply Association desired a change of the law of tenure and a settlement of the land in India, so as to give security and an impulse to the growth of cotton. Now, he (Mr. Smollett) agreed with the Association in this matter, provided they were agreed as to what a settlement of the land of India meant. The only true permanent settlement of land in India, which would be productive of benefit, was an extension of the settlement of land on the principle adopted by Lord Cornwallis in 1793, and to which Lower Bengal was indebted for its prosperity. The principle of that settlement was to denude the Government of its character of landlord, transferring the groups of farms, called villages in India, to proprietors of estates, who paid a gross amount to the Government, and made their own arrangements with the tenants. But that was not the sort of settlement gentlemen connected with the cotton trade wished to see extended to other parts of India. The hon. Baronet proposed to retain the Government landlordism, and to collect the revenue by Government officers, not in gross but in detail, fixing an annual rent upon every field or quarter of a field, payable notwithstanding a deficiency of produce or depreciation of specie. Such an arrangement would tend to perpetuate the system of agrarian communism prevalent in Southern India, and to break up the great principle of self-government inherent in the village system. It certainly must prevent colonization, because it was not to be supposed that capitalists would lay out money on land for which they were not to get an increased rent; and yet that system was supported by the Manchester school, who nevertheless, talked of the immense importance of colo- nizing British India. A great change had, however, taken place in the public mind in respect to India. Last winter agitation was triumphant in the provinces; and the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for India, was one of the best-abused men in the kingdom. Even at the beginning of this Session he was regarded by his Colleagues on the Treasury bench as the Jonah who must be thrown overboard if the Treasury ship were to be saved. Now, on the contrary, he was as popular as any of his Colleagues, always excepting the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton, who was a universal favourite. Quite recently he received a letter informing him that at Glasgow a vote of confidence had been carried in the present Indian Administration, although last winter the same commercial body, led away by popular clamour and the eloquence of Mr. Laing, declared against the measures of the right hon. Baronet.

MR. COBDEN

Sir, I wish to address a word to my right hon. Friend the Secretary for India, in the hope that I may be able to call back the practice of this House in regard to Motions of this kind to that which prevailed in former times, but which in his case, and in the case of the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, has been departed from lately. On the last occasion when the question of India was brought on by the hon. Member for Poole (Mr. H. Seymour) in a very elaborate speech of two hours' duration, the right hon. Gentleman abstained from speaking until nearly midnight; and on the occasion of the Chinese debate my hon. Friend the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs declined to rise and speak at all, and the debate therefore came to an end. Now, the good old practice was—and I wish to see it restored—that when the policy of the Government is arraigned in this House in a well-considered statement, the Minister representing the Department so arraigned should vindicate his policy, and also submit his view of the case to the House; it is then our duty to criticise, and, if necessary, to correct what we may believe to be the erroneous policy of the Government. But if we elicit no statement from the Minister till midnight, and the right hon. Gentleman is merely to listen to the compliments of the hon. Member for Dumbarton or the complaints of other Members, and then to make a statement in reply, no one has the opportunity of commenting on his arguments. I think it would be more respectful to the House, and more convenient for the conduct of public business, that the practice which has always prevailed until within the last few months should be restored. If we are now to have a repetition of the India debate simply because on the last occasion the right hon. Gentleman did not speak early, and if on Monday we are to have a repetition of the China debate because the hon. Member for Southwark did not speak at all, I say it would be better both for the interests of the Government and of the House of Commons that the practice so recently interrupted should be renewed. We have been imitating the Von Bismarck Parliament at Berlin; we seem to have come here rather to receive the orders of the Government than to impart our own views. The hon. Gentleman who has just sat down (Mr. Smollett), alluded, in rather severe terms, to the conduct of those who out of doors hold one language respecting the right hon. Baronet and in the House another. Now, I think that the hon. Member, in his own person, is one of the most extraordinary cases of that betrayal of out-of-doors opinions I have ever seen. The hon. Gentleman addressed a meeting, in Manchester, of the Cotton Supply Association, and certainly did not spare the right hon. Baronet. The meeting was presided over by my friend Mr. Cheetham, the Chairman of the Cotton Supply Association, and my hon. Friend's speech was afterwards published as a pamphlet. I will read the briefest possible abstract. In page 4 he says— The defects of our Indian administration are the true cause of India's comparative sterility and poverty; the chief obstacle to all progress being the want of a secure tenure of land. In page 6 the hon. Gentleman says— The want of a secure tenure of land in perpetuity, similar to that enjoyed in the British Colonies, is the great necessity of the times in India. Now, to-night the hon. Gentleman tells us that all these poor ryots want is to be allowed to be let alone, that they know the state of the market, and that if only let alone they can carry on their business as well as English farmers. According to the hon. Gentleman's speech now, and the high compliment he pays to the head of the India Department, nothing is wanted, and these ryots are perfectly happy and contented. Now, I do not wish to be misunderstood in the very few words I have to say on this question. We have often been taunted with not maintaining our principles of free trade in our dealing with these Indian questions; but are we in our relations with the Indian Empire governing by the principles of Adam Smith? The Government here is the most gigantic absentee landlord in all the world. This country owns the land of India, and this Parliament is responsible for its government, for it is the ultimate appeal. The right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Indian Department is, in fact, the agent and trustee of this great Indian farm. It is not as though the Indian ryots were intelligent enough to cultivate the land and turn it to the best advantage. Why, there is not a ryot who pays 19s. or 20s. a year of rent but is visited by a sub-collector from the English Government, and the hon. Gentleman will agree with me that there is a great deal of fraud and oppression perpetrated. [Mr. SMOLLETT: Hear, hear!] All that is done under the authority of the English Government. The collectors have sub-collectors, who not only gather these miserable rents, but have the settlement of the rent from time to time, so that the poor ryot does not know what further claim may be made upon him, and is not sure that he will pay the same rent next year as last. In fact, it is scarcely known what arrangement is made between these collectors and the ryots. Under these circumstances, if we urged that the Government should—under the peculiar conditions we have found ourselves in during the last two or three years—have endeavoured, in the first instance, through their collectors, and then through the native collectors, to reach these poor ryots, to inform them of what is going on in Europe, and of the impending great rise in the price of cotton, given them encouragement to plant cotton, and offered them seed, that, I say, was perfectly legitimate. It would not be considered illegitimate even in England for a landlord thus to encourage an intelligent tenant to improve, say, the breed of his stock, or to introduce better implements. Under these circumstanoes, and seeing that we have the Indian Empire on our hands—I do not say for our ultimate good, for I doubt it—what is so natural—as it is the country of all others that could give us at a short notice a great supply of cotton—what is more natural than that the cotton manufacturers in England, and I, as well as their representatives in Parliament, should expect from the Government and from the right hon. Gentleman, that in the face of the threatened privation of cotton which they foresaw, they should have endeavoured to promote among those poor cultivators the knowledge of what was impending, and stimulate and encourage them to supply the deficiency? Has the Indian Government done that? If they had merely done nothing—if they had merely neglected to do their duty, I could hardly, perhaps, stand here with so strong a case as I do; but when I see in the blue-book to which my hon. Friend has alluded that the right hon. Baronet has, I may say, with the most cold-blooded indifference, actually put obstructions in the way of the authorities in India when trying to give some stimulus to the production of cotton—I say, that if we had an Opposition in this House—which we have not—the right hon. Gentleman would be impeached for his neglect of duty. I will read a little extract from the blue-book. I wish the right hon. Gentleman could blot it out, or that it had not been written. It appears that the Governor of Madras had authorized the collectors in the districts to exempt thirty acres of land from the land tax and the rent, if they were used for the purpose of trying experiments in cotton, wherever they thought it desirable. The collector, I presume, is a gentleman who rules over an estate containing, probably, as large a population as Yorkshire—a million or two—besides being the Judge or head magistrate—almost, in fact, the despot of that territory. [Mr. SMOLLETT: Not always the Judge.] Well, generally the head magistrate. My right hon. Friend hears of the arrangement, and sits down and writes a despatch to the Governor of Madras in July 1862, in the midst of our great depressing emergency, from which I will read a short extract— I observe that you have authorized the offer to a few intelligent natives, to be selected by the collectors, of a remission of assessment for five years on such spots of land (not exceeding thirty acres in each case), as they may be willing to devote to the improvement of native cotton, due care being, of course, taken to ascertain that the terms of the agreement are satisfactorily fulfilled. …. I cannot approve of your having given to the collectors generally a discretion to remit the permanent revenue upon land to the extent of thirty acres in favour of any persons who may display a willingness to devote the land to the improvement of native cotton. Among the despatches there is one from Mr. Wedderburn, an acting collector, who says that about five hundred acres had been employed in experiments in the cotton culture, which would not have been so employed but for this inducement. Now, only think of a Minister, governing a territory about, I believe, 700,000 square miles in extent, sitting down and telling the Governor of Madras that he is not to allow the collector to permit thirty acres of land to be appropriated tax-free to experiments in the growth of cotton! Is it not miserable? Is it not more worthy of the management of a chandler's shop than of the administration of a great empire? I venture to say that no proprietor of an estate in England of a few thousand acres, if he received a letter from his bailiff, stating that a farmer wanted to try experiments in growing chicory, or anything that afforded the prospect of a good return, would thus deter him from doing a thing dictated by common sense, and likely to lead to good results. There are two changes that have for years been recommended by the highest authorities in India as the means of improving the state of things in that country. The one is the settlement of the land in perpetual tenure, and the other is the sale of waste lands. Now, I do not think the hon. Gentleman the Member for Dumbarton (Mr. Smollett) would agree with me upon the sale of waste lands as he does upon perpetual tenure. I think I have heard him make some remarks on former occasions rather unsound on that subject. He seems to be afraid of parting with the land unless he can get a good price for it. [Mr. SMOLLETT: For the value it would bring.] What you want is that the land should be occupied and turned to some useful purpose; and when you find the American Government offering land for threepence an acre, how can you expect people to go so far as India to buy land dearer than it could be bought for in America? Your main object should be to get the land occupied, and not to throw obstacles in the way of settlers. The right hon. Gentleman has written out instructions upon the land question, upon which I must make a remark. It must be painful to him to hear the remark I am about to make, but it is necessary that persons in office should hear unpleasant things when their conduct requires animadversion. I am going to read an extract from a despatch, which I should hardly have believed the right hon. Gentleman had written. It would seem to be a despatch which somebody else had penned and signed in the name of the right hon. Gentleman. We know that a Minute had been prepared of Regulations for the sale of waste lands, attributable partly to Lord Stanley and partly to Lord Canning. That Minute was not very objectionable; it was generally favourable. But hero is the Regulation which my right hon. Friend has substituted for it. I am reading from the blue-book what purports to be the right hon. Gentleman's language. He says— The applicant shall deposit with the collector the estimated expense of such survey and demarcation, and on completion of the survey the lot shall be advertised for sale by auction to the highest bidder. If the land is sold to some other purchaser, the applicant will obtain repayment of the money he has advanced for the survey. This is a joke; the right hon. Gentleman cannot be serious. Conceive a man advancing money for a survey that he may have the privilege of buying the land by auction, and in the hope that if he does not get it he may his money back again. The right hon. Gentleman goes on to say— Should he become the purchaser, he shall receive a deed signed by the collector, putting him in possession of the land, subject, nevertheless, to all general taxes and local rates, and to any other claim, whether of Government or otherwise, that may have been, or may hereafter he, established in any court of competent jurisdiction. This is telling any unfortunate man who may wish to buy land, that if he does so, he will buy, with his eyes open, a lawsuit in regard to half a dozen claimants. It seems incredible almost that that document could have been sent out by the right hon. Gentleman, and at such a time as this too! I do not know that the sale of waste lands would greatly contribute to the growth of cotton in India. It might or it might not. But a very high authority upon Indian affairs—I allude to Mr. John Crawford—speaking of the cultivation of coffee in Ceylon, says— The success of the culture of coffee in Ceylon has sprung from the investment of English skill and capital, with the liberal principles on which the sale of wild lands has been conducted, a fair administration of law and police, and the abundant supply of labour furnished by the voluntary emigration of the half-starved population of the neighbouring continent. A better practical example of the beneficial results of free trade and free culture could not well be adduced; and it well deserves to be noticed, that herein the Government of Ceylon forms a contrast to the jealous and frustrating policy still pursued, and chiefly under home instructions, in continental India. I believe Mr. Crawford is right in saying that all the obstruction to improvements in India comes, as a rule, from the delays at home, and from the actual impediments thrown in the way of the administration in India. Depend upon it that it must be more and more a question for this country to consider how it can transfer the Government of India with due responsibility to India itself. Nothing but evil can come from attempting to govern a country twelve thousand miles off by an agency in this country. My hon. Friend has told you how much larger the increase of the cotton supply has been in the Mediterranean countries than in India. What has been the progress in India? Last year India sent us about 1,000,000 bales of cotton. This year it has sent us 1,100,000, or perhaps a little more. In some countries the cotton supply has been doubled in a twelvemonth, while in India the increase has been only ten per cent; or, rather, there has hardly been any increase at all, because there has been vile adulteration in the supply—dust, rubbish, and great stones have been packed up in the cotton bales. What has been the temptation offered to India to increase the growth of cotton there? We are now paying to India 16d. per lb. for what in 1860 we paid only 4d.[An hon. MEMBER: In Liverpool.] We are paying to India this very year £21,000,000 more for our cotton than we have paid for the same quantity of cotton in 1860. You would say it was quite impossible under these circumstances that you could fail to have a largely-increased supply from a country like that. Well if we do not, I attribute that very much to the circumstance that the poor cultivators were not informed sufficiently early of what was likely to happen in this market. They have very likely heard now. My right hon. Friend told us last year they were ignorant of the prices we were paying. My complaint against my right hon. Friend is that a year or two years ago he threw obstructions in their way. If due vigilance had been observed, if your collectors and other subordinates had been instructed to inform the agricultural population of the prospects of our cotton market, we should have had a larger supply of cotton from India. A great deal has been said about the manufacturers coming to this House and asking for assistance in obtaining a supply of cotton. Now, I do hot come to this House or to any the else to help me to get cotton. I say you are in possession of India, and for Heaven's sake, in the present crisis in Lancashire, try to get cotton there in a legitimate way. I maintain that this is a matter in which not merely the cotton spinners and manufacturers of this country are concerned. I wish to say a word with regard to the position in which Lancashire stands with regard to this House, and what I may call the governing classes in this country. A calamity has befallen us, national in its effect and national in its origin. It is not a calamity that has befallen us through any neglect of duty. It is not because business is dying out, because coal or iron is exhausted, because skilled hands have gone out of the country, that this crisis has happened. You have capital in Lancashire ready to employ all your people, and ready to compete with all the world. You have the most ingenious artisans and the most enterprising capitalists in the world; but they have been deprived of the raw material of their industry, and by no act of their own but by a national act. This blockade of the Southern ports of America is part of the national policy. We say commercial blockades are a mode of carrying on war which we must maintain. But I say, when a calamity like this falls on a portion of your population by operation of national policy, it is the interest and the duty of every class in the community, according to their station and their means, to do their utmost to mitigate that calamity. And with regard to this Indian question, I hold the right hon. Gentleman first and foremost responsible. But I maintain that all those who are engaged in India, all those who benefit by Indian employments, are bound to use their best exertions to mitigate the evil under which our cotton manufacture is suffering. I remember that the President of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce, when speaking on this question, said there are a great many employments in India, many had obtained high honours and high rank in the service of India, but he never heard of any of the people of Manchester getting any of those appointments. Speaking myself as a representative of a cotton constituency, I do not come here in formâ pauperis. I ask for nothing in the way of charity, but I complain of you for not having done your duty in this matter, and I demand that you do it. Nor do I wish anything to be done in this matter that is hostile to the interests of India. I do not want the rights of India to be sacrificed for the benefit of the cotton spinners of Rochdale. I only ask that their own interests may be consulted. I ask that your superior intelligence and your superior morality shall be employed in improving the condition of the people that you have made dependent on you. I maintain, as was said by De Tocqueville, that our only title to be in India at all is because we are supposed to be superior to the people of that country, and can therefore confer advantages upon them—can improve their morality and their prosperity—can give them a secure tenure of land, and those rights and privileges which we ask for ourselves. And I again say that their interests and our interests can be brought into harmony by the employment of such courses as I recommend to the right hon. Gentleman. I maintain that what I demand may be done in the interest of that community, and in the interest of my constituents. I would scorn to stand here and ask anything for my constituents, if they were starving, at the expense of the agricultural population of India.

MR. PENDER

said, he was anxious to call attention to a few points that appeared to him to bear on the question; but before he referred to these one or two points, he would revert to what fell from the hon. Member for Dumbarton as to the quantity of cotton in India, and to a statement made by a noble Lord in the other House. He believed that that statement owed its origin to Members of the Indian Council. He had occasion last summer, in conversation with a noble Lord, to refer to the apathy of the Government, and the noble Lord retorted by saying that there was abundance of cotton in India if British merchants would send out to fetch it. He (Mr. Pender) stated, that if the British Government would send out an agent to India, he would send out an agent with him; that if the cotton was found, he would buy it; and if any large supply could be found, he would pay the expense of the Government agent as well as of his own agent. The noble Lord asked him to put his offer in writing, and he did so; but the reply of his noble Friend was that it was not compatible with the duty of the Government to pay the expense of agents. He said he would pay the expense, and the end of the whole thing was—"There is plenty of cotton in India, if you will send out agents and money to improve the cultivation." His reply was, that he knew that as well as the noble Lord who made the statement, and therefore he might state to his hon. Friend the Member for Dumbarton, that he was afraid there was a good deal of ignorance prevailing as to the quantity of cotton in India. There were those who considered that the present condition of Lancashire was owing more to over-production than to the lamentable war in America. The production of cotton goods in 1860 and 1861 no doubt was great. It amounted on the whole to £80,000,000, of which £40,000,000 worth was exported; but that was not more than the largo consumption of those two prosperous years 1858 and 1859 justified. Still, at the outbreak of the American war there was no great glut of goods either in the home or in the foreign market, although it was evident that for a time the supply had overtaken the demand. He was therefore willing to admit that there would have been a fall in the price of cotton goods if there had been no war in America, and that the exporter and producer would have suffered to some extent. But the large profits of previous years would have enabled them to bear the loss with comparative case. The existing depression in the cotton trade arose from causes very different to those which had produced a similar state of things in former years. Previous crises were the natural checks to the successful trade of former years. Then low prices were a consequence of the depression; those low prices opened new markets, and the end was an enlarged field of consumption and an increased rate of production. Unbroken prosperity ought not to be expected in the cotton trade more than in any other trade. It had its bright and dark periods, but the more markets were extended, and the more the wages of labour, especially in India, the less liable would the trade be to fluctuation. The present depression was unlike those of former years, because it was produced by a deficient supply of the raw material, while there was a high price for cotton and large stores in hand, especially in India and China. These large stores existed, not because the consumers in India and China did not require the goods, but because the price demanded was above what they could afford to pay. In 1858 the quantity of cotton goods exported to these countries averaged 4 yards per head; in 1859, 5 yards; in 1860, 4 yards; in 1861, 4 yards; and in 1862, 2½ yards per head. These figures were conclusive that the stocks on hand were not the result of over-supply, but of diminished demand, caused by the high prices at which they were held by the importers. There prevailed, too, an impression in some quarters that the cotton manufacture in England reached in 1860 its highest point of prosperity, and that now we were to witness its decay. Never was there a more baseless assumption. Those who held such views could have little faith in the progress of civilization. We had never yet supplied one-sixth part of the cotton manufactures the world wanted and would consume if their means enabled them; and there had never yet been produced a tithe of the raw cotton that could be raised. It was no extreme view to take that at no distant period India, where the almost universal dress of the people was cotton, should, as the people became better employed and better paid, consume as much cotton manufacture as the whole world now consumed. The resources of India were boundless. Railways, highways, improved navigation, irrigation, improved land tenure, would, when the present crisis had passed, create a demand for cotton goods that it was impossible to estimate. We were passing through a great change as to cotton, he admitted; but it was not a change to be looked upon with gloomy apprehensions. It was not a change leading to decay, but leading to new and wider fields of supply of the raw material, to new markets and greater demand for our manufactures, to better employment in the cotton districts than ever, for free-labour cotton, so long suppressed by the want of encouragement in India, but which now was likely to supplant the cotton grown by slavery. This was India's opportunity, and the epoch cast a grave responsibility on her rulers. Having in view the universality of the want for cotton manufactures, he was satisfied the want would be supplied. A demand so universal never yet failed to produce a supply, and it would not fail now.

MR. VANSITTART

said, he rose to order. He wished to ask if it was in accordance with the usage and rules of the House that an hon. Member should read the whole of his speech?

MR. PENDER

I am quoting from figures, and it is necessary I should refer to them. Do not let me be told that without American cotton our manufactures must cease, I undertake to say, that with a sufficient supply of Indian cotton, even as it is, at 6d. per pound (and that price would well pay the grower and the importer), not a mill in the cotton districts would stand idle, not an operative be unemployed. Decay of our cotton manufacture! I look upon this as a period above all others pregnant with its growth. Great Britain and all Europe consumed in 1860 about four million bales—4,080,000 of cotton in round numbers—costing forty millions sterling. This is a prize worth competing for, and already the competition is becoming active. In Turkey in Europe, in Egypt, in Asia, in South America, and in Australia, premiums are being given, taxes remitted, and bonuses bestowed, to encourage the growth of cotton. Even the Portuguese, proverbially slow, are bestirring themselves in the remnant that remains of their once great Indian possessions. Letters which I have received from an Indian correspondent say— Bombay, December 26th.—The Goa Government is bidding high for the export trade of the Southern Mahratta country, and has made a splendid road up to our frontier, leaving only some three miles to be made by our Government to connect Goa with Dharwar. This Sir Bartle Frere has pledged himself shall be made. The Portugese have takan, off all export duties, and made Goa almost a free port. I called on the Governor, and he offered land for presses, and every encouragement to settle. A very fine specimen of the Southern planter has got 25,000 acres for the cultivation of cotton, coffee, and tobacco, and is confident of success. Paufein, Goa, March 6th, 1863.—I have today had an interview with the Governor of Goa, and he expresses his great anxiety to induce Europeans to settle on plantations, and says he will do his utmost to assist them in every way. The liberal terms on which he has already granted land proves this is not mere talk, but that the Government really wish to open up the country—a sure indication that the Goanese are waking up from their lethargy. The terms on which the Goa Government have granted land are as follows:—The land is to be given for the first five years rent free; after which one rupee per acre on all cultivated land for fifty years, at the expiry of which, if the planters have carried out the conditions of the lease, a renewal to be made for another term of fifty years. This is a somewhat marked contradiction to the despatch from the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Indian Board (Sir Charles Wood), read by the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Cobden). Sir, I do not quarrel with the refusal, but with the tone of the letter, which is sure to be understood on the spot by the collectors that they are not to trouble themselves about cotton, and by the ryots to mean that the less they have to do with cotton-growing the better; and it will be felt here as a discouragement to European settlement in India, and European efforts to produce better cotton in India.

SIR CHARLES WOOD

The hon. Member for Rochdale is not correct in his representation of the practice in this House, because it has always been univer- sally the rule, that when, a personal attack is made on a Minister, and his conduct is impugned, he should be allowed to hear all the charges against him before being called on to reply to them. That was the course I pursued on a recent occasion, with the general concurrence of the House, and the noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn said that I was perfectly right in not rising till the attack was exhausted. Certainly, on the present occasion, when the hon. Member for Rochdale considers me deserving of being impeached, and that nothing but the want of an active opposition saves me from it, I hope that I am not less entitled to the usual courtesy of the House. With respect to the subject itself, I fully admit its great importance, and I concur in the opinion that it is to India we must look for any large increase in the supply of cotton, if there should be a failure of supply from the United States. I do not, however, mean to say that a supply of cotton may not come from other parts of the world besides, and the hon. Gentleman who introduced the Motion referred to several countries from which an increased supply might be expected; but unless I entirely failed in catching the figures correctly, I must say that the hon. Gentleman was entirely mistaken in the amount of cotton imported from Egypt and other ports on the Mediterranean, and that he placed it at an amount very much indeed above the fact. He stated the amount imported from Egypt in the first three months of the year at a figure so high that I thought I must have misunderstood him. [Mr. CAIRD: Upwards of 2,000,000 cwt.] I had understood the hon. Gentleman to say so, but this amount is so totally wrong, that I was unwilling to quote the words, lest I should have mistaken the hon. Gentleman. He has now, however, repeated the statement. That amount must be reduced very largely, for, according to the trade and navigation papers on the table of the House, the real quantities of cotton imported from Egypt were 233,000 cwt. in the first three months, and 381,000 cwt. in the first five months of the year. The hon. Gentleman went on to charge me with having always discouraged the notion of a large importation of cotton from India. That is the oddest accusation that I ever heard; for I have always been afraid that I stated too strongly my expectations of what the supply of cotton from India might be. At the same time, I have always expressed the opinion that that supply could not come at once, but must be gradual. To divert land from the production of one description of crop to the production of another must be a gradual process. Machinery may be multiplied in a short time, and the produce of it rapidly increased; but I repeat that land can not be suddenly diverted to the production of a new description of crop, especially in India, where the main crop is bread stuff, or grain of some kind for the food of the people. Therefore, though I have held out expectations that there would be a large increase in the supply of cotton from India, I have always guarded myself by saying that that increase must necessarily be gradual. I believe that the supply will come now, because now, for the first time, there has arisen that which is the indispensable stimulus for the production in India—that is, the prospect of a fair, reasonable, and certain price. That is the condition which will produce a supply of cotton, and I do not think that anything else is necessary. I have the greatest confidence in those principles of commercial policy and political economy which the hon. Member for Manchester seemed rather to disparage in his speech to-night. My conviction is, that an adequate demand, evidenced by a rise in price, will produce an adequate supply. I have held those principles throughout all my political life with the greatest confidence, and on former occasions they were warmly advocated by gentlemen who belong to what is called the Manchester school, and who declared that the best and kindest thing that could be done for trade and manufactures was to leave them alone, and that bounties and protection were not only hurtful to the community at large, but to the very trade itself which was protected. But it is said by the hon. Member for Rochdale that India is an exceptional case, that we are a despotic Government and a great landlord, and as such are bound to teach the people how to cultivate their land. I do not believe they need teaching at all. They know very well how to grow any crops for which they are satisfactorily remunerated. The hon. Gentleman next told us what a miserable set of creatures the ryots are. Such, however, is hot the account given of them by the hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment and my hon. Friend opposite very truly stated that such was not a true picture of their condition. Some remarkable letters have lately appeared in a Bombay paper, written by Mr. Smith, a stockbroker in Liverpool, who, after going through the Southern States of America last year, visited the Bombay Presidency, for the purpose of ascertaining what were the prospects of cotton cultivation there. On one point I do not quite agree with him, for I think he underrates the probable production of cotton in India. I entertain much more sanguine expectations than he does on that score, and in point of fact the exportations from India during the first five months of this year far surpass Mr. Smith's calculations. Mr. Smith says— The position of the ryot in the cotton districts is excellent, as far as the occupancy of the land is concerned. When their payment to the Government is £5, the value of their property is often £50, and their position is rather that of a small proprietor than that of a tenant farmer. Now, that is the account not of any Government official, not of any prejudiced person, but of an impartial and independent gentleman travelling through the country with the view of ascertaining the progress of the production of cotton. This single statement made by such a witness on the spot completely contradicts the allegation of the hon. Member that the ryot is a miserable, half-starved creature, who does not know how to turn his land to account and who requires Government tuition. I think the observations of my hon. Friend opposite, as to the utter absence of practical proposals on the part of those who support the Motion, are perfectly well founded. The Government are called upon to do something, but neither in the speech of the hon. Gentleman who introduced the subject, nor in the course of the debate, have I heard a single suggestion of a practical character as to what the Government ought to do. As far as I am concerned, the Government of India are perfectly ready to go to any extent within the bounds, as is expressed in the terms of the Amendment, of their legitimate functions; but I should like to know more precisely what is expected from us. I never recollect a Committee being moved for without some explanation being given by the mover of what he desired to see done, but to-night not a syllable to that effect has fallen from any of the Gentlemen who have taken part in the debate. At this period of the Session, it is too late to have an inquiry; but that is not the great objection to the Motion, so much as the absence of any practical suggestions by the hon. Member and those who support him. I am ready to admit that there is one imperative duty which the Government of India have to discharge, and that is to improve the communications of the country. I have never denied that. On the contrary, I have done my utmost to promote that object. I had prepared various statements to show what we have done, but I am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for relieving me of all trouble on that point by his admission that the communications of India are as good as those of the United States, and that the only disadvantage of India is that it is a greater distance from this country than America.

MR. CAIRD

explained that he said only that the communications of India might be made as good as those of the American States, and that the cotton-growing districts of India were not at a greater distance from the ports of shipment than those of America.

SIR CHARLES WOOD

resumed:—The words of the hon. Gentleman were that the communications in India would soon be completed. Some Members have spoken as if the growth of cotton in India were still a mere experiment and required encouragement from the Government. Why, cotton is the natural production of the country. It was from India that America obtained it, and for years and years past cotton has been grown largely there, not only for home consumption, but for exportation to China and Europe. It is, however, not many years ago since the East India Company introduced what was then a novelty—the cultivation of American cotton in India. They established model farms, they distributed American seed among the ryots, and encouraged them to plant it. These experiments established beyond all dispute the fact that there are many parts of India in which American cotton can be successfully grown, and that the ryots were perfectly able to grow it. The East India Company managed that matter in a much better way than by remitting taxes for a time, for they gave a certain price for all cotton delivered at an appointed station and of good samples. The price of American cotton at that time was such that British merchants did not think it worth while to pay what was asked for Indian cotton, and the consequence was that the cultivation fell off. The Government proved the capacity of India to supply American cotton, but it was not their business to grow cotton on a large scale for this country. That can be done only by the native cultivators on land paying the ordinary rent, and under the usual conditions of private enterprise. There is not the slightest need of prizes in order to induce the ryot to cultivate good cotton; but it is a mistake to suppose, that although I thought them unnecessary, I prohibited them. They were offered in all the Presidencies, but without any real advantage; and in the Madras Presidency the result was, that a man who had grown thirty acres of very moderately good cotton, and who was the only competitor, got £1,000. I do not think, however, that such a proceeding is at all likely to promote the cultivation, if a rise in price from 100 rupees to 400 rupees per candy failed to do so. Some time back I had the honour of receiving a large deputation in regard to encouraging the growth of Indian cotton, who made these two requests to me:—That there should be an alteration in the mode of levying the duties, and that the communications throughout India should be improved. The first request was complied with at once. I sent instructions to India, and with the concurrence of the merchants of Calcutta the duties were placed on a satisfactory footing. As to improving the communications, I said that it was the duty of the Government to do so, and that we would proceed with them as rapidly as we could; but I said that there was much that was required for improving the quality of the cotton, in regard to picking, cleaning, ginning, and packing the cotton, which could not be done by Government, and must be done by private individuals; and that it was necessary for our common object that they should do their part. I urged this upon them, and said that I was confident that by the time they had accomplished this, in regard to the cotton grown near the sea, or within reach of easy communication, they would find the roads ready for bringing down the cotton from the interior, and I pointed out to them how many cotton-growing districts there were near the coast, on the great rivers. I am sorry to say that I do not find that much, if anything, has been done towards this end. The hon. Member for Birmingham points to Surat cotton as a byword amongst the manufacturers. Now, Surat cotton is grown close to the sea—the cost of conveyance is a trifling consideration at present prices. If Surat cotton is so bad, it is, I fear, because the system of purchase is such as to give a premium for fraud. There is, as has been said, a price for quantity, but none for quality; but this is the fault, not of the Government, but of the purchasers of cotton, and cotton agents. Through the cotton-growing districts, in the upper part of the Bengal Presidency, a railroad has been carried, in addition to the water communication by the Ganges, and the Bombay and Baroda railroad runs through the northern part of the cotton-growing districts in Bombay. Then we come to Madras. The Madras railroad is completed from coast to coast, running through the main cotton districts of that Presidency. It is some years since the East India Company established a Government farm in Madras, and it is an acknowledged fact that the ryots know perfectly well how to grow cotton. I can state, on the authority of Mr. Brown, who is, generally speaking, an assailant of the Government, and consequently no friendly witness, that in Madras the native cultivators not only have very little to learn, but can grow cotton better than the American planters who came to India. He states his conclusion in the following words:— That at the end of the fifth year the planters retired from the field altogether, confessing candidly that they could not compete with Coimbatore farmers in growing equally good and equally cheap American cotton per acre. One of the American planters also stated that he found the cultivation in many parts of the Bombay Presidency also quite as good as in the greater part of America. I do not mean to say, of course, that all the cotton in India is grown as well as in America, where capital is freely applied and the business is more remunerative; but I believe that the cultivation is fairly carried on, and in a manner as well adapted to the soil as the ordinary cultivation anywhere else. It is nonsense to talk of these people as unable to cultivate their land at all. Again, in Dharwar, the cultivation of American cotton has been largely extended, and the roads are capable of carrying away any amount that is likely to be produced there. The hon. Member for Stirling has acknowledged that Berar will soon be opened by railways, and that all the best cotton districts are becoming more easily accessible every day. He stated, in a few words, that in a short time India would be on a par with the United States. The hon. Member for Rochdale complains that nothing has been done to make the people acquainted with the demand for cotton. Why, as truly stated by the hon. Member for Stirling, two years ago—in February 1861—the Government of India did all that could be expected of them. They sent commissioners round to make known to the collectors and through them to the people that there was a great demand for cotton; they distributed seed; they issued handbooks, containing all the information that could be obtained; and they devoted a considerable sum to the construction of roads. Which of the two hon. Gentlemen are we to believe?

MR. CAIRD

explained, that what he had said was, that the excellent measures proposed by the Indian Government were disallowed by the Minister at home.

SIR CHARLES WOOD

The hon. Gentleman said, that the Indian Government had been most active, and that their Regulations were sound in principle, and did all that could be desired. He then complained that they were checked by my interference. What was my interference? It was, that I thought it no part of the business of the Government to pay commercial travellers who went to buy cotton in India, that I believed prizes to be perfectly useless—but nevertheless I allowed them—and that I objected to give certain portions of land for the purpose of trying experimentally what had been proved many years ago to the satisfaction of every person in India. Such are the grievous measures with which I have discouraged the growth of cotton in India, and for which, according to the hon. Member for Rochdale, I deserve to be impeached. It is quite true, he made two other charges against me, which are easily disposed of. He read a paragraph, which he quoted as from a despatch of mine, and then said it was of such a tenor that it was incredible that I should have written it, that somebody else must have written it, and that I had unwittingly signed the despatch. I quite agree that the thing is incredible, for there is no such passage in the despatch. He then praised very much the mode of selling waste land in Ceylon, and blamed me for not following the example of that colony. The fact is that waste land in Ceylon is sold by auction exactly as I have directed that it shall be sold in India, and in the course of the recent debate on the sale of waste lands I referred to an Indian newspaper which had pointed this out. These two charges, therefore, may be dismissed, and the grounds of im- peachment are reduced to what I have stated. I am surprised that no suggestions have been made to-night as to what it is that Government should do to promote the cultivation of cotton. Suggestions have been made to me before, but I confess I thought they were perfectly inadmissible. One was that the Government, in some way or other, should turn merchants, and buy cotton, insuring certain prices for a certain period to the ryots. I have no doubt we might have made a remarkably good transaction, as far as profit is concerned, if we had acted upon that recommendation; but is the House prepared to say that the Government ought to embark on such a course? I stated in my place last year, soon after receiving this suggestion, that we were not prepared to buy cotton; that it was no part of the business of the Government to do so; that the purchase of cotton must be left to private enterprise. At the same time, I stated as broadly that to those persons who might be disposed to go to India to buy cotton we were ready to give every aid and assistance which the Government could afford. If there is one thing which has been proved more than another, it is that it is desirable to send English agents into the country to become large purchasers of cotton, not purchasers in detail, because that is impossible, but on a large scale. That is what has been recommended, without exception, by everybody who has inquired into the subject. A gentleman, well acquainted with India himself, came to me—on the part of some gentlemen who professed to be willing and able to purchase to a very large extent, through agents sent out for this purpose—the object of his visit being to ask how far the Government would be willing to assist in this matter. I asked him to have the goodness to put down upon paper what he thought we ought to do. He accordingly wrote down his suggestion. I acquiesced at once, and I hold in my hand the offer that was made through him in consequence. It was as follows:— If any number of gentlemen interested in procuring cotton from India are prepared to send agents to purchase cotton there on a large scale, the Government will do their utmost to further such an undertaking. They will give directions to the Government in India to recommend such agents to the local officers in the cotton districts, or to send a person with the agents to such local officers. In either case the various officers will be authoritatively apprised of the interest which the Government take in the operation, and they will be directed to give every assistance to the agents and to procure for them trustworthy guides and interpreters for the purpose of facilitating their intercourse with the natives. It may be said that even this was going a little beyond the proper functions of the Government; but I was so anxious that every facility should be given for the purchase of cotton by authorized agents sent from this country, that I at once offered that this should be done. From that day to this, however, no application, has been received from any one, and I do not think that any agents have been sent out. I do not blame the manufacturers for not sending agents, if they are content with the ordinary operations of supply and demand. But when they press for Government interference beyond the ordinary functions of Government, they ought at least to make those exertions, which can only be done by private persons. On the part of the Government, I have only to say, that while I was unwilling to undertake functions which ought to be left to private enterprise, I was ready to afford the facilities I have described. Is it so extraordinary that anything of this kind should be done? Is it not the practice as regards other goods, and indeed as regards cotton elsewhere? Not long ago I read an article in a Review, sensibly written by a gentleman of great knowledge in regard to the purchase of cotton. The writer says— In the States of America the cotton planter has been followed to his plantations by the agents of the European spinners, and the stimulant of the price paid for the article, according to its quality, being obtained by the planter, has promoted the growth of the best classes of cotton, and has vastly extended their cultivation. Why should not the agents of the European spinners adopt a similar course in India? If they did, I have no doubt but that a like result would be obtained. At all events, if the spinners will not send their agents to India in this way, they have no right to blame the Government for not doing what they ought to do for themselves, more especially after the offer of every facility on our part has been made to them. But another suggestion has been put forward—namely, that we should remit the land tax upon land used for the growth of cotton. It was mentioned apparently with favour by the hon. Member for Birmingham at a meeting there, and I need hardly argue against such a proposal, though it has been advocated to some extent by the hon. Member for Rochdale this evening. Indeed, Mr. Fergusson, whose authority is quoted against me on these matters, in his pamphlet recently published, says on this point— Of all the suggestions that have been put forward for encouraging the growth of cotton in India, none is so utterly impracticable as that propounded of remitting the land revenue on any land cultivated with cotton. Now, that is the opinion of one of the greatest opponents of the Indian Government on this suggestion. Let me tell the gentlemen of Lancashire that there is a great principle involved in this matter. They are not to suppose that the high price of cotton has produced distress in Lancashire alone; it has also produced great distress in India. In Cuddapah, in Guzerat, and other parts of India, the native weavers and spinners having been thrown out of employment. Happily for many of these poor people, other employment has been found for them on the railways and other public works carried on by the Indian Government, and thus they have been saved from severe suffering. But what would be said to me by the natives of India if, in order to increase that export of cotton which is producing destitution among them, I were to take money from the taxes which hey pay? It is natural that the gentlemen of Lancashire should be anxious for anything which might relieve the distress of their workpeople, who have borne their sufferings so patiently; but certainly the distress of Lancashire ought not to be alleviated at the expense of the people of India. If any Vote of public money should be thought necessary for the benefit of our factory operatives, it surely ought to be taken out of the taxes paid by this country and not out of those paid by the people of India, who are themselves suffering from the same calamity. I remember that one of the arguments used in order to induce me to buy cotton on the part of the Indian Government, was that it would be better to supply cotton to the Lancashire operatives than to vote money for relieving their distress. I did not think it necessary to dispute this position, but I observed that in that case it clearly was the Government of this country, and not the Government of India, which ought to undertake this duty. The money for relieving distress in Lancashire would be voted, by this House, and the money for the alternative clearly must be drawn from the same source, and I referred them to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I confess that I certainly have not heard of their applying to my right hon. Friend. It was far easier to find fault with the Secretary of State for India. I have heard of a government imposing a charge on the whole community in order to prevent suffering in a part of it, as, for instance, to prevent a scarcity of food; and that they were justified in so doing; but I never heard yet of a proposal to impose a charge upon the whole of a people in order to promote a measure which would aggravate the distress under which a part of it was suffering. There is no difficulty in obtaining cotton in India if people will only go there for it. The Cotton Supply Association despatched their secretary to Dharwar, and I sent Dr. Forbes with him, the Government paying the latter's expenses. The secretary of the association, however, when he got there, would not buy. Dr. Forbes said that the people flocked round him and asked him to do so, but he refused. The secretary mentioned that he was going further up the country, when the people said they would keep their cotton for him until he came back, if he would only buy it from them; but to purchase was not within the scope of his powers. Whatever might be the ultimate object of his being sent to India, I had always understood that the first in point of time was the purchase of cotton in the interior by European agency—and now it seems that the power to do so was withdrawn from him before he reached India. Mr. Stanborough, an English merchant, has stated that he had no difficulty in buying cotton in Berar, that the growers were willing to sell the cotton to him in preference to mortgaging it to the soucars, or native bankers. My belief is, that as regards any interference on the part of the Government, so far from doing good, it is far more likely to do harm. A most complete example of this is afforded by what took place in Dharwar. There the Government introduced the cultivation of American cotton, and it went on for some time under their superintendence. It was found that the ryots could grow it very successfully; and when that fact was established, the Government withdrew its interference, as forming no part of its permanent and proper duty. It appears from the report of the Collector that the moment the pressure of the Government native officials was taken off, the ryots, who had previously felt themselves compelled to grow American cotton, instantly gave it up, saying that it caused them a loss. The result was that in a single year the cultivation fell from 20,502 acres to 3,357. Nevertheless, the cultivation had taken root, and after a short interval began to increase rapidly by the voluntary action of the ryots. In his report to the present Collector, Dr. Forbes says— In 1848–9 a new period commences, which may be called that of free cultivation, the ryots having been left entirely to themselves. From that time forward, with one or two checks, the increase has been steady up to the past season, in which, in the Dharwar Collectorate and Jagheers included within its boundaries, it amounted to 214,310 acres. I saw, not long ago, Major Wingate, a most able officer, who knows the whole country in the West of India better than anybody I could name, and I asked him to tell me whether there was anything that Government could do to promote the growth of cotton. His answer was— The less you meddle the better. The ryots are suspicious; and if you interfere, they will suppose that you have some hidden motive. The cultivation has already extended; and if you let them alone, it will extend very largely. That is the result of the concurrent testimony from all parts of India, and it is confirmed by the quantity of cotton which has come home. There may, from some other places, be an increase of a few thousand hundredweights more, but the increase in the quantity received from India has been very remarkable. In the first instance, it arose from the sweeping up of all the old cotton that was to be found in the country. The intimation was given by the Government in the spring of 1861, long before a word was said in this House. The crop of 1861 came into the market in 1862, and last year, for the first time, there was a considerable increase in the quantity of land sown. The import of cotton from India amounted in the year 1859 to 1,700,000 cwt.; in 1860 to 1,800,000 cwt.; in 1861 to 3,295,000 cwt.; and in 1862 to 3,500,000 cwt. During the first five months of 1861 the import was 342,000 cwt.; of 1862, 734,000 cwt.; and of 1863, 962,000 cwt., so that the import during the first five months of the year was nearly trebled in three years. I therefore do not think that hon. Gentlemen have much reason to complain of what India has done to increase the supply of cotton. What has been the effect in other respects of this cultivation on the Bombay Presidency? I mentioned last year that the people in that Presidency were ploughing up grain a foot high to sow cotton. The price of grain in Bombay is now 100 per cent higher than it was a year ago, and there is no doubt that much of that increase is due to the extended cultivation of cotton. There is the evil of the pressure on the people from the increased price of food; but as regards the increased production of cotton, the prospects are promising, though I am afraid that in parts of India, the crop of this year has been much injured by the rains. Do let us apply to cotton and to the people of India those principles of common sense which apply to all the rest of the world, and do not let people imagine that there is something so exceptional in India that cotton can be raised from the ground as it were by the stroke of the magician's wand. The increased production must be gradual. Mr. Smith, whom I have quoted before, says that he believes that the increased quantity of land sown with cotton last year is about 25 per cent; that if anything like the present prices continue, you may look for a similar yearly increase in the cultivation, and that in six years you may get from India about the same quantity that you used to receive from America. I do not like to hold out expectations which may not be realized, more especially with regard to a crop so delicate and uncertain as cotton; but I believe that at even lower prices than the present we may look for a large increase in the supply of cotton from India. I also believe that no stimulant whatever is required by the people of India except that of profit. All that the Government can do is to increase the means of communication, and the Government of India is authorized to spend money with that object to any extent—the only limit being that they shall get good work. Whatever is within the legitimate functions of the Government we are perfectly willing and anxious to do; but it would be wrong for us to step beyond our province, and more especially to adopt any of those measures which have been recommended to-night, and which would impose a charge upon the taxpayers of India to relieve distress in this country. I do not believe that this is a purpose to which the revenues of India ought to be applied. With that exception, I am ready to do all that I can to promote the growth of cotton in India; and I believe that this is due not only to the population of Lancashire, but is essentially for the welfare of India itself.

MR. CRAWFORD

said, that he fully concurred in the views expressed by his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for India, with regard to the promotion of the cultivation of cotton in India. He had been a good deal astonished to hear the proposal to remit the land tax upon the small portions of land on which it was designed to try experiments with regard to the cultivation of cotton. The question of the waste lands had but little to do with that cultivation. Complaint was made that the Government had not stimulated the cultivation of cotton in India; but the question was how they could stimulate its cultivation. He believed that in all those parts of India where cotton could be successfully grown it had been grown for centuries past; and he further believed there was no quarter of the globe where its cultivation was so thoroughly understood as it was by the natives of India where cotton was grown. There were districts in India as highly cultivated as the districts in the neighbourhood of London. Some people were apt to compare India with America as regarded the cultivation of cotton; but America was a wild, literally unsettled country, whereas in India they found a Country which had been in cultivation for centuries, and a country where the subdivision of property and the rotation of crops were understood even long before this part of the world knew anything about such things. It was therefore wholly beside the question to institute any comparison between India and America. He thought the Government had rendered all the assistance they could properly give in a matter of the kind. They had bestowed a great deal of attention on the subject. They had incurred heavy liabilities and responsibilities in improving communications. They had listened to every reasonable proposition which had been made to them; and he did not think they were open to the charge which had been brought against them of indifference on the subject. It had been asked why did not Lancashire send agents to India to buy cotton; but, however cute the agents of Manchester might be, he undertook to say they would be beaten out of the market by the natives of India in five minutes. They seemed to think that the natives of India had no mercantile capacity; but that was an entire mistake. Having lived some years among them, he could say he had never seen a body of men who had more intelligence or a more accurate knowledge of the principles that govern men in mercantile business than the people of India, and no men, on the whole, were more honest or faithful in carrying on their business. At the same time, he thought that European intervention might be of use in the process of packing and preparing cotton for the market of England. He had never participated in the charges made against the Indian Government, and he retained the confidence in their administration he had always felt in connection with this subject.

MR. BRIGHT

I have abstained on several recent occasions when this question has been brought before the House from offering any observations upon it, because I am quite willing to confess that I do not see—what some hon. Members fancy they see—a mode by which in a very short time any great increase in the production of cotton can be made in India. There is no royal road to learning, and there is, I think, no short cut to that which we want to obtain in India. The difficulty of the question is as great as anybody has described it to be—I think greater than anybody has described it—but it does not follow that we shall get out of it, or overcome the difficulty by any legislative or administrative miracle, such as some hon. Members and some persons down in Lancashire seem to imagine to be possible. The right hon. Gentleman relies very much upon true economical principles, and he says—what is now common in all the school books—that a demand will bring a supply. But though it is a very common phrase, it has its qualifications, and there are obstacles which entirely overthrow it, I will undertake to say, that if a number of years ago, which we all remember, the right hon. Gentleman had proposed to do certain things in Ireland by the rule of demand and supply, he could not have done them. He could not, for example, have obtained a high degree of cultivation or an improved quality of grain—say of oats or wheat from a class of cultivators among whom the land had been long divided into quarter of an acre patches, and who had been accustomed to live on "lumper" potatoes. And in the case of India there must be surmounted the neglect, the oppression, and the total violation of all economic law, during the whole period that country has been governed by us, and I dare say to a large extent for a much longer period than that. The question of the tenure of land is one which seems agreed upon by the hon. Member for Dumbartonshire (Mr. Smollett) and some hon. Members on this side of the House. But every witness examined before the Committee which I obtained in 1847–8 gave the same testimony, and all evidence from that time to this comes to the same point, that unless you can give the cultivators or proprietors a tenure of land which will make their property secure, it is impossible to have that continuous and rapid improvement which under other circumstances we might hope for. So, with regard to the rent, no doubt there has been during late years a considerable reduction in the assessment in many parts of India; and wherever that has taken place I believe the Government have received a larger revenue from the smaller rent than they did before from the higher. The question of public justice, too, is one of very great importance, and under the old East India Company there was, perhaps, no country where there was so much delay and cost in obtaining justice as in India. Then the right hon. Gentleman says a great deal has been done with regard to roads, and my hon. Friend for the City, who is up to his lips in Indian railroads, will of course bear him out. Railroads have, it is true, been constructed in India, at an enormous expense; but the right hon. Gentleman was entirely mistaken when he endeavoured to bring forward the testimony of the hon. Member for Stirling in favour of that which he had accomplished. Railroads have been made, but many of them have not been made with any special reference to commerce, and do not as yet touch those districts where cotton principally grows. The right hon. Gentleman also alluded to the small farmers by whom the land was chiefly cultivated, and said they must grow food for themselves. Now, that this happens is owing, I will not say to his neglect, but to that of his predecessors in office, for there is such an absence of roads—I do not speak of railroads, by which Government officials pass from one part of the country to another, but of ordinary highways—that almost every district must grow its own food, because if, in consequence of any vicissitude, there happened to be a deficiency in any particular locality, it would be nearly impossible to obtain a supply from so short a distance as even twenty, thirty, or fifty miles. It has even been known that the price of food at one point has been five or even ten times as much as it has been at another point perhaps not sixty miles distant. That ab- sence of common roads makes it necessary that every farmer should grow food enough for his wants, and therefore no farmer can become simply a cultivator or producer of cotton. He will have some cotton, but probably the largest portion of his land is occupied with food for his family. Now, what we want in India really is what I hope we are beginning to have—we want a new life altogether—a revolution of ideas in the Government, and a revolution, too, in their practice. Such a change would, I believe, bring about through the whole country a revolution in the condition and minds of the people, and you will then have far more life and activity than you have ever seen before. But this is not a work that can be accomplished in a Bingle year. It must come after many years of the cultivation of sound principles and better practices; and it was with a view to that that so long ago as fifteen years I asked the House of Commons to make changes with regard to India that probably by this time would, if adopted, have produced good results. But the House of Commons does not like change. Nobody could induce it to pay any attention to this question, and the last person to pay any attention to it was the Chief Secretary of State for India, who was at the time President of the Board of Control. And then, when there comes this great calamity of the failure of the cotton supply, everybody runs to everybody else asking that something should be done, and there is a contest between those who are suffering in Lancashire through their representatives in this House and the Secretary of State for India, as to who is to bear the blame. I maintain now, as I have ever maintained since I first devoted my mind to the study of this question, that the great points to be taken into our consideration are the questions of policy and Government; and that so long as you choose, as you do at present, a Governor General for India, with a few gentlemen controlled by a Secretary of State here, and a Council whom it is possible he may not control, there is no chance whatever that 150,000,000 of people, speaking as many languages and comprising as many nations as is the case in Europe, can be satisfactorily, justly, and wisely ruled. That being my opinion, I have always proposed that Parliament should give to the several presidencies in India the power to govern themselves each within its own limits. But that power should be infinitely more extensive than it is now; in fact, quite as extensive as the powers confided to the general Government at Calcutta. If we had at Madras, Bombay, in the Punjaub, the North West, or in Bengal, separate and independent governments, I should ask that in each of those presidencies there should be formed a competent Board of Works, whose sole duty should be to examine the country, to determine what public works ought to be made, to make surveys, plans, and estimates, and that the works should be undertaken in some cases by the Government and in others be handed over to capitalists either of India or England. Under that system you would probably have five times, probably ten times as much capital laid out in public works in India as you can possibly have under the present system; and you would find, moreover, that if these public works were undertaken and executed, the whole country would receive new life, just as you find any district in this country receives new life when it is opened by the best mode of communication—a railroad. It is only thus that the vast territories of the United States have been brought so rapidly under cultivation and have yielded such vast products of corn and cotton as we have seen of late years. The right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for India is enthusiastic on the subject of railways, but he does not seem to me to be able to nurse more than one child at once, or to have more than one idea. He is very great with the hon. Member for the City of London, and the City railway interest, but he does not appear to believe in the least in anything else. I am satisfied that there is much to be done in the way of improving communication in India besides the great lines of communication which are already made; and a durable road along which carriages can travel conveniently at all times of the year would be an immense gain to that country. Even in that very province of Bengal to which the hon. Gentleman referred, roads were in such a state not long ago, that when the Governor of Bengal was here, and was asked whether he ever travelled through his Presidency, he said "No; there are no roads on which to travel." A few years ago it might be said with truth that there were more good and metalled reads in any one of a dozen or twenty counties in England than there were in the whole of the broad territories of India. That such should be the case is not I think creditable to the Government; and if the country remains in such a condition, it will not be creditable to Parliament. The right hon. Gentleman thought he had been very successful, no doubt, in overthrowing the arguments of the hon. Member for Rochdale. I paid great attention to the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, though I did not understand a good deal of it. But perhaps he will listen to what I am going to say. The right hon. Gentleman objected to a quotation which my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale made, and he quoted with some approbation from a pamphlet by Mr. Ferguson. Mr. Ferguson, however, says, when dealing with this very point, that so far back as 1858 Lord Canning turned his attention to the tenure of land in India, and that the conclusions which he arrived at were embodied in rules under the date of October 1861, which were liberal and encouraging. Nine months, however, after the publication of those rules, orders were sent out, putting a stop to the sale of waste lands, and Mr. Ferguson says, that while under Lord Canning's rule 100,000 acres were applied, there was not, he believed, under Sir Charles Wood's, an application for a single acre. Notwithstanding what has been said by the hon. Member for the City of London, I think that the subject of the waste lands has a great deal to do with the general question of improvements in India. The temper and manner in which the Secretary of State deals with this subject is also of importance. The right hon. Gentleman says that the extract which my hon. Friend read is not in his despatch, but that is a mere quibble to which he ought not to descend. The passage read by my hon. Friend is contained in the supplemental Rules issued at Calcutta, in August 1862. The right hon. Gentleman must therefore have been aware of it, although it is not in his despatch; for it is, as I have said, contained in the Rules issued by the Government at Calcutta, and which were, of course, framed in obedience to instructions from home.

SIR CHARLES WOOD

said, the words were not in his despatch as stated by the hon. Member for Rochdale, and could not have originated in any way from his despatch, as the Rules in which the words really were, were published in Calcutta five months before the despatch was written.

MR. BRIGHT

But those supplemental Rules have not been cancelled by the right hon. Gentleman, and are, so far as I know, still in operation.

SIR CHARLES WOOD

I have not got the sale of waste lands papers by me. If I had, I could refer to the letter to show the hon. Gentleman how the matter stood. The Bengal Government saw that the Regulations of the Government of India professed to bar private rights, which could, in fact, only be barred by a legislative enactment, and they therefore omitted an apparent promise to bar rights which they could not legally do, observing that such rights could only be barred by law, and that when the law necessary for this object was passed, no Rule would be required. This is the state of facts as regards the Government of Bengal, which seems to me to have been perfectly right; but as regards my despatch having influenced them, I repeat that the Rules were published five months before my despatch was written.

MR. BRIGHT

The right hon. Gentleman will, I presume, admit with regard to the general question of what has been done, first under the waste lands proposition of Lord Canning, and then what has been done under the altered state of things which he has effected, that in the one case there have been a great many applications for land, and in the other there has been none. That is stated in the pamphlet to which the right hon. Gentleman has appealed as an authority. [Sir CHARLES WOOD: It may be so.] The right hon. Gentleman knows that I have not been to him lately with deputations from Lancashire, but I will now take the liberty of stating to the House that the greatest possible dissatisfaction exists with regard to the manner in which this question of cotton supply from India is treated at the Indian Office. I am not going to say that there are not unreasonable expectations as to what can be done. I believe there are, and for that reason I have not during the last two or three years troubled the House with specific propositions, because I do not see any specific proposition that could make any great and immediate change. I am not in the habit of proposing things that the House cannot understand. Notwithstanding this, I am free to state to the right hon. Gentleman what is the state of feeling down in Lancashire, because I think it is necessary that he should know it, and that the House and the Government should know it. There is a general complaint—it may arise from the unfortunate manner of the Secretary of State for India—that the deputations which come to him on this matter are treated in a manner that is flippant and irritating; and that generally, instead of entering cordially into the consideration of any propositions that are made, his conversation and manner are wholly obstructive. Now, I believe I am stating in mild terms that which is said almost universally by every deputation which has come to the India Office in connection with this question during the last two or three years. It has been carried so far that I know many gentlemen down in the manufacturing districts—some of whom have heretofore not been supposed to call in question that which was done by persons in authority—who have said over and over again that they would no longer go upon any deputation to the Secretary of State for India. It may be, as I have said, his unfortunate manner; but I am telling the House, and I am telling him, that which I know to be the truth with regard to the opinions of merchants, manufacturers, spinners, members of the chamber of commerce, and so forth, who have gone to the India Office to discuss this question. When they have spoken to me, I have said to them, "You cannot probably point out to Sir Charles Wood what he can do to bring you a million bales of cotton." Well, I believe I have told them the truth, as I am telling the truth to the right hon. Gentleman. But it does not follow that nothing can be done, and it does not follow that when gentlemen who have these vast interests at stake—not merely their own personal interests, but the interests of the population among whom they live, come to a Government department—they should not be received and conversed with in a manner, that when they go away, they will at least be satisfied that they had spoken to a statesman who is anxious to do the best he could for the great interests which they represented. I am speaking to the right hon. Gentleman in a friendly spirit, and though he may think otherwise, I have defended him as long as I could; but I know that there are men in Lancashire, who are worthy to be listened to by any Member of the Government, who have said that they will no longer go to the India Office, because they find that they are not treated with that courtesy which they receive from other Ministers, and that the Secretary of State for India did not seem to comprehend the gravity and importance of the interests which they were intrusted to lay before him. I have now said what I have to say upon this question. I do not believe the Secretary of State can work miracles. I do not believe that any person can get two or three million hales of cotton immediately. I believe that such dispositions might have been made twenty years ago that you would now have had as much cotton as you want, and much more than you would use if you gave the price you now offer. But there is no escape from the neglect of the past time. The oppression—for there has been much of that—and the carelessness with which you have acted in regard to India cannot be atoned for by expressions of regret or by any sudden act of legislation, I hope the right hon. Gentleman will forgive me for what I have said. I shall be thankful if he will; but if he will not, I shall forgive him, if he will only pay a little more attention to the subject, and treat my friends with a little more courtesy than they say he has treated them when they come to see him.

MR. T. G. BARING

said, he had listened with attention to the speech of the hon. Member for Birmingham, and had heard no arguments in support of the Motion of the hon. Member for Stirling, but merely a general support of the expressions of the right hon. Member for Rochdale, who went so far as to say that the conduct of the Secretary of State had been such, that had there been any Opposition, there would have been ground for his impeachment.

MR. COBDEN

I did not mean Tower Hill; I meant to say that his conduct would have been called into question.

MR. T. G. BARING

said, he only quoted the words of the right hon. Gentleman, who might put what interpretation on them he pleased. The hon. Member for Birmingham, without using any argument or pointing out that anything had been done which ought not to have been done, or anything left undone which ought to have been done, condescended to repeat reports to the prejudice of the Secretary of State for India, which he was satisfied were without the slightest foundation. He heard the rumour some time ago, and feeling, as he had a right to feel, great personal interest in the reputation of his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, he addressed himself to the hon. and gallant Member for North Lancashire, who had introduced a deputation of working men.

MR. BRIGHT

I did not refer to the working men. I did not know there had been a deputation of working men. I said merchants, manufacturers, and spinners.

MR. T. G. BARING

said, the hon. Member indulged in vague charges and aspersions without naming the persons on whose authority they rested, and he was giving as a reason for saying they were without the slightest foundation, that the hon. and gallant Member who accompanied one deputation told him they were perfectly satisfied with the manner in which they were received, and that they were received with that courtesy which he knew his right hon. Friend invariably showed to every deputation. These charges were produced by ordinary gossip, and he wondered that the hon. Member for Birmingham should have condescended to repeat them. The hon. Member for Birmingham had endeavoured to prove that the ordinary laws of demand and supply do not operate in India. To this the fact that in the first four months of this year the export of cotton from Calcutta was nearly double the amount during the whole of last year was a complete answer. The statement was also refuted by other facts. The Russian war created a demand for articles which India could supply, and the result was a rapid increase of their export. The export of jute from India was 350,000 cwt. in 1852, and in 1860 it was 1,000,000 cwt. The value of the export of seeds had increased from £450,000 to £1,785,000; and in the face of these figures it was impossible to say that the ordinary influence of demand upon supply did not apply to India as much as to any other country in the worlds The main position in dispute was whether the ordinary principles of demand and supply would produce their usual effects, or whether it was necessary for the Government to interfere in some way or other. The hon. Member for Birmingham, in addressing the House, and more particularly public meetings in the country on these matters, always carried himself seven or eight years backward. He perpetually referred to the Committee of 1848, of which he was Chairman, and ignored all that had been done in the mean time. He perpetually stated that the peasantry of India were sunk in the deepest poverty; that no improvement had taken place in the administration of justice, and that the communications in India were in a lamentable state. Any Gentleman who had read the papers on the subject would know that there was unimpeachable evidence as well from Govern- ment servants as from gentlemen unconnected with Government, that the peasantry of India—particularly in the cotton districts—were in a constantly-improving state. With regard to communications, he was surprised to hear the hon. Member sneer at the railroads, and assume that the Government had paid too much attention to that particular mode of communication. The draught Report of the Committee of 1848, drawn up by the hon. Member himself, expressed the opinion that "the system under which India can most speedily be supplied with railway communication is that which is most deserving of support," and that private enterprises for that purpose ought to be dealt with most liberally by the Indian Government. That was precisely what had been done by the Government, and, instead of the railroads being merely for the convenience of Government officials, they were projected through the main producing districts of the country. The hon. Gentleman ignored, too, all that had been done by the Government for the improvement of the administration of justice. He must know that a code of civil procedure had been passed in 1859; that a code of criminal procedure had been passed in 1861; and that a new penal code had been passed, as well as a great measure for the amalgamation of the Sudder and Supreme Courts. More had been done for the improvement of the administration of justice since the direct Government of India had been assumed by the Crown than had been done for years before. The Secretary of State and the Council had done all in their power to increase the export of cotton from India. They had been in constant communication with the Cotton Supply Association—experiments had been continually made, and very recently cotton from Peru had been sent to be tried in India—he hoped with considerable prospect of success. One thing the Secretary of State had constantly refused to do, and that was to tax the people of India in order to encourage the growth of cotton, and he was satisfied from what had taken place that the House and the country would allow that the Government of India had done its duty in this matter. The hon. Member for Birmingham had quoted from a pamphlet in support of the reckless accusations of the hon. Member for Rochdale, but the rule to which he had referred was in reality circulated in India by the local Government before the Secretary of State's despatch arrived, and it simply referred to the existing state of the law. As to the regulations for the sale of waste lands, the hon. Member for Poole had already raised a debate on that subject—in which, by the way, neither the hon. Member for Birmingham nor the right hon. Member for Rochdale appeared to support him, and there was no necessity, therefore, why he should renew the subject on the present occasion.

MR. J. B. SMITH

said, he had told the right hon. Baronet the Secretary of State on a former occasion what the effect of a laisser faire policy with regard to the growth of cotton in India would be. Could the Government account for the fact, that though the price had risen five or six-fold, the supply had not increased? In the year 1860–1 the number of bales imported from India was 986,000; in 1862, it was 1,072,000, and in the present year it was not expected to be larger than it had been last year. The right hon. Baronet (Sir C. Wood), in a speech at Halifax, had mistakenly represented him as having proposed that the Government of India should turn cotton merchants. To correct the misrepresentation, he need only refer to the speech he made in the House last Session, and he then said that with regard to the use of Indian cotton the question was not merely a question of price, but it was also one of quality. The manufacturers of this country would always give the full price for Indian cotton, but the reason it had fetched a low price was that its quality was inferior. If Indian cotton were of the same quality as American, it would fetch the same price. The question, then, was, could India produce as good cotton as America?—and it was answered by experiments tried twenty years ago, which showed that cotton equal to American could be produced only under European superintendence. What the manufacturers thought when the American war broke out was, that the Government would have availed themselves of the large field offered by India to grow cotton, but they had not done so. In corroboration of a remark made by his hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, he could assert that he had gone on many deputations to the right hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for India, and he had scarcely ever done so that the parties acting on the deputation were not offended. The right hon. Gentleman did not do justice to himself. By the manner in which he received deputations he deprived himself of a great deal of intelligence which would be very useful to him. The Pasha of Egypt did not act in that manner. He was glad to avail himself of knowledge and experience; and what was the result? The imports of cotton from Egypt in 1861 were 94,000 bales, last year they were 140,000 bales, and this year they would be 250,000 bales. The profits from the growth of cotton in Egypt would amount to more than the produce of all the gold mines in Australia. If the English Government had taken up the question as they ought to have done, thousands of their impoverished countrymen who were now walking about in idleness would be profitably employed. When the American war broke out, what was the course taken by our Government? They sent persons to rummage out the old records of the East India Company, and to write books showing that cotton could not be grown in India. The statement of the right hon. Gentleman, that the ryots would not grow cotton from American seed, was easily explicable. At first the Bombay merchants, in their ignorance, gave higher prices for native-grown cotton, and of course the ryots shaped their operations accordingly; but since that error had been rectified by the prices obtained in the English market there had been no indisposition on the part of the ryots to grow cotton from American seed. On the contrary, the quantity of land under cultivation had gone on growing till it reached 300,000 acres. Indian cotton had a very bad reputation in Lancashire, because out of 1,000,000 bales of Surat Cotton at least 200,000 were complete rubbish. He greatly feared, that whenever cotton could be procured elsewhere, the article imported from India would cease to be taken, and that heavy losses would fall upon all who were engaged in that trade.

MR. HENRY SEYMOUR

said, that if he were laying out a programme for investigation before a Committee, he would suggest, in the first instance, that it should be seen whether the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State had done his best to sell the waste lands. There was reported to be a large estate in the centre of India suited for the growth of cotton, and only producing £5 a year to the Government; yet, when an English company-offered to buy this, and undertake the growth of cotton, they met with a refusal from the Indian Government. Mr. Temple, one of the highest officials in India, reported that along the Godavery, for hundreds of miles, there was a basin of cotton land admirably suited for the application of British capital. Mr. Temple, however, only received a "wigging" from the India Office for that information. He should suggest, as the second head, the present tenure of land as a fit subject for inquiry. It was stated, that the Government took 30 to 40 per cent of the gross produce of the soil, and while that was so they must expect to have a pauper tenantry, instead of a tenantry with capital sufficient to develop the resources of the country. The third head which he would suggest for inquiry, was, what were the impediments in the way of English enterprise. They were to be found in a gigantic system of monopolies, and in that obstructiveness which had been mentioned in the circular. They could not go to any of the public companies, except, perhaps, that over which the hon. Member for London presided, without learning that they experienced obstructions everywhere; and if concessions were obtained, it was through the influence of Members of that House. The fourth head was the state of the public works, upon which the Secretary of State was wasting £5,000,000, but nothing could be more disgraceful than the jobbery to which they gave rise. The fifth head of inquiry, was the mode of improving the staple of cotton, which he contended should be done by a system of prizes, as Lord Canning had recommended, and as had proved so successful in the hands of the American Government. He had made definite objections to the policy of the right hon. Gentleman; but his chief objection was to the illiberal spirit which had been infused by that right hon. Gentleman into the Indian officials, a spirit so unlike that which had prevailed under the administration of the noble Lord (Lord Stanley), his predecessor in office.

MR. FERRAND

said, he could not help remarking upon the extraordinary change of opinion which had been manifested that night by the Gentlemen connected with the Manchester party. Those Gentlemen had urged upon that House to become a great protection society for the growth of cotton for Lancashire, and the right hon. Gentleman (Sir Charles Wood) was grossly abused because he would not become their principal agent. Now, if he (Mr. Ferrand) had stood up to-night and called upon the right hon. Gentleman to assist the agricultural interest to grow corn, he should undoubtedly have been met by hon. Gentlemen opposite with a great howl. Now, he would advise hon. Gentlemen to trust to supply and demand for the future. Let them not come down there whining for protection. At all events, if they abandoned their principles, let them like honest men say that they had failed, and that protection to native industry must be applied once more in the case of the cotton trade as well as the agricultural interest. In 1846, when the late Sir Robert Peel came down to propose the repeal of the Corn Laws, hon. Gentlemen opposite hounded him on with every imaginable insult to the agricultural interest, and he (Mr. Ferrand) wished to remind them that he had warned them that they would be the first, when free trade was established, to come again to Parliament, and on bended knees sue for protection to their industry. He therefore felt justified that night in holding them up to the country in their proper position, as deserting their own principles without having the honesty to avow it.

MR. CAIRD

said, he was satisfied with the result of the discussion, and would withdraw his Amendment.

Question put, and agreed to.