§ MR. BAXTERasked the Secretary of State for India, with reference to Return No. 37 of the last Session of the last Parliament, entitled "East India (Ecclesiastical Department)," If it is true that the large sum of £200,000 per annum, drawn from funds supplied by the general taxation of India, is not spent in providing chaplains for the Civil and Military servants of the Queen only, but also for "persons altogether unconnected with Government;" if, notwithstanding the resolution of the Indian Government to reduce the expenditure on Church establishments, chaplains are still being appointed to stations where there are few or no officials; and, whether, before next Session of Parliament, ho will undertake to look into the subject with a view of remedying the complaint that Her Majesty's subjects in India, who are not Christians, are taxed to provide clergymen for European and Eurasian residents in that country?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONSir, in reply to the Question of my right hon. Friend, I have to state that the total annual expenditure in the Ecclesiastical Department of India appears to amount, at the Government rate of exchange, to £ 180,131. In their despatch given on pages 3 and 4 of the Return, the Government of India state that the expenditure in this Department has since 1870 been revised and reduced, and they hope to effect further reductions during the current year of 1880–81. There are a few stations to which chaplains are allotted where, according to the Return, "few or no Europeans" attend church; but such chaplains are charged with "out-stations," requiring periodical visits, and have other duties to perform which are mentioned by the Bishop, and 785 by the Archdeacon of Calcutta in his "General Remarks" contained on pages 54 and 55 of the Return. I am not aware that there has been any complaint of the character referred to in the last part of the Question of my right hon. Friend. Undoubtedly it is the case that at some stations persons altogether unconnected with the Government avail themselves of the ministrations of the Government chaplains. I do not think it would be possible or desirable, however, that these chaplains should be precluded from attending to the spiritual wants of other persons than those employed by Government, although, of course, they are primarily intended to minister to the spiritual wants of officers in the service of the Government. I am quite willing to make inquiry whether there are any cases where chaplains are not required for the legitimate purpose of this appointment.