INDIAN GOVERNMENT. (Hansard, 9 May 1853)

The EARL of AIRLIE

rose to ask a question of the noble Earl at the head of the Government with reference to the measure which it was intended to propose for the future government of India. In putting this question, he hoped he should not be considered as acting in a manner which was inconvenient or uncalled for. He did not seek to be informed as to the details of the measure which it was intended to propose for the future government of India; but he wished to ascertain whether it was intended to be the first of a series, or whether it was to stand alone. Was it, or was it not, to be understood that in adopting the measure to be proposed by the Government, Parliament was virtually pledging itself to abstain from interfering with the affairs of Indian Government during the period that the provisions of the intended Bill should be in force? Was it to be understood that for such period the question was to be considered closed? That was a question not of detail but of principle, and it was one upon which it was very desirable their Lordships should have a clear understanding. He need not 1293 remind their Lordships that the Committee of the other House had, at the close of last Session, only reported upon one of the heads or subjects referred to them; and that their Lordships' Committee, though they took a somewhat wider scope, were yet very far from exhausting the subject. He should not, he hoped, be considered as speaking disrespectfully of the majority of their Lordships when he said he did not think that, with the exception of those who had had experience in India, and with the exception also of Her Majesty's Government, the rest of their Lordships were very competent to form an opinion upon questions on which their own Committee had reported so late as the close of the last Session, that a large field of investigation was still open, and on which the Committee of the other House had expressed themselves perfectly ignorant. He excepted Her Majesty's Ministers, because he did not wish to overstate the case. He did not mean to say that they had not sources of information to which private individuals had not access; but he must say that if Her Majesty's Government called upon Parliament to legislate on such a subject at a time when they must necessarily be very imperfectly acquainted with it, they would incur a very grave responsibility. It might be said that their Lordships' Committee had reported upon the first head—that relating to the authorities for administering the Government in India and at home; and that therefore Parliament might properly proceed to legislate upon that subject. He did not deny that at all. Parliament was perfectly competent under such circumstances to deal with such a question; but he contended that the other heads of inquiry not yet investigated had reference to questions of at least as great importance as that on which their Committee had reported. There were the land revenues, the naval and military establishments, internal improvements, education, judicial establishments, and ecclesiastical provisions for the diffusion of Christian instruction. What was Government but a name, unless it was associated with these matters? and what was to be said of a measure which should profess to provide for the future government of India, and which yet should ignore these questions? They might, with their present information, be able to produce a very useful measure, and one much culled for, but not a measure calculated to place the Government of a great empire 1294 on a permanent footing. If they proceed-ed in this Session to legislate finally, and as it were in the lump, on the subject of the government of India, they would place themselves in the dilemma either of taking the responsibility of legislating on matters of great importance with which they were imperfectly acquainted, or of leaving out a most vital part of the question. They would be playing at legislation—they would be trifling with the shadow, when they should be grappling with the substance. Imperfect as was his acquaintance with the subject, he had yet learnt enough to satisfy him that though the government of India had worked well as a whole, there were yet many matters connected with it which called for a searching inquiry, and some, it might be, for a thorough reform. It was then, he contended, no light matter, it was no mere question of detail, whether the measure to be proposed by the Government was one which, while it reformed those abuses which called most loudly for redress, still left the way clear for further reform, or whether it was a measure of which the effect would be to cut short the labours of the Committees of both Houses, to postpone inquiry, and to act as a bar to further legislation. The question which he had to put to the noble Earl at the head of the Government was, whether the measure which it was proposed to introduce for the government of India was to be based on the evidence and the Report of the Select Committees of both Houses of Parliament; or whether they were to be called on to legislate this Session on matters which had not yet been investigated? In putting this question, he placed himself entirely in the hands of the noble Earl. If an answer implied the revelation of premature disclosures, he, of course, could not expect one; but, at the same time, he must say he would feel greatly disappointed.