Lords Sitting of 11 May 1871

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Sequestration (54); Adjutants (Jury) Exemption (101), negatived; Metropolitan Poor Act (1867) Amendment * (97).
Committee—County Justices Qualification Amendment * (67–108).
Committee — Report — Promissory Oaths (re-comm.) * (100); Workshop Regulation Act, 1867, Amendment * (63).
Report—University Tests (104–107); Presbyterian Church (Ireland) * (87); Primitive Wesleyan Methodist Society of Ireland Regulation * (88).

SEQUESTRATION BILL—(No. 54.)
(The Lord Bishop of Winchester.)
SEQUESTRATION BILL—(No. 54.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said, that the present measure had the same object as that which passed this House last Session, but which reached the other House at too late a period to admit of its becoming law. Its scope, however, he regretted to say, was more limited; but it steered clear of one or two difficulties which attended its predecessor. It provided that, in the event of a sequestration under a judgment obtained against any clergyman, or under his bankruptcy, being issued and continued in force for six months, the Bishop may take order for the due performance of the services of the church of the benefice, and should have power to appoint such curates as the case might require, and that the stipend assigned shall be paid by the sequestrator in priority to all payments payable by virtue of the judgment or bankruptcy; and further, that the Bishop shall have power to inhibit the incumbent from performing any services of the Church as long as the sequestration shall remain

  601
  in force. This would, in the case of small livings, have the same effect as the Bill of last Session, which proposed to void the living under such circumstances, so as to restrain creditors from rashly trusting the clergyman, and to make it their interest to make a private arrangement with him, instead of taking proceedings. They would know that the incomes of small livings would be required for the discharge of the duties, and that if they encouraged a clergyman to run into debt, there was nothing they could trust to for payment. In larger benefices the effect would be partially the same; and, as an instalment, he believed the operation of the Bill would be almost as great as the measure of last Session. He had now, happily, the support of a noble and learned Lord (Lord Cairns), who objected to a great part of the latter Bill; and, though a similar Bill was before the House of Commons, it was not likely to reach their Lordships' House. He, therefore, saw no reason for withdrawing his own Bill, being anxious that another Session should not pass without a mitigation of the evils of the present state of the law.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Bishop of Winchester.)
  LORD CAIRNSsaid, the principle of the Bill must commend itself to everyone, and he believed the Bill was calculated to accomplish the object in view, and to remedy evils which were univerally admitted, without inflicting injustice on any person. It was, therefore, free from the objections which he entertained to the measure of last Session.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

ADJUTANTS (JURY) EXEMPTION BILL.
(The Lord Stratheden.)
ADJUTANTS (JURY) EXEMPTION BILL.

  (NO. 101.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a"—(The Lord Stratheden.)
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he could not consent to the second reading. Last year, when the Jury Bill was before Parliament, numerous claims for exemption were made and settled, and he objected to the arrangement being
  602
  disturbed. It was already extremely difficult to obtain a proper attendance of jurymen, and only yesterday a case of great importance (the Tichborne case) had to be postponed on that account. There was an increasing pressure on persons liable to serve owing to the numerous exemptions, which included all officers in the Army, Navy, Militia, and Yeomanry, while on full pay.
  LORD STRATHEDEN, in reply, urged that the efficiency of Volunteer corps depended to a greater extent than in the Line on the adjutants, who might now be summoned as jurymen during field-days and inspections.
  An Amendment moved, to leave out ("now") and insert ("this day six months"): On Question, that ("now") stand part of the Motion? Resolved in the Negative; and Bill to be read 2a this day six months.

UNIVERSITY TESTS BILL—(No. 104.)
(The Earl of Kimberley).
UNIVERSITY TESTS BILL—(No. 104.)

  REPORT OF THE AMENDMENTS.
  Amendments reported (according to Order).
  LORD HOUGHTONsaid, that he had observed during the sitting of the Committee, and also during the debate, that the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury) had expressed no ill-will to the main proposition in the Bill, but had directed his observations solely to one part of the subject-matter of it, and had succeeded, by a small majority, in inserting a clause containing a declaration to be made by all persons appointed to tutorial offices in the colleges, and some other clauses. Now, he wished to appeal to the noble Marquess whether, on re-consideration, it would not be wiser to send the Bill back to the other House in something nearer to the form in which it came up than to provoke a collision between the two Houses on a single point. He would not urge as a reason for this the smallness of the majority, nor had he the slightest disrespect for the noble Lords who supported the proposal. The noble Marquess had shown a willingness to accept the decision of the other House, and to throw open the Universities to persons of all persuasions, except as regarded those intrusted with the duty of teaching, and the declaration which he had proposed as a safeguard on this point

  603
  was dictated, as the whole tone of the debate showed, by fear of a very small and unimportant portion of the community. The immense majority of the people of this country adhered to the authority and teaching of the Bible, and their reverence for it was so absolute that any person who avowed hostility to its doctrines was disabled not only from holding any office connected with moral or religious teaching, but almost from any political action. No one could appear at the hustings with any chance of success, and announce that he did not accept the Bible. The same feeling would prevail in any college or institution; and was it wise, therefore, for the sake of asserting an absolute truism, to come into collision with the other House, and to impose a test which would have no practical bearing on the present or future education of the people?
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he appreciated the moderate and conciliatory spirit in which the noble Lord's appeal had been made; but he deprecated his somewhat frequent use of the word "collision"—a favourite term applied to cases of disagreement between the two Houses. If it could be said that the two Houses could never differ without involving morally the physical results of two ships coming into collision, he could only say that the British Constitution was not likely to work very long. If there was any sense or meaning for the existence of two Houses of Parliament, it must have been contemplated that differences of opinion would arise, and therefore he did not see why a difference of opinion should be styled a collision any more than the difference of two persons sitting here or in the other House. In advocating propositions contrary to the views they had expressed, he had intended no disrespect to the other House, and he could conceive nothing improper or unconstitutional in the adoption of such propositions by a majority of their Lordships. Passing from this to more important considerations, it was precisely because he agreed with the noble Lord that the Bible was now the rule of this country, and that no one could safely appear at the hustings and announce his difference from it—precisely because he thought this the most valuable feature of the public opinion of this country, distinguished from the public opinion of
  604
  every other country in Europe—because he thought this feature should be cherished and preserved as one of the brightest jewels of our national honour—it was for this reason that he dreaded any agency by which this state of things could be disturbed. Now, his conviction was that there was only one agency by which this could be done. If those opposed to the Bible could get at the fountain-head of education, and poison the stream which issued from that well, they might succeed, as they could not otherwise do, in shaking the allegiance which the people of this country of all classes and opinions acknowledged in common to the Bible. Acting upon the Resolutions of the Select Committee, he had proposed for the approval of the House a declaration which they believed would paralyze those—if such there were—who desired to carry so unholy a project into effect; and he could not admit that because it was only sanctioned by a small majority it was therefore his duty to withdraw it. The division was taken in a small House and at an unpropitious time of the night. The noble Lord recollected, no doubt, the reason assigned by Clarendon for the vote which turned the Bishops out of this House 200 years ago—that there were people who liked dinner better than Bishops. It was possible that a reason of a similar character operated the other night. He admitted, of course, that the other hypothesis was possible, and that the opinion of the House might be closely divided. It was possible, too, that the majority of the House, if another division were taken, would be with the noble Lord:—but on neither hypothesis could he think it his duty to withdraw the clause from the consideration of both Houses. Their Lordships would be acting in the most constitutional manner by proceeding in the way usual in other cases.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved to insert the following clause:—
  "The Morning and Evening Prayer according to the Order of the Book of Common Prayer shall continue to be used daily as heretofore in the chapel of every college and hall in the Universities; but notwithstanding anything contained in the statute thirteenth and fourteenth Charles the Second, clause four, section seventeen, or in this Act, it shall be lawful for the visitor of any college or hall, on the request of the governing body thereof, to continue from time to time, in writing, any abridgement of the Order of Morning and Evening Prayer as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer in the chapel of the said col-

  605
  lege or hall instead of the said Order of Morning and Evening Prayer, and such abridgement may lawfully so be used on week days only."
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he saw no objection to the clause, but recommended that it should be printed and brought up on the third reading.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he was willing to accept the suggestion.
  THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTERremarked that as the Visitors did not originate changes the clause should contemplate application being made to them in the first instance.
  Clause (by Leave of the House) withdrawn.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYinquired whether the noble Earl would consent to the insertion of a few words giving the colleges a general power of requiring attendance at chapel — although of course not in the case of those who had conscientious objections to the form of worship.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he thought the noble Marquess would find that the clause in question carried out his views.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he wished, before the question was disposed of, to say a word with regard to his noble Friend's appeal. He was not surprised at that appeal having been made; but he wished it to be understood that Her Majesty's Government would not have thought of asking the House at the present stage, and without notice, to reverse its deliberate decision of Monday night. Without, therefore, complaining of the decision at which their Lordships had arrived, he protested against the noble Marquess's assumption that when the Bill went back to the other House they were not to judge of the considerations which had influenced both sides of the House as evidenced by the speeches which had been made, and also against the assumption that the question had been decided on an issue between those who reverenced the Bible and those who did not. Nothing could be more erroneous than the idea that the minority in the recent division had voted on such an issue; and even if such a supposition could be allowed, he must protest against the noble Marquess's insinuation that a large number of their Lordships preferred their dinner to their Bible.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMONDsaid, the noble Earl had entirely misunderstood the noble Marquess. His noble Friend had not stated or implied that those who voted on the one side reverenced the Bible, and that those on the other did not. Following the noble Earl's example of protesting, he must protest in turn against the noble Lord's (Lord Houghton's) assumption that the House of Commons was not satisfied with the Amendments. They had not been under the consideration of that House this Session, and until they had gone down to and been discussed by them it was premature to say that the Commons would not accept the Bill as it now stood. If, when the Bill went down to them, the House of Commons disagreed with the Amendments, then would be the time for their Lordships to consider what course they should take.
  Bill to be read 3a To-morrow, and to be printed, as amended (No. 107).

INDIA—INDIAN ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE.

  PETITIONS FOR A ROYAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY, in presenting Petitions (nine) of Inhabitants of British India praying for the appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into various grievances mentioned therein, said, that the grievances as to which the petitioners asked for inquiry pressed both on the English and the Native population. He could have wished that these Petitions had been entrusted to some other noble Lord, because he had the misfortune not to be able to agree with all the wishes which were expressed in them. This Petition—for the Petitions were identical—had three objects, and contained at least 20 paragraphs, and he proposed to conclude with a Motion that it be printed in the Votes. [Lord REDESDALE said, that would not be regular.] The Petitioners complained first, of the condition of the finances; secondly, of the annual migration of the Government from Calcutta to the Hills; and thirdly, of the Legislative Council not being a really representative body. Now, as to the third point of the Petition he (the Marquess of Salisbury) was unable to agree with it. It was possible that the Council

  607
  might be selected with more careful attention to the interests of the population. He believed some Native Princes, not under the jurisdiction of the Crown, were members of it, and it might be that those affected by the decisions of the Council might be more adequately represented—this, however, was a question of detail—but he felt confident that any attempt to introduce a representative system into the Legislative Council would be attended only in the first instance with confusion, and in the second instance would have the fatal effect of subjecting the Government of India to the influence of a narrow though influential class, consisting partly of Englishmen and partly of Natives, but wholly distinct from the vast mass of the people of the country, the responsibility now borne by England in the face of the world as regarded Indian administration being thus seriously diminished without any other responsibility being substituted for it. There had of late years been a considerable pressure with a view of maintaining the existing Native Governments and limiting the extension of direct British rule. He sympathized with this to a certain extent—not that he believed the Native Governments, judged by any abstract or ideal rule, were superior or equal to the English, but simply because they had the one cardinal virtue of all Governments, that they were in sympathy with the feelings, habits, and traditions of the populations over which they rule. Therefore he believed we had done wisely in maintaining such of the Native Governments as now exist. The same considerations, however, should inspire mistrust of propositions for introducing into India a mode of Government so thoroughly alien to the Asiatic nature as representative Government. It was of vital importance to attend to the nature and traditions of the governed, and representative Government in India would sin against this primary canon. As to the comparatively small matter of the removal of the Government to the Hills, from all the evidence he had been able to collect—but the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) would be able to speak with more weight—he gathered that much more real business was performed at Simla than at Calcutta, where there being no influence of public opinion, as we understood the phrase, to control
  608
  the Government, its migration to the Hills was not a matter of substantial objection. It was a great mistake to substitute the opinion of an official or narrow mercantile class, or of a few educated Indians, for the public opinion of the whole nation which we in England were so proud of. As to the first part of the Petition—that relating to finance—he did to some extent agree with it. He thought the condition of the finance of India did require serious consideration from the Home Government; and this not merely in the sense of requiring the Governor General to give his best attention to it. Nothing could be further from his wish than to suggest anything which would diminish the authority or prestige of that distinguished officer, for the Viceroy's independence, and the position he occupied in the face of the Princes and people, were of vital importance. Least of all would he do so with Lord Mayo, who, as was now generally acknowledged, had fulfilled the hopes entertained of him on acceding to that high office, and had shown himself not unworthy of the brilliant series of his predecessors in the government of that great dependency. But the position of Governor General is temporary. There was a change every six years, and there might be questions of permanent interest which it was necessary to settle on a definitive basis. The general principle of Indian finance required consideration, and he doubted whether this could be effected by the agency of the Governor General. Our progress in the management of Indian finance had hitherto been in the European direction, and he doubted whether in that course we had not taken a radically false view. The English idea of finance was that every year the Chancellor of the Exchequer put something in the crucible and moulded it anew, raising or diminishing taxes according to the wants of the moment, and the Budget was not merely a necessary incident but a social excitement. What, however, might be a pleasant excitement for us was in India a very dangerous interference with the peace of the Natives. He believed the ideal of finance of Asiatics was that of repose. The first thing was to settle the amount which could be raised without interfering with the traditions or departing from the habits of the nation; let this be per-

  609
  manent, and let the expenditure be adjusted to it. Here it was a constitutional principle for the Estimates to precede the Ways and Means; but all experience of India indicated an opposite course, Ways and Means being a comparatively-speaking permanent arrangement, and the expenditure being forced to fit itself thereto. To the Native everything new was primâ facie unjust; and scarcely any expenditure, however wise, would justify the great evil of exciting him to compare his present state with his past, and to make a grievance of financial alterations. It was for the Home Government to consider whether the excitement of annual Budgets and new taxes should not be withdrawn from the mass of political dangers with which we had to contend—the more so because, unfortunately, the opium revenue, one-sixth of the whole receipts, was so variable that the Finance Minister could not tell within 25 per cent whether it would rise or fall. So shifting an item made it necessary that in its other features it should have an aspect of stability and repose. Again, it had long been felt by the local authorities that their expenditure was supervised by the central Government in a manner which trenched on their independence and increased the difficulty of administration. The local Governments had strongly protested for greater financial decentralization, and the hesitating steps already taken in this direction, by which some accidental sources of revenue had been handed over to them to deal with as they pleased, would not settle the question. It was difficult to resist the impression that the mechanism of the Government of India was so new, and the territory over which it extended so vast, that its personal character was almost entirely lost, the enormous machine being too powerful for the Viceroy, however able, to move with his single will, and the ideal of paternal Government degenerating into a bureaucracy. There was a great tendency in the lower offices where expenditure was incurred to exceed the Estimates, and, without reflecting on the able persons who managed it, there was consequently a general belief that the expenditure did not produce anything like the results which one had a right to expect. He believed that in the Department of Public Works that impression especially prevailed. He had
  610
  been asked by these gentlemen to move for the appointment of a Royal Commission. But he could not comply with that request. Indeed, he should regard it as a very great misfortune if any Member of the Opposition should adopt that course. In matters connected with India it was of the utmost importance that not a shred of party politics should be allowed to interfere, and therefore it certainly was not his intention to make any such Motion. But he most earnestly recommended the subject to the attention of the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll). He might not wish to act upon it at once; but he believed it would be found that, independent of this memorial, the subject did require careful investigation with a view to remove the scandal of perpetual falsification of estimates and expectations, and also to diminish the undoubted discontent among the class, at least, of English residents in India in consequence of the frequent changes of taxation, and the very serious doubts which he believed were entertained whether the revenue equalled the expenditure incurred. He trusted the noble Duke would not think that in bringing this matter forward he was actuated in the slightest degree by any hostile feeling, for he had the greatest confidence in the noble Duke since he took charge of the government of India. He only desired earnestly to impress on him the importance of giving to it a careful consideration.
  THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, that the noble Marquess had treated the matter very fairly, and he was glad—although he had made some rather strong observations on some of the financial questions referred to—that he had not lent the sanction of his high authority to the prayer of the Petition, to which he wished to call the attention of the House. He believed that already the Petition had been sent to a great number of the Members both of their Lordships' and of the other House of Parliament, and it would, no doubt, be still further circulated by the very active gentlemen whose complaints were brought forward in it. The prayer of the Petition was, that Her Most Gracious Majesty should appoint a Royal Commission to inquire into and report "on the matters aforesaid"—contained in 19 paragraphs—which went pretty nearly into every question connected with the government of India

  611
  —its finance, its military administration, the possibility of introducing the representative system of government, the system of promotion in the Army, and every possible subject connected with the government of India. Now, he begged to say the appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into such a subject as that would be nothing else but a Vote of Censure on the existing Government of India both in India and at home. It had been a cardinal point of our policy at all times to uphold the policy of the Viceroy of India. The noble Marquess was well aware that the present Viceroy did not belong to the party to which he (the Duke of Argyll) was attached, and until he was appointed to that office he really had no personal acquaintance with him. But he had felt it to be his bounden duty to give him that support to which he was entitled, considering the great duties he was called on to perform; and he must give his cordial assent to the eulogy passed by the noble Marquess on the manner in which Lord Mayo had discharged the duties of Governor General. As Secretary of State he (the Duke of Argyll) had been highly gratified with the great ability Lord Mayo had devoted to those duties, and the energy he had displayed in the administration of the Empire, and, he must also add, the great success which had accompanied his exertions to rectify to a great extent the finances of that country. Now, this Petition was full of complaints respecting the manner in which the Government of India was conducted in almost all respects; but he thought it must be quite obvious to those who read the Petition that the real secret of the discontent it expressed would be found in certain financial measures which had been adopted since Lord Mayo assumed the Government of India, and especially the re-imposition of an income tax. It was not till they came to the 19th paragraph of the memorial that they found the income tax distinctly named; but indirectly it was continually referred to. He had not the slightest doubt that the feeling of discontent which prompted this memorial had reference almost exclusively to the re-imposition of the income tax. With reference to the observations of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury), he must say he was not aware that they had introduced into India any new
  612
  tax except the income tax at variance either with the habits or customs of that country. Successive Governments, no doubt, had thought it their duty to try to amend the financial system of the Empire, and in many cases to abolish taxes with which the Natives were perfectly familiar, but which in an economical point of view must be considered in the highest degree objectionable. He did not think it could truly be said that they had introduced to the grievance of the Natives any new tax whatever with the exception of the income tax. That tax was first imposed in 1860, when Mr. Wilson was Financial Minister of India. It was imposed on the ground that under the Native system of taxation a very large and wealthy class of people almost entirely escaped taxation. He believed that was perfectly true; and Mr. Wilson thought that under the financial exigencies of the Empire it was perfectly legitimate that the income tax should be levied on the English system. It was imposed at first at the rate of 4 per cent—3 per cent for Imperial purposes and 1 per cent for local purposes. It was passed for a period of five years. It was subsequently reduced to 2 per cent. In 1867 there was another pressure of financial exigency, and what was called a licence tax was imposed. In this country a licence tax would be understood to be a tax imposed on persons who sold beer, spirits, and other exciseable articles; but the licence tax passed in India in 1867 had nothing to do with exciseable commodities; it was simply an income tax under another name, including persons exercising trades and professions, and our own officers among the number. They were compelled to take out a licence and at a fixed rate, a certain percentage on their assumed income; therefore it was simply an income tax under another name. But what made this objectionable was that in Bengal many of the great landed proprietors not exercising any profession paid no licence tax. He could not say that tax was defensible in itself; but he believed it was imposed rather for the purpose of avoiding the necessity of calling it an income tax and getting a fair contribution from the landed proprietors of Bengal. Shortly before the administration of his noble Friend near him (Lord Lawrence) had closed in India the question was discussed whether the licence tax should be

  613
  converted into an income tax. It was strongly debated in his noble Friend's Council, and the result of that deliberation was that some amendments should be made in the licence tax, and that it should be converted into a certificate tax. But the same objection was made as applied to the licence tax—it still was a tax which affected our own officers, all the small dealers, traders, and merchants in the country as an income tax, but did not affect the great landed proprietors in Bengal. That was the state of things when he (the Duke of Argyll) came into office; and one of the first questions which came before him at the instance of Lord Mayo's Government was whether or not this certificate tax should or should not be converted nominally, as well as really, into an income tax. That being the question before him, he thought there could be no doubt whatever as to the answer that should be given by the Government. If the tax was taken off the total loss could not be estimated at less than £2,000,000, and this could not be afforded. The decision of the Government was that the certificate tax should be converted into an income tax upon all sources of income, with certain exemptions, of course, to the poorer classes, in the same manner as in this country, and an Act was passed by the Government of India, without creating any great dissatisfaction, for establishing a low rate of income tax between 1 and 2 per cent. In the middle of the year 1869 Lord Mayo's Government discovered that there would be at the end of the year a large deficit, and Lord Mayo endeavoured to improve the state of the finances by rigid economy and by increasing existing taxes. The amount of the deficit which Lord Mayo contemplated at that time was £2,700,000—certainly a very alarming deficit. The memorialists, he observed, stated that there had been along series of deficits from the year 1859–60 to the year 1869–70:—but that was hardly so, for during that period there had been six years of deficiency and four years of surplus. Lord Mayo, however, very properly determined to use every effort to meet the circumstances, and he therefore proposed to restrict as far as possible the amount expended on public works, to increase the salt tax in certain Provinces, and to double the income tax for the current year. That proposition came to him (the Duke of Argyll) at a time when Sir
  614
  Richard Temple was visiting this country, and was enabled to give him the benefit of his opinions. It was rather a startling proposal that in the middle of the financial year the income tax should be at once doubled; but looking to the state of the Government, to the existing state of affairs, and to the threatened deficit of £2,700,000, he thought it his duty to advise Her Majesty's Government to sanction those proposals. Now, he believed the whole of the dissatisfaction which had occurred in India had arisen from that matter. With reference to the income tax, he (the Duke of Argyll) did not say that the step was one which ought not to have been taken—on the contrary, he thought the income tax was a very fair resource for redressing a matter of this kind and restoring the balance of finances; but there could not be the least doubt that this had had to a very great extent the unfortunate effect of exciting opposition to the measures of the Government. At the same time there was, however, this to be said, that Lord Mayo's measures completely succeeded in producing the result he desired to obtain. Instead of having a deficit of £2,700,000 at the close of the financial year, the result of the economies Lord Mayo effected and the taxes he imposed was a small surplus of about £200,000; and that was a most satisfactory result which reflected great credit on Lord Mayo's Government. But seeing this result, many people in India turned round and said—"This talk of a deficit was a mere panic—it was all nonsense. There was no necessity for these severe measures, and you might have weathered the storm without doubling the income tax." But both Lord Mayo and Sir Richard Temple had given a triumphant answer to this, and had shown conclusively that the financial result of the year was due entirely to the measures taken by Lord Mayo just described. He was also happy to say that Lord Mayo's exertions were not only successful in 1869–70, but they were eminently so in 1870–71, for instead of a small surplus there was a surplus of very nearly £1,000,000—a most satisfactory surplus, which he should be glad to see repeated. At the same time, while the income tax was doubled, the minimum income to which it would apply was also raised from 500 rupees to 750 rupees, and he believed that that tax,

  615
  about which so much had been said, would not be felt by more than 480,000 people. It was said—"You levy a large sum from a comparatively small population." But at the same time it should be remembered that we levied it from a small community which was immensely rich, and which would otherwise contribute almost nothing to the financial resources of the Empire. According to the traditional system of finance in India the rich merchant of Calcutta or Bombay might spend his whole income without contributing anything to the financial resources of the country. A large part of the revenue of India was derived from opium sold to the Chinese, which yielded an income of £8,000,000 per year. Another large portion came from the rent of land, and, of course, fell upon the occupiers of land—and that was the ancient traditional source of the revenues of the country. A very small proportion indeed was derived from Customs, and the Customs duties might be evaded altogether by anyone who chose to consume only Native articles. A certain portion of the revenue was derived from the tax on salt, which fell with great severity upon the poorer classes of certain parts of India; but the amount contributed to the salt tax was only an infinitesimal fraction of expenditure of the more wealthy. In spite, therefore, of the small number of people who contributed to the income tax in India, he could not think that it was an unjust tax. The noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury) said that he objected to annual Budgets and the imposition of new taxes. He concurred in the expediency of avoiding the imposition of new taxes; but he did not think that the people who paid the taxes should not have the annual accounts placed before them. He (the Duke of Argyll) now desired to touch upon another point on which the course taken by Lord Mayo had been very successful—the course taken with regard to the expenditure on public works. The system adopted either by the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Salisbury) himself, or by Sir Stafford Northcote, was, that the expenditure in India on public works should be divided into two heads, and that those which were considered to be remunerative should be met by loan, while those which were considered unremunerative should be met out of income; the amount expended on the latter class
  616
  in some years reaching to between £5,000,000 and £6,000,000. No one could doubt that in connection with works of such magnitude, conducted over every part of India, there must be a very great amount of waste. Every Governor General of India had felt that, and had also felt the difficulty of controlling it; but Lord Mayo has succeeded in conducting the ordinary public works at a very large reduction of expense—the reduction he effected two years ago amounting, under that head, to no less a sum than £2,669,000. He had also made retrenchments in the Army, and those retrenchments, though not so great as he (the Duke of Argyll) hoped they might be made, gave us at all events a very large item of reduction. The reduction on the Army Estimates this year, when compared with the Estimates of two years ago, was about £346,000, and that saving had been effected without reduction in the number of European troops, and with only a small reduction in the number of guns; the number of European troops, including officers, remaining at 67,000, the Native troops amounting to 122,000, and there being 1,494 guns. He (the Duke of Argyll) had stated these facts only to show that this was clearly an inopportune moment for bringing forward a Motion which was really a general censure upon the Government of Lord Mayo, who during the last three years had exerted themselves successfully in endeavouring to reverse the balances of our finances; the results being that, in the first year Lord Mayo succeeded in converting an alarming deficit into a small surplus; in the second year he raised the small surplus into a surplus of very nearly £1,000,000; while in the present year, with a very large reduction in the income tax, and in the number of persons upon whom it fell, there was every hope of realizing another surplus. One point which had been referred to as a matter of complaint against the Government of India he ought, perhaps, to notice—he meant with reference to carrying on the Government service at Simla, instead of Calcutta, during the hot season. That was a complaint which had been echoed to a considerable extent by Members of the Council at home. Many of them were fine specimens of humanity, having served during the whole of their time in India in the very hottest

  617
  climates, with very little relaxation, and they were of opinion that other men might do as they did; but, as he (the Duke of Argyll) had reminded them, their weaker brethren might have been killed off during the process, and that they were the happy survivors of a large number of European officers, who had succumbed to the severity of the climate and of the service. He could not think it would be well for the Government of India to sacrifice the whole advantages which modern science had given us for the economy of life. It was against reason and against nature that when you had a healthy climate within a few hours' travel by rail you should compel men to serve all the year round in the hot climate of Calcutta, and he could not believe that the public service of the Empire would be at all promoted by such a sacrifice. He agreed with the noble Marquess that although public opinion in Calcutta was an element which every Indian Government ought to consider, it ought to exercise no predominating influence over the action of the Government, and he could not but think that the general interests of the Indian people might be as well consulted when the members of the Government were at Simla as when they were at Calcutta. Measures intimately affecting Indian habits and customs ought not, indeed, to be treated when the Native Members of the Council could not be present; but, making that exception, it was for the advantage of the people of India, as well as for the Members of the Government themselves, that they should spend the hot season in the salubrious climate which they could reach so easily. The petitioners had made an extravagant mistake with regard to the relations existing between the Indian and the Home Government. It was true the Government at home was the supreme Government, and must always continue to be so; but the Indian Government was in the main the government of first instance, as it were, and the Home Government was the government of appeal. Almost all measures affecting the welfare of the people were initiated in India, the appeal only lying to the Secretary of State at home, whose general desire it was to support the Indian Government. Some great questions of policy were, unquestionably, now and then referred to the Govern-
  618
  ment at home, when the Government of India were, perhaps, divided respecting them; and one of the most important of these was the question of local taxation and expenditure. The Government were divided upon that point, and the Home Government and a majority of the Council decided in favour of the perfect legitimacy of the plan of raising local taxes for local expenditure in India. The noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury) described this as a step towards what was popularly called the decentralization of Indian finance, and thought it would lead to more extensive measures in the same direction. He spoke of the Government of India having relinquished some powers over revenue and local Governments. Now, the noble Marquess could not have been quite aware of all that had actually occurred. The importance of the step taken by Lord Mayo related chiefly to the branches of expenditure which he had relegated to the local Governments. They were comprised under eight heads—such as gaols, roads, education, administration of local justice, and other matters, in respect of which there was a great pressure for local expenditure, and over which it was almost impossible for the supreme Government to exercise any control. The central Government would now be relieved from the pressure of the local Governments for the increase of, perhaps, extravagant expenditure under those heads—the object of the supreme Government being that the local Governments should be thrown upon their own resources. In a speech delivered in the Supreme Council Sir Seymour Fitzgerald complained of the taxation of the provinces, and said he thought that a fair share of the total Revenue was hardly assigned to them considering their burdens; but he went on to say that in Bombay there was a large local expenditure already, and there was no effectual system of accounts. If it were true that no Budget system existed, and that very considerable economy might be effected in Bombay, no doubt the same result might be attained all over India; and he had great confidence that when the expenditure of these taxes was brought home to their own doors, and when the Natives found that by roads, tanks, and small works of irrigation of a local character their wants were attended to they would

  619
  afford the amount of taxes necessary for those purposes. He entertained the less doubt on this point from the important change carried out with regard to the land revenue. Lord Derby, when in office, suggested that the Indian Government should alienate a large part of the land revenue, and settle all the land for a series of years. After long consideration, the Government of India came to the conclusion that it would be unwise to alienate permanently the land revenue, and that over a large area of country it would be unwise to make a permanent settlement. But in a despatch of 1862 his noble Friend (Viscount Halifax) decided that in certain cases, and under certain conditions, the land revenue should be permanent; and he was informed that in the North-West Provinces a considerable area of country was likely to come under a permanent settlement. Large questions of public policy were connected with this question. He knew it was the opinion of many that the State ought to retain in its own hands the power of raising the land assessment from time to time. His own opinion was that a permanent settlement was the wisest settlement, and that it was better for wealth to accumulate in the hands of the people than to flow into the Treasury. He thought that the wealth of every good and wise Government lay in the wealth of its people, and he should rejoice to see the great land-holding class of India enjoy a higher share of this wealth than it now did. One point, however, must be looked to. If the Government gave over the land in permanent settlement, thereby adding largely to the wealth of the agricultural classes, there must be some means of getting at that wealth by other taxes for the purposes of defraying expenditure. Remembering this, it became the more important that the principle sanctioned last year — that the permanent settlement of the land revenue did not preclude us from raising local taxes for local expenditure — should be maintained. The local Governments of India were now preparing measures for raising local cesses; but he had impressed upon Lord Mayo the necessity of great caution in developing this system, and the importance of carrying along with us, if possible, the feelings of the people. He understood, he might add, that notice
  620
  had been given in "another place" of a Motion—which was seriously meant—for the appointment of a Royal Commission; but he hoped Parliament would not accede to a proposal which would be most unjust to the Government of Lord Mayo, and which would almost amount to a Vote of Censure upon the Administration of India. Besides, it should be borne in mind that the Government of India was nothing more nor less than a standing Royal Commission for the administration of the affairs of that country. And how was that Royal Commission composed? Of some of the ablest men, who had worked their way up to important positions in India, and who had distinguished themselves in the administration of various departments of Government; of English statesmen, and of men who were acquainted with legislative work in this country. A more powerful standing Royal Commission he could not conceive; and the appointment of a Royal Commission by Parliament would, in his opinion, derogate most seriously from the authority of Lord Mayo, and would be accepted as a vote of want of confidence in his Government.
  Petitions ordered, to lie on the Table.

UNITED STATES—THE JOINT HIGH COMMISSION.—QUESTION.
THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEasked the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Whether, as it has been decided that the claims of Americans upon the British Government shall be heard and adjudged in the United States, it has been reciprocally determined that the claims of English upon the United States Government shall be investigated in Great Britain? The matter was one, in his opinion, which was of considerable importance, not only to the parties immediately concerned, but to the credit of this country. It would, of course, be of great advantage to American claimants that their claims should be decided by a Commission sitting in the United States, and it was, in his opinion, a very proper arrangement, as they would, in consequence, be saved a great deal of expense. A similar advantage ought, however, to be extended to English claimants, who ought to be enabled to prefer their claims before a Commission sitting in this country.
EARL GRANVILLEreplied that he could only give the same answer to the present Question which he had already given to questions relating to particular parts of the Treaty. He thought it was very desirable that the Treaty should be known in its entirety, and when the proper time came for it, it would be made known. But it was quite obvious that if he told one part of it he must answer all the questions which were put to him, and it was with regret he did not feel himself at liberty to reply to the Question of the noble Marquess.
House adjourned at Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.