ADDRESS FOR PAPERS. (Hansard, 20 May 1879)

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL
rose to move— That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for Copies of any minutes or memoranda by the Secretary of State for India, or by Members of Council, in 1873, on the subject of telegraphic communications with the Government of India. The noble Duke said, he would not have brought the matter forward at so late an hour, but that by the time their Lordships met again he should probably be on the high seas. His object in moving for these Papers was this—the Viceroy had repealed the cotton duties; the repeal would involve an estimated loss of £200,000 a-year to the revenues of India; and the Viceroy had done this by overruling, which he had the legal power to do, his Council in India. As their Lordships were aware, the sanction of the Government at home to that course of action had been given, but not in the form of a despatch which had been passed by the Council of the Secretary of State for India. He did not wish to enter on the policy of the repeal of the duties; but it was evident that the step had been taken in a manner and at a time which had roused feelings of great asperity towards this country in India. A Member of the Council in India had recorded his die- 821 sent in language that was all the more remarkable, seeing that in other respects he was a warm supporter of the policy of the Government. He said— I am convinced I do not overstate the case when I express ray firm belief that there are not at the present time a dozen officials in India who do not regret the policy which has been adopted in this matter as a policy adopted, not in the interests of India, nor even in the interests of England, but in the supposed interest of a political Party, the Leaders of which admit that it is necessary at any cost to retain the support of the cotton manufacturers of Lancashire. This was a grave accusation, which he quoted, not for the purpose of suggesting that this had been the motive of the Viceroy, but to show that the subject was one on which it was important not to have acted without the fullest opportunity given to the constituted authorities to record their opinions in the proscribed manner. The Viceroy and the Secretary of State might override their Councils; but the Act of 1857 provided that every order or communication proposed to be sent to India, or made in the United Kingdom, should be submitted to a meeting of the Council or placed in the Council Room for seven days before it was sent out or issued. True, the Secretary of State might act through his Secret Committee; but there was no pretence for saying that a reform of the tariff was a matter to go through the Secret Committee. The Secretary of State had intimated to the Viceroy that his decision would be upheld; but that had been done without any communication with the Council, so that the Members had not had even an opportunity of recording their opinions on the policy of the act. This course of procedure had been defended by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in "another place." He had no complaint to make as to the accuracy of the statement in its words given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Verbally, it was accurate; but the impression it conveyed out-of-doors was quite inaccurate. The noble Viscount the Secretary of State for India would admit that, so far as he was concerned, he was not responsible for the use made in this case of the particular forms referred to. He wished to state how the matter arose. He had occasion to send some telegrams to the Viceroy, and Sir Erskine Ferry questioned his right to send any telegrama without passing through the Council. He raised the general question 822 of principle—Could the Secretary of State send telegraphic messages to the Viceroy without passing them through the Council? He (the Duke of Argyll) would say at once that it never could be supposed that private letters were excluded under the clause in the Act of Parliament; and it was notorious that every Secretary of State communicated freely with the Viceroy and the Government of India through private letters. This led to considerable discussion in the Office. Memoranda were written by Sir Erskine Perry and Sir Henry Maine, and the result was, it was agreed that the Secretary of State might send telegrams to the Viceroy provided they were marked with the word "personal;" but it might be seen at once how easy it would be to abuse the power of sending communications to India without consulting the Council at home. He should be sorry to discuss this question fully till he saw the Memoranda. He would only say that if this arrangement with regard to telegrams in the place of private letters was to be used, not only for the purpose of overruling, but evading altogether, the opinion of the Council on such a matter as the reduction of the Indian duties, they might as well do away with the Council altogether. Nothing would be left of their power or authority, or even of their influence—especially in a matter very nearly affecting the feelings and interests of the people of India. Therefore, it was a serious question whether the noble Viscount the Secretary of State for India had or had not used this power to avoid a debate by his Council upon a matter which touched both the interests and feelings of the people of India.

§ VISCOUNT CRANBROOK
said, that the noble Duke, in discussing this subject, had taken upon himself to guess much and surmise much—and very inaccurately. He had informed the noble Duke that he might have seen the papers relating to telegrams, if he thought proper, before he addressed the House to-night. With respect to anything that he had done which was impugned, he was there perfectly 823 prepared to defend it. He had not used the telegraph for the purpose of interfering with the rights of the Council, either here or in India. The Viceroy had a perfect right by law, in carrying out his views, to overrule his Council; and it was not necessary for him to make any application to the Secretary of State for India in Council on the subject—he had the power in his own hands. But when the Viceroy asked the Secretary of State, as a Member of the Government, whether, if he took a certain course of action, the Government would be prepared to support him, he (Viscount Cranbrook) was perfectly entitled to reply in the way which he did; but the Members of the Council would have the same opportunities as they had before of expressing their opinions with respect to the Indian Budget, when the despatch relating to that subject was prepared to be sent out in the usual course. Every Member of the Council might minute his views to the fullest extent; and the noble Duke had himself quoted some of the very strong language which had been used by some Members of the Council of the Governor General in recording their opinions. The system of dissent he approved of to the fullest extent, if it was exercised in a fair and decent manner; but some of their opinions had become pamphlets and rhetorical expositions, instead of that kind of argumentative protest which was suited to the subjects dealt with. It seemed to him a strange novelty that the Members of the Council should undertake to impute motives alike to their Chief and to the Government in England. He entered his protest against the style of language that had been adopted on this subject. The real question was, whether the Secretary of State should be in confidential communication with the Viceroy? That was an essential part of his position; it had been the practice hitherto. The position of the Secretary of State would simply be intolerable if he were not to have any confidential intercourse with the Viceroy. These Councils were not appointed by him—they were put there as a check; but with respect to matters for which he was answerable to Parliament, the Secretary of State was perfectly entitled to communicate confidentially, either by letter or telegram, with 824 the Viceroy. He (Viscount Cranbrook) admitted the distinction between the Secretary of State and the Secretary of State in Council, and that telegrams from the Secretary of State in Council should be shown to the Council. With regard to the Papers moved for by the noble Duke, they should certainly be produced; and if any question was raised with respect to his conduct, he would be quite prepared to vindicate it. He had done nothing but what had been clone by his Predecessors.

§ LORD LAWRENCE
said, that what the Indian Council naturally desired was to have an opportunity of submitting to the Secretary of State arguments against any particular policy which it might be intended to pursue, and of putting their opinions upon record. A Member of Council would hardly care to place on record his opinion on a matter which had been already decided upon. It would, indeed, be useless for him to do so, except for the sake of the private satisfaction of letting Parliament hereafter know what was his individual opinion. It seemed to him that the Council had had no opportunity of using their influence with regard to the policy which had been pursued in respect to the cotton duties; for the fact appeared that the Secretary of State had allowed them no opportunity of considering the question. What moral influence could the Council have, if the Secretary of State did not consult it in important matters? It was no exaggeration to say that it would be better to do away with the Council than to treat that body as it had been treated lately. They had thus become of little use, though they were men of great experience in India, and well fitted for the position they occupied in this country. During his experience he never knew the Council to be treated in anything like the way it had been during the last two or three years.

§ THE MARQUESS OF RIPON
said, that having been himself at the India Office, he could confirm the statement of his noble Friend. He believed he was correct in stating that, although his noble Friend (Viscount Halifax) wrote numerous private letters to the Governor General and to other authorities in India, he never took any step of importance, nor sent out any important order, without having the fullest consultation with the Members 825 of the Indian Council. In one of the rare cases in which his noble Friend differed from his Council—namely, in reference to the re-organization of the Indian Army—he went out of his way, so to speak, in order to secure for its Members the fullest discussion of that important question. On that occasion he overruled the Members of his Council; but he used always to give them the most ample opportunity of expressing their opinions. He did not know how much that practice had been deviated from in recent times; but, certainly, a deviation from it must reduce the Indian Council to a nullity.