THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (The Earl of KIMBERLEY),in rising to move to discharge the Orders of the 11th and 16th of March last respecting the Select Committee on the operation of the Act for the better Government of India (1858) and certain other Acts relating to India, said, he wished to explain why the Committee appointed by the Lords to act with a Committee to be appointed by the Commons had never acted. When the Committee was first proposed in that House the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Salisbury) and the noble Viscount (Viscount Cranbrook) at once met the proposal in the most friendly manner, and offered every facility for its appointment. The Committee was accordingly appointed, and a Message was sent to the other House, inviting them to appoint a similar Committee to act in conjunction with the Committee of their Lordships in conducting the inquiry. But in the other House an opposition arose, and certainly from a most unexpected quarter—namely, from the noble Lord his Predecessor in his present Office (Lord Randolph Churchill). He had been unable to gather the precise reason for the opposition, as, owing to the course which was taken, the question never came to be discussed in the other House; but he understood that 5 the noble Lord, although he had stated that the question of the Government of India was one into which he thought there must be a real inquiry, objected to the number of Members of which it was proposed that the Committee should consist, and blocked the Motion of the Government. It was proposed that it should consist of 15 Members from each House, or 30 in all. Now, all the Indian Committees had been largo; in 1830–2 the Committee of their Lordships which inquired into the Charter of the East India Company consisted of 22 Members, and that of the other House of 35 Members; and again in 1852 the Committees of the two Houses were somewhat larger, consisting, as they did, of 30 in the Lords and 31 in the Commons. He had been told—but he could scarcely believe it—that some objection had been taken because the Committee consisted of persons not altogether official. He entirely appreciated the importance of a Committee consisting of Members of large official experience; but for an inquiry of the kind proposed it was absolutely necessary to have some persons not connected with Office, who might come to the consideration of the matter from a broader point of view. He was surprised at the position taken up by the noble Lord the late Secretary of State for India, because that noble Lord had taken a prominent part in supporting the idea of an inquiry.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI do not understand the statements of the noble Earl to rest on any formal basis. He is referring to what has not been said in the other House. Has he any evidence?
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, that his evidence was that the noble Lord the late Secretary of State for India had opposed the appointment of the Committee, and he had reason to believe that the noble Lord's objections were that there were too many poisons proposed, and that he desired that the Committee should consist of 15 or 16 persons, nearly the whole of whom should be connected with Office in this country, or in India. The noble Lord had made a speech in June last year recommending a large and comprehensive Parliamentary inquiry into the whole operation of the Government of India; and he (the Earl of Kimberley) thought, whatever the ground 6 of his Lordship's objections might be, it was extremely unfortunate that the late Secretary of State for India, after having given rise by his course of conduct to the great expectations that had been undoubtedly formed in India upon the matter, should have felt it necessary to obstruct and prevent the inquiry proposed by Her Majesty's Government. The Government much regretted that the inquiry had not taken place. The affairs of India were not a matter about which any pranks could be played by any statesman desiring to be taken seriously. He had said this to show that it was not the fault of the Government, nor yet of noble Lords opposite, but of a single man, that the inquiry had not taken place. But for that opposition the inquiry might have made some progress, and great disappointment was felt in India on account of its postponement. He was, however, glad to be able to take the opportunity of saying that he thought it probable that the Government might arrange for the appointment of a Commission by the Viceroy of India for the purpose of examining important questions in connection with the admission of Natives to the Civil Service in India, although he was not yet in a position to announce it authoritatively. If such an inquiry should take place in India, it would facilitate the dealing hereafter, by Parliamentary legislation, with the subject, and might tend to allay the disappointment, or, at all events, go to show that this country was not indifferent to the wants of India. He would make the Motion of which he had given Notice.
§ Moved, "That the Orders of the 11th and 16th of March last be discharged."—(The Earl of Kimberley.)
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYThe course taken by the noble Earl is, I think, somewhat inconvenient and unusual. The excellent speech which we have just heard should have been delivered by the Under Secretary of State for India in the other House. If objection is taken in the House to anything done by my noble Friend (Lord Randolph Churchill) he is quite competent to defend himself. I should have thought the simpler plan would have been for the Under Secretary of State for India to have moved the appoint 7 ment of the Committee in the House of Commons.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYBut that only means, that it could not come on after half-past 12 o'clock. The Government were perfectly competent to bring the subject on at an earlier hour, when there was somebody who was in a position to examine it. All my noble Friend did was to insist that the discussion should take place at a time of night when people could give attention to it, and when matters of such extreme importance as the government of India, and the controversial question as to the numbers and composition, of the Committee could be properly discussed and settled by those competent to do so. The Government, however, did not choose to give the time for this important subject, and they now fall foul of my noble Friend, because he insisted upon not going on after half-past 12, and they repeat a number of objections not stated publicly, and which, if they were to be discussed at all, should have been discussed across the floor of the other House of Parliament, in face of my noble Friend, and where a decision could have been come to. If the inquiry has failed, the responsibility for its failure rests with Her Majesty's Government.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYIf Her Majesty' Government be in Office after the General Election they will again propose the appointment of the Indian Committee.
§ Motion agreed to.
§ Orders discharged.