Lords Sitting of 17 November 1893

MADRAS AND BOMBAY ARMIES BILL.

  COMMONS AMENDMENTS.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (The Earl of KIMBERLEY): Your Lordships will remember that at the last Sittings in the course of the summer a Bill passed this House for amending the law as to the Indian Armies. The matter to which I have now to call the attention of the House merely relates to one single portion of that Bill. An Amendment was moved by Lord Cross, and supported by several Peers of experience in Indian affairs, providing that those who are to command the Bombay and Madras Armies should in future, as at present, remain Members of the Councils of those two Presidencies. At that time, when the discussion took place in this House, I said that, after so strong an expression of opinion from so many noble Lords, many of them sitting on this side of the House, I did not think it necessary to divide the House on the question, but that I reserved to myself liberty of action at a future stage of the Bill. The Bill went to the other House; and when it came on for consideration there, it was stated on behalf of the Government that they thought possibly, looking to the importance of the Bill passing and to the circumstances of the Session, those even who might not have liked the Amendment made by this House would be willing to allow the Amendment to pass, and that the Bill might become law immediately. That, however, was by no means accepted by the House of Commons generally, and an Amendment was moved and strongly supported to restore the Bill to its original position, under which the Commanders of the two Armies would cease to be members of the respective Councils. I think it right to mention these facts, because I felt myself somewhat bound, after there had been so strong an expression of opinion
  1130
  in this House, although I did not share that opinion, to take care that if the Amendment was not accepted by the other House, it should be made perfectly evident to all that there was a strong expression of opinion in that House on the subject, and that it was not done merely on the motion of the Government without some discussion. My Lords, I now move that this House take into consideration the Amendment which has been made by the Commons, and I would express a strong hope that this House will not insist upon its Amendment. I may mention that since the Bill was last before the House a Despatch has been received, in which the Government of India, having previously expressed an opinion that they saw no objection to the Commanders of the Armies remaining Members of the Councils, now state that, upon a full consideration of the whole matter, they had come to a very decided opinion that it was not necessary or desirable that the Commanders should remain upon those Councils, and they express very fully and clearly the reasons which had caused them to come to that conclusion. That Despatch has been laid upon the Table in both Houses. I need not say that I should deeply regret if a Bill of such great importance as this, the principle of which has been so very strongly advocated by successive Viceroys and Governments in India, should now, at the last moment, fail to pass. I have no doubt whatever that noble Lords who pressed the Amendment in this House thought it really desirable that the Commanders should remain in the Bombay and Madras Councils; but I venture also to think they cannot have been of opinion that the retention of the Generals upon those Councils was a matter in any degree of such importance that a Bill of this great magnitude should be endangered on that account. I greatly fear that if the House were now to insist upon its Amendment the Bill might be so endangered; and I beg, therefore, earnestly to press upon your Lordships not to insist upon your Amendment to the Bill.
  Moved, "That the House do consider the Commons Amendments."—(The Earl of Kimberley.)
  Motion agreed to.
  Moved, "That the House do agree to the Commons Amendments."—(The Earl of Kimberley.)
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I am sorry my noble Friend Lord Cross has been unavoidably prevented from attending this discussion. He would have been glad to give his opinion upon this subject now, as he did in the previous Debate. I have, however, had the advantage of conferring with him upon the matter, and with some other noble Lords. Amongst others, I have heard from Lord Roberts, who is obliged to be in Edinburgh to-day, who would have been glad to have spoken upon the matter, and whose opinion, no doubt, would have carried great weight with your Lordships. As far as I am able to ascertain, the general opinion, even among those who took our view upon the former occasion, is that, however much there is still to be said in favour of the Amendment we then proposed, its value is not such as would justify us in risking a Bill which is really of extreme importance to India. I much regret that the House of Commons has taken the view which it has; for I fear it will be, in the end, the condemnation of the separate Presidencies in India. I fear that the Councils handed over to an absolute majority of the Civil Service will be found not to work smoothly, and that in course of time the tendency to condensation and centralisation will end in drawing the Presidencies of Bombay and Madras under the more immediate Presidency of the Government of India. But however that may be, the authorities as we have them now are, there is no doubt, in favour of the Bill passing as we have it before us, as Her Majesty's Government have all along been of the opinion which is now shared by the Indian Government, and strongly endorsed by Lord Roberts, as to the advisability of accepting the view adopted by the House of Commons in regard to the Amendment. I do not think it would be at all reasonable for us to insist upon our view upon what is, after all, a matter of detail, when matters of great moment to the future government of India are in question. For some 15 or 20 years we have been longing for this change in the relations of the two Armies which the Bill
  1132
  will introduce, and it would be a very great misfortune if this opportunity of finally sanctioning it should be thrown away.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: My Lords, I wish to add one remark only. I ought to have mentioned in the few observations I made that I have received a letter from Lord Roberts strongly expressing his opinion that the Amendment formerly passed by this House should not be insisted upon, and also pointing out the great importance of passing the Bill. I am glad he has communicated his opinion also to the noble Marquess.
  Motion agreed to.

SAVINGS BANKS BILL.

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to Order).
  Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.
  Clause 3.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HERSCHELL)THE LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord HERSCHELL) moved, as a formal Amendment, after Sub-section (2) to add the following Sub-section (3)—
  "(3.) This section shall not apply to any depositor entitled bylaw to deposit or invest in a savings bank a larger sum than £200."
  Amendment agreed to.
  Remaining Clauses agreed to.
  LORD HERSCHELL: I have received communications containing suggestions for Amendments to the Bill from persons interested in Savings Banks in more than one place. One communication I only received this morning. There will be an opportunity for considering the suggestions for Amendments to be made when the Bill is in Grand Committee. I propose that it shall be considered by the Grand Committee; and as it will not be ready in the ordinary course until about the 28th instant, that will give ample time for the consideration of the suggestions which have been already made and any other suggestions which may be received, for those who have been instrumental in bringing them forward to formulate them for consideration by the Grand Committee.
  Bill re-committed to the Standing Committee.

  BETTERMENT.
  THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (The Earl of MORLEY), who had placed on the Paper a Notice to move to resolve—
  "That it is desirable that a Select Committee be appointed to join with a Committee of the House of Commons to consider and report whether, in the case of improvements sanctioned by Parliament and effected by the expenditure of public funds, persons, the value of whose property is clearly increased by an improvement, can be equitably required to contribute to the costs of the improvement; and, if so, in what cases and under what conditions Parliament should sanction the levying of such contributions in Local Acts or Provisional Orders,"
  stated that its the Notice related to a Joint Committee of the two Houses of Parliament he had been in communication with the authorities of the House of Commons, and in a communication he had received from the Chairman of Committees of that House he had been asked by Her Majesty's Government to defer the consideration of the question for a few days. It was impossible for him to resist that appeal. He regretted having been unable to give noble Lords who were interested in I he question longer notice of his intention to postpone the Motion, but their Lordships would agree with him that upon such a question he could not do otherwise than accede to the appeal of Her Majesty's Government.
  Motion postponed.

  MERCHANT SHIPPING BILL.
  Moved—
  "That the Message of the House of Commons of the 9th instant with respect to the 'Merchant Shipping Bill' be taken into consideration (The Lord Chancellor): agreed to: The said Message considered accordingly: Then it was moved that a Committee of Six Lords be appointed to join with the Committee of t lie Mouse of Commons; agreed to:
  The Lords following were named of the Committee:

  L. Chancellor.

  L. Watson

  L. President (E. Kimberley)

  L. Halsbury

  L. Thring

  E. Morley.

  Ordered, That such Committee have power to agree with the Committee of the House of Commons in the appointment of a Chairman:
  Then a Message was ordered to be sent, to the House of Commons in answer to their Message of the 9th instant, to inform them of the appointment of the said Committee by this House, and to request them to nominate an additional Member to the Joint Committee."
  House adjourned at a quarter before Five o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock.