Lords Sitting of 14 May 1900

NEW PEER.
The Eight Honourable Sir Nathaniel Lindley, Knight, having been appointed a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary under the provisions of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1876, with the dignity of a Baron for life, by the style and title of Baron Lindley, of East Carleton, in the county of Norfolk—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificates from the Examiners that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with:—
Gas Orders Confirmation (No. 1) [H. L.].
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 6) [H. L.].
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 8) [H. L.].
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 2).
Gas Order Confirmation (No. 2) [H.L.].
Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (London) [H. L.].
And the Certificates that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with:—
Aberdeen Corporation Tramways.
Leo Conservancy.
Hamilton, Motherwell, and Wishaw Tramways.
Midland Railway.
And also the Certificates that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have not been complied with:—
Crystal Palace Company [H.L.]—(Petition for additional Provision).
Costa Rica Railway Company, Limited —(Petition for Bill).
Cumberland County Council (Bridges).
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

ROE'S PATENT.
Petition of John Pearce Roe, late of 150, Leadenhall Street, in the city of London, but now of 30, St. Mary Axe, in the said city, civil engineer, praying for leave to introduce a Bill for rendering valid certain letters patent granted to John Pearce Roe for an invention for improvements in apparatus for shipping or transferring coal and other materials; together with a copy of the proposed Bill

3
annexed thereto; read, and referred to the Examiners.

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE.
Report from, That the Standing Orders not complied with in respect of the petitions for additional provision in the following Bills:

Liverpool Overhead Railway [H. L.]

Salford Corporation [H. L.]

ought to be dispensed with, and leave given to the Committee on the Bills to insert the additional provisions.
That the Standing Orders not complied with in respect of the following Bills ought to be dispensed with, and leave given to introduce the Bills:—
Great Indian Peninsula Railway Company.
Bray Urban District Council.
Read, and agreed to.

CRYSTAL PALACE COMPANY Bills. [H.L.] (PETITION FOR ADDITIONAL PROVISION).
COSTA RICA RAILWAY COMPANY, LIMITED, BILL.(PETITION FOR BILL.).
CUMBERLAND COUNTY COUNCIL (BRIDGES) BILL.
Examiner's Certificates of non-compliance with the Standing Orders referred to the Standing Orders Committee on Monday next.

NORTH EASTERN RAILWAY BILL [H.L.]
A witness ordered to attend the Select Committee.
SOUTH ESSEX WATER BOARD BILL [H.L.]
Report from the Select Committee, That it is not expedient to proceed further with the BH. L.; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
SOUTH ESSEX WATER BILL. [H.L.]
Report from the Select Committee, That it is not expedient to proceed further with the BH. L.; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
ASTON MANOR TRAMWAYS BILL. [H.L.]
Reported with Amendments.
SOUTH SHIELDS CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]
The CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES informed the House that the opposition to the BILL. was withdrawn. The Orders made on the 26th February and on Friday last discharged, and Bill committed.
WIDNES AND RUNCORN BRIDGE BH. L..
Read 2a, and committed.
EXETER CORPORATION BILL.
Read 2a, and committed. The Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.

FALKIRK CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]
CORK ELECTRIC TRAMWAYS BILL. [H. L.].
RHYMNEY RAILWAY BILL. [H. L.].
BREWERY AND COMMERCIAL INVESTMENT TRUST, LIMITED, BILL. [H.L,].
BRISTOL WATER BILL. [H. L.].
TAFF VALE RAILWAY BILL. [H. L.].
Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.

CENTRAL LONDON RAILWAY BH. L..
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.
RAILWAYS (IRELAND) AMALGAMATION BILL.S.
Message from the Commons that they have ordered that the Committee appointed by them to join with the Committee of this House to consider the Railways (Ireland) Amalgamation Bills do meet the Lords' Committee in Committee Room B on Friday next, at Two o'clock, as proposed by their Lordships.
DUBLIN CORPORATION BILL.
  CLONTARF URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
  Message from the Commons that they have ordered that the Committee appointed by them to join with the Committee of this House to consider the Dublin Corporation Bill. and the Clontarf Urban District Council Bill. do meet the Lords' Committee in Committee Room A on Thursday next, at two o'clock, as proposed by their Lordships.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 2) BILL.
  Brought from the Commons. Read la; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners. (No. 74.)
  EDUCATION BOARD PROVISIONAL OKDERS CONFIRMATION (BRIGHTON AND PRESTON UNITED DISTRICTS, ETC.) BILL [H.L.]
  Committed to a Committee of the whole House.
  METROPOLITAN POLICE PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
  Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.

  NORTH EASTERN RAILWAY BILL [H.L.]
  NORTH EASTERN RAILWAY (STEAM VESSELS) BILL [H. L.].
  MANCHESTER CORPORATION TRAMWAYS BILL [H. L.].
  WITHINGTON URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL [H. L.].
  WORKINGTON RAILWAYS AND DOCKS BILL [H.L.].
  SALFORD CORPORATION BILL [H. L.].
  LIVERPOOL OVERHEAD RAILWAY BILL [H. L.].
  DUBLIN, WICKLOW, AND WEXFORD RAILWAY BILL [H. L.].
  Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Earl of Carlisle be proposed to the House as a member of the Select Committee on the said Bills in the place of the Lord Lawrence; road, and agreed to.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.

  TRADE REPORTS (ANNUAL SERIES).
  No. 2422. Argentine Republic (Rosario).
  No. 2423. United States (New York).

  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
  General Report by the Chief Inspector of the Southern Division of Scotland for the year 1899.
  COMMERCIAL NO. 1 (1900) (SUEZ CANAL).
  Returns of Shipping and Tonnage, 1897, 1898, 1899.

  INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION BOARD (IRELAND).
  Annual Report for the year 1899.
  Presented [by Command], and ordered to lie on the Table.

  LUNACY.
  Report to the Lord Chancellor of the number of visits made, patients seen, and miles travelled by the Visitors of Lunatics, pursuant to the Lunacy Act, 1890, between October 1st, 1899, and March 31st, 1900. Laid before the House [pursuant to Act], and ordered to lie on the Table.
PETITIONS.
  DISABLED SOLDIERS AND SAILORS.
  Petition for legislation to ensure adequate provision for, from National sources, of the Guardians of the Poor of the Union of Worksop; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
  EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL [H.L.]
  Petitions for amendment of, of the Edinburgh Corporation, and the Berwickshire County Council; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
  MUNICIPAL TRADING.
  Message from the Commons that they have ordered that the Committee appointed by them to join with the Committee of this House to consider municipal trading do meet the Lords Committee in the Chairman of Committees' Committee Room on Thursday next, at Three o'clock, as proposed by their Lordships.
NEW BILL.
  SHOPS (EARLY CLOSING) BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to provide for the earlier closing of shops—Was presented by the Lord Avebury; read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Tuesday, the 22nd instant. (No. 73.)

  THE CHUPRA CASE—SEPARATION OF THE JUDICIAL AND EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS IN INDIA.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY: My Lords, I rise, in accordance with the

  7
  notice standing in my name on your Lordships' Paper, to call the attention of the House to an article in the Law Times of 13th January on the Indian Executive and the Judiciary; and to the evils of uniting judicial and executive functions, as exemplified in the Chupra case; and to the insufficient action of the Bengal Government, with respect to those that did well and those that did ill in that case; and to ask what compensation the Bengal Government has made or will be ordered to make Constable Narsingh. I will read the chief part of the article in the Law Times, which speaks for itself and leaves me but little to add. It is as follows—
  "In thus summarising the results of the scandalous incident, it is by way of securing attention to its grave bearing on magisterial administration in the Indian country districts under the present conditions of the much-mixed functions entrusted to European civilian officers. It would be impossible, in the space available, to give any complete narrative of the tangled outrages and illegalities committed. Mr. Pennell's judgment alone would occupy three of our pages; but readers may rest assured that all the essential facts are duly recorded; they having been set out in a Calcutta journal, the Amrita Bazar Patrika, without contradiction, though the demi-official journal of Allahabad has made some attempt to deprecate the severe censures passed on the actors in this cruel Dreyfus case in rural Bengal. Let us now squeeze the story into as bold and brief a form as possible. It began with Mr. J. C. Twidell, the (civilian) district magistrate, also revenue officer, giving orders to the police to induce the villagers to set about repairs of certain embankments and watercourses without pay, but by dint of ' natural persuasion. These orders were entrusted to Mr. Corbett, a very young assistant superintendent of police, who, with Mr. Simkins, the local engineer, who had charge of the tanks and waterways, went to the village of Fulmeria to ' persuade ' the ryots to do the cheap bit of public work. One of the first men they accosted for the purpose happened to be a constable, Narsingh by name, from another district, who was on sick leave. Forced labour in any shape has long been illegal in India; and though the district magistrate, Mr. Twidell, seemed to have forgotten or ignored this elementary fact, the village constable—whom they had ordered to fetch some fellows to do the work—was well aware of it. He made reply: 'Why should we help? We are free men,' also making objection for himself that as a Rajput it was against his caste to do earthwork. Thereupon the young policeman told him to go and get some low fellows to do it. Mr. Corbett, seeing that Narsingh was a constable, thought he would have authority with the villagers. On his explaining that he was not on duty, and belonged to quite another district, Mr. Corbett began to bully him fiercely, and threatened he would get him
  8
  dismissed, Mr. Simkins adding as an ultimatum, 'Will you go or not go?'
  "On this, Narsingh, the worm, turned again, and, as the two officers alleged, snapped his fingers at them, and said he did not care 'that' for their illegal orders. Then this 'boy' of a police superintendent seized Narsingh by the shoulders, kicked him behind, and told him to go. But the worm again turned, and approached, as Corbett asserted, in a menacing attitude, when Simkins hit him on the head with a rattan, and Corbett struck him three times on the face, knocking him down. Then Shaking, the engineer, who is a big man, literally sat upon the unlucky Narsingh, while both he and Corbett, with their rattan sticks, gave him a good hammering (Corbett's own confession), after which Narsingh was bundled oil to work, but after a few minutes' attempt at delving he was let off, for, as Corbett avowed in evidence, the hammered constable was looking sick! The villagers, duly impressed by this peculiar example of 'your boasted British jurisprudence' began to follow Simkins to their forced labour. It may be mentioned that though they had helplessly looked on whilst Narsingh was in chancery, a more plucky Chamar (outcast) had made at the beaters with his stave; but the engineer, equal to the occasion, seized the Chamar's stick, and with it gave him a crack on the head. Thus order, if not law, was restored to the village of Fulmeria.
  "Now it was time for legal proceedings to begin, as they did next day in a fashion worthy of Barataria. Narsingh, as we have seen, knew a little law, and it might be expected he would take out a summons for assault and battery. But before doing so, his bruises needed surgical aid, and with that object he presented himself at the Chupra Hospital with his two black eyes and other decorations. Surgeon-Captain Maddox took him in, of course, but did nothing for him other than surgically, sending word to Mr. Corbett that he had the erring constable at his disposal. Thereupon Corbett drove over to the hospital, arrested Narsingh, and took him to the house of his superior,' Mr. Bradley, the district superintendent of police. There he appears to have been bullied with threats of prosecution, which, it was suggested, he might be spared if he would resign his place as constable and go about his business. But Narsingh had still manliness left in him to refuse this tender mercy, so he was walked oft' to the Bungalow of the (Civilian) District Magistrate, Mr. Twidell, with whom the two European police officers consulted as to which sections of the Penal Code would serve for prosecution of the man whose crime—as the Sessions Judge later on remarked—seemed to have been ' the very serious one of having been assaulted by a European official.' However, the council of three found that Sections 253 and 186 I.P.C. might do to frame a charge founded on Corbett's report, and forthwith Mr. Twidell wrote out an 'order' directing prosecution before a deputy magistrate, Moulvy Zakir Hussein, one of his own subordinates. The gist of these charges (to which another was added in the course of the proceedings), as expressed by Mr. Deputy Moulvy in his finding, was ' an insult sufficiently capable of provoking (the young

  9
  officer Corbett) to commit a breach of the peace,' and, having found Narsingh ' guilty,' a sentence of ' two months rigorous imprisonment' was passed on him, thus affixing to the unhappy 'hammered' constable the stigma of a felon,
  "But before this predetermined result was reached there had been certain extra legal proceedings that must be mentioned, as illustrating how the wisest of Codes and the best rules of procedure may be rendered futile by personal neglect or daring violation thereof. On the first hearing Mr. Bradley, the District Superintendent of Police, not content with his previous bullying and private consultation with Mr. Twidell, the superior civilian magistrate, must needs plant himself on the Bench beside Deputy Moulvy, with whom 'he discussed the law and evidence' whilst the hearing was going on. After this he stepped across to Twidell's house, speedily followed by the trying magistrate with the ' record,' where they considered the course to be taken at the next hearing, the latter having previously consulted with Mr. Twidell in the train as they travelled to Chupra. Here it may be mentioned that when Mr. Deputy Moulvy, in the subsequent proceedings before Mr. ' Penuell, the Scissions Judge, was called to account for these private confabs in prevision of his finding and sentence, he naively expressed it that it was to avoid future troubles, for, as he further explained, ' sometimes when cases are disposed of, and (his superior) magistrates do not like it, they find fault, and so I settled it beforehand.' If we are to take this as an example of how in rural Bengal justice is sometimes administered, it is difficult to conceive anything more grotesque and scandalous; and as to Mr. Twidell's part in these Savoy opera proceedings in real life, he, when before the sessions judge, after much wriggling, was constrained to ' admit that it is difficult for him to say that we did not give Moulvy Zakir Hussein any hint as to how he was to decide the case.' It may be remarked here, in passing, that Mr. Twidell, the district magistrate, is a civilian of only about live years standing, while Mr. Deputy Moulvy has exercised magisterial functions for nearly thirty years; but as he is one of a class who can never rise above their subordinate position, it may he understood how that, in the language of the Sessions Judge, he is a mere servile tool in the hands of his (local) superiors,' a man without conscience, With no fear of God in his eyes.' Another instance of the shameless personal interference with the course of justice in the case may be traced to the circumstance that Mr. Twidell, when formally asked in the judge's court to proffer explanation on his part in the irregularities there disclosed, refused to give it, sheltering himself under the plea of advice from his superior, Mr. Bourdillon, Chief Commissioner of the Patna Division, who is a senior civilian officer close on the period for retirement. Yet this gentleman has so little regard for impartiality in judicial proceedings that he committed the impropriety of writing a demi-official letter to the Sessions Judge, urging that the evidence of the witnesses should be taken in camera.,
  "Two or three further circumstances must be mentioned in order to show how the case
  10
  was disposed of. It is doubtful whether these outrageous proceedings would have been formally brought to the cognisance of the Sessions Judge, had not the advocate, Mr. Jaganath Sahai. whom Narsingh had secured before the final hearing in the Deputy's Court, taken the 'unusual course'—which Mr. Pennell commended in the instance of himself swearing an affidavit ' reciting the story of these extra-judicial proceedings,' which comprised many grave irregularities besides those essential points we have selected. It was with much difficulty that Narsingh obtained bail after the first hearing; he then preferred charges against Messrs. Corbett and Sinkins of causing hurt, and of imposing unlawful compulsory labour. The same deputy magistrate heard the indictment in its usual form of a petition, but this was dismissed as 'utterly without ground … under Section 203 C.P.C.'
  "But later on the Sessions Judge, in the exercise of his 'revisional authority,' set aside Monlvy Zakir's dismissal order and directed a fresh inquiry to be made by his superior. In passing the order, Mr. Pennell directed that it should be dealt with by another district magistrate, Mr. Macpherson, seeing that Mr. Twidell himself was ' at the bottom of the dismissal by this deputy. Otherwise he should have bad to make it a direct reference to the Calcutta Higli Court.' So this is how the subsidiary case of Narsing v. Corbett and Sinkins was left when last mentioned.
  "It remains to be seen how the higher authorities will take notice or avoid taking notice of the congeries of scandals disclosed in the judgment recorded by the Sessions Judge of Chupra. The searching and comprehensive review of its flagitious magisterial muddle is worthy of the best judicial traditions of the Indian Civilian Bench, and so far affords ample vindication of the British Indian Codes, when faithfully administered. But Mr. Pennell, who had' the courage to do his obvious duty, has been dealt with penally by the executive authority of Bengal, of whom Sir John Woodburn, the present Lieutenant-Governor, is the bead. Will the Chief Justice of Calcutta, Sir Francis Maclean, sit by whilst an insidious side-blow is thus dealt at the impartial administration of justice within his province? Such evasion of duty, were it possible, would tend to weaken the fibres of the strongest cord that hinds together our Indian Empire.
  "Then there are the highest executive authorities, who are bound to see to it that such subordinate official conspiracies against the reign of law as are disclosed in the Chupra case shall not ever be possible; for we quite admit this is an exceptional instance of miscarriage in Indian judicial administration. Those executive authorities are_ the Legal Member of the Supreme Executive and the Governor-General in Council, Lord Curzon."
  This case does not require much comment, the article of the Law Times having supplied enough. From the precedents set in regard to inquiry as to military outrages, it may be expected that I shall be told, and that the House will be told, that these civilian outrages did not take

  11
  place. If so, the India Office will have to make it good by prosecuting the Law Times for libel, since its statements if not true are the most discrediting statements ever made of any administration. I regret that the editor of the Law Times, Mr. Crump, died about ten days ago. One of the chief objects in calling the attention of the House to this case is because of the light it casts upon the evils of uniting executive and judicial functions. When I brought this subject before the House in May, 1893, both the then Secretary of State for India (Lord Kimberley) and his predecessor (Viscount Cross) were fully conscious of the necessity of a reform to remedy these evils. At that time it was supposed that financial difficulties stood in the way of reform. Financial difficulties are more likely to increase than to diminish; but since then some Hindu gentlemen—in accord, I believe, with Sir Richard Garth, a former Chief Justice of Calcutta—have devised a scheme of re-distribution of officials and of official duties, which would have secured the object aimed at without any important additions to the expense of the administration. With regard to the notice as to the inadequate dealing with the case by the Bengal Government, the dismissal from the service would appear to be what would have been expected for Mr. Twidell, Mr. Bradley, Mr. Simkins, and Mr. Corbett. Mr. Bourdillon, who tried to influence the Sessions Judge, does not appear even to have been censured, but promoted to be Chief Secretary to the Bengal Government. He is near his retirement from the service, so cannot plead youthful inexperience; it would be adequate and just that the period for his retirement should be immediate. The too pliant deputy magistrate, Moulvy Zakir Hussein, should also retire upon his pension without delay. What compensation has been or will be made to the constable Narsingh for his ill-treatment, and what reward should be given him for upholding the credit of the Indian Government in respect of abolition of forced labour? How long is the Sessions Judge, Mr. Pennell, to be left in an unhealthy post, to which he was appointed shortly after pronouncing his judgment? The Law Times calls this appointment an insidious side-blow at the impartial administration of justice. The Secretary of the Bengal Government
  12
  denied that this appointment had been made on account of the judgment, but that it had been made before they had seen the judgment. A writer in India, under the signature of an "Englishman," says this is a quibble, and that they knew of the judgment though they might not have seen it. In any case, by this time everybody has seen and may have read the judgment. How is it, then, that the Sessions Judge, who has upheld the credit of the administration of British justice and law, has not been removed from Noakhaly or promoted, by the Bengal Government or by the Indian Government or by order of the Secretary of State for India? Although I have given notice to move for papers, I do not intend to do so. There ought to be two papers, one containing some explanation from the Bengal Government, and the other a despatch from the Secretary of State. M37 object in giving notice that I should move for papers was to secure the right of reply, but as the seat at the Table usually occupied by the Reading Clerk is vacant, and there is no one to supply what Lord Randolph Churchill used to call my "aural of the ears oral of the mouth deficiencies," I am perfectly at the mercy of my noble friend the Under Secretary. Whatever the noble Earl may say it will be impossible for me to reply to him to-night.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (The Earl of ONSLOW): I understand that the noble Lord does not intend, to persevere in his motion for papers on this subject. Had he done so, I should have been quite prepared to lay upon the Table of the House the resolution which has been passed by the Government of India in this case, and which, I think, would more clearly set out the views of the Government of India and the local Government than I can in the few words which I shall address to your Lordships. It will be quite sufficient, perhaps, for me to say that this case is one which has attracted a great deal of attention in India, and it is one which has been brought to the notice of the Government of India, and upon which they have thought fit to animadvert in very severe terms. No doubt it is a matter for very great regret that this assault should have been committed upon Narsingh Singh, and that the punishment which was

  13
  awarded, although severe, was hardly adequate to the case. It is also unfortunate that the judge before whom the appeal was hoard should have expressed his opinion upon the case in terms not usually expected from one in a judicial position. The Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal expressed the opinion, in which the Government of India entirely concur, that serious notice of the conduct of these officers was necessary, and His Honour has issued the following orders —
  "Mr. Twidell will be barred from promotion to an officiating magistrate-collectorship for one year. Mr. Corbett, who has become entitled to confirmation as an assistant superintendent of police of the second grade on completely passing the departmental examinations, will not be confirmed for the same period. An expression of the Lieutenant-Governor's severe displeasure will be conveyed to Mr. Bradley, and Moulvy Zakir Hussein will also be admonished. The latter is an old officer who has hitherto borne a blameless reputation."
  With regard to Mr. Pennell's judgment, the High Court of Calcutta " is of opinion that certain passages in the judgment are expressed in terms which the judges cannot but regard as intemperate, and conspicuously wanting in that sense of dignity and self-restraint which ought to characterise judicial utterances," and an expression of the disapproval of the Court has been communicated to Mr. Penncll. The Governor General in Council adds that—
  "The punishment inflicted, if not adequate to the offence as it is regarded by the Governor General in Council, is at least substantial; and his Excellency in Council cannot but regard the lamentable occurrences which he has been discussing as in some degree due to the fact that there was no officer of age and experience present on the district staff whose more mature judgment might have prevented them, It is to be hoped that the public attention which has been called to the present incident, and the notice which the Government of India have been compelled to take of the matter, may prevent the recurrence of similar events in the future, and may be productive of good in vindicating that high standard to which it is essential that British administration in this country should steadily conform."
  I think from what I have said that it will be obvious to the noble Lord that the Government of India and the Secretary of State in England are both deeply sensible of the serious nature of this case, and that steps have been taken to prevent a recurrence of the incident. I may perhaps add, in reply to the question of the
  14
  noble Lord, whether any compensation will be made or ordered to be made to Constable Narsingh Singh, that that is scarcely in accordance with practice either in India or in this country, and that we have no information at the India Office that any such compensation is in contemplation.

  INDIAN FAMINE—ADVANCES TO HYOTS.
  LORD SANDHURST: My Lords, I beg to ask the Under Secretary for India whether it is intended that the advances to the Indian ryots suffering from famine mentioned by the Secretary of State for India in a speech reported in The Times of 10th May shall be by way of loan or gift. This question is a very direct one and admits of a very direct reply; but as I have just returned from the Bombay Presidency, where undoubtedly the famine is extremely bad, perhaps your Lordships will allow mo to give an explanation in a word or two as to the reasons which actuated me in interrogating the noble Earl. A few days ago, a number of friends of mine were so good as to give me a complimentary dinner on my return from Bombay, and in making a short speech I ventured to suggest, speaking for myself alone, that if the resources of charity were deemed insufficient possibly some grant might be made by either the Homo Government or the Government of India in aid of certain famine-stricken ryots. In the course of the evening Lord George Hamilton made a brief speech, in which he used these words—
  "There was, however, one portion of work which the charitable funds had done which he thought might be undertaken by Government if it became necessary to do so. A large portion of those funds in the past had been devoted to making advances to the ryot and the cultivator, and so had enabled him to buy seed and stock, that he might once more, when the famine was over, be set upon his legs. That was a duty which he thought the Government might legitimately undertake, and he had already been in communication with the Indian Government in order that they might, if necessary, supplement any deficiency which the contributions in this country might render necessary."
  As Lord George Hamilton expressed the idea that any funds to be granted might be granted in the same way as they were from charitable funds, I assumed that the funds so to be distributed were to be by way of gift and not by loan; but at that entertainment there were a number of

  15
  experienced administrators who considered that as the word "advances" was used the Secretary of State meant to imply that the assistance should be by loan and not by gift. I hope the noble Earl will be able to clear up the ambiguity on that score. If I may be allowed to say so—speaking, of course, for myself, after a most bitter experience of two famines in India—I sincerely trust that my assumption that the assistance is to be by gift may be correct. The present famine, following the famine of 1896–7, which was of considerable dimensions, found the Presidency of Bombay and certainly the Central Provinces and other parts of India in a position in which they had hardly begun to recover from the former calamity. The famine now upon India, which must continue for some time, is of unexampled severity, and embraces an area, certainly as regards the Presidency of Bombay, larger than any before so devastated. We are in this unfortunate position, that whereas in 1896–7 over £1,000,000 was subscribed to assist the Government in their beneficent work, on this occasion, as everyone knows, we have a tremendous competition for monetary aid which naturally absorbs all minds and not less naturally draws all charitable funds towards the relief of the families of those soldiers who are serving in South Africa. Therefore, although the Indian people are confronted with a calamity of an unprecedented nature, the vast wealth of charity which was poured from the Empire on previous occasions cannot, of course, now be expected; and I greatly fear, if the aid is to be by loan, and punctual repayment is looked for, that those who are most in want of the assistance will be unable to avail themselves of it, while those who are better off, but only a shade less poor, will find their existing embarrassments increase in the future. There is one particular direction in which I would venture to suggest that this assistance might be given—namely, towards the provision of cattle when the famine has ceased. As your Lordships are aware, thousands of cattle have perished, and these useful animals, as your Lordships also know, are used for the ploughing and tilling of the land, and provide the means of transport beyond the railways. It would indeed be difficult, I think, to call your Lordship's attention too urgently to
  16
  this cattle question. The Government of Bombay—the only one I venture to speak for—have done all they reasonably could to save cattle by establishing camps, buying and supplying them with quantities of fodder, and also by railing large numbers of approved cattle to certain places in the forest where fodder was known to exist, and where water was to be found. But even if the Government of Bombay realise their most sanguine expectations they can only hope to save a fraction of the cattle. If it is true that for the moment the limits of charity have been reached, I venture respectfully to think that I have made out a case for gift and not for loan. Further than that, I see that my opinion is endorsed in a telegram from Sir Francis Maclean, Chief Justice of Calcutta, and Chairman of the Famine Belief Committee, who, in acknowledging in last Saturday's Times a remittance from the Lord Mayor of London, calls attention to the fact that this is the moment when money is most urgently required in order to assist the peasantry with seed and cattle for ploughing in view of the coming monsoons. Before I formally put the question, may I be allowed to express my extreme consciousness of the unvarying encouragement and the consistent courtesy with which I have been treated by the noble Earl opposite and by his chief, and until lately my chief, the Secretary of State for India, under circumstances which I think most people admit to have been difficult? The Secretary of State has been uniformly kind and considerate, and it has been a great pleasure to serve under him. Taking advantage of the latitude of your Lordships' House, I venture also to express my appreciation of the services of the innumerable officers by whom the Government and the people of India are being served in this time of exceptional strain and anxiety. I find it difficult, having been mixed up with them in circumstances which fall more heavily on the district officers than they do upon anyone else, to find adequate terms in which to express my admiration of their self-denial, their devotion to duty, and the zeal and courage with which they have discharged that duty. I have seen it frequently stated that sympathy does, not exist between the district officers and those over whom it is their duty to rule; but, after a most critical observation, I

  17
  am able to assure your Lordships that that statement is entirely without foundation. Whilst we naturally look for patience from civilians brought up in the country and trained to deal with civil populations, young soldiers are hardly the men you expect would patiently carry out either famine or plague administration; but. I can assure your Lordships that these young soldiers, of whom I had a largo number under me, have exceeded my utmost expectations. Whether you put them down in the crowded city of Bombay, with a great variety of communities to look after, and possibly on that account one of the most difficult cities in the world, or whether you place them in the more rural districts, you find they gain the confidence of the people, and by their tactfulness and resource are able to get them to do what they want. I cannot help thinking that the way in which relief has been given will be the means of bringing Europeans and natives closer together than they have been for many a year, and I am sure your Lordships will all have observed with admiration the extreme patience—I think I may call it the heroic fortitude—of the various peoples in India in the face of calamities which I think it is not too much to say are without parallel. I beg to ask the question standing in my name.
  THE EARL OF ONSLOW: I must, in the first place, acknowledge the manner in which the noble Lord has expressed his gratitude to the Secretary of State for the sympathy he accorded to him in the very troublous times which fell upon the Presidency of Bombay during the noble Lord's administration. I think it would have been impossible for anyone occupying the position of Secretary of State in this country not to have sympathised with the noble Lord in the extremely difficult task which fell to his lot while he was Governor of Bombay, or with the noble Earl who sits beside him (the Earl of Elgin), who was Viceroy of India at the time of the approach of the famine, which the noble Lord justly said is without precedent in the history of this generation. The Government of India has undertaken the duty of giving work, and a wage, to every man who applies for it without any inquiry, provided he states that he is in a destitute condition, and
  18
  of giving gratuitous relief to distressed people who for any reason are unable to work. Beyond that, in the circumstances, I do not think any Government is entitled to go. But there are certain things which charitable funds may stop in and do in excess of the main duty of the Government, which is to save life from starvation. These things have been very clearly set out by Lord Elgin, and they are four in number. First of all, there are sums of money provided from charitable sources which might be applied to giving some additional comforts to weaker members of the community, such as medicines; secondly, to giving relief to those who, from reasons of caste or prejudice, might be unwilling to present themselves at the relief works; thirdly, in taking charge of orphans, who have been deprived of their parents by death from famine; and lastly, and most important of all, of setting on their legs again those who have been supported on relief works, in order that on the conclusion of the famine they might resume their normal occupations, agricultural and other. It was to that that the noble Lord more particularly directed his remarks, and he asked whether this advance was to be in the form of a loan or a gift. My answer to that is, it is both or either. That is to say the Government of India intend to provide a very large sum of money to supplement what may be available from charitable funds. The funds will be applied for supplying the necessary seeds, stock, etc., to the ryots in the famine districts for carrying on their operations. The scheme under which these advances —I think advances, after all, is the right word to use—are to be made is not yet completely settled. The Viceroy is in communication with the local Governments and will advise the Secretary of State as to the final shape which the policy should take. But this I can say— there will be no interest charged upon these advances; and, under any circumstances, they will not be repayable for at least a year, and repayment will probably be spread over a considerable time. The utmost latitude will be reserved to the Indian Government to remit, altogether or in part, repayment of the advances made to the ryots; and they will take into consideration the circumstances of each case. It is hoped that such measures will avoid, on the one

  19
  hand, any tendency to pauperisation by too lavish a grant of free gifts, and, on the other hand, the infliction of any hardship in reference to repayment. The Government of India trust that they will be able by these means to set on their legs again the great majority of those who are now suffering from a famine such as has never been known before in India, and who, no doubt, without such assistance would find it difficult to resume their normal occupations. It is also hoped that, within a reasonable time after the famine has come to an end, the land revenue of the Government will be restored.
  THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (Viscount CROSS): I should like to be allowed to thank the noble Lord who has spoken from the other side for the testimony which he has borne to the action both of the civil and military officers under circumstances of very great trial and difficulty. I am quite sure that his testimony will give the greatest satisfaction both in this country and in India.
  House adjourned at a quarter past Five of the clock, till Tomorrow, half-past Ten of the clock.