IMPIIGVEMENT OF 'LORD PALMERSTON'S INDIA BILL.
„Belfast, 24i1t February 1858. Sin—Now that the change Of Ministry reopens all Indian questions, per- mit the to suggest what-I think by far the hest way of constituting-the Home
Government of India. . ,
It I8 utterly untrue to say that -the East India Company has been con- victed of failure arising from incapacity, and on that ground must be dis- placed. •It is altogether beside -the •queetion for the partisans of . the Come parcy to point to blunders in the Lublin: policy of the Ministered the Crown. It . DA& politioal but only an adininudrative change thatia needed thie must toesist In substituting a single for a double government, and ci single governme.ntmust be Under a Minister of the Crown.. At the same time there ought to be a really independent Council of In.- dis, This is the strong point of the case for the Company. Now, is-there any difficulty in reconciling a. single go,vernment under a Minister of the Crown with an independent Council? Not the slightest Lord Palmer- ston's plan was jusit what irineschal, except that the proposed Council of eight would be much too small. That why should:we constitute a new Council, when we -hive an exCellent one ready,made -?. The existing Courtof .Direet- orenughtetill-to be the Council 'of 'India, the Ministen for India being ex. officio ite President. . Vacancies as they arise shoul& be filled up by the Crown, with men of Indian experience: for it is now a useless and therefore anabsurd anomaly that any part-of the Council of, India should be elected
by the holders of Indian stock.' • • -
This very slight change is allikaielWaeomerary in order to combine-the ad- vantages of the existing Indian.--Government with the advantages' of one direotly under the Crown. But some other important questions arise out of "eiia "ii cu „ y}1.(S) ,s a1,arlj Jsul 1,:kri au rrjle
With a Council of India in London, is there any. use in keeping up the Legislative Council of India at Oideritte ? I can corteeineof none. . Is the Company's European Army to be united with the Queen's? I be- lieve this will soon_ be necessary, whether the double government is to'bh abolished or not : but it is net necessary to take the two questions together
Who ie to possess-the patronage now vested in the Directors? If patron,'
age i
is to exist at all, it s "ouch better that it choral not be transferredto any other hancle. But I am strongly in favour otsubatitutingexaminatione for patronage, in all cases where persons receive their appointments at their outset in life and have a vested interest in them : and this must ever be the ease in the Indian services,. If the system of appointments to the Indian civil service by examinations works unsatisfactorily, it is because men are permitted to,00mpete who are not young enough, and because of the very unwise abolition Otte regulation which required a year of study•in subjects of special utility to Indian administrators.
Previous page
