letter to till (Mtn.
THE GREAT INDIAN ERROR.
Sts.—In your article of last week on the Indian armies, you have, I think, fallen into some errors with regard to the plan proposed by Sir Charles Wood, and the reasons which have induced him to adopt it.
You say he has " changed his mind, because the Home and Indian Go- vernments provoked a mutiny." The fact is, that Sir Charles Wood under- took the office of Secretary of State last year, after the blunder had been committed which led to the local mutiny, but before the intelligence of its effects had reached this country. He had, therefore, only to deal with them as facts. He had accepted the existence of the local. army as laid down by his predecessors. But the local army melted away. The features of the case became altered, not the opinion of Sir Charles Wood. Sir Charles had to consider whether, in the replacing of a certain number of men, it was better to have a local army formed anew, or to reinforce the line regiments there. The second point you mention is, placing the military officers of the Go- vernment in the hands of the line officers. Or as you express it, "Trained military men for India are to be abolished." Now, this is not only not Sir
Charles Wood's plan, but it is exactly the contrary. In the days of the company, and up to the great rebellion, officers were taken from their regi- ments by favour to fill every sort of appointment without reference to their training. It is the intention of Sir Charles Wood to forbid the appointment of any officer to detached employment of any sort, without such officer have passed a certain time learning his military duties, and an examination showing a knowledge of the languages of the country. And when he shall have so done, he will leave his regiment and be placed upon a staff er unat- tached list; but which will be as much devoted to Indian service, as the native regiments from the cadres of which officers for such service have hitherto been taken.
" Chance medley" will have nothing to do with it. For no one will take the trouble to go through a severe Indian examination, unless he seriously intends devoting himself to an Indian career. But it is argued that if the discipline has been lax it is the fault of the Royal Commander-in-chief. This is quite true, and it is a truth which shows more than anything the necessity of a complete reform. The Horse Guards, as you say, have ap- pointed thoroughly incapable men. But what have these thoroughly in- capable men had to do ? They have confined themselves to administering the so-called perfect discipline of the divine corps of the Royal Army, and interfering as little as possible with the Company's troops. This is clearly, however, not the duty or the intention of such men as Rose, Mansfield, or Patrick Grant. They will feel that they are responsible, and that the country will deem them so for the discipline of the whole army. The only remaining point is denuding India of troops.
It is argued that India was denuded of troops in the Crimean war : that is two regiments were taken away. But if two regiments being abstracted was denuding India, there is nothing in Sir Charles Wood's measure which confers a power of denuding India more than existed before. The Govern- ment had the power of multiplying the denuding of India by fifteen during the Crimean difficulty, but they did not do so.
The only novelty in the removal is that certain regiments, if they become unruly, may be sent upon short colonial pay to the West Indies or Hong- kong, instead of remaining in India upon the liberal allowance of Company Bahadoor.
Sir Charles Wood has consulted all the Indian authorities. He has found that almost all of them agreed that some want of discipline existed ; and that the mode of sending officers to the staff, and getting them back again to command regiments, when old, and incapable, was the cause of such indisci- pline. He has sought to remedy this by the creation of a staff corps for Indian service only. And bv this means he is enabled to place every European soldier who is in India under the strict rule and discipline of the Royal army.
This is the principal feature of the plan ; and is, I am sure, of much greater importance than the comparatively minor question, of whether the headquarters, and home of certain corps shall be in India, or in England. There are, however, many points in the details of this plan which must oc- cupy the careful attention of the Indian Council. 1 maintain that the settlement of the great principle is an imperial question. But the details must be arranged by those conversant with India. The main points to be worked out are :-1. The cost ; 2. The authority of the Governor-General to be left unimpaired ; 3. The promotion of the staff corps; 4. The patron- age of the higher retiring pensions of the Indian military service. If Law- rence, Outram, and Frere will look to these with impartial and enlightened earnestness, I am sure the friends of India need be under no alarm of losing the empire for want of special Indian officers, or from the undue interference of Horse Guards authorities.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant, A Civcu.aee.
[The letter of our valued correspondent does not convince us that we fell into any error with regard to the plan of Sir Charles Wood, though we allow Sir Charles's own statement of his reasons ought to be accepted. We are still of opinion that the plan is a fatal error ; that the so-called mutiny of the local troops is no good reason for abolishing local regiments; and that the projected staff corps will not produce benefits that will counter- balance the evils resulting from the abolition of Local Europeans. We have always admitted that the creation of a staff corps affords the only chance of success ; but to counteract this there is the great probability that the native army will be put in a position of inferiority, and that an insane attempt will be made to hold India by means of European soldiers alone. We think that the danger arising from the temptation to denude India of troops is vast. It is not that the bill confers any greater power on the Home Government to withdraw troops ; nor did we say it did. The danger lies in multiplying the number of troops which may be withdrawn, and reducing to nil those that may not be withdrawn. The power of withdrawal is not increased, except by the very efficient process of bringing a larger number of men within the reach of that power. That is the danger. Min- isters are really altering the tenure of our rule in India, and ourselves or oar children will have to pay dearly for the error.]
Previous page
