class vessels, while others were being put into commission, which would give us a Channel fleet of eight screw ships of the line, and five heavy screw frigates. This he thought would be sufficient for all requirements; but if more became necessary, no doubt the House would cheerfully vote them. In addition to manning these vessels efficiently, in order to prevent future delays in the manning of ships, and also for the purpose of training our seamen to the practice of gunnery, it was intended to maintain a reserve of 3000 men.

The French navy was superior to the English in screw liners and frigates. He proposed to add fifteen screw liners and nine heavy frigates to the fleet by the conversion of sailing vessels and the construction of new ones. This would be done in the course of the next year. Two ironcased ships would also be built on the best principles to place us on a par in that respect with France. There was not, however, room to build these ships in the government yards, and they would therefore be built by contract. Thus the navy would be augmented during the year with 26 powerful ships. Less he could not ask, and more could not be accomplished in consequence of the crowded state of the dockyards. He, for one, would not be satisfied until larger additions were made to our fleet.

He

moved that the number of men, boys, and marines for 1859-60 should be 62,480.

Sir C. Wood reviewed the statement of Sir J. Pakington, expressing his satisfaction to find that the alarm which the House had felt, at the beginning of the

the session, on the announcement that he was about to " reconstruct" the Navy, was groundless. He offered no objection to the vote, nor to the proposal to increase the number of vessels, though he did not concur in the mode in which it was to be increased. He should desire a permanent addition to the establishment of the dockyards.

Sir C. Napier observed, that the House would never refuse to sanction a necessary increase of our Navy if the money was properly expended; but he contended that the money was not properly expended. He gave an alarming description of the naval power of France, which, he said, commanded the Channel at the present moment, and this was not a position for this country to be in.

Sir J. Ephinstone urged attention to the condition of seamen, and the necessity of raising the status of the inferior grades of the service. He complained of the deficiency of docks for the reception of the Queen's ships.

Mr. Sidney Herbert said that Governments were always afraid of proposing heavy estimates on account of the opposition they were certain to receive; illustrating his opinion by a reference to his own experience when Secretary of War. During that time he said he had the greatest possible difficulty in obtaining the most moderate estimates for a service which it was now acknowledged was far below the mark in point of efficiency.

Mr. Whitbread thought Sir J. Pakington censurable for having, with the knowledge in July of the comparative inferiority of our Navy, nevertheless concealed the

fact from the House of Commons. He pointed out defects in our naval administration which he attributed to the backwardness of Boards of Admiralty to come to that House for votes of money.

Admiral Walcott denied that we had lost the command of the Channel, and so long as we kept it, he thought there was little danger of invasion.

Mr. Bentinck objected strongly to the constitution of the Board of Admiralty. So long as the head of that Board was a civilian, liable to be frequently displaced, it was impossible that there could be an efficient system of naval administration.

Sir F. Baring agreed that it was our duty to keep ahead of foreign navies. This, however, cost a great deal of money, and it was the duty of the House of Commons to examine closely into our naval expenditure. He suggested the appointment of a Committee for this purpose.

After some remarks from Mr. Lindsay, Admiral Duncombe, and Lord Clarence Paget, the vote was agreed to.

The Army Estimates were moved by General Peel, on the 4th of March. The gallant officer began his statement by explaining certain apparent discrepancies, arising from the sums to be accounted for by the East India Company. The amount to be voted was 11,568,0607., against 11,577,7557., the amount of the estimates of last year. There was an apparent decrease, he observed, in the number of men, which appeared to be 7480 less than that of last yearnamely, 130,135-whereas the number to be actually voted this year was only 122,655. But there

was an increase in the East India establishment, the force of which was this year 106,902. The grand total of Her Majesty's land forces was 229,557 men. In the course of his explanations as to the general character of the estimates, General Peel gave some interesting details respecting the improvements in the artillery and Armstrong's guns. He concluded by moving the first vote, of 122,655 men for the service of the United Kingdom.

Sir H. Willoughby asked for information regarding the payment of the troops in this country destined for India, and whether the artillery of India was to be supplied from this country. He noticed the heavy demands which the present military expenditure would make upon the Indian finances, and that it was a serious question whether so large an expenditure should be made out of the Indian Exchequer not under the control of Parliament.

Mr. Sidney Herbert bore testimony to the improvements that had taken place in the army, and thought that the estimates, though large, could not at this time be safely reduced.

Sir W. Codrington strongly urged the defects of our recruiting system, and the want of sufficient inducements to enter the service, so that in a time of pressure, the supply required could not be obtained. The same gallant officer expressed his approval of the suggestion to teach the middle and lower classes the use of the rifle. Mr. H. Buckley and Mr. W. Williams concurred in this recommendation. After a variety of criticisms on sundry details the votes were agreed to.

On the 14th of February, Lord

Stanley, the Secretary of State for the affairs of India, made a long and elaborate statement to the House of Commons upon the financial state of that country-a subject which was then exciting much interest, and some anxiety, in the public mind. The exhaustion occasioned by the mutiny-the great loss of property and revenue--and the very heavy charges incurred by the military operations, had produced a great excess of expenditure and deficiency of revenue, and it was feared that the void thus created would have to be made good, sooner or later, out of the resources of the British tax-payer. On this account, the official statement of the Minister for India was anticipated with much interest, and was listened to with great attention by the House of Commons. The noble lord began by giving an outline of the financial state of India during the last two years compared with that of the preceding two years. The total revenue in the years 1856-57 was, he said, 33,303,000l.; the expenditure 33,482,000l., showing an apparent deficiency of 179,000l.; but this expenditure included a large sum laid out upon objects which came under the comprehensive title of "public works," but for which there would have been a considerable surplus. The deficiency, which in the year 1853-54 was 2,100,000l., was, in 1854-55, 1,700,000l.; in 1855-56, 1,000,000l.; and in 1856-57, as before stated, only 179,000l., showing that, at the time of the outbreak of the mutiny, the equilibrium between revenue and expenditure was nearly restored. The accounts for 1857-58 had not been received; but the estimated

revenue was 31,544,000l., and the expenditure 39,129,000l., showing an estimated deficiency of 7,600,000l., besides the extra expense for troops and stores, amounting to 1,500,000l.; so that the total deficiency in the year 1857-58, in round numbers, amounted to 9,000,000l. The estimate for 1858-59 was-revenue, 33,016,000l.; and expenditure, 45,629,000l., showing an estimated deficiency of 12,600,000l., to which if the deficiency of 1857-58 be added, the total deficiency of these two years since the mutiny was 21,600,000l., in which no account was taken of the compensation for the loss of private property.

Lord Stanley then proceeded to explain the sources of revenue. The sum derived from land had grown with the growth of our possessions. In 1856-57 it yielded 19,080,000l.; fell to 16,671,000l. in 1857-58; and rose again to 18,592,000l. in 1858-59. This item was of slow growth. It could only increase, where there were permanent settlements, from the cultivation of new lands, and was therefore comparatively inelastic. Another source of increase was additions of territory, of which we might hope there would be no more just at present. The increase from the cultivation of waste lands was a probable source of great wealth, but no prudent financier would calculate upon making it available in a short time. Next to land revenue, which yielded 60 per cent., was opium, which yielded 20 per cent.

This source varied with the crop, and the demand of the market. In 1857, the opium revenue was 4 696,7097.; in 1857-58, it rose to 6,443,7067.; and in

1858-59 fell to 5,195,1911. Objections had been raised to opium as a source of revenue, but there was no plea for the prohibition of opium culture that might not be equally urged in favour of the Maine Law in England. As regards the monopoly, the Government were considering whether they could substitute an excise. The other sources of revenue were salt, yielding 4,398,960l. in 185758, and a variety of miscellaneous items yielding, in round numbers, about 3,000,0001.

These facts showed that increased prosperity in India did not produce the same results upon revenue as in England. Under native Governments taxes were levied upon almost every action of a man's life, and all classes paid more equally than at present, when, excepting the salt duty and a few customs duties, the mercantile classes paid no taxes. Now it was more difficult to impose a new tax on India than on England; the Home Government had, therefore, not given special directions to the Indian Government in this matter, but had suggested the subject for mature consideration, and expressed an anxious desire that no unnecessary check should be placed on works of public improvement. Diminished outlay was the only present resource we could look to. The deficiency of 21,600,000l. was wholly due to military expenses arising out of the mutiny. Those expenses had risen from 11,546,0007. In 185657,to 18,212,000l. in 1857-58, and 22,598,000l. in 1858-59. Our expenditure might be diminished by employing uncovenanted servants, and substituting cheap Native for comparatively costly Eu

ropean agency. The salaries of the civil servants might bear revision, but hardly reduction, seeing that the rates of remuneration were relatively as great in the service of the railway companies, for example, as in the Government service. But when peace was restored, the policy of annexation being abandoned, railways being developed, our latest acquisitions becoming more settled, we should not require a larger force in India than we had before the disturbances. At present the European force in India (91,590) was nearly double what it was in 1857, and the Native force (243,956) exceeded that of 1857 by 11,732.

Lord Stanley next referred to the public debt. Compared with the revenue there had been little increase in the debt since 1800. Then the debt was 16.600,0007, and the revenue was 9,200,0007.; now the debt was 74,500,000l., the revenue $3,000,000l. This sum was held by natives in the proportion of two-fifths, by Europeans in the proportion of threefifths. The amount raised by loan since the mutiny broke out was 19,814,000l. It was worth notice that, whereas in 1800 the interest paid was 8 per cent., it was now on an average only 4 per cent. When it was considered that the whole of this debt had been incurred in a constant series of wars, the wonder was that it was not larger. Hitherto, this debt had been held to be a charge only on the Indian Exchequer; the Government would recommend no change of policy; but looking to the fact that more than 50,000,0007. had been contributed by English capitalists, it was worth considering how far England could repudiate

the debt without shaking her credit. It must be remembered that India now paid more for interest than she would pay if she had the assistance of England. It was matter of doubt whether practically we were free from responsibility. With regard to the future, he thought there were in India great materials of prosperity. Her imports had more than doubled; her exports had nearly doubled within the last twenty years; the tonnage entering and leaving her ports had also nearly doubled; the export of cotton had augmented from 352,000,000 lbs. in 1842, to 863,000,000 lbs. in 1857. The trade of Calcutta had increased one-half; the trade of Bombay had doubled in five years. In three years there would be 3100 miles of railway in operation; irrigation works were in progress in Madras; harbour works at Calcutta and Kurrachee; an electric telegraph would stretch as far towards India as Aden by next June. In order to facilitate railway enterprise, the Government would appoint by competition a special engineering service for India. Experience had shown that some public works returned profits so enormous, that they not only covered their own cost but repayed the expenses of the less successful.

Lord Stanley touched on the land tenure, and intimated that Government lands would be opened to European colonization on the principle of selling absolute ownership in the soil-a boon long demanded by Europeans; while it was proposed that Native Zemindars might also acquire, by paying a commutation of the land tax, the fec-simple of the land,

free of future charge. The sums thus obtained for land were to be applied to the extinction of debt. In connection with the land tenures were the "Enam" Commissions of inquiry. The operation of these had been much misrepresented. The object was not to disturb titles, but to confirm them-to give what in this country is called a Parliamentary title, but at the same time to detect frauds. Precautions would be taken to prevent these proceedings from being harsh to individuals.

In conclusion, Lord Stanley asked the House to authorize a loan to the Government of India of 7,000,0001. The course he proposed to take respecting this loan was the same as last year, it being intended that the loan should be secured upon the revenues of India specifically. He had great hopes that, although for a time the deficiency might continue, it would not be necessary for a long time to come to raise any further loans for India.

A general discussion of these matters took place a few nights afterwards in Committee. Lord Stanley took occasion to explain at the outset a discrepancy between some of the figures which he had stated and certain papers which had been laid before Parliament relating to the finances of India. This discrepancy was partly owing to his having taken the rupee at 2s., whereas in the Parliamentary papers it was taken at 1s. 10d. He believed that his own value was nearest to the truth. The amount of debt he had stated was quite correct- including the home debt, as well as that raised in India, the total was 74,534,000l.

Sir C. Wood, premising that