endeavour to exercise pressure in a matter the handling of which must necessarily be left to those who are better informed than ourselves. I will not further detain the House, and will only say, in conclusion, that I entirely accept the statement of the right hon. Gentleman as to the objects with which this Bill is introduced. They are undoubtedly to enlist in the service of the Government of India what I think he described as the upright sentiment and the enlightened opinion of native society, and if this Bill is discussed with as little delay as possible, and passed into law, I am certain that it will be attended with beneficial results. has, I think, gone rather too far in his interpretation of what was said by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Midlothian. The hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for India said that he endorsed entirely the words of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Midlothian, that it was not for this House-I do not profess to quote the words exactly-to dictate in detail the measures that ought to be adopted. Of course we all admit that, but I understood-I hope I am not wrong the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Midlothian to lay down the principle that it was for this House to choose the general principles on which the Government of India was to be carried out. The hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for India if he will allow me to say so-is as yet a young man, and it is a great dis tinction for him at his early age to occupy the high position he does and I congratulate him upon it, but he has not been quite so long a follower of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Midlothian as I have been, as to be as well-qualified to interpret what is meant by him. I am only sorry the right hon. Gentleman is not in his. place at this moment. I quite believethe right hon. Gentleman meant, when he spoke, that it was for this House, for the Imperial Government of this: Country to lay down the general principles of equity, under which the Government of the Indian Dependency was to be carried on; and at the same time he admitted-and we all follow him in that-that so far as matters of detail are concerned the Governor General and all the Governors of particular towns must be held responsible for the mode in which these general principles are to be applied. If both sides of the House agree upon this, of course there is no need going to Division. But we have not been told precisely by the Under Secretary of State for India that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Midlothian was right. in his interpretation of his speech. He has not told us that what was meant in Sub-section 4 of Section 1 of the Bill is the gradual introduction of the elective principle into the nominations for the various Councils that (10.42.) MR. PICTON (Leicester): There is, I think, considerable excuse for the ignorant and inexpert Members of this House to speak on this subject, for the Government of India has been removed from the immediate control of the East India Company to that of the Imperial Government, in which the House of Commons plays a conspicuous part. It is admitted that all Members of Parliament are responsible for the Government of India, and though we may not, perhaps, have a knowledge of all the various languages or of the various modes of Government in the various Provinces, yet we hold certain general principles which we believe should be applied to this Dependency, and we claim the right to express our opinions. In the course of his argument in moving this Bill the right hon. Gentleman said he did not exclude the possibility of the introduction of the principle of election or selection of the Council of the Governor General and of the various Provincial Councils. The hon. Gentleman the Member for North Manchester who moved the Amendment, said that unless the Bill recognised the principle of election it would not be effective. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Midlothian afterwards spoke and said in words of gravity and wisdom, which were recognised as much on this side of the House as they were on the opposite side, that there was not much difference of opinion between them; but the Under Secretary of State for India in the speech which he has just delivered, (11.0.) MR. SCHWANN: I wish to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether or not he will distinctly state to the House if it is intended by Subsection 4 of Clause 1 to apply the electoral principle in India? If it is so intended then I am willing to withdraw my Amendment. govern the great Dependency of India. | Empire in India and the subjects of the If he had said that I do not believe the Empire at home. You cannot neglect hon. Member for North Manchester the fact that the educated natives of would go to a Division. If I were in India have been studying our constituhis place, unless the Government more tional history, that they have been distinctly acknowledged that the elec- reading the history of the way in which tive principle must be introduced, and our forefathers wrenched something like at once, in the selection of Members of liberty and equality from their former the Council of the Governor General tyrants, and they wish to emulate the and of the other Governors of the principles and the aspirations, though Provinces, I should certainly go to a not the methods-they do not believe Division. No one on this side of the the methods are necessary-of our House thinks that India is prepared forefathers. Well, I think we ought to for Home Rule in the sense that Ireland make some allowance for the extension has been prepared for Home Rule, but of British culture to India. We leave although we believe that India may not to the future the gradual development be prepared for a complete Home Rule of the elective principle; we would be measure, yet we think that India is contented with the most modest introprepared for a tentative, gradual, and duction of it at the present time. very moderate introduction of the electoral principle and that is all that we ask. Surely, if the Marquess of Dufferin thought that the Government ought to have the means of controlling and neutralising the effect of the moral mischief which accrued from holding up English rule to hatred and contempt, we ought to have some men brought in who are elected by their fellow countrymen. I do not say they ought to dominate or control the action of the Government -very far from it. All I say is that they ought to be able to introduce some elected Members who would be able to communicate to the Government freely the aspirations and feeling of those who had elected them. The Members of all Governments, Liberal as well as Conservative, have spoken in a disparaging manner of the natives of India. I remember some years ago I (11.3.) DR. TANNER (Cork Co., had to negotiate with a Member of the Mid): As one who has listened to this Liberal Government as to the candida- Debate, and who cannot pretend in any ture for a particular constituency, the sense to have been convinced by what main Members of which had nomi- has been said in favour of the Bill, I nated an Indian gentleman. This must express my adhesion to the views Liberal Member of a Liberal Govern- enunciated by the right hon. Member ment said: "Do not have that nigger." for Midlothian-that this clause is both Well, that was in anticipation of the ambiguous and misleading. It is a words of a certain Member of the pre- proposal to place additional power and sent Government, who said something further emoluments in the hands about a black man; so that both of the bureaucracy of India. The sides are pretty much tarred with result of such instalment of SOthe same brush. Well, I think that something is necessary to bring about a closer and more fraternal sympathy between the subjects of the Mr. Picton | MR. A. J. BALFOUR: My hon. Friend is in charge of this Bill, and I trust that it will be left to him to answer the question. *MR. CURZON: I would say, in answer to the question of the hon. Member, that I do not know that I can add anything to what I have already stated in this House upon the subject. The initiative is left to the Viceroy of India, and it would be an unfortunate thing for the Government or for the House to transfer that initiative to itself. called representation would be so meagre that it would not be worth having. The subjects of the Queen in India have always been treated as sub as jects to be trodden under foot. You ber for Flint (Mr. Samuel Smith), that have only to go to any regimental affair India is growing poorer every day. Sir, in India to hear them spoken of, not as I had hoped that having made that "Indians " or "natives," but statement the hon. Member would bear facts, knowing as I do how thoroughly it out with some statistics and some well able he is to marshal facts and figures and to explain them to the House. The hon. Gentleman, however, gave us nothing of the kind. Now, Sir, though I cannot claim to be an authority, I may say that during my visit to India and formed some views which may I consulted many native authorities, possibly be as accurate as those of hon. Gentlemen opposite. One view which I formed is this: that India, so far from growing poorer is growing richer, and its trade is becoming larger, and growing almost daily. The railways of India have been increasing at the rate of 1,000 miles a year. Perhaps it may be said that these do not tend to the improvement of the wealth of India. Well, Sir, when twelve months ago I received the Viceroy of India in the middle of the central provinces, and he opened the line of railway that is some 850 miles in length, the great portion of that railway was through uninhabited jungle, where there was no wealth whatever, and yet during the present six months that railway is earning a profit sufficient to pay its guaranteed interest on £7,000,000. Surely that must mean that there is some increase of wealth in that district. Then, Sir, there are the discoveries of coal. I stood a year ago on ground where a few years previously there was no sign of coal, but where now there is a substantial coal-mining industry. The financial position of India is, of course, difficult, owing to the great depreciation of silver, but I cannot allow that this is owing to the method of English rule, or that the progress of India has not "niggers." The noble Lord who is at the head of the Government has himself called them "worse than Hottentots." I hope that my hon. Friend will go to a Division on the question, and that those who have had the opportunity of expressing their opinions with regard to it will also endorse them by going into the Division Lobby. The hon. Baronet the Member for Evesham said "Do not give political power to the Hindoos; but the hon. Baronet, like others who have held positions of trust in India, have always stood by their order and by the bureaucracy. The hon. Baronet also spoke of the mute masses of the people of India, but I would like to ask whether they have not had good reason to be mute, when they are subject to periodical starvation and periodical deprivation? I never had an opportunity of visiting the coral strands of India, nor Greenland's icy mountains but I have always understood that the headmen of the villages in India are peculiarly under official power, and that they are coming more and more in contact with English officials in India. They like to mix with the English snobocracy, and to rub skirts with officials, and by that means they are led by the nose. These are matters which are really not for the welfare of the people of India, and are not intended to raise the character of the people of India. I am convinced that this Bill will not confer upon the Indian people any benefit, as it is not intended to carry out the principle of representation, and, accordingly, I hope my hon. Friend will go to a Division. (11.20.) MR. S. HOARE (Norwich): The House has had the advantage of listening to several Members who have had the good fortune to visit India; and as one who has likewise visited that country, I should like, if the House will bear with me for a few moments, to say a few words. It was said by the hon. Gentleman opposite, the Mem VOL. III. [NEW (FOURTH) SERIES.] last 20 years. With reference to the point of establishing some kind of electoral system, I realise the great difficulties attaching to the institution for the carrying out of such a system. I asked the opinion of numbers of my and I attach great weight to what they countrymen in India on the subject, said. When the time comes we shall be glad to place some further power in been vast during the F the hands of the people of India, but it | to assent to the reference of this Bill is somewhat premature to speak of to a Select Committee, and I should introducing the electoral system. Sir, like to have an assurance on that point, I hope the statement will not be repeated that India is not progressive, because it is progressing in every part so far as its material wealth is con cerned. MR. SCHWANN: On the whole, though I have not had an altogether satisfactory pledge from the Government, I will ask leave to withdraw my Amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Main Question put, and agreed to. Bill read a second time, and committed for Thursday. as otherwise I do not think it would be right to allow a Bill of this kind to go through the House without some debate and without any explanation. This Bill deals with a question upon which I think we ought not to rush to a decision lest we should afterwards find, as we have found in the Ranges Act, that there is interference with the rights of people for whom no redress is provided. The Bill, I understand, gives the Government power to acquire rights over common land by lease or otherwise, and it does not appear to me, so far as I can understand the clauses, that commoners' rights are Now that the EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES BILL properly safeguarded. [Lords].-(No. 228.) SECOND READING. Order for Second Reading read. to move that this Bill be now read a expression of opinion in favour of the measure which was read a second time last year, and which has been most carefully considered by Lord Herschell and by all the lawyers in the House of Lords, and which meets with their approval. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time." (Sir R. Webster.) Motion agreed to. Financial Secretary has returned to his place, I put the question to him; is it intended to send this Bill to a Select Committee or a Hybrid Committee in order that the rights of persons interested in common lands may be inquired into and protected? (11.32.) THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY, WAR DEPARTMENT (Mr. BRODRICK, Surrey, Guildford): I regret that I should have been absent for I moment. It is the intention, and a believe that has already been announced by my right hon. Friend (Mr. Stanhope) that this Bill shall be referred to a Select Committee where the clauses will be fully investigated in a manner satisfactory to the hon. Gentleman. (11.33.) DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Bill read a second time, and com- Mid): It is clearly understood then, mitted for Thursday. that this Bill goes before a Select Committee. I know that many Members on this side of the House entertain objections to the Bill, but they are not present, because they assumed that the day, would not be reached before this Bill, standing No. 11 on list for 12 o'clock. Perhaps there will be less objection if the Bill is threshed out before a Committee and subsequently comes before us. I know that questions of commoners' rights arise, and notably in connection with the establishment of a rifle range in the New Forest. But I have neither power of voice or the necessary information to | Bill calling for special local inquiry. discuss the Bill now, but I sincerely In regard to the New Forest there is a hope that proper means will be taken local inquiry proceeding, and upon this to allay apprehensions I know have arisen, and I think it is a questionable proceeding to attempt to carry this stage of the Bill under these peculiar circumstances, when it would not have been reached but for the dropping of intervening Orders of the Day. (11.36.) MR. LLOYD - GEORGE (Carnarvon, &c.) I understand that the Bill includes a proposal to take away a large portion of commoners' rights in the New Forest, and I know that in this many Members take an interest, but they had no reason to expect the Bill would be taken and have left the House. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton (Mr. Labouchere) is anxious to speak on the subject, and it is a question of such public importance that the Bill should not pass without discussion. I know there is a question arises as to the abolition of public rights of way also. Would the Government be prepared to refer the Bill to a Commons Committee empowered to make the usual local inquiry under the Commons Act at the public expense? To put myself in order and to enable the hon. Gentleman to reply, I move the adjournment of the Debate. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."-(Mr. Lloyd-George.) (11.39.) MR. BRODRICK: I hardly think it is necessary for the hon. Member to insist on that Motion. With regard to the commons part of the subject, I may mention that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bradford (Mr. Shaw Lefevre) who has specially interested himself in this subject expressed himself as perfectly willing that the Bill should go before a Committee. a report will be made. This is not dealt with in the Bill. The object of the Bill is simply to consolidate existing Acts, and of course the Committee upstairs will have the opportunity of going into details which a Committee of the whole House would not have. We do not propose by the Bill to recommons; it is simply a consolidation open all the questions connected with Bill which a Committee upstairs will be eminently qualified to deal with. I think there is a general consensus of opinion in favour of such a course, and I hope the hon. Member will not press his Motion. (11.42.) MR. SHAW LEFEVRE (Bradford, Central): I hope the hon. Member will not proceed with his Motion for adjournment. I have carefully examined the Bill in the interests of commoners, and I am satisfied that it will be in the interest of commoners that the Bill should pass into law. is not merely a consolidation Bill for it does remove a very serious difficulty arising out of the Ranges Act passed last year. It In reference to this I had the honour of introducing a deputation to the Secretary for War, and the right hon. Gentleman has very fairly met the demand made by the deputation. There was one point I referred to the other night in connection with the New Forest range. Proceedings in remenced under the Act of last year, and ference to that range have been comI suggested that an Amendment should be introduced providing that this also should be dealt with under a Provisional Order as is provided in the Bill for future proceedings. Subject to this, I think the Bill is satisfactory and may well be allowed to be referred to a Committee. (11.45.) MR. S. T. EVANS (Glamorgan, Mid): I do not think my MR. LLOYD-GEORGE: What kind hon. Friend's Motion is unreasonof Committee? MR. BRODRICK: An ordinary Select Committee of the House, and I think that inquiry would satisfy hon. Gentlemen for there is nothing in the able under the circumstances. This |