of encouraging more trunk lines, the
money were devoted to the construction
of small lines of railway to take the
place of the roads of the country which
are with difficulty kept up. I look with
great apprehension on the recent addi-
tions to the network of lines towards
Bombay. Useful they must be, because
all railways are useful; but I think these
have been got up not so much in the
interest of the people of India, as owing
to the pressure of Syndicates. I have
always believed in the entire honesty of
the India Office; still, I do not think
they are strong enough to resist the
pressure of great Syndicates in the City,
composed of men of high standing. I
have known some of the best men in
the India Office to be alarmed when
these guarantees have been given over
their heads, and without their ad-
vice. I think the India Office must
take care to uphold the character
which it has so long possessed, and
which the hon. Gentleman the Under
Secretary for India has described so
eloquently, by saying that the Indian
Government looks to the welfare of the
people alone, and I trust they will not
be induced to give any rash gua-
rantees to Syndicates. Looking over
a statement which I omitted to bring
down to the House, I came to the con-
clusion that in most of the offices of the
country a system of compensation or
re-organization of offices under which
men are pensioned off in the prime of
life is prevailing to an undue extent;
and, having regard to these pensions
which are borne on the India Office |
Vote, it strikes me that the Depart-
ment is a great sinner in that re-
spect. I know there are men who
have been pensioned off at a time
of life when their services might well
be retained. I will not pretend now
to suggest the remedies which I should
like to lay before the House; but I
again say that the apprehensions which
I entertain are not allayed, but rather
made more, by the figures laid before
the House by the hon. Gentleman the
Under Secretary for India. I feel that
there is cause for great anxiety with
regard to the finances of India. The
difficulties are very great, and I believe
they will tax the best minds and the
ablest intellects to grapple with them.
Perhaps it is better, under the circum-
stances, not to place a favourable view

before the country, especially if it cannot be supported by facts.

MR. HANDEL COSSHAM (Bristol, E.): Of all the speeches I have heard in the course of this discussion, I think that which we have just listened to from the hon. Baronet the Member for the Evesham Division of Worcester (Sir Richard Temple) is the most valuable. He has brought to bear upon the subject an amount of knowledge and culture which renders his presence exceedingly valuable on any question relating to India. We have also had a number of other speeches all pertinent to the quesBut one tion before the Committee. impression I have received from the discussion is that we do not feel a suffi cient sense of the responsibility which rests upon us in governing this great portion of the Empire, and I need not say that the responsibility of governing 200,000,000 people is a very great one. Another impression which has also been fixed upon my mind is that there is not enough economy practised with regard to the finances of India, and not a sufficiently close investigation of the Accounts; and unless greater care is taken I fear we shall be driven to place burdens upon the people of India which will endanger our position in that country. I think, therefore, we should welcome in every respect public scrutiny of all matters connected with India, the expenses in connection with which coun try are growing at a fearful rate. There can be no doubt about that; and we all know very well that the resources of the country are being taxed to their fullest extent, and to an extent, in my opinion, which renders further taxation impossible to be borne. All the Natives of India with whom I have come in contact have contended that the Salt Tax is one which bears with great hardship upon the poor people of the country, as is the case of all taxes levied on the necessities of life. I therefore hope we may, to some extent, be able to modify that tax, which is both hard to bear and obstructive to the progress of the people of India. I believe that we shall all admit that it rather raises the tone of discussion in this House when we direct it to the consideration of the happiness of the people rather than to questions of coercion, and therefore I think the result of this debate will be to increase our sense of responsibility and to

strengthen our desire to lessen those and not only that, but in the minds
evils with which the people of India of all who read the reports of the
are afflicted. In that direction I think debate; at the same time, I join in
a great deal is to be done by the ad- the hope that has been expressed that
justment of the Revenue, and I am ofur connection with India in the future,
opinion that some of the taxes may be
modified with considerable advantage.
I am delighted to see, with regard to
railways, that the extension of the
system has very much helped to pre-
serve our position in India as well as
to develop the resources of the country.
The hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary
of State for India has, no doubt, referred
to a very important fact in pointing out
the bearing which the railroad system
of India has upon our food supply. I
rejoice that we are able to get this
wheat supply from India instead of from
other countries; and it is a satisfaction
to know, if we cannot produce enough
food to supply ourselves, that, at least, a
large portion of our requirements is met
by one of our own Dependencies. I am
convinced that whatever tends to com-
mercial development and the inter-
course between the two countries will
lead largely to the cementing of those
feelings of goodwill which ought to
exist. To make our rule in India per-
manent we must make it mutually ad-
vantageous, for all Governments based
on the benefit of the governing instead
of the benefit of the governed must
contain within themselves the elements
of decay. Therefore I think the hon.
Baronet the Member for the Evesham
Division deserves our gratitude for
drawing attention to the fact that our
Government of India must be based
upon the happiness of the people, and
not upon our own interest. The more
we advance in the direction of removing
wrongs, and the more we increase the
intercourse between the people of India
and the people of England, the more
lasting will be our rule and the more
blessed the result. The hon. Member
for Kirkcaldy (Sir George Campbell)
has told us that the spirit trade in India
is tending to an amount of demoraliza-
tion to which we seem to be shutting
our eyes; and I do hope that great care
will be taken not to strain our position
by obtaining our chief revenue from the
taxation of articles on which the happi-
ness of the people depends. I believe
that this debate will increase the sense
of responsibility which rests upon us in
the mind of every hon. Gentleman,

guided as it is by wise and high views,
will be lasting and happy. A wise sug-
gestion has been made in the course of
the discussion-namely, that, as far as
possible, we should draw into the Go-
vernment of their own country our
Indian fellow-subjects, and give them
thereby a sense of responsibility on the
one hand, and sympathy with the true
interests of the people on the other. I
have great pleasure in expressing my
sense of the obligation we are under to
the hon. Gentleman the Under Secre-
tary of State for India for his clear
exposition of the finances of India, al-
though I do not agree with some por-
tions of that Statement.
Last year 1
read with great interest the statement
made by the right hon. Gentleman the
Member for the Western Division of
Bristol (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach),
which was also exceedingly clear; and
my recollection of it inspires me with
the hope that he may soon return to
aid us in this House with his views
in the work of securing the happiness
and welfare of the people of India.

SIR JOHN GORST: I must confess to some amount of surprise at the observations made by the hou. Member for East Bristol (Mr. Handel Cossham) with reference to the Salt Tax, because he does not seem to remember that we have made a great reduction in that tax. The tax was some time ago equalized all over India, and reduced to two rupees per maund-that is, to 18. 6d. for 82 lbs., which I do not think can be considered a very extravagant rate of taxation. But that is not all. As a matter of fact, the consumption of salt in India has greatly increased; and if the hon. Gentleman will refer to the Abstract he will find that whereas the consumption of salt in 1876 was 25,900,000 maunds, it had risen in 1885 to 32,091,000 maunds. I think the Government may very well be satisfied with the discussion which has taken place. I observe that every hon. Member who has referred to the Indian Financial Statement has regretted the late period at which it has been brought before the House. I have here some statistics on that point. The Statement-which is

not required to be made under the neighbours, either civilized or unciviauthority of any Statute-was first lized, and if the exigencies of our made by Mr. Dundas, President of the Empire did not force upon us occasional Board of Commissioners for the Affairs extension, no doubt we should be able of India, in 1787-100 years ago- and to govern India at less expense; but it it was continued annually without inter- is of no use saying what you would do mission until 1806. The practice was if you were in a different position from then discontinued, and was not revived that in which you are placed. Situated for nearly 50 years, when Sir Charles as we are in India, I think it would not Wood made a Statement-in 1854; and only be the greatest folly, but a most since then the Statement has been made criminal act, if we were to neglect those annually, with the exception of the years measures which, in the present state of 1857 and 1858, when the Mutiny in the world, are necessary for the protec India occurred. But during all the tion of the people of India. Then the years in which the Financial Statement hon. and learned Gentleman talked was made to the House it was never about our Famine Insurance Grant, as brought forward until the very end of if we had taken possession of some of the Session, except in the years 1859, the funds, and he has used the 1865, 1871, 1877, and 1879, and on term "sacred fund" in referring to it. those occasions it was made earlier But that grant is nothing more than the because loans were contemplated. I surplus which the Government of India have made inquiries into the matter, are determined, if they can, to keep up and I find that it would be impossible a surplus of Rx1,500,000 and to lay the Financial Statement for India which they spend on purposes necesbefore the House of Commons earlier sary for the prevention of famine, or the than the month of June. The accounts lessening of it, if it should arise. But received from India can, no doubt, be laid does the hon. and learned Member imbefore the House of Commons in that ply that we should put taxation upon month; and, so far as I can see, there is the people of India for the purpose of no reason why they should not be laid creating a surplus? All that has been before the House at that time. I have done in the years 1886-7 and 1887-8 has myself no influence in this matter; but been to recognize the fact that the surI can promise that the observations plus no longer exists, and that you have which have been made in this debate not got the money that you could spend shall be laid before my noble Friend in this way. No doubt, if the finances the Secretary of State for India (Viscount of India recover themselves before any Cross), who, I believe, will do his best to fresh taxation is imposed, the Famine insure the Financial Statement being pre- Insurance Fund would revive, and for sented at an earlier period of the Session. many years I hope the surplus of I do not attempt to answer the speech Rx1,500,000 would be kept up for this of the hon. and learned Member for purpose. Then the hon. and learned Dumfries (Mr. R. T. Reid), who has Member made one of those wholesale attacked the Government of India and and general attacks upon the Governtheir policy, root and branch. He has ment for extravagance in expenditure found fault, I must say, with all Go- that I have often heard made in this vernments. He attacked the Afghan House, not only as applied to the GoBoundary Commission, which was ap- vernment of India, but as applied to the pointed by the Government of the right Government of Great Britain. In my hon. Gentleman the Member for Mid humble opinion, there is no good whatLothian (Mr. W. E. Gladstone); he at- ever in this sort of thing. Nothing is tacked the Quetta Field Force, for which, more easy than to get up and go through I believe, both the Government of that the Finance Accounts and lay your finger right hon. Gentleman and the Govern- upon certain figures and cry out against ment of Lord Salisbury were responsible; the monstrous extravagance of the Goand he attacked the annexation of Upper vernment. What the people who wish for Burmah, which the late Government ap- financial reform should do is to point out proved and carried out. Of course, if the particular items-the particular exwe were able to remain in India without penditure-which it is possible to forego. frontier defences, and without a large Now, I have just an instance here which force to protect the country against its shows the value of the hon. and learned

or there is not. If there is a contract,
all I can say is, in the words of the Town
Clerk of Ephesus-"The law is open;
let us compel one another." If there is
no contract, the Secretary of State is
free-and the hon. Member for Preston
is constrained to admit it-to make the
best terms for the Revenues of India that
he can.
Now, where I think we differ
from the hon. Member for Preston is
here he seems to think that the value
of the mines has been satisfactorily
ascertained; but the Secretary of State
thinks that that is not so. There are
two ways in which you could ascertain
the value. You might put them up to
competition, if there was a real open
competition between a large number.
But there is not. There were tenders
in Calcutta, but they were only made by
two firms, and without public advertise-
ment, and they were made before the
mines had actually been visited by
European troops, or by any European
except a Frenchman in the days of King
Theebaw, which certainly, under the cir-
cumstances, was no test of the value.
The mines had certainly never been
visited on behalf of the Government.
The other way to ascertain the value is
that the Secretary of State should send
cut to Burmah someone who is able to
give an estimate of the value of the
mines, and until that is done no contract
will be entered into by anybody whatso-
ever. I differ from the hon. Member
for Preston in thinking that a valuation
in King Theebaw's time is any test of
value at all.

the subject, that there is no race for the mines now. This is not quite the case of a cornfield-it is the case of a number of rubies, which are there. You cannot make more of them than they arethey can only be got once; if not this year, then next. The rubies remain there; they will not run away, and the only question is in what way they can be extracted so as to be satisfactory to the Revenues of India. Then there is the grievance which has been brought before the Committee by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for South Bristol (Colonel Hill). I confess that the condition, not only of the civil engineers employed by the Government, but of all those uncovenanted civil servants whose pensions are payable in rupees, is one which excites the sympathy of everybody; but, unfortunately, I do not take quite the same view of the matter which my hon. and gallant Friend does. It seems to me that upon any construction which may be put upon the agreement made between the Government of India and the uncovenanted civil servants. The pensions to which those servants are entitled are payable in rupees, and not in pounds sterling. It is otherwise with the covenanted and military servants their pensions are payable in sterling. In the case of the uncovenanted civil servants, the pensions are, by their terms of service, payable in rupees. No doubt at the time the service was undertaken these gentlemen expected that being paid a rupee was pretty nearly equivalent to being paid a 2s. piece. The Government thought so too, I dare say, when they made the contract. But, unfortunately for these civil servants, the value of the rupee has fallen. Still, I do not know that the Government would be justified, out of compassion for the disappointment which these gentlemen must feel over the bargain they have made-I do not know that the GoSIR JOHN GORST: But there was vernment would be justified in saddling no contract made in February, 1886, by the Revenues of India with increased the confession of both parties. The Go- charges because they felt compassion. I vernment did not make a contract, can only say that the question has been because they waited for the mines to be brought before successive Governments visited, and Messrs. Streeter in the mean- and Secretaries of State; and no one has time by a telegram directed that no con- yet felt himself in a position-and I am tract should be made until the pre-afraid the present Secretary of State liminary conditions had been fulfilled, one of which was to ascertain the value of the mines. And I may remind the House, as something has been said upon

MR. HANBURY: What I said was that I thought the Secretary of State was justified in making a fresh inquiry if he thought the terms with Messrs. Streeter were not fair terms; but that if he found out that they were fair terms, then the arrangement had gone so very far with the Viceroy that it would only be fair to give Messrs. Streeter the preference.

-

cannot do it-to allow his feelings of compassion to over-weigh his duty of strictly guarding the interests of the people of India. The Secretary of State,