, seeing the Chief Commissioner of Sewers in his place, wished to ask him a few questions upon that subject. He desired first to know when the sewage of Westminster was brought into the new cesspool in Parliament-gardens, where the commissioners intended to pump it out?

wished that his noble Friend had given him an intimation of his intention to put these questions. He had left his house that morning before ten to attend a meeting of the Court of Sewers, and he had only just heard of his noble Friend's questions. Still he was sufficiently familiar with the subject to be able to answer some of those questions. It was not intended to bring the sewage of Westminster into the place alluded to. What would be brought into it was not strictly sewage, although he would not say that some drainage water might not have escaped into it. The water oozed a good deal through the land, which was known to be wet, into the very deep cut which was being made as a new sewer. In the course of the works he believed that a few old drains had been cut through; but still the water in it was not, properly speaking, sewage water. It was the sort of oozing which took place into drains which had cesspools and dead bodies over them. With respect to the place which it was being pumped to, he might state that at present it was to be pumped into the old sewer at a much higher level, which ran down Great George-street into the Thames near Westminster-bridge, and it was being so disposed of in order that the men who were at present working in the wet in making the new sewer might work in the dry. It could have been desired that these works had been begun a little earlier, but it was also desirable that they should not be commenced in the middle of the winter, when there was a good deal of rain to impede the progress of the works.

said, he had addressed a letter to his noble Friend containing the questions he intended to ask, which he supposed he had not yet received. He next wished to know where the outlet to the new sewer now constructing was to be; and why the Commissioners of Sewers did not commence at the end nearest the outlet?

The outlet to the new sewer would be at the Percy Wharf, Scotland-yard. The commissioners and their engineer were of opinion that it was best to begin the work as they had begun it.

next inquired what the total estimate of the new line of sewer amounted to; and whether there was any objection to lay the estimate on the table of the House of Commons?

did not remember the exact estimate, but there would be no objection to lay it upon the table of the House. However, the greater part of the expense did not come out of the general rates, but out of the pockets of private persons.

, finally, wished to know whether the new line of drainage was sufficiently deep for the requirements of the Commissioners of the Westminster Improvements, and to drain the entire of the Westminster district?

hoped that the new sewer would be found sufficiently deep to meet the requirements of the Westminster Improvement Commissioners, but it would be very wrong for the Commissioners of Sewers to construct sewers specially with a view to particular portions of the metropolis. The sewer in question was intended as part of a larger plan for the drainage of the whole of the metropolis.

wished to ask, "whether it be intended to carry the proposed sewer from the point where the steam engine is placed, at the corner of Palace-yard, through Whitehall-gardens, to an outlet into the Thames in Scotland-yard? If such be the intention of the Commissioners of Sewers, what is their object in carrying it to so great a distance, when a shorter outlet, and, it may be presumed, at least as good a fall, might be obtained near Westminster-bridge? Whether, if an outlet were at once made for the new sewer near Westminster-bridge, the carrying off the sewage, by means of pumping it up, might not be altogether avoided?"

said, there were professional men in the commission better able to judge than he was of such matters, and they gave very sufficient reasons for taking the divergent line which had been chosen. The outlet to the Thames, he might state, was provisional, and intended only to exist during the progress of the works now going on, as the commissioners had a great desire that the Thames should not be polluted by the sewage of the metropolis any longer than was found absolutely necessary. As to the cesspool in the neighbourhood of St. Margaret's Church-yard, the place would be entirely covered over, only leaving openings to allow shafts for the pumps.

asked if it was to be understood, seeing the outlet to the Thames was only temporary, that the whole of the works carried through Whitehall-gardens, and leading to that outlet, were to be temporary also?

No. It was only the opening to the Thames that would be temporary.

begged to ask the noble Lord the Member for Bath whether he could give the House any information regarding the cesspools that were to be constructed under the new Houses of Parliament? and whether there would be any objection to lay on the table a controversy that had taken place on the subject between Mr. Barry and the Commissioners of Sewers?

believed that he had not described this matter quite scientifically the other night. He said there were three grand cesspools, whereas there was only one grand cesspool with a great many tributaries. A correspondence had taken place on this subject between the consulting surveyor of the Sewers Commission and the architect of the new Houses, and he believed some slight changes were made in consequence of that correspondence; but it was not in his power to say whether the papers could be laid on the table or not.

would, in that case, ask the noble Lord the Member for Plymouth whether he had any objection to lay the correspondence before the House?

could see no objection to the production of the papers, so far as the Commission was concerned; but as there had been some ebullitions of temper on the part of the individuals by whom the correspondence was conducted, perhaps they might have no desire to see it published.

asked if the engine now in course of erection was to be fitted with machinery for consuming the smoke?

was afraid that it would not be an engine so constructed; but anthracite, or Welsh coal, that produced little or no smoke, would be used.

Subject dropped.

I rise to ask a question of the hon. Baronet the Member for Radnorshire. A few weeks ago the hon. Baronet moved for the production of papers relative to the Greek business, and these papers have been lying some time now upon the table of the House. The question, then, that I wish to put to the hon. Baronet is this, "When does he intend to draw the attention of the House of Commons to the affairs of Greece?"

It appears that the hon. and gallant Gentleman has not given any very close attention to the part I have taken on this question, because he says I moved for papers regarding these transactions. I really, Sir, must correct the mistake under which the hon. and gallant Gentleman labours. I never moved for the production of any papers whatever. On one or two occasions, and entirely on the spur of the moment, on points which certainly excited considerable surprise in my own mind, I certainly did put several questions across the table relating to this subject; but I am not aware that, by so doing, I put myself in that prominent position which makes it necessary that I should undertake so serious a task as bringing forward this question.

, after presenting a petition from the merchants, manufacturers, and other inhabitants of Manchester, praying for a commission of inquiry with regard to the growth of cotton in India, said: I feel certain that the House will not require that I should offer any apology for bringing the subject of the growth of cotton in India under its consideration to-night, because at the very first glance I am persuaded that every Member of the House must acknowledge the importance of the question which I am about to introduce to their notice; and whatever may be the fate of the resolution which I intend to propose, whether I shall succeed in obtaining a commission of inquiry or not, there will at least be but one opinion in the House with regard to the importance of the subject—that, namely, of obtaining an adequate supply of the raw material for the greatest textile manufacture carried on in this country. I may state, that I feel bound to bring forward this question also as the representative of that constituency and that city which is the centre and heart of the greatest and most remarkable industry that the world has ever seen; and I can assure the House that the opinion of those whom I represent is strongly in favour of this proposition, and that they believe it is intimately connected with the prosperity, if not with the very existence, of the trade with which they are so much identified. It may seem out of place to offer any observations tending to show the magnitude of the trade to which I refer, and yet I think that I should fail in laying the foundation of the Motion which I have to submit if I did not give the House to understand what is the magnitude of the subject I am now about to bring under its consideration. The cotton trade employs, directly and indirectly, probably not less than two millions of the population of the united kingdom, with an amount of capital far greater than can be found engaged in any other manufacturing trade in the united kingdom. That trade also provides a very much larger amount of our whole exports than does any other branch of national industry; and if it provides a greater amount of exports than other branches, as a matter of course it must follow that the imports consequent must be greater than those derived from other branches. It must, therefore, appear of the first importance that the supply of raw material upon which all this capital is engaged, and upon the working up of which some two millions of the population obtain a livelihood—it must appear, I repeat, that the obtaining of an adequate supply of the raw material cannot be a question of local but of national importance. To show the House the rate at which this branch of industry has progressed, and the position at which it has arrived, I would beg its attention to a few facts in connexion with the subject. The whole import of cotton into this country, at the commencement of the present century, was not more than 56 millions of pounds. Since then it has increased very rapidly, until 1849, when the amount imported reached the enormous quantity of 754 millions of pounds. Now, it is of some consequence to observe whence comes this great supply. Our supplies, then, are drawn chiefly from the United States of America; secondly, in point of quantity, from the British possessions in India; thirdly, from the empire of Brazil; fourthly, from Egypt; and, fifthly, from the West Indies. The quantities so brought may be set down in this proportion. Taking the imports of the last five years, the United States furnished 78½ per cent of the cotton consumed in this country; the East Indies, 10½ per cent; Brazil, 7 per cent; Egypt, 3½ per cent; and the West Indies, only ½ per cent; but if we bear in mind that Egyptian grown cotton is worth twice as much in point of value as East Indian, instead of being of 3½ per cent, we may fairly set it down at 7 per cent in value. If we look to the increase that is taking place in the import from these several countries, we shall find that it is very great from the United States, rather limited from the Indian possessions, very considerable from Egypt, stationary as regards Brazil, whilst from the West Indies the import has almost fallen to nothing. What I wish to direct attention to is this—that we derive 78½ per cent of our raw material from the United States; and although the increase of production there has been very great, yet the crop is so fluctuating that the cotton trade of this country periodically suffers great difficulties and embarrassments from the real or menaced insufficiency of supply. To give the House an idea of these fluctuations, I will just refer to a few facts. In 1846 the crop was 1,850,000 bales; in 1848, it was 2,700,000 bales; and in 1849 it did not exceed 2,000,000 bales—varying thus 700,000 bales in one year, or in two successive crops, which is equivalent to a falling-off of 25 per cent, and involving a great increase in the cost of the raw material, as well as bringing about short time to the working classes, closing many mills, and, in fact, causing great loss to the manufacturer, as well as to the operatives engaged in the factories. There is another point very important to be observed, namely, whilst the consumption of cotton has been increasing in this country, it has also been increasing to a great extent on the Continent, as also in the United States of America. I was not a little startled by discovering the fact that the United States, in 1849, consumed a larger quantity of cotton than the whole growth of the States produced in 1824. The United States are now using a larger quantity of cotton than we were consuming in 1824; and I therefore think these facts are sufficient to induce me to bring before the notice of the House the great strides that are taking place in the United States; and also the important fact that, whilst this power of consumption is going on over the face of the world, the power of production of the raw material is not keeping pace with it. Some may think it of very little consequence whether cotton be dear or cheap, supposing that manufacturers have it in their power to raise the price of the manufactured article; but when it is borne in mind that on an advance of a penny in the pound in the consumption of last year the enhanced cost would reach nearly 3,000,000 l., and that on an advance of 3 d. in the pound by reason of the short crop of last year the total increase will be between 8,000,000 l. and 9,000,000 l. sterling, the House will see that the consequence of such increase of cost must tend to limit the consumption of articles of manufacture, and involve the trade in difficulties and embarrasments. With regard to the exports of cotton, I find the total exports of this country last year set down at 63,000,000 l. sterling, of which the cotton trade furnished an amount of 26,000,000 l., or 42 per cent of the whole amount of the exports of the country. These facts will show how important it is, if anything can be done, to relieve this branch of industry, and that it is the duty of this House to take steps conducive to that end. But there is another point, that whilst the production of cotton in the United States results from slave labour, whether we approve of any particular mode of abolishing slavery in any country or not, we are all convinced that it will be impossible in any country—and most of all in America—to keep between two and three millions of the population permanently in a state of bondage. By whatever means that system is to be abolished, whether by insurrection, which I would deplore, or by some great measure of justice from the Government, one thing is certain, that the production of cotton must be interfered with for a considerable time after such an event has taken place. And it may happen that the greatest measure of freedom that has ever been conceded, may be a measure the consequence of which will inflict mischief upon the greatest industrial pursuit that engages the labour of the operative population of this country. Such being the state of things, the House, I trust, will not blame me for bringing forward this great question, which occupies much of the attention and consideration of the people of the county with which I am connected. Well then, we look about to ascertain from whence we are to have an adequate supply of cotton. In Australia the population is not large, and the cost of labour is very high; and although the climate may admit of growing cotton, there is no probability we can receive from that colony any supply calculated to alter our condition. Then there is the colony of Natal, and with reference to that colony a gentleman within the last week gave to the Chamber of Commerce in Manchester some very valuable information as to the growth of cotton there, he himself having grown 50 bales of excellent quality. But the European population is small, and the native population does not exceed 100,000, whilst there is little capital or productive power; so that whatever may be done in future, nothing can be hoped for from that colony for some time to come. The West Indies, in the years from 1810 to 1812, furnished at the rate of 60,000 bales per annum, but taking the last five years they did not supply more than 8,000 bales per annum; and, indeed, it might be said that the growth of cotton in the West Indies is extinguished. There has been an attempt made to revive it; but it would only be deluding the House did I say that I for a moment thought the early growth of cotton there would in any degree make up for the deficiency. Then it comes to this—where are we to turn? To our possessions in India. I think there are reasons to show that there we should be successful. India has always grown cotton, as a reference to history will show. As long ago as 300 years back a celebrated traveller reported on the growth of cotton there; and at this moment there is reason to believe that within the limits of our Indian territory a quantity of cotton is grown, which does not fall very far short of the produce of the whole States of America. The soil and climate are favourable—for the growth of cotton requires heat—the people are accustomed to this particular industry; and if it were necessary to give any proof to show that we are not over sanguine in hoping on this point, I would ask the House to trace the course of the East India Company with regard to this question. I find in their papers of 1836, as also by a return moved for in the last Session by the hon. Baronet the Member for the Tower Hamlets, that in 1788 experiments were made, and that reports were founded upon them. It appeared that seed was distributed, and that in 1794 cleaning machines were sent out, and model farms established. In 1813 the East India Company sent out an American gentleman for the purpose of superintending and stimulating, the growth of cotton. In 1818, 1831, and 1836, further experiments were made, and further reports furnished thereon. In 1840 several American planters were sent out, and experimental farms were formed; so that for some sixty years the East India Company have taken an interest in the matter, and they assert that they have expended no less a sum than 100,000 l. upon it. Now, I say this, not in condemnation of the East India Company, because I believe they have a wish that the growth of cotton should be extended; and, indeed, it would be difficult to suppose they had not, after devoting upwards of sixty years, with so large an amount of money, to the subject. I merely bring it forward now for the purpose of showing there is reason to hope and believe that India is suited to the growth of cotton; and the East India Company have been of that opinion for the last sixty years. I might quote you the opinions of some of the servants of that Company, as also the evidence adduced before the Commission of 1847, appointed in the Bombay Presidency; but I will pass these over, and come to the testimony of the Select Committee of this House in 1848, of which I was chairman. We have the declaration of that Committee, based on the evidence of most competent witnesses—

"That the soil, the climate, and people, with all the natural circumstances of India, justify our expectations to receive large supplies of cotton from that country."

Now we come to this fact, that up to this moment there have been no results, notwithstanding all the attempts of Government to encourage the growth of cotton, not by depressing other branches of industry, but by example, and by encouraging and stimulating by the legitimate means open to them. Well, there has been no result; and therefore I want to know if we, the Committee of this House, the East India Company, and the members of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce, are all mistaken in our notions on this matter? If we are not mistaken, then I ask the House what is the next step to be taken? I know not whether the Government will grant this Commission or not: but if not, they are bound to show they have some clear ground on which they rest their opposition to it; they are bound to show they have some other proposition that will be as effectual as that which I now propose. I am disposed, in inquiring why we do not import cotton from India, to look at the condition of the people there. In looking at the condition of a people, you may trace, not indistinctly, their laws and institutions, and argue from that condition whether the circumstances of the Government or its administration are favourable or adverse to the progress of that people. There is one fact that cannot be too well known or too frequently reiterated, namely, that the condition of the cultivating population of India is by no means satisfactory, and that it is one of extreme, abject, and almost universal poverty. I wish the House to bear this in mind, if they will only condescend to follow me through the line of argument and illustration I intend to use in connexion with it. I never met an individual acquainted with the state of India who denied that the condition of the cultivating population was unsatisfactory; and, as I have never been in that country, I therefore shall entreat the House to listen to the opinions of those who have been, and to take their evidence, not my statements, as to the truth and facts of the case. First, I will call attention to the testimony of a celebrated native of India, who visited this country some twenty years since—I allude to Ramohun Roy, and from whose pamphlet, published in 1831, I take the following extract:—

"Under both systems (the Zamindary system of Bengal and the Ryotuary system of Madras) the condition of the cultivators is very miserable; in the one, they are placed at the mercy of the Zamindars' avarice and ambition; in the other, they are subjected to the extortions and intrigues of the surveyors and other Government revenue officers. According to the best of my recollection and belief, their condition has not been improving in any degree. In short, such is the melancholy condition of the agricultural labourers, that it always gives me the greatest pain to allude to it."

Well, in three years after, a very distinguished gentleman, Mr. Shore, who filled a judicial position in India, writes, in a concluding chapter of his work, with a view to show that the British Government is not regarded in a favourable light by the natives:—

"The gradual impoverishment of the country by a system of taxation and extortion unparalleled in the annals of any country. The ruin of the old aristocracy, and of all the respectable landholders, which has been systematically effected, in order to increase the Government revenue. At the present moment, no one connected with the land feels a day's security in his possessions; the poverty of the people is almost beyond belief; and this, joined to the almost entire disorganisation of the native society, is causing a rapid increase of crime. The simple and natural inducements here, as in every other part of the world, must, of course, be, first, security of property; secondly, a certainty of reaping the benefits of any trouble or expense incurred. The encouragement given has been to raise the land-tax as high as possible, and appropriate the whole amount to Government; with the exception of a bare sufficiency for the cultivators to exist upon, and to enable them to carry on their next year's agriculture."

I will now come to a more recent period, and can give you the opinion of a gentleman, an American planter, sent out in 1840. The gentleman to whom I refer is Mr. Finney, who kept an amusing private journal. He speaks—

"Of villages that have fallen in balance, and are in the hands of Government. These villages, too, that are now a drug in the hands of Government, would be made profitable."

I could quote several paragraphs from various Indian papers; but I will not trouble the House, because I feel that those extracts I have already laid before it are more to the purpose. I have the evidence of another gentleman, who resided in India 35 years, 14 of which he was employed in the collection of the revenue, and who left the country in 1842. Mr. Saville Marriott thus expresses himself:—

"Left India 1842. Condition of cultivators very much depressed—greatly depressed, and I believe declining; they were declining when I was in India, and I think they had done so from the commencement. He judges from their general appearance, and their being obliged to sell the personal ornaments which formed the principal part of the property of the cultivators, and their cattle, which are the principal means by which they carry on their cultivation."

There is the evidence of another native of India, who visited this country in 1849; and I will appeal to the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth in favour of the credibility of that gentleman, a native of Delhi, who published a work on Indian affairs whilst in this country. I never met with a man of more dignified character or greater intelligence; and I am sure there is no Gentleman in this House who speaks the English language with greater purity or perfection. That gentleman writes:—

"Throughout my whole line of march (to Bombay) I found the Nizam's territory better cultivated, and the Ryots more happy than in the Company's districts, where the poor peasants are in an actual state of poverty. Here I close these short but lamentably true notes on the present deplorable state of India. I fear they may be a prelude to many such histories which India will yet produce before she can attract the attention of those whose duty may prompt them to do her justice. If there is a will to pay attention to the claims of India on protection of the British Government, it is not merely what I, but English writers themselves, have said on the subject that will justify inquiry."

The last testimony I will call attention to is the report of the Select Committee of this House in 1848, which, I conceive, will be conclusive on this point:—

"It appears from the testimony of almost every witness, that the condition of the cultivating population of India is one of extreme poverty; and this is stated to be the case in every part of the country to which the evidence with regard to cotton cultivation specially refers. This observation applies to the western and southern provinces of India, including the Presidency of Bombay and portions of Madras, regarding which the knowledge of the witnesses examined is much more definite and extensive than of the Presidency of Bengal, which latter yields but a very trifling supply of cotton for exportation, in comparison with the other parts of India. Whether under the ryotwarry system in Madras, or under the village system which prevails extensively in the west, the great mass of the cultivators are almost wholly without capital, or any of those means which capital alone can furnish, by which industry may be improved and extended. They are in reality a class of cultivators in the most abject condition. They are indebted to the money lender or banker of the village for the means wherewith to procure the seed, and to carry on even the most imperfect cultivation. They give him security for his loans on the growing crops, which at maturity they frequently dispose of to him at prices more regulated by his will than by the standard of an open market, and often pay 40 or even 50 per cent interest, or even more than this."

Now, that I take to be conclusive as regards the condition of the great mass of cultivators. I am not making these references with a view to throw obloquy on the Government of India. I bring them forward because upon them I intend to base my argument in favour of the proposition I am about to submit to the House. There is another point to which I will allude. I find in the financial returns of the East India Company a sum put down under the head of "Tuccavy," meaning advances made to tenants not able to carry on their cultivation. I know not how much is thus appropriated, for the sum is mixed with others; but the whole amount is not less than 500,000 l. per annum. Now I wish to know if this universal poverty is the fault of the people of India, or is to be attributed to the Government, the fiscal system, or the administration of the law? I will not ask the House to believe it is the fault of the people. I could quote the opinion of Mr. Shore, with many other distinguished men, in proof of the contrary; as also the last and most powerful testimony—the report of the Committee of this House, which declares "there is nothing in the character or social condition of the people which would make it unreasonable in us to expect large supplies of cotton, the produce of their industry." I am bound also to look at the past history of the country, when it was remarkable for wealth, and which wealth could not have been amassed unless by the industry of the people. I will now come to the question of government, and I may say, at the commencement, that I entertain no hostility whatever to the East India Company. No feeling against them mixes with my object in bringing forward this question; and I believe I shall have their acknowledgment that I have refrained from bringing charges against them. There are two main points on which all the evidence concurs, and they are important in regard to the present condition and future prosperity of the people of India. On one point there is no difference of opinion, but I cannot say as much for the other. The first point has reference to the internal improvements of the country. The hon. Member for Guildford, himself a director of the East India Company, will admit they have fallen short of that which the people had a right to expect. I will now proceed to lay before the House a few cases on the subject of roads and irrigation. I hold in my hand a letter from a gentleman of eminence in the service of the East India Company, written in September, 1849:—

"I sincerely hope before many years to see the immense resources of this country more developed. Up to the present period nothing has been done to improve it—a few rupees to repair a broken bund that may have cost lacs, only granted after quires of correspondence, or when it is too late to save a noble work from entire destruction. This must ever be the case under our present Government, or until they set aside a certain per centage on the revenue derived from each collectorate for its internal improvement. Each collectorate would then have an interest at stake, and so would the ryots—the reverse is the case at present. The ryots, but particularly the Talookdars, derive no advantage from any improvement; and the consequence is that many of the best families in the province, who were rich and well to do when we came into Guzerat in 1807, have now scarcely clothes to their backs, owing to what they originally paid as a tribute being by our Government converted into a regular revenue settlement, with leases renewable every five or ten years, at each of which some increase is considered necessary, to show that we are lords of the soil. Our demands in money on the Talookdars are more than three times what they originally paid, without one single advantage gained on their parts. Parties from whom they have been compelled to borrow at ruinous rates of interest enforce their demands by attachment of their lands and villages: thus they sink deeper and deeper in debt, without a chance of extricating themselves. What, then, must become of their rising families, is a question which should make Government leave no stone unturned for their improvement and employment. Our new collector seems inclined to do good; but he has too much to do to do anything well."

From Belgaum, a military station farther to the south than Guzerat, I have a letter written by a soldier of the Fusiliers, descriptive of his march:—

"We had our crossbelts and firelocks to carry; at times we were very fatigued. Some marches were very bad ones. Before we were up half an hour we were up to our waists in water, crossing rivers, of which there were many, four or five in one march. The roads were very bad, mere camel tracks."

Another evidence I hold is from a gentleman very high in the military service of the East India Company; and he speaks thus of the roads in the neighbourhood of Belgaum:—

"I am afraid I should altogether fail in attempting to give you any estimate of the loss arising from bad and impracticable roads in the transportation of military stores, &c.; however, from my frequent trips on the roads in question, I can give a pretty true account of their state, and impracticability for carts, during my long residence at Belgaum. This great thoroughfare between Belgaum and Vingorla was supposed to undergo an annual repair, but one season it was not touched, consequently it became almost impassable, so much so that the unfortunate cartmen had to make the road passable, with a small picker they invariably carried, and, combining together, got over the ground with difficulty; and at the principal rivers, as each cross, wait and take their bullocks back, to get a loaded cart out of the bed of the river. The loss of time is incalculable, and the wear and tear and loss of life of men and cattle is melancholy to think of. I more particularly refer to two seasons, when Sir Jamsetjee Jeejeebhoy contracted for timber from the Dandelly Jungles, not far from Hullyhale; the number of bullocks killed on that occasion is almost incredible—timber and skeletons of bullocks were scattered along the road from Patna to Baitsee."

He gives another account of the mode in which this was neglected. He says—

"The natives were so anxious to have this ghaut improved, that Ruttongee, a Parsee, offered to carry it out if Government would allow him the customs for three years, about three lacs, so I was told. I knew the man well, a most respectable Parsee, and Sir Jamsetjee's agent; he has often conversed with me on the subject of roads, and the difficulties of transit, and the neglect of the Government on that point. There are three or four bridges required between Belgaum and the ghaut, neither of them of any magnitude, and yet even foot passengers are cut off sometimes for several days."

I might go over all India, and give similar facts with regard to the state of the internal communication; but I will content myself with quoting one more extract with regard to the roads, from a recent work of Colonel Grant, premising that it has reference to Surat, which is the great cotton-growing district of the country. Colonel Grant says — "This twenty-five or thirty-five miles of track—for roads there are none—are as bad as bad can be." There is another point to which I wish to call the attention of the House, namely, the state of the irrigation. Colonel Grant says—

"Perhaps no country offers better opportunity for applying irrigation to cotton culture on a large scale than the districts of Surat and Broach, particularly the former; or the land lying between Surat and Broach, bounded throughout its length by those two noble rivers, the Nerbudda and the Taptee, running nearly parallel to each other, at the distance of from forty to fifty miles apart. It is painful to see the magnificent volume of water, that for four months of every year runs fruitlessly to the sea, which, if but a fraction of its contents were retained, would fertilise whole districts that now, parched and dry, witness, of what they so much need, flowing by unheeded."

He says very justly that India has a rich soil, great heat, and great moisture, but that the moisture is of no use unless it be preserved by the formation of reservoirs and tanks, and by those modes of irrigation which were in ancient times practised in India, but which have of late years fallen into disuse. Major Cotton, speaking of the district of Rajahmundry, declares that, if a certain work, upon which he is now engaged, and which was reported in favour of for many years, had been carried out twenty years ago, as it might have been, the lives of not less than 100,000 persons would have been saved who perished in the famine of 1838–40. These are facts to which it behoves the House to pay some attention. I would recommend to the notice of the East India Company an extract from a pamphlet written by one of their own officers, Major Dalrymple, in 1783, addressed to Sir Henry Fletcher, who was either then, or afterwards, chairman of the East India Company. He gives this account of the ancient Gentoo Indian Government, in the south of India:—

"A certain proportion is allotted to preserve the tanks and water courses, and this is taken out of the gross produce of the lands, before any partition is made between Government and the inhabitants; and it appears the free-gift lands paid a greater share for the repair of tanks than the Circar grounds."

Then he says—

"The first attention is due to the tanks. In that climate a command of water secures a crop, and when the tanks are made to secure a sufficient store of water, the produce is almost certain; for one night's monsoon rain, if none runs to waste, is almost sufficient to supply water for the season, and, with a command of water, they can have three rice crops in a year."

With regard to the general question of internal improvements, I will give the House an extract from an address presented to the Marquess of Dalhousie, the present Governor General of India, by the natives and European merchants, on his visit to Bombay, in January last. I can say nothing so strong as this. After observing that their city has a larger population than any city in Europe or in America, except London and Paris, but that the trade is very small compared with the population, and that this arises from the neglected state of the adjacent country, they go on to say—

"So miserable indeed are the existing means of communication with the interior, that many valuable articles of produce are, for want of carriage and a market, often left to perish on the fields, while the cost of those which do find their way to this port is enormously enhanced to the extent sometimes of 200 per cent; considerable quantities never reach their destination at all, and the quality of the remainder is almost universally deteriorated."

They add—

"The roads, few and inadequate, have paid for themselves over and over again. These necessities have been constantly urged on Government by revenue and engineer officers. Little or nothing, however, has been done practically to remedy the existing state of things, which renders it evident there are external hindrances in the way towards carrying the requisite remedial measures into effect."

These grievances they ask Lord Dalhousie to investigate and remove; and they say—

"It is humiliating that while India does not possess one mile of railway, near 2,000 miles have been opened in the United States even since the preliminary surveys for the short line of thirty-five miles, from Bombay to Callian, have been completed."

I might refer to Cuba as an example of what may be done in making communications, and as justifying me in pressing the requirements of India in this respect on the attention of the House. But here is another paragraph from the same address to which I wish the House to attend:—

"It is impossible to over-estimate the inexhaustible supply of wealth, which, in conjunction with improved modes of transit, the irrigation of the country by means of the embankment of its numerous streams and rivers (the precious waters of which at present flow unimpeded into the ocean, without in any way fertilising the land through which they pass) would afford the country. The fertility of the lands on both banks of the Toomboodra, at the present day, the effect solely of the noble public works constructed by the ancient Hindoo princes, contrasted with the unproductive borders of the same river where such works are not in action, your memorialists would adduce as a practical illustration of what may be expected from similar undertakings."

I will now refer to the evidence of the hon. Member for Guildford, given before the Committee in 1848. He was questioned as to the amount which the Indian Govern- ment had expended in a series of years upon improvements such as those to which I have referred. He stated that the amount expended from 1834 to 1848 on roads, bridges, canals, and tanks for irrigation he puts down at 1,434,000 l., whereas it appears from the Parliamentary papers that the gross revenue derived in taxes from the people of India during the same period was upwards of 280,000,000 l. sterling. Now, so far with regard to the question of internal improvements, I think I have at any rate made out a case which is worthy of the attention of Parliament. I am of opinion that no agricultural country can prosper which has not good facilities of communication, so as to be able to take what it produces to the best markets, and to get what it wants at the cheapest rates from other markets. But good roads are not of themselves sufficient to insure the prosperity of a country, or else a neighbouring country, Ireland, would not for so long a period have been suffering great distress. The other point to which I want to draw the attention of the House is one upon which there is more difference of opinion, though the right hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Control and the Directors of the East India Company will perhaps admit that there are as many able and intelligent men to be found on my side of the question as on the other. I refer now to the subject of the fiscal arrangements of the Indian Government, the pressure of the land assessment, and the mode in which that species of assessment is levied upon the cultivators of the soil. Now, the hon. Member for Guildford, when examined before the Committee, maintained that it was a great advantage to the people of India that their revenue should be raised by an assessment on the land. He argued that the assessment is a rent, and that under this system, by which the Government is the landowner, the cultivator had only to pay rent, and escaped taxes. With all deference for so high an authority, I must say that I think there is a great difference between this land assessment and what we call rent. I very much doubt whether any two things could be much less alike, except that both may be counted either in pounds sterling, or in rupees. In this country the competition of tenants for land has a tendency in ordinary times to bid up the rent to the highest sum that the land is worth; while, on the other hand, the competition amongst landlords to secure good tenants has a ten- dency to bid rent down, and to keep it at that fair and natural point which, while it is profitable to the landlord, allows the tenant a fair remuneration in ordinary times for the capital and skill which he employs in cultivation. But let us see how the Government of India stands as regards its duty as a landlord. The Government of India has the power to fix any proportion of assessment over the major part of the country—it has the power of collecting even to the ruin of the cultivator. In some districts the collectors are magistrates, and I believe even the native collectors have the power to fine and imprison cultivators who do not pay up the arrears of their assessment. The East Indian Company, when it lets land, meets with no competition. The tenants must have the land, for there is no other means of obtaining a living. The collector can fix any amount of rent which he thinks it probable he will be able to get; and can we doubt that the collector does proceed to the utmost point of endurance? I do not charge the East India Company with working the screw to the utmost extent that it is possible to work it; I am only explaining the way in which this system may be, and I fear often has been, worked. On this subject I will refer to the evidence of two or three witnesses who were examined before the Committee in 1848. I will first refer to that of Mr. George Giberne, who was a collector for fourteen years, and in six different collectorates. Speaking of the remissions which he made, because the rent fixed was more than could be collected, he says—

"Notwithstanding this (remission on short crops, &c.) the rates have been so high that there has been the utmost difficulty in collecting the revenue; and there have been large outstanding balances, and they have been written off afterwards, and this remark applies to every collectorate in which I have been."

He says he never knew a case "where a man advanced himself solely by cultivation of the land—unless for a time when he had some land rent free, or very lightly assessed, which he threw up when the full charge was put upon it." This witness added, that on returning to Guzerat, after an absence of fourteen years, he found that the wealth of the inhabitants had fallen off. Mr. Crawford, a gentleman of the highest character, formerly a merchant in Bombay and a member of the Bombay Commission, and now resident in London, says, "The members of the Committee were of opinion the tax was too high in Guzerat, and that it interfered with the growth of cotton." Mr. Williamson, who had been twenty-two years in India as a collector, was asked whether the ultimate determination of the amount was left to the collector? He replies: "Of course they (the people) cannot carry their point; it is left entirely to the discretion of the collector to fix the amount in reference to the customs of the country." Of course it is not to be supposed that the collector would be entirely exempt from the influence of public opinion; but that check does not, I fear, operate much in India. The witness says, "The prosperity of a whole district mainly depends upon the personal qualifications of the officer managing it." Where the assessment was greatly reduced, he says, "The improvements were general, rapid, and remarkable, in some places almost changing the face of the country." I would now ask the House to listen to a statement of Mr. Davis, a collector in a district in the province of Guzerat—which is the largest producing district. In a report made by him to the Bombay Commission in 1847, he gives a tabular statement of the assessment from 1835 to 1847, and he shows that, taking the whole thirteen years, and estimating the value of the cotton at twopence and 6–7ths per pound, the following is the result:—

13 years—1835 to 1847:—

Value of cotton 2 d. 6–7ths, produce of a Beegah, 8 s. 5½ d. —of which Government takes 4 s. 5½ d., or 52½ per cent of gross produce.

Taking last 6 years of series:—

Value of cotton only 2 d. per lb., Beegah produce, 6 s. 6 d. —of which Government takes 4 s. 5½ d., or more than 68 per cent.

The worst year of the series:—

1841–42.—Value of cotton 1¾ d., Beegah produce, 5 s. 8 d. —of which Government takes 4 s. 5½ d., or more than 78 per cent.

Or, if cotton be 1½ d. per lb., which is only a safe calculation, the Government rent would be 91 per cent.

A beegah is equal to half an English acre. Mr. Stewart, collector in Surat, shows that the Government took more than 68 per cent of the gross produce. Mr. Davies states further, that in the six years, 1840 to 1846, he was obliged to make remissions of assessments which could not be collected, amounting to 63,000 l.; that there were written off irrecoverable balances amounting to 81,000 l. Now probably the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Control will say that these are rare and exceptional cases—that such cases did prevail at one time, but do not prevail now. But what I maintain is, that the greatest fluctuations are almost inevitable when such vast interests are placed at the disposal of collectors and natives on whom there is no adequate check. For example, the district of Bundelcund had the misfortune in 1815 to have a collector, whose name should, in reference to his conduct as a servant of the Indian Government, be infamous for ever. He raised the assessments in that province to such an extent, that from 1815 to 1835 he devastated and depopulated the province; and I have heard on the best authority, that parents actually offered to sell their children for the tax which they had not means to pay. In 1835 the Indian Government sent out express orders that this state of things should be remedied; but it had then been going on more or less severely for not less than twenty years. In the presidency of Madras, what is called the Ryotwarry system exists; and I will read to the House what Mr. Tucker—a good authority with the East India Company, who wrote some years ago a valuable work on Indian finance—says with regard to this system. He says—

"Who can fail to perceive that the system of revenue administration has much to do in arresting the progress of improvement? Will industry be called into action when the demand of the tax-gatherer keeps pace with the produce? Will capital accumulate where there is no security for prosperity, no law but that which is administered under the auspices of a revenue officer?

Further on he says—

If the deadly hand of the taxgatherer perpetually hovers over the land, and threatens to grasp that which is not yet called into existence, its benumbing influence must be fatal, and the fruits of the earth will be stifled in the very germ."

He also says, what I would not have said myself, because it might have been thought that I was exaggerating—

"When I find a system requiring a multiplicity of instruments: surveyors and inspectors; assessors, ordinary and extraordinary; potails, carnums, tehsildars, and chutcherry servants; and when I read the description of these officers by the most zealous advocates of the system, their periodical visitations are pictured in my imagination as the passage of a flight of locusts, devouring in their course the fruits of the earth."

With regard to the taxation of Malabar, I may remark that I have here the ledger of five parishes of that district, in which the tax is fixed upon every jack tree, every cocoa-nut tree, and every house in certain, proportions. Those nut trees which have not begun to bear are not charged; those which are past bearing are also exempted; and when all these minute particulars of management are left to native collectors, who are paid most inadequate salaries, and who are of necessity subjected to certain influences to which men so situated are ordinarily liable, the favouritism, the inequality, and the extortion practised under this system, must be such as I cannot adequately describe, and the House could hardly credit. Here is a paper which was drawn up by one of these native collectors—a paper furnished to him by Mr. Græme, who was some years ago, and may be still, a collector in the district of Malabar. From this it appears that there are 18 or 19 heads in the scale of charges for a jack tree and for other trees. The native collector, going to any orchard or garden, is to fix the tax on the trees within its limits, and, as every tree is to be charged, the House will see how impossible it is that anything like proper control should be exercised over the vast army of collectors spread over the presidency of Madras. There is in this paper a distinction between moist or irrigated land and dry land; in fact, the distinctions are multitudinous, and I am quite sure every one must admit that such a system of taxation requires alteration. I admit that there may be a difference of opinion on the subject of the fiscal system of India; but the more I admit that, and the more the House adopt the same view, the more justified am I in asking the House to grant the inquiry for which I am about to move. If the mode of assessment be as bad as these witnesses have described it to be, the sooner there is an inquiry the better; if, on the other hand, I am mistaken in my view, along with many others, the sooner the mistake is corrected the better. Well, now, I come to the objections which I suppose it possible that the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Control may offer to this Motion. I will assume that he thinks inquiry unnecessary. I hope he will not say that the best course would be for the merchants of Manchester to go over themselves, or to send somebody to India to buy cotton. When we have advanced so far in commercial matters, I think no one will get up and suggest such a remedy as that. Why, the Bombay merchants declare that they cannot get into the interior of the country, and that the inhabitants of the interior cannot get to them, for want of proper communication; therefore, I do not think it will be said that the merchants of Manchester ought to leave their mills and counting-houses in order to go and encour- age the growth of cotton. The right hon. Gentleman may urge that information enough has been obtained through the Bombay Commission, and the Committee for which I moved in 1848. Does the right hon. Gentleman remember that the Indian Company said the same thing before the Committee sat; and will any one say that the labours of this Committee were in vain? Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will tell us that the recommendations of the Commission and Committee are being carried out. How are they being carried out? By the project of 35 miles of railway from Bombay, about which there is as yet the greatest possible dispute. As regards the proposition to make a railroad from Bengal, I perceive that a newspaper favourable to the Government admits that there are certain difficulties which may prevent this railway from being made at all. Nothing is being done on a system, nothing on a great scale—the Indian Government are not taking up the subject as the great subject which ought to engage paramount attention. The Bombay Commission of 1847 says in its report—

"We regret that the imperfect information before us does not enable us to do more than express a general opinion as to the quarters to which we consider it desirable that the special attention of Government should be directed, with a view to the revision of the present rates of assessment."

The Committee of the House of Commons say, in their report made in the year 1848—

"We have not before us the means of forming an opinion as to how far the reductions made have placed the assessment generally on a satisfactory footing."

They add—

"We regret we have no information which would enable us to speak with any confidence regarding the cotton district of Candeish, but we are informed that little in the shape of systematic revision has been effected there since the country first came into the hands of the British Government."

The Committee also say—

"The limited nature of your Committee's inquiry, which rendered it impossible to institute a full comparison between the condition of the cultivator in the south of India, and those provinces where a system of more moderate assessment has prevailed, on which so much of the controversy turns, renders it impossible for your Committee to pronounce a confident conclusion as to the degree of weight that is to be attached to either of these representations."

Now, we know that cotton may be grown in India to any extent, but that there are some causes in operation which retard its growth. I propose that there should be a Royal Commission to inquire what the obstacles are. We know perfectly well that in this country it is not enough to have one report; there must be report after report, and the public mind and the mind of Parliament must be saturated with evidence before any steps can be taken. Take the case of Ireland. We have had sitting in this House, from the year 1800, no less than 100 Gentlemen, representing every county and all the largest towns of Ireland; previous to 1845 we have a dozen reports with regard to the condition of Ireland; and yet in 1845 the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth appointed a commission over which the Earl of Devon presided, simply to inquire into the nature of the land tenures of that country. Perhaps the right hon. President of the Board of Control will want a precedent. I will give him one, which seems to me to fit exactly. In the year 1822 a Motion was made in this House with reference to the appointment of a commission to visit the colonies of the Cape of Good Hope, Ceylon, and the Mauritius; and the following were amongst the instructions to the commissioners, which were signed "Bathurst." With regard to the Cape, the instructions run thus:—

"The tenures of land will be considered with a view to the assimilation of the old and modern rates of assessment and to encourage agriculture."

With regard to Ceylon the inquiry was

—"directed to the original tenures of land, the expediency of making grants of land, and the conditions on which such grants should be conferred, and the system of cultivation in the Cingalese and Kandyan provinces; to the effects of loans to landowners, and aids afforded by Government; the effects of gratuitous and compulsory services, and means of commuting them; the disposal of the Government share of crops; the means of promoting the growth of subsistence,"

&c.; and the document finishes thus:—

"I shall conclude this communication with observing, that it is not meant that you should be precluded from pursuing any other object of inquiry, which, though less prominent than those which I have enumerated, may usefully contribute to the stock of information which it is the desire of His Majesty's Government to collect, in order that they may be enabled to decide upon such measures as are best calculated to promote the immediate improvement and secure the lasting welfare of the valuable possessions to which you are about to proceed."

The information in the report of that commission is very extensive and very valuable, and led to several important ameliorations in the condition of the peo- ple of Ceylon, and the policy pursued there. The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Control may say that some difference exists in the case of Ceylon and that of the East Indian territories. Let us look over the clauses of the charter, and discover how far Parliament has a right to interfere with the question as far as it is connected with India. The 25th section is as follows:—

"Section 25. Board of Control invested with full power to control all acts, operations and concerns of the said company, which in anywise relate to or concern the government or revenue of the said territories, &c."

The right hon. Gentleman will correct me if I am wrong in saying that he is at this moment one of the members of a secret committee which has the absolute government of India. We have it from himself, that he himself is responsible for that government. The right hon. Gentleman can send a despatch out to India at any time, ordering either peace or war; he has the power of involving India in enormous expenditure, which the East India Company, though they disapproved of it, would be compelled to assent to. There was, therefore, the absolute power of Parliament over the whole East Indian territories, just as there was over any of our colonies. I refer again to the last Charter Act:—

"Section 30. No official communications to be sent by the Court of Directors except such as the Board of Control may allow.

"Section 51 reserves and declares the power of Parliament supreme over the East India Company and the Governor-General of India."

I state this to show the inconsistency which insists that whilst we send commissions to Ireland, Ceylon, or Canada, there are objections to our sending such a commission to India. I am prepared to show that with regard to India there are special grounds why such commission should be sent. I feel that if we take into consideration the expenditure connected with the Indian wars we shall find many matters connected with them which will afford important subjects for consideration. If battles were fought, and victories gained, was it not the Imperial Government that bestowed the honour and pensions? This is one of those cases which I think is peculiarly open to the investigation of Parliament, if Parliament thinks proper to issue a Royal Commission. I wish now to direct the attention of the House to the question of Indian finance. I will quote a passage from the speech of the right hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, on introducing his budget in the year 1842. The right hon. Gentleman says—

"In addition to all this, those events of which we have had recent cognisance, as having occurred in Affghanistan, may, and so far as I can form a judgment, will, impose upon Her Majesty's Government the necessity of calling on Parliament to sanction, perhaps, a considerable increase in the Army Estimates. I am quite aware that there may appear to be no direct and immediate connexion between the finances of India and those of this country. but that would be a superficial view of our relations with India which should omit the consideration of this subject. Depend upon it if the credit of India should become disordered, if some great exertion should become necessary, then the credit of England must be brought forward to its support, and the collateral and indirect effect of disorders in Indian finances would be felt extensively in this country. Sir, I am sorry to say that Indian finance offers no consolation for the state of finance in this country. I hold in my hand an account of the finances of India, which I have every reason to believe is a correct one; it is made up one month later than our own accounts—to the 5th of May. It states the gross revenue of India, with the charges upon it; the interest of the debt; the surplus revenue, and the charges paid on it in England; and there are two columns which contain the nett surplus and the nett deficit. In the year ending May, 1836, there was a surplus of 1,520,600 l. from the Indian revenue. In the year ending the 5th of May, 1837, there was a surplus of 1,100,000 l., which was reduced rapidly in the year ending May, 1838, to 620,000 l. In the year ending May, 1839, the surplus fell to 29,000 l.; in the year ending May, 1840, the balance of the account changed, and so far from there being any surplus, the deficit on the Indian revenue was 2,414,000 l. I am afraid I cannot calculate the deficit for the year ending May, 1841, though it depends at present partly on estimate, at much less than 2,334,000 l. The House then will bear in mind that in fulfilment of the duty I have undertaken, I present to them the deficit in this country for the current year to the amount of 2,350,000 l., with a certain prospect of a deficit for next year to the amount of at least 2,470,000 l., independently of the increase to be expected on account of China and Affghanistan; and that in India, that great portion of our empire, I show a deficit on the two last years, which will probably not be less than 4,700,000 l. [ Hansard, vol. lxi., pp. 428–9.]

That statement of the right hon. Baronet, as it afterwards turned out, was slightly exaggerated. Now, I will give the amount of each year from that time to this:—

I am not afraid that the right hon. Baronet will accuse me of introducing matter which is not relevant; for in truth it does bear on this question of the Commission, for although I bring forward this question in the performance of my duty, as a representative of the constituency of Manchester, and as one of the representatives of the industry of that district, yet I say that it bears on the subject, and that these are points which it behoves Parliament to attend to. There is another point, and it is about the last to which I will refer. It is with regard to the revenues, and the enormous power which is vested in the East India Company. I doubt if the House is aware of the amount of revenue which the East India Company collects from India. I find that in the fourteen years from 1834 to 1847, the following gross amount was collected:—

That leaves the disposable revenue of the East India Company, 20,000,000 l. against 25,000,000 l. of the disposable revenue of the united kingdom. In bringing these matters before this House, I do so not only on the part of Manchester and the cotton interest there; but I do so on the part of the whole country, and the British subjects in India. It is on behalf of all these interests, for they are indissolubly connected, that I call upon the Government to grant the Commission which I ask for. I do not know the arguments that can have any weight against the statements which I have made in bringing forward this question. The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Control may say that it is not possible that cotton should be brought from India, or that the Commission may not be able to get any valuable information. On either of these grounds he may refuse to grant it. But I have shown that there is an important industry in this country, great in every point of view; and that the perils with which it is surrounded are now very great, and that every man, whether he be an employer or a workman, would be in favour of the proposition which I submit to the House. I have shown that India has a clear right to come to this House for the redress of grievances if they exist. The population of India is helpless unless Parliament comes forward to its relief. I have also shown that the interests of every portion of this great empire, of which Parliament is so proud, are involved in the question which I have submitted to the House. I suspect that the real point of objection is a feeling of delicacy with regard to the East India Company, and that the Government does not wish to show that they have any want of confidence in that ancient corporation. I do not blame them for that feeling, but I ask them whether it should weigh against the great interests which I have endeavoured to show are so deeply affected by this question? The Charter Act will expire in the year 1854, and next year the Company will have to give notice whether they wish for its renewal or not. Parliament unfortunately does not know much about these Indian matters; indeed, I myself do not profess to be very conversant with them, though I have paid considerable attention to them. I will ask them, would it not be desirable that we should understand the question, and whether they would be less able to decide on the future government of India three or four years hence, if this Commission were appointed, and they had the result of their investigations laid before Parliament? I think that on all grounds the interests concerned in this question should weigh much heavier in the estimation of the noble Lord the First Lord of the Treasury, than any feeling which the Government may entertain with regard to the East India Company. I avoid making any attack on that Company. I am not at all insensible to what is worthy of commendation in their conduct and policy; though I must add that they have made mistakes of a serious nature. There will be differences of opinion as to our policy in the East. Many regard with unmixed pleasure our acquisition of those vast territories, as sources of wealth, and of glory to the British name; others will dwell with pain on the violence and crimes which have too often marked our career in India. All, however, must agree, that since these immense territories have come under the dominion of the British Crown, it is our duty, if there be any grievances supposed to exist in India, to inquire into them, and if they be proved to exist, it is our duty to consider the best mode in which they can be remedied. I think I have the support of a large and influential class in the north of England in making this request. I think I ask nothing unreasonable. I do not look for a Commission, the members of which I am to appoint. I am merely asking for a Commission to be appointed by the Crown, under the advice of the responsible Ministers of the Crown; and I feel that if I were a member of the Indian Government, knowing that the Commission had the confidence of the Crown, I would hail its existence as something which would test the good conduct of the Indian Government, and which, if any deficiency were discovered, would point out a sure method by which an improvement would be secured. I do not know what answer the noble Lord can make, if he rejects this inquiry. It will not be the rejection of the East India Company, it will not be the rejection of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Control, it will be the rejection of the noble Lord. Can the noble Lord answer to his conscience, to the country, and to India, if he rejects this Motion? But if the noble Lord cannot bring himself to comprehend the gravity of this question, I will then turn to the House, and I will ask you to manifest your interest in the well-being of a great industry at home, and to show your sympathy for the countless millions of our Indian population, who, if they have no voice within these walls, are but the more entitled to your consideration and regard.

Motion made, and Question put—

"That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying Her Majesty to appoint a Commission to proceed to India, to inquire into the obstacles which prevent an increased growth of Cotton in that country, and to report upon any circumstances which may injuriously affect the economical and industrial condition of the native population, being cultivators of the soil within the Presidencies of Bombay and Madras."

said, he had to request the indulgence of the House in calling its attention to the various topics which had been introduced by the hon. Member in the course of his speech. It was impossible for any one in that House—and certainly for himself, who might be supposed to be conversant with the matter—to refrain from looking to the subject which had been so ably introduced to their notice with great anxiety. He could assure the hon. Gentleman that ever since he had given notice of this Motion, he (Sir J. Hobhouse) had endeavoured to examine the question in all its bearings; and he would add, that if he thought the plan proposed by the hon. Gentleman would answer the object he had in view, he would at once say, "Take the Royal Commission, and make the best you can of it." The Motion of the hon. Gentleman involved not only the question which appeared to be the primary object of it—namely, the best means of securing a large and constant supply of cotton from India, but, according to the terms of the Motion, it involved the economical and industrial position of the people of India, and not only their economical and industrial condition, but also the effect produced by the Government of the country upon the condition of the people. With respect to the peculiar emergency of the time, he could not say that the hon. Gentleman had made out a case; for he found, on looking to the returns, to which the hon. Gentleman had also referred, that the importation of cotton from all countries showed an immense increase during the last three years. He found the importation of raw cotton in 1847 to be 474,707,615 lbs.; in 1848 it increased to 713,000,000 lbs., and in 1849 there was was no falling off, for it amounted to 775,469,000 lbs. With reference to Indian cotton, also, he found there was no diminution; for, taking a very recent period, he found a quotation in a Manchester paper which fully bore out his statements, for it distinctly stated that, instead of there being any diminution in the importation, there had been a great increase. That paper gave a quotation from the circular of a leading commercial house, in which it was stated that the importation of Indian cotton into London, Liverpool, and Glasgow, between January 1 and May 23, 1850, was 124,000 bales. The whole of this was from the presidencies of Bombay and Madras, as none had come from Bengal or the north-west provinces. During the same period of last year the importation of East India cotton was only 30,000 bales. The hon. Gentleman confessed that the East India Company was not to blame for any deficiency in the supply of the article, so far as paying due attention to the subject was concerned. He was, indeed, obliged to own that from 1788 to 1847 there had been a vast number of reports addressed to the Indian Government on the cultivation of cotton. If hon. Gentlemen would look into these reports, they would see that since 1788 the East India Company had never ceased to attend to this great subject, and that they had done all in their power to increase and improve the cultivation of the plant. Dr. Royle had recently published a pamphlet containing a summary of the proceedings of the East India Company in this matter; from which it appeared, that from 1788 to 1839, when the Earl of Auckland wrote his admirable minute on the subject, the Company had carried into effect no fewer than 29 different measures for promoting and improving the growth of Indian cotton. In 1839 and 1840 the Company went to great expense for this object in sending ten American cotton planters to India. Three were sent to Madras, three to Bombay, and four to Bengal. A number of extensive farms were established for them, to show to the natives what improvements could be made in the cultivation of cotton, as well as the best modes of preparing it for the market. Even last year not less than 200 improved cotton saw-gins had been sent to India by the East India Company, and a large reward had been offered for the invention of a machine best calculated to improve the cleaning of cotton. A mail hardly ever went to India without some allusions being made to the importance of advancing this object. The hon. Gentleman had alluded to the Bombay Committee of 1847, on the cultivation of cotton; that Committee had published some valuable reports, which he believed were highly estimated by the Committee of the House of Commons which sat on this subject in 1848. The latter was a very fair Committee; the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bright) had the nomination of it, and was chairman of it. He (Sir J. Hobhouse) knew there was not any available authority acquainted with the subject who was not examined before that Committee. There was no objection made to the appointment of this Committee; on the contrary, the Government was willing that the hon. Gentleman should have the Committee, and have all the best means of obtaining accurate information placed at his disposal. The report of that Committee was agreed to in the month of July after a long sitting. He believed the hon. Gentleman did not quarrel with the evidence given before that Committee. On the contrary, the hon. Member, in a speech which he made at Manchester, said the evidence was of very great importance; but the hon. Gentleman added that he would not pledge himself to the value of the report. It appeared, however, to him (Sir J. Hobhouse) that the report was a very fair deduction from the evidence given before the Committee. The Committee did not recommend that which the hon. Gentleman now proposed, that a Royal Commission should be sent to India, either to suggest a remedy in regard to the present mode of cultivating cotton in India, or to investigate the other subjects to to which its attention had been directed. The Committee said, that the costly experiments of the East India Company had not materially improved the cultivation of cotton, nor the mode of sending it to market. The Committee also observe—

"In the Bengal Presidency, and in the northwest provinces, constituting the Presidency of Agra, no success has hitherto been obtained in cultivating the American cotton, and the improvements in cleaning the indigenous variety have not led to any result of importance, as the staple is so short as to render it little suited to the ordinary wants of the English manufacturer."

Shortly afterwards the report states—

"The cultivation of American cotton has been introduced with perfect success into the southern Mahratta country, within the Bombay Presidency, and into the province of Coimbatore, within the Presidency of Madras. The cotton produced from New Orleans seed, under the superintendence of Mr. Shaw, the collector of Dharwar, and Mr. Mercer, one of the American planters, has met with full approbation from the manufacturers, and been pronounced to be equal to the fair American. The province of Coimbatore appears to be even better suited, in soil and climate, for the cultivation of New Orleans cotton than the southern Mahratta country. That produced under the superintendence of Dr. Wight has been pronounced to be superior in quality to that grown in the Dharwar district; and there appears to be a vast extent of land fitted for its production."

The Committee add—

"On the whole, your Committee see reason to apprehend that if the exertions of the Government were relaxed, the cultivation might return to its old course, unless this subject were taken up by men of capital and enterprise, or some other means adopted to supply that stimulus to exertion and improvement which is now afforded by the Government."

He believed the Committee were perfectly borne out in these conclusions by the evidence given before it. But why, he would ask, was it that British capital and intelligence were not applied to the cultivation of cotton in India as they were to other commodities in that quarter? That was the real question; and when the Committee began, to consider that point, then it was that their differences arose. The Committee agreed on all other matters, but split upon that, and never appeared to have agreed afterwards. In order to find out how it was that British capital was not applied in India to the cultivation of cotton, they thought proper to enter upon that vexed question — the land settlement. Some hon. Gentlemen said the land assessment had nothing to do with the question, while other persons said the whole matter of the cultivation of the soil was involved in it. Whatever difference might have arisen on this or other points, the Committee did full justice, and he hoped the House of Commons would also do justice to the East India Company. They admitted also that many obstructions which formerly existed to the cultivation of the soil had been removed. Formerly the land assessment had been taken on the nature of the produce, and not on the character of the soil. The latter mode of taking the land assessments had, by order of the Indian Government, been extended to the greater part of India. The inland custom duties, and the taxes on the inland conveyance of goods, which formerly were paid, had also been removed. He recollected, two or three years ago, the Chamber of Commerce of Manchester made complaints of the existence of these charges. The fact was, however, that they had been long previously abolished; in one Presidency eight years before that period, in another four, and in the other two years. At the time the complaint was made, no imposts of the kind were in existence. It was worth while attending to this fact, as it showed that charges of this kind were not uniformly true, although they emanated from the Manchester Chamber of Commerce. At this very moment the East India Company were going on with this important work, and were as much alive to its importance as the hon. Gentleman himself. But, at the same time, he thought it necessary to say, he very much doubted whether such an additional quantity of cotton, or such an improved article, ever could be brought from India, so as to enable that country to compete with America for our supply. Of course, he did not mean to say that every effort should not be made to add to the cultivation, and to improve the quality of the material; but there was something in the Indian production which prevented it from successfully competing with American cotton. He would mention two or three points in relation to this part of the subject, in order to prevent Gentlemen from supposing it was to be taken pro confesso, that we could at any time get so large a supply of cotton from India as to enable us to dispense with our supplies from America. Dr. Royle, than whom no man had paid greater attention to the subject, and who had the greatest anxiety for the success of the experiment, said, after quoting the opinion of Mr. Crawford—he should rejoice to believe Mr. Crawford—but his real belief was—

"That the great mass of cotton produced in India is not so fit as the American cotton for British manufacture, owing to the shortness of the staple, and the dirty state in which it was sent into the market."

Independently of this fact, he (Sir J. Hobhouse) found that American cotton had, upon an average, not more than 12½ per cent of dirt in it, whilst Indian cotton had upwards of 25 per cent. In America, also, from 250lbs. to 400lbs. per acre were produced; but in India the produce was not more than from 50lbs. to 100lbs. of clean cotton. How was it possible competition could be carried on between these countries, when there were these inequalities in the amount and quality of their productions? There was another point which ought to be remembered, to which public attention had been called in a very able article in the Examiner newspaper, written, as he understood, by a gentleman who knew India well from a long residence in that country. This gentleman said, very properly, that the difference between the cultivation in India and in America was very great in one most important particular—that though we could count upon exports from America, generally speaking, there was one reason why we could not count upon supplies from India, namely, that there were 120 millions of natives to be clothed there with their own cotton. This being the case, it was not very likely that after 120 millions of natives had been clothed, there would be such incentives to production as to make large exports very probable. The writer of the same article made this reflection upon this circumstance:—

"Suppose you allow 10 s. worth of clothing per annum for each individual (which was not a very high estimate), the whole cost of clothing the people of India would be 60,000,000 l. a year."

Now he should like to know whether that was not a higher value than was paid in any one year for the manufactured article in England? But there was no reason why, if the quantity of other produce could be increased by the application of capital and industry, the quantity of cotton should not also be increased, except there was something peculiar in the nature of its cultivation. The cultivation of indigo and opium had increased to an enormous extent. He had a statement in his hand showing that the quantity of opium sold in Bengal in 1839 was 18,563 chests; in 1840, 17,858 chests; in 1841, 18,227 chests; in 1842, 18,362 chests; in 1843, 15,104 chests; total 88,114 chests; average for five years, 17,623 chests; in 1844, 18,350 chests; in 1845, 21,437 chests; in 1846, 22,038 chests; in 1847, 21,649 chests; in 1848, 30,493 chests; total, 113,967 chests; average for five years, 22,753 chests. The number of chests sold in 1849 was 36,459. In the article of indigo there had also been a very great increase of cultivation. He would also observe, that it had been proved there was nothing in India to prevent the natives from cultivating indigo, if persons of capital and intelligence encouraged them; and he would ask the hon. Member for Manchester, whether there was anything to prevent such persons from encouraging the cultivation of cotton? The quantity of indigo exported by sea from the three presidencies for a period of three years was, from Bengal, in 1845–46, 76,397 cwt.; in 1846–47, 73,914 cwt.; in 1847–48, 67,635 cwt.; from Madras, in 1843–44, 18,906 cwts.; in 1844–45, 30,879 cwt.; in 1847–48, 10,631 cwt.; from Bombay, in 1845–46, 927 cwt.; in 1846–47, 690 cwt.; in 1847–48, 901 cwt. In the article of sugar there had also been a great increase of production. In short, in all these great articles of produce, there had been no falling-off in the production, but the cultivation had gone on steadily increasing; and he saw no reason why it should not be just the same with respect to cotton, if the natives had the same motives for following the occupation. They preferred, however, producing grain to cotton, because they could eat it themselves, and they preferred the cultivation of other products which were easy of sale or export; and so long as that was the case, it was impossible to expect the cultivation of cotton could keep pace with the cultivation of other articles. The hon. Gentleman, however, had dwelt upon the land assessment, and had spoken of the cultivators of the soil in a way which induced a belief that he was not exactly acquainted with the real condition of the people. The ryots in the Madras Presidency, or wherever else they were found, were not the mere serfs and slaves the hon. Gentleman supposed them to be. He found, indeed, with regard to the taking of the experimental farms for the cultivation of cotton, that a regular bargain was made by the ryots, and that they would not allow their land to be taken for the purpose except they had made a very good bargain. This subject was alluded to in the cotton papers of 1847; where there was the copy of a bond required by a ryot, which would show the fact to be as he had stated. This document showed that the ryots were not serfs and slaves who had no power over their own land. The hon. Gentleman had further alluded to the manner in which the assessments were raised, and he had asserted that balances were kept up against them until the Government stept in and took all. He assured the hon. Gentleman that he was mistaken, that the assessments were very often diminished, and that there was a power of appeal, and that nothing was more common than for such appeals to be successful. But in order to show the inclinations of the East India Company in this respect, he would quote the following passage from a despatch forwarded only three days ago with regard to the remission of some of the balances:—

"As the whole of these large balances are due from estates which have come under the late summary review of settlement, and as they generally disappear in the application of the revised Jumma, they are evidently mainly to be ascribed to over-assessment, and their remission was therefore perfectly proper."

And at this moment the subject of a revisal of other assessments was before the Court of Directors. The hon. Gentleman in the course of his speech had charged the East India Company with neglect in relation to the roads of the country and to irrigation. He would not enter upon the question of railways, because his hon. Friend the Member for Westbury had explained on a previous occasion what the Government had done in that matter; but with respect to canals, 353,732 l. had been expended on the Delhi, or Western Jumna Canal, 190,517 l. on the Doab or Eastern Jumna Canal; on the Ajmere Canal there had been expended, up to 1845, 12,000 l., making a total of 556,249 l. in Bengal; and it was estimated that 1,000,000 l. would be required to construct one of the greatest works in which a Government ever was engaged, namely, the Ganges Canal, which had been going on since Lord Hardinge commenced it. An irrigating canal, in the district of Tanjore, was completed in 1837, by Major Cotton, at a cost of 30,000 l., and similar works had been commenced by the same officer on the Godavery river, which were estimated to cost 200,000 l. About 100,000 l. more were annually expended in other parts of the Madras territory for tanks and channels. In the Bombay Presidency, also, there had been large disbursements for the same purposes. In the province of Scinde the amount disbursed by the Government in clearing out and maintaining the canals amounted to 25,000 l., and he was happy to say the present Governor General had given orders that, in the newly acquired province of the Punjab, 50,000 l. should be annually expended on works of irrigation. With respect to what his hon. Friend had said of the mode of applying the revenues of India, his hon. Friend ought to recollect what had been done with a large portion of these revenues in undertaking and completing great wars—a topic on which it was unnecessary to enter. If much of the income of the country was expended in one particular manner, it could not be devoted to any other; but he hoped there would be no further occasion for great military operations, so that the portion of the revenue of India not applied to the vast establishments connected with that country abroad and at home, might be applied as had been indicated. At any rate he could fairly claim for the Indian Government the merit of not having neglected the duties of their position. He would now turn to another point in the argument of the hon. Gentleman—that which related to the important question of an improvement in the condition of the people. He had two documents in his possession, which would go very far, not to contradict the statement of the hon. Gentleman on this subject, because there must always be a part of the population of every country in a state of poverty and misery, but to show that there had been a decided improvement in the condition of a portion of the people of India. In 1846, Mr. Hamilton Bell, a merchant, and not connected with the East India Company, wrote to the collector of the Agra Government:—

"I support my opinion of undiminished cotton cultivation in our own districts on several grounds. It may be assumed as undeniable that, in the north-west provinces much more land is now under cultivation than was the case thirty years ago; and, from all I can learn, the usual proportion of one-fourth of the khureef crop is still general. I imagine we may consider the population considerably increased in the last thirty years; and although the superior and middle classes are certainly much impoverished, I believe the condition of the mass of the population improved. My personal, not inattentive, observation, extending locally over the last twenty-three years, supports this impression. The wages of labour have certainly increased, and many old kisans (cultivators), with whom I constantly converse when out in the districts, have lamented to me the degeneracy and profusion of the present times, remarking that in their younger days the lower classes were exclusively fed with the inferior description of grain, whereas now, barley, and even wheat, have become the common food of the hired labourer. The improvidence of the native character is opposed to accumulation in the agricultural class for any other purpose than marriage and religious ceremonies. They spend what they earn, and I conceive it is not an unfair assumption that those who feed better will seek better clothing. If they can afford to spend more on their food, we might conjecture they would appropriate more for their clothing: but if we were to consider the same amount as previously disbursed for their apparel, this would establish a vastly enlarged demand, and a proportionate increase of consumption of the raw material for their manufactures."

The other document came from a gentleman whose merits the hon. Gentleman the Member for the Tower Hamlets would at once acknowledge. It was from Mr. Freer, the Commissioner at Sattara, who went into the recently settled district near Poonah, with which he had been formerly well acquainted; and it would be seen that he gave a most favourable account of the improvement in the condition of the natives. This gentleman's testimony was the more important, because it was a private letter to a friend in London, written without any object except that of giving information:—

"Camp Phultun, Sattara Districts,

Dec. 13, 1849.

"It is now just fourteen years since you picked me up there (indapoor district), after I had served my apprenticeship under Goldsmid, and I could not have believed that the period could have done so much for what was then the most miserable district in the Deccan. It of course still continues one of the least favoured by nature, barren in soil, ill watered, and uncertainly and scantily supplied with rain; but these natural disadvantages have been, as far as possible, neutralized by good administration. You may remember that in 1834, full two-thirds of the land was waste; now, there is not a field uncultivated, unless purposely kept so for grazing. The tillage was then most imperfect and slovenly; it is now equal to the excellent cultivation of the Christina valley, and far superior to that of the Sattara villages on the south side of the Neera, which in 1834–5 were far superior to Judapoor. The difference is most marked this year, which from unprecedented deluges of rain has been most unfavourable. Here (Sattara) there are no crops in many villages, the seed rotted in some fields, the young plants were choked with weeds in others. Throughout Indapoor, with precisely the same drawbacks, there are crops to feed the people and pay the rent, though gained, I was told, by great expenditure in labour and often in seed, some farmers having sown the same land four times over before they got the plants to come up and thrive. But this high farming, for it is nothing else, the effect of having plenty of cattle and money at command, and heart, has carried them through a bad year. They will, though with difficulty, pay their rents, which cannot be done here. In no single village did I fail to observe the recent marks of prosperity, in new and newly-rebuilt houses, some two attics high; temples, village walls and gates, chowrees, &c. Three villages, which I remembered waste and uninhabited, were thriving, and numerous hamlets had sprung up. The great money-lenders complained that there was no trade, but, on inquiry, I found that it was the trade of money-lending which had fallen off. The ryots are so well off they are tolerably independent, and either do not want to borrow, or are able to get it on reasonable terms, without submitting to extortion—9 and 10 per cent. instead of 12 and 50—a great change. The number of shops had marvellously increased; Indapoor Bazaar was at least double its former size, and Nullus, which used to be a decayed market-town with one shop, has now twenty-three. In 1835, or later, there was not one cart, with wooden wheels, in all the district: the stone-wheeled manure carts were very rare—now, standing at the Tudapoor town-gate, I counted upwards of 100 attending the bazaar, and saw some in every village. But the most marvellous change was in the people; from being the most wretched, depressed set in the Deccan, they have become thriving, independent fellows, and thoroughly grateful for what has been done for them. When it was known that I was coming, they turned out in crowds, delighted to see again any one connected with the reassessment, and doing all in their power to show how glad they were to see me. The district officers whom you examined when first you wrote about the state of the country, asked much after you, and took me to see the house where you visited them. I was overwhelmed with questions about Goldsmid, and Wingate, as well as Mansfield and poor Nash, and every one had some anecdote to tell, or something to ask about Goldsmid, who runs a good chance of being manufactured into a popular village deity, and taking the place of Mahadeo, or even Marotee. I felt quite convinced that it would be no easy matter to hatch a rebellion there. In fact, it convinced me more than ever, that our hold on the people of the Deccan is our revenue administration, and the effect is not confined to our own districts—it is felt here, and is, I am satisfied, the most effectual, if not the only counterpoise, to the discontent of the upper classes. I have seen it particularly since the annexation. The upper classes are evidently either sulky or suspicious, and a spark would set them in a blaze; but the lower orders everywhere hope that our liberal measures, in reducing assessments, &c., will now soon reach them. They always ask me about it, and often say, 'We have had many good rulers of our own, but the Company is the only Government that ever voluntarily reduced its demands to the limits fixed by the shasters.' Perhaps the most satisfactory feature about Indapoor is that, except for the first two years of Goldsmid's and Mansfield's administration, the district had no special advantages. The whole is the effect of good administration, which it has shared with the rest of the collectorate."

Now, when statements were made of there being bad collectors and bad revenue officers, and of the evil effects produced upon the condition of the people by maladministration, it was only fair to consider that such was not the uniform mode in which the people of India were treated. No doubt bad officers might be found in India, as in every country in the world; but where moderate assessments had been made, as was very properly recommended by the Committee of 1848, no complaints were made of maladministration, whilst there had been a sensible improvement in the condition of the population. Even since he had held the office he had now the honour to fill, very important changes had been made. Suttee had been very nearly abolished all over the country; and in many places it had entirely ceased. Infanticide had been got rid of. The abominable practice of Thuggee had been extinguished—a practice disgraceful to the country, and which no previous Government had ever endeavoured to grapple with. It was something for India that these things had been done; and he would relate an anecdote illustrative of the feelings which our government of the country had created. He was in company recently with a native of Bombay, a man of great intelligence, who spoke English almost as well as the hon. Member for Manchester, who said to him—

"If any man makes complaint against English management in India, just ask that man this simple question—whether life and property were secure there until British rule was established? If,"—said the gentleman—" it can be established that life and property were permanently secure under any rule before India came into British possession, then I will give up the defence of the British Government; but those who attack the British Government know very well that neither the one nor the other was secure."

Sir Henry Elliott, one of the most distinguished public servants in India, in the preface to a very learned work he had published, Mahomedan Historians of India —a work which he would recommend to the attention of hon. Gentlemen who found fault with the government of India, eloquently showed that the success of British rule was due to its moderation and justice. He said—

"Notwithstanding a civil policy and an ungenial climate, which forbid one making this country a permanent home, and deriving personal gratification or profit from its advancement; notwithstanding the many defects necessarily inherent in a system of foreign administration, in which language, colour, religion, customs, and laws preclude all natural sympathy between sovereign and subject—we have already, within the half century of our dominion, done more for the substantial benefit of the people than our predecessors, in the country of their own adoption, were able to accomplish in more than ten times that period; and, drawing auguries from the past, we will derive hope for the future, that inspired by the success which has hitherto attended our endeavours, we shall follow them up by continuous efforts to fulfil our destiny as rulers of India."

He now came to the most important part of the question—that relative to the proposed commission. He would ask the hon. Member who were to be the commissioners? The hon. Gentleman said he would not like to go to India himself, nor would any of his Manchester friends; and certainly he could not be spared from his Parliamentary duties. But if gentlemen from Manchester did go, he would mention that it would take them at least five years before they could make themselves acquainted with what they would be bound to know. They would have to teach themselves first, and then to make inquiries; and, after all, from whom would they have to inquire? Why, all their inquiries must be directed to the servants of those who had been, he would not say calumniated, but blamed, by the hon. Gentleman—the servants of the East India Company. Now, he should like to know whether those servants, supposing they were so inclined, would not have the commissioners in their own hands; and, also, whether the House had not, at that moment, every information from the very parties who were the only persons that could be consulted? The East India Company had never been shy or unwilling in giving information on this subject of cotton. On the contrary, they would afford every facility to any hon. Gentleman who would condescend to go out to India with a view to inquiry, and they had offered every facility for improving the cultivation of cotton. He did not see that the commission moved for by the hon. Gentleman would do more than the East India Company had already done, or more than the Company were willing to do. He found in the evidence from which he had been quoting, a remark by Mr. Bruce to this effect:—

"Let the gentlemen of Manchester guarantee 3½ d. per lb. for Indian cotton, and they will do more towards settling this great question than has ever yet been done."

That was the point. Let a certain price be secured for a certain quantity of cotton, and those who grew cotton would take care that there should be a supply. All that was required was that persons of capital and intelligence should give encouragement to the cultivation; and then, if Indian cotton could, under all circumstances, compete with American cotton—which for the reasons he had already stated he did not believe it could—he had not the least doubt it would have the best chance of success. He had now to mention a fact which told against the statement of the hon. Member, that he was the representative of all Manchester, and of some of the most influential gentlemen of Manchester, on this matter. Now it did so happen that, besides the Manchester Chamber of Commerce, there was a Manchester Association, a commercial association, and that that association had paid just as much attention to the cultivation of cotton, and had been as much in communication with the East India Company, and all parties connected with that cultivation, as the hon. Gentleman himself; and when the hon. Gentleman gave notice of his Motion, application was made to that association by the hon. Member for Manchester for assistance in procuring the Royal Commission in question. The result of that application was the subjoined letter from the secretary of the association to the East India Company, under date the 14th of May, which showed that they did not at all acquiesce in the hon. Gentleman's proposition. Mr. Fleming, the secretary, wrote thus:—

"Manchester Commercial Asssociation,

May 14, 1850.

"Sir—I am desired to acquaint you, for the in- formation of the Court of Directors of the hon. East India Company, that this association, having been recently applied to by Mr. Bright, M.P., for support in his endeavour to procure the appointment of a 'Government Commission' to be charged with an inquiry into the causes which operate against the extension of cotton cultivation in India, and the subject having been considered by the board, it was unanimously resolved—'That, believing much important information to have been already obtained by the official inquiry at Bombay in 1847, and the Parliamentary Committee of 1848, as well as from other sources, and that the suggestion made in the reports of the Committees engaged in those investigations are in course of being carried out by the hon. East India Company, and feeling that a Royal Commission might prove injurious at present, by exciting unfounded expectations, and interfering with existing operations, this board entertain strong doubts as to the appointment of such commission being the best means of forwarding the important object which this association have for years laboured zealously to promote, and therefore regret that they cannot accede to Mr. Bright's request.' And I am further instructed to observe, that this course has been adopted by the board in the full confidence that every effort will be made by the Court of Directors to improve the quality and increase the quantity of the cotton produced in their territories."

Such was the letter of the secretary, and it was a complete answer to the hon. Gentleman who had brought forward this Motion. The hon. Member could not deny that Mr. Aspinall Turner and that association had great experience on this subject, and that Mr. Aspinall Turner had himself been engaged in the cotton manufacture, and understood the whole matter well. Mr. Turner was not likely to speak idly; and the opinion just cited was not only his own, but was backed by a large and influential body of Manchester manufacturers. That being so, he could not admit that the hon. Mover represented the whole manufacturing interest of Manchester, although he gave him full credit for being the representative of a part; for the document he had just read gave the direct opinion of many of the first Manchester manufacturers against the plan proposed by the hon. Member. The hon. Gentleman had quoted examples of what had been done before in the way of sending out Royal Commissions. Royal Commissions, he said, had been sent to the Cape, to Ceylon, and to the Mauritius. But under what circumstances had those commissions been sent out? Those colonies were then recent acquisitions of the British Crown; and the commissions were appointed to inquire into the laws there administered, two of these colonies being subject to Dutch and one of them to French law. None of those commissions, therefore, were a precedent. No doubt, what the hon. Mover desired could be done if the House of Commons thought fit; but the proposal was, in fact, tanamount to a supercession of the East India Company, and to an admission that, first, all they had done had not been done in a proper spirit, or in a wise direction, and that nothing could be expected or hoped for from that Company. A Royal Commission, he contended, was already in existence. Every Governor General, every Governor even of a subordinate Presidency, was, in fact, a Royal Commissioner, for he was sent out to his government by the Crown; and he (Sir J. Hobhouse) would like to know if any one was prepared to allege that those Royal Commissioners had neglected their duty. Had they not inquired into these matters? He held in his hand at that moment a document written by the Earl of Auckland, which would show that he, for one, had not neglected his duty of inquiring into this matter. And was the Marquess of Dalhousie a likely man to neglect his duty? Why, if ever there was a man qualified to inquire into such matters, with a view to ascertain if any improvement could be made, and if more could be done, the Marquess of Dalhousie was particularly well qualified for the task. The published documents he had been quoting from were, he begged to inform the hon. Gentleman, not the last papers. Many later documents might be produced—and which he would produce if the House desired them—to show that the Government were still going on and still endeavouring to master this most difficult question. He professed himself unable to find out from the speech of the hon. Gentleman what it really was he proposed that his commission should do. What could they do more than had been done? They could ask questions, and they would receive answers. But questions had been asked before, thousands and thousands of them—the book was full of them—and answers had been received from persons the best qualified to give good information on the subject. If he thought the commission would do any good he would say, "Take it by all means;" but it was from a consideration that it would do no good whatever that he asked the House to reject the Motion of the hon. Gentleman. Before he sat down he would read the Marquess of Dalhousie's answer to the address to which the hon. Gentleman had referred, presented to him at Bombay, in order to show that the Marquess of Dalhousie was inclined to do his duty. His Lordship said—

"I must have spent to very little purpose the period during which I have had the honour of serving the State if I fail to obtain from you now full credit for sincerity when I say that no man desires more earnestly than I do the unbroken continuance of the peace that has been restored."

He had no doubt but that the Marquess of Dalhousie would make good use of the continuance of peace; and, believing that neither the East India Company at home, nor the Governors abroad, had neglected their duty, he should recommend the hon. Gentleman not to press his Motion to a division.

said, that he thought the subject which had been brought under the notice of the House by the Motion of the hon. Member for Manchester worthy of much more attention than it was likely to receive. Having been a Member of the Committee of 1848, he had been requested to prepare a draft report, and that draft had been wholly based upon the evidence, and in it he had given his opinion that the improvement of the country was more intimately connected with the cultivation of cotton than people generally imagined. With respect to a commission, it was not necessary that it should be composed wholly of persons sent from this country, as there were many gentlemen settled on the spot fully competent to deal with the subject. He agreed with the right hon. President of the Board of Control as to the difficulty under which Indian cotton would labour in competing with the United States produce in the British market, nor was he sanguine that, under any revenue system, the East Indies would ever provide a large share of the produce required; but, at the same time, he knew that the country laboured under heavy fiscal disadvantages, and he believed that if these were modified, and a certain proportion of capital and enterprise introduced, we should receive a greatly increased supply, and of a much finer quality than at present. But the real question before the House was, whether there were in the cotton-growing districts any circumstances peculiarly calculated to depress agricultural enterprise; and on this point he thought the hon. Member's conclusions were of far too sweeping a character. It was true that in the southern districts of India the system of taxation was oppressive; but in the north of Bengal the revenue had, two years before, been fixed on a permanent basis, and since then that province had advanced more than any other district in India. He did not attribute all the improvement to certainty of taxation, but he thought it had had a most wholesome and invigorating effect on the province. In the north-west provinces, the Government had directed their collectors to limit their demands to three-fourths of the rent, and this regulation had given greatly-increased value to the land. The revenue had also greatly benefited, having increased no less than 75 per cent in the space of thirty years. In Madras and Bombay, on the contrary, the Government had acted on the principle of being entitled to an assessment equal to the whole value of the land, and under that system the land had become utterly worthless. The land being rated to its full rental, the proprietor hoped for no profit save what he could make during his tenure. [The hon. Baronet then proceeded to read extracts from the evidence of Mr. Williamson, and another witness, examined before the commission, to show that under this mode of assessment land was unsaleable, while under a more liberal arrangement it speedily found a market.] With regard to Madras, the right hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Control contended that its decline had been caused by the export trade; but, if that could have produced a decline, in no place would it have acted more directly than in Tanjore; but, then, under the system of limited assessment the revenue had risen gradually from 31 lacs (310,000 l. ) to 48 lacs (480,000 l. ) The fact was, that there had been fifty years of uninterrupted peace in Madras, and the Government had devoted its attention to the gradual improvement of the revenue system. In cases where the Government absorbed the whole rent, it was not to be wondered at if the revenue declined. It could not be supposed that the cultivation remained stationary, and the only cause why the revenue remained in this state was the pressure with which the system acted upon the energies of the people. The imports and exports of these presidencies showed the same results, and from the same causes. He was not disposed to attach too much weight to the promises of the right hon. Baronet as to the future, for he had not seen in anything the right hon. Gentleman had stated, or anything that had been given in evidence, any reason for supposing that the authorities at the India House were at all impressed with the danger of the policy they were pursuing in assessing equal to the whole rent of the land. The attempt to exact such a tax in a country like India, where the fluctuations of the seasons were so great, was in effect to place the whole of the produce of the cultivation in every alternate year in the hands of the Government agent. What India wanted was, as was stated the other day by the hon. Member for Montrose, measures for promoting internal communication and works of irrigation. In the case of the latter, especially, the evidence of Captain Underwood and Major Cotton showed that so far from affording encouragement, the Government had, in the subordinate dependencies especially, allowed the tanks and works constructed by former Governments to fall into decay and become useless. He had no doubt, if due attention were paid to works of this nature, and the assessment were placed upon a more equitable footing, the revenue of these presidencies would, in a short time, be doubled. He had stated the grounds on which he was prepared to support the Motion of his hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, and he would now only add that the interest he took in this question was not confined to the growth of cotton, but was influenced by a desire to do justice to the natives of India, by removing those burdens by which the people were weighed down, and the development of the resources of the country prevented.

said, that it was not for Gentlemen on his side of the House to object to the eulogiums which had been passed by the right hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Control upon the internal government of India under the administration of the late and the present Governor Generals, Lord Hardinge and the Marquess of Dalhousie. He believed that under those administrations the condition of the people of India was improving; and when the hon. Member for Manchester complained that those Governor Generals had been devoting the resources of the Indian empire to perfecting the various means of communication, he thought he would not carry with him the feelings of those who looked to India as the source of a larger supply of cotton. For it was admitted on all hands that one of the principal difficulties in the way of producing and supplying this country with cotton from India, was that of conveyance between the interior and the coast. He thought that the hon. Member for Taunton, in commenting upon the present state of India, and deprecating the abandonment of many means of improvement and the nonprosecution of others, should have remembered the difficulties with which the Government of India had had to contend, to have made some allowance for the necessary expenses of the protracted, but inevitable, warfare to which the resources of our Indian empire had been exposed of late years, and not have forgotten that all our colonial dependencies were suffering from the relaxation of that system under which our colonial empire had grown up to its present magnitude. For his Mr. Newdegate's) part, he conceived it to be matter rather of surprise and gratification that the inhabitants of India had, in the face of these difficulties, made such advances under the auspices of the last and the present Governor General. It appeared to him that much of that night's discussion had been irrelevant to the real question upon which they would have to vote. When he heard the hon. Member for Manchester declare that he was appealing to the Government to give a stimulus to the cultivation of cotton in India, he really began to hope that the hon. Member and the people of Manchester were becoming sensible, from the failure of the so-called free-trade policy, of the necessity of reverting to more wholesome principles. But ceasing to consider the question of cotton, the hon. Member went on in a strain which showed that his object was rather to attack the Government of India than to seek for the best means of promoting the growth of cotton in that part of our dominions. Before the hon. Member took the trouble of asking the House to address Her Majesty to send a Commission to India, he might have inquired whether there were not circumstances which had occurred at home more likely to affect the supply of cotton from India than even the supposed misconduct of which he would have the House believe the Governors of India had been guilty. He (Mr. Newdegate) did not think the constituents of the hon. Member would thank him for this aberration, for they were anxious only to see the growth of cotton in India extended; which was a natural and reasonable desire on their part, and he believed perfectly attain- able. He (Mr. Newdegate) did not mean to say that the cotton of India was equal in quality to that of the United States of America; and one great complaint of it was, that it was not well dressed. But why was it not? Simply, because it did not pay to cure it. The great falling-off in the imports of cotton from India took place principally in the years 1844, 1845, and 1846; and it should be borne in mind that in the first of these years the duty of 1 d. a pound on foreign cotton was repealed, and that the price of Surat cotton fell, in 1845, under the operation partly of the reduction of duty, and partly of the system of purchasing by combination. He had the authority of a gentleman who had long filled the office of judge in the cotton-growing districts of India, for saying that the price of cotton in 1845 on the seaboard of India was as great as the price in Liverpool, leaving nothing for the cost of transit, or for the profit of the importer. Under these circumstances, it was not likely that the cultivation of cotton would be encouraged in India. He would read to the House an extract from a letter which he had received in 1847 from a gentleman who was largely concerned in the importation of cotton. He said—

"The true reason of a deficient supply of Surat cotton is, that the spinners drove the price below a remunerating one. The imports of East Indian cotton in 1841 were 270,000 bales, but they have gradually fallen off to 95,000, which they were in 1846, and prices have declined from 3⅛ d. 5 d. to 2½ d. 4 d. This is the reason they are now in such a fix about American cotton. They would have all the profit from the planters, merchants, and consumers; and they got it too. Twelve or fifteen months ago they made 2 d. a pound on every pound of cotton spun; but they overdid it—produced too much—actually swamped the demand—and now they call out because their immense stocks of cloth and yarn prevent any advance. The real consumer goes on as usual; but the only difference is, that the spinner does not now get all the profit. The importer gets a part, and the consumer another part. The extension of cotton cultivation in India is very important; but a good price would do it better than all legislation. I thought you might like to hear those hurried hints.

This is sheer combination, for the spinners in the different localities buy and work in union. See the Letters in the Economist, from Mr. Hindley's, M.P., partner."

But there were other circumstances which tended to depress the price of cotton, and to diminish the supply from the United States. In 1846 the duty upon foreign sugar was reduced. What was the consequence in the United States? Why, that great part of the land which had heretofore been appropriated to cotton, was diverted to the growth of sugar. He had a letter which he received from New Orleans, which showed the cause of the diminution in the growth of cotton, by the stimulus given to the growth of sugar of late in the United States. The circular was dated October 21, 1846, and was from the house of Messrs. Wylie and Egana, of New Orleans. In that document the writer said—

"The recent alteration of our tariff has reduced the protective duty on foreign sugar to such a scale as will rouse our planters to additional energy and enterprise. We consider this reduction a benefit to the industry of the State. Already are our planters distinguished by a science and adaptation of machinery much beyond anything known elsewhere. The results obtained by such enterprise have of late much stimulated the cultivation of sugar, but the low prices of cotton have done more so. During the past three years 94 new sugar estates have been established, and many plantations have passed, and are passing, from cotton to sugar. Formerly sugar at 4½ c. per lb. was considered a better return to the planter than cotton at 6½ c.; but allowing for the greater safety of the sugar crop, which in eight years out of ten is secured from frost, and for the improvement in its manufacture, it is now thought that sugar at 4½ c. is fully equal to cotton at 10 c. The average yield of estates working their full power may be stated at 5 hhds. and 250 gallons of molasses, which respectively at 4 c. and 15 c. would give

Now, the census return gives 93,222 slaves as attached to the cotton industry of this State; and if any of our friends will take our average production of cotton during the past five years, and the average cost during that period, they will see how small an interest our cotton planter has had to extend his cultivation."

That was the true and principal cause of the diminution in the production of cotton. Thus the reduction in the price of cotton and the opening of our sugar trade had diverted much of the cultivation of land in the United States from the production of cotton to that of sugar, and the free-trade policy which had been entered upon at the instigation of gentlemen from Manchester had directly tended to the diminution of the staple upon which the great industry of that place depended. If they wished to produce cotton in India, they must encourage it; they must reimpose a duty upon foreign cotton, or give the inhabitants of India some security that they should obtain a remunerative price. Let them have protection, and with the natural advantages of that great empire they would see the cultivation of cotton rise there as they had seen other products increase in other latitudes suited to their growth. But if they continued to depress the price, they would diminish the supply. For his own part, he had observed no more convincing proof that they had been pursuing a narrow-minded and shortsighted policy than had been afforded by its immediate results on the production of cotton. In short, to the Gentlemen of the free-trade school, he could only observe, that as they had got into the scrape by free trade, so they would find their only true escape from the dilemma by reversing their policy.

denied that any acrimonious spirit had been evinced by the hon. Mover to attack the Government of India. On the contrary, that hon. Gentleman was over scrupulous, and more guarded than the occasion required, whilst going into the case of the deficient supply of cotton. But, even if he had been liable to the charge brought against him by the hon. Member for North Warwickshire, that would be no sufficient reason for inducing the hon. Gentleman to vote against a Motion, the principle of which he had seemed to approve. The House would best discharge its duty by confining itself to the calm consideration of the real question at issue—namely, the practicability or otherwise of obtaining an essential article of our manufactures from the British possessions in India. He thought the right hon. President of the Board of Control had not fully admitted the immense importance of the subject now under discussion, because, in fact, no greater calamity could befal this country than a falling off in the supply of cotton, an article upon which so many thousands relied for support; and yet we were notoriously dependent at present upon one country—the United States of America—for our supply. Though 124,000 bales of cotton had been imported into this country in six months, yet that formed a very small portion indeed of the amount we required to meet the necessities of that branch of manufacture. A misunderstanding in the slave States, or even contrary winds, would not only place that branch in peril, but it would jeopardise peace and order. The question was, were we necessarily dependent on the United States for our supply? He could not believe we were. All the facts which had come under his notice brought him to the conclusion that there was no natural impediment to the growth of cotton in India—that we had the soil, the people, the climate, and the means of transportation in that great empire. Mr. Petrie, in his evidence given in March 1848, stated that from five years' experience in India he was enabled to say that in one comparatively small district of 2,000 miles square, being one-fourth of that under production, a perennial quantity of cotton might be obtained equal to 120,000 bales. What had been the history of the cotton trade in America? There was nothing in the climate or soil to render that country better adapted for the growth of cotton than India. The cotton plant in that country was an exotic. It was only sixty-five years ago that the first bale from America had been landed on our shores, and the quantity now reached 750,000,000lbs. weight. To what was this increased production owing? It was owing to the energy, perseverance, and capital which, if employed in India, would be attended with similar results. The products of indigo and opium showed what might be done in India with reference to cotton. Both these articles had been favoured. Opium was a monopoly in the hands of the East India Company; and the rapid increase which had taken place in the production of indigo was owing to the fact that European enterprise and capital had gone up the Ganges and brought that production to its present state. If indigo had succeeded under European management, and if opium had also succeeded under the stimulus given to it by the East India Company, he conceived that there was no natural impedient or insuperable obstacle to the cultivation of cotton. But the fact remained, that we did not get cotton from India. All the evidence brought before the Select Committee showed that if the land were not incumbered by taxes—that if the natives were not in a state of almost inextricable slavery, there was everything in the soil, and in the thriftiness and love of gain among the natives, to induce the hope that a very large perennial, and constantly increasing, supply of cotton might be raised in India. If this were so, then an immediate and searching inquiry ought to be instituted into the causes which had hitherto prevented us from having that supply, He would have the East India Company to give cotton lands in India rent-free for a period of years. [ A laugh. ] Yes, if its growth would avert present dangers, and prove to the people of India that they might commence and carry on a successful and profitable trade with this country, it would not be a loss, but ultimately it would be a great gain, to set them to work on lands favourable for the growth of cotton, and either wholly to remit the taxes thereon, or to reduce them so as to enable the natives to compete with the inferior descriptions of cotton coming from the United States. He begged to remind the right hon. President of the Board of Control that these natives, who once clothed themselves, were now not generally clothed with the produce of their own looms, but that they were clad in Manchester manufactured goods, the raw material of which had been obtained from the United States. It behoved us, for the sake of the natives, to give them some compensation for the almost entire annihilation of their manufactures and their exports, in the shape of a remunerative pursuit like that of the cultivation of cotton. Any longer neglect on our parts would argue a censurable indifference to their condition. Let the House recollect that all our recent conquests had been unprofitable. Everything spent upon the expedition against Affghanistan was utterly lost. The war against Scinde had not yet been productive; while the Punjaub itself was not even paying its own expenses. He contended that on this subject they ought to take the evidence of the natives of India themselves, and that evidence given by the East India Company's servants ought to be received with great caution, because they were not without their prejudices and predilections in favour of upholding the Company's Government, and justifying their system of raising revenue. He believed that the whole secret of the question lay in the pressure of the land tax upon the natives of India. One of the things which they could not do, and never would be able to do, until that burden were greatly mitigated or entirely removed, was to supply the cotton of commerce to this country. Until that burden was removed, that House need not look for any great supply unless in a particular state of the markets, when high prices might induce the people of India to send it. The resolution did not at all infringe the Company's rule, or imply anything against Her Majesty's Government; but believing that it was necessary to satisfy the public mind, and that it would be attended with useful results to India, as well as to this country, it should have his most cordial support.

felt the importance of rendering this country, if possible, independent of the supply of cotton from America, and would say that the East India Company had as strong an interest to encourage the cultivation of cotton in India and its export as any manufacturer in Manchester. But what did the hon. Member for Manchester want? Did he want information? His speech showed that he had had it. He had had his Committee, and the Motion was not founded upon their report. The hon. Gentleman, with great tact, proposed to leave it to the Govornment to appoint the Commissioners; if he sent out some of his friends from Manchester, their failure would be so complete that they would not be able to show their faces in Manchester again. In the days of Clive there was a demand for commissioners or supervisors to be sent out to India, and they were sent out; but the ship foundered at sea. If Commissioners should now proceed to India, he would wish them a better fate upon the high seas, but they would certainly founder as soon as they reached India. There was nothing to complain of in the spirit in which the Motion was brought forward; but the hon. Member must allow it to be said that he was not all Manchester. The Commercial Association had taken a much more active part in the encouragement of the growth of cotton in India than the Chamber of Commerce, and that association was against this wild Commission, and considered that the Court of Directors had done everything that was practicable. When he (Sir J. W. Hogg) was last in the chair, a deputation came from Manchester, and he said to them, "Instead of coming to London and to Parliament, send to India a little of Manchester capital and industry." Why should not the Manchester people send out a Commission, or send out agents? Could the hon. Member name any quarter of the British dominions in which the parties here who introduced its produce had not agents, except the people of Manchester, in India, where, of all places, agents were most wanted? Every witness before the Committee agreed that the one thing needful was the presence of European agents to communicate directly with the cultivators of the soil, make them advances, secure them a certain and ready market, and take care the cotton was picked clean and well packed. But the gentlemen of Manchester had not the enterprise of those engaged in the conduct of the public press, who could send out their commissioners to all countries to collect information, and even to detect frauds devised against private merchants. That course was adopted with regard to indigo—sending agents into the districts, who advanced money to the ryots, and engaged to take the produce when grown; and, whereas there was scarcely any indigo supplied seventy years ago from India, it now supplied the world. India was then a closed country; it was now open to Europeans. Then, again, there was the article of opium, which the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets asserted was grown by the Government of India. That was not the case; for in several districts it was grown without any interference of the Government; and the statement of the hon. Member was true only with respect to a small quantity grown in Patna. As to sugar, no doubt the duty had formerly prevented any export, but the increase that had taken place was attributable to the planting by European agents, and to the supply of European capital. If the Indian cultivator was asked why he did not grow cotton for the people of Manchester, he would answer that he had a family to support, and must pay his rent to the zamindar or to the governor, and could not grow cotton merely to please them, when, by growing corn, he could obtain a better profit. Great had been his astonishment when he had heard a free-trader like the hon. Gentleman opposite, the Member for the Tower Hamlets, give the most barefaced support to a bounty for the growth of cotton. Throwing away all his political economy and free-trade doctrines, the hon. Member advised the House to give a thumping bounty to the grower of cotton, by telling every man who cultivated it that he should have his land rent free! He really did not know what to think of the cotton trade when a free-trader was obliged to have recourse to such a recommendation. As to the hon. Member for Manchester's Motion, he could only say that his notice was a notice respecting cotton, but that his speech was a speech on the affairs of India, and was confined almost entirely to the working of the land tax. Now, most people did not precisely comprehend the nature of that tax. It was, in effect, neither more nor less than a certain portion of the rent of the soil set apart to be paid into the coffers of the State to meet the exigencies of the public service. It neither injured the landholder nor the landowner; and the great political economist, Mr. Mill, had called it the perfection of taxation. There were two systems of settlement in reference to the tax—the zamindary and the ryotwhar, and, without entering into the merits of the contending opinions of Sir J. Munroe, who thought the ryotwhar system the perfection of administration, and of Mr. Tucker, who was a great upholder of the zamindary plan, he might say this, that the demand of the Government on the ryot was less than the demand of the zamindar, in the proportion of 5 to 8. But the fact was, the assessment had nothing to say to the question at all. Suppose a man pays 4 s. an acre for land, and grows corn, because he finds it more profitable than cotton, he will continue to do so, even if you lower his rent to 2 s. an acre, for the advantage of growing corn over cotton would still continue the same. The next point made by the hon. Member for Manchester was the condition of the roads. He (Sir J. Hogg) admitted there was a great and lamentable want of internal communication in India, but he could not allow that the want existed to the same extent in the cotton districts. He would just direct their attention to the state of the roads in three of the principal; and, first, he would quote the report of Mr. Davis, the collector, as to Guzerat, which supplied half of the cotton in the Bombay Presidency. He stated that the roads were not macadamised, but were as well made as the nature of the soil would allow, and in Broach the roads were more numerous than in any part of India. Guzerat stretched along the sea-coast, and for a great portion of the year they had a trade wind wafting vessels from the coast right to Bombay, so that a railway would not be of great use, so far as that district was concerned, and there were plenty of roads for the carriage of cotton to the sea. He admitted at once that Broach was too highly assessed. But were similar errors and mistakes in the management of land never made in this country even in the cases of private proprietors of 300 or 400 acres? Could it be expected, then, that all over the vast expanse of India there should be no instance of overtaxing a district occasionally? There was ample proof, however, that so far from the servants of the Company being to blame for such mistakes, they were the very first to point them out to their masters, and to call on the Company to show consideration to the natives. In Candeish, the next cotton district, Mr. Bell stated that the first thing which struck a stranger was the frequent intersection of the roads; and, in Dharwar, the remaining cotton district, there was an excellent great road down the Ghauts, and several cross-roads to the port of Compta; so that all the stories about the carriage of cotton on bullocks' backs were unfounded. The hon. Member for Manchester, in speaking of Bundelcund, had used one phrase only of which he (Sir J. Hogg) had reason to complain, and that was when he spoke of the conduct of the collector who assessed it as infamous. It should be known to the House that, according to the old and very reprehensible system, the assessment was made, not with reference to the productive power of the land, but with reference to the product; and the land that grew indigo was taxed more highly than the land that grew corn. Bundelcund was assessed in 1815, when the American war had raised the price of cotton to 1 s. 6 d. a pound, and the collector assessed the land accordingly; but when the war ceased, the price of cotton fell to 7 d. or 8 d. a pound, and the cultivator, of course, suffered accordingly. A hue and cry was raised by the civil servants of the Company that Bundelcund was over-assessed, and justice was rendered, tardily, he admitted, and not so rapidly as could have been wished. He could not allow that the collector's conduct ought to be stigmatised as infamous. Let the hon. Gentleman accuse the collector of want of judgment if he pleased; but he (Sir J. Hogg) would stand up for the honour and integrity of every man in the service, living or dead, who had discharged his duty to the best of his ability and judgment, and vindicate him from such attacks. It should not be forgotten that India was not only a cotton-growing, but a great cotton-consuming country. Hon. Gentlemen seemed not to remember that fact. He believed India consumed as much cotton as the industry of England manufactured for the whole world. The people did not grow it for the purpose of making clothes merely. The natives of India used no blankets, and when they wanted warm clothing they wadded it with cotton. Thus they were able to consume all the refuse and waste of their cotton. It must also be remembered that India produced cotton for the China market. The inhabitants of China, like those of India, had a peculiar taste, and like them, he believed, had a partiality for dirty cotton—at least they made no effort to have it cleaned. Now, how could the natives of India be induced to grow a cotton with a long staple? The Manchester gentlemen said the cotton of India must be improved 20 or 30 per cent. But if they wanted to improve the growth and staple of the Indian cotton, or to introduce American cotton into that country, the only plan was for these gentlemen to give the growers of India a steady and certain market, if they would not give them high prices. In America the fluctuation in the price of cotton was very great, and Indian cotton was sought after when there was a failure in the American crop. The Indian growers then received a good price for it, and they were stimulated to greater exertion. But when they sent over more cotton next year, there had, perhaps, been a good season in America, and the Indian article became an absolute drug in the market. He believed that one gentleman, Mr. Turner, had thrown 7,000 l. worth of Indian cotton upon a dunghill because he could not find a market for it. Now, could the House expect the natives of India to grow cotton for a casual and uncertain market, when they might grow grain, which would, without any risk, enable them to feed their wives and children? Let the friends of the hon. Member for Manchester agree to take the cotton from them at a certain price, and he had no doubt the natives of India would make the exertion, and that the experiment would succeed; and the more so because, in different parts of India, there was cotton of the same variety, but of different and unequal staples. If the hon. Member for Manchester, instead of sending a Commission to India, would send a circular to the collectors and judges, he would gain more and better information in a few months than his Commission would obtain in ten years. And if he would draw up or suggest the circular, describing the information he wanted the Directors of the East India Company would send it to India, and do all in their power to assist the hon. Gentleman in obtaining information. He could not see why the hon. Gentleman should confine his attention to Bombay and Madras, nor why he should not give the Presidency of Bengal a chance. He had quoted the evidence of his hon. Friend the Member for Guildford, who had stated, that up to 1845–6 the amount expended by the Indian Government in roads, bridges, and other improvements, was 1,434,000 l, Now, he (Sir J. Hogg) found, upon more accurate investigation, that the sum expended during that time in improvements (exclusive of the Ganges Canal and the railways) was, in fact, 2,282,000 l. The Committee, in their report, said it had been urged upon their attention that the capability of India for the growth of cotton of improved qualities having been established, the one thing remaining was for European capitalists to place themselves in direct communication with the cultivators of the soil. The report went on to say—

"Your Committee are disposed thus far to concur in these views, that it is chiefly, if not solely, to British capital and intelligence applied to this subject that they look for any permanent improvement in quality or increase of production, as it is clearly owing to such means that the improvement of other important articles of the Indian soil has been advanced."

Read on.

"Your Committee, however, are slow to believe that there exists any apathy or unwillingness on the part of English capitalists to apply themselves to this or any field of employment from which valuable results are to be obtained. They feel that in this and in other matters they will decide for themselves the time and mode of remedying the evil."

Seeing, then, that the East India Company had been trying experiments for ten years on this subject with partial success, he called upon the gentlemen of Manchester to co-operate with them, and to take up the matter where they left it off, or else all their endeavours might fail. He trusted that the hon. Member would not press his Motion.

said, his vote upon this Motion would be directed by the result of the inquiry before the Committee on the Growth of Cotton in India, of which he was a member. He believed that the supply of cotton from India might be materially increased, to the benefit of the manufactures of this country. He thought, however, from the evidence taken before the Committee, that the great difficulty to be contended with was the imperfect state of the internal communications, and the difficulty there was in getting the cotton down to the coast. The witnesses examined before the Committee were almost unanimous in their opinion upon this subject, and this he understood was also the opinion of the hon. Member for Guildford himself as a Director of the East India Company. Knowing the great interest which the present Governor General of India felt in this subject, which the noble Marquess had deeply at heart, he believed that every encouragement would be given to the growth of cotton by the Government of India. It was a great discouragement, however, to the opinion he had formed, when he heard the hon. Baronet the Member for Beverley state that the want of internal communication had not been an obstacle to the growth of cotton.

wished to explain. He admitted that there was a very imperfect system of communication in the interior of India. But he had confined his observations to three districts on the coast, where there were good roads, and therefore the arguments now used did not apply.

thought, at all events, there could be no doubt, as was indeed proved before the Committee, that I cotton was brought down to the coast on bullocks' backs, and that it was so filthy as to be unfit for sale. He certainly did not abandon the hopes entertained by the Committee on this question; and, as there was a large population in this country looking to India for a supply of cotton, he thought it was the duty of the Government to make every exertion in their power to promote that object.

said, he had been so frequently referred to in the course of that discussion, that he felt it his duty to address a few words to the House before they proceeded to a decision on that question. He had not been a member of the Committee of 1848, but he had given his evidence before that Committee with the utmost possible frankness. He was no optimist; but he had on that occasion, as on all other similar occasions, made large admissions with respect to what he considered to be the shortcomings of the East India Company, while he had also stated that he believed they had made some great exertions for the promotion of the welfare of the people of India. Now, he thought it would hardly be fair on the part of his hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, or of any other Member, to take as gospel all that he had said with respect to the shortcomings of the Company, and at the same time to reject all that he had said with respect to the good which they had done. His hon. Friend the Member for North Lancashire had fallen into a mistake very common among people who were not well acquainted with India, in supposing that that vast territory could be considered as one district. It was no doubt true that in some portions of the interior of India the means of communication were very defective, but it was also true that in other portions of that country ample means of conveyance existed along the coasts. Some hon. Gentlemen complained of the land-tax system which was adopted in India; but for his part he believed that that was the best system of taxation that had ever been adopted, when it was properly administered. It was the opinion of Mr. James Mill that a better system of taxation had never existed. He would like the House to know the amount of that assessment which had been so commented upon. In Baroach the revenue was under 5 s. an acre; in Bengal it was 4 s. an acre; in Agra under 3 s.; in Shirkapore 6 d.; in Kandeish 6 d.; in Madras 2 s.; in Tanjore, 2 s.; in Tinivelli 1 s. 6 d.

said, he should certainly not support the Motion of the hon. Member for Manchester, more especially as it was for a Commission. Neither should he support the Government, but would leave them and their friends to settle the matter between them. He had no doubt if the Government gave the hon. Member for Manchester a commission, that he would accept it, and that they would be willing—if they could get rid of the hon. Member—to appoint him one of the members of it, and so get rid of him in that way.

said, that during the whole discussion there had been a general acknowledgment that, so far as the cotton manufacture and the trade of this country were concerned, the subject was an extremely important one, and that by means either of this commission or some other it ought to be promoted. He had the opposition of two Governments—the Imperial Government and that of India—and therefore it was not surprising if he found himself unsuccessful in this undertaking. The hon. Baronet the Member for Beverley recommended the Manchester people to send out a commission themselves. From that it would appear he thought a commission might get a great deal of valuable information. But the Manchester people were of opinion that a commission going out under the authority of Government would have a much greater power of making inquiries, and its authority over the country would be much greater, than that of any mere private commission. The hon. Baronet said the East India Company had been at work a great many years; but his complaint was that their experiments for sixty years had produced no result. The right hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Control said, that after sixty years the experiments of Dr. Boyle had produced, not cotton, but a summary. But it was cotton that the Manchester people wanted; and it was for the sake of obtaining this supply that he had brought forward this proposition. The hon. Member for Beverley admitted that, as far as their present experiments went, the East India Company had done about all they could; and he recommended the Manchester people to go over and purchase cotton in India. If it were true that they had done all they could, his case was made out; because he proposed a step which he thought would add to the information they had. However, this question came before the House in its present shape for the first time, bringing large questions connected with India before it; and, unfortunately, for many years Indian subjects had received no attention in that House. He was, therefore, not surprised that it was not probable the House would consent, on the first proposition, to the appointment of this commission; but he ventured to give an opinion, that the difficulties of the cotton trade in this country, from the violent fluctuations in the supply of the raw material from the United States, would increase materially, because the more extensive the trade became, the more would it suffer from these fluctuations, and at the same time the deficiencies in the Indian revenue would go on, and the condition of that country would deteriorate in the same manner. The result would be that, at no very distant period, Parliament and the Government would be obliged to take up this question in a manner much more serious than they seemed disposed to do at present. The noble Lord at the head of the Government would have done credit to his administration, and would have given hope to the great industry of the north of England, and to a large proportion of the people of India, if he had consented to this proposition. However, as the Government did not see it judicious to do so, or were not able to do so at present, and as the question was new to Parliament, with the consent of the House he should be perfectly satisfied with the discussion that had taken place, and believing that it would lead importantly in the direction in which they all wished to go, he would not put the House to the trouble of a division on this question.

put the Question, "That the Motion be withdrawn," when there were cries of "No, no!" from Colonel SIBTHORP and one or two others.

Motion was accordingly put, and negatived.

moved for leave to bring in a Bill to repeal so much of the Acts 7 Will. IV. and 1 Vic., c. 36, and other Acts now in force for regulating the conveyance of letters by post, as prohibit the transmission of letters on the Sunday otherwise than through the post. The prohibition was introduced for purposes of revenue; but as the Post Office was no longer to undertake the duty of transmitting letters on Sunday, the revenue could not be affected by a repeal of the prohibitory enactments. He thought it an unfortunate thing that the House should have agreed to an address to the Crown to stop the conveyance of letters on Sunday by the Post Office, and he hoped no objection would be offered to his Motion, because, as letters would certainly be conveyed by private hands on Sundays, perpetual breaches of the law would be committed.

Motion made, and Question proposed—

"That leave be given to bring in a Bill to repeal so much of the Acts 7 Will. IV. and 1 Vic. c. 36, and other Acts now in force for regulating the conveyance of Letters by Post, as prohibit the transmission of Letters on the Sunday otherwise than through the Post Office."

thought, in a case of this kind, that Government ought either to do the people's business for them, or allow them to do it themselves. He did not think either the Government or the commercial portion of the community had come to a thorough knowledge of what had been inflicted, not only upon the commercial world, but upon the public at large. Suppose one of his constituents at Bradford heard by the post which left London on Friday of the loss of one of his argosies, with the addition it might be of supposing one or two of his sons lost in it. He must not have further intelligence from London on Saturday, because it would be Sab- bath-breaking at Bradford to have the letter delivered to him on Sunday; and he must not have a letter from London on Sunday because that would be Sabbath-breaking in London: therefore all his intelligence must be a day behind; and vice versâ. And all this because individuals who repudiated the authority of the Author of Christianity and his immediate followers, which undeniably formed the basis of the religious belief of the great majority of the nation, had chosen to deprive the people of the right of communication they enjoyed. There were further consequences to come, if something was not hit on to prevent them. There was evidence of a communication existing between the promoters of these restrictions and the parti prêtre in France. They played into each other's hands; and it would be seen that the move made here, would be followed up in France: and nobody doubted that there the event would be, that the party would first be successful, and then would be upset. And then would come the rebound in England; all of which he thought wise statesmen should endeavour to avoid, and not sacrifice the interests of the country to a piece of most impertinent and cruel legislation. On these grounds he should support the Motion.

said, he could not agree to the Motion. He believed that the vote which the House came to the other night was an unfortunate vote, because it would lead to great breaches of the law and desecration of the Sabbath. The result would be just the reverse of what was intended by the promoters of the resolution; it would lead to a greater amount of fraudulent Sunday labour than was actually performed before the measure was proposed. At the same time, the House of Commons having come to that resolution, the Government had felt themselves bound to carry it out, as far as it was in their power. They took it for granted that the House of Commons was a faithful representation of the opinion of the public; and if they were willing to submit to the inconvenience and hardship of this restriction, which had been very much underrated in his opinion, all the Government had to do was to carry the measure out. He did not think it was their duty to attempt to do that indirectly which the House could do directly if they were disposed. He believed that the distribution of letters and newspapers on the Sunday, as at present conducted by the Post Office, led to far less desecration of the Sabbath, than would be caused by any other mode. If the public were prepared to submit to the inconvenience, they must submit to it altogether; if not, the least possible desecration of the Sabbath would be by restoring the mode of communication by post as it had existed up to this time. However, he thought it quite right that the public should know what the inconvenience was; if they were prepared to submit to it, well and good; if not, this was an indirect mode of evading the late vote of the House, which ought not to be sanctioned.

said, that the House of Commons had no reason to complain of Her Majesty's Government; but he thought that the public had great reason to complain of the House of Commons. Never was there a division taken so much by surprise as that which was taken the other day on the Motion for an Address to the Crown; and although the right hon. Gentleman said that he could not support the Motion of the hon. Member for Berwick, because it would be an indirect way of getting rid of the resolution to which the House of Commons came, he should very much regret if there was no direct way in which it could be shown that the opinion of the House and of the public was not in accordance with that of the majority upon that occasion.

opposed the Motion. He was surprised that the voice of the people on this important question, spoken in a constitutional manner through their representatives, as well as by petitions signed by hundreds of thousands of persons, should be regarded as nothing by hon. Members opposite.

supported the Motion. He thought no individual in the 19th century would stand up and say he was not to be the judge for himself whether he had not the right as a subject and member of civil society to transmit letters on a Sunday, or receive them through the various channels of communication from those who pleased to send them. Why should that right be interfered with, any more than the cooking of a dinner on Sunday?

hoped the House would not agree to the Motion, because it would lead to much further consequences than perhaps those hon. Members who supported it might apprehend. It was obvious that if, instead of the general rule, with which the Government charged itself with the transmission of letters, they were to allow letters to be conveyed on Sunday by private hand, that would become the establishment of a private post-office, and letters would be sent on that day as much as on other days of the week; that day would be the means of transmitting letters more than on the other days, and it would interfere with the general transmission of letters by the Post Office. Therefore he thought, as his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated, that if letters were to be conveyed on Sunday, it would be far better to restore the state of things that existed before the resolution of the noble Lord the Member for Bath was passed. He must say, although he thought it his duty to advise the Crown to comply with the Address of this House, which was founded on numerous petitions signed by nearly 700,000 persons, and which was declared to be the wish of the House not only by hon. Members who were present and voted for it, but by the voluntary absence of a great number of hon. Members who declined to vote against the proposition, he certainly could not share in the opinion that it was advisable. He did not rely on, nor did he attach so much importance as many hon. Members had done to the transmission of mercantile letters or mercantile intelligence; but he did think that the post, being the means of conveying to different members of a family in different parts of the kingdom the news of illness, of accidents, of danger perhaps to other members of the family, the retaining of that knowledge for twenty-four hours—[Colonel THOMPSON: Forty-eight hours!]—which they might have that time sooner, was contrary to the indulgence of those feelings of charity and affection which belonged to our Christian as well as our moral character. He therefore, in opposing this Motion, must say he very much regretted the decision to which the House came. He owned that, although there might have been, and he would not deny that there was, a very strong feeling on the part of the public in favour of the noble Lord's proposition, it appeared to him rather to tend to that which was certainly contrary to the precepts of our religion, and established for precept the opposite—that man was made for the Sabbath, and not the Sabbath for man.

said, that a number of large firms and constituencies having balanced the difficulties that might arise from the non-transmission of letters on Sunday, had earnestly deprecated the continuance of a system of transmission, because it led to a growing evil of increasing transactions of business on Sundays.

, in reply, said, the present state of the law was absurd, as persons might send parcels by railway on Sundays, though they might not send letters. One party had supported the resolution from fanaticism, and the other from fear.

Question put, and negatived.

moved for a return of the number of trees marked and proposed to be cut down in Hyde Park, for the purpose of making room for the buildings to be appropriated to the use of the proposed Exhibition of 1851. He said, that on the previous evening his hon. Friend the Member for Bridport had put a question to the noble Lord the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests on this subject; but the answer was unsatisfactory, because the noble Lord said that certain trees were going to be cut down, but they were young trees. He (Colonel Sibthorp) had had ocular proof to the contrary. In the discharge of his duty he had visited the park that day. He had taken the trouble to inquire about the trees. He saw a clump, a very important clump, and ten of them only were marked; he could not say how many more might be marked for destruction hereafter, but—

"Principiis obsta; sero medicina paratur

Cum mala, per longas convaluêre moras."

Those ten trees were elms, and he would take the liberty of giving an opinion that they were of nearly forty years' growth. He wanted to know whether there was an intention to cut down the ten trees that had been marked in the park. The parks were the property of the people, and had always been so considered, and he asked for what were they to be cut down?—for one of the greatest humbugs, one of the greatest frauds, one of the greatest absurdities ever known—he meant the intended exposition of 1851. For such a thing as that, the Government were about to be guilty of the crime of demolishing public property of the most valuable kind, and all for the purpose of encouraging foreigners, who would only laugh at the English for their folly. He asked by whose sanction was this done? Of course, he did not charge the Government with cutting down these trees with any intention of selling them, in order to put money into the pockets of the Chancellor of the Exchequer; but were they to be sacrificed for so worthless a purpose as that of the exposition? If he thought that exposition would be for the public good, he should as readily subscribe to it as any man in the country; but he would do nothing to encourage foreigners—nothing to give secret service money to them in the shape of premiums paid to strangers out of the pockets of the people of this country. There was every reason to fear that this was only the commencement of a series of inroads upon the parks. Here they were going to expend 26,000 l, on this building when the Irish poor were starving. ["Question, question!"] It might be a sore subject to some Members, but he did not care for that. It might be a sore subject to the Government; but nothing could be of much importance to them, for their days were numbered. He would tell hon. Members that "want of decency was want of sense"— parva leves capiunt animos. They were ashamed of the course they were pursuing.

Motion made, and Question proposed—

"That there be laid before this House, a Return of the number of trees already marked and proposed to be cut down in Hyde Park, for the purpose of making room for the buildings and grounds for approach, that are to be appropriated to the use of the proposed Exhibition, as it is termed, of the Industry of all Nations, in the year 1851; with a statement when and by whose authority the demolition of such trees is to be carried into effect."

said, he thought it would be unnecessary to reply to the desultory observations which the House had just heard, and he felt that he need not enter into the history of the parks. A report had been made to him that the Commissioners thought the removal of some trees necessary for the purposes of the proposed building, and he requested them to mark those trees, in order that he might see them. He had not yet heard officially that they required all those trees to be cut down, or more than the number which had been marked; he therefore was not certain whether those were the whole of the trees that were required, or even whether so many would be wanted.

begged to inquire whether the noble Lord would give any information to the House and the public, before any trees were cut down?

said, certainly not; he was responsible for whatever might be done.

wished to know if any considerable number, in addition to those marked, were to be cut down—would all those be cut down, without any deference to the wishes of the House and the public?

replied, that he had not received any official return from the Commissioners. He had not stated that all the trees would be required, nor was he able to answer fully the questions that had been put to him; but he believed that not one large tree would be removed.

did not wish to hurry the noble Lord. He was perfectly willing to wait till he was prepared, to give the House information on the subject, and would therefore withdraw his Motion.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

moved that the House do now adjourn.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the House do now adjourn."

The House divided:—Ayes 11; Noes 61: Majority 50.

considered the Bill was dangerous in character, and it was the opinion of many large agents that this Bill ought not to pass. He would ask those hon. Gentlemen who professed to be the farmers' friends what they had given back to their tenants? They might put that question to him if they liked. The Bill was a partial Bill to such partial purposes, and he insisted upon it that such a Bill was not necessary for Lancashire, whatever it might be for Berkshire. His advice to landlords was, to be liberal to tenants, and then there would be no differences between tenant and landlord. He objected to a Bill that was smuggled in at a quarter past One o'clock, like this Bill. If the cause was good, it would stand investigation. The Bill had been over and over again introduced and rejected, and now it was attempted to be smuggled through the House at that hour. He might be beaten on the question, but he would move that the further progress of the Bill be postponed to that day six months.

said, it was competent to move the adjournment of the debate, but not the postponement of the Bill.

then moved the adjournment of the debate.

Motion made, and Question put, "That the debate be now adjourned."

The House divided:—Ayes 3; Noes 51: Majority 48.

moved that the House be counted.

Strangers withdrew; but as there were forty Members present, the proceedings were continued.

said, that the Bill could not much affect the hon. and gallant Member, who he did not believe had read the Bill.

said, he had read the Bill, and he should not hesitate to do his duty, notwithstanding the impertinence of the hon. Member for Berkshire. [ Cries of "Order!"]

said, "impertinence" was not a Parliamentary phrase, and must be withdrawn.

said, the hon. Gentleman had accused him of not having read the Bill; that was an offensive remark, and ought to be withdrawn also.

said, he meant nothing personally offensive to the hon. and gallant Member.

Amendments made.

Bill to be read 3° on Thursday.

House adjourned at a quarter before Two o'clock.