will ask—­Are you going to lay these two despatches on the Table to-day?  I hope the House will not take it amiss if I say that at this stage—­perhaps at all stages—­it would be wholly disadvantageous to lay the despatches on the Table.  We are in the middle of the discussion to-day, and it would break up steady continuity if we had a premature discussion coram populo.  Everyone will understand that discussions of this kind must be very delicate, and it is of the utmost importance that they should be conducted with entire freedom.  But, to employ a word that I do not often use, I might adumbrate the proposals.  This is how the case stands.  The despatch reached His Majesty’s Government, who considered it.  We then set out our views upon the points raised in the despatch.  The Government of India will now frame what is called a Resolution.  That draft Resolution, when framed by them in conformity with the instructions of His Majesty’s Government, will in due course be sent here.  We shall consider that draft, and then it will be my duty to present it to this House if legislation is necessary, as it will be; and it will be published in India to be discussed there by all those concerned....

The main proposal is the acceptance of the general principle of a substantial enlargement of Legislative Councils, both the Governor-General’s Legislative Council and the Provincial Legislative Councils.  Details of this reform have to be further discussed in consultation with the local Governments in India, but so far it is thought best in India that an official majority must be maintained.  Again, in the discussion of the Budget in the Viceroy’s Council the subjects are to be grouped and explained severally by the members of Council in charge of the Departments, and longer time is to be allowed for this detailed discussion and for general debate.  One more suggestion.  The Secretary of State has the privilege of recommending to the Crown members of the Council of India.  I think that the time has now come when the Secretary of State may safely, wisely, and justly recommend at any rate one Indian member.  I will not discuss the question now.  I may have to argue it in Parliament at a later stage, but I think it is right to say what is my intention, realising as we all do how few opportunities the governing bodies have of hearing the voice of Indians.

I believe I have defended myself from ignoring the principle that there is a difference between the Western European and the Indian Asiatic.  There is vital difference, and it is infatuation to ignore it.  But there is another vital fact—­namely, that the Indian Asiatic is a man with very vivid susceptibilities of all kinds, and with living traditions of a civilisation of his own; and we are bound to treat him with the same kind of respect and kindness and sympathy that we should expect to be treated with ourselves.  Only the other day I saw a letter from General Gordon to a friend of mine.  He wrote—­