Commons Sitting of 17 August 1860

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1° Chancery Evidence Commision; Coast of Africa, &c, Act Amendment; Offences within Her Majesty's Possessions Abroad.
2° Metropolitan Police Force (Dockyards (No. 2): Naval Discipline.
3° Conjugal Rights (Scotland); Attorneys, Solicitors, Proctors, and Certificated Conveyancers.

WAYS AND MEANS.
Order for Committee read.
House in Committee of Ways and Means.
Mr. MASSEYin the Chair.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he rose to move the following Resolutions:

"1. That, towards making good the Supply granted to Her Majesty, the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury be authorised to raise any sum of money, not exceeding £2,000,000 sterling, by the issue of Exchequer Bonds or Exchequer Bills.

2. That the principal of all Exchequer Bonds which may be so issued shall be paid off at par, at the expiration of any period not exceeding six years from the date of such Bonds.

3. That the interest of such Exchequer Bonds shall be payable half-yearly, and shall be charged upon and issued out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom, or the growing produce thereof."

He wished to state that, so far as regarded the sum of £1,000,000, the purport of the Resolutions was to make provision, according to intimations made on the part of Government early in the Session, to replace a million of Exchequer honds, which were at present the property of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, which would expire in November next; but instead of asking for £1,000,000, the Government thought it right to ask the House for power to raise a sum not exceeding £2,000,000. That was referable to the present prospects of the harvest and the state of prices likely to exist in the country should the harvest prove unfavourable. Looking to the possibility of an advance in the prices of all kinds of food, and the effect likely to be produced on the employment of the people, it was thought desirable, in case of unfavourable influences affecting the revenue and the balances in the Exchequer, to ask for this large margin in case of need. He had no reason to suppose that it would be necessary to make use of the power now asked for, but at the same time it was desirable, in case of unfavourable circumstances occurring, to place the most ample means at the command of the Exchequer. The Committee would agree that at a time when a large military expenditure was going on and the money market might be disturbed by large importations of corn, the Government should run the risk of being obliged to have recourse to a loan.
SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, as he understood the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman, it was, that there was a possibility of an addition to the public debt
1458
of £1,000,000, in the shape of bonds. He He was extremely sorry that, on the 17th of August, the right hon. Gentleman should find himself in the necessity of contemplating an additional burden on the country, and he likewise regretted that burden should take the form of Exchequer honds, because there was no item of the public expenditure which, in the statement of accounts for the year, created greater confusion; and be had objected to those bonds when first they made their appearance. He understood the right hon. Gentleman also to say that the possibility of a bad harvest rendered it desirable that the Government should be possessed of this power for raising this further sum of money; but he had dropped an expression which appeared to him (Sir Henry Willoughby) to be the real cause of this proposal, and that was the "military expenditure." The present had proved a very curious financial year. The Session began with a vast reduction of taxation, and ended it with a vast increase. The Chancellor of the Exchequer originally stated the expenditure of the country at £70,100,000. Since that time he had taken £3,150,000 on account of the China war. Was he (Sir Henry Willoughby) then not correct in stating that the expenditure for the year ending the 31st of March, 1861, was to be £73,250,000, and that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had taken Ways and Means to the same amount, with the exception only of the £14,000 to be taken out of the Exchequer balances?
MR. W. WILLIAMSremarked, that the expenditure was enormously greater than was ever known before; and in all their discussions they had omitted to take into consideration the £2,000,000 of the terminable annuities. Including the China war and the fortifications, the expenditure of the year would be nearly £80,000,000. It was the duty of the House of Commons to put a stop to such extravagance.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he thought the House had reason to complain of the manner in which that important proposal had been brought forward. The House Bat till nearly 4 o'clock that morning; and very many of the Members were present till 2, at which time no notice whatever was given of the Motion. In fact, without any notice, except in the papers of the morning, which many hon. Members did not see till 10 o'clock, the Chancellor of the Exchequer asked at 12 o'clock for a Vote of Credit for £1,000,000, or it might be £2,000,000.

1459
As to the harvest prospects, they had not varied within the last few hours. Such conduct was not creditable to the Government. It showed that the financial calculations had been finedrawn—that they were, in fact, a "very close shave."
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he was surprised that the right hon. Gentleman should say no notice was given of these Resolutions, seeing they had appeared on the notice paper in the usual way. He had proceeded on the principle that it was not his duty to ask for an increase of means until the last moment. A change of weather, almost at the last moment, might have rendered it unnecessary for him to ask for the increase at all. He had attended to what he considered the convenience of the House. He did not think that hon. Members would like to take the matter on Saturday; but if the Committee thought proper to do so, and thereby run the risk of prolonging the Session, he had no objection. In reply to the question of the hon. Baronet, he had to remark that the year was no doubt an anomalous one, partly because they were carrying on the operations of a war which had grown up during the Session, partly because it was complicated by a special plan for the erection of fortifications. The total charge which had been voted in one form or other was this:—£70,100,000 was the charge on the 10th of February. He did not say that this had been precisely voted, because there had been some minute changes by way of diminution in the Estimate. Then £3,300,000, not £3,150,000, was the additional amount voted in Supply for the China war. £2,000,000 was the sum voted for fortifications—not, however, for the present financial year; and £1,000,000 had been voted in Supply, to replace £1,000,000 of Exchequer bonds falling due in November. These items made a total of £76,400,000. That, as the hon. Member for Lambeth had remarked, was an enormous sum; but the hon. Member knew, as well as he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) knew, that it did not depend on the will of individual Members of the House to make a change in that respect, which depended partly on the circumstances of the country, and mainly, perhaps, on the view the country was inclined to take of these circumstances, and although there never was a time when our expenditure was so large without the existence of an European war, perhaps there never was a time when the public
1460
desires, as a whole, tended more to augmentation.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he was surprised the Chancellor of the Exchequer should have represented him as saying that no notice had been given of those Resolutions. He distinctly admitted that notice had been given, but said that it was insufficient, and that many hon. Members might not have seen it.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERreplied, that he had only said what he distinctly understood had fallen from the lips of the right hon. Gentleman, but, of course, after what had fallen from him, he was hound to understand his language in the sense in which he had explained it.
(1.) Resolved,
"That, towards making good the Supply granted to Her Majesty, the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury be authorized to raise any sum of money, not exceeding £2,000,000 sterling, by the issue of Exchequer Bonds or Exchequer Bills.
(2.) Resolved,
"That the principal of all Exchequer Bonds, which may be so issued, shall be paid off, at par, at the expiration of any period not exceeding six years from the date of such Bonds.
(3.) Resolved,
"That the interest of such Exchequer Bonds shall be payable half-yearly, and shall be charged upon and issued out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom, or the growing produce thereof.
Resolutions agreed to.
House resumed.
Resolutions to be reported To-morrow; Committee to sit again To-morrow.
Order for Committee (Supply) read.

NEW ZEALAND BILL.

  QUESTION.
  MR. MALINSsaid, he wished to ask Whether the Government really intend to proceed with the New Zealand Bill this Session? All the colonists now in London were against the Bill, and there really was no urgency for upsetting a system which had been in use for twenty years.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, the Bill was introduced in the other House by the noble Duke who presided over the Colonial Department, and was now temporarily absent. The Bill was considered by the other House, and sent to the Commons at a period which, though certainly late, admitted of its being considered. The only answer that he could give to the question

  1461
  of the hon. and learned Member was, that he thought no advantage would arise from anticipating the debate which Her Majesty's Government intended to bring on on Monday evening.

  PALACE YARD.—QUESTION.
  SIR JOHN SHELLEYsaid, he wished to ask, Whether it is true that the First Commissioner of Works means to pull down the houses on the south side of New Bridge Street, and erect Public Offices on the site? He thought it would be preferable to leave the whole space open to Westminster Hall, under certain arrangements.
  MR. COWPERsaid, the houses in question would not be purchased for two or three years, and that it would then be time enough to decide in what way the space should be occupied. In the meantime, he must say that he could not approve the arrangements proposed by the hon. Baronet.

RED SEA TELEGRAPH, &c.

  QUESTION.
  SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, he wished to ask, If there is any intention of signing a Convention with the Austrian Government for the establishment of a Submarine Telegraph from Ragusa to Alexandria; also, what progress is making with the Red Sea Telegraph?
  MR. LAINGsaid, the Government had received intelligence that the undertaking with regard to the Red Sea Telegraph had failed, but steps were being taken to restore it, though it was doubtful to what extent they would be successful. A convention had been signed some time before with the Austrian Government, by which it was agreed that each Government should pay £15,000 a year for twenty years towards the promotion of telegraphic communication from Ragusa to Alexandria. Since then they had heard that the Austrian Government had consented to modify the arrangement so as to extend the guarantee to the company to fifty years. Considering the inconvenience of these guarantees, it was doubtful how far such an arrangement would be accepted.
  MR. DANBY SEYMOURasked, if it was not possible to break the contract? The Government ought to construct a telegraph of its own to India, and not be dependent on any other country.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that the essential condition of the contract was that it should not depend
  1462
  on the success of the undertaking. He doubted the wisdom of such a contract, but it had not been made by the present Government.
  MR. EDWIN JAMESsaid, it was most extraordinary that a contract should be made by any Government guaranteeing a certain amount without any corresponding undertaking on the part of the contractors for keeping the works in repair. He should take another opportunity of calling attention to the subject.
  Ordered, that the Committee do report at Six of the clock.

SUPPLY.—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.
House in Committee.
Mr. MASSEY in the Chair.
(1). Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That a sum, not exceeding £10,750, be granted to Her Majesty, to pay the Salaries and Expenses of the Mixed Commissions established under the Treaties with Foreign Powers for suppressing the Traffic in Slaves, to the 31st day of March, 1801."
MR. LAINGsaid, the explanation given by him at a previous sitting, with reference to this Vote, was, he found, quite correct. The balances to which allusions were made had been drawn, and there must be a settlement of accounts with the Treasury.
MR. DANBY SEYMOURsaid, he would move that the Vote be reduced by £1,300, the salary of the Judge and arbitrator at the Havannah. He would also like to know what steps were being taken to compel Spain to fulfil her contract with reference to the suppression of the slave trade?
Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That the item of £1,300, for the Judge and Arbitrator of the Mixed Commission at Havana, be omitted from the proposed Vote."
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, the Courts of the "Mixed Commission" were held under treaty, and there was an obligation on the part of this country to pay the salaries of the judges and arbitrators. With regard to the suppression of the slave trade, every exertion was made, not only with Spain, but with other countries, by the Government of this country to secure so desirable an object. No man had displayed more anxiety on the subject than the noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, but it certainly would be a singular mode of checking the slave trade to withdraw our Commissioner from the Havannah.
MR. LONGFIELDsaid, he thought they had every reason to complain of the conduct of Spain; but certainly it was not probable that throwing difficulties in the way of this Vote was the best mode of inducing the Government of that country to discharge the obligations of her contracts.
MR. DANBY SEYMOURsaid, he would withdraw his Amendment.
Original Question put, and agreed to.
(2.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That a sum, not exceeding £158,229, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Expense of the Consular Establishments Abroad, to the 31st day of March, 1861."
MR. DODSONdrew attention to several items in this Estimate, and complained that without any new appointments there had been a large increase of expenditure. He wished to ask particularly for an explanation with regard to the expenditure for Consuls at New York, Odessa, and in China.
COLONEL DUNNEasked how long a Consul was required to serve before he became entitled to compensation.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, there was an increase of £24,000 in the Consuls' salaries in the last four years, without the least increase of duty. In fact, in many places the duties had diminished, owing to the decline of our commerce. But unfortunately the House would not interfere to check any extravagance on the part of the Government, however flagrant. There were payments of £1,000 to the Consul at Petersburg, £350 to one at Frankfort, and other places, where we had little or no trade. The Ambassadorial establishments at those places ought to be sufficient.
MR. LAINGobserved that if Government had followed out the recommendations of a Committee of the House, the augmentation of the Vote for Consuls would have been much greater than it was, but they had only followed it to a modified extent. A good deal of the increase of late years was only apparent, as the fees were, in many cases, now paid into the Treasury. At Odessa the fees exceeded the salary of the Consul, and the salaries in New York and other places were very much made up by the fees.
MR. AYRTONcomplained of the manner in which the Committee was left to transact important branches of business in the absence of Cabinet Ministers to whose departments the very subjects under discussion belonged. The noble Lord at the
1464
head of Foreign Affairs, who had certainly exerted himself in the beginning of the Session in occupying many days of the time of the House, had left them now to dispose of this business as well as they could. The Committee seemed to have thought it always necessary that either a merchant should be appointed as Consul or a stipendiary officer. He thought in many places a native, and not a merchant, might have been advantageously and economically employed—a lawyer, for instance, who, being acquainted with the commercial laws of the ports, would be competent to advise with merchants, but who would be free from any commercial bias, having no special connection with commercial business.
MR. DODSONcomplained that there was still a Vote taken for a Consul at New York, whose office was abolished. One gentleman was receiving a pension who had retired from this office, and there was a Vote taken for salary to another.
Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That the item of £1,200, for the Consul at New York, be reduced by the amount of £900."
MR. LAINGsaid, he would make inquiry respecting the objection of the hon. Member.
Motion by leave, withdrawn.
Original Question put, and agreed to.
(3.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That a sum, not exceeding £23,320, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Expenses of the Establishments in China, Japan, and Siam, to the 31st day of March, 1861."
MR. WHITEsaid, he wished to call attention to the expenses for Consulships at Newchoang, Tangchoo, Chinseang, and Swatow. The Consuls in these places were to have been appointed as the result of the ratification of the Treaty of Tientsin, which treaty had not yet been ratified. At Swatow they were content to have a Consul there, but to the other places Consulships could not be sent until the result of the Chinese war became known. In that new war, he contended, they should never have engaged. Had the Earl of Elgin done what he was urged to do by every one practically acquainted with China, the war would never have been rendered necessary. The East India and China Association impressed on the Earl of Elgin the necessity of staying in China until he had finished the work for which he went out. Had he followed that advice, an immense expenditure and a loss of life would have been spared. Again, if the distinguished Admiral, now

1465
a Member of the House (Sir Michael Seymour), had had the prestige of aristocratic rank, power might have been conferred upon him to arrange affairs in China; and from the sagacity and justice he had displayed in his dealing's there, he would, in all probability, have been successful.
MR. LAINGsaid, the Committee could hardly expect him to touch upon the Question of general policy. The Estimate was prepared upon the supposition that the treaty would come into operation, and the occurrences which followed had been totally unexpected. At any moment, an announcement might arrive that the treaty had been ratified; and therefore it was quite necessary to frame the present Estimate.
MR. AYRTONasked on what footing the Chinese Embassy was at present. He wished to know whether these two Envoys to China were both paid, and why this double establishment was necessary. It might be a nice family arrangement to send out one brother to look after another, but he wished to know whether it was necessary for the public interests.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, if Mr. Bruce was the person receiving the salary of £8,000, lie thought in common justice that sum ought to be rejected altogether. To call the conduct of Mr. Bruce a blunder would not properly express the nature of that conduct. To call it insolence would but very faintly characterize it.
SIR. GEORGE LEWISsaid, he understood that the opposition to the Vote was intended substantially as a vote of censure against the Earl of Elgin and Mr. Bruce, but he thought more fitting opportunities of proposing such a censure than in Committee of Supply on the 17th of August might be found. The treaty was stipulated by the Earl of Elgin during the Administration of the Earl of Derby. He completed the work he had to do, and came home. Mr. Bruce was sent out to proceed to Pekin in terms of one of the stipulations of the treaty, and when he was in the act of doing so the affair of the Peiho took place. He did not see that the Earl of Elgin was open to censure for the course be had taken in China, or that Mr. Bruce was in any way to blame for his conduct in following up the instructions communicated to him. It was thought that the Earl of Elgin, by proceeding a second time to China, might perhaps avert the evils of war by inducing the Chinese to carry out the treaty, but when he reached
1466
Hong Kong he saw little hopes of doing so. His mission was an extraordinary mission, and did not at all interfere with that of Mr. Bruce, and it was possible he might yet succeed in bringing the Chinese authorities to a recognition of the obligations of the treaty. As to the expenses, they were put down in accordance with those usually incurred in such circumstances in the East, and were not at all out of place.
MR. CONINGHAMsaid, it was the fault of the Government that the Estimates were brought on at such an inconvenient time of the Session. When the Vote for Kensington Museum, or any other great project was under consideration, the whole of the Ministers were present; they took care to vote their own salaries; but now there was no one to give any explanation. He should be inclined to vote for the reduction, if it were pressed.
MR. AYRTONasked, if there was any expense for the Plenipotentiary Extraordinary looking after the Plenipotentiary Ordinary. They might put questions of this nature to the Government; but it was really impossible for them to enter into a discussion of these questions in the present state of the House. The condition of things was this, that the mode in which the most important business of the nation was carried on was a mere farce, the number of Members present at these morning sittings hardly ever exceeding what should be found on a Committee upstairs. He wished to know distinctly what were the expenses of Lord Elgin and for what they were incurred.
SIR JAMES GRAHAMsaid, he also wished to ask whether the Estimate had been framed on the assumption that we were at peace with China, There was a Vote of £8,000 a year proposed for Mr. Bruce, on the assumption that we should be at peace with China; but Mr. Bruce was there under very altered circumstances, as we were at war with China; and an Ambassador Extraordinary had been sent out to assist in the war, and to endeavour to bring round a state of peace with China. He wished to know from what source the expenses of the Envoy Extraordinary were to be paid?
MR. LAINGsaid, the Estimate was framed on the assumption that we were at peace with China. If a war with China was established, no doubt the ordinary rule would be applied to the payment of Mr. Bruce's salary. The expense of defraying the Earl of Elgin's embassy would be paid

1467
out of the Civil Contingencies; but, in the absence of the noble Lord the Foreign Secretary, he could give no more explicit statement. He was able to state, however, that the expense of the former extraordinary embassy to China was £6,485.
MR. EDWIN JAMESremarked, that it was a most unsatisfactory state of things. It was unfair that the whole onus of answering these questions should be laid on the Secretary to the Treasury. No one could answer the questions put to him more frankly than he did but it was too much to desire him to answer questions which he could not possibly answer, and which probably could not be answered in the absence of the noble Lord, the Foreign Secretary. Unless a satisfactory answer were given to the question put as to the arrangement made with the Envoy Extraordinary to China, he should move the postponement of the Vote.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he did not know that his noble Friend the Foreign Secretary could give any definite information on the subject. He did not believe that any estimate of the probable expenses of the Earl of Elgin's extraordinary mission was in existence. The Earl of Elgin was accompanied by Baron Gros on a mission similar to his own, and probably the same expenses would be incurred by both; but he did not believe that there existed any estimate. As to the salary of the permanent Ambassador, Mr. Bruce, he had to observe that legally we were not at war with China. He apprehended that if a question were raised at the present moment as to the seizure of a ship of either country, the decision would be that we were not in a belligerent relation to China. If it were found that we were at hostilities with China, then the rule usually followed in such cases would be put in force—the salary would either cease altogether, or be reduced. But, supposing peace was signed—say in October—the functions of Mr. Bruce, as ordinary Ambassador, would be resumed, and the Earl of Elgin would return to England. As at present we hardly knew whether we were at war or peace, he did not see how it was possible to give any other answer to the questions raised, than had been given. He did not believe that any other Cabinet Minister could give a more definite answer than had already been given.
LORD CLAUD HAMILTONsaid, a colleague of the right hon. Gentleman—a noble Duke—had distinctly stated in "another place" that we were at war with China.
1468
Though that was not the time to discuss the subject, he could not help saying that there were too many reasons to believe that we were entirely in the wrong in our quarrel with China.
SIR JAMES GRAHAMsaid, they were getting further and further into a labyrinth of hopeless uncertainty and so far from the difficulties of the subject being cleared the darkness was becoming thicker. It was now made doubtful whether we were at war with China or not. His right hon. Friend told them that the Earl of Elgin left this country in the hopes that something would take place to bring warlike appearances to an end; but by the time he reached Hong Kong all those hopes were at an end, though, according to his right hon. Friend, we were not yet at war with China, But if war had not taken place the aspects of the case were truly fearful, for without a declaration of war any man who put an end to the life of a Chinese would be guilty of murder. Then, if war was to be declared, why were they asked to vote a salary for a Minister who could only act in time of peace, on the assumption that amicable relations would be maintained? He could not understand why they should vote £8,000 a year to Mr. Bruce as a Minister of Peace when they were told that there was no hope of peace being maintained. He assumed that war would be declared, and in these circumstances he objected to voting a salary to the Ambassador from March, 1860, till March 1861.
SIR GEORGE LEWISobserved that, had the Government known that we should be at war with China before the 1st of April last, and that it would continue till the 1st of April next, it would have been unreasonable on their part to frame this estimate; but the facts were, in the first place, that they had not heard of the commencement of hostilities in China; and in the next, that if we did come to blows with the Chinese their defeat was all but a matter of absolute certainty, so that the war would be necessarily of short duration. He thought it unreasonable to refuse a vote of this kind in these circumstances. He would undertake thus far, that if the services of Mr. Bruce were not required in China, his salary, according to the ordinary rules of the diplomatic service, would either be suspended or reduced. He did not know exactly what the ordinary rule was in such cases, but he would undertake that it would be followed.
MR. AYRTONrepeated that lie wished to know what was the arrangement on which the Earl of Elgin went to China.
SIR GEORGE LEWIShad already told all he knew on the subject. He was able to state further, on the authority of his hon. Friend the Secretary to the Treasury, that no arrangement had been made by the Treasury for the payment of the expenses of the Earl of Elgin's mission; nor did he see how it was possible such an arrangement could have been made, He could not say whether anything had passed between the Earl of Elgin and his noble Friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, or his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the subject; but if they were able to give any information to the House he was sure they would be ready to do so when they were present.
SIR GEORGE BOWYERsaid, he could not understand the statement of the right hon. Gentleman that we were not at war with China. The very fact of a force proceeding to invade China was an act of hostility against that empire.
SIR JAMES GRAHAMsaid, he wished to descend from these heights of international law to ask the question whether the House of Commons had ever before sanctioned the payment to Mr. Bruce of £4,000 a year over and above the £4,000 he received as Superintendent of Trade in China. Even on the ground that we were at peace with China, he was ready to maintain that £8,000 a year was an extravagant salary to pay to Mr. Bruce.
MR. AYRTONsaid, he should move that the Vote be reduced by £4,000, being the sum payable to Mr. Bruce as Superintendent of Trade in China.
MR. LAINGsaid, the Vote of £8,000 was passed by the House last year. The present was the second time that it had been proposed to the House.
MR. WHITEremarked, that the Chinese had evinced a great disposition to continue friendly commercial relations with us.
Motion made, and Question put,
"That the item of £8,000, for the Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary, and Chief Superintendent of Trade, be reduced by the sum of £4,000."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 32; Noes 36: Majority 4.
Original Question put, and agreed to.
(4.) £30,000, Embassies and Missions Abroad.
MR. W. WILLIAMStook exception to the charge for the Embassy in Tuscany, on the ground that it was now unnecessary.
MR. LAINGexplained that the expenditure took place in the years 1858 and 1859. The system, on the whole, was unsatisfactory, for they got the details of the expenditure a long time after it took place. He had conferred with Mr. Hamilton, of the Foreign Office, and a circular had been sent to all ministers to foreign Courts, asking them to send in their accounts earlier than they had been in the habit of doing, and requesting that the accounts should be kept in a more regular form.
Vote agreed to.
(5.) £3,353, Polish Refugees, &c.
MR. SPOONERasked for an explanation of the Vote.
LORD HENRY LENNOXsaid, the Votes for refugees were somewhat extraordinary. There were Votes for Corsicans, Toulouese, and Poles, and refugees of all nations and denominations.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, that happily that class of Votes was nearly extinct. When he was at the Treasury he caused inquiries to be made, and he certainly found that those accounts were sufficiently checked, and that no fraud, as far as the Treasury was concerned, was practised. There was an item for an American loyalist, which dated from 1782. He supposed the payment was made to some person who was old enough to have compensation granted to him at the end of the American war, and was now alive.
Vote agreed to.
(6.) £4,081, Miscellaneous Allowances.
MR. EDWIN JAMESasked what was meant by an annuity granted by Charles II., and charged on the coal duties.
SIR JAMES GRAHAMwished to know the amount of the unexhausted balances on this Vote; he was told it was about £3,000.
MR. LAINGpromised that any sum that was not required would be surrendered.
SIR JAMES GRAHAMsaid, he heard that announcement with great pleasure. It was the commencement of a system whereby a remedy would be applied for the removal of a great evil.
Vote agreed to; as were also the following Votes.
(7.) £1,839, Public Infirmaries (Ireland).
(8.) £2,600, Westmoreland Lock Hospital (Dublin).
(9.) £700, Rotunda Lying-in Hospital (Dublin).
(10.) £200, Coombe Lying-in Hospital (Dublin).
(11.) £5,600, Hospitals of House of Industry (Dublin).
(12.) £1,900, House of Recovery and Fever Hospital (Dublin).
(13.) £600, Meath Hospital (Dublin).
(14.) £100, St. Mark's Ophthalmic Hospital (Dublin).
(15.) £1,300, Dr. Steeven's Hospital (Dublin).
(16.) £265, Superintendence of Hospitals (Dublin.)
(17.) £6,847, Charitable Allowances, &c. (Ireland).
(18.) £31,747, Nonconforming, &c, Ministers (Ireland).
MR. HADFIELDtook objection to the increase of the Vote. It was a mistaken policy to pander to religious communities at the expense of the State. One society assisted by the Vote had raised in one year £30,000 for a purpose of their own—manses; they could do everything but support their own ministers. That sect to which he referred was remarkable for paying its ministers worse than any other. He moved that the Vote should be reduced, hut did not press his Amendment.
MR. CARDWBLLdeclined to enter into a discussion of the circumstances under which the grants had been made, some of which dated from the time of Cromwell.
COLONEL SYKESinquired whether it was proposed to subsidize churches in China in the same way?
Vote agreed to; as was also,
(19.) £6,010, Local Government Act.
(20.) £3,750, Ecclesiastical Commission.
MR. W. WILLIAMSobjected to the Vote, and especially to that part relating to the Church Building Acts.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, it was not necessary to enter into the general merits of the Ecclesiastical Commission. The Commission had now to discharge the duties of those who formerly carried out what were called the Church Building Acts, and the Vote to which the hon. Member for Lambeth referred was applicable to the expenses of that department of the Commission which was engaged in giving effect to those Church Building Acts.
MR. CHILDERSexpressed a hope that the Vote would not be passed at that time, in order to a full consideration of the sub-
1472
ject. He understood a promise had been given that no Vote would be asked for on behalf of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he was not aware of such a promise having been made.
MR. AYRTONsaid, the Government hoped to get out of the difficulty that stared them in the face by proposing a Vote for the Commissioners as Church Building Commissioners. He was opposed to giving them any grant at all. When he considered the profuse and scandalous manner in which they had squandered the funds committed to their charge, and especially the manner in which they had raised the salary of the Dean of York, he thought the Committee should pause before they consented to a grant like this.
And it being Four of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to report Resolutions, and ask leave to sit again.

IRISH CONSTABULARY.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  COLONEL FRENCHsaid, he understood that it was not the intention of the Government to make that night the usual Motion for the Adjournment of the House till Monday, and therefore he rose to propose that Motion himself, not with the view of pressing it, but to enable some questions, of which notice had been given, to be brought forward. A question stood in his name with respect to some extraordinary changes made in reference to the Irish Constabulary and the resident magistrates. He wished to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland if the report was correct that the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland had transferred to the Inspector General of Constabulary the appointment of one-third of the resident magistrates, to be selected by him from the force under his command; and, if so, whether the Secretary for Ireland could state the grounds on which such a change of system had been made; and further, whether any reports showing the necessity of such a proceeding, or any communications from the Lord Lieutenant to the Home Office respecting it, had been made and were to be laid before Parliament? He did not think that the noble Lord the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, in exercising his ingenuity for perplexing matters, could have displayed it in a way more objectionable than in selecting resident magistrates from the constabulary, whose duty had been the detection and apprehension of

  1473
  offenders, and whose minds, therefore, necessarily could not be of a judicial character. It appeared that the noble Lord was not content that any Irishman should be placed in a condition of trust, and it seemed that the Irishman at the head of the force was to be got rid of, and to be succeeded by Colonel Wood.
  Motion made "That this House will at the rising of the House this day adjourn till Monday next."
  MR. VINCENT SCULLYseconded the Motion for the adjournment, and expressed his opinion that the subject brought before the House by the hon. and gallant Colonel was of an important nature. The fact of a man having been brought up in the police force ought to operate almost as a disqualification for acting in a judicial capacity. He concurred in the condemnation of the system of filling Irish offices with Englishmen. At present the beads of all the Departments were English, with the exception of the head of the Police, and it was now proposed to get rid of him too in favour of an Englishman. But the blame rested with Irishmen themselves. Englishmen took their opinion of the Irish Members from Irish newspapers, and those newspapers had no reporters in that House, but only what they called their "Own Correspondents," who were probably no correspondents at all, unless, perhaps, occasionally one of the Members themselves. Irish subjects had little interest to English newspapers, and it was therefore almost useless to speak of them, because Irish Members were not reported. The people of Ireland thus had no knowledge of what was going on in Parliament, and the consequence was that while the English press treated Irish Members with indifference, from the Irish press they got positive hostility. "Alas, poor Ireland !" said a first class Conservative paper, in the sister country, "what a show her Members make of her!" This was in reference to the Party Emblems Bill, the writer being evidently in a state of benighted ignorance as to what the Irish Members had said or done. He knew that his remarks now would be wasted on the empty wind, and that he should not be reported. The Irish papers, being in ignorance of what passed in this House, lost no opportunity of assailing Irish Members for what they were supposed to have done or to have failed in doing, and the people of England were too much inclined to believe what was said of them. The American President lately met
  1474
  300 American editors, and in his speech to them said that when he was Ambassador in England a very eminent member of the English Government—perhaps the noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) himself—said to him, "Really, judging from your newspapers, one would suppose that you Americans always select the most vile and profligate man to be your President." To which President Buchanan replied that such a conclusion was natural, but that the newspapers did not mean anything by it; it was only their way. That was just the position of the Irish Members, for if you read the Irish press you would imagine them to be the most worthless and incapable persons to be met with in the whole country. He would now ask a question of the Chief Secretary for Ireland in reference to the constitution of the Board of National Education. There were general rumours that an alteration of the constitution of that Board was about to be made by Her Majesty's Government, but if there was to be fair play there ought to be a resident Roman Catholic Commissioner as well as a Protestant resident Commissioner, who would be more important, as regarded the interests of the Roman Catholics, than all the other Commissioners put together. He therefore wished to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether it was intended to appoint a paid resident Roman Catholic Commissioner of the National Board of Education in Ireland.
  MR. BERNAL OSBORNEsaid, he considered the House was deeply indebted to the hon. and gallant Member for Roscommon for having brought the subject forward, as he, for one, was of opinion that the present constitution of the Irish police was anything but satisfactory. He did not wish to say a word of disparagement against Colonel Wood, who had been appointed to command that force, as there was no doubt he was a most distinguished and meritorious officer, but he did object that it was every day becoming more and more a military force. The Irish constabulary was neither a police nor a military force, and instead of being a detective police force was more like a badly drilled regiment of the army. The mode of dressing them was most absurd, and he thought the system effectually prevented the men from acting as police. Did any one ever hear of the Irish police detecting crime beforehand? He meant, did they ever hear of the Irish police detecting a plot beforehand? He did hope that his hon. and

  1475
  gallant Friend (Colonel French) would go further next Session, and move for a Committee to inquire into the force, for day by day it was going on in a wrong direction, by being made more military than it ought to be.
  MR. CARDWELLsaid, with regard to the selection of resident magistrates, before the Act of 1836 they were selected from the police force; but the Act of 1836 vested the power of selection in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant without any limitation to those who had already been in the commission of the peace. What his noble Friend had done was this—on every third vacancy he had consulted Sir Henry Brownrigg, the head of the constabulary force, and the gentlemen who, on the ground of long service, &c, had been selected, were of a rank of life to render them proper persons to fill the situation, and had also been subjected to a competitive examination. With respect to Colonel Wood, he believed no better selection could have been made. He had been previously unknown personally both to the Lord Lieutenant and himself. [Mr. BERNAL OSBORNE: Why, he was Quartermaster General.] Colonel Wood was personally unknown to him. His services were of course well known, and there was no doubt he would prove an efficient officer in the situation to which he had been appointed. With regard to Sir Henry Brownrigg, and the change to which his hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel French) had alluded, he could only say the hon. and gallant Colonel must have access to sources of information not open either to Sir Henry Brownrigg or to him (Mr. Card-well). He had seen Sir Henry Brownrigg only a few days ago, and he had then no intention whatever of vacating the position he had so long and so efficiently occupied. With regard to the question of the hon. Member for Cork (Air. Vincent Scully), there was no intention of adding a second paid commissioner to his friend Mr. M'Donnell, who now so ably discharged the duty of paid commissioner of the Board of Education in Ireland.
  LORD FERMOYsaid, he thought his right hon. Friend had not acted very wisely in not selecting the stipendiary magistrates from the body of unpaid magistrates, according to the usual custom. Colonel Wood was no doubt a very gallant officer; but he could hardly be a good magistrate, because he had been a military man; but the police was not his own service, and he had been taken from his profession to be
  1476
  put over the heads of men who must know their duties better than any military officer. Injustice had thus been done both to the stipendiary magistrates and to the police force, because those appointments were objects of legitimate ambition to the inspectors and other officers in the police force to conduct themselves well.
  COLONEL DICKSONsaid, he hoped that the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland would desist from making further appointments from the police to the stipendiary magistracy, and from the army to the police in Ireland, until after the whole subject had been inquired into next Session. He did not wish to throw blame upon any person, but he thought it was a great mistake to give officers in the army the appointments in the police force. It rendered that force far too military in its character. If the Government wished to increase the standing army, let it be done. He did not desire to say one word against the police force, but he thought that gentlemen should not be promoted from it to be stipendiary magistrates. In reference to Colonel Wood, he wished to state that he was a distinguished man, and had risen to his high position entirely through his own unaided efforts, but he did not think that the appointment which he had received in the police force was a proper reward for his military services. If policemen in Ireland were allowed to carry side arms, he was of opinion that soldiers should also be allowed to do so.
  CAPTAIN ESMONDEsaid, he could not agree that a gentleman who had been in the police force should not be appointed to the stipendiary magistracy. It was a recommendation rather than otherwise, and the gentlemen of Ireland would always be glad to hear of the promotion of deserving persons.
  Question put, and negatived.

HUMAN SACRIFICES AT DAHOMEY.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD FERMOYsaid, he rose to call attention to a horrible event, which he feared was about to take place, and which would cause a great sacrifice of human life. He found the following account of what was expected to take place in a West African newspaper:
  "His Majesty Badahung, King of Dahomey, is about to make the 'Grand Custom in honour of the late King Gezo. Determined to surpass all former monarchs in the magnitude of the cere-

  1477
  monies to be performed on this occasion, Badahung has made the most extensive preparations for the celebration of the Grand Custom. A great pit has been dug, which is to contain human blood enough to float a canoe. Two thousand persons will be sacrificed on this occasion. The expedition to Abbeokuta is postponed, hut the King has sent his army to make some excursions at the expense of some weaker tribes, and has succeeded in capturing many unfortunate creatures. The young-people among these prisoners will be sold into slavery, and the old persons will be killed at the Grand Custom. Would to God this might meet the eyes of some of those philanthropic Englishmen who have some feeling for Africa! Oh, for some man of eloquence and influence to point out to the people of England the comparative useless-ness of their expensive squadron out here, and the enormous benefit that must result to this country, and ultimately to England herself, morally and materially, if she would extend her establishments on this coast! Take away two-thirds of your squadron, and spend one-half its cost in creating more stations on shore, and greatly strengthening your old stations."
  He need not impress upon the House the importance of taking some steps to prevent this awful sacrifice. It might, indeed, be already too Into for interference; but probably there was yet time, as the victims could not he collected very speedily. No time should be lost in impressing upon the King of Dahomey the propriety of abandoning that frightful custom; and the Kings of that country bad always been inclined to listen to advice from England. Unfortutunately, this country refused to make treaties with African potentates, except upon condition of the abolition of slavery; a very excellent plan when it could be carried out; but, as the late King of Dahomey said, when urged to give up slave dealing, his army, his government, and everything were supported by the produce of his slaves. Still the Kings of Dahomey had expressed a great desire to have commercial relations with England, whereby slavery might be undermined. He thought that the influence of England might be usefully exerted in a remonstrance; and he wished to ask whether any attempt had been made to dissuade the King of Dahomey from the contemplated massacre?
  MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, he was happy to say that Dahomey was not one of Her Majesty's Colonies. He was not, therefore, able to enter into the question connected with the slave trade, which had been opened by the noble Lord the Member for Marylehone (Lord Fermoy). Those questions properly appertained to the Foreign Office. He was sorry, however, to say, that from information received there was every reason to believe that the
  1478
  statements as to the intended massacre at Dahomey were but too true. The state of the case was this. The British Government had considerable influence in different parts of the coast. On the Gold Coast a handful of colonists exercised a sort of protectorate against the inroads of the King of Ashantee. Further eastwards there were no English colonies, though the influence of the British name was great, but inland that influence almost entirely disappeared. What the Government had done in the matter was as follows: in the spring they received information of the contemplated sacrifice of human life, and of the territory of Abbeokuta having been singled out as the hunting ground from which the King of Dahomey was to find his victims. It was also believed that those captives who were not fit to be sold into slavery would be reserved for immolation in honour of the deceased King's manes. Upon that information the noble Lord at the head of the Foreign Office immediately gave instructions to the Admiral on the station to send a solemn message of rerconstrance to the King of Dahomey, and warning him that, as the people of Abbeokuta were friendly to the English, the latter would give them every assistance in the event of their being attacked. He had great doubts, however, whether this interference would be effectual. The potentates in the interior of Africa were hardly vulnerable to our ships, and, as to remonstrance by means of missionaries, the day for the success of such influences had hardly come yet. He was told that the Governor of the Gold Coast once remonstrated with the King of Ashantee on a similar massacre, who said that he should be glad to put an end to these horrible customs, but that he durst not, so rooted were they in the superstitions of the people. Everything had been done short of employing actual force, which he was afraid could not be brought to bear in the present case.

CHRISTIAN WOMEN IN STRIA.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. KINNAIRDsaid, he would take that opportunity of putting a question, of which he had given notice. He wished to ask Her Majesty's Ministers, Whether they had made any representations to the Turkish Government, or taken any steps to influence them, to demand the restoration of the Christian women who had been carried off and sold by the Druses? As many as

  1479
  3,000 Christian women had been told to the Bedouin Arabs at the rate of 25 piastres apiece. He believed that the vigorous interference of the Christian Powers was still required for the purpose of obtaining justice for the Christians of Syria, and ensuring the punishment of their persecutors. He had been informed by a friend, who had been in Constantinople at the time, that Kurschid Pasha, who had been in a great degree responsible for those atrocities, when he had arrived in that city, instead of being treated as a man charged with a grievous crime, had been received with military honours.

  THE SYRIAN MASSACRES.—QUESTION.
  MR. MONSELLsaid he wished to know what instructions had been given to Lord Dufferin on his appointment as Commissioner to Syria with reference to the atrocities recently perpetrated there, and whether those instructions would be laid on the table of the House? Within the last two or three days a new set of papers had been printed with regard to these lamentable occurrences, and among them a most remarkable letter from Mr. Cyril Graham, a gentleman of great ability, sent by the European Powers to Syria to ascertain what were the real facts with regard to these horrible massacres. The scenes which that gentleman described were, he (Mr. Monsell) ventured to say, such as it never could have entered into the mind of any man to conceive. The atrocities were utterly abominable. Mr. Graham stated in the most distinct manner that the Turkish authorities—many of them being of the highest grade in the district—were actually accomplices in the perpetration of the worst of these atrocities. Whether it would have been possible to prevent them if more attention had been paid to the circular letter written in April, he would not stop to inquire. He would not stop to inquire whether, if negotiations had been entered into with France in time, the evil might have been prevented. But it did certainly appear considering the history of Syria for the last twenty years, that this country was deeply responsible for these atrocities. What did we do twenty years ago? We found Ibrahim Pasha governing these disturbed districts of Syria. Under his rule these horrible scenes did not take place. We, in opposition certainly to Franco, and he believed to some of the other Powers of Europe, recommended a
  1480
  change of Government. We recommended that there should be a chief of the Druses and a chief of the Maronites, and that there should be a Turkish Pasha over both. We were warned in the strongest manner possible by Monsieur Guizot, on several occasion, and by Monsieur Thiers, when Prime Minister of France, as to what the effect of this would be. We were told that we were handing over these provinces to unlimited sway on the part of the Sultan which never existed before—that we were changing his suzerainty into a sovereignty. The gallant Admiral the Member for Southwark (Sir Charles Napier), who took part in the transactions in Syria in 1840, mentioned at a meeting in Edinburgh in 1845 that he felt it a disgrace to have had anything to do with transactions which produced such lamentable results. In 1844 the Earl of Aberdeen distinctly recognized the position of responsibility in which we had placed ourselves. In 1845 and in 1847 scenes on a smaller scale than those that had just taken place—but still terrible scenes—took place in these districts, and the Turkish Pasha in those cases also was an accomplice, and took part in the horrible transactions. On one occasion 150 Turkish soldiers looked on whilst some terrible murders were perpetrated, and two convents sacked. What he wished to know from the noble Lord at the head of the Government was this—whether, it having been found that the system which was adopted twenty years ago—owing very much to the influence of this country—was a complete failure, the commissioners who had now been sent out by the different Powers of Europe had received any instructions to reconsider that system; and whether the Lebanon district would be placed in a position in which it would be more free from the tyranny of the Pashas and replaced in that position with regard to the Ottoman Porte which it occupied in 1840.
  SIR CHARLES NAPIERsaid, that what the right hon. Gentleman had stated was quite correct. He had stated at Edinburgh, and also in that House, that he felt ashamed of the part which he had taken in the affairs of Syria. He was sent under the orders of the Government, and he did his duty, though very unwillingly. When the country was held by Mehemet Ali it was peaceable and quiet. The roads were secure and the people comparatively happy. The Turks did everything they could to stir up rebellion in Mount Lebanon, and he was afraid that the allied Powers did a

  1481
  great deal which had the same effect. Lord Ponsonby sent an agent into Mount I Lebanon to do everything which he could to stir up the inhabitants, and it was notorious that they were told they would be better used by the Turks as an inducement to take up arms. The inhabitants did take up arms, and if they bad not joined us it would have been quite impossible with our small force to have turned 30,000; or 40,000 Egyptians out of Mount Lebanon, and finally out of Syria. But before the English left the mountain the I tyranny of the Turks began before their I faces. Sir Robert Stop ford and himself did everything in their power to get rid of: the Governor sent there, as he was a regular tyrannical, cruel, old Turk. After Mehemet Ali was driven out of Syria, they I left that wretch as Governor of Mount Lebanon. Before the ink was dry on the treaty, the Turkish troops or the Turkish Government broke faith with Mehemet Ali. They sent an army to disturb his retreat, and if hon. Members read the blue-book published in that day, they would see that the Turkish Government boasted of having destroyed 30,000 men in the retreat from Damascus. All that was done under the patronage of the allied Powers. They took no steps to leave Syria in a state of safety and good Government. He did as I much as he could, and be advised Mehemet Ali not to receive the Pasha who was sent by the Porte. A very short time after the English left, the Turkish Government fomented all sorts of quarrels between the Druses and the Maronites. Colonel Rose, in his despatches, stated the manner in which the Turks behaved, and what little pains they took to prevent the Druses and I Maronites coming to blows. They did come to blows, and almost the first thing which Colonel Rose saw was a number of Turkish troops looking on and not preventing the Druses marching past with Christian heads on their pikes. If it had not been for the gallant conduct of Colonel Rose, be believed that there would have been many more massacres then than had since taken place. He never believed that the plan of a chief of the Druses and a chief of the Maronites, both under a Turk, was the way to pacify Syria. The French were now sending troops to Syria. It was a dangerous manœuvre for the French to be in possession of Syria. They knew what the French did when they took possession of Rome, and he thought they would do the same in Syria. Yet he confessed
  1482
  that he for one would sooner see the French establish themselves permanently in Syria, if they would give protection to the unfortunate inhabitants, than see them again left to the tender mercies of the Turks. He trusted that whatever arrangement the allied Powers made with the French Government as a condition for their quitting the mountain, some steps would be taken—he did not care what steps they were—to protect the people. As to leaving them in the hands of the Turks again, he hoped that was out of the question. Whatever promises the Turkish Government might make, or their Pashas might choose to make to the Turkish Government, Europe might depend upon it that no attention would be paid to them after European troops were out of the country. It was not in the nature of the Turks to govern properly. They bought their places, and they ground the people down as much as they could in order to repay the money which they bad had to borrow at Constantinople to purchase their places. As to expecting anything like common humanity, it was totally out of the question. There was never anything like humanity in Mount Lebanon. There was no humanity for the Christians in any part of Syria. They were the last remnant of Christians in the East. The allied Powers, when they drove out Mehemet Ali, promised them a better Government. They had forfeited their word. Almost the first thing which the Turkish Government did at that time was to arrest the chief of the Maronites, and take him to Constantinople, where he was kept a prisoner for ten years. He well remembered the noble Lord at the head of the present Government making a speech of two hours the night before Parliament was prorogued, in 1841 or 1842, and calling on the Government to interfere. The chief was kept a prisoner for ten years. He was sent back without any power, and the Druses had completed the catastrophe by cutting his throat.
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: I am sorry to find that my hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel French), when he has nothing better to do, invariably launches an arrow at my noble Friend the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. I can assure him that he receives no sympathy in those attacks, cither from those who personally know my noble Friend or from those who are brought in contact with my noble Friend in his official position, because every one who knows him,

  1483
  whether individually or officially, knows that there never was a man in a high position who took to his work with a more hearty desire to promote the happiness and prosperity of the people whom he is called to govern.
  With regard to the question of my noble Friend the Member for Marylebone (Lord Fermoy), as to the King of Dahomey, my hon. Friend the Under Secretary of State has stated all which the Government know on that subject. But I may say that the matter has for a long period of time engaged the attention of Her Majesty's Government. It was my lot when at the Foreign Office, for a long time to use great endeavours to persuade the former King of Dahomey to abandon these abominable practices. We sent two or three missions to the headquarters of the King. I am sorry to say that those who went reported that when they came to the King's palace, they saw around the wall which surrounded it placed, not the ornaments which are usual in civilized countries, but human skulls—skulls of the victims sacrificed on those occasions, and ostentatiously displayed on the walls of the palace. That King of Dahomey did, to a certain degree, yield to our representations. Whether the present King will be disposed to do so remains to be seen, but the capital of Dahomey is at a considerable distance from the coast, and the road to it, through jungles and marshes, is so difficult to traverse that it would be scarcely possible to take an European force there to exercise coercion. I can only assure the House that every effort will be made to persuade the authorities to listen to our representations, and if any pressure can be exerted with good effect it will not fail to be added. These massacres are not, as my noble Friend has represented, connected with the slave trade. That we have endeavoured to prevail on the King to give up; but we have nothing to do with the internal arrangements of Africa. What we have laboured incessantly and with great success to prevent has been the practice of kidnapping persons and selling them, in order that they may be transported as slaves to South America or elsewhere. The capture of Lagos, and similar occurrences on the coast have much diminished the facilities for this traffic possessed by the Native chiefs. It is for the profit of the chiefs, and of the chiefs alone, that the practice is kept up, as they derive from it a revenue greater than they could obtain from the industry
  1484
  of their subjects. The people themselves are the victims of the trade, and abominate it; but it is no easy task to induce men who are reckless of all considerations but pecuniary profit to abandon a trade which, I am sorry to say, is stimulated by civilized men in civilized countries.
  My hon. Friend the Member for Perth (Mr. Kinnaird) has asked whether any instructions have been given for the purpose of endeavouring to rescue from the harems in the interior those unhappy women who were carried off in great numbers from Damascus. Lord Dufferin has instructions, when he visits Syria, to take steps with this end in view, and communications will also be made to the Ambassadors at Constantinople to induce the Turkish authorities to co-operate with Lord Dufferin in endeavouring to accomplish this object. The two chiefs, Kurschid Pasha and Osman Bey, have, it is true, been sent to Constantinople for the purpose of being tried. Whether one of them, being a military officer, was received with the military honours attaching to his rank I do not know, and cannot consequently inform the House; but it is also true that they have been sent back to Syria, to be there tried for their crimes. Evidence will, of course, be more easily obtained on the spot, and I hope and trust that when they are arraigned they may receive the reward due to their atrocities. My right hon. Friend the Member for Limerick (Mr. Monsell) has entered into the general question of the state of Syria. He seems to imagine that these recent events were the result of the tyranny of the Turks. So far from that being the case, they have in a great degree resulted from the absence of direct authority on the part of the Turkish empire.
  MR. MONSELLexplained that he had referred, not to the tyranny of the Turks, but to their policy of fomenting civil war among the tribes by setting the Druses and Maronites one against the other.
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: My right hon. Friend, at all events, held the English Government responsible for these events. I beg in the most direct and positive manner to repudiate on our part any share of the responsibility. It is not for mo, sitting here, to say on whom that responsibility rests; it is not with us—that is all I will say. There are very strange reports as to the party that was the aggressor. In fact, there is little doubt that the Maronites commenced the disturbances, though to what extent they

  1485
  are responsible for the lamentable outbreak I am unable to say. There is a report that the first acts of violence are to he attributed to them; hut it is impossible to attach importance to rumours of so vague a character. This subject has elicited the remarks of the gallant Admiral the Member for Southwark. My hon. and gallant Friend distinguished himself, he will allow me to say, in the Syrian war, not only as a naval but as a military commander, and also as a negotiator, and performed great services in each of the three capacities. First of all, he gallantly conducted the attack on Acre; he then defeated the forces of Ibrahim Pasha on land, and finally he went to Alexandria, and extorted a very good treaty from Mehemit Ali. An arrangement was, however, made after the period to which he refers, by which the government of that district, instead of being carried on by the direct authority of the Sultan, was to be placed in the hands of two native chiefs—a Maronite chieftain to govern the Maronites, and a Druse chieftain to control the Druses—both being to a certain extent subservient to the representative of the Turkish Government, Primâ facie one would imagine this to be a good arrangement, and that these tribes would be better governed under their own chieftains than by the direct authority of a Turkish officer. Of late I have not had official knowledge of the facts, but as long as I remained at the Foreign Office and the papers passed under my observation it was the constant endeavour of the Government at Constantinople to overthrow this system of administration, and to place Syria on the same footing as all the other provinces under the control of the Porte. Therefore, so far from the arrangement being favourable to Turkish tyranny, it was one, on the contrary, which was specially directed to the withdrawal of the two tribes from the direct dominion of the Forte. And that it has to a great extent been successful is evident, because, though you cannot expect that, in an uncivilized country, where there are two races which have been from time immemorial at war with each other, conflicts will not be liable to arise, there has been nothing at all to he compared since 1841 with the atrocious outrages which have now taken place. I am not at present prepared to lay the instructions to Lord Dufferin on the table of the House; it is not usual to do so when instructions are in course of execution. But I may state that one of the duties with which
  1486
  Lord Dufferin has been intrusted is to inquire, in conjunction with his colleagues, into the state of the country, and to suggest the system of government that would be most conducive to the good and welfare of the people, and most likely to prevent a recurrence of the unfortunate collision which has taken place.
  On Motion that the House go into Committee of Supply,

IRISH VOLUNTEER FORCE.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  SIR DE LACY EVANSsaid, that though he was ready to express his satisfaction generally with the statement which had been made on the part of the Government with respect to the erection of fortifications, he deemed their conduct not a little inconsistent, inasmuch as while they asked the House to vote large sums for that purpose, the reduction of extremely well-organized regiments of Militia—no bad means of defence—was in progress of being carried into effect under their auspices. That was a policy, the expediency and prudence of which he very much doubted, because it led in the first place to the loss of excellent soldiers, and was, moreover, calculated to create no small degree of discontent among the Militia throughout the kingdom. The subject, however, to which he had risen more especially to address himself was the objection which appeared to exist on the part of the Government to the extension of the Volunteer system to Ireland. The expediency of that extension was a point with regard to which several propositions had in the course of the Session been made, but upon those occasions right hon. and hon. Gentlemen had got up in their places, and with a shake of the head had talked of the existence in Ireland of a spirit of hostility between the members of two distinct religious persuasions, and of the danger of intrusting arms into the hands of people who might make use of them for the first time in their own internal quarrels. Now, the apprehensions upon that score which some hon. Gentlemen appeared to entertain he could not help regarding as greatly exaggerated; nor could he be brought to believe that because two or three heads had on sonic recent occasion been broken in some village in the North of Ireland, where sectarian bitterness existed to a greater extent than in other parts of the country,

  1487
  that circumstance, even though it were to he repeated a dozen times in the year, furnished a sufficient reason for withholding from the Irish people that confidence which was extended to the inhabitants of England and Scotland. He could easily understand that gentlemen in Ireland, connected as they were with a local Government, might say, "For God's sake leave us as we are," but be could not understand how the noble Lord at the head of the Government and the right hon. Secretary for War could listen to such paltry objections. It was, he might add, contrary to all sound statesmanship to make such a distinction between the several portions of the realm, more particularly at a moment when Ireland was in a most progressive and improving condition, and when it was stated, on the authority of its Chief Secretary, that education was there making more rapid advances than in almost any part of Europe. The true way, he contended, to obtain the confidence of a nation was to repose confidence in its people—a policy on which Lord Chatham had acted after the rebellion of 1745, when he overcame the difficulty which had arisen out of the attachment of the inhabitants of the north of Scotland to the Stuart family, by raising some Highland regiments. It was, indeed, said that meetings were held in Ireland about the Pope, and that sentiments were given utterance to which proved it was not safe to intrust Irishmen with arms; but he could not understand how the declamation which might be indulged in at those meetings could be seriously supposed to affect the undoubted loyalty of the Irish people. In considering the subject he had been very much struck by the difference of the policy which had been pursued by the late Duke of Wellington with respect to that to which the Government at the present day seemed determined to adhere. In 1808 the Duke of Wellington—then Sir Arthur Wellesley and Chief Secretary for Ireland—did not hesitate to advocate the raising of Volunteer Corps in Ireland, notwithstanding that it was only five or six years before that a grave rebellion had been extinguished in that country. Writing in that year to Lord Castlereagh or Lord Hawkesbury, he expressed his gratification at the progress which the; corps which had been established were making, and asked to be informed to what extent the Government desired the yeomanry force in Ireland—which had at the time reached 40,000 or 50,000 men, and
  1488
  which he wished to see increased to 60,000—to he carried. There was a pretence that the law did not allow the enrolment of Volunteers in Ireland; but the Government had been invited by the hon. and gallant Member for Roscommon (Colonel French) to alter the law, and very injudiciously they had turned a deaf ear to that proposal. It was a monstrous inconsistency that, while large sums were being voted for the defence of the country, the Government should refuse the offer of a large body of men in Ireland which would be no expense to them. A noble demonstration of patriotic feeling had taken place in this country, though he was not quite sure that the Government had been ready to admit it in the first instance. Still, there were occasionally obstacles thrown in the way of the development of the movement. He had the honour of being the chairman of the first meeting which took place in Middlesex on the subject; and he could state that it was ten weeks before an answer was received from the Lord Lieutenant to the offer to form a corps. He believed, indeed, that an appeal was made to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of War, and that he exercised his authority in the matter. Within the last few days it had been proposed to form two additional corps in Westminster, but the Lord Lieutenant, it seemed, thought the two corps at present existing quite sufficient for a city containing 250,000 inhabitants. He believed the Government would be appealed to on the subject, for it was not to be borne that the obsolete prejudices of any old gentleman should interfere with the development of the movement.
  MR. MONSELLsaid, he wished to point out that in the absence of Volunteer Corps; Ireland, in the event of an invasion, would be placed in a most defenceless condition, for almost as a matter of course the greater part of the regular army would be withdrawn to this country. His consolation was, however, that there was no chance of an invasion. He wished to make an earnest appeal to the noble Lord at the head of the Government to spare the House the misery of having to discuss a Roman Catholic Charities Bill next Session by taking some steps by which the Bill now before the House might be passed into law. There was only one clause objected to, and the most eminent Catholic lawyers and solicitors had stated that there wore the greatest objections to that clause. If the Attorney General would take the

  1489
  matter in hand, he might frame a clause which would satisfy all parties, and the Bill might be settled in an hour. Otherwise the Bill must drop, a Continuance Bill would have to be passed, and the House would have the annoyance of discussing the question again next Session.
  Motion agreed to.

  SUPPLY—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.
  House in Committee.
  Mr. MASSEYin the Chair.
  (20.) £520,129, Disembodied Militia.
  COLONEL DUNNEdrew attention to the want of rifle ranges for the Militia; and he also suggested that some increase was desirable in the amount allowed for "lodging money for sergeant-majors and quartermasters.
  MR. SIDNEY HERBERTstated, that he had not yet been able to make any change in the position of militia surgeons. In Ireland their case seemed harder than it was in this country. Here the headquarters were generally at some large town, where there was a good private practice to be got; but in Ireland the head-quarters were more often in some insignificant place, which did not afford the militia surgeons the same advantages. If, in another year, he could do anything to improve their condition, he should be glad to do so. With respect to Militia ranges, the Government had been endeavouring in this country to combine the ranges of the Militia, the regular forces, and the Volunteers. Where the Volunteers had procured a range, they had been offered a rent for the use of it, and it was hoped in this way that a mutual arrangement would be made. In some places, however—for instance, in a country much enclosed, and where land was of great value—it would be impossible to provide ranges. It would be an advantage to have a musketry instructor separately in each regiment, and he hoped to be able to effect that. Whether non commissioned or commissioned officers should be employed was a question which would have to be decided. The only changes in the Estimates before the Committee were a reduction in the salary of the inspector, who was put on the same footing as a Deputy-Adjutant General; and the adoption of the recommendations of the Commission of last year, namely, that the non-commissioned officers on the permanent Staff should in future draw the same rates as were paid during embodiment. The demand for non-com-
  1490
  missioned officers was now so great, owing to their services being secured by the Volunteers, that, in order to keep men in the regiments, it was necessary to give them better pay than before.
  Vote agreed to.
  (21.) £380.355, Fortifications.
  SIR FREDERIC SMITHsaid, he rose to express his general concurrence in the Estimate of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for War, though there were some items to which he took exception. TliU3 at Dovor £70,000 was to be spent in the present year in improving the defences, the total estimated cost being £280,000, and the further amount required to complete the work was £70,500. Now the Commissioners on the National Defences said that if there were no works of defence or military establishments at Dovor already, it would become a question whether that place should or should not be fortified. If they had come to such a decision it was marvellous that the Government should propose to lay out such a sum as now contemplated upon the defences there. No man could suppose that the point of landing selected by a hostile army would be anywhere near Dovor. It was said that the harbour was an attraction, hut, if so, the Government had made it an attraction. Naval men declared generally, that it was and would be a bad harbour after all. However, as the Government appeared to think the works essential he should offer no opposition to the item as they could not be left in their present unfinished state; hut he protested against any extension. The works at Stokes Bay were most important, and should he carried out at once. They were estimated to cost £90,000. Only £15,000 was asked for this year, and the balance of £78,000 was to be expended in future years. He thought that those works should be completed at once. Then as to the works at Southsea, a portion of the cost of which was asked for this year, he strongly advised that they should be completed at once, and then the line of the Solent would be completely guarded. The defences for commercial harbours ought also to be completed without delay, and if that were done there would be no lack of Volunteer Artillerymen to man these coast batteries, which they would do very efficiently. With regard to Malta, he thought that any expenditure to put that place in a state of complete defence would be money well laid out, for Malta would be a most important

  1491
  point in ease of a war between this country and any foreign Power. He took that opportunity of repudiating an opinion that had been ascribed to him upon a former occasion by the noble Lord at the head of the Government, to the effect that two trained gunners were sufficient for each gun. He thought there should be at least six, especially for sea batteries, where celerity of fire was essential. He wished to know whether the plans of the Commissioners would be speedily published, and whether the House would have an opportunity of seeing them before they separated.
  MR. LINDSAYpaid, he wished to ask where were they going to end in this matter of fortifications. The other day he was one of a minority of 39 against 263, on the Vote of £2,000,000 for fortifications, and that night they had an Estimate of £70,000 more. Had the hon. and gallant Officer divided the Committee he would have gone with him. Considering the large Vote of the other night, and considering the opinion of the Royal Commissioners with regard to Dovor, he was at a loss to know for what they wanted this Vote. That France or any other nation would invade England, a free country, with 250,000 men, was the grossest absurdity that ever entered the brain of man: but if there was an invasion the very last, place that would be thought of for landing would be Dovor. Did they intend to fortify the 300 miles of coast which the Commissioners told them were still undefended? Were they going to fortify England round about? The whole cry was, "Fortify, fortify, fortify." It was to prevent the fear of invasion, the rumours of invasion, that they were to spend all this money. He ventured to prophesy that before twelve or eighteen months from the present time there would be a great reaction. Before eighteen months they would have a cutting down of their ships of war and of their army, and a stoppage of those Votes, and they would, perhaps, become more extravagant in their extreme economy than now in their extreme expenditure. He begged of the Government to think of the people who were so heavily taxed for little or no good.
  MR. WARREreminded the Committee that the invasion of this country was an object always very near the heart of the French people. In the year 1797 the French succeeded in landing 1,100 men under General Humbert in Ireland, who, how-
  1492
  ever, escaped back with great difficulty. Our chances against invasion were much better since the invention of steam than they were before. He was old enough to recollect the days of menaced invasion, and the value that was then placed upon early information as to what was or was not to he done was very great. Our means of acquiring information from all parts of the world had vastly improved since that, time, consequently there was not much danger of any sudden invasion of our shores. Without undervaluing those advantages, the gallantry of our people and their stubborn determination to resist to the last any attack made upon them, he nevertheless thought that it was possible for the enemy to throw some 20,000 or 30,000 men upon our coast if it were to he left still in its present defenceless state. This Vote then he considered as a move in the right direction, and he would give it his cordial support.
  SIR DE LACY EVANSsaid, the question was not one of money but of security. It was idle to talk of pounds, shillings, and pence when such vast interests were at stake. The hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Lindsay) had made a prophecy, Now, seeing that the hon. Gentleman was not a great military or naval authority, be thought he might have spoken with a little less positiveness as to the state of things that time twelve months. No one knew what might happen in that time, but looking at the present state of Europe he suspected that in twelve months the hon. Member would not speak with quite much confidence on this subject. With regard to Dovor, the Commissioners had not, perhaps, made a very judicious remark when they said it was doubtful whether, if works did not exist at Dovor, it would be desirable now to construct them. But the works were there, and when hon. Members asked triumphantly whether it would be likely the French would disembark at Dovor, he thought it not improbable they might be disposed to land 5,000 or 10,000 men there, in order by that means to command the Channel. Dovor would be very important to an army of invasion if they could get hold of it. He regretted that the works were so extensive on the western side; but the absurdity about the matter was that so commanding a height had been left so long without some fortification. Every one scouted the notion of fortifying the whole coast; but there were three or four arsenals that required some additional

  1493
  fortification. Portland, no doubt, was a very important harbour, but there was some extravagance in the proposals for fortifying it. It was proposed to construct a great tower, with three tiers of guns, at the head of the pier, which was to cost £200,000, and mount 100 guns. He thought that instead of three tiers one or two tiers, with 40 or 50 guns at the most, would be ample. He agreed that Ports-down Hill ought not to left without defence. With the present range of artillery it was quite clear that if any disembarcation took place the French might get on that hill and destroy the arsenal. This hill was, however, defensible with a small force. He suggested that six or eight batteries of Armstrong 12-pounders should DO substituted for the 226 heavy guns which had, with great want of judgment, been proposed to be placed on Portsdown Hill. Heavy guns were by no means convenient for such a position, and besides the number recommended would require a greater force to man them than, in case of an invasion, could be spared. He advised also that as a matter of economy the troops should be employed to a greater extent on these works. The want of practice in such employment was a great drawback to the men when they took the field. If 2,000 or 3,000 of the troops in garrison at Portsmouth were removed from the unwholesome atmosphere and immoral company of that town, and encamped on the top of the hill for five or six months every year, there to be employed, under the guidance of competent persons, on the works, it would be a great saving to the country and a great benefit to the men.
  COLONEL DICKSONstated that the soldiers at Portsmouth were already so overworked that they were in bed only three nights a week. He did not think, however, that, as a rule, soldiers should be employed on such works as the gallant General proposed.
  SIR DE LACY EVANSadmitted that the gallant Officer had given a valid objection to his proposal in the case of Portsmouth garrison, but perhaps other troops might be spared for the purpose.
  MR. DODSONasked what conclusion had been drawn from the recent experiment of firing an Armstrong gun against one of the Martello towers?
  MR. SIDNEY HERBERTsaid, he could not say at present what deduction was to be drawn from the experiment in question. As to the works of Dovor, he
  1494
  should be willing to rest their defence upon the arguments of the hon. and gallant Member for Westminster. Sir John Burgoyne said, with great truth, that Dovor was a strategetical point in the defence of the kingdom of great value, where a vast deal of good and useful work was already accomplished, and where but a little more remained to be done to render it complete and effective. Nothing could be more unwise than to leave a work, which might so readily be made powerful, feeble and incomplete. The gallant Officer the Member for Chatham (Sir Frederic Smith) said it would be better to spend a large sum on these works at once, and get them completed off hand. That was exactly what was done by the Fortifications Bill. He could not describe the nature of the detailed plans of the fortifications. The Commission had given a general outline of them. He had arranged that after a working Committee had drawn up the plans, they should be submitted first to a number of experienced officers and to the Defence Committee, and that they should then be returned to Sir John Burgoyne for his final sanction and approval. The greatest care would be taken that the work should be done in the most efficient way. He agreed with the gallant General that there should be a mixed armament of light and heavy guns on Portsdown Hill. Additional sums had been taken under the Fortifications Bill for many of the purposes included in this Vote. The works at Portland had been sanctioned by Parliament some time back. It was proposed originally to have a battery there at the end of the breakwater, at the cost of £120,000. Subsequently, however, it was considered advisable to reduce that amount. Ships taking refuge there were generally such as were enabled to defend themselves. Some earthworks were to be constructed at the right of the breakwater, and on the western side a line of defences.
  MR. CONUSGHAMsaid, that there was in the Vote an estimate for the purchase of land at Alderney. He was sorry to find that the fortifications there were to be extended, as be believed they were a mistake, and that it would require 10,000 men to garrison the island. Indeed, he believed that all those fortifications proceeded on a fallacy. It was assumed that they would enable the country to dispense with a number of soldiers, whereas he was told by eminent military authorities that they would render a larger force necessary. With re-

  1495
  gard to the Martello towers, he was told last year, when he was down at Eastbourne, that the tower there had recently been repaired, but that the contractor deferred it till he had no other work; that in consequence the outer face of masonry was run up in the frost, and the effect was that, as his informant told him, you might kick it down. He hoped the fortifications that were now to be erected would be of a more substantial character.
  LORD HOTHAMasked whether the Government intended to proceed with the works for strengthening the defences at the mouth of the Humber? Hull was the emporium of the commerce between this country and the north of Europe, and, with the exception of Liverpool and London, it was by far the port of largest trade in the kingdom. He hoped, therefore, no time would be lost in proceeding with these works.
  SIR FREDERIC SMITHsaid, there was £150,000 to be spent at Hull.
  MR. SIDNEY HERBERTsaid, that in this country people, so far from thinking they ought to make sacrifices to assist in a public object, seemed to conspire to make the purchase of land as expensive as possible. The Government were obliged to resist. Legal gentlemen intervened, and they did not hasten matters. He did hope, however, that they should secure a site at Hull, and at once proceed to put works upon it. With respect to the observations of the hon. Member for Brighton (Mr. Coningham), he had never maintained that fortifications required fewer men, but that to carry on war without fortifications would require more men. There was no theory which could not be treated with ridicule by those who were opposed to it, and no truth which could not be called a fallacy by those who disagreed with it. As to the story picked up at Eastbourne, many builders found that they commenced works too late in the season, and in these accounts there was always a great deal of exaggeration. With regard to Alderney, the fortifications were almost completed, and the money was for the purchase of land which it was important the Government should possess, t would be nearer the mark to say the garrison must be 3,000; it would certainly not require 10,000 men.
  MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, they had recently had a celebrated and friendly letter from the Emperor of the French, showing that he had an army only of 400,000 men. [An HON. MEMBER: But who believes it—
  1496
  do you?] This country had 323,000 men who knew the use of arms. There was in addition the Irish constabulary, and he might say the whole force was 400,000 men, which could be greatly increased. The force which this country depended upon was the navy, and the navy was treated as if it had no existence in these discussions. He thought the idea of invasion absurd, and that the fortifications would require an increase of the standing army. He agreed with his hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland in regarding these defensive fortifications on land as a complete waste of money. An opinion had been given by a gentleman of great experience, that, in the event of actual invasion, the most prudent thing we could do would be to blow up all our forts, and concentrate our troops for the purpose of resistance in the field.
  Vote agreed to; as were also the following Votes:—
  (22.) £277,547, Educational and Scientific Branches.
  (23.) £25,390, Rewards for Military Services.
  (24.) £75,860, General Officers.
  (25.) £492,357, Reduced and Retired Officers.
  (26.) £184,523, Pensions to Widows, &c.
  (27.) £44,123, Pensions, &c, for Wounds.
  (28.) £30,638, Chelsea and Kilmainham Hospitals.
  COLONEL DUNNEexpressed his opinion that pensions ought to be granted to all men who, having passed a medical examination, were afterwards disabled by wounds or loss of health. He also called attention to the anomalous position in which barrack masters were placed, being entitled to pensions neither as military nor civil officers, and hoped that their case would be favourably considered.
  Vote agreed to, as were also—
  (29.) £1,144,895, Out-Pensioners of Chelsea Hospital.
  (30.) £136,837, Superannuation and Retired Allowances.
  (31.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £3,750, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray a portion of the Expenses of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England, to the 31st day of March, 1861."
  MR. AYRTONsaid, the Committee had been engaged with the consideration of this Vote at the morning sitting, and he objected to it because the circumstance of

  1497
  the recent grant of £2,000 a year to the Dean of York showed that the Commissioners were prepared to dispose of the public money without any sense of responsibility. On the death of the late Dean of York, in 1858, an estimable gentleman and the son of a noble Lord—himself possessed of an ample fortune—was appointed his successor. At that time the public were under the impression that it was not in the power of the Commissioners to increase the income beyond £1,000 a year, legal opinions to that effect having been obtained, although it now appeared that conflicting opinions had since been given. That the present Dean did not expect the larger salary was shown by the fact that on three occasions he had written to request that it might be made up to £1,000 a year. The Deans of Wells and Salisbury, however, in the month of February, 1859, addressed a memorial to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, in which they set forth reasons why their incomes should be increased, and it was remarkable that application was based, not on spiritual, but on purely secular grounds. They held it to be "inexpedient that ecclesiastical dignities should be so slenderly endowed as to render them tenable only by men of independent fortune;" and, secondly, they complained that they were "unable adequately to maintain their position, owing to their income having been reduced so much below that of their predecessors." Not a word was said about the duties which they had to perform. The Dean of York wrote at the foot of the memorial appended his entire concurrence in its prayer "on public grounds, and as a matter of principle;" but so little expectation had he of the increase being offered to himself, that in October of last year he again made application to the Commission, asking that his salary might he made up to £1,000. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners, however, drew up a scheme with the object of increasing those incomes, but by a most extraordinary proceeding the amounts were not filled in, but were left in blank. At a subsequent meeting of the Commission, when there was a much smaller attendance of members, the scheme of £1,000 a year was approved; hut instead of acquiescing in that arrangement, the ecclesiastical dignitaries in the Commission met again in November, and insisted that the subject should be reconsidered. Accordingly, they referred it to a Committee, which made a report; they next invoked
  1498
  the assisance of the Secretary of State, and at last, in January of the present year, the common seal was affixed to a scheme by which the Dean of York was to receive £2,000 per annum. Subsequently, when they consulted counsel, they found that the scheme was retrospective, and that the Dean ought to receive the increased salary from the death of his predecessor. The Commissioners, in acting thus, had been guilty of such a gratuitous casting away of public money upon a gentleman who neither desired, expected, nor wanted it, in order to carry out the principle of endowing the dignitaries of the Church with the largest possible sums, that It was the duty of the Committee to see whether it was necessary to grant any funds from the public treasury in aid of the operations of such a body. While they were encouraged by the Government to revel in the funds of the Church the House of Commons ought to endeavour to put some check upon their proceedings by refusing to vote money for the maintenance of their establishment.
  MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he was surprised that the Government should have proposed the present Vote. When the Vote for the rent of the offices occupied by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners was under discussion, the Home Secretary distinctly stated that no further sum would be required. Here, however, was a Vote of £3,750 to defray the expenses cast upon the Ecclesiastical Commissioners by the Church Building Acts. When the Church Building Commissioners were in existence they had some duties to perform, but those duties had entirely ceased. He should take the sense of the Committee upon the Vote.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, that if this was intended as a vote of censure on the Ecclesiastical Commission for raising the stipend of the Dean of York it would have been better to have brought it forward as a specific Motion, because hon. Members could then give a distinct vote on the question. But by raising it in this indirect way in Committee of Supply it was not brought distinctly before the House, and some would give their votes on one ground and others on a different ground. The question now before the Committee was whether the faith of Parliament was pledged, as he maintained it was, to the payment of a certain sum of money for defraying the expenses of the Church Building Acts. Those Acts were still in force,

  1499
  there were substantial' duties to be performed in connection with them, and there was also an Act which said that the expenses were to be defrayed out of money to be voted by Parliament. The Government were prepared not to propose any additional Vote for the expenses of the Ecclesiastical Commission, as far as the proper business of the Commission was concerned; but it appeared on examination that there were duties cast upon them which necessitated a considerable addition to their establishment, and which were independent of the administration of their own funds. Under these circumstances the Government thought it their duty to propose this Vote, and he hoped the Committee would assent to it. The hon. Member for Pontefract said in the morning sitting that Government had promised that a Vote would not be proposed for the expenses of the Ecclesiastical Commission this Session, but on referring to the usual records of their proceedings, he found in the Report of the debates for July 24, that he distinctly stated this very Vote would be proposed later in the Session, and that it would be grounded on the expenses cast on the Ecclesiastical Commission by the Chinch Building Acts. His hon. Friend, therefore, must have made some mistake.
  SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFEsaid, his vote would depend upon the truth of a report which had reached him that the salaries of the officers of the Commission had been considerably raised—from the highest to the lowest he understood that there had been an enormous increase of salary, and if so, he wished to know where that increase came from. Did Church property supply the advance in these salaries, or was it to come out of the Vote before the Committee? If it were not supplied by that Vote it would seem as if those gentlemen paid themselves. If so, the funds which were intended to increase the incomes of the working clergy had been diverted for enlarging the salaries of the officials and for increasing the income of deans. If there were extra duties to be performed that might be a reason for additional remuneration being granted, but the funds of the Church ought to be under better supervision.
  MR. EDWIN JAMESsaid, that the hon. Member for Pontefract (Mr. Monckton Milnes) who was unable to be in his place, had forwarded to him a statement made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Cambridge (Mr. Wal-
  1500
  pole) upon the Vote of £680, which was quite distinct as to the withdrawl of this Vote. The right hon. Gentleman was reported in The Times of July 23 to have said:—
  "About £3,600 was taken annually in Votes for the Ecclesiastical Commission, but that sum was now removed from the Votes. Therefore, the £080 for rent was only providing so much of the guaranteed expense of carrying out the Church Building Act as was necessary for defraying the rent of the House required for the purposes of the Act."
  It appeared that the Commissioners themselves had had some doubt as to the propriety of asking for this Vote, because there was appended to it a note,—
  "Doubts having arisen with regard to the propriety of again submitting to Parliament an estimate for the Ecclesiastical Commission, the following correspondence is appended in explanation of the proposed Vote."
  If his hon. Friend the Member for Lambeth divided the Committee upon this Vote, he should certainly go into the same lobby with him.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISremarked that in the proceedings as reported of the previous debate, it appeared to have been distinctly stated that the most convenient mode of discussing the question raised by his hon. Friend would be to wait till the Estimate for the Ecclesiastical Commission came under consideration. He could give no explanation of the raising of the salaries of the officers of the Commission, but he apprehended it was competent to the Commissioners to regulate the salaries of their own officers. The demand now made upon the Committee was to compensate the Commissioners for the duties they performed under the Church Building Act.
  MR. MELLORsaid, he should not give his vote on an understanding of what had taken place on a previous occasion, but he thought if ever they were justified in refusing a Vote they were justified in so doing on the present occasion by the conduct of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. It would be monstrous if, under the circumstances, the House of Commons should agree to this Vote.
  SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFEsaid, it was true that the Commissioners had increased duties thrust upon them, but they had already remunerated the officers under them for those duties, and, besides that, they had voted sums to persons who had not even asked for them, and did not want

  1501
  them, while they refused to do anything for necessitous clergymen.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, that if the Committee refused this £3,500, the expense of carrying out the Church Building Act would have to be thrown on the common fund of the Ecclesiastical Commission—a fund already appropriated by law, which ought no more to be charged with this burden than the coal duties or any other fund. Even if the salaries of the secretaries and clerks had been unduly-raised, the money did not come out of the public taxes, and it would not be just to disallow this Vote. Did hon. Gentlemen think it desirable to establish a separate Commission, and to take a separate Vote for the execution of the Church Building Acts? Some might suppose that the duties of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners were not rightly performed, but they were certainly laborious, and those who did the work were surely entitled to their hire. The stipend of the Dean of York had been raised to an equality with that of the Dean of Canterbury, but it entailed no additional burden on the country, coming as it did out of the funds of the Ecclesiastical Commission. The executive Government was not properly responsible for that increase in the Dean's stipend; but as it required the confirmation of an Order in Council, probably no further augmentation of it would take place. He hoped the Committee would not be induced to reject this Vote by the very persuasive eloquence of the hon. Member for Lambeth.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, that if the Ecclesiastical Commissioners had done wrong in increasing the Dean of York's stipend, in raising the salaries of their staff, or in the expenditure of the funds intrusted to them for other purposes, let them by all means be called over the coals for it, and censured in a direct and straightforward manner. They would then know what they had to meet, and if they could not make out a good defence, let them bear the brunt of their misdeeds. He for one' would never attempt to shield them. But the truth was all that had nothing whatever to do with this question. A distinct bargain had been made with the Ecclesiastical Commissioners when they were to do the work of the Church Building Commissioners that Parliament should pay them the requisite sum for doing it. On that ground he must support this Vote.
  MR. FREELANDsaid, he was anxious to receive some explanation with respect
  1502
  to a meeting of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners held in the month of June, 1859, upon the subject of a proposed increase in the stipends of the Deans of Salisbury, Wells, and York. It appeared that the meeting had been attended by the First Lord of the Treasury, the Secretary of State (it was not mentioned for which department), the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge University, and his hon. Friend the Member for East Kent. It appeared, also, that after much discussion a division took place. He wished to know whether it was a fact, that in the important division referred to, all the Bishops and Deans voted one way, and all the lay Commissioners another?
  SIR GEORGE LEWIS,not having had notice of the question, could not undertake to say precisely what took place at a meeting held last year. He remembered that considerable discussion took place, and that the noble Lord at the head of the Government, together with himself and some of his Colleagues, who were against increasing the income of the deans, were in a minority.
  MR. AYRTONsaid, he would refresh the memory of the right hon. Gentleman by reading the resolution of the meeting referred to, which was to the effect that a scheme should he prepared and submitted to the Queen in Council, for securing annual incomes of £1,500 to certains deans and blank sums to others. The Commissioners disposed of public funds apparently without responsibility; and the Ministers of the day being out-voted in the Commission could not control its expenditure. The Committee, by refusing to grant any money at all to such a body, would compel the Government to place its affairs on a better footing. It was rumoured that another department was about to be created, which, as it was not to be represented in that House, would be exempt from accountability for its conduct.
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, it seemed to him that hon. Gentlemen who opposed the Vote were confounding the duties and functions of the Commissioners. The Vote was for performing different duties arising out of Acts of Parliament and which were unconnected with the duties, the neglect of which the hon. Member who opposed it alleged as the reason for his opposition; and the Vote which was now proposed, if negatived, would have no influence whatever upon the course which the Ecclesiastical Commissioners

  1503
  would pursue with regard to those matters.
  MR. HADFIELDreminded the Committee that the Church Building Commission had been abolished simply because it had nothing on earth to do. He contended they should have had a statement of how much of the expenses of the Ecclesiastical Commission had been occasioned by the Church Building Acts. If they had made work for themselves, it had been for no useful purpose whatever.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISstated that the opinion of the Treasury was that the Vote should be discontinued, and a communication had been made to that effect to the Home Office. He had inquired exactly as to the nature of the duties performed by the Ecclesiastical Commission, and the information given in detail was that one-fourth of the duties actually discharged in the office of the Ecclesiastical Commission was caused by the Church Building Acts. If any hon. Gentleman moved for a detailed statement, he would receive it.
  MR. BASSsaid, he thought as the Commissioners had a superfluity of funds in their hands, their officials should be paid out of them.
  MR. P. W. MARTINsaid, he hoped the Government would withdraw the Vote. It was quite clear the right hon. Gentleman had nothing to say in favour of the Commission, although he stood up for them from a sense of chivalry. There appeared to be no necessity for granting this money; and if Government did not withdraw it, the result of the division would by nine out of ten be connected with the conduct of the Commission in augmenting the salary of the Dean of York.
  MR. HANKEYsaid, he thought it scarcely respectful to the Committee that no one representing the Ecclesiastical Commission was present to state what were the duties they performed in connection with the Church Building Acts. They had not heard whether those Acts were still in force or what was doing and at what expense.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, it was impossible to give a detailed account of all the subordinate offices under the Government. They were extremely numerous, and unless he had notice that he should be called upon to give a detailed explanation of what duties the Ecclesiastical Commission bad to perform in connection with the Church Building Acts it would be impossible to extemporize such information. He
  1504
  could only say he did inquire as to the fact at the proper source, and he received information from a credible authority to the effect he had stated. If the Committee, however, would agree to the Vote, he would undertake, when the Report was brought up, to state in sufficient detail what were the precise duties of the Ecclesiastical Commission in relation to the Church Building Acts.
  MR. LYGONsaid, that though unconnected with the Ecclesiastical Commission, he was enabled to state the duties devolving upon them in connection with the Church Building Acts. No church could be built without a conveyance of the site being made to the Commission, who satisfied themselves as to all details and accepted the conveyance. Considering that the number of churches built was very great, and that considerable expense had to be incurred in the investigation of titles, &c, it would be but fair to remunerate the Commissioners accordingly.
  MR. EDWIN JAMEScalled attention to the fact that there was a charge of £150 per annum for the expenses of solicitors and architects contained in the Estimates. The right hon. Member for Oxfordshire in his usual simple but forcible style spoke of calling the Commissioners "over the coals." They might call spirits from the vasty deep, but would they come? They had been calling the Commissioners over the coals, but no one was present to answer for them. He thought the Vote should be indignantly rejected by the Committee.
  Question put,
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 45; Noes 44: Majority 1.
  Vote agreed to; as was also
  (32.) £17,070, Charity Commission.
  (33.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £25,480, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to pay the Salaries and Expenses of sundry temporary Commissions, to the 31st day of March, 1861."
  MR. EDWIN JAMESsaid, that Parliament was this year called on to Vote £777 for statute law consolidation, and last year £2,361 were voted under the same head. It appeared that all that enormous payment had taken place without any result; and altogether the country had spent £30,000 for the purpose of consolidating the statute laws, The matter had

  1505
  been alluded to in the Speech from the Throne, and the House was promised a consolidation of the criminal law. One night his hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General stated that the Bills should be proceeded with, and on the following night his hon. and learned colleague the Solicitor General said the Bills were not to be proceeded with this Session. He ventured to say that four able criminal lawyers connected with Westminster Hall would have efficiently performed the work for one-tenth part of this enormous expenditure; and he should therefore Move that the item of £777 for statute law consolidation be omitted from the Vote.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That the item of £777, for the Statute Law Consolidation Commission, be omitted from the proposed Vote."
  THE ATTORNEY GENERALobserved, that the hon. and learned Member had mixed up together several different subjects, and did not seem to understand the matter. The item in the Vote was for work done by the Statute Law Consolidation Commission, which had expired and was no more; whereas the Criminal Law Consolidation Bills, which had been before the House, were the result of the labour of no Commission whatever, but of persons employed under the direction of the Lord Chancellor and the law officers. With respect to the profit resulting from the Statute Law Commission, he was not disposed to refuse concurrence with the hon. and learned Gentleman, and it was a good deal from his own advice that the Commission had been put an end to. However, the duty performed by that Commission had been done on the faith of an engagement, and it was impossible now to refuse the payment of the sum which was due. That Commission did not fulfil all that might have been expected from it, but still a great number of things had been done, and materials had been collected from which he trusted a good deal of profit might be derived. On the expiration of that Commission the Lord Chancellor and the law officers proceeded, with the aid of the Treasury, to spend a very modest sum of money in consolidating the statute law, and if it had been anything but a mere mockery, considering the circumstances of the Session, to bring the matter before the House, he should have laid on the table, in addition to the Bills for Consolidating the Criminal Law, a Bill for the purpose of removing from the statute-book a vast num-
  1506
  ber of obsolete, repealed, and expired Acts. It was undoubtedly true that he had stated that the criminal Bills should be proceeded with; nevertheless, those Bills, like many others, had been sacrificed to the extraordinary events of a most singular Session, but he hoped that when they were reintroduced on a future occasion they would meet with a better fate.
  MR. MELLORsaid, he hoped that after the explanation given by the Attorney General, his hon. and learned Friend the Member for Marylebone would not press his Motion. Of the responsibility of having urged upon the Government the withdrawal of the Bills in question he himself was prepared to take his share.
  MR. EDWIN JAMESsaid, the hon. and learned Attorney General was in the habit of imputing ignorance to everybody who differed from him in opinion, and he could assure the hon. and learned Gentleman he felt it to be a compliment, rather than the contrary, to be included by him in the list of those against whom he indulged in making such imputations. There was, however, one point on which he was not ignorant, and that was, that out of the vast amount of legal reform which had been promised by the Government in the present Session, not a single important measure had been passed into a law. The hon. and learned Gentleman had observed that this was a singular Session, and in that opinion he concurred, deeming it to be not the less singular because of the course which the Government had taken with respect to that great measure of reform in bankruptcy, which the hon. and learned Gentleman had introduced, in passing which he might have calculated on receiving the assistance of almost every lawyer in the House, but which nevertheless he had withdrawn—he would not say in a fit of ill-temper, but at all events with a degree of suddenness which afforded some ground for surprise. In conclusion he had simply to say, while expressing his regret that he should lie under the imputation of ignorance, that he believed he understood the question on which he had just spoken quite as well as the hon. and learned Attorney General himself. It was not his intention, he might add, to press his Motion.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  COLONEL DICKSONthen drew attention to the item of £6,000 to discharge the claim of Messrs. Quilter, Ball, and Jay, in connection with the Weedon inquiry, which

  1507
  he characterized as a monstrous charge. In mentioning the inquiry itself, he wished to speak of the officers who took part in it with nil possible respect, but he must be permitted to observe that be could not understand how Captain Gordon and Mr. Commissary Adams should have come to the conclusion that nothing could be made of the accounts kept at Weedon, when it appeared that Mr. Moore, who was at the time employed there, gave it as his opinion that ample data for rendering them clear existed, an opinion in which Mr. Jay, when called on, expressed his concurrence. Mr. Jay was appointed solely on Mr. Turner's responsibility, and shortly after his appointment he became partner in the house of Messrs. Quilter and Ball, who, no doubt, were very glad to get a partner who had such a good piece of business on his hands. But after all this cost, Mr. Arbuthnot had reported that the report of Messrs. Quilter and Ball did not present such accurate results as might have been expected from professional accountants, after the expenditure of so much time and labour. If he received any support, he should certainly move the omission of the item.
  LORD CLAUD HAMILTONsaid, he thought his hon. and gallant Friend could not be aware that this inquiry was not gratuitously undertaken by the Government, but was the result of a Committee of that House, which sat on the subject. All the statements made by the officials from Weedon were to the effect that, though the system there was an excellent one originally, such an accumulation of stores had been poured into the establishment that the staff was overburdened; and, though the accounts, owing to that press of business, were in a state of confusion, yet, with time and extra hands, they could be brought into perfect order. The subsequent inquiry showed that this was substantially the case, and that though there was great confusion, there had neither been peculation nor positive loss. As to the hon. Member for Manchester (Mr. Turner) he deserved the greatest credit for the manner in which he had discharged an onerous and odious task. He knew how deeply the hon. Gentleman felt the responsibility of it at the time, and he was in a manner coerced into undertaking it by a sense of public duty. Before commencing the inquiry, he had mentioned to him his belief that nothing but submitting the accounts to a practical commercial man would
  1508
  bring out an explanation of them which would be satisfactory to the public. He was sure that in appointing Mr. Jay the hon. Gentleman had only been actuated by the desire of securing the best man he could for the purpose.
  MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he wished for some explanation with regard to an item of £2,000 for a Commission to inquire into the Scottish Universities. What were the duties of that Commission?
  MR. LAINGsaid, the object of the inquiry was to improve the means of education in these Universities.
  Original Question put, and agreed to.
  (34.) £28,229, Patent Law Amendment Act.
  MR. W. WILLIAMScomplained of the enormous amount in fees paid to the Solicitor General.
  Vote agreed to, as were also
  (35.) £12,998, Board of Fisheries (Scotland).
  (36.) £2,000, Board of Manufactures (Scotland).
  (37.) £5,000, Highland Roads and Bridges.
  MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, it was quite time that this charge should cease. He did not know why the people of England should be taxed for the support of bridges and roads in Scotland.
  LORD CLAUD HAMILTONremarked that it was too bad that, while there were tracts of heather on which, for twenty miles round, no tourist or sketcher was allowed to set foot, the public should be obliged to pay for a macadamized road right through them.
  MR. LAINGsaid, that the Vote used to be paid out of the Scotch revenue, and did not appear in the Estimates. It dated from the time when military roads were required in the Highlands on a scale which were not necessary for the convenience of the districts, and which they could not be expected to maintain. He thought it was at present inexpedient to disturb an arrangement which had existed for so many years. A considerable portion of the Vote would go to defray the expenses of reconstructing a bridge at Inverness, which had been swept away by a flood.
  Vote agreed to.
  (38.) £900, Ancient Laws and Institutes of Ireland.
  MR. EDWIN JAMESsaid, it appeared that the Brehons were the ancient Judges of Ireland, and that they laid down extraordinary laws. There was one of them

  1509
  with an unpronounceable name, a Bishop and King of Ulster, and certainly a great portion of the law, as laid down by him, was anything but favourable to morality. He found that the republication of those laws had already cost £3,900, and he should like, before agreeing to the Vote, to hear from some Irish Member what benefits had been derived from the perusal of the Brehon Laws.
  MR. CARDWELLsaid, that seventy years ago the nation determined to devote a small sum for the purpose of collecting and compiling and transcribing the antiquities of Ireland. A Commission existed, an honorary commission of learned men, who were engaged upon this interesting subject, and the results of this labour were looked forward to with interest, not only in Ireland, but by learned bodies on the Continent.
  MR. HENNESSYsaid, he should support the Vote, which had been originally granted by the right hon. Member for Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli).
  Mr. EDWIN JAMESasked if any one had read the translations.
  MR. HENNESSYreplied that they were not yet published.
  Vote agreed to. as were also
  (39.) £58,700, Pensions, &c. (Merchant Service).
  (40.) £20,000, Distressed British Seamen Abroad.
  (41.) £4,000, Quarantine Arrangements.
  SIR JERVOISE JERVOISEsaid, although this was a small sum, yet he should like to know by what Board the fund was expended. The subject of quarantine was an important one, and required consideration, for not long ago, in consequence of a virulent disorder having appeared among cattle in the countries bordering on the Baltic, an order was issued to prohibit the importation not only of cattle, but also of hides, horns, hoofs, and bones.
  MR. LAINGsaid, the Vote did not apply to the subject referred to by the hon. Baronet.
  Vote agreed to.
  (42.) £50,000, Payments under Treaties of Reciprocity.
  MR. AYRTONsaid, he was glad to find that the Vote had been reduced from last year. A Report had just been issued by a Committee of that House condemning the system upon which this grant was made. He hoped that Report would receive the serious consideration of the Government.
  Vote agreed to.
  MR. PEACOCKEmoved that the Chair, man report Progress.
  House resumed.
  Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.
  Committee to sit again To-morrow.

PARTY EMBLEMS (IRELAND) BILL.

  COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  MR. HENNESSYsaid, he rose to move that the House go into Committee on the Bill on' that day three months. He insisted that the present law was quite sufficient to put down any of the objectionable proceedings against which the Bill was directed, and that the legal adviser of the Crown in Ireland had acknowledged that such was the case. The right hon. Chief Secretary proposed the insertion of a clause to provide that any person who should commit certain acts which were recited in such a manner as to provoke animosity between different classes of the people should be guilty of a misdemeanour. Among those nets were included the exhibition of flags or any party symbols and the playing of music. He predicted that, whether the Bill passed or not, St. Patrick's Day would still be celebrated in Ireland by the display of the shamrock and the playing of national tunes. The symbols of the Catholic churches would fall within the scope of the Bill, and it would be within the power of any magistrate who believed they caused ill-feeling among the people to pull them down. The Bill was not at all required, and would produce incalculable mischief in Ireland. It would deepen and perpetuate the divisions between the two great parties in Ireland. As Mr. O'Connell had told the Government in that very House, the spirit of a great portion of the community could not be put down by legislation; it might be managed, but could not be curbed. He then moved that the House go into Committee on the Bill on that day three months.
  SIR EDWARD GROGANsaid, he deeply regretted that such a Bill should have been introduced, because he believed that no measure had ever been proposed since he had been a Member of that House which was so well calculated to revive all the animosity and rancour of party spirit in Ireland. It had been the custom, for example, in the Theatre Royal of Dublin, for the orchestra to play certain tunes between the first and second pieces, and if

  1511
  this Bill were passed it would be in the power of any magistrate, if he thought they were party tunes, to put the law in force against the innocent amusements of the people. He would second the Amendment.
  MR. O'BRIENsaid, the question for their consideration was, whether the Bill was not intended to prevent the display of political emblems which were calculated to give offence to a particular party, and to encourage sectarian strife. He believed that the measure would have that effect, and he would therefore support it.
  SIR GEORGE BOWYERsaid, he had opposed the Peace Preservation Bill on the ground that the common law of the land was sufficient to preserve the peace, and that exceptional legislation, being unnecessary, was undesirable. The Bill before the House was founded on the same principle, and open to the same objection. He thought it likely to produce ill-feeling among the people, and he therefore opposed it. The Bill would authorize the taking down of a cross from outside a chapel; in fact, it appeared to encourage the notion that anything which any person might be offended at could be removed by the machinery of the law. All exceptional laws like the present were deviations from the Constitution, and only tended to increase the evil at which they were levelled.
  MR. DEASYsaid, nothing could be further from the wish of the Government than to trench on the rights or liberties of Protestants. There were few Irish Members who represented more Protestants than himself, or were more indebted to them for kindness and support. But, in supporting this Bill, he felt that he was carrying out, and not acting in violation of, their wishes. Nothing could be more strenuous than the representations which the Government had received from numbers of influential Protestants in the north of Ireland, showing the necessity for passing an Act to prohibit displays tending to disastrous consequences, which the law was powerless to prevent. Unfortunately these displays had that year been more numerous than for a long time previously. He had received from the Crown Solicitor, Mr. Maxwell Hamilton, himself a Protestant and Conservative, a report stating that from the 1st to the 12th of July Orange flags had been kept flying from the different church steeples; and Mr. Hamilton urged that to prevent the serious consequences which
  1512
  must ensue from the continuance of such a state of things, the Legislature should at once pass a Bill such as he had recommended in 1837, when examined before a Committee of the House of Lords. In Derry an orange or crimson flag had been hoisted on the Cathedral, and though the Bishop tried to prevent it, he failed to do so. At another time when Her Majesty's Judges entered an assize town, a similar flag was hoisted for a similar purpose of insult. Could such proceedings be tolerated by the House of Commons? In England it was not customary to celebrate the battles of the Revolution—[Mr. BUTT: Guy Fawkes.] In his view the memory of Guy Fawkes was objectionally perpetuated; but yet the celebration was conducted in an orderly manner and subject to police jurisdiction. The hon. Member for King's County was, he thought, mistaken in saying that the existing law was sufficient to prevent the displays complained of in Ireland; but if the learned Judge had given any such opinion he differed from him.
  MR. HENNESSYsaid, he had based his letter on a statement in the Government paper—the Dublin Evening Post.
  MR. DEASYemphatically denied that there was any Government paper. He hoped the House would not refuse to strengthen the hands of the respectable inhabitants of Ireland, Protestants and Catholic, but would pass the measure. In Armagh, the Protestants had gone to the Catholic quarter, drumming and fifing, and the Catholics retaliated in like manner; conflicts ensued, and houses were wrecked. The Government wanted to obtain power to prevent the recurrence of such scenes, flags had been displayed on churches and were kept flying in opposition to the wishes of the Roman Catholic clergy—they wished to give these gentlemen power to prevent the irritating displays. It was the boast of the Orangemen that they obeyed the law, and therefore with the passing of this Act the provocations to outrage would terminate.
  MR. BUTTsaid, he had been exceedingly surprised to hear it stated by the right hon. and learned Gentleman that the existing law was inadequate. Did he mean to say that either at common or statute law it was permissible for large bodies to parade in party processions drumming and fifing, and in a manner calculated to disturb the public peace?
  MR. DEASYsaid, the existing law was

  1513
  competent to deal with party processions, but not with drumming and fifing.
  MR. BUTTsaid, the Party Processions Act expressly declared that parties were not to proceed in array with music.
  MR. DEASYreplied, that it had been impossible to indict the parties in Armagh under the Party Processions Act, but they were tried for a riot.
  MR. BUTTunhesitatingly asserted that every procession assembling in a manner reasonably calculated to provoke a breach of the peace, constituted in itself an illegal assembly, and whether with or without flags, they were guilty of misdemeanour. On information by any sub-inspector that reasonable apprehensions of a disturbance were entertained, the local magistrates would be bound to prevent such an assembly, and if they did not do so, they would be amenable to the jurisdiction of the Court of Queen's Bench. The Government should bear in mind that the operation of this Bill was not confined exclusively to Protestants. If the present Bill had been in force only a few years ago every person wearing a Repeal button could have been dragged by a constable to gaol. He contended that the common law was sufficient to preserve the peace in Ireland, and that the powers now sought were unnecessary for any useful purpose.
  MR. LEFROYdenied that the Protestants of the North of Ireland were in favour of the Bill, and said that though he was at first disposed to give the Bill his support, upon more mature consideration he found he could not do so. He had no wish to encourage such scenes as those which had recently occurred at Armagh, but the powers already possessed by the Government were sufficient for the preservation of the peace. He recommended that the Bill should be withdrawn.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, it might be true that the offence against which the Bill was directed was already an offence against the common law; but the Bill gave new and summary powers of repression, which it was of the utmost importance the Executive should possess.
  MR. BLAKE: I regret being obliged to take a different course from my hon. Friends, the Members for King's County, Tipperary, Dundalk, and others, with regard to this Bill. I give them full credit for acting up to their conscientious convictions in the matter; but after giving the subject the fullest consideration, I feel bound to give the Government my support
  1514
  in their effort to pass the Bill. I believe the Chief Secretary and Attorney General, in bringing it forward, have been actuated by an honest desire to prevent a recurrence of those Orange outrages which have always been productive of evil consequences in Ireland, and which were lately attended by the sacrifice of human life. I regard the question from an entirely Irish point of view, by which I mean that the only considerations which will influence me in voting will be what is most likely to lead to the cessation of practices certain to keep up ill feeling between a portion of my Catholic and Protestant fellow-countrymen. The Orangemen of the North deserve the severest punishment for the acrimony which their periodic insulting displays are sure to engender between those who ought to live in harmony together. The celebration of anniversaries of battles gained over the Catholics, the wearing of party symbols, offensive shouts, and playing insulting tunes, all contribute to bring back to Catholics sad, bitter memories, reminding painfully of long years of conquest, humiliation, and suffering. Now, this state of things should not be permitted or borne with any longer. It caused a distraction in the country, to remedy which and insure quietude one of three remedies would require to be adopted—that the Catholics should rise up and drive the offending Orangemen into the sea, or that the Orangemen devise some means to annihilate the Catholics, or else pass a stringent law for the suppression of Orange displays, and enforce it with a vigorous hand. I should be very sorry to see either of the two first expedients tried; and besides, neither party might find it very easy to get rid of the other; therefore, I give my support to the only remedy that remains, the total putting down of demonstrations that lead to collisions between the two parties. I am surprised to find Catholic Gentlemen objecting to this Bill, on the ground that it would be likely to interfere unpleasantly with the proceedings of Catholics; but I would beg of them to remember that the Irish Catholics have no party processions, war-cries, emblems, or tunes; they never do anything in that way calculated to offend Protestants in the slightest degree. ["Oh, oh!"] I repeat it, and challenge any Member to name an emblem worn or tune played by Catholics that Protestants do not also adopt. The shamrock, I am happy to say, is worn by both; and from the lively strains of

  1515
  "Garryowen" and "St. Patrick's Day," both derive equal delight—indeed, Protestants claim the latter as an apostle of their own. Therefore, as Catholics never indulge in demonstrations insulting to any party or religion, they have nothing to apprehend from a Bill intended to put a stop to such improprieties, and will not be compelled to resign anything; and even if the provisions of the Bill admitted of their being interfered with in instances that might be uncalled for, I believe I am justified in stating, on the part of my co-religionists, that so anxious are they to live in peace and friendship with every one, that they would even submit cheerfully to some unjust restriction if they thought their doing so would contribute to putting an end to those dreadful scenes in the North, which have been productive of such dreadful results there, as well as disturbing the harmony which it is most desirable, on every account, should exist between Catholics and Protestants in Ireland. I would show no mercy to the man who raises sectarian discord, no matter what creed he might belong to. No doubt some of the powers sought for by this Bill are very stringent; and Gentlemen at this side of the House say that existing statutes are all-sufficient to prevent a recurrence of the disturbances complained of. However, Government tell us that they have not sufficient power for the purpose. Considering the great object aimed at, and that we hold the Administration responsible for the prevention of outrages, which have been endured too long, I think we should not scrutinize the measure too closely, but stretch a point to arm the Ministry with a power which they assure us will be used for an object that every Irishman ought to rejoice to aid. I therefore feel great pleasure in giving Government my hearty support on this occasion, in the earnest hope that by the judicious, but firm, enforcement of the law we are about to pass, there will be an* end put to those disgraceful practices which keep alive animosities between Irishmen of different denominations, and distract and interfere with the progress of the country.
  LORD CLAUD HAMILTONsaid, he, too, gave credit to the Government for good intentions in endeavouring to legislate upon this subject, but he was afraid that mischief might result from the provisions of this measure. He believed that, if there was a general expression of opinion on the part of the House that these dis-
  1516
  plays should be put down, the object might be effected without legislation.
  MR. CARDWELLsaid, that this Bill had been introduced in consequence of an appeal from all sides of that House to the Government to take measures to prevent the recurrence of disturbances; and he did not think that the rejection or withdrawal of the Bill, after it had passed its second reading, would tend to promote peace or order in Ireland.
  Motion made, and Question put, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
  The House divided:—Ayes 53; Noes 22: Majority 31.
  Bill considered in Committee.
  House resumed.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again on Monday next.
  House adjourned at Two o'clock.