Commons Sitting of 7 February 1862

MINUTES.
NEW WRITS ISSUED.—For Great Grimsby, v. Lord Worsley, now Earl of Yarborough.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1o Qualification for Offices Abolition; Highways; Qualification for Offices Abolition; Whipping; Poor Relief (Ireland).

ADDRESS IN ANSWER TO THE LORDS COMMISSIONERS' SPEECH.—REPORT.
MR. PORTUMAN brought up the Report on the Address in reply to the Lords Commissioners' Speech.

UNITED STATES.—BLOCKADE OF THE SOUTHERN STATES.
MR. GREGORYsaid, he had been unwilling on the preceding evening, on the occasion of the Address, to introduce any subject which could have given rise to a debate. But there was one topic which was on the lips of every one, and which

93
was uppermost in the minds of every person in this country, and that was the effects which the lamentable war in America had produced upon the industry of the United Kingdom. It was not his intention, however, at the present moment to enter into that subject; but there was one point connected with the war which he thought he or any other Member was fully justified in taking the earliest opportunity of inquiring into, and that was the condition of the blockade. He had taken upon himself this duty because last year he put three Questions to the Foreign Secretary, one of which had reference to this subject. He asked Earl Russell upon the 6th of May whether the Government of the United States had been informed that the blockade of any part of the Southern Confederated States, unless effective, would not be recognised? The reply of the noble Earl on that occasion was, that he had not felt it necessary to give any instructions to out Minister on that subject; that it was web known to Lord Lyons, and bad been declared law by the United States, that no blockade could be recognised? or deemed valid unless it were an effective blockade; and he (Earl Russell) had no doubt there would be no difference between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States upon that point. Now, a document had been placed in his (Mr. Gregory's) hands within the last few days, which gave him reason to believe that more than a doubt existed as to whether this blockade was effective. He believed he should be in a position to show that in a great measure this blockade could only be considered as a paper blockade; but he had no wish now to forestall the discussion which must arise on the papers which he understood would be laid before the House. He only brought forward the question on this occasion in order to say that he should j most unquestionably take some early opportunity of bringing the whole question of the effectiveness of the blockade before the House; because, if the figures which he should be prepared to quote were acknowledged to be true, then he thought the House of Commons would pronounce that the blockade was not effective. On the other hand, if these figures were disputed, it would rest with the Government to pronounce whether they considered the blockade to be effective or not. He thought that while they ought to look upon all these matters in a conciliatory spirit as regarded the United States, while he should
94
be the last person to advocate any act of hostility or severity towards that country—still, as this country had acknowledged there were two belligerent parties, he thought that in justice to both, and also in justice to the suffering manufacturing population of this country, that House could not take too early an opportunity of discussing this subject, and of ascertaining, both for their satisfaction and our own, whether the blockade really was or was not effective.
ADMIRAL WALGOTT:Sir, the few observations which I have to offer will be made in my Capacity of a naval officer. While I thoroughly, heart and spirit, sympathize with the outburst of patriotic feeling which attended the removal of the Southern Commissioners from the sanctuary of the deck of a British vessel, and the protection of the British colours, I cannot view that event entirely with regret. Not only has it proved the immunity which we have claimed for our flag, but it has elicited such a grand manifestation of hearty indignation that it will be long before any nation will indulge in England's decrepitude. Not only this; that magnificent colony which abuts on the borders of the United States, has found an occasion of expressing spontaneously its loyalty, fidelity, and love for the mother country in a manner which proves its reality, and must confound any who have erred in their estimate of the true sympathies of Canada. There is one subject nearer home which demands our warm recognition—need I say, that I allude to that gratifying exhibition of zeal, and those proffers of services which were made by the naval reserve of this kingdom. At no time have we had a navy more complete in equipment—never so capable of being manned not only without pressure, but with eager demands to be employed in the service of their country. That exhibition of our Naval Volunteers will be never forgotten. I think any amount of mere money was well devoted when our navy was rendered, I had almost said invincible—and I do say, with the blessing of the Almighty, it is invincible, when science has rendered our ships invulnerable, and the patriotism of its seafaring population places crews of volunteers at our disposal sufficient to man a fleet in numbers and spirit at a moment's notice. Such events, I think, should not incline us to regret the affront of the Trent. Both countries had done well:

95
England was firm and resolute; America did justice, though tardily, and such a peace was of the nature of a conquest, when—
—" both parties nobly are subdued;
And neither party loser."
MR. BENTINCKsaid, he had heard with much pleasure the announcement of the hon. Member for Gal way that he intended to call the attention of the House to the question of the efficiency of the blockade of the Southern ports. He thought there were two questions involved in this matter; the first, its bearing on our commercial interest, the second its bearing on our national honour and the rules of international law. With respect to our commercial interests, he would say nothing at that moment; but it appeared perfectly clear that if his hon. Friend was able to substantiate the statement which he had shadowed forth to the House, and showed that the blockade had been practically nothing but a paper blockade, undoubtedly in that case the character of this country would to a great extent be involved by its recognition. He believed it was admitted on all hands that the recognition of a paper blockade would be a violation of the rules of international law, and in that case, assuming, for the sake of argument, that It could be shown that it was really a paper blockade only, what became of the principle of non-intervention of which they had heard so much?—because, unless it could be shown to have been perfectly effectual, it appeared to him that its recognition was for all purposes, and, in every sense of the word, an act of intervention on the part of this country in favour of the Northern States. It appeared to him that it was necessary for her Majesty's Government to show that there was no foundation whatever for the assumption put forward by his hon. Friend that the blockade had not been effective. Taking that view of the subject, he was extremely glad that his hon. Friend intended to bring the subject forward for discussion.
MR. DARBY GRIFFITHsaid, there was one paragraph in the Royal Speech, that alluding to Morocco, to which, as he had brought the subject forward last Session, and as it happened to fall to his lot to take part in the matter, he wished to refer. He appealed to the Government last year to take some steps to put an end to the very unsatisfactory state of affairs which then existed. At that time the Spanish Government had possession of
96
Tetuan, and appeared, from a statement of the noble Lord the Foreign Secretary, likely to keep possession. But he (Mr. Darby Griffith) then drew attention to the fact that the security of Gibraltar required the independence of Morocco. Since then the Government had dealt with the question. The great difficulty was that the Emperor of Morocco had entered into financial engagements with the Spanish Government which he found himself unable to fulfil. He had 3,000,000 dollars to pay, and had only 1,000,000 dollars to pay it with, leaving a deficiency of 2,000,000 dollars to be raised. Until that amount was raised, however, the Spanish Government had a right, by the treaty to which the Government of Morocco had consented, to retain possession of Tetuan. Of course it was not the policy of the English Government to encourage the Government of Morocco to nullify treaty engagements, but the question was a pressing one, and it sent a gentleman of the highest business talents and diplomatic authority in that part of the world, Mr. Drummond Hay, to wait on the Emperor at Fez, to see what could be done. In the course of the arrangements a British merchant trading to that country, Mr. Ford, offered to advance the capital at £ 10 per cent; but it was suggested by him that the British Government should give some assistance, and it was proposed that our Government agents should be concerned in collecting the revenues of Morocco and handing them over to the British capitalists. The question was an extremely pressing one, as the continued occupation of Tetuan was fraught with danger. No doubt the Government had great and paramount objections to giving any direct guarantee; but, at the same time, they felt that it was of the greatest possible importance that such a state of things should terminate. They were, therefore, induced, as an exceptional case, to look favourably on the proposition of a modified intervention in respect to the collection of the revenues. That proceeding or concession on their part had greatly facilitated the matter; and they now knew that a loan had been contracted in London which would enable the Emperor of Morocco to make the payment necessary to obtain the evacuation of Tetuan. He wished to ask the Government whether that payment was in the course of being made, and whether, in point of fact, the transaction would be carried out to

97
completion without delay? Considering; the extreme importance of this question as connected with our possession of Gibraltar, and the urgency of the matter, he felt it his duty to press it upon tin attention of the Government last Session in a very pointed manner, and he now gave them great credit for the energy they had displayed. Under all the circumstances he thought that no better expedient could have been hit upon to settle the business satisfactorily. He differed altogether from the view which he understood the noble Lord the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to have intimated last Session, that much forbearance and concession ought to be shown towards the Spanish Government—that Government had never manifested any gratitude for the efforts we had made in the war with Napoleon I. to preserve her independence, or had fulfilled other engagements she had entered into with us; and, therefore, it was idle to attempt to conciliate Spain. All that, we had to consider was our own interests respecting the fortress of Gibraltar; and it was of essential importance to preserve the independence of Morocco, and not to allow Spain to obtain a footing there, either for herself or as a cat's-paw for the Emperor of the French, or we should soon find the whole of that coast, from Algeria to the Straits of Gibraltar, occupied by a foreign and hostile power, and our retention of Gibraltar would be rendered more difficult. On those grounds he was glad to find that the Government had exerted itself to settle the question, and he gave them great credit for having done the best they could under the circumstances.
Address agreed to:—To be presented by Privy Councillors.

LORDS COMMISSIONERS' SPEECH.
LORDS COMMISSIONERS' SPEECHto be taken into consideration on Monday next.
HIGHWAYS BILL

  LEAVE. FIRST READING
  SIR GEORGE GREY, in moving for leave to bring in a Bill for the better management of Highways in England, said, the subject, unfortunately, was by no means a new one to the House, and therefore, in introducing a measure which very much resembled its predecessors, he did not propose to say anything which could give rise
  98
  to debate. Any discussion on the principle of the Bill or its details would be better reserved for a future stage. He would only say that it was identical in principle and similar in most of its details to those introduced by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Leominster (Mr. Hardy) and by his right hon. Friend now the Secretary for War (Sir George Lewis). It provided for the formation of highway districts by order of magistrates in sessions; only, however, after notice that such proceedings would be brought forward at the sessions on the requisition of five magistrates, and subject to confirmation at subsequent sessions. The order, moreover, was not to come into operation until confirmed by the Secretary of State, so that reasonable opportunity might be afforded to those parishes which objected to the arrangement to have the matter fully considered. The Bill also provided for the formation of Highway Boards, composed of way-wardens appointed by the parishes included in the district; and it was an essential principle of the Bill that a pa d district surveyor should he appointed, whose duty it would he to act under the Highway Board, and look to the maintenance and repair of the roads. As in the Bill of last year, places subject to local acts were excepted from the operation of the general measure; and there were some other small exceptions identical with those in the Bill which was then introduced. It was proposed absolutely to exclude boroughs from the operation of the Bill, except where the consent of the council of such borough or the vestry of such parish was obtained. The measure was chiefly required in agricultural districts, and in many parts of the country with which he was most conversant it was calculated to produce great public benefit, and, ultimately, to diminish the expense of making highways. Many parishes in the north of England were divided into townships, each of which appointed its own surveyor, and one had no control over the other; so that continually persons had to pass in the same parish from a good road to a bad one, and there was no way of enforcing any change in the interest of the general public, though such a power was in many instances greatly desired. He hoped the House would not object to the introduction of a Bill similar in principle to those which had been assented to on former occasions, either by large majorities or without a division. In case the House agreed, as he trusted it would do,

  99
  to read the Bill a second time on an early day, he was prepared to fix the Committee for any date which would best suit the general convenience.
  MR. BARROWsaid, it was with much regret that he heard it was intended to reintroduce this Bill. After the opposition so generally expressed with regard to it last year, and without anything which could be called an expression of public opinon in its favour out of doors, he had trusted they should hear no more of it. The tendency of the Bill was to deparochialize England by destroying those local authorities who had hitherto exercised some important functions, and to remove from the parishes the right of local government in almost the only instance in which it yet existed, and therefore to set aside a material and important element of the Constitution of the country. The Bill proposed to remove from the parishes the control they had hitherto exercised over their own finances, and to transfer it to a body not elected by the vestries, but mainly nominated by the Crown; for although each parish was to have its own way warden, still that functionary was to exercise no real power over the acts of the Board. In most parishes the rate levied for the purposes of these roads was equal to the tax imposed under the two schedules of the Property-tax, and the Bill proposed to transfer to the new Boards additional powers in this respect; so that an immense power would be placed in the hands of those who were to control that amount of taxation. The majority of the landed property of this country would, consequently, be virtually placed under the control of a very small minority in point of numbers, and certainly not a majority in point of value of the landowners. The measure would be a violation of the rule, which was now recognised as one of the fundamental principles of our Government, that the people should only be taxed and the expenditure should only be authorized by themselves or by their representatives. As such he should strongly oppose it. I Leave given.
  Bill ordered to be brought in by Sir GEORGE GREY and Mr. CLIVE.
  Bill presented, and read 1o

QUALIFICATION FOR OFFICES ABOLITION BILL.

  LEAVE. FIRST READING.
  MR. HADFIELD MR. HADFIELD moved that the House do resolve itself into Committee to consi-
  100
  der the Acts relating to Qualifications for Office and Employment.
  MR. NEWDEGATEexpressed his regret that the hon. Member should think it necessary to re-introduce this most obnoxious measure, which had hitherto been invariably rejected by a majority of at least two to one. He should have thought, after the distinct expression of opinion by the House, that the hon. Member would not have further trespassed upon its patience. The hon. Gentleman, however, was prepared to ask them again to reverse the whole course of legislation adopted on this subject for the last 32 years, in order to enable persons who were invested with corporate powers to use them against the Church of England, which was one of the great institutions of the State. No one could really doubt that the subject had been already sufficiently ventilated; therefore, he trusted the House would not even sanction the introduction of the measure, the more especially as they knew very well that even if it passed this House it was not likely to become law; but in all probability would only promote differences between the two branches of the Legislature, upon a subject with respect to which no public interest whatever had been excited.
  Motion agreed to.
  Acts read; considered in Committee. (In the Committee.)
  Resolved,
  "That the Chairman be directed to move the House, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to render it unnecessary to make and subscribe certain Declarations as a Qualification for Offices and Employment."
  Resolution agreed to.
  Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. HADFIELD, Sir MORTON PETO, Mr. BANIES, and Mr. KERSHAW.
  Bill presented, and read 1o.

WHIPPING BILL.

  LEAVE. FIRST READING.
  MR. HADEIELD MR. HADEIELD moved for leave to introduce a Bill to abolish punishment by Whipping for Offences committed by Criminal Prisoners, and to amend so much of an Act for the more speedy trial and punishment of Juvenile Offenders as relates to the Whipping of Offenders. He said the House was aware that the Legislature had already made considerable alterations in criminal law, and these alterations necessitated additional Legislation upon the subject. He therefore introduced this Bill, to which the Home Secretary had no objection.

  101
  He would postpone the second reading to the 26th inst., and he hoped that the law would he amended so as to relieve the country from those grievous statements upon this subject which last year affected public feelings and opinion.
  SIR GEORGE GREY, in consenting to the introduction of the Bill, desired not to be understood as assenting to the principle that corporeal punishments could in all cases be abolished. The disturbances in the Chatham prison last year showed that it was necessary that the power should be reserved. He believed there were instances when whipping might be advantageously practised. He admitted that from the returns laid before Parliament last Session it was evident that a great diversity of punishment prevailed in different gaols, and he had instituted inquiries upon the subject: with a view to explain the matter to the House.
  Leave given.
  Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. HADFIELD, Mr. KINNAIRD, Mr. BRISCOE, and Sir FREDERIC SMITH.
  Bill presented and road 1o,

POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.

  LEAVE. FIRST READING.
  MR. HENNESSY MR. HENNESSY moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law for the Relief of the Poor in Ireland.
  SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, he had himself given notice of his intention to bring in a Bill on this subject on an early day. Under these circumstances, perhaps, the hon. and learned Member for the King's County would wait and see whether the provisions of that Bill did not meet his own views.
  MR. HENNESSYobserved, that the Bill which he proposed to introduce had already received the sanction of the House. In the Session of 1860 he had the honour of submitting the two clauses of which his Bill consisted, and on three divisions the House agreed to them. He understood from the right lion. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland that the Government proposed substantially to accept his clauses; but, as he believed there was some difference between the Government clauses and those of his Bill, he hoped that, in accordance with the courtesy usually extended to hon. Members, the right hon. Gentleman would not oppose the present Motion.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that, as a matter of courtesy, the Government would I
  102
  not oppose the Bill; but he put it to the lion, and learned Member whether it would not be better for him to wait till the Bill of his right hon. Friend was on the table, in order that he might see whether there was that difference to which he had referred.
  MR. HENNESSYremarked, that if leave were given him to bring in his Bill, he would take care that its second reading should not take precedence of that of the right hon. Baronet's measure.
  Leave given.
  Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. HENNESSY and Mr. GREGORY.
  House adjourned at a quarter before Six o'clock, till Monday next.