Commons Sitting of 11 July 1862

PAROCHIAL ASSESSMENTS BILL.

  [BILL NO. 144.] COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  House in Committee.
  Clause 14 (Committee may enlarge Time for making Valuation Lists, and may give Directions concerning Valuations and Valuation Lists, and may appoint Persons to make the same).
  MR. ASPINALL TURNERsaid, the Bill was one of the greatest importance, and had caused much excitement throughout the country, and the fact that they were about to discuss it in a Committee of only about twenty Members was perfectly monstrous. He therefore begged leave to move that the Chairman do report progress.
  MR. C. P. VILLIERSsaid, that almost every one who had taken a part in former discussions had been in favour of the principle of the Bill. That was the third time the House had gone into Committee on the Bill; and as the remaining clauses only

  235
  involved the machinery of the Bill, he trusted the hon. Member would not press his Motion.
  MR. ALDERMAN SIDNEYsaid, he was of opinion that the fact of so few Members being present, showed that the Bill had created no excitement in the country, and that the absent Members were satisfied with it.
  MR. ASPINALL TURNERsaid, he should persist in going to a division.
  Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
  The Committee divided: — Ayes 7; Noes 29: Majority 22.
  MR. KNIGHTsaid, he objected to the power given to the committees to appoint valuers without specifying the exact amount of remuneration, and also to the mode of valuation. There was only one way of mitigating the injurious operation of the clause, namely, by making the cost of the valuation payable out of the common fund of the union. He thought the whole of the clause so objectionable that he was inclined to move the omission of all the words in it after the words "The union," at its commencement.
  MR. DODSONsaid, the clause contained the pith and marrow of the Bill; and he hoped after it had been agreed to there would be no further objection to the progress of the measure, which had been thoroughly examined in the Select Committees.
  MR. NEWDEGATEsaid, he thought that there could be no doubt that the real difficulty was that which was felt by the hon. Member for Manchester, when he moved to report progress—namely, that the Bill was being discussed by a mere fraction of the House; and, as far as the opinion of the Members were concerned, he was thoroughly convinced that the seven who voted for reporting progress fairly represented the opinion of the absent Members.
  MR. H. A. BRUCEsaid, he was of opinion that the hon. Member was making mountains of mole hills, and that the real cause of the absence of Members was because the absentees were thoroughly satisfied with it.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, that the clause was one of the most important of the Bill; and believing that it was neither fair nor decent to go on with the discussion in such a House, he had voted in the minority
  236
  in favour of reporting progress. The Bill was in a very curious state, because when a Committee had sat two years upon it, and, as they said, settled the whole matter, they found that even the Government that supported it and Members of the Committee who sat upon it differed widely with regard to the clauses. Two things were wanted in such a measure as the present—first, to secure equality between occupiers in the same parish; and, secondly, to secure equality between parish and parish in the same union. With regard to the first, if the system were to come into force, the occupiers of houses in a particular parish in a union ought to have power to go to the committee to say, that as a parish they were satisfactorily valued, but that they required to have the valuation more fairly apportioned among themselves. With regard to the second point, the common fund was so important an item of expenditure that the Bill ought to have contained some more distinct provision that all those parishes should be rated on the same basis. He thought that the power of appeal given by the hon. Member for Bridgwater would not cure those difficulties, because they could only deal with the appeal as to those parishes which happened to be in the county to the quarter sessions of which the appeal would go. At the same time, he quite admitted that he did not see how it was possible to remedy the existing defects.
  MR. C. P. VILLIERSsaid, that enormous evils and great irregularities existed in regard to parochial assessments, and the Bill contained an improved machinery for correcting some of those evils. It provided effectually for remedying inequalities between occupiers in the same parish. As between parish and parish, there were no means of establishing a uniform rate. The assessment committee, however, would have a sort of jurisdiction over the whole union, and they would be able to rectify any inequality between different parishes. Something like a principle of rating was established in the 6 & 7 Will. IV; but it was not always acted upon, and it would be the duty of the assessment committee to gee that that principle was fairly carried out. The object of the Bill was to prevent expense, and to obtain a correct and uniform valuation of different parishes. He proposed, however, to insert a provision against the assessment committee correct-

  237
  ing the valuation without referring the subject to the whole of the board of guardians. With respect to the parishes forming part of a union situated in two counties, there would be the same remedy as in the case of an appeal against a county rate.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, that the right hon. Gentleman had not at all met the case he put. The union which he had in his mind was situated in two counties, and it might happen that the parishioners of one might appeal to the quarter sessions of another county, and those two courts of quarter sessions might come to contrary decisions. The inconvenience which might arise from such a state of things was not provided for in the Bill, and in his opinion it was a capital defect.
  COLONEL NORTHsaid, the case might be carried still further, because some unions were situated in three counties.
  MR. AYRTONsaid, the Bill aimed at remedying certain inequalities in regard to tenements, and also at establishing uniformity of rating between parish and parish; but it appeared to him that the Bill proposed to accomplish those two objects in a very inconvenient manner. He proposed to omit the words "correctness of such list," and to insert "for ensuring a uniform and correct valuation of every parish in the union."
  MR. DODSONsaid, he could not see any advantage in the Amendment, as it merely substituted words the meaning of which was exactly the same as the words already in the clause.
  MR. KEKEWICHsaid, he thought the Poor Law Board should have the power of confirming the appointment of the surveyor, in order to provide against the appointment of an incompetent person.
  MR. C. P. VILLIERSsaid, that under the present system, where a new valuation was required, the Poor Law Board agreed to such new valuation being made, and left it to the board of guardians to appoint the surveyor. As the object of the Bill was to effect a correct and uniform rating in every parish in the union, of course he should have no objection to the insertion of any words which might attain that object more conveniently than would the clause if passed in its present shape. He had no objection to permit the representatives of different parishes to come before the assessment committee to complain of inequality.
  Amendment agreed to.
  LORD HENLEYsaid, he thought the first thing the assessment committee would have to do after the passing of the Bill, would be to direct a new assessment of the whole of the property in the union. It might cause some extra expense, but it would prevent a vast deal of litigation.
  MR. DEEDESsaid, if the slightest idea had existed that there was to be a new valuation of the property in the unions, the greatest objection to the measure would have arisen throughout the country, and the result would be that no Bill of the sort would be passed through either House.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, he thought the clause should stand as it was, and that parties should be left to do as they liked with regard to a new valuation. If a new valuation should be made compulsory, the anticipated expenses would create much opposition to the Bill, and it would be their duty to resist the passing of it altogether.
  Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 15 (Valuation Lists to be deposited for Inspection, and afterwards transmitted to the Committee).
  MR. HENLEYsaid, it sometimes happened that a surveyor valued the property in a parish too high by 20 or 25 per cent. If the surveyor made a valuation of that kind, he wished to know whether the assessment committee were to have any discretion in the matter, or were they to send the valuation to the parish to be appealed against? He thought the assessment committee ought to exercise their own judgment before they sent the valuations to the parish. He thought also that some provision should be made by which parishes should have an opportunity of seeing, at the board of guardians, how other parishes were rated, so that they might appeal if they considered themselves aggrieved.
  MR. C. P. VILLIERSsaid, the suggestion was deserving of consideration. If an alteration of the clause were thought desirable, it might be made on the report.
  MR. DEEDESwould prefer that the valuation should be sent at once to the parish, instead of being cavilled over by the assessment committee.
  MR. AYRTONsaid, he would move, as an Amendment, words which would provide that a copy of the valuation lists should be sent to the board of guardians, and be there open to inspection of the ratepayers.
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. KNIGHTsaid, he could not allow the clause to pass without taking a division against it. The Bill would cause great expense, and much objection would be felt to it in country districts.
  MR. WALTERsaid, that the clause had nothing to do with taxation. If the hon. Member wished to raise the question whether the expense of the valuation should be defrayed out of the common fund or out of the rates of each parish, the proper time for so doing would be on the 34th clause.
  Clause, as amended, agreed to.
  Clause 16 (Objections to Valuation Lists).
  MR. AYRTONsaid, he wished to move an Amendment, to the effect that any overseer of any parish in a union should have the same right as any person to object on behalf of the parish to the valuation.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 17 to 19 also agreed to.
  Clause 20 (If on Appeal a Rate is amended, the Valuation List to be altered).
  MR. HENLEYsaid, he wished to ask the Committee to consider whether it was wise, on a simple question of value, to give an appeal to a couple of justices in petty sessions, as well as an appeal to quarter sessions.
  MR. H. A. BRUCEsaid, that the Select Committee were desirous to disturb the existing law as little as possible.
  MR. ALDERMAN SALOMONSsaid, he trusted that the right of appeal to petty sessions would not be taken away.
  MR. AYRTONsuggested that the ratepayers should be able to appeal against the assessment and the valuation as well as against the rate.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 21 to 23, inclusive, were also agreed to.
  Clause 24 (Committee may from time to time direct new Valuation and new or supplemental Valuation List).
  MR. HENLEYsaid, he objected to the provision giving power to the Committee to require a person applying on frivolous or insufficient grounds for a new survey to pay the costs of the new valuation.
  MR. C. P. VILLIERSsaid, the words were inserted by the Select Committee; but if the right hon. Gentleman had no fear of any frivolous application, he was willing to strike out the proviso.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, the assessment committee need not be at any expense,
  240
  as they were not obliged to order the survey unless they thought it necessary.
  Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 25 was also agreed to.
  House resumed.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again on Tuesday next at Twelve of the clock.

COMMERCIAL TREATY WITH BELGIUM

  QUESTION.
  MR. HEYGATEsaid, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, What progress has been made in the negotiations for the long-promised Commercial Treaty between Belgium and this country?
  MR. LAYARDsaid, he had been obliged to ask the indulgence of hon. Members before upon this subject, and he was afraid he should have to do so on the present occasion also. Her Majesty's Government were most desirous to bring the matter to a successful conclusion, but they could not consent to give any details on the subject while the affair was still pending. M. Rogier, the Belgian Minister, who took a deep interest in the subject, was now in this country, and was engaged in negotiations which he hoped would be brought to a favourable termination.

CHINA—THE TAEPINGS.—QUESTION.
LORD BURGHLEYsaid, he rose to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether his attention has been drawn to the accounts which have appeared in the public journals of the horrible atrocities alleged to have been perpetrated by the Chinese upon the Taeping prisoners who had been given up for execution into the hands of the Mandarins by the English and French authorities; and whether the Government has received any official intelligence on the subject?
MR. LAYARDin reply said, his attention had been called by his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Aberdeen (Colonel Sykes) to a letter, without date, which appeared in an Indian newspaper, and which did not state where the alleged events took place. The letter was anonymous, nor was there any clue whatever to its writer. The letter appeared to him to bear internal evidence of being untrue, or, at all events, to have grossly exaggerated the facts. That part of the letter which

241
referred to the English prisoners who fell into the hands of the Chinese was entirely untrue, and he trusted that the rest was equally false. He felt confident that no Englishman would be a party in any way to the barbarous executions which were alleged to have taken place. The letter appeared to be a reply to certain statements in the Saturday Review. He had written to China for all the explanations that could be obtained on the subject, but he had a strong conviction that the letter was a series of gross exaggerations.

CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS BILL— [BILL No. 43.]—QUESTION.
MR. POWELLsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it is the intention of the Government to proceed with the Corrupt Practices at Elections Bill in the present Session, or merely to renew the existing Act upon the subject; and, in the event of the Government proceeding with the Bill before the House, whether it is intended to insist upon the last clause, which provides for the disfranchisement of the whole body of electors in constituencies in which corrupt practices are reported to have existed?
SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he wished to proceed with the Bill, but was obliged to postpone it, owing to the Parochial Assessment Bill, and Lunacy Law Amendment Bill, of which he was in charge, not having made greater progress. Next week he should be able to say whether he should be able to
proceed with the Bill or not. As to the last clause, the hon. Gentleman was mistaken in the view he had taken of it. It did not disfranchise the whole body of electors, but merely sanctioned the suspension of the writ in the event of corrupt practices being proved.

TROOPS IN CANADA.—QUESTION.
MR. ADDERLEYsaid, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether information has been received of any measures having been introduced by the new Canadian Ministry for the embodiment of a Militia or Volunteer Force; and if so, what is the nature of such measures; if not, whether he intends the 12,000 British troops now there to remain during the winter wholly unaided by the Canadians themselves; and whether he will lay upon the table Copies of the Correspondence which has passed between
242
the Secretary of State for the Colonies and the Canadian Government on the subject of a guarantee from the British Treasury to a loan of £3,000,000, on certain conditions, for the proposed Railway?
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, that the new Canadian Ministry had carried an Act amending the Militia Law of the Colony. It was less extensive than the measure introduced by the late Ministry and rejected by the Canadian Parliament. But it increased the power of the Governor General in respect to calling out the Militia, and raised the active portion of that force from 5,000 to 10,000 men. With respect to the correspondence asked for, it was laid before Parliament a week ago.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, in the present state of things it was not the intention of the Government to withdraw any portion of the troops from Canada. At the same time, he would say he could not entertain a doubt, if there were any occasion for the defence of the country, there would not be simply 10,000 Militia to undertake that duty, but as many men would be ready to take arms as the circumstances of the case might require.

RECOGNITION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY.—QUESTION.
MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, in consequence of an apparent discrepancy in the statements of the noble Lord and the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, he wished to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Correspondence between the Governments of Russia, France, and Italy, relative to the recognition of the Kingdom of Italy by Russia, has been communicated to Her Majesty's Government; and if so, whether there is any objection to such Correspondence being laid upon the table?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, that no such correspondence as that referred to had been communicated to Her Majesty's Government.

AMERICAN CRUISERS AND THE BRITISH FLAG.—QUESTION.
MR. GREGORYsaid, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether any Despatches have been received from the Governor of the Bahamas relating to the capture, by United States Cruisers, of vessels sailing under the British flag; and, if so, whether

243
he has any objection to produce them; and whether any complaints have been made by the Governor of the Bahamas of the blockade, by United States Cruisers, of the port of Nassau? He also wished to know, in case of such Despatches having been received, whether they have been submitted to the Law Officers of the Crown; and if so, whether they have pronounced any opinion upon the question at issue?
MR. SEYMOUR FITZGERALDsaid, before the hon. Gentleman answered the question, he hoped he would be kind enough to say whether he has communicated to the department of the Admiralty of this country, or to the Government of the Bahamas, any information in reference to the capture of the Bermuda, and whether that vessel was captured in British waters.
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, that Despatches had been received from the Governor of the Bahamas, but the Government could not produce them at that moment, as the correspondence on the subject was still going on. The case of the Bermuda was one of those referred to in the Despatches. The circumstances attending the capture of the Bermuda and other vessels had been referred to the Law Officers of the Crown, but they had not as yet pronounced an opinion upon the matter. The Government had received no information as to anything that could be called a blockade of the port of Nassau. The Governor of the Bahamas reported that American cruisers had stopped certain vessels, on the ground of their intention to run the blockade of the American ports.

SUPPLY.
Order for Committee read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."

AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS.

  ORSERVATIONS.
  MR. CAIRDsaid, he rose to make a statement regarding the supply of food, and to put a question to the First Lord of the Treasury with reference to the collection of agricultural statistics. If he had no other reason for calling the attention of the House to the subject before the close of the Session, he might find an argument for so doing in the unfavourable character
  244
  of the weather during the last two months. The cold state of the atmosphere was unprecedented at this period of the year, the Registrar General having reported that the temperature during the month of June was four degrees lower than it had been at any time during the previous forty years. Such continued cold, accompanied as it had been by wet, could hardly fail to be prejudicial to the crops, though he hoped that no serious damage had yet been sustained which might not be repaired, at least on the well-cultivated lands, by a few weeks of sunshine and heat. His information from several of the largest corn-growers led to that conclusion; but it had generally proved in England that a season characterized by cold weather was an unfavourable one for wheat. The question was one of growing importance, from the increasing dependence of the country upon foreign food. Since 1847 about one-fourth of the population, on the average, subsisted on foreign corn. But in the last three years that proportion had been gradually increasing, and within the last harvest year probably not less than one-half the population of the kingdom were fed on imported corn. That was partly the result of very deficient harvests in 1860 and 1861, but partly also, he believed, it arose from a diminished breadth of corn. The high price of labour, and the increasing value of live stock and animal produce, concurred, in his opinion, in tending to diminish in the United Kingdom the extent of land in corn, and to increase that of pasture. The farmers in Ireland had been adopting that system to a large extent. Between 1849 and 1859 the extent of corn land in Ireland had diminished one-fifth, whilst the number of live stock had increased one-half. Such a change would be perfectly legitimate and proper, and would be productive of little inconvenience, if they had any means of knowing with accuracy the extent to which it was taking place. But how vast the results which such a change might be silently working! If one farmer found it his interest to lay one-fourth of his corn land to grass, the probability would be that the same circumstances might influence all others. Now, one-fourth of the corn-crop of these kingdoms might be taken at 10,000,000 quarters. A deficit so vast, coming suddenly and without warning, would agitate every market, and unhinge all monetary operations. To some extent, he believed, they were experiencing the effects of such

  245
  a change. The deliveries of home-grown wheat, as shown by the corn returns for the last sixteen weeks of that and the previous year, were 50 per cent less than the average of preceding years. The crops of 1860 and 1861 were, no doubt, most defective, but he could not help believing that so vast a decrease, especially in the present year, was partly caused by a diminution of the breadth sown. Now, a return of the acreage under each crop would give timely warning of any serious change. It was important to consider the principal sources of the supplies. Last year North America gave us three-eighths of our whole supply; Russia, one-eighth; Turkey and Egypt, one eighth; or five-eighths in all were thus drawn from distant sources of supply. The remainder was got from the nearer parts of Europe; but, as the large proportion came from a distance, it was important that early notice of our probable requirements should be obtained. Moreover, we might have formidable competitors in the world's corn market. France, which in 1858 and 1859 gave about one-fifth of our foreign supply, imported last year upwards of 5,000,000 quarters of wheat and flour. It would be a great mistake to treat the question as one solely affecting the farmers. He believed them to be fully as much interested in obtaining reliable information as any class, for they had the earliest command of the market, and might take advantage of that position if they had any means of accurately anticipating the course of prices. But the vast importance of the question as affecting the supply of food ought to override every objection in a country which so largely subsisted on foreign corn. It also most materially affected both financial and commercial proceedings. The payments for foreign corn in the last year amounted to the vast sum of £35,000,000 sterling, and that was £15,000,000 more than in any one year before 1860. But if they extended their calculations, and made a comparison of the cost of foreign corn and provisions for 1860, 1861, and 1862 (calculating the remainder of the present year in the same ratio as it had hitherto maintained), and compared it with that of 1857, 1858, and 1859, they would find the most startling result. That which cost £66,000,000 in the former three years, was increased to £118,000,000 in the latter. So that we had been paying in the last three years not less than £17,000,000 a year more for foreign corn and provi-
  246
  sions than we had been accustomed to do. Agricultural statistics would not prevent that, but they would give us timely warning of what was coming. Again, in regard to commerce, the transport of such vast supplies was a matter of immense importance. Upwards of 3,000,000 tons weight of corn were imported last year, and must have employed that amount of shipping. And if they calculated three months as the average voyage, the conveyance of that supply would occupy for the whole year one-fourth of our foreign-going ships. Surely a question thus vitally affecting the supply of food, and the financial arrangements of the country, and giving such vast employment to the mercantile marine, ought not to be treated as solely a farmers' question. What had been done by the Government? The right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Duchy (Mr. Card well) some time ago suggested the employment of the county police as the most economical machinery for collecting the Returns. But whether they employed the police or any other machinery, they must pay for the additional duties they imposed upon the persons employed; and, in his opinion, therefore, the employment of the police would be just as expensive a method of obtaining the information as any other that might be resorted to. The Home Secretary had sent a circular to the different counties to ascertain what the feeling was with regard to the collection of agricultural statistics, and the employment of the police in that duty, and the result was as follows—Thirty of the counties were favourable to the collection of statistics, but only fifteen of that number were favourable to the employment of the police; twenty-one expressed no opinion as to the advantage of the collection of statistics, but objected to the duty being performed by the police; six deferred the question for further consideration; and only two objected to the collecdion of agriculture statistics altogether. In his own opinion the Office of the Registrar General afforded a machinery by which agricultural statistics might be most effectually, most economically, and most easily obtained. He did not say that they might not be obtained through the Office of Inland Revenue; for he knew that in Scotland the machinery existed in that office, by which the duty might be performed without any difficulty whatever, and he knew also that the Inland Revenue Office in England believed itself quite capable

  247
  of performing the duty, and that the work could be done by that office and its sister office in Scotland for a sum not exceeding £20,000 a year, but there were reasons which induced him to give the preference to the Registrar General's Office. As the acreage was the only fact that could be ascertained, the inquiry should be limited to that, and it might be completed before harvest in each year. No Act of Parliament was needed—only an order of that House, and provision made for the necessary expenses. He was at a loss to know who really were the opponents of the measure. He believed that much of the former opposition to it on the part of certain farmers had died out, and the great body of them was not against it; for it had been most successfully done in Ireland and Scotland, and in several English counties. The great landlords were not against it, for the House of Lords had already passed a Bill on the subject. The Returns he asked for were not of an inquisitorial nature. He should have been extremely glad to have included in them the live stock bred and reared in England; but as that was of comparatively minor importance, and the farmers looked upon a return of live stock as exceedingly inquisitorial, he should not propose to enter into that part of the question. He would venture to adduce one opinion which, he believed, would have the greatest weight with both the House and the country. It was that of the lamented Prince Consort. In July, 1860, as President of the International Statistical Congress, the Prince, in his opening address, referred to agricultural statistics in these words—
  "The Registrar General of Ireland has proved by his success in obtaining these Returns, at a comparatively moderate expense, and by the voluntary assistance of the landowners and cultivators, as well as of the clergy of all denominations, that the apprehension was groundless that it could not be done without inordinate cost, or without injuring individual interests. We must hope," he added, "that considering its importance with regard to all questions affecting the food of the people, this inquiry will not only be extended to England and Scotland, but also to the continent generally, wherever it may not already have been instituted."
  He trusted that such an opinion would have its full effect on Her Majesty's Government, and he begged to ask the noble Viscount whether the Government would take the matter up seriously, and themselves bring forward a plan for obtaining Returns of the acreage under the various crops in Great Britain.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he had substantially answered the question of his hon. Friend at an earlier period of the Session. He was far from denying the advantages to be derived from the publication of accurate agricultural statistics; but he thought that such Returns would be unsatisfactory if they did not include live stock. At the same time, he agreed with his hon. Friend that to include Returns of live stock in the first instance would add to the difficulty of obtaining agricultural statistics, and it might be more prudent therefore, to confine the Returns at first to the quantity of ground on which corn was actually grown in this country. It had been rather assumed that there was great objection in that House to the production of such Returns; and no doubt there was some time ago a feeling against enforcing the collection of such statistics, but the opposition had, he believed, very much diminished, and the Returns from the quarter sessions, to which the hon. Member had referred, showed that there was no indisposition on the part of the owners of land to furnish the information. There was still some apprehension on the part of tenant farmers that the effect might be to increase their rents; but that objection might be met by avoiding the publication of individual Returns and giving the Returns for the district only. He felt that the publication of such information as the hon. Member desired could not do the farmers any possible injury, while the commercial interest might derive from it great advantage. The result of the inquiry addressed by his predecessor to the different counties was certainly not such as to justify the employment of police in collecting agricultural statistics. His hon. Friend, after ascertaining what the general nature of the replies was, had communicated with him with referenee to the practicability of obtaining these Returns through the Registrar General; and he had had an interview with the Registrar General upon the subject. The Registrar General did not think it impracticable, but he saw more difficulty in the matter than his hon. Friend appeared to think existed. He (Sir G. Grey) was not, however, without hope that that office might be made available for the purpose, and that if Parliament would sanction the expense, the Returns might be obtained through its machinery. In his opinion, that agency would be better than the Inland Revenue Office, because he doubted whether the excisemen going to the

  249
  houses of farmers, for the purpose of obtaining the necessary information, would be looked upon with much favour. The hon. Gentleman said that he did not think it necessary that an Act of Parliament should be obtained to carry out the object in view. No doubt an Act of Parliament would not be necessary if the making of the Returns were not to be compulsory; and it was not intended, when it was proposed that the police should be employed, that the measure should be compulsory in the first instance. He would communicate further with the Registrar General upon the subject.
  MR. BASSsaid, he wished to thank the hon. Member for Stirling for the clear, able, and comprehensive manner in which he had brought the subject before the House. Still, he was somewhat at a loss to know how the hon. Member obtained his information with regard to the amount of food consumed in this country, for the most remarkable differences of opinion existed amongst agriculturists upon the subject; and the consumption had been variously stated in the Mark Lane Express at from 15,000,000 to 30,000,000 of quarters. It was as important to have statistics of food as of population, and only the most ignorant amongst the farmers could have the smallest objection to giving the best possible information upon that very interesting subject. Certainly, when his hon. Friend brought forward the question on a former occasion, he did not receive any great amount of encouragement, but he trusted that there had been a change of feeling since then, and that there was no longer any objection on the part of those who represented agricultural constituencies in that House to the information being supplied. He hoped that the Home Secretary would at an early period next Session bring forward a measure upon the subject.
  LORD HOTHAMsaid, that the hon. Member who had just sat down might, perhaps, include him and other Members on that side of the House amongst the most ignorant class of farmers, because they happened to differ from him in opinion. Although many of the persons engaged in agricultural pursuits might not possess an amount of intelligence equal to that of the hon. Member for Derby, and although, perhaps, they might entertain some prejudices, their prejudices were entitled to respect, and it was not by stigmatizing them as ignorant that those who
  250
  desired this information would be likely to effect their object. He doubted very much whether the farmers would derive any benefit from these Returns. There was no doubt, however, that they would be very beneficial to corn merchants and persons engaged in trade, and the large and intelligent class of farmers in Scotland, who might be described as large capitalists; but he believed that the ordinary class of tenant farmers would derive no advantage whatever from them. As to knowing when they had best dispose of their corn, he believed that the old principle of threshing the corn as soon as it was ready, and selling it when threshed, would be found in the long run to be more advantageous to the farmer than speculating for high prices. It had been said that a great willingness had been found on the part of landowners to forward the production of agricultural statistics; but that fact, if it were a fact, might lead to increased unwillingness on the part of occupiers. He believed the feeling of farmers generally was, that the Government Returns would be acted upon in some way to their disadvantage; and as long as that feeling existed, great difficulty would be found in inducing them to consent to any compulsory system, even though their refusal might expose them to the attacks of the hon. Member for Derby.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, that his noble Friend (Lord Hotham) had so well expressed the feelings with which he (Mr. Henley) viewed this question that he should not have thought it necessary to address the House but for the remarks of the hon. Member for Derby (Mr. Bass). If anything could have been done to render the collection of agricultural statistics impossible, the hon. Member for Derby had contrived to do it. The hon. Gentleman appeared to have forgotten what had previously taken place on the subject some fourteen or fifteen years ago, when the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Halifax (Sir C. Wood) was Chancellor of the Exchequer. A Bill was brought in for the purpose, which was not very favourably received by the agricultural interest, who were in no very pleasant humour in consequence of the legislation which had taken place shortly before that period. That Bill, however, might probably have passed if those who wanted the information had been ready to pay for it. But the Chancellor of the Exchequer refused to do so. The course pursued on that occasion

  251
  roused a strong feeling in the country, and to use a common expression had the effect of "putting their backs up." They said, "You are introducing an inquisitive measure for the advantage of a certain class of persons, and want us to pay for the information." He was not prepared to say whether any advantage could be derived from the modified system proposed, but he was satisfied that the difficulty experienced in getting it adopted was owing to the course pursued on the occasion to which he had referred.
  SIR JOHN SHELLEYsaid, he was not surprised that the hon. Member for. Derby, who was a large buyer, should be in favour of agricultural statistics. They all knew that the hon. Member, being at the head of a great establishment, which required to know the extent of the growth of barley, was obliged to obtain the information sought by these statistics, no matter at what cost; it would therefore, no doubt, be a great advantage to him if he could acquire that information at the public cost. But, when the hon. Member talked of the ignorance of those who might oppose these Returns, he must say he could not see how the farmers in any shape or way would be benefited by them. If there was any good in such Returns, it would be something which gave a fair average, on which they could depend; but there were such variations from one year to another that even the acreage would involve all sorts of difficulty. The business of the hon. Member for Derby was, no doubt, a very good one, and he could afford to buy the information he required; for himself, he protested avainst the public money being expended to enable a few wealthy men to obtain information at the expense of the community.
  MR. HUBBARDsaid, he thought the information, whether as to barley for malting, or wheat for the bread of the people, intimately concerned the general welfare. It was of great advantage that the earliest possible information should be had on the subject, and in case of a deficiency purchases should be made abroad as speedily as possible. It was quite true that a person in the position of the hon. Member for Derby, was deeply interested in acquiring the information; but he could command it sooner than any one else, and might sweep the markets of the produce he required; but if these statistics were supplied by the Government, every one would be as well informed as the hon. Member himself, and
  252
  would have the same advantage in the market. He therefore hoped that no petty prejudice would prevent the Government from taking up the subject in a vigorous and determined manner.
  LORD HARRY VANEsaid, he did not believe there was as much prejudice as was represented in the agricultural districts against the production of information; but as the benefit was to be general, the expense at least ought not to be charged on a class. Returns on the acreage sown would be of value, because the season would always indicate the prospects of harvest. In other countries such information was collected, and in France special pains were taken to obtain it; and, speaking generally, it had of late years been remarkably correct. It could hardly be that in this country the only subject on which information should not be furnished should be the subject of the food raised for the people. The expense of obtaining the information, however, ought not to be thrown on the county rates.
  MR. BRISCOEsaid, he must deny that the tenant farmers could justly be termed ignorant. They were generally a most intelligent as well as a most respectable class, and they deserved to have their opinions fairly considered. If a Bill were brought in upon the subject, he should feel himself at liberty to support or oppose it, as the character of the measure might appear to justify. He thought, however, that the proposed returns would mislead the tenant-farmers, from their necessary incompleteness. What was really wanted was more accurate information as to the statistics of foreign grain.
  MR. THOMSON HANKEYsaid, he thought the opinion of the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Hubbard), from his great information on all such subjects, was deserving of the greatest weight with the House. He also trusted that next year the Government would take up the question, and secure the same information regarding agriculture in this country as they were all so anxious to obtain respecting everything that affected the corn-markets abroad.
  MR. PULLERsaid, there might be a considerable class of farmers who were obliged to thrash their corn as soon as they got it in, in order to pay their rent; but it did not follow that they were not interested in the result of the harvest, particularly in years of scarcity, being made known to all the world at the earliest moment. Any

  253
  attempt to obtain from the farmers throughout the country the amount produced per acre would be entirely hopeless; but that was not at all necessary to enable us to judge of the probable amount of the harvest. By taking note of the sales by auction of farm produce in July and August the means of reckoning probable averages would be afforded. The Government might obtain all the particulars they required without any inquisitorial process.
  MR. PAGETsaid, he believed that it would be advantageous to the whole community if the best information were collected on these matters. In 1854, England, from her want of accurate knowledge of the state of the markets, sold to France an enormous quantity of corn at a very moderate price, and rebought it afterwards at a great enhancement. The loss of money thus sustained would have paid the expense of collecting these statistics ten times over.
  SIR BALDWIN LEIGHTONdenied that there was any obstinate prejudice against the taking of agricultural statistics among the tenant farmers in his part of the country.
  MR. HEYGATEsaid, he thought there was an almost unanimous opinion in favour of the collection of agricultural statistics in some form; the only objection was to their being obtained in an inquisitorial manner. He trusted the Government would, by acceding to the views of the hon. Mover, endeavour to wipe away from this country what he considered to be a disgrace to it.

STATE OF THE VENETIAN PROVINCES.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. FREELAND,* rose to call attention to our relations with Austria, and also to the present state of the Venetian Provinces, as a source of danger to the Peace of Europe; and to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether any Communications have been received from our diplomatic or consular Agents in Austria or Italy, with reference to the present state and proposed increase of taxation in the Venetian Provinces, and with reference to the number of Emigrés from those provinces, and to the sentences of illegal emigration which had been notified in the usual manner by the Austrian Government; and to move for Copies of any such Communications which Her Majesty's Government may have received. He said:
  254
  Sir, if I thought that any discussion which, may arise on the Motion which I am about to make, and particularly on that portion of it which relates to the Venetian provinces, could do harm to the best interests of the Venetians, or the Italians, or to the cause of order and peace in Europe, I would never have yielded to the urgent solicitations which have induced me to submit this Motion to the consideration of the House. I believe that, on the contrary, good may be done. I believe that, to some extent at all events, by means of frank discussion in this House, and perhaps in other Representative Assemblies, a danger to the cause of peace may be removed from the chapter of passions and of accidents to the domain of reason and of public opinion in Europe. On those higher grounds which influence, or ought to influence, a Christian people—on those lower grounds which specially affect the British taxpayer, it is, I think, our bounden duty to do all that in us lies to promote a peaceful settlement of the Venetian question, and to avert, if possible, the outbreak of another war in Italy. If war broke out in Italy, it would soon, I think, involve Europe. Europe narrowly escaped from it only a few weeks since; and I trust that Europe will take warning from the occurcnces at Sarnico and at Brescia. I will not pretend to penetrate the mystery of those occurrences; but if an attack on the Tyrol was intended, an attack on the Tyrol would have been an attack, not only on Austria, but on the territory of the Germanic Confederation. It would have given to Austria, at all events, a pretext for calling Germany to her aid. If Austria had marched to Milan—if Austria had reconquered Lombardy—France might have been drawn into the field to defend the results which were obtained by the victories of Magenta and Solferino, and Europe might have seen the legions of four Powers contending upon the plains of Lombardy. If the Continent were engaged in war, it might be difficult for England to keep clear of its entanglements; and even if England did keep clear of those entanglements, she would soon feel in the diminution of her exports, involving a large increase of local, and, perhaps, ultimately of imperial taxation, the pressure of the calamity which had occurred. Under these circumstances, the Government, I hope, will be able to tell us that they are seeking earnestly to arrive at a peaceful solution of the Venetian difficulty. I hope, too, that

  255
  they will have the courage to lay boldly and unreservedly on the table of the House the information which they must have received with regard to the present state of the Venetian provinces—information which will enable Parliament to appreciate the existing danger in its full extent and bearing.
  Sir, I will not detain the House with any lengthened remarks with reference to our present relations with Austria. Austria has long been one of the leading European Powers. The wishes and policy of England point, I think, with sufficient distinctness to this, that Austria, if she will but march with the age, ought to continue to be a leading Power, and an element for maintaining the balance of power in Europe. That policy, I think, was well expressed by the noble Lord at the head of the Government, in a speech made so far back as 1849. In that speech he referred to those considerations which ought to render the maintenance of the Austrian empire an object of solicitude to every English statesman. Again, Sir, I cannot forget that Austria is, as regards this country, a friendly Power; and not only is Austria a friendly Power, but Austria is the ancient ally of England. The noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs said, so recently as March in last year, that during many contests in Europe for two centuries past, we had often contended in the same cause, and against the preponderance of other Powers, with Austria. Well, but then, Sir, the alliance of Austria with England means, in these days especially, if it means anything, an alliance with the principles of justice—an alliance with the principles of liberty and progress. It means, at home more free institutions for Austria; and I rejoice to think that she is obtaining them. It means abroad, if not absolute free trade, a liberalized commercial policy. Apart from these, the alliance of Austria with England has no great moral or material significance.
  Prince Napoleon, in his speech made in March of last year, spoke of the alliance between his country and England as being not an alliance with this or that minister, but with the great liberal English people. By that alliance, he said that France, though she might have to make concessions on secondary points, could defend the great principles of liberty and progress. Monsieur Billault said, in the same debate, that this alliance had already ac-
  256
  complished great things, and that still more remained to be done. Let us hope that Austrian statesmen will emulate these sentiments. If they do so, they will meet, I am persuaded, with a very cordial and hearty response here. England honours old alliances, but there are some things which England honours even more; and these are the principles of justice, the principles of liberty and progress applied in practice to the government of populations, whether they live beneath a native or an alien sway. I have alluded, and I am glad to have been able to allude, to the political changes which have taken place in Austria. Those changes cannot, I think, but tend to a greater community of political sentiments, and to greater harmony of political and commercial action between the Governments and the people of Austria and England. There cannot be a doubt that, in a commercial point of view, an alliance with a country like Austria, whose natural resources and producing powers are capable of large development, might, under a wise commercial system, be of great and growing importance to a country like England, which is the seat of a vast manufacturing industry. In the pathways of commercial reforms, indeed, Austria, as in the case of other reforms, moves slowly. Still Austria made some modifications in her prohibitive system in 1851. In that year, too—for I wish to be just to Austria even where Venice is concerned—she restored to Venice the privileges of a free port, of which Venice had been deprived on account of the part she had taken in the revolutionary movements of the preceding period. Austria took a further step in the right direction by concluding, in 1853, a commercial treaty with Prussia and the Zollverein. The changes it effected were productive of great benefit to Hungary, to Germany, and to Austria herself. As between the parties to the treaty, the duties, I believe, are generally three-fifths less than those which are levied on the productions of other countries. The more free access which English goods have obtained, and will obtain, to the Continent under the new commercial relations subsisting between England and France, combined with those which France is endeavouring to bring to completion with Prussia and the Zollverein, and the provisions of which will, it is said, be extended to England, will probably soon force Austria to modify still further her commercial system,

  257
  or to sacrifice an even larger amount of customs revenue on English goods than she at present sacrifices to the smuggler. Every month's delay in the conclusion of the treaty between France and Prussia is, we are told, a source of positive loss to England, yet our old ally Austria is instigating the southern States of the Zollverein to oppose its conclusion. I hope, therefore, that the noble Lord at the head of the Government, will be able to tell us that the Government is directing its earnest attention to the extremely important subject of our commercial relations with Austria.
  I pass now, Sir, from Austria in her relations with this country to Austria in her relations with Venetia; and the subject is, I feel, a delicate and painful one. But no regard for old alliances ought, I think, to make us blind to the necessity of examining with care a question which, disguise its real character as you may, is undoubtedly a question full of danger to the peace of Europe. On this ground, and on other and more special grounds, we are, I think, clearly entitled to consider it; and this too, without offence to Austria. Austria has more than once solicited our mediation in the affairs of Italy, and England was a party to the Treaty of Vienna. That treaty reassigned to Austria the Venetian Provinces, upon the implied promise, at all events, that those provinces should be equitably governed. England, therefore, is bound to feel a special interest in everything which affects the material and political welfare of the inhabitants of those provinces. Before I refer to the state of Venetia, I am anxious, if the House will kindly permit me, to say a few words on the difficulties with which Austria, it is said, has to contend in considering what I believe to be the only real and final solution of the Venetian question—I mean the cession of Venetia to the Italian kingdom. Those difficulties have, I think, been overstated. It is said, I know, by some, that Austria cannot give up Venetia; because, if she does, she must give up Trieste also. Now, although my sympathies are with Italy, I could not, if I thought that Trieste must follow the destiny of the Venetian Provinces, honestly stand up in my place and say that Austria ought to listen for a single moment to any proposals for a cession of Venetia to the Italian kingdom. But I cannot, I confess, see that the cession of Venetia involves the cession of Trieste also. It is true that in
  258
  Trieste—drawn thither by commercial and other considerations—the Italian element preponderates. But in Trieste the Italian element is, at all events, the foreign element; it is the national element in Venetia. Again, Trieste, as a port, has greater natural advantages than the port of Venice, and it is of immense maritime and commercial importance to Austria. The shipping of Trieste, too, I am informed, comprised upwards of two-thirds of the entire shipping of Austria. Trieste, moreover, has been called the Hamburgh of Southern Germany, and it owes everything to Imperial favour. So far back as 1719 it was declared a free port by the Emperor Charles VI. It received important privileges from his daughter, that great Sovereign and virtuous woman the Empress Maria Theresa. Still later, in 1818, it acquired the title of "the most faithful city," and became a member of the Germanic Confederation. Again, thirty years later, in the time of the Italian and Hungarian revolutions, Trieste continued faithful to Austria, and it gave proofs of its Germanic predilections, if I remember rightly, by sending a representative to the German Parliament at Frankfort. For these reasons, Sir, I cannot see in this argument which relates to Trieste the force that some attribute to it. If I were an Austrian, I would not sacrifice a single shilling or a single man in order to maintain possession of Venetia, but I would sacrifice my last shilling and my last man rather than listen to any proposal for the cession of Trieste to the Italian kingdom. Then, again, it is urged by many that in a strategical point of view the possession of the Quadrilateral by Austria is necessary in order to enable her to defend the southern frontier of Germany. This point, with many others, has been ably, but not, I think, conclusively urged by Mr. Bonamy Price in his pamphlet on Venetia, to which Mr. Grenfell has published a pamphlet in reply. Without attempting to follow Mr. Price, I may say that his strategical arguments have, it seems to me, been answered by anticipation, by the Austrian Archduke Charles. The Archduke is a great military authority, and his principal work is published I believe, by the Government of Austria for the use of Austrian officers. A summary of the views of the Archduke has been so clearly and concisely given by Mr. R. Macdonnell, in an article in Macmillan's Magazine on "Venetia and the Peace of

  259
  Europe," that the House will, I hope, allow me to read the extract concerning it. It is as follows:—
  "In the introductory chapter of his History of the Campaign of 1799, the Archduke Charles enters into an elaborate consideration of the various possible theatres of war between France and Austria. He describes their geographical characters, and discusses at length the advantages and disadvantages to each of the belligerents presented by each scene of operations; and he comes to the conclusion that the valley of the Danube is the vital point in every war between France and Austria. He lays down distinctly that a march from Milan through Venetia upon Vienna is hopeless, so long as Austria holds the defiles of the Upper Danube; and he advises his countrymen, in every war with France, to devote, without hesitation, the bulk of their forces to the valley of the Danube. He refers to possible diversions on the side of Italy as little to be dreaded, and (what is not least important) he takes for granted that the advance of a French army on the Danube necessitates, as a matter of course, the evacuation by Austria of the Tyrol and of Northern Italy."
  And, Sir, not only have we the authority of the Archduke Charles as to the true points of defence for Austria, but in February of last year the Prussian Chamber of Deputies decided on the Motion of Von Vincke, in opposition to Baron Schleinitz and the whole power of the Government, that it was not in the interest of Prussia or of Germany to place any obstacles in the way of the consolidation of the unity of Italy. That, at all events, was a strong expression of opinion on the part of a majority in the Prussian Chamber, that the Quadrilateral was not wanted for the defence of Germany. It was equivalent to an abandonment of Venetia. Let us hope, Sir, that it will pave the way for the recognition by Prussia of Victor Emmanuel as King of Italy. I am sure, Sir, that we are all delighted to hear that the Emperor of Russia has recognised Victor Emmanuel, and that such recognition has not been purchased by any unworthy compliances on the part of the Italian Government. Well, but then, Sir, if the Quadrilateral is not wanted for the defence of Germany in the hands of Austria, it will be looked upon as a menace to the new kingdom of Italy. And, Sir, this brings us to the real question, which is, "Can peace be maintained if Austria is to continue to occupy in the Quadrilateral a position menacing to Italy?" I believe, Sir, that it is absolutely impossible. I believe, too, that the character of Austrian rule in the Venetian provinces, and still more the proposed increase in a taxation already crushing, must tend inevitably to
  260
  precipitate a crisis dangerous to Europe. The cries of suffering in Venetia become more audible; the sympathies of the party of action in Italy grow more impatient from day to day. Let us hope that peaceful means may be devised to avert a crisis, which the organs of opinion both in this and other countries assure us is impending.
  Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; House counted; and 40 Members not being present,
  House adjourned at a quarter after Eight o'clock, till Monday next.