HC Deb 16 June 1864 vol 175 cc1882-912

SUPPLY considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)

(1.) £3,200:to complete the sum for the Civil Establishment, Bermudas.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

said, he thought the colonial revenue should be called upon to meet expenditure for colonial purposes. It was true that of late steps in that direction had been take, but further progress should be made. A colony with a local revenue, which had increased from £11,000 to £17,000 a year, and a population of only 12,000 inhabitants might well be required to meet its own expenses.

MR. CARDWELL

said, he would admit that if the revenue of the colony were able for a series of years to maintain its own expenses, there would be no ground for asking a vote for the purpose from that House; but such was not the case.

Vote agreed to,

(2.) £3,213, to complete the sum for the Ecclesiastical Establishment, British North American Provinces.

(3.) £1,000, Indian Department, Canada.

MR. HENNESSY

said, he wished, to call the attention of the Government to the permission granted by Governor Dallas to Major Hatch, commanding the United States' troops, to cross the frontier and attack the unfortunate Indians, who were gallantly defending themselves against the United States' troops, and who, had taken refuge in British territory. The permission, he maintained, was opposed to international law. He had formerly referred to the subject, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to explain more fully under what circumstances the permission had been given.

MR. CARDWELL

observed, that the subject had no reference whatever to the vote before the committee. The territory in question was not in Canada or under Canadian authority, but under that of the Hudson's Bay Company. He had stated on a former occasion that permission had been given, and he had the pleasure to add that it had never been acted upon.

MR. WATKIN

, said that the Indians who were at war with the United States considered themselves under the dominion of the British Crown. He believed the facts of the case were these. The chief of the tribe, who was called the Little Grow, attended by many of his people, came into Fort Gurry, in the Hudson's Bay territory and demanded assistance in arms and food. Governor Dallas, while ready to give food, would not give arms, which if used for warfare might create difficulties with a friendly nation, but he Undertook to use his friendly offices in order to procure a fair Consideration of the claims of these unfortunate Indians. With that view he wrote a very excellent despatch to the Governor of Minnesota, and he received; a suitable reply. Being in Canada in July last, he had gone with Governor Dallas to Lord Monck the Governor General, when the circumstances of the case were fully before him. The reply given was that, when Lord Lyons came to Canada the circumstances should be stated to him, but that as Governor General of Canada he had nothing to do with the Hudson's Bay territory Governor Dallas had found himself in a most painful and difficult position when applied to to permit the forces of the United States to cross the frontier. Those Indians who came to him demanding arms and food were all decorated with the British medal, which they received in 1812 as allies of the British nation from "their old father King George;" and when Minnesota was given up they were told if ever they required assistance, if they would only go to the North, they would always find the red flag flying. When they did apply for assistance, Governor Dallas had no military force to resist the military incursion of the United States troops, and he every unwisely, but under pressure, permitted Major Hatch to cross the frontier. The right hon. Gentleman said the permission given had not been acted upon but from the information he had received he believed it had been acted upon. He was sorry to think that these old relations with the Indian tribes, rude as they might be, were being broken up, and under circumstances which must damage-the prestige of the country It was another argument for settling the possessions of the Hudson's Bay Company, which if not Anglicized would soon be Americanized.

MR. HENNESSY

said, be wished to ask who Governor Dallas was. Was he in any degree under British authority, and was it the British flag that was flying over the Hudson's Bay port? Was the territory British territory? If not, what territory was it?

MR. BLAKE

said, he believed great injustice had been done in the case of some of these Indians by the Canada Government. It would be remembered that some time since an Indian chief had been introduced by the Duke of Newcastle to Her Majesty, who, after hearing his statement of grievances, promised that when the Duke went to British North America with the Prince of Wales inquiries should be made into the facts of the case. He wished to know whether the Duke had made the promised inquiries, and whether any redress had been obtained for the Indians.

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, he perfectly recollected the case to which the hon. Gentleman referred. The conduct of Indian affairs had been handed over to the Canadian Government, and in consequence of that transfer the Vote had been reduced from many thousands a year to the trifling sum of £1,000, which went in pensions to some old Indians who had served the British Crown in former wars. Under these circumstances, all power and responsibility having been transferred to Canada, we could not undertake to dictate what course the Canadian Government should pursue in their dealings with the Indian tribes as to the sale of their lands or any matter of that kind. Anil although he knew that the Duke of Newcastle did interest himself in this matter, and did make inquiries regarding it while in Canada, yet officially he did not think it his duty to interfere.

MR. CARDWELL

said, there could be no doubt that the territory in question was British territory, and that the Sovereign of that territory was the Sovereign of Great Britain; but it was also known that it was under the Government of the Hudson's Bay Company Governor Dallas was a gentleman exceedingly Well known, and a most valuable servant of the Hudson's Bay Company.

MR. ARTHUR MILLS

said, that Governor Dallas was nominated by the Hudson's Bay Company, and was not the representative of the Crown. He supposed that the Vote entirely represented pensions, and had nothing to do with the distribution of presents to the Indians, which had an injurious effect, as the presents were often exchanged for ardent spirits.

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, the Vote was strictly for expiring life-pensions paid to Indians who were formerly in our service.

Vote agreed to.

(4.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £21,278, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1865, for the Salaries of the Governors, Lieutenant Governors, and others, in the West Indies, and certain other Colonies.

MR. ADDERLEY

wished to repeat a question relative to a matter on which he had previously sought information. He wished to know whether certain ecclesiastical payments in the West Indies were to continue to be voted by Parliament.

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, that those payments were charged by Act of Parliament upon the Consolidated Fund, and had never appended on the Votes.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN

complained that the salary of the Governor of Western Australia was paid out of the Imperial Treasury, while all the other Australian Colonies paid their own Governors.

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, that the distinction made in the case of Western Australia arose from the circumstances of its being to a great extent a penal colony to which the mother country sent her convicts.

MR. ARTHUR MILLS

said, he wished to ask for an explanation of the item of £1,000 for the High Commissioner of British Caffraria; and also to inquire whether any measures had been taken to annex British Caffraria to the Cape Colony, as had been in contemplation a few years ago.

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, that the allowance of £1,000 to the Governor of the Cape, as High Commissioner British Caffraria, was paid to him not solely in his character of Governor of the Cape Colony, but rather in his diplomatic character as administrator 0f Foreign affairs in connection with our South African settlements. In answer to the hon. Member's second question, he had to state that no arrangement had yet been made for annexing British Caffraria to the Cape of Good Hope, and that it still continued a separate settlement.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

complained that in the case of these West India Islands the expenditure in almost every case exceeded the revenue.

MR. BLAKE

said, he thought that in the case of the Governors of these small islands the office should be held for a longer period than five years.

MR. CAVE

said, he did not agree with the hon. Gentleman. He thought Governors were retained very often only too long; and when they failed in one Government were punished by being sent to a better. He suggested that it would be well if these small colonies were governed by persona sent from the permanent staff of the Colonial Office, so that if they failed, they might be recalled and resume their work at home instead of being re-appointed to Colonial Governorships out of a feeling of compassion, there being no other resource for them.

MR. HENNESSY

said, he observed that one of the items in the Vote was £450 for" residing magistrate of Anguilla." That colony was an island sixteen miles in length and one and a half in breadth. It had scarcely any trade, although it was formerly of more importance, as it was the spot from which Sea Island cotton was originally brought, though it no longer flourished there. The population consisted of 100 whites and 2,400 blacks, and there was a local body which levied taxes and seemed to regulate the charges which the House was called upon to pay. The revenue of the island, according to the last Return, was £414. He did not propose to touch the sum heretofore allowed for the official staff there, but the £450 was an increase of the amount usually voted for Anguilla, and the Committee would bear in mind that it was an increase which exceeded the whole revenue of the colony. He, therefore, moved the reduction of the Vote by a sum of £450.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, he should support the reduction.

Whereupon, Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Item of £450, for the Presiding Magistrate of Anguilla, be omitted from the proposed Vote."—(Mr. Henneasy.)

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

thought the hon. Member for the King's County had treated the House with an original argument in stating that because the colony was poor and its revenue was only £414 it should not be assisted in providing for the-support of a magistrate. It was simply because the island was so poor that the House was asked to pay the salary of a stipendiary magistrate.

MR. ADDERLEY

said, he could not perceive any inconsistency in the argument of the hon. Member for the King's County. According to the principle laid down by the right hon. Gentleman, a barren rock would be best entitled to a grant of public money, Again, the smallnesso' the revenue of the colony might proceed, not from poverty, but from the lightness of its taxation, and it would be unfair to tax the British taxpayer to enable the colonists to escape from a burden which they ought more properly to bear. He certainly should support the Amendment.

MR. HENNESSY

observed, that the official Report of the Governor stated that the people generally were indolent, and that that indolence arose partly from their having no incentive to continuous labour, and having been fostered by grants of public money from the Treasury. To give these people an incentive to industry he should press his Motion to a division.

MR. CARDWELL

said, the island was sixty miles from St. Kitt's, that the resident magistrate had died last year, and that it was deemed necessary to appoint some one who would see that justice was administered and order maintained among its 2,500 inhabitants.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

said, there was an allowance to the Chief Justice of St. Kitt's, and that Anguilla was a mere dependency. Last year the Chief Justice was called Chief Justice of Anguilla.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, he wished to know what were the duties of the Chief Justice of St. Kitt's with regard to Anguilla.

MR. CARDWELL

replied, that the Chief Justice visited the island in the discharge of his judicial duties, but he did not act as a magistrate.

MR. DILLWYN

said, he wished to ask on what principle the Government proceeded in making those appointments. What was the minimum number of inhabitants for which a resident magistrate was deemed necessary?

MR. CARDWELL

I believe this is the minimum.

MR. ARTHUR MILLS

said, his objection to the payment was, it tended to make the island unproductive and the people indolent. If grants of that kind were continued, no effort would be made to raise a larger revenue. He should support the redaction on the simple principle that the colonies, which we wished to make self-supporting, ought to do something to support themselves.

MR. CAVE

said, he did not think that the proposition of depriving the island of a stipendiary magistrate would have the effect of inducing the people to work. The cause which had interfered with the prosperity of the West India Islands was the legislation of this country, from the effect of which they had not yet recovered, and this formed the real justification of the assistance afforded by us in regard to these charges.

MR. ARTHUR MILLS

said, he would remind the hon. Member that Parliament had granted compensation to those islands to the extent of £20,000,000.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 34; Noes 45: Majority 11.

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(5.) £6,200, to complete the sum for Justices, West Indies.

Vote agreed to.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £14,355, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1865, for the Civil Establishments on the Western Coast of Africa.

SIR JOHN HAY

said, he found that the sum of £2,000 was set down in the Vote for the expenses of the Ashantee war. He believed that war had cost more than £200,000, and he had also to observe that when the hon. and gallant Member for Portarlington had moved for a statement of the cost of the war, the return made by the Colonial Office was that they had not yet received any information upon the subject. Under those circumstances he wished to know why only the charge of £2,000 appeared in the Vote, when it was notorious that £200,000 was nearer the mark.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, that it was a misnomer to speak of that as a war expenditure. Although many men had been lost by the climate, he believed that not a shot had been fired.

MR. CARDWELL

said, that when the Estimate was framed, the Colonial Office had received an intimation from the Governor that he had drawn £1,900 for raising levies of troops. That being the only information in the possession of the Office, it was thought right to ask for a Vote of £2,000. He had received no information which would enable him to lay any other Estimate before the House.

MR. WALPOLE

said, that he noticed in the papers which had been produced by the Colonial Office, that the despatches of the right hon. Gentleman's excellent predecessor, the Duke of Newcastle, referred to sow despatches which had not keen printed, but which were the most important of all. Perhaps his right hon. Friend would say whether he would lay on the table those despatches which induced the Duke of Newcastle to express a strong opinion upon the conduct of a certain Officer with respect to the war

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, that the despatches to which the right hon. Gentleman referred Were not included in the papers which had been laid before Parliament—first, because they did not come within the terms of the Motion of the hon. and gallant Gentleman, and, in the next place because it did not appear to those who prepared the papers that they would throw any additional light upon the subject. If, however, the right hon. Gentleman and the House wished to know more of the differences of opinion which occurred as to the conduct last year of the war in defence of the protected territories, and of the part which was taken by the then commanding officer. Major Cochrane, he knew no reason why those despatches should not be produced. He would endeavour to lay them on the table to-morrow.

SIR JOHN TRELAWNY

said he had read the papers referred to, and had been struck by the same circumstance which the right hon. Gentleman had noticed. It seemed suspicious on the face of it that if there were good reasons for embarking in that war, and for jeopardizing our forces in the same foolish way that we had done in New Zealand, they should not be stated. Let the House be informed what they were, and then they would see whether they could feel confidence in the conduct of affairs by her Majesty Government. The House at present is very little of the matter, and with the object of enabling them to gain the requisite information he would move that the chairman report Progress.

Whereupon motion made, and Question proposed, "That the chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to site again.—(Sir John Trelawny.)

SIR JOHN HAY

said, he hoped the Secretary of State would also lay on the table the despatch issued by the right hon. Gentleman who conducted the affairs of the colonial Office during the lamented illness of Duke of Newcastle, and the despatch containing a remonstrance from commander Wilmot.

SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONE

remarked that the Vote ought to be postponed until the whole of our relations with the Coast of Africa ought to be discussed and revised, and that the time had come when we ought to select the points necessary for controlling the trade and advancing the civilization of the country, with a view to concentrating our establishments and reducing expenditure as much, as possible.

MR. CARDWELL

said, he was anxious to give the fullest information to the House at the earliest moment, and if a desire existed to postpone the Vote he should be happy to consult the convenience of the House. The Return produced had been prepared in accordance with the terms of the Motion, but further papers should be forthcoming if desired.

SIR JOHN TRELAWNY

said, he approved the course taken by the right hon. Gentleman. As it indicated a reversal of the policy pursued for the last few years, it was evident the Department was beginning to draw in its horns. After the statement of the; right hon. Gentleman however he should not press his Motion.

Motion, and Original Question, by leave, withdrawn.

(6.) £2,924, to complete the sum for St. Helena.

(7.) £700, Orange River Territory (Cape of Good Hope).

(8.) £960, Heligoland.

MR. ADDERLEY

said, the Vole provided, for the service of one clergyman at £50 and two magistrates at £30 each. He wished to ask for some explanation.

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUSE

explained that the community was exceedingly primitive in its character. He was unable to say whether those Gentlemen received any additional income from local revenues.

Vote agreed to.

(9.) £3,608, to, complete the sum for the Falkland Islands.

(10.) £3,825, to complete the sum for Labuan.

(11.) £300, Pitcairn Islanders Norfolk Island.

MR. BLAKE

said, the whole amount appeared to be devoted to the salary of a schoolmaster.

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, the Committee could hardly form an idea of the Simplicity and childlike character of these people, who really needed some intelligent, clever Englishman to look after affairs in general for them. The schoolmaster not only instructed the children, but kept all the public accounts, and rendered invaluable assistance to the community.

Vote agreed to.

(12.) £7,720, to complete the sum for Emigration.

MR. ADDERLEY

said, he wished to know what was done by that body, having its offices in an obscure back street, and with no public funds at its disposal beyond the salaries of its members. It appeared that some of the colonies had emigration agents of their own in this country, while other colonies had their emigration business conducted by that Board. He believed that but for that business the Board would have very little work of any kind to perform.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

complained of the staff of six clerks as altogether too large. One had been added since the previous year.

SIR HARRY VERNEY

said, he hoped some assurance would he given to the Committee, that if a State Emigration Department were maintained, no vessels except those which were seaworthy would he allowed in future to leave with emigrants.

MR. ARTHUR MILLS

said, he would remind hon. Members that a large proportion of the emigration was conducted at the instance of the colonies, which provided the necessary means. He should lament any diminution of the usefulness of the Emigration Board, which consisted of very efficient men.

MR. ALDERMAN ROSE

said, that the Lancashire City Relief Fund had set apart a portion of its funds for the purpose of assisting emigration, but they had met with so little success that the sum thus set aside had been re-transferred to the main fund. The difficulties interposed were the more extraordinary, as he had been assured the other day by a member of the Legislature of Sydney, that the Australian Colonies could receive any amount of emigration. There appeared to be something defective in the emigration machinery under such circumstances.

COLONEL DUNNE

said, he would be glad to know what sort of supervision was exercised by the Board, and what were its duties?

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, that the Emigration Board was one of the most effective of our public departments, with important and onerous duties to perform. The Board, by the desire of the colonies in question, superintended the emigration to Victoria, Western Australia, and Port Natal. The Board chartered the ships, appointed the surgeons, and looked after the emigration depôts. Another important branch of its duties was to superintend and work the Passenger Act. No doubt breaches of that Act occasionally occurred, but they would be still more numerous if the Board did not exist. The Emigration Board had also to superintend the great system of Coolie emigration from the East Indies and China to the West Indian colonies and the Mauritius. That necessitated frequent communication with the Colonial and Indian Offices. The Board chartered the ships and advised the Secretary of State for the Colonies on all matters relating to emigration, and also on questions affecting the management and disposal of the Crown lands in all colonies where they had not been made over to the local Government. It was also called upon to report upon every despatch from the West Indian Colonies, the Mauritius, and Natal, relative to emigration in all its branches. The Colonial Office was thus brought into constant communication with the Emigration Board, and derived the most valuable assistance from the long experience and ability of the Emigration Commissioners. The Board likewise embodied in its Colonization Circular advice relative to the wages, demand for labour, and means of reaching the colonies.

MR. ARTHUR MILLS

inquired whether Victoria and all the provinces of New Zealand did not take up their own ships and manage their own emigration?

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, that was not the case with regard to Victoria. He believed it was true of New Zealand.

MR. ALDERMAN ROSE

said, he wished to know the number of emigrants sent out by this costly machinery?

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, the number could be given, but it would only represent one portion of the duties of the Board.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

said, he wished to know why there were six officers at Liverpool that year, against five officers in the last year, for the superintendence of emigration.

MR. CARDWELL

observed, that the House, knowing the largely increased emigration from Liverpool that year, would not be surprised that an additional officer had been found necessary.

In answer to Mr. ADDERLEY,

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, that the Secretary to the Board (Mr. Walcott) had been appointed Second Commissioner as well as Secretary.

MR. ADDERLEY

said, he had attacked that Vote for many years. When he first began there were three Commissioners. By perseverance he got the number reduced to two, and he believed that if they were further reduced to a single Commissioner he would be quite sufficient for all the duties of the Board.

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, there was, in fact, only one Commissioner now. There were certain duties which were required by law to be performed by two Commissioners, and for the purpose of enabling that to be done the Secretary had received powers to perform those duties.

CAPTAIN JERVIS

observed, that among the other duties of the emigration officers was this—they were not only to assist emigration from this country but to see that the people went to a fair field for their labour on leaving this country. He wanted to know if they had taken any trouble with respect to those emigrants who were leaving Ireland and going to the United States for the purpose of being murdered at so many dollars a head. That was an important question. It was their duty to see that these unfortunate people, leaving their country under false pretences, were protected, and had a fair field to go to for the exercise of their labour.

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

replied, that it was not for the Emigration Commissioners, or any Department of the Government, to undertake the paternal duty of persuading emigrants to go to one country rather than another. With respect to unassisted emigrants, their duty simply was to carry out the provisions of the Passengers Act. With respect to assisted emigrants, they chartered the vessels, appointed officers, and exercised a very strict control.

MR. MONSELL

said, the observations of the bon. Under Secretary might be true, but there ought to be some British authority in New York and Boston to see that the emigrants were not unfairly dealt with. The number of men who enlisted in Ireland for the United States' army was very small compared with those who were laid hold of when they went abroad. In the present exigency it would be desirable that either the Foreign Office or the Emigration Commissioners should take some steps for the protection of those poor people against the arts that were used to entrap them.

COLONEL DUNNE

said, an immense number of unfortunate people from Ireland went over to America without the slightest intention of enlisting, and get entrapped there. He knew an instance of a man who on arriving at the other side of the water fell in with people who gave him drink, and when he awoke he found himself in the uniform of the United States' army, and was told that he had enlisted, and if he refused to serve he should be shot. He was sent to the scene of war, fought for six months, and, luckily for himself, got ague. They then sent him into hospital, and after a time he made his escape at the risk of being shot, and got home to Ireland. The same thing had happened to several. Why should not the Government call upon the Consular authorities in the United States to put a stop to doings of that kind? At that moment a great number of our soldiers were about to be discharged after their ten years' service, and he had reason to believe that there were Federal agents in this country for the purpose of catching them, to become non - commissioned officers in the Federal army if it was in existence, as he hoped it was not at the present moment.

MR. DILLWYN

remarked, that it would be dangerous for the Government to give paternal advice to our emigrants.

MR. MOOR

inquired how the Commissioners sitting in Park Street could possibly regulate the coolie emigration between China and the West Indies when they were not upon the spot where the emigration was going on.

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, of course, the emigration must in a great measure be regulated on the spot. But then it was absolutely necessary that the Government at home should superintend the whole process, which was conducted under the strictest rules for the protection of the emigrants. Those rules were framed by the Colonial Office, with the advice of the Land and Emigration Commissioners.

MR. CAVE

said, that as allusion had been made to coolie emigration, it was but just that he should bear testimony to the efficiency of the Commissioners. Nothing could be more stringent than the rules laid down and enforced by the Board in Park Lane. The people of the West Indies, indeed, complained that the regulations were much too strict. He did not concur in this, and, as far as his experience went, no Department of the Government was more efficiently conducted than the Emigration Board.

CAPTAIN JERVIS

said, it was all very well for the hon. Member for Swansea to talk of the Government not interfering with the emigrants. But it was generally believed that they had encouraged the emigration of Irishmen to North America, and allowed the North American authorities to enlist men in Ireland for the purpose of recruiting their armies, while the same privilege was not given to the Southern States. The object of spending money on emigration was to open fresh labour markets; but the Government certainly ought to explain how it was that emigration was made the means of enlistments which were not only contrary to our own laws, but those of the United States.

MR. CARDWELL

said, he had heard a good many strange things in his time, but he had never heard anything more astonishing than the allegation that the Government and the Emigration Commissioners had encouraged these enlistments. It was not the duty of the Emigration Commissioners to tell the people where to go, but they provided them with information as to various colonies. The anecdotes told by the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite showed how blameless the Emigration Commissioners were in that matter, for the men of whom he spoke never intended to enlist at all. He could not sit down without bearing his testimony to the valuable, praiseworthy, and conscientious services of the Emigration Commissioners.

MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE

said, the Emigration Commissioners had assured him that there was no reason to believe that those enlistments had actually been the cause of any considerable increase of emigration. The number of able-bodied single men emigrating had but little increased.

MR. HIBBERT

said, there were at that moment agents engaged in the country in tempting the Lancashire operatives to emigrate to work in mills in America. That was done openly, and though he regretted that these people should go, it would be unfair to them if the Government were to interfere.

Vote agreed to.

(13.) £32,550, to complete the sum for the Treasury Chest.

MR. DAWSON

asked for an explanation of the item of £29,550 to make good a loss on transactions of the Treasury Chest?

MR. PEEL

said, that the transactions of the Treasury resulted in a profit everywhere except in China. The profit this year amounted to over £10,000 a year, but the loss in China was caused by the difference between the army rate of the dollar and the price at which it was purchased. The rate at which the dollar was entered in the army accounts was 4s. 2d., but the price at which the dollar had to be purchased during 1862–3 varied from 4s. 6d. to 4s. 7d. It was proposed to raise the army rate, but this was postponed for the present pending the erection of a mint at Hong Kong.

MR. WALPOLE

remarked, that the explanation only referred to one item of the account. There was an item of £32,000 for discount on bills. How did that occur?

MR. PEEL

said, the same explanation applied to all the items. The money was paid in dollars, but bills had to be purchased for those dollars at the rate of 4s. 6d. per dollar.

Vote agreed to.

(14.) £12,500, for the Zambesi Expedition.

MR. WALPOLE

asked, what was the present state of affairs in the Zambesi district, and whether the expedition was to be continued on the existing footing, or were the Englishmen who had been sent there to remain?

MR. LAYARD

said, he regretted to say that the expedition had failed. Dr. Livingstone had left the country, and was on his route home by way of India. The expedition would be given up altogether, and this, therefore, would be the last Vote asked for.

MR. WALPOLE

said, he wished to know whether the Englishmen stationed there were to come home?

MR. LAYARD

said, they could come home.

MR. F. S. POWELL

observed, that all classes in this country, especially in religious and scientific circles, took a great interest in the expedition, and he thought it was the duty of Her Majesty's Government to give more information than was contained in the jaunty explanation they had just heard.

MR. LAYARD

said, that until Dr. Livingstone returned to England it would be impossible to give a full explanation to the House. Dr. Livingstone would return to this country, and Government did not think it right to spend any further money for the prosecution of the expedition.

MR. HADFIELD

inquired, whether the failure of the expedition was to be attributed to the unfriendly feeling of the Portuguese Government?

MR. LAYARD

replied, that he could not say that it was owing to unfriendly feeling on the part of the Portuguese Government, but he believed that the slave-trading operations carried on by Portuguese colonists in a great measure tended to produce the result.

MR. PAULL

asked, whether, as the expedition had failed, that was the last Vote that would be proposed on account of the expedition?

MR. LAYARD

said, he could not say but that there might be some small balance yet to be made up.

Vote agreed to.

(15.) £2,000, for the Niger Expedition.

MR. LAYARD

stated, that the Niger Expedition, so far from being a failure, had been attended with a great success, and there was a strong feeling in favour of the Vote among mercantile men.

MR. HORSFALL

said, he begged to dissent from the observation that the mercantile community were in favour of the Vote, for mercantile men were afraid that the expedition would not be attended with any practical result.

MR. LAYARD

said, he was aware that some persons thought so, but a large number were of a contrary opinion.

Vote agreed to.

(16.) £55,000, to complete the sum for Captured Negroes, Bounties on Slaves, &c.

MR. CAVE

called attention to a great piece of extravagance—namely, the payment of £5,500 expenses and compensation in the case of the Bushair, captured and destroyed by H. M. S. Sidon, the seizure having been illegal. He adverted to other instances of large sums spent in payment of compensation to vessels which had been captured as slavers, but were not really so. It appeared that the Iola and Castilia, bearing the Spanish flag, on being captured were sent to Jamaica, to the Vice Admiralty Court, instead of being taken before the mixed Commission Court at Havanah; and when the mistake about jurisdiction was found out the sum of £3,044 was paid for compensation in one case, and £3,100 in the other, the chief part of which arose from demurrage. In the case of the Laura, Captain Hillier complained of delay in the Vice Admiralty Courts of Antigua, and there seemed to be good ground for his so doing. He (Mr. Cave) thought it right to call the attention of the Government to this subject, in order that the system necessary for repressing the slave trade might not fall into disrepute.

MR. LAYARD

said, that when vessels were captured with colours and papers they were taken to the Mixed Commission Courts, which alone could deal efficiently with the cases, but when there were no papers or colours the matter went before Vice Admiralty Courts. With regard to the Castilia, it was an unfortunate mistake. The owner proceeded for compensation, and, after a full investigation, a sum was awarded, which the Government had no alternative but to pay. There were of course instructions to commanders of cruisers to be as careful as possible.

MR. CAVE

asked for an explanation of how it was that demurrage for so long a period as 230 days had been incurred.

MR. C. P. BERKELEY

said, that the reason was that the Barracouta, which had captured the vessel, was suddenly ordered to sea in consequence of having the yellow-fever on board, and getting short of coal she came to England to replenish. That caused delay in adjudicating on the captured vessel, but the conduct of the captain in coming to England was approved by the Admiralty.

MR. CAVE

said, he thought that no answer.

Vote agreed to,

(17.) £7,650, to complete the sum for Commissions for Suppression of Slave Trade.

MR. CAVE

observed, that there was now a Mixed Commission Court at New York under the new treaty, but it was hardly likely that any slaver would be taken in there. In other Mixed Commission Courts also, there was but little to do in consequence of slavers without colours or papers going before Vice Admiralty Courts. He stated facts to prove bow few cases were taken before these courts, and though admitting that some were necessary, he said it was a question whether some others might not be dispensed with.

MR. TORRENS

said, he saw no necessity for an arbitrator at the Cape of Good Hope. Not a single case had yet been tried in the Mixed Commission Court at New York. Again, at Havannah, there were only two cases of slavers captured, though 8,000 slaves had been landed in the island. It was very gratifying to hear of the great exertions which were being made by the Captain General of Cuba to put down the slave trade, but be hoped that the Government would take into consideration the circumstance that the Mixed Commission Courts had proved quite a failure, and he thought the expenditure upon them might be considerably diminished. It might not be possible for our Government at once to put an end to them without previous negotiations with Foreign Powers, but many of the appointments were unnecessary and ought to be done away with.

MR. LAYARD

stated that the Mixed Commission Courts had jurisdiction in cases which could not be dealt with by the Vice Admiralty Courts. Where there were neither flags nor papers the Vice Admiralty Courts might condemn the vessels, but could not touch the captains and owners, whereas the Mixed Commission Courts could do both. The consequence was, that when a vessel was chased, the flags and papers were thrown overboard to avoid being taken before the Mixed Commission. If they abolished the Mixed Commission these vessels would retain their flags and papers, and the persons connected with them would escape with impunity. On the coast of Africa the Mixed Commission Courts were found very effective in the suppression of the slave trade; and, besides, they were bound by treaty to keep them up. An arbitrator had been-appointed at the Cape of Good Hope, out of courtesy to the American Government; but elsewhere the post of arbitrator and registrar had not been filled up, and he hoped that in Course of time they might make arrangements by which those officers might be still further reduced in number.

Vote agreed to.

(18.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £124,508, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1805, for the Consular Establishments abroad.

MR. CAVE

observed, that there were two Consuls and one Vice Consul in Cuba charged in the Estimates, but besides these there were several consular agents. He inquired by whom they were appointed? He asked the question because he had heard, but he could not vouch for the fact, that the authorities there, both Spanish and English, were hampered in putting down the slave trade in consequence of want of information from remote parts of the island, a circumstance easily accounted for, if it were true as reported, that some of the consular agents were slave owners. He hoped that special care was taken to appoint proper persons for consular agents in Cuba.

MR. LAYARD

replied that the officers in question were appointed by the Foreign Office on the nomination of Consul General Crawford, who had, perhaps, done more for the suppression of the slave trade than any other man living, and who would not recommend any one in whom he had not entire confidence.

MR. W. WILLIAMS

observed, that the Consular Staff at Venice, Warsaw, and Morocco, among other places, was unnecessarily large.

MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH

asked for information as to the increase of salaries to Consuls. They, had increased from £135,000 to £138,000, and he should like to know why there were so many consulships in which the fees were not credited. If the fees were part of the salary, that ought to be stated. He thought that many Consulships, at Venice, Leipsic, Warsaw, were excessive. As for the Consulate at Reunion, to which he had always objected, he thought the expense of it should be defrayed out of the funds of our East Indian territories.

MR. LAYARD

said, that the cases to which the lion. Member for Lambeth (Mr. Williams) had referred were exceptional, for the Consuls General at Venice, Warsaw, and Morocco had to discharge important diplomatic functions. He took credit to the Foreign Office for the reductions which had already been effected in that branch, while at the same time the recom- mendations of the Committee as to the increase of salary had been carried out in the case of some Consuls who before were underpaid. In a short time he hoped that all the Consuls would receive fixed salaries, and would make a return of fees to the Government, but the arrangement could not be accomplished all at once. An official memorandum gave the following explanation of the consular accounts:— The check placed in 1861 upon consular expenditure by the new system of keeping and managing the consular accounts continues to answer admirably. We now know, which no one did before, what money will really be required, and what sum is actually used. In 1803–4, the expenditure was less than the sum voted by £11,273, and in the three years just ended we have spent less than the sum voted by £34,844. This surplus, which is created by our going on the safe principle of asking for rather more than we think absolutely necessary, reverts, under a modern financial scheme, to the Exchequer, and is re-voted as revenue. The fees levied on Government account ought also to be carried to the credit of the consular services, and the demand upon the public for the payment of those services would then be reduced to the sum which would really show the actual charge to the country. For instance, the sum paid for consular services in 1863–4 was £165,269 19s. 1d., but we collected fees amounting to £15,206 6s. 3d.; and accordingly the net charge to the public was only £140,068 12s. 10d. On the other hand, the sum voted was £166,643; and Parliament, the public, and the country have, therefore, to a certain extent, been misled into thinking the consular service for 186– has cost more than it really did by £26,479 7s. 2d.

In reply to Mr. DODSON,

MR. LAYARD

said, that the Governor of Labuan was also Consul General.

MR. AYRTON

observed, that under the head of "United States" it was proposed to vote a sum for Consuls at Richmond, Charleston, Savannah, and Mobile. From correspondence on the table it appeared that the President of the Confederate States was extremely anxious that the Consuls who were originally appointed to the United States should remain at their posts in the Confederate States. And Lord Lyons urged very strongly upon the Foreign Office the desirableness of acceding to the view of President Davis, and he also cautioned Her Majesty's Government against taking any step that would necessarily give offence to the Government of the Confederate States. The Foreign Office, nevertheless, seemed to have gone out of its way to place these Consuls in a very invidious position, and President Davis was compelled to call upon them to leave the Confederate States. But as their salaries were to be continued till 1865, he should be glad to hear from the Under Secretary that some arrangement had been made whereby these Consuls might stay at their post to watch over British interests, and that as far as possible the differences that had arisen had been cleared up. It was important that Her Majesty's Government should reciprocate the conciliatory spirit of the Confederate Government.

MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK

said, he wished to know whether a Consul General was not bound to perform the duties of an ordinary Consul, and whether the Consul General at Venice was instructed to act independently of the mission at Vienna?

MR. LAYARD

said, that the Consul General had commercial as well as diplomatic duties to perform. The Consul General at Venice was not independent of the embassy at Vienna.

MR. CORBALLY

said, he wished to call attention to the inconvenience sustained at Rome by British subjects, who were compelled to get their passports viséd by the British Consul and to pay fees, while the Americans were under no such necessity.

MR. LAYARD

said, he had written to Rome to make inquiries on the subject. He could not understand why English travellers should be put to more trouble than French and American travellers as to the viséing of passports at Rome. But as to the fees paid to the British Consul, he insisted that there was no extortion in the matter. The British Consul at Rome was kept there simply for the convenience of English travellers, and he did not see why they should object to the payment of a small fee towards supporting the Consul.

MR. AYRTON

said, his experience led him to believe that English Consuls abroad rather encouraged the police to insist on travellers getting their passports viséd, whereas their duty ought to be in the contrary direction. In fact there was a combination between the Consuls and the police to get money out of British subjects abroad, who were consequently put to a great deal of trouble. He wished to know from the hon. Gentleman whether it was intended to re-appoint the British Consuls dismissed from the Confederate States, their salaries still appearing in the Estimate?

MR. LAYARD

said, he could not allow the unjustifiable observations of the hon. Gentleman to pass unnoticed. Such an accusation as that made by the hon. Member against a body of English gentlemen was almost unexampled. He had accused the English Consuls—men whose character stood unimpeached—of combining with the police to obtain fees. He repudiated the accusation with indignation. It was wholly unfounded. [A laugh.] He did not see what there was to excite the laughter of the lion. Member for Dundalk. Such accusations would go abroad, and would give great pain to a body of gentlemen of high honour. If the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets made such an accusation, he was bound to give the particulars of any case he might know, so that he might institute an inquiry into it. But he did not hesitate to say that there was not a word of truth in the accusation. With regard to the Consuls who had been appointed to the Confederate States, he regretted they had been compelled to quit their posts. They had interfered to prevent British subjects from being forced to serve in the Confederate army, and for that offence had been compelled to quit the Confederate States. No arrangement had been made for their re-appointment, but meanwhile it would be Unfair to stop their salaries for no fault of their own. In course of time they would no doubt receive appointments of some sort.

SIR GEORGE BOWYER

said, the burst of red-tape indignation to which the House had listened was really enough to take away one's breath, and illustrated the saying that there was only a step from the sublime to the ridiculous. As to the Consul at Rome, what use was he? He was not there for the purpose of trade, because we had no trade with Rome, and Rome was not a manufacturing or commercial city. The fact was, that the duty of the British Consul at Rome was to foment discontent among the few persons who were still discontented with the Romish Government. He said this advisedly, because the people of Rome began to find that they were paying rather less than one-tenth of the taxes paid by the population around them, while those who had placed themselves under the King of Sardinia bitterly regretted what they had done. The Consul at Rome was perfectly unnecessary; the sooner he was suppressed the better; and the British political agent there might go along with him. He compelled travellers to come to him to have their passports viséd, so that he was not only unnecessary, but mischievous.

MR. WHALLEY

said, he would support the hon. Member for Dundalk if that Gentleman would follow up his remarks by moving the discontinuance of all communication with Rome.

MR. CORBALLY

said, he must disclaim the desire to make any charge against the consul or other British officials at Rome; he only complained of the system under which such heavy fees were charged for the inspection of passports.

MR. HENRY SEYMOUR

said, he could not agree in the propriety of keeping a consul at Rome for the mere convenience of British travellers, as the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs assigned that as the only reason for that official's presence there. It was well known that the English Government had a diplomatic representative at Rome, in the person of Mr. Odo Russell, whose services would be quite sufficient for all purposes. The presence of a consul was chiefly for commercial purposes, but as we carried on no commerce with Rome he considered that such an officer was useless there. He should, therefore, move that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £400, the salary allowed him.

Whereupon Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Item of £400, for the Salary of the Consul at Rome, be omitted from the proposed Vote,"—(Mr. Henry Seymour,)

MR. LAYARD

said, that as soon as there was a good Government in Rome there would no longer be any necessity for a British Consul in the city. It was perfectly true that Mr. Odo Russell resided at Rome, but it should be remembered that that gentleman was precluded by Act of Parliament from bearing any recognized relation to the Papal Government, and that consequently no official communication could be conveyed through him. The passports were purely a police arrangement. He would inform himself of the regulations of the Government at Rome, and if they proved to be vexatious he would do his best to remedy them.

MR. HARVEY LEWIS

said, he had been at Rome, and he did not see any advantage to be obtained by our having a consul there. There was a British vice consul at Civita Vecchia, who was paid £250 a year. Be thought that the latter official might appoint an agent at Rome at a salary of £100 a year, which would be paid by English travellers, and that arrangement would meet all the wants to be satisfied by such an officer.

MR. NEWDEGATE

said, he was anxious to express the reasons why he thought it important that England should have a consul at Rome. This country had decided that for all commercial purposes the relations of the people of the Papal States and this country should be maintained. The Act also guarded against the admission of any ecclesiastic as an accredited agent of Rome in this country. He was most anxious to maintain relations with the people of Rome upon the sole footing of diplomatic relations. He thought it would be most unwise to make any change in that respect. He would therefore support the entire Vote.

MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK

said, there were £400 in the Vote for the salary of the Consul, and £100 for his office expenses. Against that Vote he saw £290. He wished to know whether it was the difference between those two items that was now asked for.

MR. LAYARD

said, the £290 was, of course, paid into the Exchequer, and the amount of the salary would be reduced by so much.

MR. WHALLEY

said, he wished to ask what the hon. Member for North Warwick shire meant by saying that the relations between the English people and the Roman people ought to be maintained He submitted that in the appointment of a Consul at Rome, we knew nothing of the Roman people.

MR. NEWDEGATE

said, he wished to maintain the salary of our Consul within the dominions of the Sovereign of the Ro-man States. That, he believed, was the term used in diplomatic language.

MR. WHALLEY

said, he thought that the existence of a Consul at any place should be the evidence of some trade or commercial relations, but he believed the Roman Government, whether at Rome or in any other part of the world, to be inimical to all commercial interests.

MR. WHITESIDE

desired to know the principle which actuated the Foreign Office in their retention of consulships. The hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had said that if the Roman Government were a good one there would be no Consul at Rome. He would like to know whether the Foreign Office decided upon maintaining the consulships of this country in accordance with the views which might be taken by the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of the excellence of the Governments of the different countries abroad.

SIR GEORGE BOWYEE

said, he would beg leave to remind the noble Lord at the head of the Government of the injunction— Caveat consul ne quid respublica detrimenti capiat.

MR. THOMSON HANKEY

said, that the consulate only cost this country about £210 a year, the remainder being met by the fees received from British residents in Rome, and tourists for services rendered to them. It would be most unwise to deprive our countrymen of the advantage of having a Consul at Rome. Whatever the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs might have said about political duties, he apprehended that the hon. Gentleman's remark was more said by way of joke than anything else.

SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE

said, he did not think that a matter of that kind ought to be allowed to pass with a joke from the Treasury Bench, but that sufficient reason ought to be shown for the maintenance of a Consul at Rome.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

I think my hon. Friend the Under Secretary has given very good reason for the appointment of a Consul at Rome. As to the Government being accused of passing this matter off with a joke, I think that the House has been in a greater humour for merriment than the Members sitting on the Treasury Bench. The hon. Baronet the Member for Dundalk has favoured us with his reading of the duty of a Consul. It would be hard on the Consul to apply to him practically the line, Solventur risu tabulœ tu missus abibis, and to dismiss him as if it was a practical joke. What has been said by my hon. Friend is perfectly true. There are a great number of British residents at Rome, and a large number of British travellers who pass periodically through that city. Rome is a great capital. Whether it is well governed or not is a question into which I will not now enter. It is quite impossible that there should be a great European capital, frequented by British subjects, without some recognized British authority in connection with the Government of the place. Our subjects residing at Rome or visiting that capital for the purposes of instruction or pleasure, would in the absence of a Consul be exposed to great inconvenience, which I am sure this House would he sorry to be the means of inflicting upon a large number of our fellow-countrymen.

CAPTAIN JERVIS

said, he wished to know what were Mr. Odo Russell's duties at Rome, because both he and a Consul were not wanted there. He thought the Under Secretary was throwing a shield over the British Consul that he did not require. He wished also to know what was Mr. Odo Russell's salary?

MR. ESMONDE

said, that having suffered from the inconvenience of having to apply to the Consul at Rome, he wanted to know whether it was necessary that such application should be required before obtaining the police permission to leave Borne? He understood that the proceeding upon which a small fee was paid, was not necessary as regards French and Americans. The reason why the discussion had wandered into the question of our diplomatic relations with Rome was because the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs had lost his temper. He thought the question might be narrowed to the necessity for a Consul which at present occasioned to travellers a delay in leaving Rome. He also wished to know if the fees were included in the salary of £290. Mr. Odo Russell held an anomalous position in Rome, and he might illustrate it by repeating a rumour that had reached him, that Mr. Odo Russell had declined to preside at a Shakesperian festival in Rome, on account of his anomalous position, he having no locus standi there.

SIR GEORGE BOWYER

said, the noble Viscount at the head of the Government was technically correct in saying that the British Consul at Rome was necessary because we had no diplomatic relations with that Court, but substantially he was in error. Mr. Odo Russell lived at Borne, had audiences with the Pope, and was in communication with Cardinal Antonelli and other authorities. If a Consul was necessary for the protection of British subjects, of what use was Mr. Odo Russell? Was that gentleman retained at Rome to make political capital—to write despatches of which the Government at home could make political capital in that or the other House of Parliament? Either Mr. Odo Russell or a Consul was unnecessary at Rome.

MR. MONSELL

said, it appeared to him it was unnecessary to discuss Mr. Odo Russell's position. He certainly was in the position that he was not recognized by the Romish Government, and could not discharge the duties of a British Consul. He could not but believe that it would be a great advantage if they had a recognized Minister at Rome, and an acknowledged representative of the Romish Court in this country. The question, however, was, whether they, could get rid of a person who occupied no official position there, like Mr. Odo Russell.

MR. DARBY GRIFFITH

said, that a Liberal Government ought not to defend the system, which was one of the most irregular that could be conceived. The great reason why he was disposed to join in the Amendment was in the requisition made for fees. A great deal of virtuous indignation had been expressed on the Treasury Benches in the diplomatic way to which they were all accustomed, but he would say— O fortunatam natam me consule Romam.

MR. LAYARD

said, he must remind hon. Members it was not a question of the interests of the Consul. The fees were not received for his own benefit, as they were paid into the Treasury. The Select Committee on the consular system recommended the payment of the fees. The visas were matters of police arrangements, and he was unable to say how far they were enforced. He had sent to Rome for information.

MR. WHITESIDE

asked the hon. Gentleman to state what were Mr. Odo Russell's functions.

CAPTAIN JERVIS

said, he had asked a plain question of the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and he wished for an answer, namely, what were Mr. Odo Russell's duties, and what was his salary? He had not asked for the information for the purpose of opposing the Vote but for information. He wished to know how it was he was required there as well as a Consul?

MR. LAYARD

said, he believed every hon. Member was well aware what Mr. Odo Russell's functions were. ["No!"] If they did not, he scarcely knew how to explain them. Mr. Odo Russell's position had been described as anomalous, and to a certain extent it was so; and because under an Act of Parliament this country could not maintain a diplomatic agent at Rome, Mr. Odo Russell held a position in the Italian embassy, but with not a very large salary. His duties were quite distinct from those of the Consul. There were, for instance, duties connected with the wills and property of British subjects which required the attention and signature of an official who was recognized by the Roman Government. These duties, which could not be performed by Mr. Odo Russell, were discharged by Mr. Severn.

MR. AYRTON

observed, that the visa had been abolished in the case of American subjects, he believed also in the case of the French, and he did not understand why it should be insisted on by the English Consul. After the extraordinary explanation which had been given by the; hon. Under Secretary, who commenced! by saying that every one knew the position of Mr. Odo Russell, and then confessed: he could not describe his functions, they had no alternative but to divide against the Vote. The real question was, whether the Consul at Rome should not also be intrusted with the functions of Mr. Odo ! Russell? They had no description of what! Mr. Odo Russell's duties were. The explanations from the Treasury Bench had led to so much confusion that there had been a long debate on a very small matter. If the hon. Under Secretary had given a clear and intelligible statement the debate would have ended long ago. The hon. Gentleman had been entirely carried away, if not by temper, by a very ardent imagination.

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

With regard to Mr. Odo Russell, by law as it formerly stood we were precluded from having any diplomatic relations with the Court of Rome. Some years ago the House thought it desirable that the Crownshould have diplomatic relations with the Court of Rome, and an Act of Parliament was passed authorizing the Crown to have those diplomatic relations. In the course of that Bill through Parliament a clause was introduced providing that no ecclesiastic should be received in this country as a diplomatic representative of the Pope. The Court of Rome took offence at that clause, and said that if they were not allowed to be represented here by an ecclesiastic, they would not be represented at all. We were obliged to submit to that decision, and, therefore, as they would not be represented here, so they said also they would not receive at Rome any accredited Minister from the Crown of England. Well, it appeared to the Government that it was almost childish that diplomatic intercourse with the Sovereign of Rome should be prevented by that question of etiquette, and accordingly the Secretary of Legation at Florence was stationed at Rome, with the consent of the Roman Government, to be the official organ of the Government with the Court of Rome; but of late years Mr. Odo Russell has been acting in that capacity. He is, unofficially I may say, the diplomatic agent of the Crown of England at Rome. He is, as has been stated by the hon. Baronet opposite, cordially received by the Pope, to whom he has free access, and with whom he is on the best possible personal terms. Mr. Odo Russell is at Rome for these general purposes, and it is quite a mistake to suppose that he is there for any political intrigues. He is there to give us that general information which diplomatic agents do give at the Courts where they are stationed, and to carry on those communications which from time to time it is expedient to carry on with the Roman Government, but these functions are totally distinct from those performed by a Consul. The Consul could not perform the functions of Mr. Odo Russell, and Mr. Odo Russell could not perform the functions of the Consul.

SIR MINTO FARQUHAR

said, that after the full explanation of the noble Viscount he could not conceive that the Amendment could be pressed. It was as clear as possible that the distinction between the post of Mr. Odo Russell and the Consul was great. The Court of Rome did not choose to have a representative from England unless he was an ecclesiastic; but, that the Government should know politically what was going on at Rome, the Court of Rome permitted a gentleman attached to the embassy to another State to fill the post. There were those who would have no diplomatic arrangements with the Pope; there were others who were satisfied at having agents at Rome to let us know what political intrigues were going on there. He thought it desirable that we should have a person like Mr. Odo Russell at Rome. On the other hand, he thought there ought to be a Consul at Rome to assist the travellers passing through the country. The Vote was on the question of salary. A Committee of which he was a member reported in favour of a Consul, with a salary, but without fees; and he hoped the Committee would affirm their opinion. If the consular functionary elsewhere were paid by salary, why not at Rome also.

MR. J. R. ORMSBY GORE

said, he wished to repeat the question which had been put, but to which no answer had been given—what was the salary received by Mr. Odo Russell?

MR. HENRY SEYMOUR

asked, if there was a Consul at Florence, why his name was not inserted in the Vote?

MR. LAYARD

said, it was because he was not paid.

MR. HENRY SEYMOUR

said, if that were the case he would ask, why should the Consul at Rome be paid?

Question put, and negatived.

Original Question again proposed.

MR. CLAY

asked for some explanation with respect to the state of the Russia Company.

MR. MONSELL

said, there was a distinct understanding that no Vote should be taken after eleven o'clock.

MR. LAYARD

said, he hoped the Committee would allow the Vote to pass. He would inquire as to the state of the Russia Company.

CAPTAIN JERVIS

understood that the question to report Progress had been raised.

MR. HENRY SEYMOUR

said, he should move that the Chairman report Progress.

Whereupon Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."— (Mr. Henry Seymour.)

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

said, he really hoped that as they had discussed the Vote for two hours, the Committee would come to a decision upon it. It was not proposed that they should, after that one, take any more Votes that night.

MR. HENRY SEYMOUR

said, there were many important points still to be raised on that Vote, and among others the small amount of the fees received by the Government since the Consuls had to pay them over to the Treasury. He did not see how they were to keep down the Estimates if they did not look into these small items. The patronage connected with the Consular Department was believed to have been much abused; and a few years ago they had the case of one Consul at the Dardanelles making off with a very large sum of the public money.

MR. LAYARD

said, that if the hon. Member would look at the Estimates, he would find that the amount of the consular fees had been annually increasing since 1860.

Question put.

The Committee divided:— Ayes 40; Noes 111: Majority 71.

Original Question again proposed,

MR. DARBY GRIFFITH

said, he thought it unworthy of the country to take back in fees £250 of the £500 paid to the Consul at Rome. He wished to know what the sentiments of the noble Lord at the head of the Government were on the subject; and he begged to move that the Chairman leave the chair.

Whereupon Motion made, and Question, "That the Chairman do now leave the Chair."—(Mr. Darby Griffith.)

VISCOUNT PALMERSTON

observed, that at one time the salaries of Consuls were entirely defrayed out of fees levied on shipping. These fees were abolished, and only notarine fees left, the distribution was very unequal, the amount in some cases being too large, and in other cases insufficient. The Committee which sat on the subject recommended, in order to equalize the payments, that the fees be paid to the public, and Consuls be paid by fixed salaries. If fees should be abolished altogether, the public would lose the benefit of the amount. He did not see why individuals who had offices performed for them should not make some small payment for the services which they received.

SIR MINTO FARQUHAR

said, his hon. Friend (Mr. Griffith) seemed to fancy that the only duty of a Consul was to take fees. Now, the duties of these officials were almost endless; and he could not understand why a small fee should not be paid by those who received the benefit of their services. If everything of that kind was to be done for nothing, the British public would be some £15,000 a year out of pocket.

Question put, and negative

Original Question put, and agreed to.

House resumed.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.

Committee to sit again To-morrow,