Commons Sitting of 5 July 1866

MINUTES.
— NEW MEMBER SWORN—William Baliol Brett, esquire, for Helston.
SELECT COMMITTEE — Report — On Education (No. 392.)
PUBLIC BILLS— Ordered — Prisons (Ireland) *; Revising Barristers' Qualifications.*
First Reading—Prisons (Ireland)* [207]; Revising Barristers' Qualifications * [208].
Report of Select Committee—On Thames Navigation (No. 391).
Committee—Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation (No. 2) * [170]; General Police and Improvement (Scotland) Act (1862) Amendment* [171].
Report—Thames Navigation* [205]; Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation (No. 2) * [170]; General Police and Improvement (Scotland) Act (1862) Amendment* [171].
Third Reading— Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation * [148], and passed.

DEVONPORT ELECTION.
Mr. SPEAKERacquainted the House, that he had this day received a Letter from John C. Thierens and John Beer, informing him that it is not their intention to proceed with their Petition complaining of an undue Election and Return for the Borough of Devonport:—Letter read as follows:—
Devonport, June 30 th, 1866. Sir,—In the matter of our Petition delivered in on the 5th of June instant, complaining of an undue Election and Return for the Borough of Devonport, we beg to inform you that it is not our intention to proceed with the same.—We have the honour to be, Sir, Your obedient Servants,
JOHN C. THIERENS.
JNO. BEER.
To the Right Honble.The Speaker of the House of Commons,
Ordered, That no further proceedings be taken upon the said Petition.

HELSTON ELECTION.
House informed, that the Committee had determined,—
That Robert Campbell, esquire, is not duly elected a Burgess to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Helston.
That William Baliol Brett, esquire, is duly elected, and ought to have been returned, a Burgess to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Helston.
And the said Determinations were ordered to be entered in the Journals of this House.
House further informed, That they had altered the Poll taken at the last Election for the Borough of Helston, by striking off the name of the Reverend Isaac Rodgers, as not having had a right to vote at such Election.
That no evidence having been adduced in support of any of the charges of bribery, treating, and undue influence made in one of the Petitions, the Committee have no reason to believe that corrupt practices have extensively prevailed at the last Election.
That it appears from the Poll Books produced before the Committee that the number of votes given for Robert Campbell, esquire, was equal to the number given for William Baliol Brett, esquire, and that the Returning Officer nevertheless returned the said Robert Campbell, esquire, as duly elected.
That the Returning Officer was not in attendance before the Committee, and no explanation was offered to the Committee of such a Return having been made.
Report to lie upon the Table.
Clerk of the Crown to attend forthwith to amend the Return.
The Clerk of the Crown attending, according to Order, amended the said Return accordingly.
MR. LOWE: There is a matter arising out of the Report of the Helston Election Committee, of which I was Chairman, which I am instructed by the Committee to bring under the notice of the House. It appears that the returning officer was served with the Speaker's warrant and with a notice to appear, but that he received a letter from the parties who, I suppose, procured those documents informing him that his evidence would not be required. The Committee, however, were of opinion that the facts disclosed in their Report did require further explanation, and they therefore instructed me to make some Motion to the House in order to give the House an opportunity of hearing from the returning officer that explanation which the Committee did not hear. I therefore am anxious to take the most convenient course. We are hardly in a position to discuss such a question at present, and I therefore propose, with the concurrence of the House, that on this day fortnight the Report of the Committee should be taken into consideration. I do not know whether I am in order, but it appears to me desirable that the returning officer should attend at the Bar on that day to give some explanation. I will, therefore, make those two Motions.
MR. LOWEthereupon moved that the returning officer be required to attend at the Bar of the House on that day.
COLONEL WILSON PATTENsuggested that it would be more convenient if the consideration of the Report were to take place first, so that the House might determine for itself whether it

717
would be necessary to require the attendance of the returning officer.
MR. LOWEthereupon withdrew the Motion.
Report to be considered upon Thursday, July 19.

THE BANK RATE OF DISCOUNT.

  QUESTION.
  MR. WATKINsaid, he would beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, What communications have taken place between himself and the Bank of England in reference to his Letter and to the continuance of the discount rate of 10 per cent by the Bank?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Sir, I cannot say that any communications of a formal or official nature have taken place; but, after writing a letter of the character of that referred to by the hon. Member, on the part of the Government and in conjunction with my noble Friend Earl Russell, I naturally took pains, aided by the Deputy Governor of the Bank, to inform myself as to the course of its operations and the consequent state of the Reserve, so long as it appeared to be probable or within the range of anything like likelihood that that Letter might be so far acted upon as to involve measures not sustained by the Act of 1844. I am not quite sure whether the Question of my hon. Friend (Mr. Watkin) is intended to go beyond that. I rather infer that he desires to know whether, and in what degree, the Government are parties to the present course and action of the Bank. The Letter itself explains the point up to which the Government is engaged in joint action with the Bank under certain hypothetical circumstances, which have not actually arrived. Short of their arrival I do not consider it is any part of the functions of the Government to attempt to instruct or influence the Bank in regard to the course it may think fit to take as to discounting bills, and the prices which may be charged. I think that if such a mixture of functions took place at all, it ought to be recognized and defined by law. I am not by any means of opinion that it should receive the sanction of law; but I am clearly of opinion that nothing could be more inconvenient than the assumption of responsibility by the Government in the conduct of the ordinary business of the Bank. As
  718
  to the course the Bank has taken since the issue of that Letter, and especially as to the course the Bank has taken within the last two or three weeks, during which time there has been some public expectation of a reduction of the rate of discount, I have only to say that the Directors of the Bank have acted entirely on their own judgment, and—so far have I thought it my duty to go—they have not been influenced by any considerations relating to that Letter. That is all I have thought it to be my duty to ascertain. I apprehend that the Directors have been governed entirely by banking considerations, It is not for me to pass any opinion one way or the other upon the correctness of the judgment they have formed. Undoubtedly, I should not wish it to be supposed for a moment that I have presumed to arrive at any judgment differing from theirs, or that I imagine they have formed an inaccurate estimate of the circumstances under which they act. That is all I have to say, but if there is any point on which the hon. Member wishes for further information I shall be happy to give it.

  REPORT ON THE MORAL AND MATERIAL PROGRESS OF INDIA.—QUESTION.
  MR. TREVELYANsaid, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether he is prepared to lay upon the table summaries of the detailed statements relating to the moral and material progress of India, in conformity with the recent Act of Parliament?
  MR. STANSFELD: I have, Sir, to-day laid upon the table of the House the statement to which the hon. Member refers; and, as this is the first occasion upon which such statements have been produced, I may, perhaps, be allowed to say a few words in explanation of their nature and object. It has been the custom to lay upon the table of the House very voluminous Reports relating to the respective Presidencies; but my noble Friend Earl de Grey was of opinion that the time had arrived when, in conformity with the provisions of the Act of Parliament, something like a manageable summary of the valuable information contained in these detailed Reports, which generally ranged from 1,000 to 1,200 pages, might be given to the House. Such a summary we have endeavoured to produce. I trust that it will be found to be readable, that it will be read, and that it will tend to popularize

  719
  Indian questions, and to increase the knowledge of and the interest in them, not only in the House, but throughout the country. I must acknowledge the obligation under which the department lies to Mr. Waterfield, the clerk in the India Office, who has drawn up this summary. It is the product of considerable labour, contains the fruits of much industry, and is in my opinion distinguished by great accuracy and lucidity of statement.

  AUSTRIA AND PRUSSIA—CESSION OF VENETIA.—QUESTION.
  MR. BAILLIE COCHRANE: Sir, I wish to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the Report which appeared in the second editions of the papers has been confirmed by news received at the Foreign Office—namely, of the defeat of the Austrian army, and the proposed cession of Venetia?
  MR. LAYARD: Sir, in reply to the hon. Member, I have to state that we have received telegrams which confirm the reports of the defeat of the Austrian army between Sadowa and Horwitz. There is also reason to believe that the statement of the Moniteur, which appears in the second edition of The Times, is correct.

IRELAND—THE QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY.

  QUESTION.
  MR. LOWE: I wish, Sir, to ask a Question, in explanation of which I may be allowed to make a statement. Early this Session, my right hon. Friend the Member for Tamworth (Sir Robert Peel) and myself received an assurance from the Chancellor of the Exchequer which, as we understood it, was, that nothing should be done with regard to the Queen's University in Ireland, without an opportunity being afforded to the House to express its opinion. I beg to ask my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether, notwithstanding that declaration, a Charter has not been prepared, and actually signed by Her Majesty, giving fresh powers in the conferring of degrees to the Senate of the Queen's University in Ireland?
  MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE: Sir, the best answer I can give to the Question of my right hon. Friend is to state simply what has occurred, and what the Government have done in this matter. My right hon. Friend is aware that the Government, in pursuance of a promise
  720
  made at the beginning of the Session, did state their intentions with respect to the alterations to be made in the Queen's University most fully in the form of a letter addressed by the Home Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. That letter, I believe, was presented to Parliament immediately after the Easter recess. Some weeks subsequently, there was again an opportunity of stating the intentions of the Government, when I introduced the Reform Bill for Ireland. In proposing, as part of that measure, that a Member should be given to the Queen's University in Ireland, I took occasion to state still more distinctly to the House the course the Government meant to take upon that subject. That course, advised by the Law Officers of the Crown, both of England and Ireland, was the passing of a Supplemental Charter to effect whatever could be effected by the power of the Crown, and the preparation of a Bill to supply what would be wanting in the Charter. Those two statements of the intentions of the Government having been unchallenged by this House, and no one having displayed any anxiety to call them in question, the Government proceeded to act upon them by the preparation of a Supplemental Charter and of a Bill. The Charter received the Queen's signature some three weeks ago, and the effect of it is to enable the Senate of the Queen's University in Ireland to confer degrees upon all who pass their examinations without regard to their place of education. That, and that only, is the effect of the Supplemental Charter, that being all which, according to the advice of the Law Officers of the Crown, came within its powers, having regard to the existing Charter of the University. We also had a Bill in preparation, of which I was on the point of giving notice a fortnight ago, when the division took place on the Motion of the hon. Member for Galway (Lord Dunkellin). The effect of that Bill would have been, and I hope it will be, to place the new class of graduates upon an equal footing, as to all rights and privileges as members of convocation and corporate bodies, with existing graduates of the University. The Bill also provided for a certain increase in the number of Senators, and for some other minor objects. That is the course the Government have taken, and it is not open to any such objection as that which my right hon. Friend appeared to imply.

IRELAND—NATIONAL EDUCATION.

  QUESTION.
  MR. PEEL DAWSONsaid, he wished to ask, Whether any advice has been given by the Government to the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland to alter the rule as to the attendance of children in the National Schools during the hours of religious instruction?
  MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, in reply, that no advice was given by the Government to the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland to alter their rules with regard to the attendance of children during the hours of religious instruction. The Commissioners had long felt that their rule was unsatisfactory, and, of their own accord, they proposed to adopt a new rule upon the subject. It was moved, he believed, by Lord Kildare, and adopted by a majority of the Commissioners; but, being a fundamental rule, it was in the usual course submitted to the Lord Lieutenant and the Government. The Government gave it their careful consideration, and were not prepared to adopt it precisely in the shape in which it was proposed. They thought it necessary that it should be accompanied by a provision, which would be in the hands of Members shortly, and the object of which would be to preserve scrupulously one of the principles of the national system—that of parental authority in the matter of education. That proviso was submitted to the Commissioners by the Lord Lieutenant, with an intimation that the rule would be approved with the addition of that proviso. The Commissioners accepted the addition; and the rule, with the added proviso, has received the sanction of the Lord Lieutenant.

  ABYSSINIA—IMPRISONMENT OF BRI TISH, SUBJECTS—STATEMENT OF MR. FLAD.—QUESTION.
  MR. WHITESIDEsaid, he rose to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Whether he can give the House any information with respect to the fate of the Abyssinian captives?
  MR. LAYARD: Sir, a telegram has been received by the Government from our Consul General at Alexandria, stating that Mr. Flad, the German Missionary who was detained in Abyssinia, is coming to England, and is now on his way with despatches from Mr. Rassam. I gather from this
  722
  communication that the King, before allowing the prisoners to leave Abyssinia, desired to receive some kind of assurance that the English Government would not demand reparation for his conduct towards those whom he had thrown into prison. I do not, of course, know the full contents of these despatches. Mr. Flad says that the captives released were treated with great kindness by the King, and I trust that little delay will take place before they reach England. I hope shortly to give the House fuller details on the subject. Meanwhile, letters have been written to the friends of the captives, with the information which I have now given to the House.

RESIGNATION OF MINISTERS.

  MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I am about to give a Notice which may appear unusual under present circumstances, and I therefore desire to state the reason—that to-morrow I shall move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the laws relating to the Inland Revenue. The Bill is one affecting particular interests, and if now brought in it may be printed and considered by the country before the new Government are called upon to form a judgment respecting it. At this period of the Session there will be great convenience in such an arrangement, and this is the only reason why I propose it. I may also now give Notice that I shall move to-morrow for the production of certain accounts of Public Income and Expenditure in each financial year from 1688 to 1801. These accounts have been two years in preparation, and will form a document of great interest. I have also to perform my last act in an official capacity in moving the adjournment of the House until to-morrow at the hour of five, which I understand will be the most convenient hour with reference to Motions which it is intended to make for the issue of certain writs, and with reference to the proceedings at Windsor, which will take place at an earlier hour in the afternoon. I shall therefore submit a Motion to that effect. Along with that Motion I wish to join a single expression which is really only the acknowledgment of a debt as respects the relations between the Government and a portion of the House of Commons; while, on the other hand, I am quite certain that any Gentleman who sits opposite, or who

  723
  sitting on this side of the House, has taken a different course, will not construe it as invidious, or as implying that any one has acted in a manner inconsistent with his honour, and against his conscience and his sense of public duty. Having regard to the length and tenacity of the struggle in which we were engaged upon the measure, which ultimately ended in the resignation of the Government, I hope I may, without offence, tender, in my own name and that of my Colleagues, the expression of our gratitude to those who with so much zeal and with so much perseverance supported us in the course of the struggle. I say that I tender these thanks in the name of my Colleagues, but very specially in my own name, because I am sensible that there may be many disadvantages under which they have had to act, in consequence of any part or influence which I may have had in the matter.
  Motion agreed to.
  House at rising to adjourn till To-morrow, at Five of the clock.

  PRISONS (IRELAND) BILL.
  OR Motion of Mr. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE, Bill to consolidate and amend the Law relating to Prisons in Ireland, ordered to be brought in by Mr. CHICHESTER FORTESCHE and Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL for IRELAND.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 207.]

  REVISING BARRISTERS' QUALIFICATIONS BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Bill to amend the Law relating to the Qualifications of
  724
  Revising Barristers, ordered to be brought in by Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Mr. SOLICITOR GENERAL, and Sir GEORGE GREY.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 208.]
  House adjourned at a quarter after Five o'clock.