§ (29.) £3,200, to complete the sum for the Bermudas.
§ In answer to Mr. HADFIELD,
§ MR. CHILDERSstated, that out of £30,000 a year which the establishments at Bermuda cost, this country bore a cost of £4,000; but the Treasury had been in correspondence during the last few months with the Government of the Bermudas, and 723 it was hoped that this Vote would be reduced next year.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (30.) £2,513, to complete the sum for the Clergy, North America.
§ In reply to Mr. HADFIELD,
§ MR. CHILDERSsaid, that some explanation was due respecting it. This was a matter of a very old arrangement with the colonies of North America, under which certain of the rectors and missionaries were paid from the Votes of Parliament; but as their number decreased by death the Vote would be reduced.
§ MR. HADFIELDthought that the taxing of England for the maintenance of clergymen in such a wealthy colony as Canada was a piece of absurdity, and he therefore objected to the Vote.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, that the country was pledged to this Vote during the lifetime of the present recipients of the money, and there was therefore no possibility of getting rid of it. With regard to the clergy in the West Indies, that did not at all apply to the present Vote. That, however, would be a very proper question to raise at some not very distant time when the statute under which certain payments were made would cease.
§ MR. HADFIELDwanted to know in what manner the statutes would put an end to the claims in question. Would the successors to the present Bishops receive the same amount of money as was now paid, or would the payments cease with their death? There was a growing opinion both at home and abroad that it was time these things were done away with. They were mischievous, and produced a bad feeling in the country to which the clergymen were sent, although at the expense of England. He wished to have a clear understanding before going further that measures were being taken to put an end to these payments.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, it was very easy to give an answer to his hon. Friend. This was an expiring remnant of what was once a heavy charge, which had been taken away under Earl Grey's Government. The money was for the most part remitted in very small sums to missionaries in the North American colonies; it was on the faith of this provision that they had committed themselves to a particular line of life. The stoppage of these allowances was therefore felt to be a very great hardship, and, consequently, it was determined that the money should 724 be continued to the present recipients till their decease. The amount was gradually being reduced, and did not now exceed £3,000, and the time would come when Parliament could cease to grant the Vote without breaking faith with a number of earnest and laborious men. With respect to the statute of which his hon. Friend had spoken, that had nothing to do with the Vote in hand.
§ MR. CANDLISHwas opposed to all grants of this nature, but where individual interests were concerned he would not, to give effect to his own views, consent to do a personal wrong.
MR. AKLANDsaid, the money seemed to be received by the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, and a Society of that kind was not likely to die.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that they were only the agents through whom the money was paid.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (31.) £1,000, for the Indian Department, Canada.
§ (32.) £17,178, to complete the sum for Governors and others, West Indies, &c.
§ MR. BENTINCKsaid, he observed in the Estimates a sum of £1,500
To make good the loss of emolument sustained by the Governor of New Zealand owing to his transfer from the more lucrative Government of the Cape of Good Hope,and he begged to ask for some explanation in reference to it.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, that Sir George Grey was in receipt of a much larger salary before he went to New Zealand; but he was sent there on the supposition that he was the most suitable person, considering the state of the country, to fill the office of Governor, and the sum of £1,500 was to compensate him for the loss he had sustained by his removal.
§ MR. BENTINCKsaid, the salaries of both officers should have been stated, in order that hon. Members might be able to decide whether the sum to be granted was a proper amount.
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, that Sir George Grey did not profit by his removal to New Zealand. An addition was simply made to the ordinary salary of the Governor of New Zealand, to secure Sir George Grey against any loss in accepting a post inferior in the rank of Colonial Governors; and he accepted it solely at the request of the Home Government, for the sake of the public service.
MR. HENLEYthought this was a curious sort of proceeding. In the ordinary course of affairs New Zealand paid its own Governor; but it appeared from this proposition that the sum which the colony allotted for the purpose was not enough to secure a sufficiently good man. At the same time, the circumstances of the colony were such as to require the presence of a man of the highest ability and great previous experience, and if the colony could find such a man they ought to pay him adequately. If New Zealand wanted a man as highly gifted as Sir George Grey—who was, no doubt, a very able man, and with great previous knowledge of the colony—they ought to pay a proper salary to secure him. It was not a sound principle that this country should supplement payments made by a colony for local purposes. Of course Sir George Grey ought not to be the loser, but this was an awkward precedent to set.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, nothing could be fairer than the way in which the question had been stated by the right hon. Gentleman. The Vote was one of a novel description, and it ought to be carefully watched by the House of Commons, lest it should grow into a precedent. But he thought it was justified by the peculiar circumstances of the case. A particular emergency had arisen in New Zealand—a state of war, in fact. It was true that New Zealand paid for its civil Governor, and it was very probable that for the sum they allot a competent person might have been found, and one that would have carried on the government in accordance with the views of the colonists. But there were questions, such as those connected with the aborigines, with regard to which this country had feelings and interests not fully shared by the colonists, and the object of the Government was to send out a man who would not simply carry out the views of the colonists, but who would do justice to both parties. Sir George Grey, having been Governor of New Zealand for a very long period, was held to be the fittest man to effect a settlement. Now it was not fair to call upon the colonists to pay the whole salary of this Governor; because, in point of fact, he was not sent out to give effect to their views, but of those of the Government at home. There being thus a public object to be gained, the Vote, he thought, was perfectly justifiable; at the same time the proposal was avowedly exceptional in its 726 character, and ought not to be drawn into a precedent. The order to proceed to New Zealand was sent to Sir George Grey at the Cape of Good Hope without any previous communication with him, and this, of course, increased the obligation of the Government.
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, the Government of Sir George Grey had been already prolonged by exceptional circumstances in the colony, and therefore the extra charge was not likely to be of long continuance.
MR. HENLEYagreed that the money ought to be paid, but the precedent was an awkward one whichever way it was looked at. The colony might complain and say, "You are paying a man high to come out here and do what we do not want to be done."
§ MR. BENTINCKwas satisfied with the explanation furnished by the Government, but thought a full statement ought to precede Votes of so exceptional a character. He wished to learn the details of Sir George Grey's salary, and whether there was any likelihood that the amount now voted would ever be repaid by the colony.
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, the Vote was a free grant by the House, made with no undertaking, contingent or otherwise, on the part of the colony, to refund the amount. The Vote added to Sir George Grey's salary as Governor of Now Zealand would exactly make up his official income as Governor of the Cape of Good Hope.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (33.) £5,750, to complete the sum for Justices, West Indies.
MR. REMINGTON MILLSobjected to the principle of paying for the magistrates of the West Indies, especially as it appeared from recent events that justice there was very partially administered, and that the black people were cruelly oppressed, and a stipendiary magistracy, if it existed at all, ought to be paid from the local funds.
§ MR. CARDWELLagreed with much that had fallen from the hon. Member. But it was an expiring Vote, the residue of a much larger sum. As to the administration of justice, it would require more than the six magistrates referred to, to do justice in the island.
§ MR. HADFIELDasked would the Vote expire as the magistrates die off?
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, that after the Emancipation Act stipendiary magistrates were sent out from England, whoso exertions had proved most salutary. The House of Assembly, however, refusing to provide salaries for them, these were necessarily paid by the English Government. The Vote would diminish as the number of remaining magistrates grew smaller. He knew that great complaints had been made—he did not say with what foundation—as to the administration of justice in Jamaica; but he had never heard any complaint against the administration of justice by the stipendiary magistrates.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (34.) £36,500, to complete the sum for Western Coast of Africa.
§ MR. HADFIELDasked for some explanation on the Vote.
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, that a Committee who inquired into the question last Session were unanimously of opinion that, though it was not desirable to increase our establishment in Western Africa, it was necessary to maintain them.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (35.) £3,524, to complete the sum for St. Helena.
§ MR. HADFIELDobserved, that the constant demands under this head called for some explanation.
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, that certain charges which formerly had been paid by the East India Company were now paid out of the Imperial Exchequer.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (36.) £500, for Orange River Territory.
§ GENERAL. DUNNEasked how it was that this payment still continued?
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, that the money was paid in pursuance of an arrangement come to ten years ago, when the Orange River Territory was given up. Certain pensions were then given the recipients of which were gradually diminishing.
§ MR. CANDLISHthought it would be a great advantage to us if we could get rid of other territories on similar terms.
§ MR. BENTINCKinquired in what manner the persons who received the pensions died off. Were there any reversionary interests? Did their children receive pensions?
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, there was no reversionary interest in the pensions. He did not know exactly in what manner the pensioners died off, but he presumed that they departed in the same way as all human beings did.
§ MR. BENTINCKhad no doubt they died in the ordinary way. It did not require one to be a Privy Councillor to tell that. What he wanted to know was, the way in which the payment of the money was to come to an end.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (37.) £1,100, for Heligoland.
§ (38.) £3,875, to complete the sum for the Falkland Islands.
§ (39.) £2,644, to complete the sum for Labuan.
§ GENERAL DUNNEasked what were to be the future arrangements for Labuan? Was the garrison composed of British or Indian troops?
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, that expenses were incurred in consequence of the coal to be found in the vicinity of the station. The garrison was composed of Sepoys.
§ MR. POWELLasked whether any portion of the Vote was applied to the investigation of the nature of the coal-fields?
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, the coal-fields were already open, and coal had been brought to the surface, so that it was now too late for inquiry on that head. Petroleum also had been discovered there; hut it was too early yet to say anything with respect to that.
§ MR. POWELLinquired what was the extent of the coal-fields?
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, the coal-fields were considerable. He could not state with statistical accuracy the extent of the coal-fields or the quality of the coal.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (40.) £300, for the Pitcairn Islanders (Norfolk Island).
§ (41). £7,418, to complete the sum for Emigration.
§ MR. POWELLsaid, he could not help thinking that the time might not be far distant when it would be no longer thought expedient to vote money for this purpose. He thought the time was not far distant when we should discover, to our loss, that we had not a surplus of population at home. If there was a field for the labour of emigrants in the colonies, the colonies ought to make the grant for emigration. There 729 could be no doubt that there was, even at present, a great scarcity of labour in the scenes of our commercial enterprize at home; and the policy of encouraging emigration to the colonies by Votes from the Imperial Exchequer was therefore questionable, to say the least. If Parliament were called on to vote a sum for this purpose, by parity of reasoning it might be called on to aid in removing labourers from Devonshire, or other agricultural districts, to the more populous and better-paid districts of Lancashire and Yorkshire.
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, that the expenditure in question was not incurred in removing persons to the colonies, but for the very necessary purpose of seeing that those who emigrated did so in a manner consistent with humanity, safety, and comfort. He was sure that a Vote for that purpose would not be objected to, and that it would be contrary to the wishes of the House to do anything which should defeat the object in view, and allow persons to go to sea in un sea worthy ships, or under circumstances that might involve suffering or danger.
MR. HENLEYsaid, that in the inquiry which was made into the loss of the London, which had so greatly shocked the people of this country; reference was made to the surveys and so forth the vessel had undergone before leaving port. Prom the evidence on this point it appeared to him it was possible for some things, to use a common phrase, to fall to the ground between two stools. The Emigration surveyors seemed to look to one thing, and other parties to another; but there seemed to be no one responsible altogether for the safety of the vessel. He wished to ask whether, since that inquiry, the attention of the Emigration Officer had been called to that branch of the subject. The House would not grudge a proper payment to have the work of inspection well done. If it suited people to go to the colonies, it was necessary that there should be some oversight to afford security that the vessels in which they sailed were fit to take them; but care must be taken that money was paid for a good and useful purpose, and not for merely nominal surveys. From the evidence given at the inquiry it was impossible to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion as to the condition of the vessel when she left Plymouth, and as to whether she was or was not properly laden with a great quantity of deck cargo in the shape of coal which might have contributed to the loss 730 of the vessel. He asked for an assurance that the matter had received, or would receive, consideration.
§ MR. CARDWELLcould assure the right hon. Gentleman that the matter did receive consideration at the time; and he would add that it should receive the further attention both of his Office and of the Emigration Commissioners.
§ MR. ALDERMAN LUSKsaid, that having known for twenty-five years Captain Lean, the Emigration Surveyor of the port of London, he could testify that he was a conscientious and faithful officer, and that he troubled shipowners by being rather too particular. No man would look so much to the sails of a steamship as to those of a sailing vessel, and in the case of the London the Emigration Officer, having looked to the engines, took the word of the owners as to the sails. With respect to the loading of the London he had ascertained that it was quite in accordance with the rules of Lloyd's Emigration Commissioner, and that she had eight inches to spare out of the water. Therefore, Captain Lean and the Emigration officers were not open to the blame which had been imputed to them.
§ SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFEsaid, that the Vote for the London office, £6,031, and that for all other ports, £4,337, suggested the fear that there was a disproportion in numbers between the controlling staff and the working staff, and that, considering the duties to be performed, the subordinate officers were too few and were underpaid.
§ SIR MATTHEW RIDLEY, in reference to the surgeons on board emigrant ships, wished to direct attention to the case of the surgeon of the East London, who, although he had been thirteen years in the emigration service, had been refused a re-appointment by the Emigration Office, solely, as appeared from the minutes of an inquiry held at Calcutta, because at the time of the wreck of the East London he failed to lodge a protest against the steamtug Elgin for leaving the East London. Considering the length of the surgeon's service and his unimpeached character, and especially that at the time of the wreck he was suffering from pleurisy and broken ribs, he was hardly used in being refused a re-appointment for so slight a neglect as the failure to discharge a duty which seemed to belong to a naval rather than to a medical officer.
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, this appeared 731 to be a case of individual grievance perfectly well known to the hon. Baronet, but which had not yet been submitted to the Emigration Commissioners. [Sir MATTHEW RIDLEY: I beg pardon; it has.] At all events, it had not been submitted to him. All that he knew was that in the report of the Indian Commission some blame was attached to the Emigration Agent at the time; but the Emigration Commissioners were not able to take notice of it because the Emigration Agent died, and, of course, the matter was at an end.
§ SIR MATTHEW RIDLEYsaid, the papers were in his possession, and he should be happy to place them in the right hon. Gentleman's hands.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (42.) £3,500, Expedition.
§ In reply to Mr. BENTINCK,
§ MR. LAYARDsaid, that the Vote was for the establishment by the late Dr. Baikie of the station at the confluence of the rivers Niger and Tchadda, which was very important for purposes of trade. For one year they had little or no communication with Dr. Baikie who had gone up the river, and the expenses attached to the Vote referred to payments extending over some time for salaries of staff and contingencies. Dr. Baikie came down last year, but, unfortunately, he died at Sierra Leone before reaching this country. Whether the establishment would be kept up would depend very much on whether the Liverpool merchants would continue to send vessels up the Niger for purposes of trade.
§ MR. OLIPHANThoped the House would not be alarmed by the protests of the hon. Member for Sheffield (Mr. Hadfield) against establishments of this kind, which were in the highest degree desirable with a view to the maintenance of British interests. He trusted the trade up the Niger would be so great as to induce the Government to keep up the establishments which had been of such benefit to the country.
§ MR. ALDERMAN LUSKwished to know why that House should pay £3,500 because the Liverpool merchants for their own purposes sent out an expedition?
§ MR. LAYARDsaid, the Vote was necessary in order to keep up the credit of this country in those regions. It was necessary that trade should be protected, and that could be done only by a British Consul, whom they had promised to keep 732 at the junction of the two rivers, if the merchants engaged in the trade on the Western coast of Africa declared their intention of navigating the Niger for commercial purposes.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (43.) £1,000, Treasury Chest.
§ (44.) £29,000, to complete the sum for Captured Negroes, Bounties on Slaves, &c.
§ MR. WHITEsaid, he did not think that so large a sum as that proposed was really required. Although there was a diminution of £8,000 on the Vote as compared with that of last year, nevertheless, the fact of the American Government having joined us now in our endeavour to put down the slave trade, he considered that there ought to be a much larger reduction in the Vote,
§ MR. CHILDERSsaid, there had not as yet been time to appreciate the advantage of the co-operation of the American Government, but next year he anticipated there would be a considerable diminution in the Vote; but it was generally a year, and sometimes two, before the accounts were made up.
§ MR. DARBY GRIFFITHreminded the Committee that the Spanish Government were also co-operating with us in the attempt to suppress the slave trade, inasmuch as they had sent bonâ fide instructions to their Captain General at Cuba to use his utmost energies in that direction; and as the American Government were also uniting with us to effect the same object, we might expect in future a very different state of things from what we had so long been accustomed to.
§ MR. LAYARDsaid, he was happy to announce the gratifying fact that during the last year there had been only one cargo of slaves shipped from the Westerns Coast of Africa, as far as he could learn. The Foreign Office had information of a cargo recently landed at Cuba, but it was immediately seized by the Spanish authorities. They had not ascertained whence it had come. Nothing could exceed the energetic and able manner in which General Dulce carried out the instructions which he received from his Government for the suppression of the slave trade. He believed it was entirely owing to these instructions and to the resolute conduct of the late Captain General of Cuba—for he regretted to say that his term of office had expired 733 —that the importation of slaves in Cuba had ceased. Such had been the change of opinion in Cuba on the subject that a large and influential Society had been formed there, of which General Dulce was president, for the suppression of slavery and the introduction of free labour. If the objects of this society could be carried out the whole slave trade on the Western Coast of Africa would cease, and he trusted they would shortly hear no more of it. On the Eastern Coast it was quite another matter, and the trade there, he feared, was likely to continue.
§ MR. CHILDERSsaid, that they did not.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (45.) £7,450, to complete the sum for Commissions for Suppression of Slave Trade.
§ MR. BENTINCKinquired by whom the trade in slaves was carried on on the East Coast of Africa?
§ MR. LAYARDsaid, the trade there was carried on in two ways. In the northern part of the East Coast of Africa it was carried on by the Arab tribes in the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf; on the southern side by the tribes under the protection of Portugal chiefly. The Portuguese Government, however, were exerting themselves to put a stop to this trade. We had cruisers on the East Coast as well as the West Coast of Africa.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (46.) £123,978, to complete the sum for Consuls Abroad.
§ MR. WHITEsaid, that the first item was for a Consul at Massowah, in Abyssinia; and after the painful experience we had had of the results of involving ourselves in Abyssinian politics, he thought the Government would do well to extinguish this consulate.
§ MR. LAYARDsaid, that notwithstanding the entry in the Estimates, Massowah was not in Abyssinia, though our Consul there had jurisdiction in that kingdom, but in the Turkish dominions. The imprisonment of the European captives in that country had had nothing whatever to do with our Consular establishment at Massowah.
MR, DARBY GRIFFITHobserved, 734 that there was a large increase of salary for the Consul at Rustchuck—from £200 to £850.
§ MR. LAYARDsaid, that there was a change in the administration of the Turkish Provinces. The Turkish Government had established three great jurisdictions, and a full Consul would be placed at Rustchuck, which would be the seat of the Governor. The allowances for Consuls at Varna and other places would be at the same time reduced, and a saving would be effected.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (47.) £121,978, to complete the sum for services in China, Japan, and Siam.
§ GENERAL DUNNEasked, upon what ground the civil salaries had been augmented, whilst the military salaries had been diminished. He did not complain of the increase in the former, but he thought it was disgraceful that our soldiers in Hong Kong were treated in such a niggardly spirit. He attributed the frightful malady amongst them at Hong Kong lately to this system which had been adopted towards them.
§ MR. READcomplained of the meagre information supplied them in relation to such large sums as those which comprised the Vote,
§ MR. LAYARDaccounted for the augmentation in the Vote for civil salaries by the circumstance of certain legal changes having recently taken place in the places in question, which necessitated this augmentation. An officer had been sent out to China and Japan to ascertain what accommodation in the shape of buildings, &c, would be necessary for our Consuls and other officers in those countries. No satisfactory estimate could be formed at home of the value of the buildings required for our representatives in China and Japan.
§ MR. DARBY GRIFFITHsaid, the first item of this Vote would appear to carry on its face a reduction; but from the manner in which the information was given in the Votes it was impossible to say 'whether it was a reduction or not.
§ MR. LAYARDsaid, he imagined it had been reduced by £2,000 last year; the sum of £8,000 was considered excessive. It was now reduced to £6,000.
§ Vote agreed to.
735
§
(48.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £24,000, 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 1867, for the Extraordinary Disbursements of Her Majesty's Embassies and Missions Abroad.
§ MR. CANDLISHasked for an explanation of the £1,000 in the Miscellaneous Charges for the French Embassy.
§ MR. LAYARDsaid, he could not give a correct explanation of it. The hon. Member must see that many heavy charges were likely to be incurred by the Paris Embassy.
§ MR. DARBY GRIFFITHcomplained of the unsatisfactory manner in which the diplomatic expenses were brought before the Committee. Part was charged to one fund and part to another. They had now a piebald account, which did not show what the diplomatic charges had been. They ought to be paid out of one fund instead of as at present out of two funds.
§ MR. LAYARDsaid, the extra sum for the attaches was paid under Vote 22, in accordance with the recommendation of a Committee appointed to inquire into the diplomatic service.
§ SIR ROBERT PEELwished to bring under the notice of the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the case of a British subject who was in some danger on a charge of deserting from the Swiss Army. The man claimed to be a British subject; but the Swiss Government claimed him as one of their subjects, it being alleged that he was a citizen of Geneva, and it would be as well if our Minister at Berne could make some inquiries into the matter with a view to his being absolved from the charge that had been made against him.
§ MR. LAYARDsaid, the case referred to was a very hard one, and it had occupied the attention of the Foreign Office. His right hon. Friend brought the subject under his consideration some time ago, and he had lost no time in making full inquiry into it. He only received yesterday a Report from the Law Officers of the Crown, and from it he feared the man had no case. It was a very difficult point of law, and he was afraid it would turn out that this person was not a British subject. His father was a British subject, but his grandfather was not, and the nationality of the grandfather decided the nationality of the grandson, and strictly speaking, therefore, he was not a British subject. He 736 hoped the Swiss Government, as a matter of comity and good feeling, would release him from the penalties which he had involuntarily incurred in ignorance of what was his real status. Every exertion would be used by Her Majesty's Government to release him from the difficult position in which he was placed.
§ SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, this person was born in London, and he could not see how the grandfather's accepting the citizenship of Geneva, when his son was thirty-three years of age, could deprive the grandson of his nationality—that of a British subject.
§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTHcomplained that the Votes in Class V. had been taken rather unexpectedly; and as he knew that an hon. Member, who was then absent, wished to make some observation on one of the Votes, he moved that the Chairman report Progress.
§ Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Sclater-Booth.)
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 31; Noes 81: Majority 50.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he wished to receive some explanation of the item set down for the conveyance of distinguished foreigners from Dover to Calais.
§ MR. LAYARDreplied that that item was not included in the Vote under discussion.
§ Original Question put, and agreed to.
§
(49.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £15,000, 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 1867, for Special Missions, Diplomatic Outfits, and Conveyance and Entertainment of Colonial Officers and others.
MR. REMINGTON MILLStook occasion to ask for an explanation of the sum of £21 17s. 6d., which was set down under the head of "Expenses for the conveyance of the Bishop of Kingston and his servant from Jamaica to Belize and back."
§ MR. CARDWELLreplied that the charge was one which was customary when a Bishop was obliged, as in the present instance, to go from one part of his diocese to another.
§ MR. REMINGTON MILLS moved that the item be struck out.
737
§
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That the Item of £21 17s. 6d., for the expenses of the Bishop of Kingston and servant from Jamaica to Belize and back, be omitted from the proposed Vote."—(Mr. Remington Mills.)
§ MR. CHILDERSsaid, the item was one in the account for last year, and that its omission would not in reality effect a reduction of the Vote for the present year.
MR. HENLEYshould like to know who those distinguished foreigners were to whom he had just referred.
THE CHAIRMANsaid, the discussion must be confined to the matter immediately before the Committee, which was the striking out of the item of £21 17s. 6d.
MR. HENLEYrenewed his inquiry as to who the distinguished persons were who were conveyed between Dover and Calais. He should like to know whether they were blacks or whites, and what objection there was to stating their names?
§ MR. LAYARDreplied that he could not go into the details of the information which the right hon. Gentleman required. It was usual, when the guests of Her Majesty crossed the Channel between Dover and Calais, to convey them at the public expense. Their names were not given, because they were conveyed in special packets. Those whose names were given had been conveyed and entertained on board Her Majesty's vessels,
MR. HENLEYwas quite aware that was so, but the list in the present instance appeared to be a very long one,
MR. GUILDERSsaid, the charge for each of those special passages was £10, and there had been four of them.
§ MR. OLIPHANThaving observed that a sum of £2,000 was asked for to defray the expenses of Mr. Palgrave, who went out to release Consul Cameron from his captivity in Abyssinia, he should like to know when Mr. Palgrave was appointed to that mission? How long he was employed on it, and generally, what were the results of his efforts in the matter?
§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTHshould like to hear on what principle the various items in the Vote were charged. He found that, while the round sums of £2,000 and £1,500 were set opposite the names of Mr. Palgrave and Mr. Hutt, shillings and pence were very carefully given in other instances.
§ MR. LAYARDreplied, that when the gross sums were put down as in the cases which the hon. Gentleman mentioned, it was because the money had been paid on account. With respect to Mr. Palgrave, as last year there was a strong feeling that sufficient was not being done—though he did not think so—to obtain the release of Consul Cameron and the other captives in Abyssinia, Earl Russell considered it to be his duty to take further steps to obtain their release, and he instructed Mr. Palgrave to proceed to Egypt, and from thence to Abyssinia in the event of Mr. Rassam's mission having failed. When Mr. Palgrave arrived in Cairo, Mr. Rassam had received the invitation from King Theodore, and Mr. Palgrave was ordered to remain at Cairo until the result of Mr. Rassam's visit to Gondar was known. When information had been received that it had been successful, Mr. Palgrave was directed to return to this country.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he did not think the explanation with regard to the conveyance of distinguished persons very satisfactory. The Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs had said that the reason the names were not given was, because the distinguished persons were conveyed in special packets; but the names of the Duke of Cambridge and the Princess Mary, conveyed by special packets, were given, and he wished to know, therefore, why the names of the other distinguished persons were not given?
§ MR. LAYARDreplied, that it was never the habit to specify by name distinguished foreign visitors to Her Majesty conveyed by special packets between Dover and Calais.
§ MR. OLIPHANTsaid, that the release of the Abyssinian captives was not due to the exertions of Mr. Palgrave, and he thought £2,000 a large sum to give him.
§ MR. CHILDERSexplained, that the sum of £2,000 was advanced when Mr. Palgrave was originally sent to Abyssinia, for the purpose of meeting the expenses of the mission. If the expenses did not amount to £2,000, the balance would be returned.
§ MR. ALDERMAN LUSKobserved, that the expense of the mission for investing the King of Portugal with the Order of the Garter was put down at £659, and the expenses of the mission for investing the King of Denmark with the same Order was stated to be £915. He wished to 739 know the reason of the difference in the two cases?
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Original Question put, and agreed to.
§ (50.) £2,600, to complete the sum for Third Secretaries to Embassies.
§ In reply to Mr. DARBY GRIFFITH,
§ MR. LAYARDsaid, that since the system of unpaid attaches had been done away with in consequence of the Report of a Committee, and the junior members of missions had been paid, the class of attaches had signally improved during the last few years. The experiment had fully succeeded, and a highly competent body of men was now attached to the missions abroad.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ MR. CHILDERS moved that the Chairman report Progress.
§ MR. BENTINCKasked, what course would be taken if the House got into Committee of Supply to-morrow? Would the Education Vote be taken?
§ MR. CHILDERSsaid, the intention tomorrow was to take one Vote in the Army Estimates—that for Fortifications. After that they would take the remaining votes in Classes VI. and VII., but not the Education Vote. At eleven o'clock to-morrow night, he should move that the Chairman report Progress, and his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer would then take the second reading of the Customs Bill.
§ House resumed.
§ Resolutions to be reported To-morrow;
§ Committee to sit again To-morrow.