Commons Sitting of 4 March 1880

MINUTES.
NEW MEMBERS SWORN—John Francis Smithwick, esquire, for Kilkenny City; Benjamin "Whitworth, esquire, for Drogheda Borough.
SUPPLY—considered in Committee—CIVIL SERVICE SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES, Classes II., III., IV., and V.
PUBLIC BILLS—Ordered—Parliamentary Elections and Corrupt Practices.
Committee—Blind and Deaf-Mute Children [41]—R.P.
Committee—Report—Road Debts on Entailed Estates (Scotland) * [95].
Third Reading—Beer Dealers' Retail Licences * [65], and passed.

QUESTIONS.

  PARLIAMENT—ARRANGEMENT OF PUBLIC BUSINESS.
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If he could inform the House at what hour he expected to be able to bring on his Motion respecting the appropriation of the vacant seats? He should also like to know, What Business was proposed to be taken on Monday next, and at what date it was proposed that the House should rise for the Easter Holidays?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER,in reply, said, that the Government did not propose at present to proceed with any but the Supplementary Estimates, which it would be necessary to pass without delay, as the Ways and Means Bill had to be passed before the close of the financial year. He hoped that hon. Members in charge of other Bills would be disposed to assist the Government in proceeding with the Appropriation of Seats Bill. He did not propose to proceed with that Bill after half-past 11 o'clock that night. With regard to the noble Lord's last Question, without making an absolute undertaking, he believed the most convenient course would be for the House to rise on Thursday, the 25th instant, and adjourn until Monday week following, the 5th April. While on his legs, he wished to make an appeal to the hon. Baronet the Member for Chelsea (Sir Charles W. Dilke) and the hon. and gallant Gentle-
  298
  man the Member for Kincardineshire (General Sir George Balfour) with regard to Notices of opposition which they had placed against the Motion for the nomination of the Committee on Public Accounts. He was not aware of the grounds of their opposition; but the effect of it was that the Government were unable to bring forward that Motion after half-past 12. Now, it was important for the regular conduct of the financial Business of the House that the Committee should be nominated within a reasonable time; and if the hon Members in question objected merely to particular names on that Committee they could state their objection when the nomination was made.
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, he believed it was necessary for the Committee to make a Report before the close of the present financial year; and, therefore, he would withdraw his Notice.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALPOURsaid, he would do the same; but he intended to question the constitution of the Committee.

  VALUATION OF PROPERTY (METROPOLIS) ACT—CLAUSES 4, 6, & 7.
  SIR JOHN HAY (for Mr. HUBBARD)asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he will direct the omission of Clauses 4,6, and 7, from the Return issued for the assessment of property under the Valuation of Property (Metropolis) Act, the said Clauses being largely disapproved as raising questions which are not essential to an accurate valuation?
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON: Sir, it is not correct to say that the questions raised in Clauses 4, 6, and 7 of the forms are not essential to an accurate valuation. They are all required for purposes of house duty and Income Tax. It was intended to insert clauses in a Valuation Bill last year to provide for similar secrecy to that given in the Income Tax Returns, and this year I propose doing that by a separate Bill now before the House. When that is passed the Returns as issued now will be enforced; but until that Bill passes, remembering the promise of the Chancellor of the Exchequer last year, penalties will not be enforced against those who do not choose to fill up the clauses of the forms which are objected to.

  THE SUNDAY QUESTION—THE BRIGHTON AQUARIUM.
  MR. HOLTasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he is aware that the recent remission of penalties in the Brighton Aquarium case has given rise in the minds of many persons to misapprehension; and, if he will state to the House the exceptional grounds upon which he advised the Crown to remit the penalty in that case, and also the general intentions of the Government as to the exercise of the powers contained in "The Remission of Penalties Act, 1875," in its bearing on the Sunday question?
  MR. ASSHETON CROSS,in reply, said, that if the Brighton Aquarium Company had continued as they first opened there would have been no remission of penalties; but alterations had since been made which removed all objections, and now no persons were employed in the Aquarium on Sunday except those who were actually required for the care of the place. The Government had no intention of doing anything to encourage plans for turning Sunday into a day of labour for commercial gain, and he should certainly feel it his duty to discourage any practice which would have such an effect.

  MERCHANT SEAMEN—LEGISLATION.
  MR. BURTasked the President of the Board of Trade, If he can state when he will introduce the Bill promised in the early part of last Session relating to seamen?
  VISCOUNT SANDON: Sir, I am very anxious to introduce the measure respecting merchant seamen which I had prepared last year, but was unable to introduce; and as soon as I see that the Business of the House gives me any hope of securing due consideration for the subject I shall bring it forward.

  MERCANTILE MARINE—LIGHT DUES ON SHIPPING.
  MR. C. TENNANTasked the President of the Board of Trade, If it be correct, as had been stated at the recent meeting of the Chamber of Shipping, London, and repeated at the meeting of the Shipowners' Association of Glasgow, that Great Britain and Turkey were the
  300
  only two countries which exacted Light Duties from shipping, and that other countries maintained their lighthouses out of the Imperial Revenue?
  VISCOUNT SANDON: Sir, although I have not been able to verify the correctness of the statement to which the hon. Member refers, there is no doubt that a considerable number of foreign countries do maintain their lighthouses out of their National Exchequer. But I believe I am correct in saying that several of these countries levy on shipping dues and other taxes, which they pay into their National Treasuries; while I need hardly say that in this country there is no tax imposed on shipping which is paid into the National Treasury. I may add that the comparison of the taxes on shipping levied in different ports and different countries is a very complicated and difficult question.

  ARMY (IRELAND)—AUXILIARY FORCES —THE LIEUTENANT COLONEL OF THE ANTRIM MILITIA.
  MR. BIGGARasked the Secretary of State for War, Is it a fact that on the 29th day of July 1879 the following serious charges were brought against the Lieutenant Colonel of the Antrim Artillery Militia, viz. of having, during the training in June 1879, been frequently intoxicated and disorderly; if so, were the charges investigated, and, if not, for what reason, as the person who brought the charges declared he was prepared to substantiate them, and, if withdrawn, whether any pressure or influence was brought to bear to induce the person to do so?
  COLONEL STANLEY: Sir, I have no information on the subject at all. I cannot find that there is anything traceable on the matter at the War Office; but I will cause inquiry to be made of the Commander-in-Chief in Ireland.

  POOR LAW—ELECTION OF GUARDIANS —LEGISLATION.
  MR. HIBBERTasked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether it is his intention to introduce any measure during the present Session to carry out the recommendations of the Select Committee of 1878 with reference to the mode of election and tenure of office of guardians of the poor?
  MR. SCLATER-BOOTH,in reply, said, that the Poor Law Amendment Bill would contain clauses to carry out the recommendations of the Select Committee of 1878 with reference to the mode of election and tenure of office of Guardians of the poor.

  ARMY—PROMOTION—COMPULSORY RETIREMENT.
  MR. A. BASSasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether, taking into consideration that there are seventeen Regiments and Battalions whose Lieutenant Colonels have held command for periods varying from nine to fourteen years, he intends to take any steps towards their compulsory retirement, and thus place the senior Majors and Captains of these Regiments under the same advantages with regard to promotion as other Regiments of Her Majesty's Service?
  COLONEL STANLEY: A letter has been sent to each of the colonels referred to, stating that it is proposed to submit to the Queen a draft warrant to abolish the exemption from the five-years' rule which at present exists in their case, and offering them the alternative of employment with brigade depots or on the Staff if duly qualified. Several have accepted the proposal; but we have not yet received answers from all the officers to whom we have written.

  ARMY—AUXILIARY FORCES—RETIRED VOLUNTEER OFFICERS.
  MR. A. BASSasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he is prepared to extend to Volunteer Officers, on the recommendation of their Commanding Officers, the privilege now enjoyed by Militia Majors and Captains of retiring with a step of honorary rank and permission to wear the uniform of such rank after twenty-five or twenty years' service respectively?
  COLONEL STANLEY: Sir, the question has been several times discussed how far the privilege now enjoyed by the Militia regiments of retiring on honorary ranks should be extended to the Volunteers. It was fully gone into several years ago, and at that time considerable concessions were made in favour of Volunteers, among others that they should retain their uniform, if com-
  302
  missioned officers, after 15 years' service—a concession not given to officers of the Regular Army. It is not, therefore, at present intended to give any further step of rank, or to give an honorary rank on retirement.

  MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT—IMPRISONMENT OF SAILORS.
  MR. PLIMSOLLasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If he is in a position now to give any information in regard to the case of the men who were committed to gaol by the Falmouth magistrates for refusing to proceed to sea in a vessel which they alleged to be unseaworthy; and, whether this committal took place by the magistrates without a survey of the ship, although the men desired one to be made, and although there was a Board of Trade surveyor in the town?
  MR. ASSHETON CROSS: Sir, my attention had been called to this case by my noble Friend the President of the Board of Trade before the Question was put on the Paper, and I have been in consultation with him, and have taken the best advice on the subject. In my opinion, the magistrates have made a mistake with regard to the Act of Parliament. It seems to me that they ought to have taken the evidence of a surveyor in the first instance, and then come to a conclusion, instead of which they seemed to have waited until they thought a survey was unnecessary. Undoubtedly, the survey ought to have been made by the Board of Trade surveyor, who was ready to hand. It was a great mistake on the part of the magistrates, and, under those circumstances, I have thought it right to let the men out of prison.

  FISHERY PIERS (IRELAND)—NEW SHANNON PIER.
  MR. O'CLERYasked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether the Government will advance the money necessary for a fishing pier and proper harbour accommodation at Gooleen, Ross, at the mouth of the Shannon?
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON: Provision has been made in the Estimates 1880–1, p. 48, for a grant of £225 towards the construction of a pier at Gooleen, County Cork, and the Board of Works is about to proceed at once with the undertaking.

  ARMY—BREVET MAJORITIES.
  MR. A. BASSasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether, previous to the final abolition of promotion to brevet majorities in October next, he intends to promote to that rank all Captains of Cavalry and Infantry who attained their companies previous to the abolition of purchase in October 1871, thus more nearly equalising their promotion to that of the Artillery and Engineer branches?
  COLONEL STANLEY,in reply, said, that there had been considerable discussion on the subject, and that no positive decision had been arrived at with respect to it, but that the views entertained were adverse to such a step as that suggested.

  CRIME (IRELAND)—ATTACK ON TENANT RIGHT MEETING AT PORTADOWN.
  SIR THOMAS M'CLUREasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether any of the persons concerned in the attack upon a public meeting held at Portadown on Wednesday the 15th ult. for the purpose of urging upon Parliament the further security of tenant right in Ireland had been made amenable; and, if it is the intention of the Government to institute an inquiry into the circumstances connected therewith?
  MR. J. LOWTHER: Sir, as Notice has been given some days since of a Question upon this subject by the hon. Member for Dungarvan, previous to the Notice given by the hon. Gentleman (Sir Thomas M'Clure), which only appeared upon the Paper this morning, I think it would be better if he would be so good as to postpone his Question till to-morrow.

  RELIEF OF DISTRESS (IRELAND)—THE CLIFDEN BOARD OF GUARDIANS.
  MR. MITCHELL HENRYasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether he will lay upon the Table a Copy of a resolution passed by the Clifden Board of Guardians, in the barony of Ballanahinch, on the 5th ultimo, and forwarded to the Local Government Board, to the effect that the cultivators in the union are overwhelmed with debt, and cannot be accepted as security for seed potatoes, and that the rates are so alarmingly high and the union so poor that extraordinary out-door relief would overwhelm
  304
  the union with ruin; whether it is true that the potatoes ordered would not give more than a few pounds weight to each man; and, under these circumstances, to inquire whether the Government intend to endeavour to avert still greater destitution next year in this impoverished locality by taking other means of furnishing the people with seed and manure?
  MR. J. LOWTHER: I cannot find that the Guardians of Clifden Union passed any resolution to this effect on the 5th ult., but I find that on the 25th they did pass a resolution, in the course of which they state their opinion that the deficiency in the seeds supply of the Union ought to be filled up by the Government, and that public works should be commenced in the district at the expense of Parliament, in order to give employment for labour. It is not necessary for me to say that the Local Government Board has done what it could in this matter. I find, however, that yesterday the board re-considered the resolution with regard to the seeds required. With regard to the latter part of the Question, I may say there is no intention whatever on the part of the Government to supply manure.
  MR. MITCHELL HENRY: Will the right hon. Gentleman tell me how much seed has been ordered by the Board of Guardians?
  MR. J. LOWTHER: I only learned by telegram to-day that at a meeting held yesterday the Board of Guardians consented to order an amount of oats and potatoes sufficient. Therefore, l cannot answer the Question.

  RELIEF OF DISTRESS (IRELAND)—THE SUPPLY OF SEED POTATOES.
  MR. ERRINGTONasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether the Irish Local Government Board has as yet replied to applications and estimates for supply of seed potatoes sent in by various Unions, among others from Granard; if not, whether he will, take care that no unnecessary time is lost, as the matter is now very pressing?
  MR. J. LOWTHER: Sir, I have been informed that an application was sent in by the Granard Board of Guardians; but owing to the change made in the Bill when passing through Parliament the estimate had to be sent back for amendment. When it is amended no time will be lost in acting on it.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

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

LIGHTHOUSES.

  MOTION FOR PAPERS.
  MR. T. BRASSEY,in rising to call attention to the necessity for additional lighthouses on the island of Galita, in the Red Sea, and the Gulf of Aden; and to move for Papers, said, that the value of the trade passing between Great Britain and India had been computed at no less than £98,000,000 sterling, and nothing which affected so vast a commerce could be set aside as unimportant. Since the opening of the Suez Canal, our trade with the East had been largely diverted to that route. The tonnage which passed through the Canal in 1877 was 2,050,000; but it had increased in 1878 to 3,250,000. England led the way with 1,117 ships; France followed with only 87 ships; Italy came next with 44; and Germany last, with 27 ships. He thought it unnecessary to say more in order to show how deeply interested we were in everything which could add to the safety of navigation on this main route from Europe to the East. Of the various aids to the navigator which science had afforded, lighthouses were the most important, not only as a means of saving life and property, but as a means of shortening the passage. With the growth of commerce, the number of lighthouses on our own shores had been rapidly increased. We had now one light for every 10½ miles of coast. The illumination of the French coasts was equally perfect. While, however, the coasts of the great maritime Powers were now efficiently lighted, lighthouses had been seriously neglected in the hands of Governments with exhausted Treasuries; and the coasts of barbarous or half-civilized countries, in the absence of concerted action on the part of the maritime Powers, must remain in total darkness. Hitherto, with one notable and praiseworthy exception, no attempt had been made to organize such concerted action. Taking an ima-
  306
  ginary voyage from England to the East, the first point where a lighthouse was required was on the coast adjacent to Cape Finisterre. It was one of the most important land-falls in the world. It was true a first-class light was exhibited from Finisterre; but the position was badly chosen, and the light itself was not in good order. He was within range of Cape Finisterre for several hours during the night of the 27th of January, and on that occasion the light did not revolve. Another first-class light was urgently required on Cape Villano, 25 miles north-east of Finisterre. The range of the existing light was only eight miles. In consequence of the insufficient lighting of this coast, vessels were compelled to steer many miles further to the westward than would be necessary if a powerful light were exhibited on Villano. Continuing eastwards and entering the Mediterranean, the southern shores of Spain, and the long range of the north coast of Africa, in the hands of the French Government, were well protected with lights. But when we reached the coast of Tunis the lighthouses were too few in number. The Island of Galita, which was under the jurisdiction of the Bey of Tunis, was one of the most important pivot points on the voyage to the East. Ships navigating the Mediterranean made a straight run of 690 miles from Gibraltar, until they arrived off the north end of Galita, when they altered their course two points and steered for the Malta Channel. In the night, or in the thick weather prevailing near Galita in the winter, the prudent navigator would pass the Island at a distance of from 10 to 15 miles. With a first-class light a margin of five miles would be ample. If the passage to the south of the Island were taken, which would be perfectly practicable in clear weather, the saving of distance would be still more considerable. The necessity that existed for such a light on Galita had been repeatedly urged by the Committee of Lloyd's. On this point Captain Angove, the commander of the Peninsular and Oriental steamer Poonah, had written as follows:—
  "The absence of a light on the Island of Galita has often caused me great anxiety. In the winter months the weather is frequently dirty in that vicinity, and the currents are strong."
  Passing onwards on the voyage to the

  307
  East, the navigator was assisted by an adequate number of lights until he emerged from the Gulf of Suez into the Red Sea. At a distance of 95 miles north of the light on the Dædalus shoal, which was the southernmost light at present shown in this part of the Rod Sea, the track of steamers ran close to two rocks called "The Brothers," only 20 feet above water. They were invisible at night, and the current in that part of the Red Sea was strong and uncertain. A few years ago the Dutch steamer Prinz Hendrik, carrying troops to Batavia, was totally wrecked on these rocks. A light of the second or third order, visible at a distance of say 10 miles, was very necessary at this point. Proceeding down the Red Sea, for a distance of 720 miles, no lights were absolutely required, until within 100 miles of the Island of Perim. At its southern end the shores of the Red Sea were fringed with reefs, which ran out seawards for some distance on each side of the channel, and here the experienced commanders in the Peninsular and Oriental Service urgently asked for two additional lights—a light with a range of 20 miles, on the islet of Aboo-Ail, off the north end of the Island of Jebel-Zuker, and a light on the bank off Mocha. The Peninsular and Oriental steamer Alma was wrecked on Jebel-Zuker, and the steamer Penguin was quite recently lost on the same spot. The value of lighthouses as a means of saving life might be illustrated by a statement lately made to him by Captain White, a commander in the Peninsular and Oriental Service. On a recent occasion, arriving off Aboo-Ail in the evening, he was obliged to close the Arabian shore, and to navigate the vessel by the lead, until he arrived off the Island of Perim, a distance of 90 miles. With a light on Aboo-Ail, he might have run boldly on and have made the passage in eight hours. Not having the assistance of the light, the time actually occupied was 18 hours. The detention in these intricate spots in the case of vessels commanded by masters not intimately acquainted with the Red Sea must necessarily be more serious. Captain Symons, in an interesting letter on this subject, very justly said that the Red Sea was now the highway of the world for Eastern traffic. On his last homeward voyage he had passed nine large steamers
  308
  in one watch of four hours. Ten years ago, an equal number would not have been seen in a month. Considering the value of property, mostly carried in English ships, that now passed through the Red Sea, it was imperatively necessary that the coasts should be properly lighted. The mail steamers, especially, were called upon to maintain a high rate of speed, were timed to arrive to the hour, and were liable to heavy penalties if late. They certainly ought to have the benefit of any modern invention for facilitating navigation on a dangerous coast. Continuing an imaginary voyage to the East, the next important point on which a lighthouse was required was Cape Guardafui. Here 12 large steamers had gone ashore within the last six years. The list included the Meikong, of the French Messageries Service, and the Garonne, a steamer of the Orient Line recently established between London and Australia. Ten of these ships were totally wrecked. Among the shipowners interested in the trade to the East who had strongly recommended the establishment of a light on Cape Guardafui, he might more particularly refer to the General Shipowners' Association, and the owners of the Glen, the Castle, and the Ducal lines. The directors of the British India Company, while expressing a strong opinion as to the desirability of establishing a light on Cape Guardafui, recommended that it should be erected by the British Government, under international arrangement, and not by the Egyptian Government. It might be necessary to explain that the Egyptian Government had contemplated the erection of two lighthouses—the one on Ras-Hafoon, the other on Guardafui, in compliance with suggestions from the British Government. The objections of the British Indian Company were fully shared by Captain Roberts, the Superintendent of the Peninsular and Oriental Company at Suez. The expenditure for the two lights, as estimated by the Egyptian Government, was £48,000, and they proposed to levy an additional tax upon passing ships of 2d. per ton. Efficient lighthouses could be erected at a much more moderate cost. He was unwilling to trouble the House with nautical details, and would not, therefore, enter into the various considerations which had been urged by those who doubted the utility of a light on

  309
  Guardafui during the period when the south-west monsoon was at its height. Opinions were unanimous as to the value of the light through at least eight months of the year. A light on Ras-Hafoon, 90 miles south of Guardafui, would be valuable at all seasons to ships engaged in the important trade with the Mauritius and the East Coast of Africa. He had only to mention two other points on the route to the East on which lights were required. One was the east end of the Island of Socotra, which was passed by all vessels bound to and from Bombay, and in the south-west monsoon also by vessels navigating to and from Galle. The other point to which he referred was Minicoy, a small Island of the Laccadive group, upon which some years ago the Peninsular and Oriental steamer Colombo was totally lost, and which must be passed by every vessel bound from the Red Sea to Ceylon, the Bay of Bengal, the Eastern Archipelago, China, and Japan. All the lights which he had enumerated would, if established, be of the greatest advantage to navigation. At Cape Guardafui it might be necessary to erect a fort, and to provide a small garrison for the protection of the light. In the other cases nothing more than an ordinary lighthouse was required. None of these lights, however, could be erected except under international agreement; and in bringing the subject under the notice of the House his desire was to urge the Government, without delay, to secure the concerted action of the maritime Powers. Sir Travers Twiss, in a paper read at the Guildhall in August last, had suggested that the Convention signed at Tangier between the Sultan of Morocco and the Representatives of the European Powers furnished a precedent that might be conveniently followed. Under the terms of this Convention, the Sultan of Morocco had erected a lighthouse on Cape Spartel, and made over the entire administration to the contracting Powers, each of whom contributed £60 a-year towards the maintenance of the light. The light on Cape Spartel afforded the greatest assistance in the navigation of the Straits of Gibraltar; and it belonged to England, as having by far the deepest interest in the trade with the East, to take the initiative in negotiating similar arrangements with reference to the additional lights required on the voyage from Europe to
  310
  the East. The House would doubtless share the hope expressed by Sir Travers Twiss that hereafter international lighthouses would be among the trophies of peace which the civilization of Europe would set up in the Islands of the far East. The aggregate expenditure on the lighthouses would be small, it would be readily shared by other nations, and it was absolutely trifling in comparison with the loss of, perhaps, £250,000 in a single steamer. When the lighthouses which he had enumerated were completed premiums of insurance would be reduced voyages would be accelerated, the dangers to life would be diminished, and the anxieties of harassed commanders would be relieved. The hon. Member concluded by moving for Papers on the subject.
  SIR JOHN HAY,in seconding the Motion, said, everyone must agree with him that the immense amount of trade which now passed through the Suez Canal and traversed the Mediterranean and the Red Sea rendered it highly desirable that the channel should be safely lighted. His hon. Friend had made an imaginary voyage from England; he would make the return voyage from India. Everyone acquainted with the shores of India must be of opinion that the great channel by which Bombay was approached ought certainly to be lighted. The nine degree and the eight degree channel were divided by the Island of Minikoi under the Government of Ceylon, and a light on that island seemed indispensable. On a late occasion one of the largest steamers, filled with passengers, ran on the Island of Minikoi, and was eventually relieved after three months' detention. On going towards the Gulf of Aden during the south-western monsoon, all vessels, except those of the greatest power, usually went to the southward and approached the coast of Africa. A careful navigator might navigate his ship with safety, and the lead was a sufficient guide. Many masters of merchant ships, however, were not careful navigators, and were not provided with the most recent charts. Perhaps it would be found that the owners did not provide charts, and that the master supplied himself with. the cheapest he could get. Masters of that kind, instead of timing their arrival so as to sight the land in daylight, took a glass of grog, turned in, and trusted

  311
  to Providence. The consequence was that their vessels often ran ashore. It was, therefore, desirable that a light should be placed on Ras-Hafoon; but that was not so important as a light on Cape Guardafui itself. It was said that there was great difficulty in procuring water at that place; but that ought not to be regarded as a very serious objection in these days, when it was an easy matter to obtain water by the process of distillation. If, however, it was not intended to place a lighthouse on Cape Guardafui, it would be necessary to build one in a small valley about eight miles south-south-west of that point; though the better plan would be, if possible, to light the promontory itself; for during the south-west monsoons a thick yellow haze made it all but impossible to observe the land, which showed through the haze almost identical in colour. This necessitated the erection of a powerful light. He agreed with his hon. Friend as to the desirability of placing a light on the east end of Socotra, where powerful steamers often took shelter; but oven that was not so necessary as that Cape Guardafui should be lighted. Proceeding up the Gulf of Aden, and after passing Perim, ships encountered a variety of dangers which materially impeded their progress. Considering the importance of time and the cost of delay, especially to mail steamers, it would be seen that a lightship might be very usefully established in the Turkish waters off the town of Mocha, and a lighthouse on Ali Khel, and then the lighting of the Southern part of the Rod Sea would be satisfactory. He strongly recommended the erection of a lighthouse on "The Brothers," a very dangerous shoal further north, which lay right in the fairway and caused much loss of time to vessels in the endeavour to avoid all risk in connection with it. He hoped soon to hear that negotiations were in progress with reference to that shoal. Coming through the Suez Canal, and continuing the voyage past Malta, he found a light necessary at Galita, west-south-west of which were the Sorelli Rocks, which were still unlighted. It was a moot point as to the precise spot on which the light should be placed; his own opinion was that the Sorelli Rocks would probably be the best, though perhaps not the cheapest, position. Those rocks belonged to Tunis,
  312
  on the coast of which State there were already several creditable lights; and it would be necessary to make an arrangement with the French and the Tunisian Governments in order to remove the last danger of the Mediterranean. With the lighting to the west of those rocks he was quite satisfied; but the points he had mentioned—Minikoi, west end of Socotra, Ras-Hafoon, Cape Guardafui, a light-ship off Mocha, Ali Khel, "The Brothers," and Galitana or the Sorelli Rocks—ought to be lighted, and he hoped that his suggestions would be considered by the Government.
  VISCOUNT SANDONsaid, that the House and the Government were very much indebted to the two hon. Gentlemen who had spoken for the information they had given on a subject so interesting to all Englishmen, and particularly to the President of the Board of Trade. He thoroughly agreed with his hon. Friends as to the desirability of having more lighthouses in difficult and dangerous seas; but the first difficulty was that they were not independent in the matter, but had to negotiate with other Powers, some of whom were not very largely provided with funds. All such obstacles resolved themselves into questions of money. He could assure his hon. Friends that the Government had not been idle in the matter. It was not easy to interfere with respect to the first point to which attention had been called; but as regarded Galita, the Government had been in communication with the French Government, and last year they received an assurance from Lord Lyons that France and Tunis were likely jointly to erect a proper lighthouse there. He might remind the House that the existing lights in the Canal and the Red Sea were owing, in a great measure, to the exertions of former British Governments. In the year 1870 the Hydrographer of the Navy and Colonel Clarke had been sent to the Red Sea to make investigations into the subject, and had made a Report thereon. They had pressed the matter on the Khedive, and had asked the French Government to enter into an arrangement. The question mainly turned on the necessary expense, and the French Government set the matter aside for the time. It had been raised again by the Indian Government in 1874; but France had not been willing to make any pecuniary engagements till 1879. But

  313
  in 1877 the Khedive had agreed, on the representations of the British Government, to erect a lighthouse on Cape Guardafui, provided that certain tolls were allowed; and the British Government bad then attempted to bring about an agreement between the maritime Powers, and ascertained that they would all agree to pay the requisite tolls as soon as it was settled where the lighthouse should be erected. The Khedive then proceeded to send an engineer to make a survey of that part of the country, and Her Majesty's Government had only been put in possession of his Report last year. That gentleman had found difficulties about erecting a lighthouse at the point which had been indicated, and recommended that it should be placed some eight miles south of the promontory of Guardafui. So the matter remained at present, and it would be necessary to wait till the Egyptian Government had made up its mind. At any rate, some progress had been made, for the country had been surveyed, and the maritime Powers had come to an agreement. He could hardly give an opinion as to the Indian lights; but he might assure hon. Members that the Government fully acknowledged the importance of the subject, and would do their best to induce other Powers to co-operate with them in future.
  MR. PEASE,after thanking the noble Lord for his speech, remarked that Ways and Means ought not to stand in the way of the object he had in view. The actual cost of all the existing lighthouses was insignificant compared with the far greater importance of safety and speed in navigation. As representing a maritime constituency, he would urge upon the Government that time should not be lost in doing the work. It was of the greatest importance, as it would effect an economy of time by materially shortening the voyage. The most important element of the question was that the work would bring our Indian Empire much nearer to us. It was a great practical undertaking, in which this great maritime nation should allow no delay.
  MR. BENTINCKsaid, that the House ought to be obliged to the hon. Member for Hastings for having called the attention of the House to that subject. He thought it would be better to have a light to avoid the outer danger than the inner danger in the case of a passage
  314
  between two reefs. There was a tendency to forget that, though steamers were taking the place of sailing ships, to a great extent the latter still existed. One of the most dangerous shoals in the Mediterranean, lying right in the track of the passage to Gibraltar and Malta, was Smith's Reef. It would be remembered that it was on that reef, owing to the absence of lighthouse or lightship, Her Majesty's ship Athenian was lost. He would, therefore, strongly recommend that a light should be placed at that point without delay.
  MR. T. BRASSEYsaid, that he would not press his Motion, and thanked the noble Lord for the attention which he had given to the subject.

CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. MONK,who had given Notice to call attention to the gradual but constant increase in the Estimates in certain Classes of the Civil Service; and to move—
  "That, in the opinion of this House, the expenditure upon the Civil Services is excessive, and ought to be diminished,"
  said, it was a self-evident proposition that the Civil expenditure of the country was on the increase from year to year. He did not intend to go greatly into details; but he would ask hon. Members to bear in mind that during four complete years of the late Government, ending the 31st of March, 1874, the outlay in the Civil Service Department, according to the Appropriation Accounts, amounted to £7 6,567,000, averaging about £19,000,000, or exactly £19,141,750; whereas, during four complete years of the present Government, down to the 31st of March, 1879, it amounted to £93,055,000, averaging £23,263,750, an increase of more than £4,000,000 a-year. It would be said by the Secretary to the Treasury that the greater part of the increase was owing, first, to the Education Vote, and, secondly, to the relief afforded to local taxation. He would not complain of any increase which had arisen in consequence of the great measure which was brought in during the Administration of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich (Mr. Gladstone). But there was still a large increase which required explanation from the Government, and he

  315
  did not think the causes he had mentioned and the increase of population were a sufficient explanation. Without charging the Government with reckless expenditure or extravagance, he maintained that the economic principle was altogether absent from the mode in which the Treasury prepared these Estimates. He was inclined to say that they were framed on a kind of happy-go-lucky principle; because they never, by any happy chance, managed to hit off the exact sum, or anything like the exact sum, which eventually was required for the service of the year. He objected to having three sets of Estimates brought before the House. First, there were the Estimates brought in soon after the meeting of Parliament, which were supposed to cover the requirements of the coming year; then they had in July Supplementary Estimates, then an Estimate for excesses. He did not expect that there could be complete Estimates in February; but he thought they ought to have full knowledge of the amounts required by the middle of March, before the Budget. But there seemed to be a habit of always falling back on Estimates for excesses. He would defy any young Member who wished to become acquainted with the course of Business in the House to master the details of these different Estimates. Seeing that no Bills of any importance, with the exception of the Criminal Code Bill, had been introduced by the Government of late years, he wanted to know how it was such large sums as 500 and 600 guineas were paid to gentlemen not connected with any Government office for drafting Bills, and what were the names of the learned gentlemen to whom these amounts were paid, as it appeared to him to be throwing a very large amount of patronage into the hands of the Government? He knew that he should have the stereotyped answer that Sir Henry Thring and his assistants were unable to overtake the work which was thrown upon them in the Session; but he wanted to know why the Bills could not be drafted in the Recess. Then there was an increase in the Vote for the Stationery Office. A short time ago they were told that the hon. Member for Lincolnshire (Mr. Rowland Winn) had cleaned out the Augean stable, and yet this year there was an increased Vote. They were also asked for an increased
  316
  Vote of £2,706 for the Charity Commission. How could the Government reconcile it to their conscience—if they had a conscience—to pay such a sum for the Charity Commission, particularly as there was a Resolution passed unanimously, on the Journals of the House, affirming that the expenses of that Commission ought to be paid by a tax on the Charities themselves? The Secretary to the Treasury brought in a Bill to that effect last year; why had he not reintroduced it this Session? Then they had an extraordinary item of £8,000 for refurnishing an Embassy house. That was a very large sum for such a purpose, and he wanted some explanation of it. There was also a sum of £120,000 required to make good the deficiency on the part of the Savings Banks and Friendly Societies. The total amount received up to the 20th of November, 1879, in respect of Savings Banks and Friendly Societies was £126,253,000. The amount of principal and interest paid to the Trustees was £80,532,000. Therefore the sum due to the Trustees by the Commissioners on the 20th of November, 1879, was £45,720,000, and the value of the securities held by the Commissioners was only £41,571,000. A loss, therefore, had been incurred by the Treasury of £4,149,000; and, as he had said, the Vote required this year to make up the deficiency was £120,000. Some explanation was due on that head. He could not understand why, with 2½ per cent paid to investors in the Savings Banks, the Government could incur such a fearful loss. With regard to the expenditure on retired allowances, it was very objectionable that young men between 20 and 30 should be compulsorily retired, instead of being put into other places. He regretted very much that he had been induced by the right hon. Member for Pontefract (Mr. Childers) to withdraw his opposition to the Vote for the increase of salaries of Masters in connection with the Supreme Court of Judicature, for he understood that while the salaries had been increased there was a large number of sinecures, and no reduction whatever had occurred. The House and the public were very little aware of the enormous increase in the amount of the Civil Service Estimates. He had thought it his duty to draw attention to the subject; but as he had no wish to delay the passing of the Supple-

  317
  mentary Estimates he should not move the Resolution of which he had given Notice.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, the question which had been raised by the hon. Member was one which had been brought before the House on more than one occasion, when it had received the same reply which he was afraid he must give to it on the present occasion. Everyone would allow that, although the Civil Service Estimates showed in their bulk an undoubted increase in latter years, they owed that increase to the action of Parliament itself with regard either to the education grants or to those grants for local taxation which had not met with unqualified opposition at the hands of the hon. Member. Both these grants had been the means of throwing an increase upon the Estimates; and he thought it only fair to eliminate them from the consideration of the question of the increase in the Estimates, as they were due to the action of Parliament. He would draw the attention of the House to a Return issued from the Treasury Department, and moved for by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Pontefract (Mr. Childers). That Return showed that if the charges for grants for local taxation and for education were put aside, and the Civil Service charges, real and proper, were only considered, there had been really a decrease in the Estimates from the year 1857 to the present time. In 1857–8 the Estimates for the Civil Service proper amounted to £5,921,311, and they had fluctuated between that amount and £5,750,000, which was the amount in 1878–9. That was to say, there was a diminution this year in the Estimates for the Service proper as compared with the year 1857–8. This showed that successive Governments had kept such control over the Estimates that they had not increased in the period which he had named. The hon. Member, turning from the subject of the Civil Service charges to the preparation of the Estimates, called the mode of preparing them haphazard, and objected to the Government taking Supplementary Estimates in July. Well, the Estimates being called for in December in order to be prepared for the coming year, it was necessary to fix a date in January beyond which no further in-
  318
  crease or alteration could be made in them. From that date the Estimates were in type and unalterable, and ready to be placed on the Table of the House at the meeting of Parliament. But things occurred in the different Departments after their Returns had been made of which they could have no previous knowledge. For instance, advantageous offers were made with regard to leases, which on economical grounds the Treasury could not refuse; or buildings had suddenly to be erected. If in such cases a hard-and-fast rule were to be laid down, and if no fresh expenditure were to be incurred, say after March or February, the Treasury would often be placed in a position very detrimental to the Public Service, and offers which might not be renewed in advantageous forms would have to be refused. It was the constant effort of the Treasury to resist incurring such expenditure as he was referring to; and it was only done when, in the interest of the public, the demands of the Public Service required it. It became in this manner absolutely necessary to sanction money Votes which were not contemplated in the preparation of the Returns; and, consequently, Governments were unwillingly obliged to submit to Parliament Supplementary Estimates in the month of July. The hon. Member used the word "excessive," and pointed to the excessive Supplementary Estimates which they had been forced to submit to the House this year. But the hon. Member ought to have remembered that these Estimates, if it had not been for one item, would have been lower than the Estimates for several recent years. With regard to the charge of £230,000 for the Prison Vote, the item to which he referred, he thought it right to say that it was only a very short time ago that the arrangements of the Home Office in respect to that Vote were concluded, so that it was impossible last year to forecast what amount of money would be required in any one instance of arrangement. The expense of this Vote, it should also be remembered, was recouped to the extent of £210,000 by the receipts on behalf of the Prison Commission paid into the Exchequer. The real loss, therefore, did not amount to more than between £20,000 and £30,000. He thought that the House, after considering the figures he had put

  319
  before them, would not consider the Supplementary Estimates exceptional. The hon. Member also referred to the expenses in connection with the drafting of Bills. It was quite true that a large expenditure had been incurred beyond the amount required for the Parliamentary staff kept for the purpose of drafting Bills; but if all the Bills that were brought in—Bills not contemplated before the commencement of the Session, and Bills that could not be easily drawn during the Recess—were to be drawn by the official draftsmen, it would be necessary to greatly increase the present staff. There were many advantages in the existing system of sometimes employing others than the official draftsmen, as it gave opportunities for bringing particular talent and knowledge to bear upon a peculiar subject. He might mention, for example, that in the case of the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act very important service was rendered to Parliament and the country from their having secured the aid of a gentleman having special knowledge of the whole subject. As to the remarks made in reference to the Charity Commission, he had to say that part of the sum demanded on its account was needed to make payments which would not have been made had Parliament not decided to continue the Commission. Coming to the question of the retirement of officers from the Public Service, he had to remind the hon. Member that one or two re-organizations of Departments had taken place in the last year, and that Bills were passed in that House enabling special terms to be given to officers on retirement. It was only by offering special terms that it was possible to carry out any re-organizations at all. He could assure the hon. Member that nothing was more in accordance with the wishes of the Secretary to the Treasury than to keep down the Civil Service Estimates as far as was consistent with the public interest. He knew well that, in dealing with the Civil Service Estimates, they were dealing with a part of the public finances which allowed less reduction than any other. But he hoped he had shown that those parts of the Estimates over which the Secretary to the Treasury had real control were lower than in some recent years.
  MR. RYLANDSsaid, the hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury
  320
  had referred to a certain re-organization in the Department. He was bound to say his experience led him to the belief that although they had always the promise of advantages by re-organization, they were so remote as to be, in many cases, worse than the original state of affairs. It appeared to him that the necessity for re-organization arose from the vices which existed in the Civil Service. If that Service were placed on a basis in which the members of it would, first of all, be required fully to do their duty in an efficient manner, and to give a sufficient amount of time to the Public Service, he had no doubt whatever that they would always be able to weed out from the Civil Service those men who were not efficient, and who simply took the place of gentlemen who were. He recollected a few years ago, when he was a Member of a Select Committee of that House to inquire into the Civil Service Department, that he asked Sir William Stephenson, who was a very high authority, whether, in the Department of the Customs, or in any other Public Department in which gentlemen were employed in the capacity of clerks, it was not a fact that, however inefficient a young man happened to be, by virtue of seniority he would rise gradually, with an increment of salary, without reference to efficiency of conduct? He (Sir William Stephenson) said—
  "Well, to a great extent, unless a clerk is guilty of some scandalous neglect of duty, it would be impossible for a head of a Department to supersede him."
  And he said further—
  "You Gentlemen in Parliament would rise and complain if any supersession of individuals took place, unless there were very clear grounds for the course."
  He knew that pressure was put on every head of a Department on account of promotion in that Department being slow. Reorganization of the Department was then pressed for in order to improve the position, and a number of men were sent out of the Department, and they were paid compensation for loss of office. The hon. Member for Gloucester (Mr. Monk) had alluded to another question in which he (Mr. Rylands) had had good reason to complain that the Government would not take advantage of the opportunity afforded them of economizing in an im-

  321
  portant Department. The House, at the end of last Session, was called upon to pass the Supreme Court of Judicature Bill. His hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester and he opposed the Bill, on the ground that they had no guarantee in the Bill that there would be economy. The right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in reply, said that the present Lord Chancellor, whatever might have been the case with previous Lord Chancellors, was most anxious to promote economy; and they might rely that if the Bill were passed into law very great economy would be effected in the High Court of Judicature. He would now make the charge that there had not been the slightest economy. Unless he was very much misinformed, there had been an increase of expenditure which was probably of an unnecessary character. Certainly there was no fulfilment of the pledge given last Session that action would be taken by the Lord Chancellor with a view to reduce the cost of the High Court of Judicature. When that Vote came on in the ordinary Civil Service Estimates, he had no doubt that the Government would be called upon by his hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester, or by himself, to give an explanation of what they had done in accordance with the pledges given in the House; and unless those pledges had been given he ventured to say it would have been utterly impossible for the Bill to have passed into law. The facts he was furnished with showed that, so far from that Bill having worked in an economical way, it had given opportunity for further expenditure. He must say, if they were to deal effectively with the Civil Service expenditure, they must be determined to deal with it in such a way as to secure that every public servant should give a greater amount of service, and that the Public Departments should not be a public scandal, as he believed at the present time was the case in a great many of the Offices, in the way in which they were over-manned, and the careless way the Public Service was conducted during the comparatively short period of labour. He thought they ought to insist that there should be longer hours. In some of the Public Offices, he had no hesitation in saying that there ought to be longer hours. They ought to give inducement to clerks in Offices by reward-
  322
  ing merit with promotion. Still, further, every man who did not fulfil his duty should be removed; and if they adopted that system, they would not be continually, as at present, piling up the Superannuation Fund. It could not be denied that the expenditure for pensions and superannuation was increasing every year to a monstrous extent. He had a very decided impression that some day the House would have to deal strongly with that enormous expenditure; and even in cases where they made a profit out of a Department, that was no reason why they should spend a lot of money on unnecessary officials. The mere fact that a Department received a considerable sum of money through stamps and fees was no justification for the expenditure being in excess of what the Office could be reasonably conducted upon. Not only should they have to deal very strongly with the present system of employment in the Public Offices; but he thought also that if the Secretary to the Treasury wished to have his hands strengthened against clamour as to the expenditure on the Services of the Crown, nothing would have greater effect in that direction than the appointment of such a Committee as his hon. Friend the Member for Swansea (Mr. Dillwyn) suggested last year—namely, a Select Committee to inquire into the Estimates for the Civil Services. He was bound to say that the present mode of taking the Civil Service Estimates was very clumsy; and he thought that the Government might adopt a more complete examination of the Public Expenditure in those Departments, so that, without any parsimony with regard to salaries, the public duty might be carried on in a more efficient, and, at the same time, a more economical manner.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, a Return obtained by the right hon. Member for Pontefract (Mr. Childers) for one particular purpose, to show the progress made in increasing some particular portions of the Public Expenditure, had been quoted for another and different one as to the progress of all the Civil expenditure. The Secretary to the Treasury would have made a much better comparison if he had used the Return moved for by the right hon. Member for Halifax (Mr. Stansfeld), or that which the First Lord of the Trea-

  323
  sury obtained a few years ago. He denied that any credit was due to the present Government for keeping down expenditure. There had been an enormous increase of the Civil Service expenditure during the last 20 years, but more especially during the administration of the present Government. It was the fashion, when speaking of the Naval and Military expenditure, to compare the gross for these Services of 20 years ago with the gross of the present day; and the result was that the outlay on what was called the spending Departments had largely increased. None of the deductions were made there from which might and ought to be made. He was ready to admit that the Civil expenditure of the country had very considerably increased from special causes. The Education Vote had swollen 50 per cent in four years, and the grants in aid of local taxation had risen from £2,761,000 to upwards of £5,000,000 in 1880. Those increases in the Civil charges arose from the loose way of putting forward Supplementary Estimates. He knew that Supplementary Estimates were sometimes unavoidable. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for London University (Mr. Lowe), when Chancellor of the Exchequer, admitted so much, and thereby encouraged this financially bad habit; but it was a matter for regret that they should have so largely increased, especially in the present year. One great evil in the system was that by accepting such Estimates the House took upon itself a responsibility that should be placed on the heads of Departments for preparing loose Estimates. The sooner heads of Departments were brought face to face with the House or with the Public Accounts Committee, to explain why they had not originally foreseen all the wants of their Departments, the better would Parliament be able to control the expenditure. As it was, these heads bore no responsibility. They brought to bear all their influence upon the Treasury, and they got all their demands complied with, and escaped all censure and blame. That, he submitted, was a grave evil, and he looked to the Secretary to the Treasury to remedy it.
  Motion, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave, the Chair," agreed to.

SUPPLY—CIVIL SERVICE SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES, 1879–80.
  COMMITTEE.
    SUPPLY—considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)

  CLASS II.—SALARIES AND EXPENSES OF PUBLIC DEPARTMENTS.
  (1.) £36,000, Stationery and Printing.
  MR. MONKsaid, that he found on this Vote an increase on account of salaries of £600. No explanation was given of this increase, except that it was said that, "although the re-organization of the Department in July last will ultimately result in considerable economy in salaries, the immediate effect is an increase of about this amount." He wished to ask the hon. Baronet the Secretary to the Treasury whether those salaries were in addition to the retiring allowances? He should also like to know whether the increase in salaries was due to certain officers being paid higher salaries under the re-organization scheme, or whether an additional staff of clerks had been employed; and, further, whether, under the re-organization scheme, any of the clerks had been pensioned off?
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that as he understood some of the increase was due to the employment of fresh clerks. Owing to the reduction in the number of officers in the Department as a whole, the salaries of other officers had been increased. The effect of the reduction would not be felt until the pensions of some of those officers who had retired ceased to be payable. Ultimately, there would be a considerable decrease in the Expenditure.
  MR. RYLANDSsaid, that with regard to the re-organization scheme, he wished to submit to the hon. Baronet the Secretary to the Treasury whether it would not be convenient to lay upon the Table of the House a Paper showing the actual immediate addition to the Expenditure by the increase of salaries, and also the reduction which had been made in the Office; and, further, the ultimate advantage that would accrue to the public in the form of reduction in the Expenditure? He believed that that was done in the case of the Admiralty, and in one or two other instances; and he thought that it was very desirable that the same course should be pursued in the present

  325
  case. He wished to ask the hon. Baronet whether it was anybody's duty to ascertain whether the statements that were made from time to time as to reduction in expenditure were proved by experience to be accurate or not? He thought that an attempt should be made to ascertain whether, in consequence of the re-organization, a diminished or an increased expenditure took place in the Department. The public ought to be informed whether the expectations held out at the time of re-organization were realized; and whether, through an additional expenditure not contemplated at the time of re-organization, the expected reduction had not taken place.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that he could inform the hon. Member that the whole results of the re-organization of a Department were submitted to the Treasury. When a reorganization was proposed the Treasury had to be satisfied both as to the existing amount of the expenditure and as to the future maximum result of the changes. The Treasury then judged whether or not to sanction the change. No re-organization could take place without the sanction of the Treasury, which always considered its probable results. The hon. Member, had asked whether any watch was kept by the Treasury as to the working out of the results? So far as the Estimates went, they had an absolute check upon the results. They had the actual results brought before them, and could thus see how far the expectations as to reduction were realized. The hon. Member asked whether the Treasury had found that in some cases it was necessary to amplify the original scheme by the introduction of other officers. So far as his own experience went, he had never found that that had been the result. The results of the re-organizations were watched with the greatest possible care by the Treasury, and it took care that only schemes of a really practical character were adopted. He could see no objection to furnishing the House in future with the information that the Treasury itself always possessed with regard to any proposed scheme. In the case of the re-organization last year full information was submitted to the House. The Treasury took note of the proposed saving and of the proposed salaries; and he saw no reason for being unable, if the
  326
  House desired it, to put it in possession of all the information in the hands of the Treasury.
  SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, that, in his opinion, the results of re-organization schemes had been to give a great many gentlemen increased salaries, and a great many others good pensions. It was generally found, when a change had taken place, that something which had been overlooked called for a fresh expenditure. He thought that these re-organization schemes required to be looked into much more carefully than they were. One or two instances of that kind he had noted, and could refer to. He had known cases of gentlemen being retired at middle age on pensions, and taking other employments, when they might have been much better employed in the Government Offices. He thought that his hon. Friend the Member for Burnley had done well in bringing the subject to the notice of the Committee.
  MR. CHAMBERLAINsaid, that there was a matter in connection with the Stationery and Printing Vote which he proposed to bring before the notice of the Committee when the ordinary Civil Service Estimates were considered. He did not propose to raise a discussion then; but he should like to take that opportunity of asking the hon. Baronet the Secretary to the Treasury what had been done in the matter of the distribution of pamphlets and reports in accordance with his suggestion? The Government had promised that Mr. Speaker should be consulted as to whether some satisfactory arrangement could not be made for the gratuitous distribution of the official Papers in question to the free libraries throughout the country.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that he was very sorry he could not give a satisfactory reply to the question addressed to him by the hon. Member for Birmingham. On more than one occasion he had been in communication with Mr. Speaker on the subject, and various schemes had been suggested. Unfortunately, owing to certain difficulties with regard to the contracts for the printing of the House, they had not yet been able to adopt the course proposed by the hon. Member. Perhaps on another occasion he should be enabled to announce a more satisfactory result.
  MR. CHAMBERLAINsaid, that there could be no possible difficulty in the

  327
  matter, if the Government made up its mind to take the step he suggested. His proposal was that 100 extra copies of pamphlets and other official Papers should be printed and distributed amongst the free libraries of the country. He could not understand the necessity for referring the matter to Mr. Speaker; for if the Government were to consent to a slight increase of the Expenditure in this Vote it could be done.
  MR. RYLANDSsaid, that his hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham was perfectly justified in pressing this matter upon the attention of the Government. In his opinion, it was a question of very great public importance, and he hoped that his hon. Friend would take the opportunity of the Civil Service Estimates for bringing the matter again before the House. The real Obstructive in this matter was the noble Lord the Postmaster General; for if he would make no charge for the transmission of these Blue Books the principal obstacle to the gratuitous distribution would vanish.
  Vote agreed to.
  (2.) £180, Lunacy Commission, Scotland.
  (3.) £36, Lord Lieutenant's Household, Ireland.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, that this sum was stated to be required for emblazoning arms, and was a charge which used to be defrayed from the Stationery and Printing Vote. He should like to ask whether the work was given to an Irish firm or not? He only rose to ask the question for the purpose of giving the Government the satisfaction of stating that that was the case.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that this item was originally included in the Stationery Vote. The work was executed under the immediate eye of Sir Bernard Burke, and it had been thought better to take the items from the Stationery Vote, and place it in the Vote for the expenses of the Lord Lieutenant's Household. He had no doubt that Sir Bernard Burke had acted as the hon. Member would have desired that he should act. The duty of emblazoning these arms was intrusted to the Herald's Office.
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, that it was his impression that the chief expenses for the College of Arms were not
  328
  paid by Vote, but were charged upon the Consolidated Fund.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that he believed that was the case. The Vote in question was formerly defrayed from the Stationery Vote; but it had been thought better to separate it, and place it under the present head.
  Vote agreed to.
  (4.) £2,700, Local Government Board, Ireland.
  MAJOR NOLANsaid, that he should like to call attention to a matter in connection with this Vote. Under subhead F, the sum of £300 was charged on account of travelling expenses of four Inspectors. To that item he did not wish to object; but he desired to point out that there was a large district in the West of Ireland called Connemara, which was situated partly in Galway and partly in Mayo, which was utterly beyond the control of the local Board of Guardians. That district was in great need of supervision; for the Boards of Guardians, though very efficient, were unable, from the extent of the district, to exercise anything like efficient control. The distress might be very severely felt in those districts, unless they were placed under the special superintendence of some Government Department. He wished to ask the Government whether they intended to place that part of Gal-way under some special supervision? The Government ought to give some assurance that the Local Government Board would pay special attention to the wants of those districts, and see that there were efficient means of relief there.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that he could assure the hon. and gallant Member that the Government were thoroughly alive to the matter referred to. He might point out to the Committee that three additional Inspectors were appointed in addition to the four originally sanctioned. The Treasury had permitted the appointment of such additional staff in order that the most thorough inspection might be made, and that the Government might be kept fully alive to the extent of the distress. His right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant kept himself fully acquainted with the wants of each district; and he could assure the hon. and gallant Gentleman that there was no district in Ireland as to which the Go-

  329
  vernment had not the means of exercising the most complete supervision.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, that he did not wish to doubt the statement of the hon. Baronet; but he feared, notwithstanding the willingness of the Government, that they were taking an optimist view of the situation, and of the distress which existed. In a great many districts there was fearful distress, while, for some reason or other, the inspection was extremely faulty. He could give several cases in illustration of that view. He should like to know how it was that state of things existed in Tipperary, a district which was by no means amongst the worst off in Ireland? He would just quote one single instance of the existing state of things; and, except on the fact, as he had stated, that the Government inspection had been at fault, he could not understand how matters could have arrived at such a pass. In Tipperary the Board-room of the Guardians had been invaded by a crowd of hundreds of starving labourers, who, together with their families, were living in a state of destitution, and who absolutely threatened the Guardians by saying that they had no other resource than to break open the broad stores and support themselves and their families by plunder. Hero was a threat of social insurrection. The mob was only pacified by a promise of instant relief. Had any proper means of inspection been at the disposal of the Government, or had the means already existing been properly used, how, he asked, could the distress in this particular district have culminated in an outbreak and the threat of a broad riot? He was greatly afraid that too much optimism prevailed in Government quarters with regard to Irish distress. It was announced in the papers of that morning that the contributions from America were falling off owing to the belief that abundant means had already been provided for meeting that distress; and a few weeks ago the representative of that estimable body, the Duchess of Marlborough's Committee, gave an intimation that their measures were so complete that the danger of further distress had passed away. Now, he believed that there existed the most imminent danger of extreme and frightful distress extending far beyond the regions in Ireland which were usually associated with it in the minds of hon. Members.
  330
  If this view were correct, he believed the Government and the people in Ireland would arrive at a very critical pass before the end of many months. An English provincial newspaper had, moreover, that day given descriptions of cases of most horrible destitution which had occurred in the existing condition of affairs. While giving the Government credit for the same feelings of humanity which were claimed by those around him, he could not help asking how came it that those horrible, frightful, and revolting scenes were taking place all over Ireland, if there existed proper means of bringing the fact to the notice of the Government, or if the Government officials were properly making use of the means at their disposal? It would seem that no adequate use was being made of existing means of relief, and that the Government seemed to be unaware of the state of things in Ireland.
  Vote agreed to.
  (5.) £2,000, Public Works Office, Ireland.
  MAJOR NOLANsaid, he did not object to this item; but took that opportunity of pointing out to the Committee that there were two modes by which Her Majesty's Government were affording relief to persons in Ireland, one of thorn being the system of out-door relief, and the other the system of labour on public works under the baronial sessions. The Poor Law Unions had to apply to the baronial sessions to give work for the employment of labour. Now, lie understood from the statements contained in newspapers, and the reports which had reached him, that in many eases when these applications for the employment of labour had been made the baronial sessions had inadequately responded to the appeal, and he believed that the amount of work given had not been sufficient to meet the present emergency. It had been pointed out that the money granted for this purpose would be ill-spent, and the work ill-executed, owing to the hurry in which it was carried out; and that, consequently, there existed a dislike to paying for the baronial works. But this was really the chief means which the Government had held out for relieving the present distress in Ireland. He desired to know whether the Treasury could make up any statement that would

  331
  show what had been the amount of work done in each barony under the baronial sessions at the request of the Poor Law Unions, and whether they would lay such statement on the Table of the House? Again, he would like to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland if there existed at that moment any power by which the Local Government Board could step in and compel the Poor Law Unions to relieve the poor—by which, if any works were ordered to be undertaken in a particular barony for the relief of the poor, they could say to the Guardians—"You are not doing your work." He thought no such power was vested in the Local Government Board; but it seemed to him that there ought to be some machinery by means of which that body could compel the Poor Law Union to do its work. His second question, therefore, was, what machinery had the Government at their disposal for enforcing the execution of a certain amount of work, if the barony did not respond to the application of the Poor Law Unions?
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, that the hon. and gallant Member for Galway (Major Nolan) had most opportunely raised a very important question. Relief by means of employment on public works was really the only portion of the Government scheme for the relief of distress in Ireland which was in itself calculated to attain the object in view; and he entirely agreed with his hon. and gallant Friend that there was a necessity for some means of putting pressure upon the baronial presentment sessions in order to make them vote the works for relief. The other day there had appeared in The Freeman's Journal a detailed account of the way in which the baronial presentment sessions came to grief in one of the most distressed counties in the West of Ireland. There were only summoned to the session on the occasion in question six representatives of the cesspayers, while the landlord interest came for miles and miles from all parts of the county around. The result of their deliberations was to throw out almost the whole of the works which had been pressed upon their acceptance; and it was openly stated that, inasmuch as the proposed works would cast a certain burden upon the estates of the landlords, they were exceedingly difficult of being persuaded of their
  332
  necessity. The vote of the cesspayers having been reduced to a nullity, the proposal for the relief works was rejected. Now, it was through these relief works alone that any sensible alleviation of the existing distress would be made by the Government scheme. Relief by means of loan to one person for the improvement of his estate had already, to a large extent, been proved to be a failure, so far as the relief of distress was concerned; for, after so much had been expended in materials, so much in the supervision of labour, &c, but a comparatively small portion of the fund lent to the proprietor for the improvement of his estate remained to be expended in the employment of that ever wretched class of labourers. He was afraid, therefore, that a very small portion of the sums advanced to landed proprietors would really go to meet the distress then prevalent in Ireland. He did not at all accuse the landed proprietors of trifling with the distress, or unduly turning aside the funds from their proper application. But the landed proprietor, when he borrowed money, would have to look to that application of it which would tend to recoup him for his outlay; and, in a large percentage of cases, the application of the Government funds, which would repay the landlord best, would not be that which would go directly to the relief of a starving neighbourhood. Practically, as he had said before, in an enormous number of cases, the scheme for relief by means of the improvement of estates had already broken down and proved to be a thorough failure. It was through the employment of labour on works undertaken under Government control that the relief could reach distressed persons; and if the Government did not extend the system under the Boards of Works, if they did not apply some means, and, in case of necessity, a vigorous stimulus to the baronial presentment sessions, that portion of their scheme would break down also. If scenes like the fiasco in the baronial sessions to which he had referred were to be repeated, and there were to be no proper means of forcing the baronial presentment sessions to do their work in the present crisis, then he maintained that both portions of the Government scheme would prove deplorable failures.
  MR. ERRINGTONsaid, he hoped that the Chief Secretary for Ireland would give the Committee some idea as to the amount of money passed at the baronial sessions. He expressed his regret that not only upon that point, but upon others, they wore without any information. He had moved for Returns of the amounts applied for and granted in the various Poor Law Unions; but though the Returns had been ordered no information was yet forthcoming. A great deal of the efficiency of the relief measures would depend on the accurate knowledge which might be obtained as to the progress of the relief works; and he could not help saying that there seemed to be a considerable want of appreciation on the part of the Government of the importance of the present crisis, since no attempt had been made by them to afford information of that kind. He also hoped that the Chief Secretary for Ireland would agree to furnish another Return of which he had given him Notice in the course of the evening. He trusted that the Returns, which would show the amount of the loans to the various Boards of Guardians, sanitary authorities, and landlords, would also prove that the system had worked well, to a certain extent, in affording relief.
  MR. J. LOWTHERhoped that the information asked for by the hon. Member for Longford County would be in the hands of hon. Members very shortly. With regard to the questions of the hon. and gallant Member for Galway (Major Nolan), the engineers appointed were for the purpose of expediting, as far as possible, investigations of a preliminary character in regard to those works for which loans were required, and of superintending also the works in progress. If the hon. and gallant Member asked for a detailed statement with regard to their work he would see how far this could be done; but there were some difficulties in the way of the Returns. The hon. Member for Dungarvan had, as he understood, asked for information with regard to the power possessed by the Government of compelling the baronial sessions to make a presentment. No such power existed, and he thought it would be a very unreasonable one for the Government to seek to obtain. Up to that time no money had been advanced upon the recommendation of the baronial presentment sessions by the Board of Works.
  MAJOR NOLANsaid, if he was to understand that no money had been sanctioned for expenditure by the baronies up to that moment, he would like to know when it would be sanctioned?
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that until the Government had gone carefully into all the applications by landowners, sanitary authorities, and others, up to the 29th of February inclusive, it would be impossible for them fully to inform themselves as to the requirements of each locality. Of course, no unnecessary delay would take place.
  MAJOR NOLANsaid, he had not asked anything about the duties of the engineers to the Board of Works. As far as he knew, they had been working very well. His questions related to the baronial presentment sessions. What he wanted to know was whether the presentment of the sessions were sanctioned, and when hon. Members would have in their hands a Return showing that they were sanctioned. Hon. Members would not be able to talk to their constituents on that important subject during the Recess unless a Return of the presentments made by the different baronial presentment sessions were placed on the Table of the House within a fortnight.
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, he hoped that, within the time named by the hon. and gallant Member for Galway, the information would be forthcoming.
  MR. BIGGARsaid, he should be glad of information concerning these grants to landlords. He would also like to know what machinery was in existence for spending the money. It did not appear to him that there was to be any check at all; neither was there any provision for the employment of persons in distress.
  MR. P. MARTINsaid, he should like to know what had been done with respect to the Board of Works in Ireland? Lord Lansdowne's Report to the Treasury in 1872 condemned the then constitution of that body, and the manner in which their administrative duties were discharged. The Departmental Committee appointed in 1877 had reported that the working of the Board was most unsatisfactory, and had, in practice, totally failed. Various recommendations had been made by the Commissioners for the re-organization of the Board, and suggestions which, if adopted, would

  335
  have facilitated the administrative operations of that most important Board. Yet though, as he believed, that Report had been sent to the Treasury some throe years ago, nothing had been done by the Government. He thought, under those circumstances, before the Committee sanctioned the Supplementary Vote of £2,000, some satisfactory explanation should be given why these recommendations and suggestions thus made by the Committee had been disregarded. The importance, at the present time, of facilitating and supplying the manner of obtaining loans in respect to the progress of Ireland, so far as either landlords or tenants were concerned, could not be over-estimated. Yet, as had been shown, the operations of the Board were fettered by some 300 Acts of Parliament of a confused and contradictory character, which prevented the free working of that body. In point of fact, any landowner who applied for a loan to the Board of Works had it present to his mind that the expense would be of a very serious character, and that he was about to present an application to a body, whose solicitor even was doubtful and uncertain as to the powers vested in them by Statute. In the cases of many of the loans there were searches as to title and incumbrances, which ought to be dispensed with as recommended. Why should not priority be given to the charges in all cases similar to that which existed in the case of land improvement loans? He trusted that the Committee would receive some intimation from the hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury as to how it was proposed to remedy this state of affairs. There was at that moment in Ireland a great lack of work; and it became, therefore, necessary to stimulate and encourage the employment of labour. Last year the House had been informed by the Secretary to the Treasury that a gentleman had been appointed, to consolidate the Acts of Parliament by which the action of the Board of Works was impeded, and that a Bill to deal with the whole question would, in a short time, be presented to Parliament. But they had already made some advance into the present Session, and no Bill had been presented. He had, therefore, asked to be enlightened by the Secretary to the Treasury with respect to this subject; and he found that, as a matter of fact,
  336
  the gentleman employed upon the consolidation of the Acts of Parliament had only got half through his work. Now, if a gentleman of the requisite ability had been employed for more than a year and a half in attempting to consolidate these Statutes, how could it be expected that a landowner should apply for a loan to authorities who were ignorant of the extent of their powers? How could he be enabled to approach a body which had 300 Acts of Parliament to clog its action. Under these circumstances, he considered that the Committee were entitled to receive from the Secretary to the Treasury some further information before the Vote was agreed to.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, he was able to give some information to the hon. and learned Gentleman who had just sat down (Mr. P. Martin). He would beg to remind him that there was a great difficulty attending the consolidation of 300 Acts of Parliament, and that it was a matter that required very careful and lengthy consideration. The course the Government had taken was an unavoidable one, and the work of consolidation had been referred to a most competent member of the Legal Profession, who had been employed upon that work for nearly a year, and had only just completed about half the work. If the hon. and learned Member had been aware of the size of these Acts, he felt sure that he would not have made the remarks that he had. But he would remind the Committee that the question of consolidation was apart from that under the consideration of the Government. The question before them was whether there should be a re-organization of the Board of Works in Ireland or not. He had stated last year that the Government were about to consider that question in accordance with the suggestions of the Committee that inquired into the subject. The hon. and learned Member had referred to that Committee as having sat three years ago. They did, in fact, sit two years ago, and their Report was only received about 18 months since. At this moment a statement was being drawn up upon the subject, in order that it might be submitted to the House of Commons, and he hoped and believed that that statement would contain a satisfactory solution of the question. He was sure that the Committee would

  337
  agree that the question of there-organization of the Board of Works was most inopportune at this time, in view of the prevailing distress in Ireland. If the Committee would allow him, he should like to call their attention to the fact that the present was not the occasion for entering into these questions for another reason. They were now discussing the Supplementary Estimates, and he begged to submit that they were hardly in a position to criticize the formation or the constitution of the Board of Public Works in Ireland. The question submitted to the Committee was, whether sanction should be given for the employment of an additional number of engineers for the purpose of carrying out—whether rightly or wrongly he would not say—what the House had agreed upon in the terms of the Relief of Distress (Ireland) Bill; and they had also to consider whether salaries to the amount of £2,000 should be voted to pay for the additional work thrown on the Board of Works. He deprecated entering into the questions referred to by the hon. and learned Member for Kilkenny County, for discussion on them would much more properly come under the consideration of the Estimates themselves.
  MR. P. MARTINsaid, that the matter to which he had referred was too grave and of too much importance to be thus lightly dealt with. The Secretary to the Treasury had told them last year that this Bill for the consolidation of these Acts of Parliament was prepared and ready to be laid before the House.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, he must ask the Committee to be allowed to explain. He might have said that a Bill was in course of preparation; but he begged to deny that he had used the words imputed to him by the hon. and learned Member.
  MR. P. MARTINbegged to withdraw the remark. He must have misunderstood the hon. Gentleman. He certainly had considered that the Bill was ready, and he thought that a reference to Hansard would show that he was there represented to have stated what he had charged him with having said. He could not refrain from stating that, in view of the distress that was likely to prevail, he thought the Bill ought to have been now ready. He ventured to say
  338
  that any professional gentleman competent could consolidate the number of Statutes in six months. He did not mean to cast the slightest imputation on the gentleman intrusted with the work. No doubt he was thoroughly competent. For his own part, he thought that the Treasury had made a great mistake with regard to this consolidation of Statutes. What was required was a repeal of the entire of the existing Acts, and a new and simple Code, as well as radical changes in the Board of Public Works. He knew, from practice, that the enactments in the present Acts were so confused and contradictory that nothing but a new Code could deal properly and effectively with the evil. One Act repealed another, and so on, to such an extent that reference was required to about 30 others in order to construe one. For this reason he desired he should not be considered as making any reflection on the gentleman who had the work of consolidation in hand. What he wanted to impress upon the Government was that the question was one of most serious importance; and he, therefore, begged them to urge the matter forward. With reference to the Board of Works, he had heard many gentlemen say that they were always most courteous and anxious to assist, but they seemed incapable of efficient action; and he thought that was a strong reason why no time should be wasted before a re-organization of the Department took place. He should like to get some assurance from the Secretary to the Treasury that, instead of dealing with consolidation of Statutes, the Government would deal boldly with the matter, cut the Gordian knot, and present to the country a new Code, and place the Board of Works on an efficient footing. It had been pointed out in "another place," that in point of fact, the Bill for the relief of distress in Ireland would have the effect of an enormous increase in the rates, and inevitably tend towards the impoverishment of the districts which were at present not classed as distressed districts in Ireland. The matter was of vital importance. It would be an immense boon to be able to get a mode of procedure simpler than at present, and to have a Board in such an efficient state that when applications were made for loans the exact costs attendant on the transactions might be known without any delay.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, he could assure the hon. and learned Member that he was mistaken as to his remarks. It was simply impossible that he could have given the assurance to the House to which the hon. Member had referred, for the consolidation of the Statutes was not commenced until somewhere about the middle of last year. There were a large number of Statutes which had to be considered; and, in fact, it appeared now that their consolidation would take much longer than had been first anticipated. There was, no doubt, a good deal of difficulty attending the matter; and when the Government decided on the consolidation they resolved that it should be carried out carefully, in order that a useful Code might be laid before the country. He must remind the hon. and learned Member that there were two distinct questions raised; codification was only a part of the recommendation of the Committee. He had already stated, with regard to the other recommendations in which an alteration was proposed in the system of the Public Works Board in Ireland, that a Bill would be prepared for that purpose, in order that the suggestions of the Committee of 1878 might be carried into effect. Those suggestions must be considered in discussing the Estimates for public works generally; but all that the Government asked now was that an addition of £2,000 should be made to the Estimate for the purpose of carrying out the works which had already received the sanction of the House of Commons, and those which had been undertaken previously, pending the acceptance by the House of the Bill which had now become law.
  MR. SHAWsaid, that he regretted he had been unable to hear the former part of the discussion. His objection to the Vote was that it was not enough. He had a very strong objection to things being done in an imperfect manner. There had been great delay on the part of the Board of Works; and they had been now some five or six months getting that body to institute drainage and other useful works. It appeared to him that they had not half enough engineers nor officials generally. He was sure, if the Government had estimated this charge at £4,000 or £5,000, money would have been saved in the long run. It was not the time, he agreed, to consider the
  340
  other question of re-organization. He saw no reason why the Bill containing the recommendations of the Committee had not before now been placed upon the Table of the House. The question which was being asked was—What was going to be done? They might soon find themselves in the midst of a General Election; and he did hope that before that time arrived some settlement might be come to in this matter. There was nothing that would increase the prosperity of Ireland so much as the reorganization of the Board of Works. The reason of so much delay was that whatever was proposed to be done was invariably reported adversely upon by one of these Boards. There was no independence about the Local Boards. He thought that the Board in Dublin ought to be represented in the House of Commons by a Member who should be responsible both to the House and the country. The engineers who were now required ought to be appointed independently of the Treasury. It was the Treasury, after all, that placed obstacles in the way and caused delay. Nothing could be got out of them, although their words were fair enough. The Irish people wore giving up applications for assistance to the Board of Works in despair, as they had so little done for them. Money was not wanted, but facilities for instituting works. He was confident that the sum proposed was too small.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, he would merely call attention to the fact that the Vote before the Committee was to meet a Supplementary Estimate for the coming year.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, he should like to understand exactly the remarks which had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland (Mr. J. Lowther). He understood, in the first place, that the Government had strictly discouraged expenditure by means of presentments at baronial sessions up to the present time. That expenditure had been already sanctioned by Parliament; but if he rightly understood the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman, the reason for delay on the part of the Board of Works was obvious. In the second place, was he right in understanding that the Government were going to inspect carefully the manner in which the landowners were laying out the

  341
  money advanced to them, in order that it might be properly expended on labour, and labour only?
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, if the hon. Member would bear in mind what took place on the discussion of the Bill, he would remember that it was then stated that loans to landlords and sanitary authorities were the first steps to giving employment. He must call attention to the fact that it was distinctly stated that it was only in the event of the landowners and sanitary authorities failing to provide adequate employment that baronial presentments were to be had recourse to. He had stated just before that he had only just been able to ascertain the amount applied for by landowners up to the 29th. ultimo, inclusive; and the time since that was so short that it was impossible that the Government could arrive at a conclusion as to whether the ways in which the money was proposed to be expended were desirable. It was, therefore, out of his power to afford the information to the Committee. The advertisements issued by the Board of Works distinctly stated the only ways in which the money to be obtained was to be expended.
  Vote agreed to.

  CLASS III.—LAW AND JUSTICE.
  (6.) £18,761, Law Charges.
  MR. SHAWsaid, he should like an explanation with reference to the item marked "J"—Fees paid to Counsel for revising the Irish Ante-Union Statutes—he failed to understand its meaning.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that in the absence of his right hon. and loarned Friend the Attorney General for Ireland he was unable to give an explanation.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, that he had been asked to call attention to one of the items in order that an answer might be obtained to the question, why the same protection to property was not afforded in Ireland as in England? Under the head B appeared the cost of the prosecution of the West of England Bank Directors. This was instituted in order to protect the property of those who might be attracted by a flashy prospectus and lose their investments. But why was there no such law in Ireland? He would give them an instance where a similar thing had occurred, but no steps had been
  342
  taken by the authorities. A firm recently failed in the South-West of Ireland, and almost immediately before failing a prospectus was issued calling attention to the character of the business, and the prosperous condition of it. It was similar to the City of Glasgow Bank case. A large number of people with small means had been reduced to beggary, and the Company had paid only a most miserable dividend. The creditors were unable to bring the directors to trial on account of their poverty, and they were now at largo, no steps having been taken by the Government in the matter. He would not press the matter; but he felt it his duty to call attention to it, and to urge that equal justice should be administered to the three countries.
  SIR ANDREW LUSKsaid, that he did not think that sufficient explanations had been given with regard to the enormous increase in the Vote for Law Charges. Under sub-head C the sum of £9,000 was charged, and the only explanation was as follows:—
  "The fees paid to counsel have been heavy, the increase of work from the various legal departments taken over by the Solicitor to the Treasury has been distinctly felt."
  Then, again, under letter D, the sum charged was £400, and it was stated that "the number of coin prosecutions conducted during the year has been greater than usual." And in letter E, for bankruptcy prosecutions, £2,200 were now asked for, because "some of the bills of costs paid have been large in amount." He certainly agreed that some of the bills of costs in these prosecutions must have been very heavy indeed; but that was a very slight explanation of such a large extra charge as £2,200. He thought a great deal too much money was paid in fees to counsel. He hoped that some notice would be taken of the wanton expense which was continually going on in legal matters, and that a check would be put upon it. It seemed to him that trials that formerly lasted a day now occupied a week, and that trials which formerly were finished in a week now continued for a whole month.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsaid, that the hon. Baronet complained of the large sum spent in public prosecutions in England. In Ireland they enjoyed the advantages, and the occasional disadvantages, of a Public Prosecutor. They had an Attorney General who was charged

  343
  with the duty of acting as Public Prosecutor, and barristers were appointed in each county to discharge subsidiary duties under him. He ventured to think that if the same power of preventing bankruptcy prosecutions existed in England as in Ireland much of the expense which at present existed would be saved. In Ireland the Bankruptcy Court frequently exercised the power of preventing prosecutions.
  SIR PATRICK O'BRIENthought that 99 out of every 100 prosecutions in Ireland were under the immediate cognizance of the Attorney General. The heaviest part of the duty of an Attorney General in Ireland was that he could not really depend upon his subordinates, but was obliged in every case of a prosecution to read the depositions himself. No doubt, there occasionally happened such cases as those alluded to by the hon. Member for Dungarvan. He believed that when persons were not in a pecuniary position to carry on prosecutions, if it came to the notice of the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General, it would be his duty as a matter of public policy to take up the prosecution on the part of the Crown. He had never heard that in Ireland any case had occurred in which, where a private prosecutor had made representations to the Attorney General that he could not carry on the prosecution, the Crown had refused to take it up. He believed that the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General and his Predecessors had always stepped in to relieve private prosecutors whenever the circumstances rendered it necessary. The hon. Baronet the Member for Finsbury (Sir Andrew Lusk) had taken objection to these Estimates on the ground that the law charges were excessive. He objected principally to the very large Vote for public prosecutions; but he would ask the hon. Baronet whether, if the Government had not taken up the prosecutions in question, they would not have been told they ought to do so? And if that were the case, they certainly were now entitled to come to Parliament for money to pay the costs incurred. If they had a Public Prosecutor in England; he believed it would be a very great advantage, and would conduce materially to the satisfaction of justice.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that with reference to what had
  344
  fallen from the hon. Baronet the Member for Finsbury with respect to counsels' fees for criminal prosecutions, a foot-note in the Estimates stated certain criminal trials that had led to the original Estimate being exceeded. During 1879 there had been several important trials—namely, "Reg. v. Catherine Webster," "Reg. v. Hannah Dobbs," "Reg. v. Levy," "Reg. v. Froggatt," "Reg. v. Addison," "Reg. v. Hammond and others;" and the expenses of the proceedings now being taken against the West of England Bank would be very serious in amount. With regard to the charge, under sub-head C, of £9,000 for legal proceedings not criminal, he would point out that the increase was principally owing to the accession of business taken over by the Treasury Solicitor from other Departments. It had been thought wise to centre in the hands of the Legal Advisers of the Treasury the legal work of all the various Departments. The Treasury had come to the conclusion that the cost of the legal work would be very much diminished if centred in the hands of the Treasury Solicitor. In 1875–6, the legal business of the Board of Works was transferred to the Treasury; and in 1876–7 that of the War Office was also transferred. In the same year the legal business of the Admiralty was also placed in the hands of the Treasury Solicitor. The result of transferring the business of the different Departments to the Treasury had been a very considerable saving; but, owing to the development of the business in the hands of the Treasury Solicitor since the transfer, the cost for business which had come had rendered necessary this additional Estimate. The hon. Baronet the Member for Finsbury might feel assured that the costs of the Department of the Solicitor to the Treasury, even with this additional Estimate, would fall far short of what would have been charged for the legal work when transacted by the different Departments.
  SIR ANDREW LUSKsaid, he was pleased to hear the hon. Baronet the Secretary to the Treasury state that an economy had been effected. Certainly, the sum of £2,200 for extra costs for bankruptcy prosecution was very large, and required some explanation. He was, however, very pleased to accept the statement of the hon. Baronet.
  MR. BIGGARsaid, that, in his opinion, the Attorney General for Ireland should not be paid by fees upon the prosecutions, for the system made it his interest to encourage prosecutions.
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. GIBSON)said, there was no possibility of regulating the number of cases that might come before the magistrates; and it became the duty of the Attorney General to take such cases into consideration, and, if necessary, direct prosecutions. It was necessary that the Attorney General should read the informations in every case, as he was the only responsible person. It was not in the power of the Attorney General in the slightest degree to control the increase or diminution of a number of cases.
  MR. DODSONsaid, that a Supplementary Vote of £1,070 was asked for in respect of Parliamentary Agency, and the explanation given was that Messrs. Wyatts' costs amounted to £2,329 4s. He should like to know whether those costs were not provided for in the original Estimate?
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that the only explanation he could give was that it was impossible, when the Estimates were compiled, to state the number of Bills which would require to be brought into Parliament. Last year they estimated the probable amount which would be required for Parliamentary Agency at £1,500; but, in consequence of numerous other Bills being brought in, it became necessary to incur further costs. The result would doubtless be that the costs of Parliamentary Agency had nearly doubled the original Estimate.
  MR. SHAWsaid, that, doubtless, it would be a better plan if the payment of the Attorney General was by means of salary instead of fees. He should like some explanation from the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General with regard to the item J, for Statute Law Revision. It was stated that fees had been paid to counsel for revising the Irish Ante-Union Statute, and that those fees were not provided for in the Estimates. It appeared that the original Estimate for that purpose was £1,130, and that a a sum of £271 extra was now required.
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. GIBSON)said, that when
  346
  he first took Office he found that the question of revising the Irish Ante-Union Statutes was in a very backward state. In England Statute Law had been revised from the earliest times to the present day; but a singular exception had occurred in the case of the Irish Ante-Union Statutes. He applied himself to remedy that most unfortunate omission; and he was happy to state that all the Irish Ante-Union Statutes had now been revised. One portion of the Statutes had been revised in 1878, and the remainder last year. The work of revising those Statutes was of an extremely complicated character. Two members of the Bar were employed upon it—one was an Irish barrister, and the other was an English barrister, but an Irishman by birth, and, he had no doubt, was well known to both sides of the House as a talented and able man. He might say that the rate of remuneration paid for the work was far less than that given to members of the English Bar for revising the English Statutes.
  Vote agreed to.
  (7.) £965, Public Prosecutor's Office.
  (8.) £5,000, Criminal Prosecutions, Sheriffs' Expenses, &c.
  MR. BIGGARsaid, he thought the present was the proper time to ask the hon. Baronet the Secretary to the Treasury to what extent this Supplementary Vote was rendered necessary by the Winter Assizes. He understood that the Judges were frequently sent to places where there was no business for them to get through, and that a great waste of time had in consequence resulted.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that the question raised by the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar) was one that had led to a very considerable difference of opinion as to whether the Winter Assizes had been successful or not. At the same time, he wished to call the attention of the Committee to the object with which the Winter Assize had been established. There had existed, both in the House and in the country, a strong opinion that it was not fair to allow prisoners to remain for a long time untried. The attention of the Government had been directed to a remarkable instance of a person under a charge of a very grave offence, of which he was entirely innocent, who had been

  347
  kept in prison for many months. It was considered, at that time, that it would be more satisfactory to insure a clearance of the gaols at regular periods, and it was then that the Winter Assize was instituted. He did not mean to imply that the hon. Member for Cavan was not right in pointing out the great inconvenience as to the waste of time of Judges going Circuits where few prisoners had to be tried. At the same time, it might be well to consider whether an arrangement could not be made by which the work of the Judges would be simplified rather than by abolishing the Winter Assize, which had been of benefit to the country.
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEsaid, he was glad that attention had been called to the subject. He was anxious to say a word or two upon that topic, because it had happened that some very severe comments had not long ago been made upon the conduct of the Grand Jury of the county with which he was connected in respect of this particular question. There had been a Special Assize held at Devizes; and Mr. Justice Denman being upon that Assize, had thought it fit to make what appeared to him to be a very improper agitation against the Act of Parliament. He did not think it was the business of the Judges who were on Circuit to make addresses to Grand Juries, commenting severely upon the Acts of Parliament which they had to administer. The result of the language used by the learned Judge at Devizes was that the Grand Jury had been led into making a presentment against the Act, and he believed that the same thing had happened at other places where Special Assizes had been held. As a consequence of this presentment the Grand Jury, as he had said before, had been severely commented upon for having followed a course, which seemed to the writers of the public Press to be an absurd one. He would not discuss whether the conduct of the Grand Jury, composed of gentlemen for whom he had the highest respect, was wise or not; but he wished to call attention to the unfairness of the situation in which a Grand Jury was placed that had an address made to it by the Judge, and which was practically invited to make a presentment against the Act of Parliament. Hon. Members would see that were the Grand
  348
  Jury to refuse to make such presentment they would practically place themselves in collision with the Judge. He did not know whether other Grand Juries who had been addressed in a similar manner had made a presentment; but in this case they had done so, and, having made it, they were severely commented upon and exposed to ridicule by one of the leading journals. He asked whether it was right that the Judge should make observations of the kind he had referred to? In his opinion, it was not; and had the Judge wished to promote the interests of justice, he thought it would have been far better to call the attention of the Home Secretary to his own individual opinion that the right way to clear the gaols was not to hold Winter Assizes, but to increase the jurisdiction of the Chairman of Quarter Sessions.
  MR. GREGORYsaid, that while in many cases there had been few prisoners for trial at the Winter Assizes, and little or no civil business for the Courts, there had been a great derangement of business in the Courts of Westminster. With regard to some of the Assizes lately held, it might be truly said that there was no business for the Judges. Under those circumstances, it was satisfactory to have heard that this matter was under re-consideration by Government, and that some arrangement was contemplated which would improve the present condition of affairs. He would have liked to see the Assizes consolidated; and that prisoners, where there were very few of them, should be tried at some central place, or that there might be no Sessions held at small towns where there was no necessity for them, and by which the business of the country was so very much impeded. He trusted that the Government would re-consider the question and apply some practical remedy, either by consolidation of the Assizes, or by bringing the business together and confining the Assizes to large towns.
  SIR ANDREW LUSKsaid, this was a fair opportunity to call the attention of the Secretary to the Treasury to the subject which had been referred to by the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar). It was well known that under the present system the Judges had to go down specially to small towns where there was little or nothing for them to do, but where, nevertheless, great preparations

  349
  had to be made by the Sheriffs for their reception. Could not the hon. Baronet do something to enlarge the jurisdiction of the Quarter Sessions? What, he asked, was the use of these eminent Judges going down from Westminster to sentence a man for stealing a few ducks? Yet, such was the nature of the business which they were called upon to perform, and which, as hon. Members were aware, would be settled by a London magistrate in a very short space of time. While the Judges were engaged in trying little cases of this kind, there were causes of very much more importance at Westminster, which could not be gone through. Could not the hon. Baronet simplify these matters, and do away with these small trials, which required so much form to be gone through and kept jurymen for so long a time away from their occupations? Jurymen were called upon, most unnecessarily, to give up a large portion of their time at these Assizes, while other trials of far greater importance were decided in London very often without any juries at all.
  MR. GORSTsaid, he wished to call the attention of hon. Members to the fact that there was before the House the Criminal Code Bill, which dealt with the jurisdiction of the Quarter Sessions, which would, therefore, in a short time, receive proper consideration. That Bill would so enlarge the jurisdiction of the Quarter Sessions as to relieve the Judges of a great deal of the work which they had then unnecessarily to perform.
  MR. D. DAVIESsaid, that the objection which had been raised to the Winter Assize would apply more to Wales than to England. In his district, jurymen complained bitterly of the manner in which their time was unnecessarily occupied. Taking the counties of Montgomeryshire and Merionethshire, for instance, there was really nothing for the Judges to do at the Winter Assizes; but, of course, in the case of the towns of Swansea and Cardiff, where there were a great many foreigners, the case was different. It was, no doubt, a very great waste of time to send Judges down to places where there was not one single case to be tried.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, he was glad to hear the testimony which had been borne by the hon. Member for Cardigan to the moral character of the Welsh. Indeed, as they were near relations of
  350
  the Irish, he was highly satisfied at hearing of their good behaviour. He rose, however, to express his fear that the increased number of Assizes had rather pre-disposed a number of committing magistrates to think more lightly than before of leaving a prisoner in gaol without accepting bail. It was very hard to account for some of the refusals to receive bail to which they had lately been treated in Ireland on the part of the local justices. He had in view particularly a case where seven or eight poor men in the county of Galway had been accused, on the unsupported testimony of a process-server, of having entered into a conspiracy to intimidate him. Although these men had wives and families, and were persons of good standing, bail had been refused when it was perfectly certain that to keep them in gaol would be their ruin. The magistrates seemed to have no regard for humanity or justice, and appeared to think that as the Assizes were then so frequent there was no hardship in a man lying in gaol for a couple of months. It, however, meant ruin to the person so committed, as it most certainly did in the case which had pressed this state of things on his attention. It had been pointed out by several hon. Members that a remedy could be found for the existing condition of affairs by enlarging the jurisdiction of the Quarter Sessions. He thought, however, on the other hand, that it would be better if some cheaper means were provided by law to meet the cases of poor men refused to be admitted to bail by justices of so superior a station as those he had alluded to, and who had no means of putting in operation the rather expensive machinery then in use for the purpose of over-riding the dogmatic decisions of Justices of the Peace.
  Vote agreed to.
  (9.) £9,800, Queen's Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer Divisions of the High Court of Justice.
  (10.) £25,206, County Courts.
  (11.) £1,300, Police—Counties and Boroughs (Great Britain).
  (12.) £216,245, Prisons, England.
  MR. WHITBREADsaid, that the sum required for compensation to prison authorities, amounting to £195,170, had

  351
  come upon the Committee without any previous warning; at all events, no provision had been made for this purpose in the original Estimates, and this appeared to him to be rather an extraordinary proceeding. He hoped that when they came to the accounts for the Prisons, that they would be presented in such a shape as would enable the Committee fairly to judge of the result of the Prisons' Act.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, he assured the hon. Member who had just sat down that it was the wish of the Treasury, and those who had the administration of these particular prisons, to present full and accurate accounts of their working; but the hon. Member would see that up to the present moment, while the arrangements remained in their present state, it was exceedingly difficult to arrive at anything like an accurate account of prison management. The salaries of the different officers which had been transferred to the State had required to be classified; and there had been, besides, a large amount of other work to be gone through. But the whole arrangement had now become an accomplished fact, and would find its detailed statement in the accounts of the year. He was aware that the accounts had been up to that time of a very meagre character; but this was accounted for by their having been in a state of transition, and by the staff of officers who prepared them having also been under re-organization. They had been unable to give, in consequence, the results of the working of the whole system; and he was not surprised that the hon. Member for Bedford had called the attention of the Committee to the amount for compensation to prison authorities which had been included in that Vote. But had the hon. Member been present in the House rather earlier in the evening, when the discussion was raised upon the Supplementary Estimates of the year, he would have heard some explanation of the point referred to in the statement which he had addressed to the House. The hon. Member was aware that the Act of Parliament under which the transfer of the prisons was effected allowed a certain amount of compensation to be arranged, such as for prison accommodation, services, and loss of contract between the local autho-
  352
  rities and the Government. Now, all these questions had to be gone through after the prisons had been transferred to the State. In one case, the amount of compensation for cell accommodation over and above the necessities of particular localities where the prisons had been transferred to the State required to be considered. In another case, the sum payable by localities for not having fulfilled their obligations had also to be taken into account. There were five prisons with which, up to the present time, no settlement had been made. The amount claimed against the Government was £235,000; but the payments by localities for deficient cell accommodation, and from other sources, reduced the amount to about £40,000. The reason for the Vote appearing in the Supplementary Estimates was that when the original Estimates for last year were prepared there was no possibility of arriving at a knowledge of what the amounts would be that were recoverable from the different localities. The hon. Member would see that the preparation of these accounts required a great deal of time to be expended upon it. They were, at the present moment, still under discussion; and this, he believed, would show why so large a Supplementary Vote had been necessary, while it would also make it clear that the amount was really increased by the extra receipts.
  MR. WHITBREADsaid, that at the beginning of the year there was no sort of idea that the present large sum would be asked for at all. His hon. Friend the Secretary to the Treasury must have known perfectly well that the Government must have contemplated a charge of some kind; and he (Mr. Whitbread) did not think it was right that the Government, knowing a charge of this kind was coming on, should omit all reference to it in their original Estimates for the year because they were unable to estimate correctly what the charge would be. It was only right that Parliament should be warned of every charge that was likely to be made.
  SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEYremarked, that it had been known, after the passing of the Prisons' Act in the altered form in which it left the House, that there would be considerable cost incurred in transferring the prisons from the local authorities to the Go-

  353
  vernment. At the same time, there was a note in the Estimates to the effect that it was impossible to foresee what the actual charge would be, or to form any accurate idea of the sums that were likely to fall due this year. He thought his right hon. Friend would have been to blame if he had put down a sum which afterwards turned out to be altogether wrong; and it was impossible to form a proper estimate of the details, as they had to negotiate with the local authorities, and an Estimate might have prejudiced the negotiations.
  MR. BELLsaid, he recollected that a very elaborate statement was made by the Home Secretary to show the economical character of the proposed arrangement. He (Mr. Bell) was afraid that the cost of the prisons to the country would be a great deal more than it was before.
  SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEYremarked, that so far that had not been the case.
  MR. DILLWYNsaid, it was not unusual to give an estimate which, as an actual fact, was exceeded. In the case of new buildings and alterations, the estimate of £25,000 had been exceeded by £13,000; but in that instance there did not seem to have been any difficulty in giving a rough estimate. It certainly must have been a very rough estimate, or it would not have been so much exceeded. He did not see why there should not have been a rough estimate given of the larger sum.
  MR. WHITBREADsaid, he gathered from the last observation of the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department that there was a desire to do nothing that might interfere with the negotiations between the Government and the local authorities. The fact, however, that no Estimate had been given at the proper time could not be passed over in silence. He admitted the difficulty of making an accurate estimate; but, at the same time, the House of Commons should be very strict in not allowing any charge which the Government knew would come upon Parliament in the course of the year to be entirely omitted, even although the actual charge might largely exceed the estimate.
  SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEYsaid, that though it had been expected to cost a good deal more, £25,000 would cover the net cost to
  354
  the country of taking over the prisons. It was impossible to give such an item in the Estimates. No doubt a sum might have been put down; but it would have given no information whatever to the House. It would certainly be of no use for the Government to give an Estimate which they were not prepared to defend.
  MR. DODSONsaid, the best argument offered by the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department for not having submitted an Estimate of this expenditure to the House in the original Estimates of the year was that it might have prejudiced the negotiations the Government were required to enter into with the local authorities. He understood, moreover, that in the discussion upon the Prisons Bill the Home Secretary did mention a sum. Was he wrong in that supposition?
  SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEYsaid, his right hon. Friend made the House perfectly aware that there would be a charge for the expense of taking over the prisons; but he (Sir Matthew White Ridley) could not say that any exact sum was stated.
  MR. DODSONwas disposed to agree with his hon. Friend the Member for Bedford (Mr. Whitbread) that it would have been better to have submitted to the House an Estimate of what the Expenditure was expected to be. He hardly thought that the negotiations with the localities would have been very much affected by such an Estimate. The House of Commons must not forget this—that it was most advisable that, as far as possible, the Government should submit at the commencement of the year an Estimate of what the entire Expenditure of the year was likely to be. If they once got into the habit of allowing Supplementary Estimates to be introduced, once or twice, or three or four times in the year, it would become impossible for the House to exercise any control over the Expenditure.
  SIR ANDREW LUSKwas dissatisfied with the amount of the Vote. It was all very well for the hon. Baronet the Under Secretary of State for the Home Department to say that the Government could not give an Estimate. The hon. Gentleman forgot altogether what was stated when the Prisons Bill was brought in, and when this very matter was dealt with. The Home Secretary

  355
  told them that the change of control would effect a large annual saving. He had it all down with exactness, and was prepared to put all the magistrates of the country to shame by what his saving would be. He came now and told the Committee that last year he did give an Estimate; but he required now £216,000 more than the Estimate. It was quite evident that the Government had not been very accurate in their calculations; and if they had been so very much out in this particular item, how could the House expect that they had been more accurate in other respects? The Estimate now before the Committee showed one of two things—either that the Government were very inaccurate, or very careless, in reference to the Estimates they made. There ought to be no difficulty in arriving at an approximate Estimate. Builders and contractors who entered into very large undertakings were able to estimate very closely what their expenses were likely to be; but here it appeared the Government were no less than£216,000 out of their reckoning.
  SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEYsaid, the arrangements of the Government with the local authorities were of a very complicated character. Every single cell in all the prisons in England had to be considered with its dimensions, capacity, and so on; and all the calculations were carefully gone into. When the transference was made every prison book in England had to be searched, and the circumstances of each prison had to be thoroughly gone into in regard to separate accommodation, alterations, new buildings, and many other details. It was also necessary to find out if there were any contracts to be paid for; and after all these matters were ascertained negotiations had to be opened with the local authorities. Their views had then to be explained to the Home Office, numerous interviews had to take place between them and the Home Office, and a great deal of time was taken up. It was, therefore, absolutely impossible—indeed, as great a financier as the hon. Baronet who had just sat down would have found it absolutely impossible—to form an Estimate that should accurately state the claims of the local authorities. Then, again, on the other side of the question, a calculation had to be made of the amount which the Government were to receive from the local authorities. Al-
  356
  though the Estimate was for £216,000, the net charge to the country, which represented the cost of transferring the prisons to the Government, was only £25,000. Under all the circumstances, he thought it was hardly fair to charge the Government with inaccuracy in framing the Estimate.
  MR. DODSONsaid, it appeared to him that the information which the hon. Gentleman had given landed the Committee in this dilemma. When they introduced the Prisons Bill, either they had a pretty good estimate in their minds of what the cost of taking over the prisons would be, or they had, as the hon. Gentleman now appeared to say, none whatever. If they knew very well what the cost of taking over the prisons would be, there could have been no difficulty in giving an Estimate that would have been pretty nearly accurate; but if they had no idea whatever, then they really did not know, within£50,000 or more, what the scheme was likely to cost the country.
  MR. ASSHETON CROSSsaid, the right hon. Gentleman had totally forgotten one circumstance. When the Prisons Bill was introduced the matter was not gone into at all; but it was forced upon the Government. In the course of the discussion in Committee—not, perhaps, by the right hon. Gentleman himself, but certainly by right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite—it was insisted that the Government should pay the counties which had a certain amount of cell accommodation, and, on the other hand, should receive payment from those which had not. That was not his scheme, which was to take the rough with the smooth. It was forced upon the Government; and, therefore, the right hon. Gentleman had no right to say that when they introduced the Bill they ought to have made these calculations.
  MR. DODSONadmitted the soundness of the right hon. Gentleman's correction. The right hon. Gentleman had re-called the circumstance to his memory; but he also remembered that, as far as he could, he endeavoured to strengthen the hands of the right hon. Gentleman in resisting the proposition then made. He very much regretted that the right hon. Gentleman's Colleague, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, yielded to it.
  MR. RYLANDSdid not think it necessary to continue the discussion which had been raised. What the House were

  357
  more intimately concerned in was the course which the Government ultimately pursued. He thought the proposal was a fair, and probably a just proposal, and that it did not entail upon the country any serious expenditure. He did not take exactly the same ground of objection to this Vote. He admitted that the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary, who was perfectly competent to explain any point to the House connected with his own Department, had explained this matter with perfect satisfaction. That, however, was not the point; but he wished to point out that the Home Secretary had induced the House to accept the Prisons Bill in the expectation that it would be a very economical measure. These Supplementary Estimates certainly gave him the impression that the right hon. Gentleman would be disappointed in his expectations. He was quite aware that the Home Secretary thought, and fully anticipated, that he would be enabled to control the expenditure in such a way as to prevent excessive expenditure. But when the Bill was under discussion he (Mr. Rylands) raised an objection to it, that the moment the gaols came into the hands of the Government there would be a large increase in the cost of building; that they would have constant additions to the existing gaols; that some of them would be re-constructed; and that there would be expenditure in a variety of ways arising out of the pressure brought to bear upon the Department by surveyors, architects, and others. He found that they had already incurred an expenditure of something like £13,000 in new buildings and alterations, and £8,000 for the purchase of land. That was a class of expenditure which, he thought, was very likely to increase. He knew the Home Secretary would say that they must have efficient gaols. Of course they must. But the question was whether, under Government superintendence and control, the expenditure for the purpose would be in excess of what it would have been if the matter had been left in the hands of the local authorities? That was the point. Personally, he believed that under the local authorities there would have been a certain amount of control, and an anxiety to keep down the expenditure, that would check unnecessary proposals for alterations in existing gaols, or the construction of new build-
  358
  ings. He was afraid that the Estimate now before the Committee was only the commencement of an expenditure which was of a character that was likely to increase.
  MR. ASSHETON CROSSsaid, he had explained at the time the previous Bill was introduced that the measure would not increase the prison expenditure. He was in a position now to assert that the expenditure under the previous Bill had actually decreased.
  Vote agreed to.
  (13.) £267, County Prisons, &c, Great Britain.
  (14.) £485, Reformatory and Industrial Schools, Great Britain.
  (15.) £342, Queen's Bench, &c, Division, Ireland.
  (16.) £125, Probate, &c, Registries, Ireland.
  (17.) £156, Registry of Deeds, Ireland.
  (18.) £7,300, County Court Officers, &c, Ireland.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYasked for an explanation of an item which appeared in the Vote as follows:—
  "A. Clerks of Crown and Peace for Cavan, County Cork East Riding, and City Cork West Riding and County appointed. Clerkship of Peace for City of Londonderry added to the office of Clerk of Crown and Peace for the County, entailing an increase of £2,600."
  Was that merely for maintaining the Clerkship of the Peace for the City of Londonderry, or was it an increase paid by all the places mentioned? He should also like an explanation about another and more important matter, which he found in the same Estimate, under the letter D. "Salaries of additional resident magistrates, £200." He supposed that the £200 was a proportionate part of the new magistrates' salary for a certain time. He would like to have more information on the matter. He had always considered that in Ireland they had quite enough of resident magistrates for ordinary purposes, and there had been nothing in the late circumstances of the country to justify an increase of the number. He wished to know what the number of these new magistrates was, when they were appointed, and if it was intended that they should be permanent? In making these

  359
  remarks he believed he was speaking not only his own views, but the feeling generally of the people on the other side of the water, who agreed with him that the present staff of resident magistrates was sufficient.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that with regard to the first question, whether the whole of the increase mentioned was received by the Clerk of the Crown of the City of Londonderry, he might explain that the amount was proposed for the Clerks of the Crown and Peace of Cavan, County Cork, East Biding, and City Cork, West Biding, and City of Londonderry in this proportion—Cork £1,000, Cavan £750, and City of Londonderry £850. That would answer the first question. He was not able sufficiently to answer in detail the hon. Member's question as to the increase under letter D, with the exception that the increase was for three additional magistrates.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYthought that the answer was scarcely satisfactory. The Committee ought to know at least whether the three magistrates were to be permanent or temporary magistrates. Temporary magistrates in Ireland were called provisional appointments. He wished to know if these were permanent or temporary appointments? He was glad to see that the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland was now in his place, because it was desirable that some Member of the Irish Executive should tell them something about the matter. He hoped he might be excused for pressing the question now; but it was the first time, as far as he was aware, that such an item had been placed in the Estimate, and the Vote might be formed into a precedent for the future. It was highly desirable, if these new resident magistrates were to become a permanent charge, that they should know what they were doing.
  MR. BIGGARwished to call attention to another item in the same Vote, which appeared under the letter B—"Clerks of the Crown and Peace Allowances for 1878–9 and 1879–80, £3,550." He should have thought that these additional Clerks of the Crown were not necessary, and that, instead of an increase of expenditure under this head, there would have been a decrease. It seemed to him that the same person held the two offices, and where that was the case he ought
  360
  to receive a less sum than two officers would get if the appointment were held separately. What was the meaning of the term "allowance?" At present these officers got extravagant salaries, amounting, in his opinion, to about four times as much as they ought to get. Some of them got £1,000 or £1,200 a-year for about ten days' work in the year, and they were very much overpaid. He did not see that these gentlemen were entitled to any special favour. Of course, they were entitled to the salaries which Parliament awarded to them; but, as he had already said, those salaries were exceedingly extravagant.
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. GIBSON)said, he might explain that the reason why these Clerks of the Crown appeared in the Estimate was that there had been an amalgamation of offices previously paid for out of county sources. The salaries consequent upon the amalgamation of offices, under the provisions of the Act of Parliament, came for the first time in the Estimates. In regard to the question put by the hon. Member for Cavan, in relation to the allowance for 1878–9 and 1879–80 paid to these officers, the hon. Member would find that there was a provision in the Act of Parliament providing that they should be given offices and other allowances. The amount of those allowances was not sanctioned officially by the Treasury until recently; and, in fact, it was a very urgent grievance on the part of the officers that they had been kept so long out of their pay. It was quite a mistake on the part of the hon. Member to suggest that these officers had only to work for nine or ten days a-year, because he (the Attorney General for Ireland) knew, as a matter of fact, that in the larger counties of Ireland they worked for 120 or 150 days a-year, and their salaries were not at all out of proportion to the services rendered. They were all measured by the Act of 1877. The highest was£l,100, and there were some of that class as low as £450. He ventured to think that if there was any error it was on the side of moderation. With reference to the question raised by the hon. Member for Limerick (Mr. O'Shaughnessy), he might say that, up to within the last two or three years, the appointments had not been filled up; but when it became necessary to meet the exigencies of the country the appointments had been re-

  361
  filled. The gentlemen appointed, however, were only appointed temporarily, and not permanently.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsaid, that he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether these offices were to be an addition to the present Government establishment in Ireland? What had rendered these additional appointments necessary, and what districts had been made for them? He should also like to know the names of the gentlemen, and what professional qualifications they had for their appointments?
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that the additions to the resident magistracy were two, and the reasons for those additions were very simple. A few years ago the state of the country permitted the Government to amalgamate certain districts, and to diminish the establishment of magistrates by two. But in consequence not only of disturbances in various districts, but on account of the want of gentlemen who could take upon themselves the duty of magistrates, the Government had to consider the best course to adopt. It was decided, under those circumstances, to apply to the Treasury to allow the staff of resident magistrates to be increased to the number from which it had been reduced. The Treasury sanctioned the appointments, and two additional magistrates had accordingly been appointed. One of the gentlemen who had been nominated had for many years been in the Royal Irish Constabulary, and he was appointed to Balladaghereen, upon the borders of Mayo, Sligo, and Roscommon; the other gentleman appointed had been allocated to a district whore a vacancy existed, and both were well fitted for their posts.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsaid, that the Government had informed them years ago that the ordinary establishment of residential magistrates in Ireland had been reduced by two; but now they alleged that, owing to the exceptional circumstances of the country, it had become necessary to fill up the two vacancies. He thought that hon. Members from Ireland were justified in supposing that the two men appointed were to be resident magistrates on the same footing as the others. He certainly thought that there were no grounds for the appointment when it was possible to obtain ordinary unpaid
  362
  magistrates to perform the duty. It seemed to him that those appointments, like many others made in Ireland, were simply for the purpose of placing additional patronage in the hands of the Government.
  MR. P. MARTINsaid, that the gentlemen had, as the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland had observed, very arduous duties to perform, and which required for their due discharge great care and some skilled knowledge, and involved serious responsibility. It was impossible to obtain the services of competent men except they were paid adequate remuneration. So far from officials in Ireland being overpaid, he believed there was a very strong feeling in Ireland that they were very much underpaid, and that they received very much less for their services than was paid in proportion to the English officials. He did not wish to occupy the time of the Committee, but only rose for the purpose of preventing an impression that it was the opinion of Irish Members that officials in Ireland were overpaid. He was only speaking for himself; but he believed the general opinion in Ireland to be that officials did not receive sufficient remuneration. If the scale of remuneration paid to officials in England were compared with that which existed in Ireland, it would be seen that the Irish officials had very good ground for complaint.
  MR. BIGGARsaid, that he was under the impression that all lawyers were overpaid. It seemed to him that a barrister who could make £200 a-year by his practice at the Bar would be very glad to accept a County Court Judgeship at £200 or £300 a-year. With regard to these offices, it was well known that they were always bestowed for political services rendered. The fact was that the number of attorneys in Ireland who could earn £100 a-year by their profession was very small. Those gentlemen were able to make a great deal more by occupying an official position than by the ordinary practice of their profession. Some of the Clerks of the Peace and Clerks of the Crown had private practices in addition to their official functions, and the duties of their official position were in many cases carried out by substitutes, who got, perhaps, not one-fourth of the salary which was paid by Votes of that House. The truth was that lawyers

  363
  were interested in allowing salaries to he paid to lawyers; but the public should make some exertion to put down the extortionate payments to lawyers both in England and Ireland.
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. GIBSON)said, that no barrister could obtain one of these appointments at the present time. The effect of the Act of 1877 was practically to take away the patronage from the present Government, and to provide that, whenever a vacancy occurred in those offices, it should be filled up by a certain amalgamation of offices, and should be paid by salary. It was stipulated that the holders of those offices should retire from the practice of their profession. It would be obvious that every care had been taken to prevent the Government having patronage with regard to these offices.
  MR. CALLANsaid, he could bear testimony to the efficiency of the County Court Judges in Ireland, who administered the law for the majority of the people of that country. It was true that a large amount of patronage had been taken out of the hands of the Government by the Act of 1877. He thought that the Judges who had to administer the law to the bulk of the people of Ireland should be well paid, or, at least, as well paid as their brethren in England. He trusted that their scale of remuneration would be assimilated to that which prevailed in this country.
  MR. BIGGARsaid, that he did not wish to make any charge against the Government; but when he raised his voice against the exorbitant salaries paid to lawyers he intended to mean both barristers and attorneys, for he thought the two Professions seemed to play wonderfully well into each other's hands. Anyone who was acquainted with the doings of those people would, he thought, agree with him that the general public would do well to use their utmost exertions to lessen the amount of money paid to lawyers.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, that he had listened to the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary on the subject of these additional magistrates, and he confessed that the observations of the right hon. Gentleman had inspired him with a thirst for further information. To make the matter clear, he believed that for some time past letters had appeared in the Pall Mall
  364
  Gazette very zealously denouncing the land agitation in Ireland. Those communications had, he believed, proceeded from a very promising young sub-inspector, named. Blake, the son-in-law of a former Member of that House (Mr. Bernal Osborne). He wished to know whether it was not the case that one of those additional magistrates whom the Government had found it necessary to appoint was, singularly enough, of the same name as the gentleman who had defended the Government in the columns of the Pall Mall Gazette? If his information were accurate, it only went to show that, from time to time, on rare occasions, Her Majesty's Government could show a generous appreciation of literary merit. But he had great curiosity to know whether one of these additional magistrates was the Mr. Blake in question?
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that one of the magistrates appointed was a Captain Trawl, and the other was a gentleman whose name he had mistaken just now, when asked, but which certainly did not very closely resemble that just alluded to. The name was Mr. Monsell.
  Vote agreed to.
  (19.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £7,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1880, for the Constabulary Force in Ireland."
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, that notwithstanding that he had before his eyes the fear of the new Standing Orders of the House, yet he could not help characterizing this Vote as one of the most audacious that had ever been proposed to that House. The original Estimate for the Constabulary of Ireland was £1,097,192, and an additional sum of £7,000 was now asked for. That sum was divided between extra pay and allowances and travelling expenses. They were told that the extra pay and allowances were on account of the extra services occasioned by disturbances. He had heard of no disturbances except those occasioned by the officers of the law. It was true he had heard of disturbances being caused by armed troops charging helpless crowds of women and children; but he was not aware that those were services that required the especial recognition of that House. He

  365
  should, therefore, feel it his duty to move that the item should be reduced by the sum of £3,250. In one case with which he was acquainted a man was brought down from Dublin to serve a process; and not being acquainted with the locality, a member of the Constabulary Force accompanied him, to point out the house at which it was to be served. He wished to know whether the appointment of a public officer to show the minister of a private vengeance the house of the victim was a service which demanded extra pay and allowance? He should like to know what there was in the extra services of the Royal Irish Constabulary for which the Imperial Parliament should be asked to recompense them out of public funds. Again, the services performed by the Constabulary had been employed in serving notices upon the tenants at Derry Park. Colonel Clements, who had succeeded to a portion of the Leitrim estates, seemed disposed to repeat some of the deplorable performances that had distinguished his predecessor for many years. At Derry Park the Constabulary were under the command of a sub-inspector, and accompanied a process server to serve notices of ejectment. They were not accompanied by any magistrate until they had arrived at the scene of operations, when a magistrate joined them with a re-inforcement of 100 men. But before the magistrate arrived, the sub-inspector had made several charges in brilliant military style against the wretched women and children who were about. Before armed troops were called upon to act against the helpless population in England some such formality as that of reading the Riot Act was gone through. Troops in England would not be allowed to charge the civil population before the Riot Act had been read in the responsible presence of magisterial authority. He wanted to know how the services of the Constabulary at Derry Park gave them a title to public compensation, or how they entitled them to any compensation whatever from the public funds? Perhaps one of the services for which the Constabulary were to receive extra pay was that of providing a process server with a suit of their uniform; but he doubted very much whether disguising such a person in the uniform of the members of the Royal Irish Constabulary was a matter that could be properly recognized
  366
  as affording a title to extra remuneration. If quarrels took place between the Constabulary and the people of Ireland, whose fault was it? Everyone must admit that the conduct of the Constabulary in allowing a process server—the minister of the most petty and private vengeance—the minister of the spite of some landlord who had seen his tenants vote against him at an election—to be clothed in the uniform of the Constabulary, was to be condemned. The most noble the Marquess of Clanricarde—the most worthy representative of a worthy ancestry—had recently declared his undying hostility to his tenantry on account of the way in which they behaved at a recent election. His hon. and gallant Friend the Member for County Galway (Major Nolan) polled a majority of the electors, but was unseated by Judge Keogh on petition; and because his tenants voted against his wishes the Marquess of Clanricarde had declared his undying hostility to them, and was not satisfied with having lately raised their rent by a considerable amount. It seemed to him that clothing a process server in the uniform of the Constabulary was a most effectual method to adopt for stirring up the feelings of the people against the Constabulary, and that it would result in broils; but if that did happen it was the Government, and the Ministers of the Government, who would be responsible. In the observations he had made with regard to the Constabulary, he did not mean to convey any slight upon the members of that Force individually. He believed that no one could entertain a more strenuous objection to the use that had been made of them, in the way he had indicated, than the members of the Royal Irish Constabulary themselves. The feeling amongst the members of that Force was one of detestation of the policy which made them the ministers of landlord vengeance and landlord greed in that sore crisis of national distress. It was not, therefore, against the Royal Irish Constabulary that his observations were directed. They did their duty, however repellant to their manhood—they were simply faithful to their sword. It was against the Government that allowed them to be sent upon these miserable errands that their complaints were directed. The services of the Constabulary, for which this Vote was asked, had

  367
  tended to deepen the discontent in Ireland. The best troops, when thrown into conflict, must occasionally lose their heads; and it was not to be expected that the Royal Irish Constabulary could remain entirely free from blame in the struggles in which they were engaged. If he had any disposition to take up the time of the Committee, he believed that he could show, at some length, how operations had been carried on against the starving peasantry in the West of Ireland. While the Government's hand had been kept back, and not a single promise of relief had been made, the Constabulary had been sent, not only to point out to the process servers—the ministers of private vengeance—the house of the objectionable tenant; but again and again the Constabulary had been brought into conflict with the peasantry, even without being under magisterial supervision. They had used their bayonets against women and children, and struck them with the butt end of their rifles. He was not representing the accounts of mere National journals—he was not stating the representations of a mere disaffected Press. The Government itself had, on many occasions, recognized the moderation and the services of the Lord Mayor of Dublin; and in his responsible newspaper, The Freeman's Journal—a paper which was distinguished for the moderation of its tone, and which did not always go so far as they on that side of the House thought it ought to go, and exercised a great influence in Ireland—would be found accounts of what he had stated. Again and again acts of the greatest brutality had been reported against the Constabulary, and altogether the proceedings had been of the most demoralizing character. He could also quote columns from the correspondence of the Ministerial Standard, describing the dreadful scenes that had accompanied the action of the Royal Irish Constabulary. Both the Irish people and the Government ought to be proud of the Royal Irish Constabulary, for they were certainly a fine body of men; but they ought not to be employed in proceedings of this kind. No doubt, it suited the exigencies of the Conservative Party to permit their satellites in Ireland to do as they liked. It was in accordance with the traditions of English Toryism that starving families, who had no refuge but
  368
  the workhouse or the road side, should be permitted to be turned out by the ministers of private vengeance, supported by the bayonets of the military. But the employment of the Royal Irish Constabulary, during the recent distress in Ireland, as the ministers of private vengeance, had caused immense disaffection, and was the direct cause of many of the disturbances that had occurred. He would ask the Committee, and more particularly the Irish Members, to join with him in protesting against special allowances being made to the Irish Constabulary for work of this kind. The very services for which the Constabulary was to be paid were the direct cause of the disturbances complained of. They were, in fact, to be remunerated for their heroic conduct in fighting starving women and children. He could only conclude as he had begun, by saying that this was, perhaps, the most audacious proposal that even Her Majesty's Government had ever made in connection with its dealings with Ireland. He begged to move to reduce the Vote by the sum of £3,250, being the extra pay and allowance to the different ranks of the Royal Irish Constabulary.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That the Item of £3,250, for Extra Pay and Allowances, be omitted from the proposod Vote."—(Mr. O'Donnell.)
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsaid, he should support the Motion for the reduction of the Vote. He went altogether with his hon. Friend the Member for Dungarvan in his objection to employing the police as assistant bailiffs for the serving of processes. No doubt, it would be said by those who defended such proceedings that the excited state of the peasantry required the protection of the police in order to carry out the process of the law; and that, primâ facie, might be some defence for their being so employed. But, in order to test that defence for the constant employment of force, one would be obliged to go into the circumstances which had excited the peasantry; one would have to go over the whole history of the injustice of the landlords which, undoubtedly, had excited the peasantry. But he knew that if he pursued that subject he would be called to Order; and, therefore, he would dismiss it by saying that as long as the landlords remained as they were, so long

  369
  would the Government find, not a justification, but an excuse, for asking for that amount of force to carry out the law. Was it right that the law should be in such a state as to make it absolutely necessary to employ the police on such errands? Was it not better to consider proposals for a change in the land? However, passing to the second purpose for which the police were employed, he said deliberately that the absence of the police from the public meetings which had been alluded to would have done no harm, but all the good in the world. Everyone knew that there was no danger at those meetings, which were conducted in a perfectly peaceable manner. Whatever their objects were, whether they were prudent or not, the whole effect the presence of the police had was to excite the people and to render a breach of the peace imminent. Therefore, he protested in the name of peace against the employment of the police for such purposes, and against the taxpayers being called upon to pay for such duties. Further, he protested against it because it made the police unpopular by bringing them into unnecessary conflict with the people. The police were mixed up with the people in the cities, towns, and villages; and, under ordinary circumstances, they got on very well. They were admirable for the suppression of small crimes, and there was a fair amount of cordiality between them and the people. The only danger was their employment on political occasions, not for the purpose of preventing disturbances, but really for the purpose of preventing the people from expressing their opinions in a perfectly Constitutional way. He knew the good humour and good temper usually displayed by the police, and believed that, under ordinary circumstances, it would be impossible to produce any hostility towards them. If hostility could be created, it would be by the uses to which the police were put by the Government.
  MR. D. DAVIESremarked, that if the hon. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. O'Donnell) used such violent language in Ireland as he did in that House with regard to the police, he was very much surprised that somebody had not been killed there before now. In his time he had had a great many Irishmen in his employment, and he found they were a very good class of men, provided that
  370
  care was taken not to excite them. They generally kept together, and sometimes some among them might say very strong things, and then there was a row. But with regard to this Vote, he thought that as Ireland would have to pay by far the least proportion of the amount the hon. Member for Dungarvan should be the last to complain. He did not agree that it was not necessary to have the police employed for the purposes in question. The hon. Member at first spoke in very complimentary terms of the police; and then, before he sat down, he said they used the bayonet and the butt-end of the gun for women and children. There seemed to be some little inconsistency in that, and he did not think that the police would be guilty of such violence towards women and children. But if there was much excitement, and especially if they heard the hon. Member's speech, the poor people might rush against the bayonet and. so get hurt. He hoped the Committee would now allow the Vote to be passed. Ireland would only be paying something like £600 or £700, and England and Scotland would be paying all the rest. He was very willing, as a rule, to support the hon. Member; but he (Mr. Davies) thought he was unreasonable on the present occasion, and, therefore, he hoped he would withdraw his Motion.
  MR. BIGGARthought the money was not required. The police in Ireland were thoroughly idle nine-tenths of their time. They simply had to loaf about, and when they had a chance of some extra work on a pleasure occasion he thought they were able to do it without any extra pay. As to this alleged disturbance at public meetings, that did not exist at all. He had attended several meetings, and there was not the slightest excuse for bringing the police to them. The people were all unanimous, and there was nothing to fight for. In County Meath there was an enormously large meeting held in honour of the hon. Member for Meath (Mr. Parnell, the proceedings of which began in the morning and lasted until evening. The people came and peaceably listened to the speeches, and went away quietly; and he repeated that, so far as public meetings were concerned, there was not the slightest excuse for employing the police. He admitted that in County Armagh a few days ago there

  371
  was a meeting of North of Ireland Whigs, which was attacked and broken up by Orangemen of the district; but at the bonâ fide land meetings there was no such disturbance. The fact was that the Government took the part of dishonest landlords to extort most exorbitant and unreasonable and tyrannical rents from the tenants. He thought that when the landlords sought to eject their tenants they ought to bear the expense themselves. If they wanted extra police they should pay for them. If the promoter of a race meeting applied for police he had to pay for their attendance, and why should those extortionate landlords in Ireland not have to do the same? He really did not see what grounds there were for extra payment to these men, who were kept in ordinary times for ornamental purposes, just to overawe the people and make them believe that they ought to submit to that system of English government. Neither did he see why the taxpayers of this Kingdom should pay for police for the benefit of tyrannical and unreasonable and dishonest landlords.
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, it was, fortunately, not necessary for him to defend the character of the Royal Irish Constabulary. Everybody knew there was not a finer body of men in the world. The only wonder was how, under such great provocation, they displayed so much moderation. He believed it was universally conceded that the Constabulary had, on recent occasions, under very trying circumstances, behaved with singular moderation. They had simply to afford protection to all Her Majesty's subjects in the discharge of their legal rights. It was not for him to go into the question whether the laws of the land were good or bad. They had been passed by Parliament, and were subject to the revision of Parliament. At the proper time he should not be slow to give his opinion on them; but, at the present moment, all the Committee were called upon to do was to vote a sum of money which was rendered necessary by the obligation of the Government to keep order in the country. The Government had simply discharged their duty, and the extra pay and allowances now asked for were only what had been usual under similar circumstances.
  MR. SHAWthought it was important to ascertain whether there was any
  372
  foundation for the charges against the police which had been made that evening, and which he had seen in the papers. Some of those charges—namely, that the police acted towards women and children in a brutal manner, originated in English papers. From his own observation as a magistrate, he had never known the police as a body act in an unfair way; but he thought the Government were bound to investigate those charges. He would vote for the Amendment as a protest against the way in which the Government had employed the police. There was nothing more absurd, or more calculated to create a breach of the peace, than gathering a crowd of policemen in any district where there was likely to be a disturbance at a large meeting. Did any man in his senses think that the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar) and the hon. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. O'Donnell) would risk their precious lives at any of those meetings? Was it likely that when 20,000 or 30,000 men were assembled those hon. Gentlemen would desire anything like a breach of the peace, or want to do anything illegal? Nothing of the kind. They met there to discuss a great public question. He might say that he had read almost all the speeches which were made at those meetings, and he did not think he ever remembered so many speeches in which there was such a fair average of nonsense. Now, he did not think that, as a general rule, looking at the history of insurrections, nonsense was ever the cause of an insurrection. The people of Ireland were not fools; and they knew very well that those hon. Gentlemen did not mean to do anything illegal; but to collect hundreds of police in martial array was almost a temptation to the people to commit a breach of the peace. The people of this country would not allow it for a moment. He thought such a use of the police was most unreasonable; and in that time of excitement half the evil was caused by ignorant people in Dublin Castle rushing to conclusions, and imagining that because a public meeting was going to be held there was going to be something illegal done. If the people had been let alone they would have listened to the sense and rejected the nonsense; but, by the action of the Government, the people had been almost led to prefer the latter. It was

  373
  very objectionable, also, that the police should be employed in serving processes of ejectment, and more especially during last year. He had no doubt many landlords of Ireland were placed in a disagreeable position. They had their families to support and their engagements to meet; and the hon. Member for Cavan went rather against their getting any rent. Consequently, they were in a difficult position; but it was really putting them in no better position to send out those armed policemen, and to create such an excitement in the country that the rent which they would have got if the people had been left to themselves they would not now get at all. That was really the effect of the action of the Government. They had prevented the landlords from getting any rent at all. He hoped the Government would seriously consider that question of the employment of the police, because their present police in Ireland did as much harm as good. In some parts of the country the police were not wanted at all, and they were idling about; whilst in other parts, where they might be usefully employed, they were so used as to create a great deal of prejudice and evil.
  THE O'DONOGHUEsaid, although there could be no doubt that some members of the Force did commit grave indiscretions, he had always had faith in the patriotism of the great body of the Constabulary. He firmly believed they regarded with abhorrence the duty they were called upon to discharge in the West of Ireland. He had read the speeches to which the hon. Member for Cork (Mr. Shaw) referred as containing so much nonsense, and he must say he was totally unable to discover any nonsense at all; and although that statement of his hon. Friend might create laughter in the House, he ventured to say it would be regarded with deep displeasure by the people of Ireland. It was impossible for those who held certain opinions on the Land Question to vote for the remuneration of the police for such services; they were simply employed to drive people from their homes for the non-payment of rent which they were totally unable to pay. He hoped his hon. Friend the Member for Dungarvan would go to a division.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, he should certainly go to a division. He had been deluged with letters of complaint from mem-
  374
  bers of the Constabulary as to the scandalous uses to which their Force had been put. They were brothers and sons of small tenant farmers, but they had to do what they were ordered, and they felt it bitterly when they were employed to escort process servers, and to turn out starving families into the roadside; and still more bitterly when they had to act as informers, and direct the process servers to the houses of their victims.
  MR. P. MARTINquite agreed with his hon. Friend the Member for County Cork (Mr. Shaw) that, as many of these charges had been stated on the authority of newspaper correspondents, an inquiry would be advisable. He must say, from what he had heard and read in some of the Irish papers, his own impression was that these charges could not be substantiated. But it appeared they had been made; and he thought it was for the interest of the members of the Irish Constabulary, and of the public in Ireland, these statements should be subjected to a searching inquiry and public investigation. He believed, as he had stated at these public meetings, that when employed in aiding the service of ejectment processes the members of the Constabulary had individually acted with great moderation and forbearance. He felt bound to say that he considered it opposed to the best interests of peace, law, and order, that the Constabulary had been employed on duties of this character. He thought the Government stood condemned by their own showing. They had drafted from other parts of Ireland to the West large bodies of these police; and these police had been marching and counter-marching, parading backward and forward in military array, merely to aid in trying to affix some processes. He considered that the use to which the Constabulary had been put was both unbecoming and lamentable. An impression was produced that the Government unduly favoured the landlord class. In case of difficulty in effecting service, the law provided that it could be substituted—at some additional expense, it was true. But, from the accounts, it appeared that in the case of small tenants, wretched men who were paying £2, £3, and £4 a-year, all this parade and military display had been made use of to facilitate service. The only advantage that was obtained by this mode of procedure was, that a decree could be procured six

  375
  months earlier. He need not remind the Committee that on application being made to a Judge of a County Court service could have been substituted, and the same result could be obtained by more regular and proper means. It should be remembered, also, that serious injustice was done by the Government to those parts of Ireland from which these police had been drafted. They had not only been deprived of their regular police, but had had to pay very heavy taxes to defray the charges consequent upon the appointment by the authorities at Dublin Castle of an extra Force.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 30; Noes 172: Majority 142.—(Div. List, No. 34.)
  Original Question again proposed.
  MR. BIGGARbegged to move that the next item, E, Travelling Expenses, be omitted. He would not go over the same ground as the hon. Gentleman had already done on the last item; but it appeared clear to him that if the landlords wished for special bailiffs, in order to execute the decrees of the Court, they ought to pay their travelling expenses. If the police had been called on, on be-half of landlords, to perform extra duty, the cost of such extravagance on their part should be defrayed by them.
  THE O'DONOGHUEsaid, he thought his hon. Friend was quite right in asking that that item be rejected. He begged to second his Motion.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That the Item of £3,750, for Travelling Expenses, be omitted from the proposed Vote."—(Mr. Biggar.)
  MR. O'DONNELLquite agreed with the remark of the hon. Member for Tralee (the O'Donoghue). The sum under consideration formed part of a very objectionable amount, and he should like to see it rejected. There were some very ludicrous incidents in the recent agitation with which that expenditure was concerned. As soon as it was known that a meeting was to be held about the tenant right, a force of about 100 constables was sent in search of the meeting. At first, they soon came upon the meeting; but, after a while, a fictitious meeting was arranged to be held at the same time as the real one, and the Constabulary almost invariably went to the wrong
  376
  place. That was the way in which the money had been spent which they were now asked to vote. These marchings and counter-marchings were, therefore, of little service; and a good deal of them was a practical joke played on Her Majesty's Government by the Irish people. For these reasons he felt bound to oppose the item being allowed to stand in the Estimates. He thought it was to be regretted that Irish blunders of this kind could not be made to come directly out of the pockets of Her Majesty's Ministers. Nothing would lead to good government in Ireland quicker than personal responsibility attaching to Ministers for their blunders. Another reason why the Amendment should be pressed to a division was that it would afford the Liberal Party another opportunity of evincing a laudable interest in the discontent which was rife not many hundreds of miles from where they were then assembled. But he was aware that the whole of their affections were centred in Bulgaria, and not at home; and, therefore, they must, he believed, put up with seeing them again enter the Ministerial Lobby.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 7; Noes 183: Majority 176.—(Div. List, No. 35.)
  Original Question put, and agreed to.
  (20.) £62, National Portrait Gallery.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, he observed that credit was given in this Vote for a very remarkable saving—namely, the sum retained during the interval between the death of the Messenger and the appointment of his successor. He thought that the economical disposition of the Government would be better shown in some more important department than in the striking out of that pitiful sum. The office must have been performed by somebody during the interval between the death of the Messenger and the appointment of his successor, or else it must have been entirely superfluous.
  Vote agreed to.
  (21.) £203, London University.

  CLASS IV.—EDUCATION, SCIENCE, AND ART.
  (22.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a Supplementary sum, not exeeeding £8,800, he granted to Her Majesty, to defray

  377
  the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1880, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland."
  SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, he should like to know whether they were to be committed to the payment of the increase in regard to the salaries of the National Teachers from the Imperial Treasury which had been foreshadowed last year?
  MR. ERRINGTONsaid, he should like to ask whether information could be given as to the retiring gratuities of Teachers, and as to the meaning of the words—"Some large gratuities have been authorized for which the original provision was inadequate." As the item appeared to be of a very questionable character, he would be glad to know under what circumstances these unexpected gratuities had been authorized?
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, in answer to the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy, that the increase of salaries to the National Teachers was due to the arrangements made last Session.
  SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, that he intended to move the reduction of this Vote by the sum of £3,000, on the ground that it represented a change of the Government policy in regard to the salaries of National Teachers which had not been sanctioned last year. At that time it was only foreshadowed; but it was now introduced in the guise of a small addition to the Estimates. He had no desire whatever to reduce the salaries of Teachers, but only wanted to raise the question whether the charge should be a local one, or be borne by the Imperial Exchequer. It was unreasonable that the Committee should be asked to sanction so important a change which had not been brought forward in a straightforward manner. Under those circumstances, he moved the reduction of the Vote by the sum of £3,000.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £5,800, he granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1880, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland."—(Sir George Campbell.)
  MR. SHAWsaid, he could not agree with the hon. Gentleman in cutting down the salaries to be given to the National
  378
  School Teachers. There had been no extravagance whatever in the working of the National Educational Board, which, in his opinion, had operated in the most satisfactory manner. There were, however, a few things which it was thought ought to be amended, and he would point out that the training of Teachers in Ireland was very inadequate, there being only one Institution in Dublin for that purpose. In England all denominations were enabled by Government to train their own Teachers; but this was not the case in Ireland, where it would be seen the training of Teachers was very badly provided for. He trusted the Government would attend to this question. Another point which he desired to bring before the Chief Secretary for Ireland was the question of Agricultural Education. The Government had adopted the policy of reducing the number of the agricultural schools to such an extent as he believed would almost entirely extinguish them. About 15 months ago two gentlemen met in the County of Cork and agreed to subscribe a sum of money for an agricultural school if the Government would give them some additional aid. But they had never been able to get the Government to see the use or need of this proposal. The school, consequently, remained in a dead-and-alive state. He complained that the Government would not take in hand those measures which the people in Ireland thought they ought to attend to. There was no doubt that in a country like Ireland it was perfectly absurd that there should be no means of giving the people any education in the great business of agriculture, in which they were principally engaged. The Government would not lay hold of this important question and give any distinct answer concerning it.
  MR. MACARTNEYsaid, there were formerly in Ireland several model farms, established for the purpose of giving practical instruction to agriculturists in the best mode of farming; but, unfortunately, they had been managed in such a way as to bring them into disrepute. In one case there was an expensive building, provided with accommodation for 40 pupils, who, instead of being instructed in agriculture, and being made themselves to work the farms, were taught geography, mathematics, men-

  379
  suration, and other subjects of a like character, and the Institution had been made a stepping-stone for other purposes than those for which it was originally designed. It seemed to him that schools might be established in various parts of Ireland, in which farming alone might be taught, and not for the purpose of instructing persons in the higher branches of education.
  MR. D. TAYLORsaid, he acknowledged the great value of model schools for the purposes of education in Ireland. In fact, he thought that anyone thoroughly acquainted with that system could not but bear the highest testimony to their efficiency. Prom what he knew of them, he believed the Teachers had been altogether badly remunerated for the attention they had given to their duties. They had not only discharged their ordinary duties as Model School Teachers; but he knew that a number of them had spent a great deal of time in teaching science and other subjects. The remuneration which they received was, in his opinion, far below the amount which their talents entitled them to. The model school connected with the district which he represented had been the means of giving a number of Teachers to the district. He believed that their salaries should not only not be decreased, but that they were entitled to any additional sum which the Government might think it right to allow. He hoped the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy would not object to the Vote.
  MR. ERRINGTONsaid, he wished to know whether the increase of retiring pensions indicated that the Government were going to inaugurate a new departure in this respect? If that were so, it was clear that in the ordinary course of things these retiring gratuities should not appear in the Supplementary Estimates.
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that the increase in the amount of retiring pensions was due to ordinary causes, and was not connected with any intention to inaugurate any new departure.
  SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, there was no difference of opinion as to the desirability of increasing the salaries of the Teachers in the National Schools; but the question which had to be decided was, whether that charge should be taken from the taxpayers of England and Scotland, or whether it should be, as
  380
  he believed it should be, a local charge on Ireland. His impression was that the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland had only announced, incidentally, in a speech upon another subject, that he was going to make a proposal of this kind. What had been the policy of the House and of the country on this point? Parliament had consented, up to a certain point, to provide schools in Ireland in a different manner to that in which they were provided in England; but it was also decided that after that point any additions required must come from local sources. An Act had been passed by which the Guardians in Ireland were authorized to supplement the salaries of teachers to the required extent; but they had not done so. If they were not to be compelled, then the House had seen the Irish Church Fund lately devoted to this, that, and the other object; and it seemed to him that one of the most proper purposes to which that fund could be applied was to supplement the salaries of the National School Teachers. He protested against an important change of policy being introduced through the medium of the Supplementary Estimates, and the charge being thrown on the country.
  MR. RAMSAYsaid, that the sum of £1,200 in this Vote was said to be payments entirely required for copyists. He should like some explanation of what kind of officials these copyists were?
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsaid, that the training now given to the Teachers did not accord with the views of the great majority of the Irish people. The result was that, so long as the present system was persisted in, trained Teachers would not be employed in the great bulk of the schools of Ireland. If a proper system of training schools were established, and the Teachers were trained in accordance with the views of the people, it would be possible to obtain an approach to universal elementary education in Ireland.
  MR. MACARTNEYsaid, that he wished to know whether the gratuities to be given to the Teachers were fixed upon the same scale as those estimated for last year, by which the age of 65 years was proposed for men, and that of 60 for women. He knew that a great deal of disaffection prevailed with regard to that scale, and he should like to know if it had been abolished?
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that the question raised by the hon. Member for Limerick was a very large one, and could not conveniently be discussed on a Supplementary Estimate. There was a very large amount of official Correspondence in consequence of the work caused by the National School Teachers, and the copyists were required in the Office of National Education in Ireland. With regard to the scale for retiring allowances, it was considered last year, and he believed that it gave general satisfaction.
  MR. P. MARTINsaid, that before the Vote was put he should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for some information with regard to these schools. Very grave dissatisfaction existed with regard to those model schools. Undoubtedly, those model schools were attended by a class of persons who ought not to have their education paid for by the State. That was the grievance complained of with regard to these schools. He was sure that now attention had been drawn to the matter the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary would look into it. He should like to have some intimation of the intentions of the Government on the subject.
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that the hon. Member was quite correct in stating that his attention had been called to this matter. He looked into it when he was last in Ireland; but he trusted the hon. Member would excuse him from entering into a discussion of the matter at that period. The question was raised in a very infinitesimal manner upon the Supplementary Estimates.
  Question put, and negatived.
  Original Question put, and agreed to.
  (23.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £810, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1880, for the Salaries and Expenses of the National School Teachers' Superannuation Office, Dublin.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsaid, that this Vote appeared for the first time in the present Estimates, and was practically a Vote for a new Department. Some time ago it was desired to grant pensions to Teachers; and, accordingly, an Act of Parliament was passed to carry that purpose into effect. But, instead of
  382
  allowing the work to be done in the Education Office in Dublin, the Government had thought it necessary to create a new Office. He should like to know what was the necessity for the creation of this Office? Already the sum of £810 was required for it; and, according to the salaries paid, it would obviously amount in a few years to £1,000 a-year. It was certain that in the course of a few years the annual salaries of the clerks in the Office would be raised, and then the expenses of distributing these pensions would amount to £1,000 a-year. He could not see why it was not possible to conduct the administrations of these pensions by means of the staff of officials which already existed. When the work of estimating the pensions in the first instance had been gone through, then it seemed to him that it would be possible to return the work to the ordinary staff of the Education Office. The first person mentioned in the Votes was the Superintendent in Dublin, who, it was stated, also received a salary from the Army Votes as a principal clerk and actuary in the War Office. The next three persons had special allowances. It seemed that the first clerk was paid £190, including a special allowance of £100 a-year. The second clerk at present got £118, including a special allowance of £60 a-year. The maximum salary for the second clerk was £300 per annum; and each of the lower division clerks would receive a maximum salary of £250. Therefore, in the course of a few years, the expenses of the Office would reach £1,000. He should like to be informed whether this Office was intended to be permanent in its character or not?
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that an Act was passed last Session by which a large amount of additional work was caused. It had been found impossible to get that work done by the ordinary staff' of the Education Office. In the first place, the work required the personal attention of an experienced actuary, and the Government had found a gentleman of the requisite experience in the War Office to perform the duties. He might say that the greatest economy had been observed in what had been done.
  SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, that this Vote was another instance of the financially immoral process of trying to pass under these Votes entirely new es-

  383
  tablishments and charges which came before the House at a late hour and towards the end of the financial year.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsaid, that his question had not been answered as to whether this establishment was to be permanent or temporary? No doubt, in the first instance, it might be necessary to have a temporary staff; but he could not see why a permanent one would be requisite.
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that so far as it was at present determined the establishment would be temporary as regarded some of its features, but the matter was not finally decided upon; but some addition to the staff of the National Education Commissioners would have been required to enable the duties to be discharged if they had been attached to that Department. The items in the Votes at present were temporary.
  MR. COURTNEYsaid, that last year they passed a Bill by which £1,300,000 was voted out of the Irish Church Surplus Fund for the purpose of working this pension scheme. Now the House had started upon it an additional charge for managing those pensions. He considered that the £1,300,000 was granted for the purpose of managing the whole business; and he was surprised that a further sum should now be asked by means of the Supplementary Estimates for the management of the scheme.
  MR. CALLANsaid, that if the hon. Member for Liskeard would read the Act of Parliament, he would find that the money voted was not allocated for the expenses of the Education Office, but for the pensions only. He wished to point out that no new appointments had been made in this mater, but only that promotions had been made in the Education Office in Dublin.
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that it was distinctly stated last year that the money so taken from the Irish Church Surplus was to go to defray the charge for pensions and not for management. The staff now employed was, to a great extent, only temporary, though, no doubt, some of the clerks would have to be permanent.
  MR. RYLANDSsaid, that with respect to the first clerk, who had a special allowance of £100 a-year, he should like to know whether that gentleman held a temporary appointment? No doubt, there might be good reason for
  384
  putting an experienced actuary in the first instance to superintend the granting of these pensions; but he did not know whether the gentleman who was employed in the Office should receive special allowances. Why should there be any special allowances in that department? He agreed with what had been said, that this work ought to have been undertaken in the Office of the National Education Commissioners. It would have been more economically conducted in that manner, and it would have given the clerks in the Education Office full occupation for their time instead of taking gentlemen already engaged in public business from their work. In his opinion, this item was one of the most objectionably loose Estimates which had ever been laid upon the Table of the House.
  MR. SHAWsaid, that he did not see anything particularly loose about this Estimate. It appeared to him that there were only two ways of paying clerks. They might be paid by making a deduction from the Pension Fund, or they might be paid out of the public rates. It seemed to him that the proper course had been taken in the present instance by making their salaries fall upon the public purse rather than upon the Pension Fund. He was extremely sorry that any objection had been raised to the Vote.
  MR. DODDSsaid, that the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary had been challenged to say whether or not this was the establishment of a new office; but he had carefully refrained from giving them any information on that point. The right hon. Gentleman had had the point put to him two or three times as to whether or not the establishment was to be a new office; but he had only gone so far as to state that an additional expense might be thrown upon the National Board of Education in Ireland. If that were the case, he did not think there would be very great objections; but what he did object to was the establishment of an entirely new office. The Vote was inserted in the Estimates as entirely new matter, and was not put forward in any way as an addition to the expenses of the National Board of Education in Dublin. The items showed that one clerk received a salary of £118 a-year, which was to be increased to £300, and four lower division clerks

  385
  were now paid £148, which might be increased to £250 each, thus bringing the total expense of the office, on this account alone, to £1,000 per annum. Another item showed that the office was intended to be permanent—namely, that of 15 s. a-week for a messenger. If the Government felt disposed to establish a new office, let it be done by all means after the customary explanation, but it should not be done in the manner that was attempted in this case. His attention was also called to an allowance for cleaning the office, and that showed clearly enough that a new office was intended. He hoped that the Committee would not allow the Vote to pass in its present form, for the creation of a perfectly new office by a side-wind, without any kind of explanation, seemed to him to be open to very great objection.
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that the objections of hon. Members to the establishment of a new office should have been taken when the Bill sanctioning these pensions passed through Parliament. The Bill was received with very general satisfaction on both sides of the House, and under it £1,300,000 was voted out of the Irish Church Surplus Fund for these pensions. It must occur to the House that the administration of that sum of money would require the services of a certain amount of staff. There was no power under the Act to charge the expenses upon the Pension Fund, and therefore the Government had had no alternative but to bring the expense into the Supplementary Estimates. As he had said before, it would no doubt be necessary to retain some of the clerks permanently, but most of the appointments were temporary only.
  MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsaid, that it seemed to him a matter of importance for the Committee to know whether the administration of the Pension Funds was to be entrusted to a new office, or simply to be made an addition to the work of the National Education Commissioners. He looked forward to the day when they might manage their own affairs in Ireland, and if they had legacies of this kind in the shape of new establishments, they would find considerable difficulty in dealing with them. It seemed to him that the constant creation of offices was likely to exercise a most demoralizing effect in Ireland. By placing further patronage in the hands of the Govern-
  386
  ment, it tempted the people to seek it. Although he was in Opposition, the amount of communications which he was continually receiving from persons desirous of obtaining situations under Government was enormous. He should like to be informed whether this additional expense was to be always borne upon the Estimates as a separate Vote, or whether it was in future to form part of the general expenditure of the National Education Board?
  MR. CALLANsaid, that he happened to know something about the Educational Office in Dublin. It was not, he believed, very well known in London, that so small was the number of clerks employed in the Education Department in Dublin, that when Returns had been asked for, the staff had been unable to furnish them except by working overtime, and receiving an increase of pay in consequence. There were only two or three rooms in Dublin, which went under the name of the National Teachers' Pension Office.
  MR. DODDSsaid, that the Chief Secretary for Ireland had stated that the office had been rendered necessary by the Act of Parliament passed last year, and that the sum now required was to be expended for that purpose. But he had also told the Committee that there was no power under the Act of Parliament to provide the necessary machinery. The question which the Committee had to decide was how this should be provided. The only single item which had been mentioned as being of a temporary character was that of £89 for the Actuary. All the other items appeared to be connected with the new establishment which the Committee were told was to be formed as a branch of the Board of Education in Dublin, but which had to be accounted for by the Treasury Remembrancer in Ireland. He had no hesitation whatever, under those circumstances, in moving that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £610, that was to say, by omitting all the items except the special item which had been paid to the Actuary. He, therefore, begged to move to reduce the Vote by the sum of £610.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £200, be granted to Her Majesty to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1880, for the

  387
  Salaries and Expenses of the National School Teachers' Superannuation Office, Dublin."—(Mr. Dodds.)
  SIR PATRICK O'BRIENsaid, that the House had most unanimously voted this sum last year for the pensions of the National School Teachers in Ireland. The question now raised by the hon. Member for Stockton appeared to be one of economy as regarded the administration of the office. Everyone would admit that it must be administered in some way; and no hon. Member had given any intimation of how it could be more economically administered than under the system proposed by Government. Would any hon. Gentleman say that the staff of the National Board in Ireland were qualified to settle the question of pensions? The hon. Member for Stockton had not made any proposal by which he had shown that the existing administration of the National Board in Ireland could take men away from their existing duties to perform this particular function. Had the hon. Member done this, he, for one, would not have opposed the Motion for reduction; but, as he had failed to hear any reason of that kind, he should certainly support the Government with reference to the Vote.
  MR. DODDSsaid, that the hon. Baronet could not have heard what had taken place, or he would have learned that the Vote for the Actuary was of an entirely temporary character, and was not to be continued. He seemed to think that it was suggested that the fund should be administered by the Board of Education. This was not a question of economy, but a question of establishing a totally new and distinct office, instead of adopting one of two other courses open to the Government—either to provide funds under last year's appropriation out of the Church Surplus, or to increase the Supplementary Estimate in connection with the Board of Education. He had adopted the explanation of the Chief Secretary for Ireland so far as the actuarial business was concerned, by moving the reduction of the Vote by the sum of £610, which was ordinary expenditure, and which ought to be provided for out of the Church Funds under the Act of last Session.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, he believed that the Act of last year meant that a sum should be set aside out of the Church surplus for the
  388
  especial purpose of raising the salaries of the teachers, and that no part of that sum was contemplated for the management of the office. The Fund was guaranteed by the National Debt Commissioners; and, under those circumstances, the Treasury were bound to account for any expenditure there might be in the management of the work done under that particular Act of Parliament. The National Debt Commissioners were ultimately responsible for the whole of the management of the matter.
  MR. C. S. PARKERsaid, he should like to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he was prepared to say that the House had contemplated taking funds from any other sources than the Irish Church Surplus Fund?
  MR. MONKsaid, he wished to know what it was that the National Debt Commissioners had guaranteed? Had they guaranteed that this Fund of £1,300,000 should be properly expended in providing pensions for the teachers in Ireland? He had no doubt that Parliament had intended that the whole expense connected with the management of the Department should come out of that sum of £1,300,000. He recollected what had taken place last year as well, probably, as most other hon. Members, and there had not been one word uttered in his hearing as to the expense of managing the Fund being taken out of the Consolidated Fund. He was certainly of opinion that it was a reckless expenditure on the part of the Government to establish a new office for the management of this Fund, inasmuch as there was an office already in existence by which it might be admirably administered. He thought the Committee would have no objection to vote the necessary funds for increasing the Educational system; but he objected altogether to the establishment of another office, because the consequence would be the formation of a new staff of clerks and managers, with prospective claims for compensation, and all the reckless expenditure which had been so frequent during the last few years.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, he had endeavoured to point out that this office was necessary, because the National Debt Commissioners of England were ultimately responsible for any deficiency which might occur in the Church Surplus Fund, so far as the pen-

  389
  sions of Teachers were concerned, and that it was a safeguard to them that it should be administered under the direction and responsibility of the Treasury in this country. What had really happened was that a sum had been allocated to pay the pensions of teachers; and although it was not probable that the Fund from which that amount was to be drawn would fail to provide the necessary amount, yet it was necessary, when the Government had to deal with the question of pensions, that some guarantee should be given. Now, the National Debt Commissioners were the guarantees of this particular Fund; and as some administration of the sum voted for the pensions of teachers had had to be provided, it was thought necessary that it should be carried out under the eyes of the Treasury. A certain number of clerks had, therefore, been appointed in addition to the Actuary, who had been sent over to Ireland to work this particular branch of the Education Department.
  MR. DODDS(who, on rising, was met by cries of "Divide, divide!") said, that the hon. Member for Dundalk (Mr. Callan) might cry "Divide, divide!" as long as he pleased; but he should continue to address the Committee as long as it was necessary, or until he was stopped by the Chairman. The Committee had now heard from the Secretary to the Treasury something like an explanation of the reason why this Vote had been submitted to its consideration; although, up to the time of the rising of the hon. Baronet, no such explanation had been given. The hon. Baronet had told the Committee that the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt were the backing for this sum of £1,300,000, and were responsible for it in case the Irish Church Fund was not sufficient. He had been looking at the Act of Parliament whilst the hon. Baronet had been speaking, but had failed to see anything therein which justified that view. What he had found was, that this Fund had to be provided by the Commissioners of Church Temporalities in Ireland, and that the Commissioners, with the consent of the Lord Lieutenant and the Treasury, were to provide for the purposes of this Act such sums, not exceeding in the whole £1,300,000 sterling, as the Commissioners of the
  390
  National Debt should from time to time certify as required. The National Debt Commissioners were, therefore, to find such sums not exceeding the amount named as were necessary for the purposes of this Act. He contended that one of the purposes of the Act was that it should be put in operation, and though it fully justified the payment out of the Fund of the expense of putting the Act into operation, there was no clause which justified the view taken by the hon. Baronet. The 10th clause of the Act commenced as follows:—
  "Any time after the passing of this Act, the Treasury, with the consent of the Lord Lieutenant, may make Rules for the administration of this Act; and all such Rules shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament within 14 days if sitting, and, if not sitting, within 14 days from the re-assembling of Parliament."
  He asked whether these Rules had been made, and, if so, why they had not been laid upon the Table of the House? Had the Irish Government Department done its duty with regard to this Act of Parliament, the Committee would have had these Rules before them, and would have had an opportunity of discussing the whole question in a regular and proper manner. Instead of that, they had laid before them an Estimate which established a new office directly contrary to the Act of Parliament.
  MR. CALLANsaid, he cried "Divide!" because he felt that the Committee were placed in a humiliating position by the delay of Public Business in spending two hours over that paltry Vote.
  MR. MONKsaid, he wished to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland, whether the Rules referred to in the Act of Parliament had been framed; and, if so, why they had not been laid upon the Table of the House?
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that the arrangements of the Department were at that time not quite complete.
  Question put, and negatived.
  Original Question put, and agreed to.

  CLASS V.—COLONIAL, CONSULAR, AND OTHER FOREIGN SERVICES.
  (24.) £35,170, Diplomatic Services.
  MR. H. SAMUELSONdid not like to be constantly putting Questions to the Secretary to the Treasury on the same subject; but the hon. Baronet would now have an opportunity of answering

  391
  his inquiry with respect to the item for telegrams more fully than he had done on a former occasion. He observed that the sum of £2,800 additional was required for telegrams, and farther, he saw that on page 12, Class II., Vote 5, there was another very large extra sum charged for the same purpose. The total amount spent on telegrams was, therefore, £17,200, which seemed to be a very large sum, considering the small quantity of information derived from that source. He had not objected to the Vote on a former occasion, because he was informed that the charge was for telegrams sent out from this country; and as he thought it was necessary that telegrams should be despatched in order to obtain information, he did not consider the amount to be extravagant. Now it was found that the cost of telegrams sent to the Foreign Office amounted to no less than £7,800, and that according to the Supplementary Estimate, the additional sum of £2,800 was asked for; and yet nothing was more remarkable than the slight amount of information which the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs ever seemed able to afford the House upon any subject. He must say that, considering the little information that they got for the money, he considered the item for telegrams in the present Estimate excessive. He would like to know, now that the Committee were upon this Vote, whether Mr. Blunt, the Consul General at Salonica had yet sent home the further Report in the case of Mr. Ogle, which had been promised; and, also, whether, if it had not been sent home, Her Majesty's Government had communicated with him with the view of obtaining that Report? Mr. Ogle was murdered in March, 1878, and the Government shortly afterwards promised that a full inquiry should take place whenever it became practicable. When the murder was committed, that part of the country in which it occurred was in a state of insurrection; the House was even told, during the debate which took place in the month of May, 1878, that the country was in a state of war. Now, there had been nothing like a state of war about Volo for two years, and the country was not in any such condition as would prevent an inquiry being carried out. The neglect to hold this inquiry, therefore, showed that Her
  392
  Majesty's Government were not as careful in protecting the lives of British subjects abroad as they ought to be. But it was not only the murderers of Mr. Ogle who had remained unpunished; there was another British subject who had been murdered by Turks in the island of Crete, and nothing had been done to bring the murderers to justice; and, at that very moment, a British ex-official was in the hands of Turkish brigands. He trusted that Her Majesty's Government would give some information upon the point in question. When he brought forward the subject on a former occasion, his Motion had received the full support of the House, not one single hon. Member, except the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, having spoken against it. The Chancellor of the Exchequer himself had said that he was not asking for anything improper or unreasonable; on the contrary, he stated "that the demand was both reasonable and proper." The right hon. Gentleman, however, had taken exception to some parts of the Motion, which he had accordingly waived. Knowing that there existed a considerable feeling in the country to justify his inquiries into this matter, he desired to state that the only object he had in view in so frequently calling the attention of the House to the subject was that it appeared to be quite impossible to obtain from the Government the fulfilment of the definite promise which they had given in August, 1878. On the contrary, Her Majesty's Government had continually put him off upon one plea or another, while always asserting their intention to fulfil their promise. He wished to know whether the Government were willing to allow it to be understood that Englishmen might be murdered in different parts of the world, and that there would be no inquiry into the circumstances of their death? There had been no real inquiry into the circumstances of the murder of Mr. Ogle, and no witnesses had been examined, although there were witnesses who were willing to give evidence (the Blue Book, Turkey, No. 24, 1878, would inform hon. Members of the perfect correctness of his statement), whose whereabouts, as he had been informed by a gentleman lately returned from the part of Thessaly where the murder was committed, had never been lost sight of up to the pre-

  393
  sent time. The deepest and greatest shame was felt by the Christians, not only of Greece but of that part of Turkey which had not been incorporated in the Hellenic Kingdom, at the apparent carelessness of England with regard to this murder. The day of the murder had, moreover, been kept as a sort of saint's day by the people of Volo out of respect to his memory, because they knew that when he met with his untimely end he was discharging his duty, and was actuated by the most philanthropic motives. Two years had now elapsed since Mr. Ogle's murder, and a year and three quarters since Government promised a new inquiry. The question was one which should as quickly as possible be attended to by Her Majesty's Government, or it would be too late to inquire into the murder at all. He had been informed, on every occasion of his referring to it, that it was their intention to deal with the case. The last answer received was that the case had been referred to Mr. Blunt, the Consul General at Salonica, against whom he had not one word to say, although he was obliged to remark that when he put forward a plea in favour of delay a certain amount of suspicion was cast upon his absolute impartiality, when it was remembered that he was the very person who held the abortive inquiry which had taken place into the circumstances of this murder, and who had signed every deposition. On the removal of Mr. Blunt on another mission, Mr. Fawcett was appointed to continue the inquiry, but he did not examine one single witness. Nevertheless, he had reported on the strength of the depositions taken, but not on oath before Mr. Blunt. What that Report was worth he had shown last year. He did not think that the Government had taken the proper course in dealing with this matter, nor did he think it right that it should be allowed to rest, because it was a matter which excited the greatest possible interest in the country, and because the honour of this country was distinctly involved in the question.
  MR. BOURKEsaid, that he did not suppose that the hon. Member really intended to dispute the correctness or fairness of the additional amount charged in the Vote for telegrams, but had simply taken the opportunity of that Vote for making a speech upon other questions. Probably the Committee on that occa-
  394
  sion would not wish him to go into the question of the murder of Mr. Ogle. The hon. Gentleman, however, pointedly asked whether Her Majesty's Government were in earnest on that subject? As he understood, that was the object which the hon. Gentleman had in view. His right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer had already stated, in answer to Questions put to him, that it was the intention of the Government to do all they could to obtain a proper inquiry into the subject of Mr. Ogle's death. But to say that the Government wished for an inquiry was one thing, but it was quite another to carry out that inquiry in Turkey. They had it upon high authority that it would be perfectly impossible for an impartial inquiry to take place at the present time. They had received other Reports from Sir Henry Layard, and also from Mr. Blunt, with respect to the matter. The latter said that, in his opinion, it was impossible to hope that witnesses would come forward to tell the truth at the present time, considering the state of the country. He (Mr. Bourke) fully admitted that the hon. Gentleman did make out a very strong case for an inquiry when he originally brought the subject forward. At the same time, he could not conceal from himself that the hon. Gentleman's case, although, no doubt, perfectly bonâ fide, was, after all, but an ex parte statement. That speech was sent out to Turkey, and it must be taken for what it was worth. No doubt, it was made by the hon. Gentleman in perfectly good faith, but no ex parte statement could be assumed to be altogether accurate. When an hon. Member of that House came and said that he was prepared to vouch for the statements he made, it was impossible for the Government to do otherwise than to believe in his accuracy. They could only say that they would inquire into the subject. The Government had done its best to obtain a further inquiry. They had, however, been told by their Ambassador that a satisfactory inquiry at present would not be obtainable. He did not think that the hon. Gentleman could, under these circumstances, charge Her Majesty's Government with having been guilty of any neglect in the matter; at all events, he did not think that that opinion was held by any large number of persons in England.
  MR. H. SAMUELSONsaid, that the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had, no doubt, unintentionally, somewhat misrepresented his observations. No doubt he had answered him, as he always did, to the best of his ability; but he must say that there was nothing in the hon. Gentleman's statement which could be deemed at all satisfactory. They were told that the Government wished for an inquiry to take place at the proper time. Then, said the hon. Gentleman, "that it was one thing to wish for an inquiry, and another to obtain it." Now, he (Mr. H. Samuelson) wished to know what steps had been really taken to obtain it? The hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State said that the statements he had made on the subject of Mr. Ogle's death were ex parte; but he could inform him that that statement was submitted to Lord Tenterden, to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and other Members of the Government before he made it; the names of the witnesses were not concealed from the noble Lord and the right hon. Gentleman, and the general accuracy of the assertions which he (Mr. H. Samuelson) had made in bringing the matter before the House had never been disputed. It seemed to him that Her Majesty's Government was strangely unwilling to take the proper steps in this matter. The right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on a previous occasion, had informed him that Sir Henry Layard did not think that any good would be effected by an inquiry at the present time; but that, in his opinion, there was nothing in the state of Thessaly to prevent anyone coming forward to give evidence. But in order to fortify himself with the opinion of a witness on the spot, Sir Henry Layard wrote to Mr. Blunt. In answer to that letter, Mr. Blunt stated that he did not think it would be desirable to hold an inquiry, but he would himself ask for the opinion of another person on the actual spot. But to the present time the result of the inquiry by Mr. Blunt had not been communicated to him. He really must press for the Report which had been made by the person to whom Mr. Blunt referred; and in order to put himself in Order, he would move, unless he received proper information, that "The Chairman do now re-
  396
  port Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
  MR. BOURKEsaid, that he had not the slightest idea that this case would have been brought before the Committee upon the Supplementary Estimates. It had been brought forward without the slightest Notice to him, and it seemed to him that it was very unfair to raise it at that time. He had already stated what the intentions of Her Majesty's Government were, and he would give the hon. Gentleman any further information if he gave him due Notice of a Question. The hon. Gentleman could put a Question to him to-morrow, or at any other time upon the subject; but he had no right to say that he had withheld any information.
  MR. H. SAMUELSONsaid, that he had not accused the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of any desire to withhold information. He had never made that statement, although the hon. Gentleman always accused him of making it to suit his own purposes. He did, however, complain that the hon. Gentleman never had any information to give. He might say that this case had been before the Government now for two years; he had put three Questions with regard to it that Session, and the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. E. Jenkins) had put another Question; but it was quite impossible to get an answer of a satisfactory character from the hon. Gentleman because he always took care to answer Questions in so very literal a manner. It was in order to save the House from the constant repetition of Questions on the same subject that he had introduced the matter at that time. A number of Questions had been put upon this subject during the present Session; and he did not see, therefore, how the hon. Gentleman could complain that he had been taken by surprise. He thought that the Government might consent to lay the Papers upon the Table, and to inform him whether the Report which Mr. Blunt had led them to expect had been received.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that he quite acquitted the hon. Member for Frome of any wish to do anything unfair; but he certainly had placed his hon. Friend the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in a position in which it was not rea-

  397
  sonable that he should be placed. He thought that the Committee ought to know how the matter stood. There was originally an inquiry made into the circumstances of Mr. Ogle's death, and a certain Report was made. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Frome, who took a great interest in the subject, brought the matter under the notice of the House, and made a very interesting speech, in which he said that he was in possession of a good deal of information which would show that the result of that inquiry had not represented the real state of the case. A promise was then made to him by the Government that a further inquiry should be held whenever the state of the country was such as should make it possible to conduct an investigation without causing any inconvenience. The matter had been brought from time to time before the notice of the Representatives of this country in Turkey; but it had not been thought possible, owing to the condition of that country, to undertake an inquiry. The hon. Member had naturally, at intervals, put Questions on the subject, and the answers given to him had generally been that, in consequence of the unsettled state of Turkey, it was impossible to institute further inquiry. Some little time ago he renewed those Questions, and was then told that very recently communications had taken place between Sir Henry Layard and Consul Blunt. In answer to a Question, the hon. Gentleman was informed that Consul Blunt had wished to take the opinion of another gentlemen before answering the Question, no (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was not able to say whether that answer had yet been given: but, at all events, he had not seen it. It seemed to him that his hon. Friend the Under Secretary of State could only answer the Question put to him in the general terms in which he had done so. He would state that the Government was anxious to proceed with the inquiry, if it appeared that it could safely and properly be done. But the hon. Member had taken the opportunity of the Vote for the purpose of making a sharp attack upon the Government, and threatened to move to report Progress unless his inquiries were satisfactorily answered. His complaint was that there was a difficulty in getting information. The only information which
  398
  the Government possessed was that to which he had referred. If the hon. Gentleman had given Notice of the Question he was about to put, then the Under Secretary of State would have given him every information that was in his power.
  MR. H. SAMUELSONsaid, that he was entirely satisfied with what the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said upon the subject. He had informed him that the Report in question had not yet been received, and that when it was he would communicate it to him. He had endeavoured to get that promise from the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State, but he had now received the assurance from the right hon. Gentleman, which he was unable to extract from the Under Secretary.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that the question of the hon. Member ought to be put in a proper way to his hon. Friend the Under Secretary. He could not promise him that the Report should be laid upon the Table of the House, but an answer would be given in the proper way, when the communication in question was received.
  MR. H. SAMUELSONasked whether the right hon. Gentleman would inform him when the communication was received?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Yes.
  MR. MONKsaid, that he wished to ask for an explanation with regard to an item in the Vote, under the head of Special Rewards and Services for "Mr. Harrison's expenses in connection with the Financial Inquiry Commission at Constantinople, £2,690." As that inquiry took place at the desire of the Turkish Government, he thought that the Turkish Government ought to be responsible for the expense. He should be glad to know whether this expense would be paid by this country or by Turkey? There was another item to which he also wished to refer, and that was "Expenses incurred by Officers employed on Special Service in Turkey, £1,350." First, they had the expenses of the Special Mission to Turkey, and then a vote was proposed for Special Service in Turkey. The latter Vote seemed to be for some anonymous employment, which, perhaps, the Secretary to the Treasury could explain.
  MR. D. DAVIESsaid, that £1,000 had been expended on account of the Alexandria Harbour Dues Commission. He wished to know whether that sum had been paid in the interests of the harbour authorities, or in the interests of the public? Was the Khedive going to repay that money to the country?
  An hon. MEMBER said, that he should like to hear some explanation with reference to the additional sum for the Boundary Commissions under the Treaty of Berlin. The amount now charged, £1,800, was about five times the sum of the original Estimate, and he should like to know whether the cause for this expense had arisen recently?
  MR. BOURKEsaid, that first, with regard to the question of the hon. Member for Gloucester (Mr. Monk) as to the expenses connected with the Financial Inquiry Commission at Constantinople two years ago, it was absolutely necessary for Her Majesty's Government to know, as nearly as possible, the exact financial condition of the Turkish Empire. There was no necessity for him to enlarge upon the importance to Her Majesty's Government, in a political point of view, of exact information on that point. It was thought most desirable that an English officer should be sent out to ascertain, as nearly as possible, what was the position of the Turkish Empire. Under those circumstances, Her Majesty's Government decided to employ Mr. Harrison, who was then at home on leave from India, he being a gentleman who was thought to be well suited for the business. When Mr. Harrison got to Turkey it was found, owing to representations made, that it would be best to appoint a Regular Commission, and Mr. Harrison was made a member of it. He had since made a Report that wont most fully into the question. That was the whole history of the case. So far as he was aware, everything that had been done in that matter, had been to the full satisfaction of Her Majesty's Government, so far as Mr. Harrison was concerned. Another Question had been asked with respect to the expenses of the officers employed on special service in Turkey. It was thought most desirable to employ officers particularly well suited for the special service in which they were to be engaged. Some of the officers were charged with missions in the neigh-
  400
  bourhood of the insurgents, and others were stationed on the frontiers of Turkey and Greece. The remuneration of the officers employed, was not settled until some time afterwards. General Chermside, who was employed near Smyrna, had made a Report, which had appeared in the form of a Blue Book. ColonelSynge was also engaged on a similar mission with regard to the insurgents. With respect to the Question asked by the hon. Member for Cardigan (Mr. D. Davies) as to the Alexandria Harbour Dues Commission, the matter arose in this way. For some years past large works had been going on at the Alexandria Harbour, and a large harbour and wharfage had been constructed. Some little time ago the Egyptian Government proposed to put a scale of dues upon all ships using the harbour, and also to charge certain rates for wharfage, and when that scale became known, the greatest dissatisfaction was produced. After various negotiations, it was thought desirable that this country should join in a Commission which was appointed on the subject, and that Commission had now prepared a Report. The Government of France also joined in the matter, and in all probability the labours of the Commission would result in a satisfactory conclusion. As for the Boundary Commissions under the Treaty of Berlin, those various Commissions were appointed to ascertain the boundaries of the different States. Those Commissions were five—namely, Bulgaria, Servia, Roumelia, Montenegro, and the Asiatic Commission. In consequence of the unwillingness of Montenegro, the labours of that Commission had not yet come to a conclusion; nor had the labours of the Asiatic Commission yet concluded.
  Vote agreed to.
  (25.) £2,000, Consular Services.
  SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFsaid, that he wished to impress upon the Government the necessity of providing better salaries for the Consular officers in Bulgaria. He was assured that the salary given to the Consul General at Phillipopolis was utterly inadequate to the services which he had to perform. The Consul was a man of remarkable ability, and he trusted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not find it necessary to exercise any great caution in giving him a fair and proper remu-

  401
  neration. There existed a great scarcity and dearness of provisions in his district, where there was very little food to he obtained besides geese. He hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not grumble at giving him an addition to his salary of £100 or £200.
  MR. RYLANDSsaid, it would be better to consider the matter when they came to the Estimate for the whole Consular Service, when they would be able to compare the salary of the Consul referred to with the various salaries given to officers in situations of a like character. He had observed that Consuls always had friends amongst Members of Parliament, who were ready at all times to point out that their remuneration was insufficient. He desired some information upon another point which the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs would, no doubt, be able to afford. The Vote included a charge for deficiency through the stationing of Consular officers of a higher rank at Phillipopolis, Salonica, and Bourgas, and by the new appointments in Anatolia. On this point he desired to ask whether the officers so appointed were on half-pay, and why it was considered desirable to appoint military officers to these Consular posts?
  MR. BOURKEsaid, the selection had been made with the greatest possible care, and he thought that the best answer which he could give to the hon. Member for Burnley was that when the Secretary of State had to appoint men for the discharge of special duties, he had taken all points into consideration in selecting each individual person. He did not think it desirable to say anything more upon the subject, other than that he believed that the appointments made would turn out to be thoroughly satisfactory.
  MR. RYLANDSsaid, that the answer of the hon. Gentleman was of a very remarkable character; but it was quite in accordance with the whole of the proceedings of the Government, who took a line contrary to custom, and then, declining to give any information, expected hon. Members to accept, without any justification, a departure from the usual practice. It was an unusual thing to appoint military officers to the position of Consul; but the Committee were informed that there was some high policy involved in this proceeding—the old story when the Government expected
  402
  hon. Members to accept their arrangements without question—and that they could not answer questions because it would be detrimental to the Public Service. It was perfectly right, however, for the Committee to inquire into any unusual course which the Government took in appointing persons to public offices, and he protested entirely against a departure from the usual custom being insisted upon by Government under the plea that to give information would be detrimental to the Public Service.
  SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFEsaid, he protested against the Consuls being considered friends of his. He had merely spoken in the public interest, and because he knew that it was very difficult for those officers to live on the salaries which they received.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, he thought the Committee were entitled to receive something like an explanation of the nature of the services expected from these semi-military Consuls who had been appointed in Asia Minor. It was possible that the Government considered it too late to enter into any question of detail relating to this subject, and it did seem rather late to be discussing the proceedings of the Boundary Commission. A year and a-half had elapsed since the Berlin Treaty was executed, and at the end of that time he thought something should be known as to the policy of the Government in the appointment of these officers, because, although the hon. Member for Burnley had intimated that the Government might have some mysterious policy behind all that, he reminded the Committee that there was a Party in the country which considered that the Government had no policy at all. Whichever Party was right, however, it was well to know what was being done, and what was not being done, in Asia Minor. He confessed that with regard to a couple of the appointments in question, he had heard it stated by people who affected to know something about the matter, that military gentlemen had been appointed who really might not have got speedy advancement in another line. The Government, of course, would not like to say that there was nothing of importance in these appointments; and having taken part with Prince Bismarck and Count Andrassy at Berlin, and having come home as grand as the fly in the

  403
  fable who said to the ox—"How we are carrying that cart along," Lord Beacons-field was, of course, bound to keep up the appearance of managing everything besides. It was quite possible that the country might find itself in a muddle in Asia Minor, as it had found itself in a muddle everywhere else, and when that muddle occurred, they would have it explained away by the Government. After this a little disaster would take place which the Government would also explain away; in short, everything would be explained down to the last possible point, when, no doubt, some fresh muddle would occur. He trusted that the appointment of military officers to Consular posts in Asia Minor would do no harm to the interests of the country or to the Conservative bogey—the Russian Empire.
  Vote agreed to.
  (26.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £8,704, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1880, in aid of Colonial Local Revenue, and for the Salaries and Allowances of Governors, &c, and for other Expenses in certain Colonies."
  MR. COURTNEYsaid, he did not understand how it was that Sir Bartle Frere was going to get five quarters' salary; upon which point, as also upon the next item for the salary of Sir Garnet Wolseley as Governor of Natal, he hoped to receive some information from the Colonial Secretary. He did not understand the position now held by Sir Garnet Wolseley in South Africa; and, further, he wished to be informed as to the position of Colonel Sir George Colley?
  SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACHsaid, that by some technical error in the year 1878–9, Sir Bartle Frere had not drawn his last quarter's salary until after the end of that financial year, for which reason that quarter's salary appeared in the Supplementary Estimates of the present year. The hon. Member for Liskeard (Mr. Courtney) had asked what was the position occupied by Sir Garnet Wolseley, to which he replied that it remained precisely the same as that which he originally occupied. Sir George Colley would succeed Sir Garnet Wolseley and Sir Henry Bulwer as High Commissioner and Governor of Natal.
  MR. COURTNEY: What is to be the salary of Sir George Colley in his new position?
  SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH: It is not yet decided.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, the question was a very important one; and it was quite clear that the Committee were not likely, at that advanced hour, to get any detailed statement from the Government. He, therefore, begged leave to move that Progress be reported.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. O'Donnell.)
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONhoped the hon. Member for Dungarvan would remember that the Committee were then discussing certain items which must necessarily be completed before the end of the financial year. A debate on the Government policy, with respect to the Transvaal, Natal, and other parts, might surely more properly come on at a time when the Estimates brought before the Committee the arrangements for the coming year. He was quite aware that it was working the Committee a great deal to go through the whole of the Votes at that time in the morning; but the Government were driven to that necessity by the fact that the Supplementary Estimates would have to be put into the Ways and Means Bill, which had to go through all its stages before the end of the financial year. On those grounds, therefore, he asked the hon. Member for Dungarvan to withdraw his Motion to report Progress, and to allow the Business in hand, which was of the utmost necessity, to proceed, and to defer the question of policy to the time when the Estimates for the coming year were in the hands of the Committee.
  MR. MONKsaid, he joined the hon. Baronet in appealing to the hon. Member for Dungarvan to withdraw his Motion, and allow the Vote to be taken. The hon. Member for Liskeard had received as full an answer as could be expected; but he must remind the hon. Baronet that they had been already seven hours engaged in the consideration of the Supplementary Estimates, and that they had passed a very fatiguing night. It must be clear that it was impossible to get through all the Votes that evening, for they would certainly take an hour or

  405
  more to finish. He hoped, therefore, that the Government would consent to report Progress after the Vote then before the Committee had been taken.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, it was on the ground of absolute necessity that he had asked the hon. Member for Dungarvan to withdraw his Motion. He had admitted that it was working the Committee a great deal to continue, although there were occasions when the interest of the Public Service had to be considered. He again appealed to the Committee to finish the Supplementary Votes, as the delay of the Estimates might prevent the Government from getting through a Ways and Means Bill.
  MR. RYLANDSsaid, he should be the last person in the world to stand in the way of the Secretary to the Treasury in his desire to get all the Votes passed, if he thought that, under the circumstances of the case, it was absolutely necessary, in the interests of the Public Business, to yield to his opinion. He would remind the hon. Baronet that if the Supplementary Votes were completed on Monday, they could be reported on Tuesday, and there would, certainly, be ample time to get through a Ways and Means Bill before the end of the financial year. There were some other Motions on the Paper that would occupy some little time; and he, therefore, hoped that the hon. Member for Dungarvan would allow this Vote to pass, as he (Mr. Rylands) quite agreed that it should pass. With regard to the other Votes, he thought they should be taken on Monday along with the other Civil Service Estimates.
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, he also appealed to his hon. Friend the Member for Dungarvan to allow the Votes to go through that evening. He would point out that the Government had been calculating on beginning their Easter Recess on Thursday in Passion Week. The House had never sat either on Wednesday or Thursday in Passion Week before—at any rate, he had looked up the cases since 1857—but he had no doubt that the Government would get Tuesday in Passion Week given to them.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, lie should prefer the arrangement suggested by the hon. Baronet, which he believed would be much to the convenience of the House in
  406
  general. The Government had a great deal of necessary Business to complete by the time named, and he hoped the hon. Gentleman would allow them to get through the Supplementary Estimates that evening.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, as there appeared to be a general wish on the part of hon. Members that the present Vote should pass, he did not see why the Government should not take all the Votes that evening, and he therefore begged leave to withdraw his Motion to report Progress.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  Original Question put, and agreed to.
  (27.) £4,450, Tonnage Bounties, &c, and Liberated African Department.
  (28.) £10,425, Subsidies to Telegraph Companies.
  (29.) £136, Treasury Chest Robbery.
  (30.) £13,000, Superannuation and Retired Allowances.
  (31.) £3,000, Belief of Distressed British Seamen Abroad.
  (32.) £2,716, Pauper Lunatics, Ireland.
  (33.) £9,110, Temporary Commissions.
  MR. MACDONALDsaid, it had been his intention to call the attention of the House at some length to the expenses in connection with the Accidents in Mines Commission. Considering, however, the appeal made by the hon. Baronet the Secretary of the Treasury, he would not stand in the way of the House passing the Vote, but would reserve his observations until the main Vote came before them in the Civil Service Estimates. He must, however, take that opportunity of saying that he did protest against the expenses incurred by this Commission. It was the belief of many that much loss of life in the mining districts would have been prevented had the subject been dealt with at once, instead of being referred to this Commission. He went further, than others. The manner in which this Commission was conducted—it being with closed doors—to his mind, was an outrage on common sense. Hundreds, from its privacy, never heard of it that could have given valuable evidence. But, beyond these, there were, among mine owners of the country and mine managers,

  407
  hundreds that were not only willing for improvement, but were anxious to take advantage of all information that would enable them to save life, and to protect the limbs of the workmen who toiled under ground. Had the investigation been public, all information would have been scattered broadcast in the mining districts weekly. It had not been so from the Resolution of this worse than stupid Commission; and he would say that if there had been laid before it anything that would have prevented the loss of one single life, he charged that life to their action—which was a crime.
  MR. DODDSsaid, that amongst the expenses of the Accidents in Mines Commission, the sum of £650 was charged for travelling expenses. He should like to know how much of that sum had been spent for witnesses, and how much of it had been paid for the travelling expenses of those engaged upon the Commission?
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that he could not undertake to answer the Question then, but would inform the hon. Gentleman upon Report.
  Vote agreed to.
  (34.) £9,869, Repayment to the Civil Contingencies Fund.
  MR. RYLANDSsaid, that he thought that some information was required with respect to various items in this Vote. The sum of £2,120 was charged for "special packets for the conveyance of distinguished persons." Perhaps, upon Report, the hon. Baronet the Secretary to the Treasury would toll the House the names of those persons for whose conveyance the packets had been provided? It had been customary to adopt that course on similar occasions. He did not wish to move a deduction of the Vote for that sum, but only to obtain information. Then, with respect to the sum of £300 for a gratuity to Lord Giffard, V.C., for bringing home the despatches announcing the successful termination of military operations in South Africa, he thought that that matter had caused a considerable amount of dissatisfaction in the Army. There was no doubt, whatever, that that gratuity ought to have been given to the distinguished officer who was chiefly instrumental in capturing Cetewayo, and that he ought to have been sent off with the despatches to this country. Instead of
  408
  Major Marter receiving the £300, it had, by some means or other, been given to Lord Giffard. That seemed to him, and to many persons, to be an instance of the grossest favouritism, which ought not to pass without some observation.
  MR. COURTNEYsaid, that he should like to know what was the meaning of the item of £331 19 s. 3d. on account of the
  "Record and Writ Clerks' Office, Chancery loss sustained by Mr. A. Ash and Mr. J. Warwick, as stamp distributors, in respect of stamped copies not called for?"
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, that Messrs. Ash and Warwick were the stamp distributors in the Record and Writ Clerks' Office. It had been the custom in the Record and Writ Clerks' Office that solicitors should leave the deeds there to have the proper stamps affixed for them, and the deeds were made ready for the solicitors when they called. In course of time the number of deeds that had not been called for accumulated very largely, so that the value of the stamps on the deeds so left amounted to £820. Messrs. Ash and Warwick had paid for those stamps, and through no fault of their own, but entirely through a Rule with which they were bound to comply, the deeds were stamped and the money lost. In answer to their application for an allowance for spoiled stamps, the Board of Inland Revenue said that they could not admit their claim, inasmuch as the stamps in question were not spoiled stamps. The Treasury was desirous of compensating Messrs Ash and Warwick for the loss which they had incurred, and, consequently, the item in question had been included in the Estimates, under the head of Civil Contingencies Fund.
  MR. MONKsaid, that, perhaps, the hon. Baronet would inform the Committee why the sum of £2,500 had been awarded to Mr. Ford and wife, as compensation to them in respect of their illegal arrest?
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, he must ask the hon. Gentleman to allow him to ask that Question upon Report.
  Vote, agreed to.
  (35.) £4,300, Revenue Departments.
  (36.) £7,400, Post Office Packet Service.
  (37.) £985, Abyssinian Expedition.
  (38.) £15,050 3s. 3d., Charges Defrayed by the War Office on account of India.
  House resumed.
  Resolutions to be reported To-morrow. Committee to sit again To-morrow.

BLIND AND DEAF-MUTE CHILDREN BILL— [BILL 41.]
(Mr. Wheelhouse, Mr. Montague Scott, Mr. Benjamin Williams.)
BLIND AND DEAF-MUTE CHILDREN BILL— [BILL 41.]

  COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."—{Mr. Wheelhouse.)
  MR. DODDSsaid, that he objected to this Bill proceeding. He had given Notice of opposition to it, but that Notice had not been put upon the Paper.
  MR. MONKsaid, that the Bill was read a second time yesterday, and he then asked the hon. and learned Member for Leeds (Mr. Wheelhouse) whether he intended or was willing to accept the Amendments which were inserted in a similar Bill last Session? The hon. and learned Member, he considered, might have condescended to make some reply; at all events, when he made the Motion "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair." He had, however, heard nothing from the hon. and learned Member; nor did he know whether he intended to accept the Amendments. It was impossible for the House properly to consider the Amendments until they were on the Notice Paper. He believed that it was a Rule of the House that Amendments should not be printed until a Bill had been read a second time. This Bill was read a second time yesterday, and, as the House adjourned at 4 o'clock in the afternoon, there was no time for the Amendments to be printed. The Bill was only read about five minutes before the House adjourned. His Amendments were now lying on the Table; and even if they were placed in the hands of the Chairman of Committees, it would be impossible for hon. Members to understand them properly until they were printed. He did not think there was any absolute Rule against the Amendments being then considered; but he
  410
  thought it would be a very unusual course for the hon. Member to press the Bill before the Amendments were printed. He begged to move "That the Debate be now adjourned."
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Monk.)
  MR. RYLANDSsaid, that he objected to the Bill when it was read a second time. It was quite clear that they could not consider the Amendments of his hon. Friend with any advantage until they were printed. There had been no opportunity as yet of printing the Amendments, and he thought it would be most unreasonable, at that time of the morning, to ask the House to proceed with the Bill.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that the best course to be adopted would be that the Chairman should take the Chair, and that they should then report Progress in order that the Amendment might be put upon the Paper.
  MR. DODDSsaid, that he should object to that course being pursued, because he thought the Amendments ought to be circulated before Mr. Speaker left the Chair.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes 9; Noes 54: Majority 45.—(Div. List, No. 36.)
  Original Question again proposed.
  MR. DODDS: I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.
  MR. SPEAKERsaid, that he must remind the hon. Member that he had already spoken upon the Main Question.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Brogden.)
  MR. DODDSsaid, that his reason for wishing to move the adjournment of the House was in order to make an appeal to Her Majesty's Government not to force the House to consider, at that hour, a Bill which was very much opposed. It was then nearly half-past 2, and about half-an-hour before an appeal was made to them to allow the Supplementary Estimates to be got through. To that appeal the House yielded, and the Government ought not to assist a private Member in forcing on a Bill of

  411
  that kind at such an hour. He believed, moreover, that Her Majesty's Government entertained as strong an objection to the measure as any Member upon that side of the House.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that although he had not looked at the Bill, he believed it was substantially the same as that which had passed through the House last year; and he thought it was only fair that his hon. and learned Friend should get a stage from Progress. He proposed, therefore, to proceed as far as that, and he would then agree to the Motion for the adjournment of the House.
  MR. MONKsaid, he was perfectly ready to accept the offer of the right hon. Gentleman.
  MR. BROGDENbegged leave to withdraw his Motion for adjournment.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  Original Question put, and agreed to.
  Bill considered in Committee.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.

PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS AND CORRUPT PRACTICES BILL.
SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, he did not know whether the Government were bringing in the same Bill which was introduced last year; but he had objected to that measure on the ground that it did not deal with the employment of vehicles at elections, and had pointed out that the law was universally broken, while, at the same time, he had moved a Resolution that it should be either enforced or repealed. He begged to give Notice that he should move a similar Resolution on the second reading.
On Motion of Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Bill to amend and continue the Acts relating to Election Petitions and to the prevention of Corrupt Practices at Parliamentary Elections, ordered to he brought in by Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL and Mr. SOLICITOR GENERAL.
Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members not being present,
House adjourned at a quarter before Three o'clock.