§ (18.) 2,100, Monument to the Earl of Beaconsfield.
§ (19.) £5,000, Supplementary sum for Public Buildings.
§
(20.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £10,000, be granted to Her Majesty, in aid of the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1882, for executing the necessary repairs of the Caledonian Canal, and for meeting the outstanding liabilities of the Commissioners of the Canal appointed under 11 and 12 Vic. c. 54.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he thought the payment of £10,000 in connection with the Caledonial Canal was an expense to the country that ought to be got rid of, and reminded the noble Lord the Secretary to the Treasury of the opinion he had just expressed against the expenditure of public money upon private enterprize.
§ LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISHsaid, that in ordinary years the receipts just about covered the expenditure on the Canal; but when, as in the present year, extraordinary repairs were necessary, the only source from which they could be met was a Parliamentary Vote, and the Commissioners therefore applied to Parliament in accordance with the Act. He adhered to the opinion he had expressed in the discussion upon the last Vote as to the undesirability of Government undertaking private enter-prizes.
§ MR. HEALYsuggested that the noble Lord should bring in a Bill to relieve the country of this liability. They were now asked for £10,000; but he believed the country would probably spend £2,000,000 on it in course of time, unless something were done to get rid of the liability.
§ MR. BIGGARsaid, this Vote was an exemplification of the system which prevailed in connection with a great many canals. The practice of supporting them by Parliamentary grants was altogether objectionable, and he held that the Committee were not justified in voting public money upon works of this kind for the purpose of putting profit into the pockets of private individuals, because it was quite clear that when any profit was made it went to the proprietors; whereas, if the undertaking did not succeed, the loss fell upon the nation. If the Caledonian Canal was not able to pay its own expenses, it was direct evidence that the Canal was not required, and therefore it would be no more than judicious to throw it up. At one time canals were legitimate enterprizes enough; but canal carriage, owing to extended railway communication, was now going out of use, although, of course, it was still required in some parts of the country, and where it was still used, and the shareholders were willing to have the responsibility, of course there could be no interference. But with regard to those canals which would not pay their working expenses, and came upon the nation to make up their deficiencies, as he had said before, it was clear they were not required, and the public liability in connection with them ought to be put an end to at once. He, therefore, concurred with his hon. Friend the Member for Wexford (Mr. Healy) in saying that the Acts under which such liability now accrued should be repealed.
§ MR. CALLANasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether there was any intention of keeping open in Ireland water communication of similar character to that of the Caledonian Canal? He reminded the Committee that the Ballinamore Canal, which connected the Ulster Canal with the Shannon, was in such a state of ruin as to be wholly unworkable. These canals had been allowed to get into this state, notwithstanding that they were orignally constructed 144 by, and still belonged to, the Government.
THE CHAIRMANreminded the hon. Member that the question he was discussing did not arise upon this Vote, which only related to the Caledonian Canal.
§ MR. CALLANsaid, he would not pursue the question of the Irish canal system; but he had a right to refer to the utter uselessness of spending money on this Scotch monstrosity. He suggested that the poll tax once imposed in Scotland should be levied on the tourists who made use of the Caledonian Canal in summer, for the purpose of relieving the poor taxpayers in Ireland from this incubus of liability.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, as an Irish Representative, he objected to any portion of the taxes paid by the Irish people being expended in what he conceived to be an improper manner on Scotch works, while works of a similar character in Ireland were allowed to go into a state of disrepair. The Government did not ask for any money for the Irish canals; and he should, therefore, move the reduction of the Vote by the sum of £1,000, which represented the proportion of Irish money included in the sum now asked for.
§
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £9,000, be granted to Her Majesty, in aid of the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1882, for executing the necessary repairs of the Caledonian Canal, and for meeting the outstanding liabilities of the Commissioners of the Canal appointed under 11 and 12 Vic. c. 54."—(Mr. Arthur O'Connor.)
§ LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISHwas understood to point out that the Caledonian Canal was different in its character to the interior canal system in Ireland. He trusted the hon. Member would not press his Motion to a division.
§ MR. BIGGARregretted that his hon. Friend the Member for Queen's County had moved the reduction of the Vote. He thought the right course would have been to divide against the whole Vote, inasmuch as no Member of the Government had shown that the Caledonian Canal was in any way required. For his own part, he regarded the expenditure upon this Canal as wholly unreasonable and uncalled for. But the truth 145 of the matter was that the subsidizing of these canals involved a certain amount of patronage in the appointment of secretaries, managers, engineers, and others. It was really plundering the ratepayers of the Three Kingdoms to continue to uphold these unnecessary and unprofitable works. He certainly protested against similar experiments being made in Ireland with regard to canals, and as long as he had a seat in the House of Commons he should protest against the expenditure of public money for such purposes. For these reasons, he trusted his hon. Friend would withdraw his Motion, and thereby give the Committee an opportunity of dividing against the entire Vote.
§ MR. O'DONNELLremarked, that it was a curious circumstance in connection with an independent sort of people like the Scotch that nearly all the expenses of their trade, from herring-branding to canals, fell upon the taxpayers at large. He would not ask his hon. Friend to persist in his Motion; but he hoped that the voice of conscience would be heard in reference to these demands.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked leave to withdraw the Motion before the Committee.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Original Question put, and agreed to.
§ (21.) £25,000, Supplementary sum for Mint and Coinage.
§ MR. O'DONNELLremarked, that some years ago the sovereign, upon the reverse side, used to bear a design emblematic of the Three Kingdoms; but that now the reverse side was monopolized by a representation of St. George and the Dragon. It would seem as if the Government had a difficulty in acknowledging that Ireland was part of the United Kingdom.
§ LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISHsaid, it was settled some years ago that the design of St. George and the Dragon should appear on the sovereign whenever the new coinage took place.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, the noble Lord the Financial Secretary to the Treasury had promised to give the Committee some information with regard to the Easter offering of the vicar of St. Botolph's.
§ LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISHsaid, this was only a Supplementary 146 Vote, and he could not give any information as to the general question.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (22.) £3,000, Supplementary sum for British Museum.
§ (23.) £4,500, Supplementary sum for Diplomatic Services.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, he noticed an item of £2,000 for Mr. Goschen's expenses as Special Ambassador at Constantinople. Would the noble Lord inform him whether it was right that this should be made a public charge, and what was the object of the Embassy?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, that the understanding which had been arrived at on a former occasion as to Mr. Goschen's Mission was that the expenses were to be paid by the public, but that the right hon. Gentleman was to receive no salary whatever. The expenses were £2,000—that was to say, the expenses charged to the Exchequer were £2,000, and which was much less than the amount which would have been paid to an ordinary Ambassador. Mr. Goschen had not drawn the whole of his expenditure. He had not drawn anything on account of the almost necessary payments which he had made at Constantinople for charitable purposes—for instance, to the fund raised to assist the destitute portion of the subjects of the Sultan. Altogether, Mr. Goschen spent £2,000 in this way; but he refused to charge anything that he did not think it was fair to call upon the public to pay. The sum was £500 less than had been voted on the previous occasion, and the only amount included in the Vote in the nature of a salary was a sum of £100 or £200 to be paid to Mr. Goschen's brother for acting as secretary.
§ MR. O'DONNELLsaid, no doubt it was perfectly correct that the money was less than the Mission had cost Mr. Goschen, and he had no fault to find with the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs; but was it not rather a strange thing that this country should be placed under an obligation to a private individual, however respectable that individual might be? If Mr. Goschen's 147 Mission to Constantinople was a matter of Imperial necessity, surely it was a disgrace to the country and to the Executive to allow him to be one penny out of pocket, or to do anything else than recompense him to the full. If, however, the Mission was merely a showy promenade for the purpose of removing a prominent Liberal from the near purview of home politics, he did not think it ought to be tolerated. The Vote was either a great deal too little or a great deal too much. They were now laying down a most dangerous precedent, and were perpetrating a public scandal of no slight description. If Mr. Goschen had been the Ambassador of this country, he ought to be paid as an Ambassador. What would be the invariable result of accepting this class of service gratuitously? Why, the private individual who, in this magnificent way, made the country his debtor, would expect a recompense of some other kind. If he did not get his Ambassadorial salary, he would think, perhaps, that he had a claim for a coronet. That might not be so in Mr. Goschen's case—in the case of a man of singular public virtue—but it was evident that if they sent public men all over the world on the business of the country at their own expense, they would have to recompense them in some other way. To his mind, it would be much better to pay in the sterling coin of the realm for the work Mr. Goschen had done—if it had been worth anything—and he had an opinion of his own upon that matter—than to be put to the necessity of having to recompense gentlemen executing similar labours by conferring upon them titles, stars, ribbons, gold sticks-in-waiting, and all the other paraphernalia supposed to be the due of those who performed distinguished services.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, this subject was very fully discussed last year—at any rate, it had been discussed for a quarter of an hour or 20 minutes, which was a long time for the consideration of a matter which really lay in a nutshell. It was stated last year, if Mr. Goschen was not paid all the money he was out of pocket on account of his Mission, it was simply because he would not take it. There were plenty of precedents for an arrangement of the kind that was come to. Special Missions had taken place almost every year for a 148 great many years past, in which the gentlemen who had performed them had received the money, and no more than the money, they had actually expended. In some cases these gentlemen had published the whole of their accounts; but in other cases only part of their accounts had been submitted to the Treasury.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREtrusted the hon. Member opposite would not divide on this Vote, as there did not seem to be any reason for such a course. Mr. Goschen had done very good work, and did not in the least complain of the way in which he had been treated. The hon. Baronet (Sir Charles W. Dilke) had stated that the money Mr. Goschen was not paid, and which he had refused to accept, was certain charitable contributions made by him in Constantinople. It would be an open question whether the noble Lord the Secretary to the Treasury could legally assent to the principle that when a gentleman was sent on a special Mission he should charge the Treasury with charitable donations made by him whilst on that Mission. There was another reason why they should not push this matter, and it was this—that during a considerable portion of the time Mr. Goschen was at Constantinople Sir Henry Layard was permanent Ambassador there, and was in receipt of a large salary. He did not think the Committee really had anything to complain of in this Vote. If Mr. Gosehen had intended to receive any payment beyond his actual expenses—that was to say, if he had accepted what he had given for charitable purposes—it would have been necessary for him to have vacated his seat, and that was what they knew Mr. Goschen had not done.
§ MR. O'DONNELLsaid, he would not put the Committee to the trouble of a division; but he should require the Vote to be affirmed. If Mr. Goschen had a claim upon the State for recompense, his seat should be declared to be vacated, for unless that were done his constituents would be deprived of an opportunity of expressing their opinion on an important crisis, and at a time when it was necessary that the views of the constituency should be taken. He was afraid that this arrangement would be a precedent under which dangerous jobs might be perpetrated. He would oppose the Vote for the sake of the principle which ap- 149 peared to him to be clearly involved, although he would not put the Committee to the trouble of dividing.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (24.) £5,730, Supplementary sum for Colonies, Grants in Aid.
§ SIR DAVID WEDDERBURNsaid, the hon. Member for Cambridge (Mr. W. Fowler) had given Notice of his intention to move the reduction of this Vote by £2,721 for the ex-King Cetewayo. The hon. Member, however, was not in his place; and, under these circumstances he (Sir David Wedderburn) would have taken on himself to move the reduction of the Vote and to take the decision of the Committee upon it. However, since the Notice had been placed on the Paper, a Memorial had been presented on behalf of the ex-King, signed by a number of Members of Parliament, and an answer had been given to it. He believed that all the hon. Members who signed that Memorial were satisfied with the sympathetic reply given by the Prime Minister, and under the circumstances he would offer no opposition to the Vote. He would point out, however, that there was evidence forthcoming from a number of people in various positions, and all independent witnesses, as to the expediency and wisdom of restoring Cetewayo to his own country. He (Sir David Wedderburn) knew that the Colonial Office was not much in the habit of paying attention to, or being guided by, unofficial information; they maintained their own Agents, and were always guided by the information they received from them. But it was nevertheless a fact that there was a strong opinion among a great number of people in Natal that it would have the effect of preserving peace and rendering things much quieter in that part of South Africa if Cetewayo were allowed to return to his people. The settlement that had been arrived at had failed to give satisfaction, and even now civil war was taking place. The time, he knew, was not proper for entering into a debate upon this subject; but still he felt himself obliged to express an opinion on it.
§ MR. R. N. FOWLERsaid, he hoped that the Memorial which had been presented to the Prime Minister would receive the attention of the Government. It seemed to him that it was the legitimate sequence of the course pursued by 150 the Government that this unfortunate man should be released. They had considered it desirable to give up the Sovereignty of the Transvaal. That course he, for one, very much regretted; but, in giving up that Sovereignty, hon. Gentlemen opposite seemed to have washed their hands entirely of the affairs of the country, and it appeared to him to be out of keeping with the rest of their policy to retain in prison a man whom they took charge of for the sake of a State that was at the time under British administration, but the independence of which had been since acknowleged. He knew the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies (Mr. Courtney) was a great friend of the Transvaal Republic; and he would ask him whether, representing the Colony in that House, he was prepared any longer to act as gaoler to an unfortunate Prince, to whom he (Mr. Fowler), differing from the opinion of many of his Friends on that (the Conservative) side of the House, believed this country had done great injustice. He trusted that Her Majesty's Government would take the matter into their consideration, and would not, for the sake of a State the control of which they had given up, detain this unfortunate Prince in custody.
§ MR. HEALYsaid, he would like to ask the noble Lord the Secretary to the Treasury whether this was likely to be a permanent charge upon the Treasury until Cetewayo was released, or whether the Cape Government was to pay part of it? Everyone who had read Cetewayo's letter must have felt that it carried on every part of it the stamp of truth. The man had dictated it to an interpreter, and there was no devious or doubtful statement in it. It was clear from this document that the British at home had been imposed upon; that Cetewayo had had no desire to make war upon our troops; and that it was merely in consequence of the action of Sir Bartle Frere, or whoever it was that had led the Government into the war, that he had taken up arms against us.
§ MR. COURTNEYsaid, an hon. Member had described him as the friend of the Transvaal Republic—
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORThe quondam friend of the Transvaal Republic.
§ MR. COURTNEYsaid, hon. Members could describe him as the friend of the 151 Transvaal Republic if they chose, for he had never shrunk from declaring his opinion on the annexation of the Transvaal; but he was equally open to the accusation of being a friend of Cetewayo. They could not look upon the condition of affairs in Zululand as satisfactory; but still there were many difficulties in the way of adopting the course pointed out by hon. Members. Hon. Members must be aware that Zululand had been parcelled out amongst 13 Chiefs, and if Cetewayo were released we should have to make terms with all of them. Even if we thought it right to restore the King it would not be easy to do so. As to the question put by the hon. Member for Wexford (Mr. Healy), he would find that it had been suggested by the Colonial Secretary that the cost of maintaining Cetewayo should be borne partly by Natal and partly by the Transvaal. It was not fair to suggest that a portion of this cost should be borne by the Cape Colony, which had had nothing at all to do with the operations against the Prince. The matter was not yet settled.
MR. HEALTsaid, what he wished to know was whether the English Government had any Representative at the Cape in charge of Cetewayo, or whether he was simply in charge of a Colonial officer?
§ MR. COURTNEYsaid, that Cape Colony had passed an Act rendering Cetewayo's imprisonment in that Colony legal. The prisoner was under the charge of the Cape Government.
§ MR. COURTNEYThe English Government has as much influence in this matter as it has in all other matters affecting the Colonies.
§ MR. CALLANsaid, it had been stated that there was a certain difficulty in this matter of restoring Cetewayo on account of the ultimate fate of the 13 Chiefs amongst whom Zululand had been parcelled out. If the difficulty really existed, he would suggest that, following the lines of their action in another matter, and to meet the justice of the case, they should leave these 13 Chiefs to be dealt with by Cetewayo, just as they had left Abdurrahman to the tender mercies of Ayoub Khan.
§ MR. O'DONNELLsaid, he understood that Cetewayo was under the Cape Par- 152 liament, and we had no authority to break an Act of the Colonial Legislature, so that, in reality, the Prince was entirely at the disposal of the Cape Government; and, if the Cape authorities thought proper, they could interfere with any arrangement of ours as to his destination. For instance, it might suit us—and he (Mr. O'Donnell) sincerely hoped it would—to restore Cetewayo to his Kingdom, in which event the Cape Colony might exercise a veto, and say—"You shall not restore this man." Even though there might be this legal difficulty, he trusted the Government had satisfied itself that there would be no opposition to the restoration of Cetewayo on the part of the Colonial Government. For his own part, he thought Cetewayo ought to be restored, as he believed there would be no peace in Zululand until that Monarch was once more among his people. To his mind, the 13 Chiefs were the 13 plagues of the country.
§ MR. DALYsaid, that if they were to keep Cotewayo in prison, as he had five wives, it was a serious thing for us to consider what would have to be done with his successors.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ (25.) £2,900, Supplementary sum for Houses of Parliament.
§ MR. H. H. FOWLERsaid, that before the Vote was put he wished to bring two questions before the Government for consideration during the Recess—two questions relating to the comfort of hon. Members. This Session, it had been computed by an ingenious statistician that nine or ten days had been spent in the Division Lobbies. He would suggest to the authorities that as the Lobbies were so much used it would be desirable to have them ventilated. At present they were in an unhealthy condition. Then, again, as a new Tea Room was to be provided, he would suggest that there should be an adequate supply of newspapers. At the present time there was always a rush for the papers; and looking at the fact that Members were kept in the House so late at night, and for so many hours, he did not think it was too much to ask that there should be some improvement in these arrangements.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORI rise to a point of Order. I wish to know 153 whether there is any special reason for departing from the ordinary method of putting these Votes? You, Sir, seem to have departed from the proper order.
THE CHAIRMANI have departed from the order in which the Votes appear on the Estimates; but my reason for doing so was to consult the convenience of the Committee. The two next Votes are of a similar nature—namely, for Cyprus and the Transvaal, and it appeared to me more convenient to take them together.
§ MR. CALLANsaid, that, with regard to the arrangements of the House, perhaps the First Commissioner of "Works would inform them what newspapers were likely to be supplied to hon. Members? He made inquiries the other day as to what newspapers were supplied at present, and he found that there was only one London Times for the use of 650 Members of Parliament. But to make up for this there was an additional supply of the penny papers. There were three copies of The Daily News to one copy of The Times. Then, as to the local papers, he was informed that there was no subscription paid for them; but that such as were received were presented to the House. He would suggest to the First Commissioner of Works that he should publish an advertisement to the effect that the House of Commons would thankfully receive donations from liberal-minded country newspaper proprietors. The Belfast News Letter, and other papers, he was informed, were already supplied gratuitously; and he would suggest that the proprietors of The Manchester Guardian, The Manchester Courier, and such like journals should be requested to supply copies in the same way; but he would also suggest that they should be requested to send them at as early an hour as possible, and not keep them, as they did at present, until the news in them was stale. It was most disgraceful that the News Room of the House of Commons should be supplied gratuitously with the few local papers it received. With regard to the ventilation of the Division Lobbies, if hon. Members went into the Map Room of the House, they would find maps of almost every country in the world, and plans of many of the principal buildings in the world; but there was one building of which they would find no plan, and that was the British House of Commons. He would 154 suggest that it would be desirable to have a plan prepared and placed in the Library, showing the amount of space and the number of rooms in the House of Commons, and the amount of space and the number of rooms devoted to the use of Members. There were many rooms that would be most valuable to Members, and rooms which had been pointed out to the authorities as easily convertible into comfortable apartments for the use of those whose business brought them to that House; but whenever these rooms were spoken of, it was always said—"Oh, they are for officials." There was a great want of space complained of in the House; but if they went into the courtyards of the building they would find numerous doors leading to rooms occupied by officials. These apartments seemed to be allocated for the luxury of officials, while the comfort of Members of Parliament seemed to be lost sight of altogether. No doubt, it was an unpleasant subject to moot, and, no doubt, officials did not wish to have their perquisites interfered with; but these matters should be gone into when the convenience of those who were sent to the House of Commons by the country was in question. At the proper time he would make a Motion for a plan of the Houses of Parliament, showing each floor and the number of rooms, how each was allocated, and by whose authority they were occupied. Like all other institutions under the Government, although these were new Houses of Parliament, they were venerable in abuses. Surely an explanation in this matter could be given by the First Commissioner of Works. If it had not been for the illness of Colonel Forrester, the reporters would have continued to be cooped up as though they were in the Black Hole of Calcutta. Now, owing to Colonel Forrester's departure, these gentlemen occupied decent rooms, and not the disgraceful holes they had formerly been obliged to use.
§ Vote agreed to.
§ Resolutions to be reported.
§ MR. BIGGARmoved that Progress be reported.
§ Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Biggar.)
155§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 13; Noes 43: Majority 30.—(Div. List, No. 394.)
§ LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISHmoved, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."
§ Motion agreed to.
§ Resolutions to be reported To-morrow;
§ Committee to sit again Tomorrow.