Lords Sitting of 14 March 1864

MINUTES.
Took the Oath—The Lord DUNSANY.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Marine Mutiny.*
Second Reading—Vestry Cess Abolition (Ireland) (No. 19); Inclosure* (No. 26.)

THE COURT MARTIAL ON COLONEL CRAWLEY—THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL.—QUESTION.
LORD CHELMSFORDsaid, that a noble Friend, who was not now present, had on a recent evening asked the noble Earl the Secretary for War, Whether the military authorities recognized the part taken by the Deputy Judge Advocate at
1896
the court-martial on Colonel Crawley as a precedent to be followed in future? The noble Earl stated in reply, that it was a question of some difficulty; but that it might be desirable to consider whether the duties of the Judge Advocate General ought not to be limited to his judicial functions, and that the matter was under the consideration of the Government and the military authorities. He had heard that statement with great satisfaction; but it was dissipated a few nights afterwards by the answer given in the other House by the Judge Advocate General himself, who stated that it was not his intention to propose any alteration whatever in the duties of the office. He would now ask, Whether any alteration was contemplated, or whether things were to remain in their present state, with a chance of the recurrence of circumstances which had caused considerable dissatisfaction?
EARL DE GREY AND RIPONsaid, that there was no difference of opinion between the Judge Advocate General and himself on this subject. He (Earl de Grey) stated on the previous occasion, that the question was under the consideration of the Government and the military authorities, but that it was not a matter on which it was desirable to come to a hasty conclusion. At that time the Mutiny Act had not been passed, and the question put in another place had reference to the Articles of War, which were founded on the Mutiny Act, and the answer was that this year it was not proposed to make any change in the Articles of War. There was, however, nothing in the Articles of War which rendered the employment of the Judge Advocate General necessary in such cases. The tendency of the Articles of War was, on the contrary, rather in the opposite direction. The matter was well worthy of the consideration of Her Majesty's Government, and he quite agreed with the noble and learned Lord as to its importance.

DENMARK AND GERMANY—SPEECH OF M. HALL.—QUESTION.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, that with reference to the mission of the noble Lord opposite (Lord Wodehouse) to Copenhagen, he wished to put a Question with regard to a speech attributed to the late Danish Minister, M. Hall, which had been printed in the public papers. M. Hall, in appearing before the electors, stated the other day that he had had a conversation

1897
with the noble Lord, in which he asked him whether the withdrawal of the Constitution of November, as recommended by Her Majesty's Government, would be sufficient to avert the invasion of Schleswig. To this the noble Lord was reported to have answered most distinctly that it certainly would not. He did not see in the Correspondence anything to bear out that statement, and as the papers delivered came down to a later date, if any such statement had been made it ought to have been published. On the 21st of December there was, indeed, a conversation between M. Hall and the noble Lord, in which the former asked whether the withdrawal of the Constitution would be sufficient to prevent any further demands from being made, or any further steps taken by the German Powers. The noble Lord appeared to have evaded the question very ingeniously, the answer given being that it would be better for Denmark to consider not what she would gain by complying, but what she might lose by refusing. He wished to know, Whether there were any other circumstances that approached nearer to the statement of M. Hall; and, if so, whether the noble Lord would have any objection to state them?
EARL GRANVILLEsuggested that it was a very irregular course to ask an individual Peer as to the part he had taken in a negotiation of this description. The Government were anxious to give every information on this subject, but he was not quite sure whether it was for the advantage of the public service that Her Majesty's Government should be asked questions upon every phase of negotiations still going on. It would have been more regular to put a question to the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, if he had been in his place, than to question an individual Peer as to the course he had pursued on a mission of this kind.
THE EARL or DERBYsaid, he had given private notice to the noble Lord (Lord Wodehouse) of his intention, and he informed him that he had not only no objection to answer the question, but that he should be very much obliged to him for putting it. When a statement had been made by a noble Lord in his character of representative of this country, and when publicity had been given to the statement, it was only due to the noble Lord that he should have an opportunity of explanation.
LORD WODEHOUSEsaid, he was glad to have the opportunity of answering the
1898
Question which had been put by the noble Earl, as he thought it most desirable to remove the impression which had arisen from the manner in which the statement had appeared in the public papers. He had read the speech of M. Hall, but he was not clear what M. Hall meant to say. It appeared, however, that M. Hall stated that he (Lord Wodehouse) said that the revocation of the Constitution of November 18th, as regarded Schleswig, would not prevent the German invasion of that State. On his arrival at Copenhagen the execution which had been ordered by the German Diet in Holstein was imminent; and those who had read the papers would see from his despatch of the 16th of December that he stated that he had considered whether any measures that the Danish Government might be advised to take would have the effect of stopping the Federal execution, and that he regretted he had come to the conclusion that no measures which the Government could take would have that effect. He had very little doubt that M. Hall referred to that statement. He remembered being asked, after his arrival in Copenhagen, whether any measures were likely to stop the execution; and his answer was, in accordance with what he had stated in the despatch, that he was afraid nothing could stop it; and this was perfectly in accordance with what he had heard at Berlin. With regard to any further measures which the German Governments had since taken, it was clear he could not have made the statement in reference to them, for the simple reason that he could not possibly know what those measures would be. As the negotiations went on until the end of January, and he left in the first week in January, it was not probable that he could state with confidence what would be the result of the advice given by him during the last weeks of December. The object of the advice which he tendered at the instance of Her Majesty's Government to the Danish Government was, if possible, to prevent the invasion of Schleswig; and although he should have been taking too much upon himself had he engaged for the German Powers that they would not invade Schleswig, yet undoubtedly the object of the advice which he gave was to limit the occupation of the German troops to Holstein. He was speaking of a time when the execution had taken place, and when the only object was to prevent the invasion of another State which did not belong to the

1899
German Confederation, which the German Confederation had never claimed, and the invasion of which the Danish Government throughout declared they would regard as an act of war.

DENMARK AND GERMANY.

  JOINT ACTION OF EUROPEAN POWERS.
  LORD STRATHEDEN,who had given notice of his intention to inquire of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, What Credit ought to be attached to the Allegation of Prince Gortschakoff, reported by Lord Napier in a Despatch from St. Petersburg, page 504, No. 4 of the Danish Papers, to the effect that the four Governments of Austria, Prussia, Russia, and Great Britain are "now thinking and acting in harmony on a Question still more important than that of Holstein or Schleswig," said, he should have postponed his Question, but that he had been requested to put it by his noble Friend the President of the Council. It would be interesting to know what subject Prince Gortschakoff was thinking of when he wrote; it could hardly have been attendance at the proposed Congress, since the definite refusal of England to be present was known at that time.
  EARL GRANVILLE: In the absence of my noble Friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs—which is caused by a slight indisposition—I will state in reply to the question of the noble Lord, that we suppose that the allusion made by Prince Gortschakoff to an agreement between the four Powers necessarily referred to the agreement supposed to exist against the plan of a General European Congress. I can state in the fullest and most explicit terms that, as regards England, we have entered into no combination or treaty of any sort or kind with the other great Powers of Europe, of a nature which can be construed into the slightest hostile feeling towards France. I am anxious to state that in the most positive terms, so that it may be understood that no common agreement exists between the Powers mentioned, with regard to the great questions now pending in Europe.

IRISH REPRODUCTIVE LOAN FUND.

  QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF LEITRIMasked the noble Lord the President of the Council, What is the Amount of the Funds at present rested in Her Majesty under the Pro-
  1900
  visions of the 11 & 12 Vict. c. 115, and formerly the Property of the "Irish Reproductive Loan Fund Institution," and not disposed of; and how the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury proposed to dispose of that Money for the benefit of the Poor?
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that a balance of about £23,000 remained available. The Act provided for the mode of its administration, but he was not aware that any precise decision had been made with regard to its disposal. An application had been put forward to the Government to aid the present flax movement in Ireland by sending Inspectors to instruct the agriculturists; but the Government obviously could not take upon themselves the responsibility of selecting proper persons and setting them their work. Another plan was under consideration, whereby it might be possible to give some assistance for that purpose to local authorities properly constituted. He could not yet say whether that plan would be adopted or not; or, of course, from what fund, in the event of its being given, the assistance might come.

  VESTRY CESS ABOLITION (IRELAND) BILL— [No 19.]—SECOND READING.
  EARL ST. GERMANS moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.
  THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREsaid, that he approved of the object of the Bill, but he objected to the fourth clause, which would affect the whole system of the Poor Law in Ireland. The object of that clause was discussed by the Committee of the House of Commons which sat two years ago, and was almost unanimously rejected. With the insertion of this clause the Bill went beyond its title, and unless the noble Earl agreed to have it considered on bringing up the Report, he should move its omission in Committee to-morrow.
  EARL ST. GERMANSsaid, the Bill only enabled the Boards of Guardians to do what the vestries were enabled to do at present. The power of providing coffins for the poor existed in England, and it was not abused. He believed there was even less danger of that power being abused in Ireland, where the people were very desirous of having their friends buried respectably. He should do what he could to meet the wishes of the noble Earl.
  Motion agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow

THE AUSTRIAN FLEET.

  QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, that in the absence of the noble Earl at the head of the Foreign Office, he would ask the noble Earl the Lord President of the Council, Whether he had observed in the Correspondence from Malta, published to-day, that three Austrian vessels of war—a 50-gun frigate, a corvette of 22 guns, and a gunboat—had left Malta, it was stated, for Gibraltar and the Baltic. If that was so, they were now coming up the Channel with a westerly wind, and a week hence might he assisting in the attack upon Fredericia and Alsen. He should like to know whether the Government was acquainted with this circumstance, and whether any measures had been adopted in consequence?
  THE DUKE OF SOMERSETwas understood to say, that he believed the vessels referred to by the noble Earl had left Malta for Gibraltar; but beyond that he had no information,
  THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, that it was stated that their sailing instructions were for Gibraltar and the Baltic.
  House adjourned at a quarter before Six o'clock, till to-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.