Lords Sitting of 23 May 1865

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—On River Shannon (Navigation and Drainage) nominated. (see p. 628.)
Report—Office of Clerk of the Parliaments and Office of Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, Second Report * (120).
Second Reading—Mortgage Debentures (107); War Department Tramway (Devon) * [H.L.]
Committee—Companies Workmens' Education(121) [H.L.]; Pilotage Order Confirmation * (67); Public Offices (Site and Approaches) * (68); India Office (Site and Approaches) * (69); Pheasants (Ireland) * (109); Tories, Robbers, and Rapparees * (96).
Report—Public Offices (Site and Approaches) * (68); India Office (Site and Approaches) * (69); Pheasants (Ireland) * (109); Tories, Robbers, and Rapparees (Ireland) * [96].
Third Reading—Exchequer Bonds (£1,000,000),* and passed.

THE PATENT OFFICE. APPOINTMENT OF MR. EDMUNDS.

  EXPLANATION.
  LORD ST. LEONARDSsaid, he de sired to make an explanation of a somewhat personal character in reference to the part he had taken in the appointment of Mr. Edmunds. He found, upon looking over the evidence given before their Lordships' Committee upon the Edmunds case, that,
  718
  in answer to the Earl of Clarendon, the Master of the Rolls said he did not know exactly in what year the office of Clerk to the Commissioners of Patents was created, but he knew that Mr. Edmunds was appointed by Lord St. Leo nards—he believed under the statute of 1852. The fact was that under the Act constituting the Commission the power of making appointments was granted to three of the Commissioners, one of which number must be the Lord Chancellor or the Master of the Rolls. He could not recollect the meeting to which the learned Master of the Rolls referred in his evidence, but he was not in any way complaining of the statement. He had writ ten to the Master of the Rolls, who, in reply, stated that he never meant to imply that there had been any irregularity in the appointment of Mr. Edmunds. The fact was that Mr. Edmunds had been Clerk of the Patents for many years before the Commission was appointed, having received the appointment in 1833, and when it became necessary to appoint a Clerk to the Commissioners it appeared only fair that Mr. Edmunds should have that appointment, and it was regularly made with the concurrence of the two other Commissioners.
  LORD CHELMSFORDwas sure it had never been intended to impute to his noble and learned Friend that he had either made an appointment which was beyond his authority, nor that he had made an appointment which was not justifiable.

  COMPANIES WORKMENS' EDUCATION BILL—(No. 121.)—COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to Order.)
  In answer to Earl GRANVILLE.
  THE ARCHBISHOP OF YORKsaid, he believed that by law public companies were not competent to vote any portion of their funds to purposes other than those for which they were incorporated, except by a unanimous vote of their members, and that they could not, therefore, vote any money on account of education or worship.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the law as stated by the most rev. Prelate was correct. It was competent to any company to divert the corporate funds to other than corporate purposes. Nothing, in fact, was more common than applications to the Court of Chancery praying for in junctions to restrain companies from apply-

  719
  ing their funds to other than corporate objects. Such a Bill as that introduced by the most rev. Prelate, therefore, was necessary to effect the required alteration in the state of the law.
  Amendments made; The principal of which were that the appropriation of money and land should be made by the votes of three-fourths, instead of three-fifths, of the shareholders, and the land to be appropriated in perpetuity was limited to one acre.
  The Report thereof to he received on Monday next; and Bill to be printed as amended (No. 121).

MORTGAGE DEBENTURES BILL—(No. 107.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE, in rising to move the second reading of this Bill, said, its object was to enable certain companies to issue mortgage debentures founded on securities upon or affecting law. A Bill having a similar object had been introduced into the House of Commons last Session as a Private Bill, and passed that House; but when it reached the House of Lords his noble Friend the Chairman of Committees objected to its progress on the ground that it should have been brought in as a Public instead of a Private Bill. It was decided that it should be treated as a public measure, and as such it was passed by the House of Lords, after having been carefully examined by a Select Committee, and sent down to the House of Commons, but at so late a period in the Session that it could not be dealt with, and therefore dropped. He assumed that there was no objection to the principle of the Bill. It differed only very slightly in one or two points from the Bill of last Session, and he begged to move that it be now read a second time.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Donoughnore.)
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, he would not have troubled their Lordships with any observations if this Bill had been precisely the same as that of last Session. But it was, in fact, a very different Bill in several important particulars. The Bill introduced last Session contemplated the issue of debentures by companies of very substantial and solid character, with shares of not less than £50 each, and with a paid-up capital
  720
  of £100,000 at least, being not less than one-tenth nor more than one-half of their nominal subscribed capital. Moreover, their transactions were to be limited to dealings in such securities alone as would justify the issue of debentures thereon, whereas by this Bill the company issuing debentures might lend money on any, even on personal security only. The effect of this Bill probably would be that they would have companies created, of anything but a substantial character, lending money in all directions, and involving them selves in considerable liabilities, and these mortgage debentures once issued might continue in circulation after the company had ceased to be solvent. Unless the provisions of the Bill were materially modified he should certainly oppose it in its future stages. This was a question of much more importance than was generally considered. He did not think it had been sufficiently considered even by the Government. Great care should be taken that the companies intrusted with the powers of this Bill should be of the soundest and most undeniable character.
  THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGHsaid, the principle of the present Bill had been very carefully considered, and assented to by their Lordships last year. The principle was admitted to be a most beneficial one, enabling landowners to obtain money for the improvement of their estates on mortgage upon easy terms, without en countering the legal and other difficulties which now encompassed every transaction of that kind. It was fully considered last year in connection with the very useful Bill of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack to enable landowners to charge their estates with improvements on the certificate of the Landed Estates Court. Formerly, it was necessary for a landowner to go to one of two companies, and through their agency to effect the charge which would enable him to make the desired improvement. This Bill would now enable him to effect the improvement, and on receiving the certificate of the Inclosure Commissioners to create a charge on his estate, which he would be able to take to any banking office, or company, or person having money to lend, sell the charge, and reimburse his expenditure. It was very important, he thought, that respectable companies of this kind should be established to enable landowners to take advantage of the most useful Act of last year. It was very unadvisable that landowners

  721
  should be confined to one or two companies in order to obtain the funds necessary for the improvement of their estates. The principle of the Bill was virtually the same as that of the Bill brought forward by his noble Friend the Chairman of Committees last year, and it gave this additional security, that, instead of the securities on which the debentures would be issued being deposited with the company, they were under this Bill to be deposited in the Land Registry Office. He thought that the objection of the noble Lord the Chairman of Committees was one which would have been better reserved for the Committee, in which he (the Duke of Marlborough) would probably give it his support.
  LORD ST. LEONARDSsaid, that if the Bill were really for the benefit of the landed proprietors it should have his warmest support; but he thought they were getting into a new mode of dealing with money and property, and with trade and commerce, which called for serious consideration. Instead of private persons engaging individually in the pursuits of trade and commerce, they were forming large companies with limited liability; and the fear was that in this way the country would lose the advantage of individual energy and enterprize, while there would be large companies continually drawing upon the community for money and capital to carry on their concerns. In fact, men were driven out of business by these great companies. All the tendency now was to have their Credits Fonciers and their Credits Mobiliers after the French pattern. They had companies with very small capital which operated on the public welfare in a very peculiar way. To enable them to judge of the probable working of that Bill, their Lordships ought to know what was the number and what the nature of the companies who were likely to avail themselves of the privileges it I conferred. Let them take the case of a company under this Bill with £100,000 of capital, of which only £10,000 was paid up. There would thus be £90,000 remaining uncalled for—and it should be remembered that sometimes when calls were made they might be made in vain. But the company might lend at interest its £10,000 of paid up capital upon security, and there would be a valuation of the property. Then it might borrow, upon what the Bill described as mortgage debentures, another £10,000, secured upon the mortgage for its first loan to the like
  722
  amount. And what would be the effect of these mortgage debentures upon the money market? Now, would they interfere with the floating debt of the country? The process became not a bonâ fide trade of buying and selling, but a game of lending and borrowing without any effectual check. Having obtained these securities, the company would then borrow another £10,000, and that £10,000 being money in hand, it would lend it again upon other securities. That was the second time it would have turned its capital. When they had got their new securities for the second £10,000 they would then issue further mortgage debentures to that amount. And so that company might go on borrowing and lending ad infinitum. True, it was provided by the Bill that the Company must have an equal value of securities with their mort gage bonds; but the value of a property differed at different periods, being affected by fire, tempests, and floods. The only check provided by the Bill was that there must be a corresponding value of securities and bonds; and it would practically amount to nothing. Again, as soon as money had been lent by these companies, and they had got any given number of securities for it, those securities would form one fund, which would become liable for the whole of the mortgage debentures. This requires explanation. The first mortgage bonds of the company would be issued upon the security of the first mortgage to them, but any future loans by them would be issued on the security of all the mortgages to them. Even upon the first mortgage to them it might not be agreeable to find that £50 shareholders—the tradesmen of your neighbourhood probably—had a mortgage on your property, nor where you borrowed £5,000 might you like to find that your property was thrown into a common fund of all the company's securities and charged with them to it may be £100,000. When the mortgage debentures were issued, they were intended to circulate throughout the country; and if they are not paid, the owner would be at liberty to go to the Court of Chancery, when a receiver would be appointed, and all the securities of the company were to be called in and sold. In such case he needed not to tell their Lordships how much money would remain to be divided among the mortgage debtors, and the unfortunate borrowers would with out any default of their own be plunged into prolonged litigation with numerous parties wholly unknown to them. More-

  723
  over, if landowners pledged their estates in this way they would sap the foundation of settlements. He believed that young men would avail themselves of the Bill for the purpose of raising money, and thus involve themselves in transactions tending to encumber their property beyond relief. There was likewise no direction in the Bill as to how any surplus was to be accounted for; but care was taken to pro vide by one of the clauses that the mort gage debentures should be no specific charge on the property or effects of the company. There were provisions in the Bill authorizing trustees to lend their trust moneys on these mortgage debentures; which Government ought not to sanction.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that as the Bill had come up from the House of Commons, he thought it advisable to read it a second time, with the understanding that the various provisions would receive careful consideration in Committee.
  On Question, agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

CASE OF CATHERINE GAUGHAN.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  EARL GRANVILLEasked the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Westmeath), to postpone his notice relative to the case of Catherine Gaughan.
  THE MARQUESS OF WESTMEATH, who had given Notice
  "To call the Attention of the House to the Papers laid upon the Table respecting the Case of Catherine Gaughan; and to inquire why the Decision of the Inspector General of Constabulary of the 28th of February last for the Removal of Sub-Inspector Burke, Constable Cassidy, and Sub-Constables M'Cormack, Sweeny, and Kelly has not been carried out,"
  said, this Motion had been upon the paper of their Lordships' House for a consider able time; a week ago a similar appeal was made to him by the noble Earl, to which he (the Marquess of Westmeath) had readily consented; and he should have been glad to accede to his noble Friend's request now, as he wished to show the same courtesy to the leader of the Government as the noble Earl had always shown to every one: but this case showed such an indifference to justice on the part of the officials in Ireland that he could not consent to postpone the statement any further. Indeed, many might be of the opinion that there was no Government in Ireland. There was the name but
  724
  not the reality, and the whole concern might be supposed to go on of itself. The Lord Lieutenant received his salary, and the tide ebbed and flowed in Dublin Bay, but there was no Government. The present Government had evinced a very fair spirit in their distribution of patronage. There had been a copious distribution of places among Roman Catholics; and, perhaps, the Government was justified by the manner in which their appointments had been conferred. But the Protestant population had also a right to expect that their feelings would be attended to and respected, and thus when they appealed to the courts for justice, and had judgment in their favour, the decisions would be carried out honestly and fairly. The case which he was about to mention was that of a female of about twenty years of age, who, born of Irish parents in Scot land, returned to the native place of her parents who were dead. She met with in human treatment from her remaining relatives because she had dared to change her religion and desired to read the Bible. A priest was brought to her and did his utmost to influence her, but he failed to change her determination. Her relatives collected a mob about her who dragged her along the stones by the hair; but after a time she took refuge in a house. A gentleman of the name of Simpson appealed to the police to prevent further outrage, but the only answer which he and others who interfered got was that it was a family affair, and therefore they would not interfere. The girl continued in the house, where they wanted to keep her, and was only released by a warrant from a magistrate, obtained by a Protestant minister; and this being so, their Lordships could judge of the character of the excuse that was offered by the police for not interfering. The true reason was that all the police but one were Roman Catholics, and they were determined that they would give her no protection. The matter was investigated by a court composed of four magistrates, two Protestant and two Roman Catholic. The investigation took place during four days, and the magistrates unanimously convicted the parties who were involved in this atrocity. The charge against the police was that of gross neglect of duty, and the Court said that sub-Inspector Burke was the person principally responsible; but he being a Government officer, they left the matter in the hands of the Government to deal with him as they thought fit. They

  725
  had also fined him £2, and two others were fined a few shillings each. The matter having been brought under the attention of the Inspector General, he expressed his surprise at the want of zeal of the officers, and directed the removal of the sub-Inspector to Longford at his own expense. The constables were, no doubt, equally responsible, and the excuse which they gave, that it was a family quarrel, the Inspector General said was absurd. These constables had clearly forsworn themselves, for their oath was, under all circumstances, to support the law, and pre serve the peace; and yet in the broad day light they left this poor Protestant girl to be nearly murdered because she had changed her religion. The Inspector General also, like a "great swell"—to use a vulgar expression—denounced the conduct of the officers, and then removed the principal offender into a better situation by way of punishment. The Lord Lieutanant had also sworn to uphold the laws, and he could not but know of this matter. He had hoped that the Lord Lieutenancy would have been before this abolished, for there was no reason for the office being continued. In truth, the Lord Lieutenant received £20,000 for doing nothing except keeping up a pinchbeck Court which no body respected. It was extremely painful to the Irish that a second-class placeman should stand between them and their Sovereign; and he would ask whether they were to be "hewers of wood and drawers of water" until the end of time? Were they not to receive the same consideration as the English, Welsh and Scotch? He knew he was excited when speaking of these matters, for he had warm-hearted feelings as an Irishman. There was no part of the trans action to which he bad referred which was not a disgrace to everybody concerned; and though the noble Earl had been informed, and no doubt believed, that there had not been sufficient time for inquiry, he (the Marquess of Westmeath) could not concur with that view, for the transaction took place on the 26th of January so that there had been plenty of time for inquiry.
  VISCOUNT LIFFORDthought the noble Marquess had made out a primâ facie case affecting the liberty of the subject, and, therefore, if the noble Earl could give any information he trusted that it would not be withheld.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he had re quested the noble Marquess to postpone his Motion until information could be re-
  726
  ceived from Ireland. He could only repeat that he was not in a position to give an answer then. An inquiry into the circum stances referred to had been ordered, but the result had not yet been communicated to him.

IMPRISONMENT OF BRITISH SUBJECTS IN ABYSSINIA.

  MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
  LORD CHELMSFORDrose to move for an Address for Copies of Letters and Papers relating to the imprisonment of British Subjects in Abyssinia; specifying in detail the documents which he required; and also for an account of the presents sent with a letter from Her Majesty the Queen to the Emperor of Abyssinia. The noble and learned Lord said, that he could not help expressing his regret that the noble Earl the Secretary for Foreign Affairs had determined to refuse the production of the papers to which the Motion referred; because this being so he should have to trespass on their Lordships' time with some observations which he believed would prove satisfactorily that he was en titled to ask for those papers, and that the noble Earl was not justified in his refusal. Those papers related to a subject that was calculated to excite universal and painful sympathy. It seemed to him a remarkable circumstance that the public should be left in almost entire ignorance; of the fact that for more than eighteen months many of our fellow countrymen, including missionaries and a British Consul, had been languishing in Abyssinian prisons, exposed to great indignities, amounting to torture, and their friends, at the present moment, being unaware of their actual I condition, though knowing that their imprisonment still continued. He was compelled to say that all this misery and I suffering had been, if not produced, certainly prolonged, by most extraordinary carelessness and want of judgment on the part of the Foreign Office; and he was not surprised, under these circumstances, that the noble Earl should desire to delay all inquiry into this subject, because he hoped day after day to receive information of the release of these unhappy persons, and then, of course, the observation would be made, "What is the use of now discus sing the question when every complaint is actually removed by the release of the prisoners." There was also another mode adopted to deter persons from entering

  727
  upon any discussion of this question. It was constantly stated that the Emperor of Abyssinia (for "Emperor" was his proper title) was cognizant of all their proceedings, and that if anything were said in Parliament to which he objected, it was likely to operate to the prejudice of those unfortunate persons. Notwithstanding the warning which had been given, undertaking, as he did, the serious responsibility of all the consequences of his Motion, he thought that he was entitled to call upon the noble Bail to state explicitly and distinctly which of all these papers for which the present Motion was made—and of which he had given a precise and correct description—was likely to compromise a single individual, or to prejudice in the slightest degree the case of these persons. In order that their Lordships might understand the grounds upon which he demanded these papers, he must enter into a brief history of previous facts. The elevation to the throne of the present Emperor of Abyssinia, by whose orders these imprisonments had taken place, occurred in February, 1855. He had been a soldier of fortune, and had opened his way to the throne with his sword. Previous to his accession there had been a race of Emperors who were in a state of utter dependence; some external homage was paid to them by reason of an imaginary descent from King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, but in reality they were puppets in the hands of two or three powerful vassals. One family had succeeded in securing the dignity of Vizier of the Empire, and they were sovereigns in all but name. One of these in 1849 entered into a treaty of friendship and commerce with this country, in the name of the Emperor; that treaty was ratified in 1852, and a copy of it was laid upon the tables of both Houses of Parliament in that year. There were two Articles in that treaty that had a most important bearing upon the case now before their Lordships. By the second and third Articles it was stipulated that for the purpose of preserving and strengthening friendly relations between the two nations, His Majesty the Emperor of Abyssinia and his successors would receive and protect any Ambassador, Envoy, or Consul whom Her Britannic Majesty might think fit to send to Abyssinia, and that Her Britannic Majesty would receive and protect any Ambassador, Envoy, or Consul whom His Majesty the Emperor of Abyssinia should send. At the time of the
  728
  accession of the present Emperor, Mr. Plowden had been for many years our Consul at Massowah, a port in the Red Sea, within the Turkish dominions. There had been no accredited agent to Abyssinia, but Mr. Plowden was intrusted with presents to the ruling power in Abyssinia. He went with these presents and remained in Abyssinia, taking part with the Government in assisting to suppress a rebellion, and on the accession of the present Emperor he continued his services to that potentate. He was actively employed in putting down the rebellion in the empire, and he (Lord Chelmsford) believed that the course he pursued was, if not approved, certainly not condemned by the home authorities. In 1860 while Mr. Plowden was proceeding with a small party, he was attacked by a superior force of rebels, was wounded, and taken prisoner; but he was afterwards ransomed by the Emperor and subsequently died of his wounds. On the arrival of intelligence of Mr. Plowden's death in this country, Captain Cameron, now one of the prisoners, who there held some consulate in the Black Sea, was appointed to succeed him. By some circumstances which were not necessary to be mentioned, Captain Cameron was not able to reach Abyssinia until 1862. He was the bearer of presents to the Sovereign, and he found when he arrived at Gondar, the capital, that the Emperor was in the field against the rebels, lie went to his camp in October, 1862, delivered his presents, and met with a favourable reception. From that time Captain Cameron continued to live in Abyssinia in the way his predecessors had done. During the reign of the preceding Sovereign, and while the power of the Vizier who had concluded the treaty was in the ascendant, he contemplated carrying out the Treaty of 1849 by sending an Embassy to this country. This was postponed in consequence of his fall; but it was resumed on the accession of the present Emperor; and on the arrival of Consul Cameron the Emperor expressed his earnest desire that the treaty should be carried out; and in October or November, 1862, he wrote an autograph letter to Her Majesty the Queen, the contents of which they had from the observations of the noble Earl on a former occasion—a letter requesting permission to send an Embassy to this country. That letter was intrusted to Consul Cameron to

  729
  despatch to England. His journey to the coast was intercepted by a party of rebels; and when he arrived at Massowah he had to send the letter by a circuitous way to Aden, so that it only arrived in this country in February, 1863. When Consul Cameron had despatched this important letter he went to Bogos, understanding that there had been an invasion of that territory by some neighbouring chiefs, in tending to pursue the same policy that his predecessor had adopted. But a different view seemed to have been taken of the course to be pursued by Consul Cameron—he received from the Consul General of Egypt orders to return to his post at Massowah, and not interfere further with the internal affairs of Abyssinia. He (Lord Chelmsford) was not finding fault with this—he was merely stating the fact; but that circumstance was the first occasion of any displeasure by the Emperor towards Consul Cameron. Of course, it was not likely that the total neglect to at tend to the autograph letter of the Emperor which reached this country in February, 1862, should be calculated to appease the anger of the Sovereign, and unfortunately circumstances soon occurred to kindle it afresh. There was a missionary station in Abyssinia, established by Mr. Stern, who had been sent out by the Society for Promoting Christianity amongst the Jews. Mr. Stern had paid a visit to this country, and had gone back to Abyssinia, accompanied by a Mr. and Mrs. Rosenthal. Not having seen the Sovereign of Abyssinia since his return, in September 1863, Mr. Stern waited upon the Emperor, accompanied by two interpreters, the servants of an other missionary, and of Consul Cameron. In the course of the interview the Emperor was dissatisfied with the manner in which these servants interpreted the address. His anger broke out against them, and by his order they were so severely beaten with rods that the unfortunate men expired the same night. Mr. Stern was naturally excited at this; he could not conceal his feelings; he put his thumb in his mouth (which was interpreted by the Emperor as signifying a threat of vengeance); he was also ordered to be beaten; and his life was in consider able danger. He was afterwards sent down to Gondar, and placed in prison there. In November, 1863, twelve months after the receipt of Consul Cameron's letter, the Emperor sent a body of troops
  730
  to the missionary station, seized all the missionaries there, loaded them with chains, and put them in prison. He also seized Consul Cameron, imprisoned him, and loaded him with chains; and afterwards he was chained day and night to an Abyssinian soldier. These things having taken place, a Great Court was assembled for the trial of prisoners on the 20th of November, the offenders being Messrs. Stern and Rosenthal. Mr. Stern, unfortunately for him, had published a pamphlet in which he had characterized the mutilations and tortures of certain rebels, who had been taken prisoners by the Emperor of Abyssininia, as a cold-blooded murder, and Mr. Rosenthal had said that it was better to live under the rule of the Turks than under the Abyssinians. The prisoners were brought forward, and after their examination the Emperor caused to be read out a list of his victories, to the number of thirty—a table of his descent from King Solomon, and the Queen of Sheba, and a portion of the Abyssinian code, which was founded upon that of Justinian, which declared death to be the punishment for reviling a sovereign. The members of the Council were consulted as to the punishment to be awarded to the prisoners. Some of them were for inflicting the punishment of death; but milder counsels prevailed, and it was ordered that they should be re-committed to prison, and again loaded with chains from 15lb. to 20lb. weight. At this critical time, when everything was conspiring to exasperate the Emperor of Abyssinia—when twelve months had elapsed, and no answer had been given to his autograph letter, and no notice taken of it—two days after this Great Court was held, a Despatch arrived from the Foreign Office to Consul Cameron, not accompanied by any letter of acknowledgment of the Emperor's letter, directing Consul Cameron to return to his post at Massowah, and giving him some thing like a reprimand for his absence. It may easily be imagined how highly the Emperor was incensed by this contemptuous disregard of the applications he had made. His anger fell, unfortunately, with full weight on Consul Cameron; he was loaded with heavier chains; he was chained to a native night and day; and his imprisonment was made much more rigorous. At length Consul Cameron contrived to get a letter despatched to Massowah, which reached this country, he (Lord Chelmsford) believed, in February, 1864. That letter contained one important passage, to the

  731
  effect that there would be no chance for the liberation of the prisoners until an answer was returned to the Emperor's letter. How soon that letter was received by the Foreign Office he (Lord Chelmsford) was unable to say; but at least eighteen months from the time when the autograph letter of the Emperor was written, and sixteen months after that letter had been received at the Foreign Office, it occurred to the noble Earl the Secretary of State that it might be as well to take some notice of it; and accordingly a letter was prepared, under the Sign Manual of Her Majesty, and when that letter was prepared it was sent out for the purpose of being delivered. Now he (Lord Chelmsford) I might ask here, as he had done on a former occasion, if it was thought right to send a letter in the month of June, 1864, why it was unfortunately not thought right and proper to have sent a letter soon after February, 1863, when the Emperor's communication was received at the Foreign Office? He (Lord Chelmsford) had put the question to the noble Earl on a former occasion, and he thought it was but due to the noble Earl that he should make the House acquainted with the answer. The noble Earl seemed to think that he had displayed a great amount of simplicity in supposing that there could be that diplomatic Despatch which he had anticipated. The noble Earl said—
  "The noble and learned Lord seemed to think that it was a very easy thing to give an answer to that letter. The letter asked permission to send an Embassy to this country. The state of Abyssinia was very unsettled, and the King complained of encroachments on his territory by Turks and Egyptians, and wished the English and French to take his part if war broke out. Her Majesty's Government by no means desired to take part in such a war, and it was therefore matter of consideration what answer should he given, and the Secretary for India was instructed to pause be fore returning an answer."
  The noble Earl had certainly shown a great deal of ingenuity in making allusion to the expected war with the Turks and the Egyptians, as the letter, according to his own statement, contained no allusion to anything of the kind. The letter was a letter merely asking permission to send an I Embassy of friendship and amity to this country, and he should have thought a day or two would have been quite sufficient time to frame an answer. But even sup-posing that the suggested difficulties existed, the wisdom of Government should, he thought, have been adequate to preparing an answer in a month, but it was only
  732
  after sixteen months that the Government could make up their minds that it was necessary to return an answer at all to the Sovereign of that country. He need not tell their Lordships that this delay had occasioned great irritation on the part of the Emperor, and he attributed much of the miseries and privations of these unhappy persons to the conduct of the Foreign Office. But the mischief was done, and when the Government had resolved to send out an answer, the circumstances, he thought, were such as should have induced them very carefully to consider what sort of message should be sent to appease the offended Emperor. He (Lord Chelmsford) ventured to express on a former occasion an opinion that it would have been expedient to have sent out a message by an Englishman of some station, with proper attendants, and with presents, which were the usual means of approaching an Eastern Sovereign. The noble Earl was certainly told that there was one per son quite ready to undertake the mission with every prospect of success. This gentleman was Dr. Beke, who had written a pamphlet respecting Abyssinia, who was very well acquainted with the country, and who certainly made an offer to the noble Earl to undertake this mission. He (Lord Chelmsford) had a copy of the letter of Dr. Beke, addressed to one of Consul Cameron's relations, from which he would read the following passage:—
  "In answer to your inquiry of the 19th instant, as to whether it is true that I offered to go to Abyssinia with a view to the liberation of Captain Cameron and the other British captives in that country, I beg leave to say that I wrote to Earl Russell offering my services for that purpose on the 18th of March, 1864, and that I repeated my offer on the 18th of May, 1864,and that I renewed it on the 13th of February, 1865. Had my offer been accepted, I have not the slightest doubt I should have been successful."
  Whether the writer was rather sanguine in his expectations or whether he was exactly the person that should have been selected for the mission, he (Lord Chelmsford) would not offer any opinion; but this he knew, that a very distinguished officer who had before been employed in diplomatic missions, was quite ready to under take the duty, Sir William Coghlan, from whom a letter had been received, in which he stated—
  "It is a mistake to say that I objected to be named in connection with the Abyssinian difficulty; on the contrary, I am ready at the shortest notice to make any effort which Her Majesty's Government may be pleased to call on me for to-

  733
  wards its solution; and I may add that my readiness is known to Her Majesty's Government, and to many persons with whom I have discussed the question."
  But instead of Sir William Coghlan, who was an Englishman, the person who unfortunately was chosen by the Foreign Office was Mr. Rassam, who was believed to be an Armenian. He had been of great assistance to Mr. Layard in his excavations at Ninevah; he was the assistant to the Political Resident at Aden, and no doubt a man of great ability, and one who might have been well intrusted with any other mission than this; but the fact of his being an Asiatic, and not a European, was entirely against any hope of success. The result proved the truth of what he (Lord Chelmsford) stated. Mr. Rassam arrived at Massowah in August last, intrusted with a letter under the Sign Manual of the Queen. He announced his arrival, but the Sovereign refused to receive the letter. Mr. Rassam remained at Massowah from August to November; and when two Abyssinians were sent down from Gondar for the purpose of ascertaining what sort of mission had been sent out, they found Mr. Rassam alone and without attendants, for the medical gentleman who accompanied him happened to be absent. These envoys re turned to Gondar and reported "the naked ness of the land" and up to this moment Mr. Rassam remained without a chance of having an audience with the Emperor, or an opportunity of delivering the letter. The noble Earl, on a former occasion, said—
  "Some persons thought that if a magnificent mission were sent out with a number of presents the prisoners might be liberated, but the obvious inference would be that the way to obtain respect and consideration from this country would be to imprison one of our Consuls."
  Now, he had never asked the noble Earl to send out a magnificent mission; but he did suggest that, under the circumstances in which this country was placed, it was absolutely necessary to take care that a pro per and respectable mission should be sent out, having at its head an Englishman of some station, and that presents ought to he sent. Now, he understood that the Foreign Office had at last become convinced of the necessity of approaching the King with presents, for, as he was informed, 500 stands of arms had been sent to be presented to the Sovereign of Abyssinia, either to accompany the delivery of the letter intrusted to Mr. Rassam or some
  734
  other letter sent by some other person. He thought he was entitled to ask, if it was improper to send presents to the King be fore, how did it become proper to send these 500 stands of arms now? And if it was proper to send presents now, why were they not sent before? Mr. Rassam had up to this time not been allowed access to the Abyssinian Court; and the miseries suffered by the prisoners were attributable, first to the carelessness of the Foreign Office, and next to their want of judgment. The noble Lord might say, what would you have us do? Would you have us use force against the Emperor of Abyssinia? The noble Lord on a former occasion said the Government had never thought it advisable to use or threaten force, and the King was informed that if the captives were liberated no reparation would be required. They were accustomed to the diplomatic language of the noble Lord, but he should have thought that this looked something like a threat because "if the captives were liberated no reparation would be required," seemed to imply that if they were not liberated reparation would be required. He thought they were placed in a painful and humiliating position. What must be the feelings of the Emperor of Abyssinia to wards this country when he found that he could with impunity imprison and torture British subjects, and without any intervention on the part of the Government? The noble Lord had contrived to lower the country in the eyes of Europe and America, and he was now doing his best to degrade us in Africa. He asked the House if he had not made out a case which demanded that these papers should be produced. The noble and learned Lord then Moved—
  "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for, Copies of Letters and Papers relating to the Imprisonment of British Subjects in Abyssinia—namely—

  "1. Copy of Instructions to Captain Cameron, British Consul at Massowah, upon his proceeding to his Consulate; and a List of the Presents which he was ordered to deliver to The King of Abyssinia:

  "2. Copy of Letter written by Captain Cameron on or about October or November, 1862, on the Subject of a proposed Embassy from The King of Abyssinia, with the Reply (if any) to such Letter:

  "3. Copy of Autograph Letter of The King of Abyssinia to Her Majesty the Queen, and Statement of the Time when such Letter was received at the Foreign Office:

  "4. Copy of Report made by Captain Cameron from Bogos on or about March, 1863, and of the

  735
  Orders in consequence of such Report sent to him by the Consul General in Egypt or from the Foreign Office:

  "5. Copy of Letter ordering Captain Cameron to return to his Consulate at Massowah, which Letter arrived at Gondar about November, 1863:

  "6. The Date of any Letter under Her Majesty's Sign Manual addressed to The King of Abyssinia in acknowledgment of His Autograph Letter, and the Name and Nation of the Person employed to deliver the same:

  "7. Account of the Presents sent to the King of Abyssinia to accompany the Delivery of such Letter:

  "8. Copies of all Letters sent to the Foreign Office containing Offers of Assistance to obtain the Liberation of the British Subjects imprisoned in Abyssinia."

  EARL RUSSELLsaid, that when the noble and learned Lord rose, he felt a good deal of curiosity to know whether his object was to throw blame on the Foreign Secretary and Foreign Office, or to be of use to the unfortunate persons who were imprisoned and still detained by the King of Abyssinia. He had come to the conclusion, looking to the tenor of his speech, that the first was the object of the noble and learned Lord. He had repeated over and over again that he had to find fault with the carelessness and want of judgment of the Foreign Office; but with regard to these unhappy prisoners and the means of relieving them from their imprisonment, he had heard very little from the noble and learned Lord—certainly the noble and learned Lord had not pointed out any step that could be taken usefully for that purpose. Every person acquainted with these countries—every person who had been in Abyssinia—whom he had seen, had assured him that any information that was produced here, reached the Emperor of Abyssinia, and if there was anything in it tending to throw blame on that Sovereign, he was sure to visit it by increased restrictions and severities on the prisoners. He, therefore, held that if any increased restrictions and severities were imposed, the noble and learned Lord was responsible for having aggravated their situation. The noble and learned Lord had given a history of these transactions, from which he (Earl Russell) differed very little. He did not see the faults committed by the Foreign Office in this very difficult matter. The noble and learned Lord had stated that there were formerly sovereigns in Abyssinia who assumed to be descended from Solomon and the Queen of Sheba; but they had but a nominal power—they were only what the French called Mayors of the Palace—but the present Emperor Theodore, a success
  736
  ful soldier, had obtained the crown. The British officer who was Consul, had assisted the King in his civil wars; he was wounded and died of his wounds. The King went against the rebels, and a great number of them who surrendered were re fused quarter. He (Earl Russell) confessed that when he heard of the death of the Consul, and it became his duty to communicate it to Her Majesty, it did not appear to him to be expedient that Consuls sent by the British Government to Abyssinia should take part either in civil wars or in external hostilities waged by the Sovereign of that country against Egypt or any Turkish province. Captain Cameron, a distinguished officer, who had served under Sir Fenwick Williams, of Kars, was then sent as British Consul to Massowah, and he was received in a very courteous manner by the King of Abyssinia. In October, 1862, he was intrusted with a letter from the King for transmission to this country, stating that he was desirous of sending an embassy to this country. The noble and learned Lord said there had been carelessness in the way that letter was treated; but it was perfectly well known that the object of the King of Abyssinia was to obtain the assistance of France and England against the Viceroy of Egypt in regard to some territory which he thought was wrongfully withheld from him, and it occurred to him that it was better that the British Government should not interfere with those disputes, but should rather leave them alone; and he did not know whether he would be reproved by the noble and learned Lord for entertaining that opinion. He confessed that that letter ought to have been answered earlier; but be did not believe that that had anything to do with the imprisonment of Consul Cameron, or that it was connected, or connected in more than the slightest manner, with the subsequent acts of the King. His letter proposed to send an embassy to England. When the King of Abyssinia sent a message to the Emperor of the French, it appeared that he was afterwards very angry about the treatment he had received. That certainly showed that the Sovereign of Abyssinia was ready to make complaints when he did not receive the treatment which he thought due to his dignity; complaint was also made of the language used by M. Drouyn de Lhuys. It therefore seemed there was great danger that the King of Abyssinia might take offence at any

  737
  proceeding which he deemed not quite consistent with his dignity. The business of Consul Cameron was not to be a resident at the Court of King Theodore, or in any way to become a partizan in any wars or dispute, in which he might be engaged. His business was to return to Massowah and remain there as Consul. Instead of that he went away at one time, and went to the Court at Gondar. Consul Cameron, he conceived, was greatly in fault in going to the Court of Gondar. Mr. Stern, the missionary, had written in his paper reflections very injurious to the character of the King. That gentleman had been so ill-treated that his life was for some time in danger; and it was, perhaps, hardly to have been expected that the British Consul should altogether escape. For some reason or other, which he was unable to fathom, Consul Cameron was put in chains and confined with some other persons in prison. When that intelligence reached this country everybody at the Foreign Office was exceedingly anxious that pro per means should be devised to obtain his liberation. Any person might run as much risk as Mr. Stern if sent to the Court of Abyssinia. Sir William Coghlan, a very experienced officer, was the person to whom the Foreign Office immediately had recourse to learn what was best to be done. As he understood the opinion of Sir William Coghlan, it was that it was desirable that in the mission to Abyssinia—a mission of considerable importance—some officer of the army or navy and some scientific person should be attached to it, but that it was not advisable that that mission should be sent until the captives had been released. Although Sir William was ready to go himself at that time, still that was his decided opinion. Therefore Mr. Rassam went—a person who, though not a native-born Englishman, held the office of Assistant to the British Resident at Aden, and was, therefore, the second officer of the Government in that important dependency, and intrusted with the confidence of the resident and everybody else there. At a later time it was suggested that some military or naval officer would be treated with more respect; and he had therefore desired through the India Office that the resident at Aden should send a military officer to Massowah, and such an officer had been sent. The noble and learned Lord observed that if it was
  738
  desirable that the King's letter should be answered and presents sent, it should have been long before. That was a very easy thing to say; but the fact was, they certainly could not have foreseen that the Sovereign of Abyssinia would put their Consul in prison without any justification whatever. Were they to expect always that the Sovereign of an Eastern country would cast into prison the person whom they sent with a letter from Her Majesty? It should he remembered that Consul Cameron was intrusted with a letter, not proposing anything, but answering a communication which had been received, and when the Consul delivered that letter the transaction ought to have been at an end. Mr. Rassam had frequently written from Massowah, and he displayed good judgment and temper. He had sent more than one person to Gondar, and the answer always was, that the King was engaged in an expedition against the rebels, and it would be a long time before he returned to his capital. Very lately a person who represented himself to be, and who was believed to be, brother to the steward of the King of Abyssinia arrived at Massowah, and he stated that the imprisonment of the Consul was then very greatly alleviated. He should hope that when the Sovereign of Abyssinia returned to his capital, and became aware that Mr. Rassam, and an officer in Her Majesty's army were waiting with letters, he would receive those gentlemen. As for the papers moved for, he did not think that any one particular paper was likely to be a cause of aggravation; but the publication of the whole of them, accompanied, as it would be, by comments in this country unfavourable, no doubt, to the conduct of the Sovereign of Abyssinia, would probably cause these unfortunate prisoners to he treated with greater severity.
  On Question? Their Lorships divided.
  EARL GRANVILLE(who spoke from his place sitting, and covered) took notice that a noble Baron, Lord Ravens-worth, was not in the House when the Question was put, and he therefore moved that the noble Baron's vote be disallowed.
  THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he thought that was an objection which hardly ought to be pressed, but he would give the noble Earl the advantage of it. On the other hand, he would draw attention to another irregularity. A noble Peer (Lord Col-

  739
  chester) informed him that the Tellers left the Bar before he passed into the House, and that he followed them complaining that his vote had not been taken. He understood, also, that the Question was put before the Bar was ordered to be cleared, so that there was no time for a Peer who happened to be momentarily out of the House to return and hear the Question put, and it was in this way that his noble Friend (Lord Ravensworth) was prevented from hearing the putting of the Question. Under these circumstances he suggested that the proper course to pursue was to pass over the division which had just taken place and call for a fresh division.
  THE EARL OF BESSBOROUGHsaid, the Tellers waited for a moment or two, and if the noble Lord (Lord Colchester) chose to remain behind it was not their duty to remain.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he would not trouble their Lordships to divide on the Motion of the noble Earl opposite.
  Then, on Motion, it was resolved that the vote of Lord Colchester be received. The Numbers were then declared to be—Contents 43; Not-Contents 42: Majority 1.

  CONTENTS.

  Richmond, D

  Blayney, L

  Bolton L.

  Exeter, M.

  Castlemaine, L.

  Tweeddale, M.

  Chelmsford, L.

  Westmeath, M.

  Colchester, L.

  Colville of Culross, L. [Teller.]

  Amherst, E.

  Bandon, E.

  Delamere, L.

  Bantry, E.

  Denman, L

  Belmore, E

  Dunsany, L.

  Cadogan,E

  Feversham, L.

  Derby, E.

  Grinstead, L. (E. Enniskillen.)

  Graham, E. (D. Montrose.)

  Heytesbury, L.

  Hardwicke, E.

  Monson, L.

  Mayo, E.

  Moore, L. (M. Drogheda.)

  Nelson, E.

  Pomfret, E.

  Polwarth, L.

  Shrewsbury, E.

  Raglan, L.

  Redesdale, L.

  Hawarden, V. [Teller.]

  Rollo, L.

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore.)

  Strathspey, L. (E. Seafield.)

  Melville, V.

  Tredegar, L.

  Strathallan, V.

  Walsingham, L.

  Wynford, L.

  Blantyre, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Westbury, L. (L. Chancellor.)

  Caithness, E.

  Chichester, E.

  Clarendon, E.

  Cleveland, D.

  Cottenham, E.

  Saint Albans, D.

  De Grey, E.

  Somerset, D.

  Ducie, E.

  Granville, E.

  Normanby, M.

  Harrowby, E.

  740

  Russell, E.

  Dartrey, L. (L. Cremorne.)

  Saint Germans, E.

  Spencer, E.

  Foley, L. [Teller.]

  Granard, L. (E. Granard.)

  Eversley, V.

  Leigh, L.

  Stratford de Redcliffe, V.

  Methuen, L.

  Sydney, V.

  Oxenfoord, L. (E. Stair.)

  Torrington, V.

  Ponsonby, L. (E. Bessborough.) [Teller]

  Rivers, L.

  Durham, Bp.

  Seaton, L.

  Sefton, L. (E. Sefton.)

  Seymour, L. (E. St. Maur.)

  Aveland, L.

  Belper, L.

  Somerhill, L. (M. Clanricarde.)

  Camoys, L.

  Clandeboye, L. (L. Dufferin and Claneboye.)

  Stanley of Alderley, L.

  Truro, L.

  Wenlock, L.

  Cranworth, L.

  Wentworth, L.

  House adjourned at a quarter past Eight o'clock, to Friday next, half-past Ten o'clock.