Lords Sitting of 15 August 1867

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Consolidated Fund (Appropriation)*; Courts of Referees* (340); Hours of Labour Regulation* (341).
Second Reading—Companies Act (1862) Amendment (333); Investment of Trust Funds (246).
Report—Master and Servant* (334 & 342).
Third Reading—Local Government Supplemental (No. 6)* (239); Army Reserve* (320); Militia Reserve* (314); Public Works (Ireland)* (315), and passed.
Royal Assent—Representation of the People [30 & 31 Vict. c. 102]; Naval Knights of Windsor [30 & 31 Vict. c. 100]; Public Health (Scotland) [30 & 31 Vict. c. 101]; Masters and Workmen [300 & 31 Vict. c. 105]; Factory Acts Extension [30 & 31 Vict. c. 103]; Railways (Ireland) [30 & 31 Vict. c. 104].

THE LONDON, CHATHAM, AND DOVER RAILWAY (ARRANGEMENT) BILL.

  THIRD READING.
  LORD REDESDALE, in moving the third reading of this Bill, said he did so under protest, objecting to every part of it. He believed it to be the very worst measure he ever saw framed.
  LORD WESTBURYexpressed his regret that the noble Lord (the Chairman of Committees) should entertain such an opinion of the Bill, which must be regarded as one which proceeded on compromise and arrangement between the parties. Although much censure might be cast on the measure, much also would be cast on the law which rendered such legislation necessary, in order to supply a remedy which ought to be supplied in some more efficient manner. He admitted that he regarded the machinery of the measure as very defective; and there were two Amendments which, before the Bill passed, he should like to submit to the notice of the House. Clause 25 proposed that the consents to future proceedings of the mortgagees or debenture-holders should be necessary, but no machinery was provided for the purpose of ascertaining that those consents were duly given. He should move, therefore an addition to the clause by way of Amendment, to the effect that the certificate of a Justice of the Peace of the number of consents from time to time obtained by the company to their proceedings, and of the amount of the mortgages represented by such consents, should be sufficient evidence that those assents had been given.
  Bill read 3a.
  Then Lord WESTBURY'S Amendment moved.
  LORD REDESDALEthought the provision suggested by the noble and learned Lord was open to very great objection. The Bill would, he contended, be much better without it. The provisions of the Companies Act required that one-half the capital of the company should be paid up, but their Lordships all knew how that requirement had been complied with in the case of the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway. Sir Morton Peto gave a bit of paper on one side and got a receipt on the other, and the money was said to have been obtained when not a single shilling had been paid. Such was the manner in which the proceedings of the London, Chatham, and Dover Company were managed; and if the Amendment of the noble and learned Lord were agreed to, it would afford no protection to the rights of the parties concerned. He hoped, therefore, the Bill would be allowed to pass as it stood, and that the proof of the consents having been given would be left to be taken in some other way.
  LORD HYLTON, as Chairman of the Committee which sat on the Bill, entirely agreed with the noble Lord, as to the great laxity which seemed to have prevailed in regard to all those matters which it was required should be brought before a Justice in dealing with the affairs of the Company. The facts had been fully proved by the evidence before the Committee. Under those circumstances he could not help thinking that it would be better to reject the Amendment.
  LORD WESTBURYsaid, that if a Justice of the Peace were to grant a certificate in the absence of all evidence he would perform his duty in a most reprehensible manner. The Bill provided no machinery in its present shape to effect the object which he had in view, and if there were no person appointed who would interfere judicially for the purpose of ascertaining the facts, the Company would be left simply to the assertion of the Board of Management for the proof that the consents had been obtained.
  On Question? Resolved in the Negative.
  LORD WESTBURYbriefly adverted to some other provisions of the Bill, observing that when it came up to that House it contained a provision relieving the Imperial Mercantile Association from the operation of the suspending clauses. He proposed an Amendment for the purpose of protecting the interests of the Imperial Mercantile Association, and which he said had been agreed to by all the parties concerned.
  Lord HYLTONAfter a few words from Lord HYLTON,
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, he gave an unwilling assent to the introduction of the clause. It was true that one of the most disgraceful transactions that could occur had taken place. The authorities of this Railway Company had on the same day and in the same room mortgaged the same property to two different parties without the persons who were interested in advancing the several monies being aware of what had taken place. The whole of the provisions of that Bill proceeded on the extraordinary principle that all legal proceedings against the Company should be hung up for ten years, and the Imperial Mercantile Association had no more right to be excepted from the operation of that principle than any of the other creditors of the Railway Company. He agreed that these parties had been hardly dealt with. The transaction which made that clause necessary was one of the most disgraceful

  1539
  transactions which had ever taken place in the affairs of any company.
  Motion agreed to; Clause added to the Bill.
  Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

  INCREASE OF THE EPISCOPATE BILL. (No. 331.)
  (The Lord Lyttelton.)

  COMMONS' AMENDMENTS.
  Commons' Amendments considered (according to Order.)
  LORD LYTTELTONmoved that the Commons' Amendments be agreed to. The first consisted of the introduction of words into the first clause, providing that no scheme for the erection of a new see should take effect till the endowment was subscribed and paid. To that he did not object. The next were words in the fifth clause, proposed by a strong Liberal, who had so tender a regard for the dignity of the Church that he was shocked at the idea of a Bishop without a Chapter; he had therefore proposed that there should be a capitular body, but he had not required any endowment to be provided for them, or he allowed it to be of a merely nominal character. The House of Commons had varied the seventh clause, on the subject of the congé d'élire; but he had received a letter from Sir Roundell Palmer, to the effect that the use of the word "election" twice in the Bill, coupled with the general terms of the Act of Henry VIII., preserved the right so far as regarded future Bishops of the new sees. As to the funds of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, he had the opinion of Sir Roundell Palmer that no part of them could be applied to the purpose of founding new bishoprics; the original Episcopal Fund being applicable only to the purposes of the episcopate as it then existed. The omission of the Rotation clause, coupled with the provision that there should be no increase in the number of Bishops sitting in the House of Lords under the provision of the Bill, would prevent the new prelates from ever becoming Lords of Parliament. For his own part he assented to that arrangement; for he thought that the permanence of the connection between the right rev. Bench and the House of Lords would not be weakened by it. He attached so much importance to the recognition of the principle of an increase of the episcopacy that he trusted their
  1540
  Lordships would not offer any opposition, to Amendments which were not fatal to the principle. The appointment of Suffragan or Assistant Bishops would not, he hoped, be lost sight of, and he trusted that a proposition of that kind would be again brought forward.
  Moved, to agree to the Amendments made by the Commons in the said Bill.—(The Lord Lyttelton.)
  THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he had given his willing and cordial assent to the principle of the Bill as originally introduced by the noble Lord, because he felt, and still felt, that a moderate increase of the episcopacy was to be urgently desired for the advantage of the Established Church. He would not, however, treat so lightly as the noble Lord the Amendments made by the other House, because they appeared to him to change the whole character of the Bill, and to make it so utterly impracticable, that it would be almost impossible to assent to a measure so much altered, not only in its details, but also in its fundamental principles. At this time of the Session he knew that there would be little hope of passing the Bill if the Amendments of the other House were disagreed to, and that in such an event there would be little hope of obtaining the assent of the House of Commons or of passing the Bill. He did not support the proposition made in their Lordships' House that the minimum salary of these Bishops should be £4,200, because he thought that in fixing so high a minimum an additional difficulty would be placed in the way of obtaining the necessary subscriptions, more especially as their Lordships had decided that no portion of the Common Fund of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners should be applied to the increase of the episcopacy. By the Bill as it now stood the whole question was left in the hands of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. ["Lord LYTTELTON: With the consent of Parliament.] Yes, but see how it worked. They desired by private subscriptions to raise funds for providing a new bishopric. But what funds did they require? That point was left entirely in the dark. It was for the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to fix what income should be provided, and also whether and what income should be given to the capitular body. A landowner in Cornwall might be very anxious to raise funds for a Bishop for that county; but when he found that the whole question as to the amount of

  1541
  that fund was in the breast of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners he might take a different view of the question. If the Ecclesiastical Commissioners chose to say that the people of Cornwall should not have a Bishop unless they paid him £4,200 a year, and unless they provided him with a Dean and Chapter, he would feel great difficulty even in beginning to collect subscriptions. He could not consent to leave the matter exclusively in the irresponsible hands of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, subject only to a power in Parliament to object to their scheme; for while Parliament could object to a scheme it could not sanction a new scheme without the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. It seemed to him that these provisions raised insuperable difficulties in the way of working the principle of the measure. There was another serious objection and that was—that they were about to constitute an entirely new class of Bishops, and to draw a distinction which had never hitherto been made. He knew there was a general feeling that it would be inconvenient to increase the number of Bishops sitting in that House, and if there were any large number of new Bishops, and the principle of rotation were adopted, they might be kept waiting for seats until the right rev. Bench was filled with Prelates the most advanced in years, and, therefore, the least likely to attend to their laborious duties in Parliament. At present, as there was on the average a vacancy every year, no single Bishop appointed under the Bill would have to wait for more than about four years on an average. That was no extraordinary time to wait, and there would be no great inconvenience from the number kept waiting. Again, it would be very inconvenient that certain dioceses should be singled out for the purpose of never being episcopally represented in that House while there were certain dioceses that never ceased to be represented in the House. The Bishops of London, Durham, and Winchester always had seats in that House; but the other Bishops had not a seat until a vacancy occurred. A noble Lord had objected to the income of the new Bishops being reduced and left to the option of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, because he said he was afraid of what he considered the danger of translation. But if anything would encourage translation more than another, it was the creation of a class of Bishops with less incomes than the other members of the
  1542
  Episcopal Bench, and without the possibility of seats in the House of Lords. That was an objection not merely to the detail, but to the whole principle of the measure. With regard to the appropriation of the Common Fund, he must, of course, bow to the opinion of so learned a person as Sir Roundell Palmer; but he had always understood that, when there was a sufficient surplus from the original Episcopal Fund, it was in the power of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, if they thought fit, and with the consent of Parliament, to apply those funds to any ecclesiastical purpose. Much as he should regret the Bill being lost, he would rather see it lost than consent to Amendments which completely altered its character. He believed that the scheme, as the Bill at present stood, would be impracticable, and he did not believe that a single see would be erected under it. As the noble Lord (Lord Lyttelton) had obtained the sanction of Parliament to the principle of an increase in the episcopate, he hoped he would be content and not press the measure further in the present Session.
  THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYsaid, it was with deep regret that he should oppose the passing of the Bill, but he could not assent to the Amendments introduced by the House of Commons. The noble Earl had clearly pointed out their objectionable character, and for his own part he could not sanction the creation of an inferior order of Bishops, which would be setting a precedent for the exclusion of Bishops from the House altogether. He trusted, therefore, that the noble Lord would proceed no further.
  THE BISHOP OF OXFORDsaid, that so far from thinking that the Bill, as amended, would facilitate an increase of the Episcopate, he thought that nothing would so much stand in the way of such an increase hereafter as the present measure. He advised his noble Friend to be content with having obtained the sanction of Parliament to the principle of the extension of the episcopate, he should stop there, and not attempt to force what would prove a most unworkable Bill through Parliament this Session.
  LORD LYTTELTONhoped their Lordships would not disagree to the Amendments in toto, several of them being perfectly free from objection.
  THE EARL OF DERBYsuggested that the Amendments should be considered seriatim.
  LORD LYTTELTONagreed to the course.
  Moved, to agree to the Amendment made by the Commons in Clause 1.
  THE EARL OF DERBYobjected to this Amendment, on the ground that, recognizing only voluntary subscriptions and bequests, it virtually excluded contributions from the Episcopal or any other fund.
  On Question? Resolved in the Negaive.
  Moved, to agree to the Amendments made by the Commons omitting Clause 2.
  On Question? their Lordships divided:—Contents 24; Not-Contents 12: Majority 12.

  CONTENTS.

  Chelmsford, L. (L. Chancellor.)

  Malmesbury, E.

  Romney, E.

  Beaufort, D.

  De Vesci, V.

  Buckingham and Chandos, D.

  Hawarden, V.

  Marlborough, D.

  Bagot, L.

  Richmond, D.

  Clinton, L.

  Colville of Culross, L.

  Amherst, E.

  Ebury, L.

  Cadogan, E.

  Lyttelton, L. [Teller.]

  Derby, E.

  Redesdale, L.

  Devon, E.

  Silchester, L. (E. Longford.)

  Graham, E. (D. Montrose.)

  Skelmersdale, L.

  Leven and Melville, E.

  Templemore, L. [Teller.]

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Canterbury, Archp.

  Gloucester and Bristol, Bp.

  Beauchamp, E. [Teller.]

  London, Bp.

  Lichfield, E.

  Oxford, Bp.

  Shaftesbury, E. [Teller.]

  Foley, L.

  Sydney, V.

  Mostyn, L.

  Vernon, L.

  Chester, Bp.

  Resolved in the Affirmative.
  Some Amendments agreed to; others disagreed to.
  Moved to agree to the Amendment made by the Commons in Clause 12.—(The Lord Lyttelton.)
  On Question? their Lordships divided:—Contents 7; Not-Contents 29: Majority 22.

  CONTENTS.

  Graham, E. (D. Montrose.)

  Chester, Bp.

  London, Bp.

  Harrowby, E.

  Shaftesbury, E. [Teller.]

  Ebury, L.

  Lyttelton, L. [Teller.]

  1544

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Canterbury, Archp.

  De Vesci, V.

  Chelmsford, L. (L. Chancellor.)

  Hawarden, V.

  Sidmouth, V.

  Beaufort, D.

  Gloucester and Bristol, Bp.

  Buckingham and Chandos, D.

  Oxford, Bp.

  Marlborough, D.

  Richmond, D.

  Bagot, L.

  Clinton, L.

  Amherst, E.

  Colville of Culross, L.

  Beauchamp, E. [Teller.]

  Denman, L.

  Cadogan, E.

  Redesdale, L.

  Derby, E.

  Silchester, L. (E. Longford.)

  Devon, E.

  Leven and Melville, E.

  Skelmersdale, L.

  Lichfield, E.

  Templemore, L.

  Malmesbury, E.

  Vernon, L.

  Romney, E. [Teller.]

  Resolved in the Negative.
  A Committee appointed to prepare Reasons to be offered to the Commons for the Lords disagreeing to some of the said Amendments.

  COMPANIES ACT (1862) AMENDMENT BILL—(No. 333.)
  (The Duke of Richmond.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND, in moving the second reading of this Bill, said, that it had been brought into the other House of Parliament in consequence of the Resolutions to which a Select Committee appointed to inquire into the working of the Act of 1862 had come. His right hon. Friend the Vice President of the Board of Trade had the conduct of the Bill in the other House. On its first appearance there certain objections were taken to some of the provisions, and as he believed with great justice, by Sir Roundell Palmer. That hon. and learned Gentleman proposed the insertion of some clauses, the omission of others, and certain other Amendments to be made; and the result was the Bill in its present shape. One object of the Bill was to allow companies to reduce the amount of their capital and subdivide their shares, due provision being made for the protection of creditors. Again, companies formed for purposes of charity might be registered under the Act without adopting the word "limited." It was said that if companies wished to alter the amount of their nominal capital they ought to wind up their affairs and begin again de novo. But such a course in the case of

  1545
  banks would be productive of great inconvenience. They might lose their connection; and a certain amount of discredit attached to such a proceeding. By giving to companies the facilities proposed by the Bill, no persons need be injured; the rights of creditors were most strictly protected; and the measure altogether was one which greatly interested the banking and commercial world, and which they were very desirous should pass in the course of the present Session.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a,"—(The Duke of Richmond.)
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, all would admit that this was a Bill of the greatest importance, yet their Lordships were asked to pass it without knowing its contents—so that it was not really to be the legislation of both Houses of Parliament—it was to be the legislation of one. He had asked for the Bill in the House this morning, and it was not then delivered, and he had not been able to obtain a copy until the afternoon. How, then, could their Lordships be asked now to read it a second time? It was proposed to allow a company which had been established without any provision for the reduction of its capital to make such a reduction upon a resolution passed to that effect. Such a proposal demanded grave consideration, and also, he thought, more safeguards than were provided in the Bill. As far as he could judge, such a power given to companies would subject their creditors to the same inconvenience and trouble as if they became bankrupt. For example, a creditor was obliged to object before the Court, or, if he could show that he had had no notice, he had a remedy against the shareholders, according to the extent to which each would have been liable for that particular debt if the capital had not been reduced. With regard to associations which were not established for purposes of profit, he did not see why they should object to the use of the word "limited." It must be remembered that such associations entered into engagements and had creditors. The Bill appeared to him to be framed in order to enable companies to do anything, and he believed that if passed it would throw joint-stock companies into great confusion and uncertainty. Their Lordships ought not to be called upon to pass a measure which hardly any Member of the House could have had an opportunity of considering. He had barely had time to look into
  1546
  the Bill himself; but it was one that demanded serious consideration, and it would be highly imprudent to proceed with it at that period of the Session.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYsaid, that his attention had been called to the Bill by a letter he had received from Liverpool, which represented the urgency of the case. The Bill had passed the ordeal of a very intelligent Committee of the House of Commons; that pains had been taken to secure the rights of all parties concerned; and urged the very great importance of giving something like stability to joint-stock companies. Great discredit had been thrown on these undertakings, and public confidence in them had been shaken by the disparity which had been found to exist between real and nominal capital; and it was highly desirable, if possible, by removing that disparity, to give solidity to property of this nature. Due attention had been paid to the interests of creditors, whose position would be as little altered as possible. He did not pretend to be master of all the details of the Bill, and possibly it might be amended in Committee; but at the same time, considering the extreme urgency of the case and its public importance, he hoped their Lordships would consent to the second reading.
  LORD REDESDALEasked what time there would be, if Amendments were proposed, for their discussion, the Report, and the third reading? He asserted that the passing of a Bill of this sort, when their Lordships had not time to do anything with it, would be a most dangerous proceeding.
  On Question? agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

  INVESTMENT OF TRUST FUNDS BILL
  (The Lord Chancellor.)

  (NO. 246.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, its object was to remove doubts as to the liberty of trustees and executors to invest trust funds in certain securities. Many years ago, when trustees were empowered by deed or will to invest trust money in Government securities, they could only place it in the Three per Cents, no matter how secure other funds might be.

  1547
  However desirable it might be that the money should be so invested as to increase the amount of the income, the trustees had no power whatever, except at their own risk and peril, to invest in any other security than the Three per Cents. After a time the Legislature intervened, and said that trustees might invest in Bank Stock and also in East India Stock. Since then the Government of India had been transferred to the Crown, and there had been created a new East India Stock chargeable on the revenues of India. Doubts had arisen as to whether this new Stock came within the provisions of the Act, and the object of the Bill was to remove these doubts by empowering trustees to invest in this Stock. There was also a clause enabling them to invest in any security guaranteed by Parliament. Of course it was desirable that trustees should have a large sphere of action; and he apprehended their Lordships would have no objection to the second reading of the Bill which he now moved.
  Motion agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

INSURRECTION IN CANDIA.

  MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
  VISCOUNT STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFE, in rising to move that an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for such further Correspondence between Her Majesty's Government and the Governments in alliance with Her Majesty as may have occurred since the date of the 5th of February in this year respecting the insurrection of Candia, the means employed for its pacification, and the assistance afforded to the insurgents either by the Greeks, the Greek Government, or the natives or Governments of any other countries, said: My Lords, I feel, on this occasion, even more than ordinary embarrassment, proceeding in part from the late period of this anxious and protracted Session, and partly from the denuded state of the benches, a natural consequence of the very advanced stage of the public business. I explained on a former evening the accidental circumstances which had compelled me to postpone the Motion of which I had given Notice, and if I now persevere in bringing forward the subject to which it relates, I may fairly affirm that I am less influenced by motives of personal consistency than by a sense
  1548
  of public duty and also of respect for your Lordships' House. I claim no merit for meaning to perform my task with as much conciseness as the nature of its object and the principal considerations belonging to it will permit.
  You are aware, my Lords, that the formidable insurrection which broke out in the island of Candia about twelve months ago has never been entirely extinguished. It rages no longer with the violence which characterized it at first; but it continues, nevertheless, to smoulder beneath its ashes, and to prolong a state of disturbance and suffering, when it has probably ceased in real effect to be a source of hope on the one side and a cause of serious apprehension on the other. Although the actual scene of contention between the Sultan and his Christian subjects in Candia is limited to that island, it stands in such close connection with more extensive countries, and brings into play so many eventful interests, that, even at this distance we cannot be indifferent to the incidents which occur there. The island itself, though comparatively of small extent, is by no means destitute of natural advantages, and whether under the name of Candia, or under that of Crete, has acquired no trifling renown; and from its situation with respect to Greece, to Egypt, and to Turkey, has on several occasions excited the ambition of rival Powers. The desire of independence has operated strongly on that part of its population, which is Greek, and has led to a display of energy on their side which is worthy of better fortune and of better times. The Turks also have employed powerful means in support of their authority, and have shown by their exertions what deep importance they attach to the retention of Candia under their rule. The loss of that island, placed as it is near the entrance to the Archipelago, would not only diminish their revenue, but compromise in no small degree their political power, and greatly tend to hasten the catastrophe which ever hangs over them in the shape of the Eastern Question. It does not appear that the insurrection had its origin in any oppressive acts committed by the local authorities. The habitual state of antagonism subsisting between the two separate races, and rival creeds is enough to account for a mutual disposition to quarrel, and it may readily be imagined how intensely the war of last year in Germany worked among the ardent minds of the Greek population, and

  1549
  inspired the hope of a general convulsion favourable to their deliverance. Committees were not wanting to fan the nascent enthusiasm, to organize the means of insurrection, and to create sympathies capable of assuming in due time the form of material succour. The Hellenic Government could hardly expect to avoid the suspicion of encouraging, and perhaps even of aiding, the Cretans in their rash but patriotic efforts to throw off the Mussulman yoke; and greater Powers were not likely to neglect so good an opportunity of promoting that process of decay and exposure to dismemberment in Turkey, for which their policy is supposed to have been long prepared. The natural vicissitudes of war, resulting from superior forces on one side, and from remarkable advantages of position on the other, its cruel necessities and brilliant exploits, have rendered the situation still more complicated in its bearings and dangerous in its contingent results.
  My Lords, it is not my intention to open a discussion as to the manner, discreet or otherwise, in which Her Majesty's Government have dealt with this important matter; and with respect to the noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs, I readily acknowledge the commanding ability he has displayed in the performance of his public duties. But I must at the same time assert it to be the duty of Parliament to take an active part in watching over the proceedings of that department with respect to an event of such political magnitude as the insurrection in Crete. It cannot be denied, my Lords, that such transactions are of the greatest importance not only to the interests but to the honour of our country. England, whether we look to her political relations, or to her commercial interests, has a deep stake in the movements and destinies of the Eastern World; she is bound thereto by obligations of the most solemn character. She has given her guarantee to the Turkish Empire, and also to the kingdom of Greece. She has made herself virtually responsible for the conduct of both those Governments. Engagements of such importance, whether wisely contracted or not, must be held to carry with them no common charge of duties as well as of rights. If Turkey is supported by the guarantee of England and her allies, the guaranteeing powers are fully entitled to insist that the Porte shall lose no time in carrying into real effect those measures of administrative reform which
  1550
  it has solemnly adopted and proclaimed as necessary to the existence of its empire. If Greece and its independence are sheltered from danger by the protection of Christian Powers, the protecting Governments are morally bound to restrain the Greeks from every act of unprovoked hostility against the Sultan. These obligations evidently press with the greater force upon England, because, of all the powers concerned, this country is the most fitted to command the confidence of Turkey as well as of Greece, and the most exposed to injury and loss by a revival of the Eastern Question. It is but too clear, from occurrences reported in the public journals, that not only sympathy but material aid in men and munitions of war has been largely afforded to the Cretan insurgents, if not by the Government, at least by the inhabitants, of Greece. I do not wonder at, indeed, I can hardly blame the feelings which have found utterance in this manner. But they are not the less indulged to a degree which compels the Turkish authorities to employ severer means for putting down the revolt, which prolongs the horrors of a hopeless contest, and exposes the protecting Powers to reproach, to trouble, and eventually to the most disastrous contingencies. The Hellenic vessel, which has earned the largest share of admiration by the courage and dexterity of its crew in running the blockade, would also seem to have shown the most daring contempt for the law of nations, the most utter disregard of the duties prescribed to every vessel bearing the colours of Greece, and not prepared to incur the extreme penalties of piracy. Can it be doubted that in such a state of things your Lordships must desire to know what language has been held, what steps have been taken by Her Majesty's Government with respect to the transactions in question. Has anything been said or done in the name of England to restrain such perilous excesses, and at the same time to dissuade the Turkish Government from pushing its rights to an extreme? The best friends of Turkey are those who, while they respect its independence, and withhold as far as possible every kind of coercive intervention, employ their friendly influence with effective energy to settle its administration on a broader basis, and to provide impartially for the welfare and protection of all classes of its dependents. The best friends of Greece are those who would engage its people to seek a gradual

  1551
  extension of power by improving its natural resources in every branch, and by regaining the confidence of other nations. The sea is open to its activity, the neighbouring continent to its intelligence, and its example in cultivating the arts of peace would do more for the Greeks in Turkey than any ebullition of a lawless and aggrandizing spirit. I have no hesitation in expressing my deep conviction that Europe, and more particularly England, will find its true interest, no less than Greece and Turkey will find theirs, in pursuing this twofold policy, which is at once conservative and progressive in the best sense of those words. Whatever feeling may be entertained in favour of the Greek populations, or to their disparagement, I, for one, have never ceased to give them my cordial sympathy, originating in the remembrance of their condition under the oppressive sway of Turkey before the existing reforms were introduced. There is a further consideration which cannot with justice or safety be left out of the account—I mean the moral duty of maintaining the law of nations, and not lending the countenance of this great country to any violation of that law. With respect to Turkey itself, your Lordships cannot have forgotten with what generosity the blood and treasure of England, and of England's allies, were expended on behalf of that Empire only a few years ago. In coming forward with assistance involving so many sacrifices we surely acquired a right to take care that the rulers of Turkey perform whatever depends upon them to prevent the necessity of our undergoing the same tribulations again. If we have pledged ourselves by a treaty of guarantee to them, they also have pledged themselves to us by proclaiming a system of internal reforms confessed by them to be necessary, and recorded with their concurrence in the same treaty. The idea of nationality is become so powerful a dissolvent of political relations, and, by consequence, so abundant a source of disturbance and confusion that it is the more incumbent upon us to hold the Porte to a steady performance of its obligations, and thereby to protect ourselves and our allies from those evils which the continued and, therefore, increasing weakness of its Empire would not fail to reproduce. This sounds like intervention, and such in truth it is; but friendly intervention in the matter of Greece and Turkey is no longer a question open to our choice. It is the natural
  1552
  fruit of anterior circumstances, the necessary consequence of engagements now in force; a rightful duty, to be exercised with due discretion and under its appropriate limitations.
  I trust, my Lords, that in the course of these remarks I have suggested reasons enough to justify a call for that additional Correspondence to which my Notice refers. The Papers already communicated to Parliament on the subject in question go but very little beyond the month of January. More than six months have elapsed since that time, and the long interval has been productive of occurrences no less significant than those which appeared in the first series of documents, and no less capable of giving occasion for important communications between the several Governments concerned. Now, my Lords, when interests so momentous, as I have shewn them to be, are at stake, when the honour and prospects of the country are involved with the conduct and language of the Foreign Secretary, I am greatly mistaken if your Lordships would approve of being kept indefinitely in the dark. It is true that we are now on the verge of prorogation, and cannot hope to exercise any effective or immediate control over the transactions in Downing Street. But it is not the less desirable that Parliament should stimulate the sense of responsibility in official quarters, and convince the nation that a vigilant attention is paid by both Houses to its interests abroad as well as to those which lie more directly under our observation at home. Such being the case, I rely with full confidence upon that support which useful and constitutional suggestions are sure to receive at your Lordships' hands. I appeal to you, my Lords, with the greater earnestness, because to my apprehension the time is not far distant when an impartial estimate of the functions assigned to this House of Parliament may avail much towards maintaining a wholesome equipoise in the popular institutions of this deep-rooted but not unshaken monarchy. We have just returned, as it were, from launching the Vessel of the State, with all its time-honoured freight of liberties, glories, and prosperities, upon a new sea of illimitable expanse. We have seen it quit the well-known, long-tried shore of our ancestors, and whether, as all must hope, it shall find a brighter course and a safer haven in regions favoured by all the elements, or meet, as many fear, a disastrous doom in the dominions of the

  1553
  iceberg or the hurricane, your Lordships must wish to have the satisfaction of looking back with honest pride on services rendered by this House to the country in many successive ages. Under these impressions and in this spirit I humbly solicit your Lordships' assent to my present Motion.
  Moved, That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for such further Correspondence between Her Majesty's Government and the Governments in alliance with Her Majesty, as may have occurred since the date of the 5th February in this year, inspecting the Insurrection of Candia, the Means employed for its Pacification, and the Assistance afforded to the Insurgents, either by the Greeks, the Greek Government, or the Natives or Governments of any other Countries.—(The Viscount Stratford de Redcliffe.)
  THE EARL OF DERBY: My Lords, nothing can be more natural than that my noble Friend, who has been so closely connected with the affairs of Greece, should desire to receive all the information which it is possible for the Government to give with respect to a subject in which he, in common with many other Members of your Lordships' House, takes the deepest interest. I can, on the part of the Government, assure my noble Friend that we have not the slighest wish to withold any information bearing upon that subject which we think we can lay before Parliament consistently with the public interests I can, however, I have no doubt, satisfy him and the House that it would be inexpedient to produce at the present moment the Papers for which he asks. No very great or material change in the aspect of affairs in Crete has, I regret to say, taken place since the last Correspondence relating to them was laid upon the table. The insurrection still continues with unabated activity, although Omar Pasha has, I believe, lately met with some signal successes; and I have very little doubt that the insurrection would long since have been suppressed had it not been for the encouragement and assistance in volunteers, provisions, and warlike stores, which the insurgents have received from the Greeks. There exists, no doubt, on the part of the Christian populations in the East a very great desire to be emancipated from the rule of the Turkish Government; but I am not at all disposed to think that the unity between them and their Greek allies as to the ultimate objects they have in view is very great. I do not believe that it is the desire of the great body of the Christian population to be annexed to Greece, although
  1554
  they may be very anxious to get rid of the domination of Turkey. I entirely concur, I may add, in the view which has been expressed by my noble Friend (Viscount Stratford de Redcliffe) as to the policy which ought to be pursued by Greece at the present moment. I think with him that her true policy consists not in attempting to extend her territory by means of foreign conquests; but in the more rational and modest ambition of establishing peace, good order, and tranquillity in her own dominions; by that means she will be more likely to promote her happiness and that of the populations around her than by indulging in wild schemes which will interfere with her tranquility and progress. And if my noble Friend entertains the least suspicion that Her Majesty's Government have been indifferent to the occurrences in Crete, or have in the slightest degree encouraged the Greek Government to take any part in assisting the insurgents in Crete, I assure him he is very much mistaken as to the course which we have deemed it to be our duty to adopt. The fact is, whatever appearances may be, that the Greek Government has always steadily denied any complicity in the expeditions which have been organized for that purpose. It is said that those who leave Greece and convey assistance to the insurgents do so in the character of blockade-runners, and that they do not leave it under the sanction of the Government, which has no means of preventing them from doing so. But we have expressly stated our opinion that blockade-runners are subject to the penalties of illegal commerce, and are not the less subject although they should sail with the sanction of the Greek Government. Unfortunately the Turkish navy is utterly insufficient to prevent this illegal traffic, so that some vessels, few in number and comparatively insignificant, are able to carry over with them stores and volunteers with perfect impunity. One vessel is said to have made twenty-two voyages with perfect immunity, landing ammunition and stores on each occasion, and carrying back with her on her return to Greece, numbers of wounded volunteers, women, and children. Only in one case did a collision take place, when a Turkish vessel pursuing a Greek vessel into Greek waters was fired upon by a fort. With regard to the position of the Turkish forces at the present moment, I apprehend the case to be this—that they constantly obtain very considerable successes, but that the

  1555
  continual reinforcements arriving week by week, and day by day, among the insurgents, keep alive the spirit of revolt; and although, no doubt, both on the one side and on the other, there have been some cruelties and atrocities perpetrated by the Mussulmans on the Christians, and by the Christians on the Mussulmans, yet any excesses on the part of the Turks have been chiefly committed by irregular troops. I believe that the regular Turkish troops have, on the whole, behaved with singular moderation, that Omar Pasha has earnestly endeavoured to avoid any unnecessary effusion of blood and especially to spare the lives of women and children, has forborne to take sanguinary measures, and has protracted negotiations with a special view to spare human life. I believe that the slowness of his movements may be in some degree attributed to this motive. There is no doubt that where the Christian population have made their submission, men, women, and children have been furnished by the Turkish authorities with provisions and supplies, and have been treated with great humanity, and I. believe there is no case in which those who have so submitted have had reason to complain of the conduct of the regular Turkish troops towards them. With regard to the interference of foreign Powers, the matter stands thus—Her Majesty's Government, in common with the Great Powers of Europe, have sought to impress, as they have a perfect right to do, upon the Turkish Government the expediency of carrying out internal reforms and improvements for the benefit of its Christian subjects; and I must do the Turkish Government the justice of saying that they have never shown any indisposition to enter upon a course of such reforms and improvements. They have not even made any objection to the mission of the persons appointed by the different Governments to associate themselves with the Turkish Government for the purpose of inquiring into the causes of complaint which the Christian population of Crete had against them. They have, however, said this—"As long as this insurrection goes on we must use our best means for putting it down. We are ready to follow your advice as far as possible, provided you will give us a security that the object is not to despoil Turkey of that which is an integral portion of her dominions, and provided, also, that encouragement is not afforded to foreigners—more especially to
  1556
  the Greeks — to throw in reinforcements from various parts, and thus to keep alive the spirit of insurrection among her subjects." Her Majesty's Government took early opportunity of joining in the recommendation to the Turkish Government to issue a Commission to act with persons deputed by foreign Powers for the purpose of making inquiry; but they have done so separately from, and not in conjunction with, those other Powers. We are in harmony with their wishes; but we have not felt ourselves bound to press on the Turkish Government that which other Governments have thought it reasonable to urge on them—namely, that this Commission should be issued irrespective of any such condition as that imposed by Turkey, or that during the progress of the insurrection any security should be given by the different Powers that they would discourage it. That is how the matter stands at the present moment. All the Powers of Europe are agreed in urging that Turkey should do justice to her Christian subjects; but they are not all agreed as to the extent and the manner in which they would press their recommendations upon Turkey. This subject has engaged the anxious consideration of the Foreign Office, and the Correspondence with reference to it which has taken place with other Powers has been very voluminous. There is one particular thing in which we have refused to join with other Powers, and which may, at first sight, appear to be an act of humanity—namely, the sending of vessels of war to remove any portion of the Christian population from Crete. Russia and France have felt it to be consistent with their duty to send out their vessels of war for that purpose; although the Turkish Government protested against that proceeding they acquiesced in it, and those vessels have carried away considerable numbers from the island. The case therefore stands in this way—united, as all the Powers are, in the object which they desire to effect—namely, the improvement of the condition of the Christian population subject to Turkey—an object, let me say, which I believe the Sultan and many of his subordinate agents are sincerely desirous of promoting—we have not come to an agreement as to the mode in which, if at all, we should enforce our views upon the Turkish Government. Her Majesty's Government have steadily refused to take any step for forcing their advice upon Turkey. They have given

  1557
  her their advice as a friendly Power. That course we have thought was consistent, not only with our own obligations, but with the best interests of the Ottoman Empire. But if Turkey should not be disposed, under present circumstances, to listen to our arguments and recommendations, we do not feel ourselves in a position to force them upon her. There being, therefore, at present a certain amount of divergence between the views of Her Majesty's Government and those of the other Powers, I think my noble Friend (Viscount Stratford de Redcliffe), with his long experience, will acknowledge that the production of the Correspondence which has taken place with the several Powers—with whom we have not yet come to an agreement as to our course of action, although we may hope that we shall be able to do so in future—would not be likely to serve any useful end, but might prove very mischievous. I can assure my noble Friend that nothing would give me greater pleasure than to have it in my power to produce any information on this subject to your Lordships; and I believe I may express a confident hope that before Parliament re-assembles next Session we shall be able to place before it a full account of the proceedings connected with this Question, and that, too, at a time when Parliament will have an ample opportunity of giving it their best consideration; for your Lordships may rest perfectly satisfied that we have not the slightest desire to conceal any portion of our conduct on this important matter.
  VISCOUNT STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFEsaid a few words in reply. He acknowledged the courteous manner in which his noble Friend at the head of Her Majesty's Government had treated his Motion; and he could not but admit the general validity of the reasons alleged by the noble Lord for postponing awhile the communication of any further Correspondence respecting Crete. He relied upon the assurances given by his noble Friend that the Papers in question would be laid upon their Lordships' table before the next Session; and he had heard, with satisfaction, the principal part of what the noble Earl had thought proper to disclose of the opinions entertained and the course of policy pursued by himself and his Colleagues. He (Viscount Stratford de Redcliffe) trusted that the contest in Crete would speedily terminate in some arrangement calculated to secure the tranquillity and
  1558
  equitable administration of that island; and he expressed once more his conviction that, in pressing that object on the Sultan's consideration, Her Majesty's Government might be sure that their advice would carry with it all the weight which the friendly and disinterested policy of England towards Turkey so justly deserved. On these grounds, and only on these grounds, he could see no objection to withdrawing his Motion.
  Motion (by Leave of the House) withdrawn.

THE ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.

  NOTICE WITHDRAWN.
  THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY, who had given notice to call the attention of the House to the state of the Ecclesiastical Courts, said, that his Notice related to the whole subject of these Courts; but the advanced period of the Session rendered it indispensable that he should postpone bringing forward the entire question till next year. He wished, however, to be permitted to quote two or three extracts in order to show that he had not rashly or unadvisedly taken up the subject. He found that Lord Cranworth, when Lord Chancellor, in 1856, described the existing system of the Ecclesiastical Courts as cumbrous, dilatory, and expensive, and cited, as an instance, the case of "Furnell v. Craig," which lasted four years, and cost an immense sum. In November, 1866, Dr. Lushington said, "The framer or framers of the Church Discipline Act had not the advantage of knowing the Ecclesiastical Law," and he added, "the confusions introduced by it have no limit." Again, Lord Chancellor Cranworth, in 1856, said of the Chancellors of the Dioceses, "In five cases out of ten the Chancellor or Vicar General is not a properly qualified person for the administration of justice." Many of these opinions were shared by the Convocation of Canterbury in 1853, and were strongly expressed. There were ample funds obtainable from ecclesiastical sources for carrying out any improvement which might be required in the present system. For example, there were the fees derived from marriage licenses, which from the twenty-eight ecclesiastical registries amounted to about £42,000 a year. The average fee of a marriage licence being about £2, and the number being estimated at 21,000 annually, gave a sum of £42,000 a year. This

  1559
  was an amount from which the salaries of a sufficient staff of Judges might be derived to administer the affairs of these Courts to the satisfaction of everyone. He mentioned these facts to show that he had not taken up the matter rashly. He now gave notice that he would next Session call the attention of the House to the state of the Ecclesiastical Courts.
  THE BISHOP OF OXFORDsaid, he should be very glad to have the whole subject to which the noble Earl had referred thoroughly investigated; but reminded him that many of the abuses complained of had already been reformed, one of the principal reforms being the substitution by the new Judge of the Admiralty Court of oral for documentary evidence in certain cases.
  House adjourned at a quarter before Eight o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter before Five o'clock.