Lords Sitting of 26 April 1872

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Pacific Islanders Protection * (90).
Second Reading—Royal Parks and Gardens (79); West Indies (Incumbered Estates)* (88).
Select Committee—Union of Benefices Act Amendment* (12), The Earl of Chichester and The Earl Nelson added.

INTERNATIONAL PRISON CONGRESS, LONDON—QUESTIONS.
THE EARL OF CARNARVONasked, Whether Her Majesty's Government have been applied to to defray the expenses of printing the necessary papers in connection with the International Prison Congress to be held in London on the 3rd of July at the instance of the United States' Government and of the Governments of other Continental nations, and what answer Her Majesty's Government have returned? The subject to which his Question referred had attracted a good deal of attention in this and other countries, and nowhere more than in the United States. In 1870 a Committee to inquire into the subject of prison discipline was appointed by the United States Government, and that Committee put itself in communication with other Governments. Subsequently a Commissioner accredited from the United States came to this country to make arrangements for a Congress, and it was finally settled that the Congress should be held in London. He believed a request had been made to Her Majesty's Government that some contribution of public money might be made towards the expenses of the Congress; and, though he had not himself seen the answer, he was rather afraid that it had been unfavourable. He hoped, however, that if this were the case the Government would reconsider the matter. It might be urged as against such a request that the Congress was a voluntary one; but he thought it would be found that its labours would be of a public nature, and he thought Congresses such as these, for some common purpose, ought to be encouraged, for they would certainly tend to promote identity of action. He might also say that the granting of financial assistance to this Congress would not be without precedent. In proof of this he might refer to the

1881
case of a Congress in 1860, presided over by the Prince Consort.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, the noble Earl (the Earl of Carnarvon) was correct in his supposition that an application such as that to which he had referred had been made to Her Majesty's Government. It was not, however, limited to the request that the Government should defray the expenses of printing the requisite papers for the proposed Congress, but embraced the further request that a grant of money to the amount of £700 should be made for the general purposes of the Congress. The application had been received by the Treasury and by the Foreign Office. The decision in respect of the money grant naturally rested with the former Department. The Government were of opinion that compliance with the application would form an inconvenient precedent, as the Congress would be a voluntary one, and not one for the proceedings of which the Government of this country was in any way responsible. Admitting the utility of International Congresses, it must be borne in mind that the forthcoming Conference was of a purely voluntary character, over the composition of which the Government had no control, and no power in its direction. To contribute to the Congress from the National Exchequer would be to recognize in a very objectionable manner proceedings for which, as he had just stated, the Government would be in no way responsible. He admitted that the case to which the noble Earl had referred might be regarded as one more or less like the present, but the particular application must be judged on its own merits, and in viewing it in this way the Government were of opinion that it would not be advisable to give the pecuniary aid for which the request had been made.
THE EARL OF CAENAEVONasked, whether he was to understand that, while objecting to a money grant, the Government did not object to defray the expenses of printing?
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, the same objection applied to both branches of the application.

ROYAL PARKS AND GARDENS BILL.
(The Duke of St. Albans.)
ROYAL PARKS AND GARDENS BILL.

  (No. 79.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE DUKE OF ST. ALBAN'S, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said, that the Bill, which had come up from the Commons after much discussion, provided for the protection and regulation of the Royal Parks and Gardens, which being placed under the management of the Commissioners of Works and Buildings might be, in some sense, said to be public property, and as the public were freely admitted to these beautiful spaces it was desirable that they should be protected from molestation and annoyance while enjoying them. The Parks and Gardens mentioned in the Schedule were Hyde Park, St. James' Park, the Green Park, Kensington Gardens, Parliament Square Gardens, Regent's Park, Kennington Park, Primrose Hill, Victoria Park, Battersea Park, Greenwich Park, Kew Gardens, Hampton Court, Richmond Park, Bushey Park, Holyrood Park, and Linlithgow Park. The Bill gave the necessary powers to the park-keepers and officials employed in the regulation of the Parks, and provided penalties for the infraction of the authorized rules; and the first Schedule set out a series of regulations of general application which were to be observed by persons using the Parks. The noble Duke concluded by moving the second reading.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.
  House adjourned at halt-past Five o'clock, to Monday next, Eleven o'clock.