Lords Sitting of 15 July 1873

MINUTES.
—Sat First in Parliament—The Earl De La Warr, after the death of his brother; The Lord Stourton, after the death of his father; The Lord Manners, after the death of his father.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Public Works Loan Commissioners (School and Sanitary Loans)* (193); Militia (Service, &c.) (206).
Committee — Report—Gas and Water Works Facilities Act, 1870, Amendment (201); Public Schools (Eton College Property)* (204).
Report—Law Agents (Scotland) (207–213).
Third Reading—Blackwater Bridge (Composition of Debt)* (199); Colonial Church* (208); Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 6)* (157), and passed.

CHURCH ASSOCIATION—CONFESSION THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

  PERSONAL EXPLANATION.
  LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNEsaid, he desired to offer a personal explanation to their Lordships on a matter that had arisen out of the debate of last night, that the Question on his Motion was put so quickly that he had no opportunity of replying to the right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Winchester) who charged him with making a tissue of mistakes. With every respect for the right rev. Prelate, he must deny having done so. What he stated with reference to Mr. Maguire was, not that Mr. Maguire had been licensed by two successive Bishops of London to deliver lectures in his church — which he, of
  386
  course, knew to be unnecessary—but that he delivered the lectures with their sanction. The two Prelates referred to were present last night, and did not contradict this statement, and he believed it to be correct. He stated also, not that the right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Winchester) inhibited Mr. Maguire, but that he forbade Mr. Curling to allow Mr. Maguire to deliver these Protestant lectures in St. Saviour's Church. He (Lord Oranmore and Browne) believed this also was entirely correct, and he hoped the right rev. Prelate would allow his official communications and the correspondence to be published, that the public might judge what had really occurred.
  THE BISHOP OF WINCHESTER: My Lords, I do not apprehend that in what the noble Lord has just stated there is the slightest contradiction to what I said yesterday. I found fault with the noble Lord's assertion that I had inhibited a gentleman who wanted to deliver certain lectures in my diocese. I stated that, being applied to by one of the church-wardens on behalf of the other of the two vicars, I told the vicar who had given the permission that he must not allow those controversial lectures to be delivered in that church. I accompanied that intimation with a statement that I acted from no sort of difference as to the nature of the lectures or from disapprobation of them, but invited him, as there was a public hall not far off suitable for such occasions, to deliver them in another place in the diocese. When, therefore, this was invidiously cited, after the lapse of a year, to represent that I had some dislike to anti-Roman lectures being delivered in my diocese, it was a mis-statement not of a very ordinary character, and I think I was justified in characterizing the statement as a tissue of mistakes. I repeat that the ground of my action was an ecclesiastical objection which had nothing whatever to do with the nature of the lectures. That a gentleman of another diocese, against the will of one of two vicars, and against the will of the laity as represented by the churchwardens, should come and deliver lectures in a church without my permission, is contrary to ecclesiastical régime, and as such I prohibited it, and would prohibit it again to-morrow. The noble Lord wants me to publish correspondence with my clergy. Now, I never will correspond with a

  387
  clergyman in my diocese who is corresponding with me in order to send the letters to the newspapers. There would be an end to all the very useful power possessed by a Bishop in his diocese if he once allowed it. The intercourse between me and my clergy is confidential and affectionate—filial on the one side, fatherly on the other. If letters written in that spirit are at any moment of irritation to be thrown into what are called the "religious newspapers," and the world be brought in to criticize every single word of them, there must be an end to all that open, kindly, free correspondence upon which a Bishop's influence for good depends. I therefore—not in this instance only, but in every instance—refuse to communicate, except through my secretary, with any gentleman whose appetite for print is of that voracious character that he writes letters in order to publish them in the newspapers, and I refuse to break my rule in this instance. I have to complain of the noble Lord for saying it was some tendency towards Roman doctrines that had led me to act. That is a most serious charge—as serious an imputation as to charge an officer in the Army with disloyalty to his Queen. I hate and abhor the attempt to Romanize the Church of England, and I will never hear anyone make such a charge without telling him to his face that he is guilty of gross misrepresentation; especially when such charges come from one who has been endeavouring to his utmost in Ireland to get the Prayer Book of the Church of England altered in order to make it suit his views.

  LAW AGENTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  (The lord Chancellor.)
  (NO. 207.) REPORT.
  Amendment reprinted (according to Order).
  LORD COLONSAYsaid, he would again bring forward the clause which their Lordships had negatived in Committee by a small majority. He thought the question was of much importance, because by the provisions of the Bill, the Writers to the Signet who had had the right to practise in the Superior Courts of Scotland at least since 1532, and who by that position were entitled to practice as law agents, were required, if they desired to be enrolled as law agents, to
  388
  submit to the same examination, both as to their knowledge of the law and their general knowledge, as was required from persons of inferior position. He thought this requirement degrading to a class of gentlemen of such high standing, and that it tended to degrade the acquirements demanded of the Writers to the Signet to the level of those required from the law agents. The Bill, as he understood it, was intended to open the practice of law in the Courts to a larger class of persons who had not hitherto enjoyed the privilege, and he could not at all see why it should give this advantage with one hand and with the other take away the right which had been possessed for over 300 years by a numerous and highly trained body of legal practitioners.
  Amendment moved to insert after clause 40 the following new clause:—
  "Every person who shall hereafter be admitted a member of the Society of Writers to the Signet shall be enrolled as a law agent by the registrar on producing a certificate of his admission by an officer authorised by the Society to grant such certificate."—(The Lord Colonsay.)
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he must continue his opposition to the clause. The question was not whether the Society of Writers to the Signet should continue to exist and retain a special connection with the administration of justice in Scotland, but whether they should retain certain special privileges in regard to the right to grant admission to practise as law agents under a Bill which proposed in the ease of other bodies of men to abolish similar rights and privileges. He thought upon general principles that it was not expedient, when they were endeavouring to establish a uniform system of admission for the whole country, to go on, and retain the concurrent privileges of an independent body, however respectable that body might be. Since the matter was last before their Lordships, he had received several representations from other legal bodies in Scotland, to the effect that they should be very much dissatisfied if, when other ancient rights and privileges of this kind were abolished, those of the Writers to the Signet were retained. He very much doubted whether the result predicted by his noble and learned Friend (Lord Colonsay) would result from the operation of the Bill, even if, for the purpose of admission to practise as law agents,

  389
  Writers to the Signet might be able to qualify themselves by a less difficult examination than they had already passed for that position. He thought it more probable that a just emulation would induce many law agents to attempt to pass the higher examination of the Society of Writers to the Signet, rather than lower the latter to the level of the minimum required for admission to practise.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid, that if it was proposed to level at all it should be by levelling up instead of levelling down. They would not reform their legal system by sweeping away the best part of it. He should support the clause moved by the noble and learned Lord.
  On Question? Their Lordships divided:—Contents 60; Not-Contents 40; Majority 20.
  Resolved in the Affirmative; and Clause inserted in the Bill.
  Then, on the Motion of the DUKE of RICHMOND, new clause added giving the same right to the members of the Society of Solicitors in the Supreme Court.
  Further Amendments made.
  Bill to be read 3a on Thursday next; and to be printed as amended. (No. 213.)

  GAS AND WATER FACILITIES ACT (1870) AMENDMENT BILL. (No. 201.)
  (The Earl Cowper.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, that the object of this Bill was not to make good any genuine losses which might have been incurred on account of unforeseen circumstances, but to meet circumstances to which every trading company was exposed, and its practical effect would be to fix a minimum dividend of 5 per cent. This was a dangerous principle to introduce into legislation with regard to public companies, and he felt bound to caution their Lordships respecting it. He thought that an Amendment should be introduced into some of the clauses which would confine the operation of the Bill to genuine unforeseen losses. With that object in view, he would move in Clause 7, page 2, line 25, after ("where"), to leave out ("with a view to prevent undue loss"), and insert ("upon proof given that notwithstanding the exercise of careful economy in
  390
  the manufacture of gas loss must arise.") Should that Amendment be accepted, he would further move in lines 26 and 27, to leave out ("or to the prevention of undue accumulation of profits by undertakers"); in line 38, after ("Act"), insert ("such addition being in the opinion of the Board necessary to prevent loss"); and in page 3, lines 1 and 5, to leave out ("five"), and insert ("two").
  EARL COWPERsaid, he did not consider such an Amendment as this necessary. He thought it would not be fair to make companies manufacture gas at reduced profits when the causes of such reduction were no fault of theirs. The proposition was that dividends should be sustained at 5 per cent. Considering that the usual dividend among the shareholders of gas companies was 10 per cent, he did not think this too much of a concession. The public would suffer great inconvenience if these companies, owing to the increased price of materials, suspended operations.
  LORD REDESDALEexplained that what he objected to was the principle involved.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYwould like to extract through the Confessional or otherwise the noble Lord's idea of a shareholder. He appeared to think that the last farthing should be wrung from him, and that he should be allowed no profit. It was only fair that when gas companies had been obliged to give the public the benefit of profits exceeding a certain sum they should be allowed a fair profit when prices altered.
  House in Committee accordingly.
  Bill reported without Amendment; to be read 3a on Thursday next.

  MILITIA (SERVICE, &c.) BILL.
  (The Maquess of Lansdowne.)

  (NO. 206.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE,in moving that the Bill be now read the second time said, its object was to extend the term of service in the Militia from five years to six. The Committee last year on clothing had, in the first place recommended this as a more economical period. The contemplated arrangements for stoppages, which would be applied to the Militia again made it desirable to adopt a plan which

  391
  would slightly diminish the cost to the public. Six years, moreover, was the normal term of service in the Regular Army. The Bill substituted one form of oath for the various forms of oath now required to be taken in the different parts of the United Kingdom; and provided that where local circumstances rendered it convenient that Militia recruits should be trained with Line soldiers they should, for the purposes of discipline, be under the command of the officers of the Line regiment and should be tried by them in Court martials. The Bill likewise repealed a stipulation in an Act of George III. forbidding the adjutant and permanent staff of the Militia to absent themselves from the place where the arms or stores were kept. Now that the county organization had been abolished, this restriction was undesirable. The fifth clause provided that when a commanding officer was on leave the command devolved on his second in command in accordance with the usual custom of the service. At present the Queen had to sign a warrant in each ease. The eighth clause entitled a borough which had contributed to a county Militia armoury to a share of the purchase money. These were the principal provisions of the Bill, which he would be glad to explain further if necessary.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a." —(The Marquess of Lansdowne.)
  THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHasked whether the Militia bounty would be altered. He thought six years a more convenient term, but doubted whether the disgraceful rubbish now issued to the Militia in the way of clothing would hold together for that time.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMONDsaid, this measure might be for the good of the Militia force, but he rather doubted it. The Bill had only been delivered that morning, and he suggested that the Committee should be fixed at a distant date, in order that the Bill might be fairly considered by those noble Lords who took an interest in the question, which was of some importance. He did not think the proposal to place Militia recruits when out for training under the command of officers of the Line, instead of their own officers, would have a good effect. His own idea was that if Militia were to be well drilled, they must be trained by their own officers. There were one or two curious clauses in the
  392
  Bill. Clause 5, for instance, provided that—
  "when the commanding officer of any regiment of militia is absent on leave, the command of such regiment shall devolve on the officer next in rank who may, for the time being, be present with such regiment, and be capable of assuming the command."
  He thought every officer of Militia was capable of assuming command if he had passed through drill, unless there were others senior to him, in which case they would be preferred. With regard to the alteration of the period of service, he had no objection to it; only he thought the same principle should be applied to the Regular Army.
  THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEdisclaimed any intention on the part of the War Department to cast even the slightest reflection upon the value of the Militia as a force; nor did the Bill in any way ignore its just claims. As to clothing, the Department had the best hopes as to the result of the new arrangement, which was made in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Clothing. As to the command of Militia recruits, where a small body of Militia might, for convenience sake, train with a Line regiment, Line as well as Militia officers were to have the power of enforcing discipline. That, he thought, was at once a simple and necessary arrangement. Clause 5 was not intended to make any change with regard to the present devolution of the command, and as to the word "capable" it was not difficult to conceive cases where the commanding officer being absent his second in command might, from physical causes perhaps be "incapable" of replacing him.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday, the 24th instant.

ARMY—MEDICAL OFFICERS OF THE ARMY—ROYAL WARRANT, 1858.

  MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
  EARL DE LA WARRrose to move that an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that Her Majesty will be graciously pleased to take into her consideration the present position as regards rank and pay of the medical officers of the Army who volunteered and served on the West Coast of Africa between the years 1859 and 1867, in order that they may receive the benefit of

  393
  the Royal warrant, signed the 1st of October 1858, of which they have hitherto been deprived. The noble Earl said, that towards the close of the year 1867 the Medical Regulations of the Army were promulgated, containing a portion of a Royal Warrant, dated October, 1858, which stated—
  "Each medical officer volunteering for the West Coast of Africa will be required to serve there continuously for a period of twelve months: every such year of service on the Coast to count as two years for promotion and retirement."
  On the faith of this Warrant many medical officers volunteered for service in this unhealthy climate, believing, as one of them wrote, "that the double service would count towards the rank of of Surgeon-Major." After some time, however, another Warrant was issued, stating, as before, that each year of such service should be allowed to reckon double for promotion and retirement; adding, however, these words, "but shall not so reckon towards increased pay;" and another later Warrant added, "or qualify for the rank of Surgeon-Major." Neither of these qualifications appeared in the first Warrant, under which 76 medical officers had volunteered their services upon the West Coast. Of those gentlemen a large number had died, others were invalided, others had retired from the service, and there now remained about 30, whose cases were, as he submitted, a hard one. It might be objected on the part of men of older standing that these 30 medical officers should not be promoted over their heads. It was still harder, however, that the 30 should have served for seven years under the impression that their service would count as double, and should then be told that it would count neither for pay nor promotion. He was quite content to leave this subject in the hands of Her Majesty's Government with the assurance that it would receive a fair consideration.
  Moved that an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that Her Majesty will be graciously pleased to take into her consideration the present position as regards rank and pay of the medical officers of the Army who volunteered and served on the West Coast of Africa between the years 1859 and 1867, in order that they may receive the benefit of the Royal Warrant signed the 1st of October 1858, of which they have hitherto been deprived.—(The Earl De La Warr.)
  THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, that promotion was transfer from
  394
  one grade to another grade. A surgeon becoming a surgeon-major was not so transferred. The Royal Warrant of the 1st of October, 1858, regulating the grades of Medical Officers in the Army, ordered that those grades should be four—namely, 1st, the Inspector-General of Hospitals; 2nd, the Deputy-Inspector-General of Hospitals; 3rd, the staff or regimental Surgeon, who, after 20 years' full-pay service in any rank shall be styled Surgeon-Major; and 4th, the staff or regimental Surgeon, the attainment of the style of surgeon-major was therefore not promotion within the meaning of the words in question, and he contended that these officers had received all to which they were entitled by the Royal Warrant of 1858. This case had been brought forward in Parliament more than once; and he believed the interpretation which he now put on the Royal Warrant had never been seriously contended to be a wrong one. Under these circumstances, he hoped the noble Earl would not persist in his Motion.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

  SPAIN — CONVEYANCE OF CHINESE COOLIES INTO CUBA.—QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF AIRLIEasked, Whether any representations have been made by Her Majesty's Government to the Government of Spain with respect to the importation of Coolies from China into Cuba; or whether any communications on the subject have been received from Her Majesty's Consuls in Cuba since the receipt of Consul Dunlop's despatch of 24th December 1872 presented in pursuance of Commons' Address June 16, 1873. Their Lordships might be aware that a Paper containing the Correspondence relating to the treatment of Chinese Coolies at Macao and during their passage to Cuba and after their arrival there, had been recently presented to Parliament pursuant to an Address of the other House on the 16th June last. This Correspondence contained such a fearful narrative of the horrors of the Chinese Coolie traffic that he was desirous of bringing it under their Lordships' Notice, and of commending it to the immediate attention of Her Majesty's Government. On the 9th of November, 1872, the Earl of

  395
  Kimberley wrote to Sir Arthur Kennedy the Governor of Hong Kong as follows:—
  "It has at different times been represented to me that foreign vessels engaged in the shipment of coolies from Macao are equipped in the port of Hong Kong, or furnished with supplies or stores from that Colony, and my attention has recently been directed to the following paragraph extracted from a Hong Kong newspaper:—
  'The Spanish steamer 'Bueno Ventura,' a sister to, and belonging to the same owner as the steamship 'Yrurac Bat,' which vessel fitted up here and left a few days back for Macao, for a cargo of coolies, has arrived here to fit up for the same purpose.'
  "2. You are probably aware that during the late Session of Parliament an Act (three copies of which I inclose) was passed for the purpose of repressing the abuses connected with the movement of natives from their islands in the Pacific Ocean to labour on plantations.
  "3. Although great cruelties have been perpetrated in connection with this traffic in South Sea islanders, they can hardly have been greater than those which have led to the disgraceful and horrible occurrences from time to time reported as having taken place on hoard ships conveying Chinese coolies from Macao.
  "4. Her Majesty's Government, which has been under the necessity of making repeated remonstrances to the Portuguese Government on the subject of the Macao coolie trade, cannot permit that there should be even the shadow of a justification for any such imputation as that British subjects in Hong Kong partake in, and profit by, a traffic which the Queen's Government deplores and protests against. And I see no reason why British subjects resident in Hong Kong should not as well as those in Australasia be subjected to the punishment prescribed in Section 9 of the 'Kidnapping Act, 1872,' for the offences specified in that section, if committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the Colony.
  "5. I request you to give particular attention to the Kidnapping Act, 1872,' and to consider whether some of its provisions might not with the necessary alterations be made applicable to Hong Kong. If you are of opinion that they might be, I request you to transmit to me, as soon as possible, the draft of an Ordnance for that purpose."—[Correspondence C.—797. p. 1.]
  On the 2nd of November, 1872, Mr. Wade wrote from Peking to Earl Granville to say that—
  "The Chinese Government is doing something to stop the slave trade at Macao, but, as usual, its action for good is greatly hindered by its incurable corruptions."
  Consul Dunlop, writing to Earl Granville from Havannah on the 24th of December, 1872, said, that—
  "It would appear from this evidence that the 'Fatchoy' is really engaged in slave trading, with the knowledge and concurrence of her German owners at Hong Kong. The Chinese, on arrival here, are immediately 'contracted' or sold to the planters, and are as much 'slaves' as the negro bondmen throughout Cuba. This
  396
  will be their real condition so long as negro slavery, in any shape, exists here."
  The following extract appeared in an American newspaper:—
  "Chinese labourers continue to arrive. The steamer 'Fatchoy' brought over 900 of this unfortunate people, and official notice has been published of the expected arrival of the 'Irurac Bat' with the same number. Other vessels now in China are engaged in the same traffic, which yields an immense profit to shipowners and all engaged in it. A passenger of the 'Fatchoy' has informed your correspondent that the vessel went from point to point kidnapping Chinese; others were inveigled on board by speculators or 'vagabonds,' as they are called there, who received 30 dollars for each one of their victims. As soon as they arrive on board they are stowed away below in irons until the full complement was received, which was ten times the number the capacity of the vessel allowed. The horrors of the traffic and the voyage of the 'Fatchoy' can easily be imagined. Three mutinies and an attempt to burn the steamer took place during the voyage. The crew and all hands on such occasions fired into the Chinese and adopted other severe measures, such as hard knocks and scalding water, until the tumults were quelled. The loss on the voyage of the 'Fatchoy' on this account and deaths from sickness and suffering was over eighty Chinese."—[p. 3.]
  The following declaration was made by one of the men employed in the engine-room on board the Fatchoy:—
  "The steamer 'Fatchoy; formerly 'Vixen' (British), was sold at Hong Kong in July 1872, and placed under the German flag. The purchasers, Messrs. Paul Eblers and Co., had her then put under the Spanish flag by nominal transfer to a Spaniard. She was then fitted-out at Hong Kong with iron grating on the hatches, and round the hatches, and in the between decks, and at the side ports, iron barricades were also fitted out in deck. After this work had been done, she took in water and coal and proceeded, on the 1st of last August, to Macao. On or about the 15th of August she commenced loading coolies; they were sent off in lots, three times a week, generally on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, sometimes from 40 to 100 in a lot, but seldom above 50. The coolies are never considered to be filially secured until they are once on board, then their case becomes one of desolation and despair. While 'Fafehoy' was lying at Macao, the steamer 'Roseta d'Nina,' which had been dispatched some six weeks previously, returned to Macao in distress, and her cargo of 700 coolies was transferred to the 'Fatchoy;' these coolies were in a sad state, many of them had been cruelly flogged and otherwise ill-used on board the Rosati, d'Nina,' With this large accession, the cargo was soon completed to the number of 1,005 coolies. Every one of these men gave indications that the vilest deception had been practised upon them, and once having 'realized' the utter hopelessness of their situation, gave themselves up to frantic despair. Some would throw themselves overboard whenever an opportunity offered, but two boats were constantly alongside to pick them up and return them on board. The price paid the 'coolie-catchers,' as

  397
  they are called, is 50 dollars per head (delivered at the barracoons), but the amount is not paid over until the coolie is on board ship. Thus the 'catcher' or 'kidnapper,' insures the delivery of the coolie, although he is sent off in the ship's boats. The 'Fatchoy' left Macao on the 26th August, with the 1,005 coolies on board; all went well until the fourth day out. On this day, at about 3 P.M., a cry of 'Mutiny forward' was raised. The coolies had attacked the guards; one of the guards went overboard, probably thrown over by the coolies; the other guard took to the rigging. The coolies had made a rush to the Chinese 'galley' (for cooking), probably to try to get knives or weapons. The mate and second mate, from the bridge, shot into the crowd and wounded three of the coolies. This checked the mutiny. The officers then rallied, and succeeded in catching a number of the coolies and tying them by their long hair to the iron 'barricade,' or to the iron gratings, and driving the rest below. About 150 were put in irons. The next morning the Spanish captain had them brought up. Some bags of rice were placed on deck and the prisoners were laid across the bags, then unmercifully flogged and beaten by two men keeping time with their whips or sticks. In a short time the deck was covered with blood. As each coolie was flogged, he was washed with salt and water and sent below. We arrived at Anger, Batavia, on the 9th September, remained there two days, and thence proceeded to the Mauritius, and there took in water and coal, the ship remaining in quarantine. From the Mauritius we went to the Cape of Good Hope. In all these ports the coolies were kept below; and while coaling was going on, the hatches were put on, and the 'hospital' bulkheads for the sick were closed. The heat was intolerable even in the open air. The voyage for the coolies was one of the most unimaginable sufferings: they were struck, kicked, flogged, and otherwise treated with the greatest brutality. The filth and stench was something horrible. The hospitals were not cleaned during the whole voyage. I often turned away my eyes when I witnessed such dreadful scenes. I venture to say that in the annals of the African Slave Trade all the horrors of the 'middle passage' never surpassed those of this China slave-ship. The deaths on this direful and murderous voyage reached eighty, or about 8 per cent. of the number taken on board at Macao. Their deaths were, doubtless, caused by the blows they received, by general ill-usage, and by the filthy condition of the ship."—[P. 3.]
  Governor Sir Arthur Kennedy, in writing to the Earl of Kimberley from Hong Kong on the 25th of April, 1873, said, that that statement was "fully corroborated by sworn testimony in the colony." He thought that the importance of this subject would be his excuse for having troubled the House with this statement, and he trusted that Her Majesty's Government would address a strong representation with reference to the matter to the Spanish Government.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that the noble Earl need not make any apology
  398
  for having brought this subject under the notice of the House. It was impossible to pretend that there was the least exaggeration in the statement the noble Earl had made with regard to the treatment of the Coolies in their passage from China to Cuba. Strong representations on the subject had been made last year to the Spanish Government, but without success, the Spanish Minister having declared that in the then state of Cuba it was impossible for any effective steps to be taken to put a stop to the evil. Owing to the state of affairs in Spain those representations had not been renewed during the present year. The Spanish Government, however, had shown considerable anxiety to put an end to slavery in Cuba, and Mr. Layard who had been entrusted with the management of the subject had displayed the greatest firmness and judgment. No further report had, he might add, been received on the subject.
  House adjourned at Seven o'clock, to Thursday next, Eleven o'clock.