Lords Sitting of 23 July 1875

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Department of Science and Art * (221); Conspiracy and Protection of Property * (220); Turnpike Acts Continuance * (222); Foreign Jurisdiction * (224).
Second Reading—Entail Amendment (Scotland) * (214); Washington Treaty (Claims Distribution)* (216).
Committee—Pharmacy * (209–223).
Third Reading—Police Constables (Scotland) * (199); Police (Expenses) * (207); Copyright of Designs * (211), and passed.

PARLIAMENT—BUSINESS OF THE SESSION.—QUESTION.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  EARL GRANVILLE: I wish to put a Question to the noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Richmond), of which I gave Notice yesterday, respecting the course of Public Business. I do not put the Question in any way of complaint; but I put it in order to get information—which is not always the object of Parliamentary Questions. I may say that with one exception—to which I do not now intend to allude—I do not think your Lordships' House has any cause to complain of the conduct of Business this Session by the noble Duke. Her Majesty's Government brought in many important Bills at the beginning of the Session, and they received more than average attention at that period of the Session. As regards the future, your Lordships are aware that for seve-

  1869
  ral years it was urged that it was the duty of your Lordships' House to consider all important measures even at a late period of the Session. I find that my Question is not quite so urgent as it was yesterday, for I find the Prime Minister has modified his declaration that all Government Bills were to pass this Session. My noble Friend opposite will remember that in a speech which he delivered in another place, and which showed remarkable power and produced a very great effect, he drew a comparison of the legislative action of the present Government with that of the late Government, and stated that all the Government Bills would pass—or certainly all that were important. I think my noble Friend alluded particularly to the Merchant Shipping Bill, which I hear has now been abandoned. Fearing that the House might be left in ignorance of the subjects to be brought before it, I should very much like to know, Whether my noble Friend can give the House any information as to what Bills are likely to be brought before us during the remainder of the Session and at what time?
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND: With regard to the principle my noble Friend has laid down of discussing measures at a late period of the Session, I imagine your Lordships will be perfectly prepared to receive and discuss any Bills which may be sent up for our consideration by the other House of Parliament. I wish to refer to one part of my noble Friend's remarks in which he stated that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister had announced his intention to carry all the Bills which the Government had introduced. I think my noble Friend has misapprehended what was stated by the Prime Minister on the occasion to which he alludes. If I mistake not, the Prime Minister was referring only to Bills which had then passed the second reading—that is my impression of what he intended to convey. With regard to the measures which Her Majesty's Government are preparing to bring forward, and also with reference to the speech which my noble Friend has done me the honour to allude to which I made in another place, I may say that if I had to speak again tomorrow I should be quite prepared to make the same speech as I delivered on that occasion—with the exception, of
  1870
  course, of one Bill which has since that time been abandoned by the Government, because they felt it would be impossible to discuss it sufficiently this Session—I mean the Merchant Shipping Bill. With regard to the Business before your Lordships, my noble Friend will see that a Bill of some importance stands for second reading this evening—namely, the Scotch Entail Bill. Then there is the Pharmacy Bill, which will be considered in Committee this evening. The Police Constables (Scotland) Bill, the Police Expenses Bill, and the Copyright of Designs Bill stand for third reading, and the Washington Treaty (Claims Distribution) Bill is down for second reading. There are two very important Bills which have been read a third time in the other House of Parliament. One has been read a first time in this House, the Employers and Workmen Bill; and the Conspiracy Bill, which goes with that, was, I think, read a third time last night—though whether it has been sent up to this House I am not aware. It is, however, the intention of my noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack to move the second reading of both these Bills at the same time, and he had intended to ask your Lord-ships to discuss them on Thursday next; but we have been informed that it would be more convenient to noble Lords on the other side of the House that these Bills should be taken at an earlier period, and therefore he proposes to move the second reading of the Employers and Workmen Bill and the Conspiracy Bill on Monday next, with the hope that it will be convenient to go into Committee on both Bills on Tuesday or Thursday in next week, if that should suit the convenience of the House. I do not know of any other measures with which Her Majesty's Government have to deal in this House to which I need further allude. I do not know whether this will be regarded by my noble Friend as a satisfactory answer; but if he wishes for further details and will indicate in what direction his views are, I shall be most happy to give the subject my best attention.
  EARL GRANVILLE: Does Her Majesty's Government intend to pass all their Bills with the exception of the Merchant Shipping Bill, which they have announced it to be their intention to abandon?
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND: I believe that if my noble Friend will at the end of the Session refer to the Bills passed in the Sessions of 1874 and 1875, he will, with his usual candour, admit that they are equal, if not greater, in importance than the Bills passed in 1872 and 1873 by the Government of which he was so distinguished a Member. We need not go into such a comparison now; but Her Majesty's Government will this year have passed a number of most important measures. No doubt, the Merchant Shipping Bill has been withdrawn; but at this moment I cannot call to mind any other Bill of an important character which has been or is likely to be abandoned.

AGRICULTURAL CHILDREN ACT.

  ADDRESS FOR COPY OF CORRESPONDENCE.
  EARL DE LA WARR, on rising to move an Address for Papers relative to the operation of the Agricultural Children Act, said, that that statute was passed in 1873, its object being as stated to regulate the employment of children in agriculture. At the commencement of the present year the Act came nominally into operation: since that time, however, it appeared to have become almost inoperative, partly from the want of machinery to put it in force, and partly from the fact that there was no very general feeling in the country that such an Act was required. Agricultural schools were everywhere increasing in number and efficiency, and it was becoming the exception in agricultural districts to find a child who was not receiving a fair amount of elementary instruction. That would, perhaps, in some measure explain why the Act had hitherto been almost a dead letter. But there was, he believed, another reason. A strong feeling existed against legislative interference to such an extent as was authorized by this Act with the private and domestic arrangements of families—especially when it was applied to a single class. It was the agricultural labourer only who was subjected to the penalties of the Act; while another class—the small occupiers of land, who were not much removed from the labouring class, might employ their own children of any age in the cultivation of their own land without incurring the penalties of the Act. It had recently been stated,
  1872
  by one of the London journals, that Justices of Quarter Sessions, acting in accordance with instructions from Her Majesty's Government, had directed the police to enforce the provisions of that Act. Now, if that were the course which Her Majesty's Government proposed to sanction with regard to the enforcing of that Act, it was open to very grave objections. The penalties of the Act were aimed at one class only; but he much doubted whether their Lordships would be prepared to say that a police constable should have the power of entering the house of anyone to ascertain how his children were being educated for the purpose of bringing him, if necessary, before a Bench of Magistrates. It was a power which was not granted to the police except in the case of suspected criminals, and he could not see why the agricultural labourer should be made an exception to other classes and subjected to this interference with the privacy of his family. If the Act was to be enforced—which he could not but regard as objectionable in principle, and inconvenient in practice as interfering with agricultural labour—it should be done, he ventured to suggest, in some other way than through the county police; and he trusted that Her Majesty's Government would give some assurance that would allay the apprehensions which were felt with regard to the future operation of this Act.
  Moved, "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for, Copy of Correspondence between the Home Office and Justices of Quarter Sessions relative to the operation of the Agricultural Children Act; also for copies of Instructions issued to the Police of different counties with regard to enforcing the said Act."
  Address agreed to.

ARMY—COMPETITIVE EXAMINATIONS.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYasked the Under Secretary for War, Whether it is intended to make success in a competitive examination, among other English works, in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, a necessary introduction to the military service of Her Majesty as Cavalry and Infantry officers; and whether the provisions for such examination are under the sanction of the Commander-in-Chief or the Secretary for War? As

  1873
  we all knew, competition prevailed in almost every branch of public life except the highest—we had not yet come to the period when Ministers of State were appointed because of the number of "marks" achieved by them or when they were complimented by the House of Commons because of the success which they had gained in their examination—that was a point which we had not yet reached. But meanwhile he thought their Lordships would agree that it was only proper that in those cases in which examinations prevailed those examinations should be conducted with a view to the objects to be obtained by them. He quite agreed that military students should be examined as to their general knowledge of English literature and the English language; but even in Prussia and France, where these matters were carried to extremes, he was not aware that Prussian military students were subject to examination in the ancient German language, or that young French officers were examined as to their proficiency in ancient French literature. He put this Question because on looking over the list of subjects for examination on entrance into the Army he found that Chaucer was one of the authors with whose writings candidates were required to be acquainted. He should have thought that an acquaintance with the Chronicles of Froissart would have been more consonant with a military education; but however that might be, he felt sure that their Lordships would agree with him that the compulsory study of Chaucer savoured more of the pedantry of the Professor than the wise conclusion of the practical man. He was aware that neither English literature nor Chaucer was in terms compulsory; but rivalry in competition practically made it so. He wanted to know whether this scheme of examination was proposed by the Civil Service Examiners; and, if so, whether it had received the sanction of the military authorities? If the former was the case, it seemed strange to him that the Examiners should have been allowed to frame such a scheme; and if the latter, he would think it still more strange that so important a part of the education of young officers for the Army should have received the sanction of the authorities who were responsible for the efficiency of officers admitted to the service.
  EARL CADOGANsaid, the question of the noble Earl was based upon two erroneous assumptions, the first of which was that candidates for admission to the Army were bound to pass an examination in English Literature, and the second that Chaucer was always included among the authors presented for examination. Neither of these assumptions was correct. The fact was that English Literature was one of nine subjects from which the candidates might select four, and that Chaucer was only incidentally included among the authors in reference to whose works students might be examined. No student, however, who took up the subject of English Literature was bound to study any particular one of the authors named. In reply to his noble Friend's Question he had to say that the subjects for examination were chosen by the Civil Service Commissioners and then submitted for publication to the Director General of Military Education. The Secretary of State for War had power of veto in case he did not approve the curriculum chosen by the Commissioners. He was not, however, aware that upon any occasion the authorities at the War Office had altered or dissented from the selection that had been made by the Civil Service Commissioners.
  LORD WAVENEYsaid, he had paid particular attention to these examinations, and had observed that, as a rule, the subjects had been well selected and the results satisfactory; but he had been surprised to observe that one passage of Chaucer, in which there was a very fine military description, had been omitted from the selections for examination.
  EARL STANHOPEthought the noble Earl (the Earl of Harrowby) had done good service by raising this question. He conceived very few authors were less suited to advance military education than Chaucer. In order to understand Chaucer it was necessary to pass through a preliminary study of old English and to acquire a knowledge of a vast number of archaic words which had long passed out of general use and were only preserved by the laborious students of early English literature. If these words were introduced into modern speech the person using them would be exposed to ridicule. He viewed with great regret the introduction of such authors into a system of military examination; and,

  1875
  further, he would go the length of stating his opinion that if the person devising such a course had desired to bring into contempt the whole system of military examinations he could hardly have hit upon a better method. He was therefore sorry to find the noble Earl the Under Secretary of State for War opposing the view of the noble Earl who had brought the question forward, and stating that the subjects for examination were submitted to and approved by the Secretary of State for War.
  EARL CADOGAN, in explanation, said, the subjects for examination were selected by the Civil Service Commissioners, but they were forwarded to the Director General of Military Education for publication, and they were subject to the approval of the Secretary of State.
  THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGEsaid, he understood that the Civil Service Commissioners, having chosen the subjects for examination, handed them to the Director General of Military Education, not for supervision, but merely that he might transmit them to the Secretary of State.
  EARL STANHOPEthought the system referred to by the illustrious Duke ought not to remain in force; but that a plan more suited to the future career of candidates for the profession of arms ought to be adopted.
  VISCOUNT CARDWELLsaid, it seemed to be assumed that the object in view in these examinations was military education; but the fact was that that was not the purpose immediately in view. Some years ago the state of general education in the Army was so unsatisfactory that a Royal Commission was appointed with a view to its improvement, and their recommendation was that officers should entered the Army at an early age with a good English education. There was one object which the Commissioners had particularly in view. They noticed that a very small portion of young man who enter the Army were drawn from public schools; but they learnt from commanding officers that the best officers were those who had been drawn from our public schools, and, therefore, they said in effect—"Let us have a system by which we may secure for the Army youths with the best civil education which the country affords, and let us give them, afterwards, the best mili-
  1876
  tary education which we can provide." It was in strict conformity with the recommendations of the Royal Commissioners that the Civil Service Commissioners had endeavoured to proceed. It was in deference to the opinion of the Royal Commissioners that the examinations were given over to the Civil Service Commissioners. While the present system had been in operation the War Office, he believed, had never interfered with the choice of the Civil Service Commissioners; and the Civil Service Commissioners, on their part, had scrupulously endeavoured to ascertain and act in accordance with the wishes of the illustrious Duke (the Duke of Cambridge) and the Secretary of State for War. The question, therefore, was not whether the study of Chaucer or any other author formed a desirable part of a military education—for the military education was to come afterwards—but whether it ought to enter into the education of an English gentleman. In this matter the object of the Civil Service Commissioners, as of the Royal Commissioners, had been, not to tell the managers of public schools what they ought to teach, but to follow the course of study they had adopted, as the one calculated to make the best officers for the Army. He confessed he had been much surprised in the course of the discussion to hear men of the greatest literary attainments speak of Chaucer as if he were not a proper subject for study. Chaucer was pronounced by Hallam to be "the greatest poet of the Middle Ages beyond comparison," and he should have thought that, in trying to find out the best pupils of the English public schools, it was not an unnatural thing to select Chaucer's works as a subject of examination.
  THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGEalso desired to point out that the examinations in question were not military examinations, but were designed solely with the view of securing officers of good general education for the Army. They were, in fact, public school examinations, and were intended to get young men from the public schools to enter the Service. The Civil Service Commissioners had been intrusted with these examinations, and, so far as he was aware, the authorities of the War Office, whether civil or military, had in no way interfered in the matter. The question

  1877
  which had been raised was therefore one for the Civil Service Commissioners alone to deal with. It was not until the young men had passed the examination in question that it became the duty of the authorities at the War Office to deal with their military education.
  LORD HAMPTONwas understood to express his entire concurrence with the noble Earl (the Earl of Harrowby), and to say that, in his opinion, the present system of examination for introduction to the Army was very far from satisfactory.
  EARL GREYthought the most crying evil of the present system of competitive examination was that it fostered "cramming." That being so, to fix upon Chaucer as a subject by an acquaintance with which a good many marks might be obtained by young men, appeared to him to be a course the tendency of which would be to increase that evil.
  After a few words from Earl FORTESCUE,
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that not one word of English was taught at the public school at which he was. Whether that was a creditable state of things he did not know; but there was now a modern side to most public schools, and he should be very much surprised if in any course of English literature the study of Chaucer should be entirely omitted. The noble Earl opposite (Earl Cadogan), who spoke with great authority on such a subject, said it would be a disadvantage for a young man to study Chaucer, inasmuch as it might introduce the use of obsolete words into his ordinary conversation; but that argument would, in his opinion, apply equally to the study of Latin.
  LORD LAWRENCEwas understood to say it was most desirable that young men should receive a good general education, for by that means they acquired a knowledge of a great variety of subjects.

FIRST COMMISSIONS IN THE ARMY.

  RESOLUTION.
  LORD STRATHNAIRN: My Lords, I feel persuaded that I do not misrepresent your sentiments when I say that the system of education which qualifies candidates for first appointments—that is, to command your soldiers, especially to lead them in war—is a State interest of vital—the greatest—importance; and
  1878
  I am equally certain that your Lordships will consider entitled to discussion and inquiry the general and serious complaints that the present educational system—of which competition is a principal feature—is based on great anomalies and erroneous principles, which endanger the efficient officering of the Army; because, my Lords, that system is a course of wholly civil and literary instruction—a preparation for civil and literary, not military distinction, or a military career—competition awarding the military prize, an officer's commission, to civil and literary, not to military proficiency. And, in justice to this important question, I should submit to your Lordships' special attention that a considerable portion of this education—poetry and plays—is absurd and demoralizing as instruction, as will be apparent to your Lordships, from the following quotation from the Prologue to the Canterbury Tales:—
  "He was a gentil harlot and a kind,
  A better felaw shulde a man not find,
  He wolde suffer, for a quart of wine,
  A good felaw to have his concubine.
  A twelve month, and excuse him at the full
  In danger hadde he at his owen gise
  The younge girles of the diocese."
  What excuse can be given, my Lords, by the responsible authorities—if there be any responsibility—for giving to boys and youths such low and pernicious study in lieu of books like Napier's Peninsular Campaigns, a model of style and a source of valuable military instruction? And as regards discipline, my Lords, which instruction—Chaucer's looseness, Othello's excesses, or the Duke of Wellington's Art of War—would cause an officer to exhibit a good example to our troops, and exercise a proper control over them, when marching through an enemy's country or when storming a town with the inhabitants at their mercy. A Book of Euclid, history, and geography are taught, but without military adaptation. Candidates are occasionally examined on the operations of war. But as the Examiners are not instructed in war operations, and know nothing about them, the test must be a fallacious one. The greatest anomaly remains to be told. The training of candidates for first appointments in the Army is not of the competency or responsibility of the Commander-in-Chief of the Army—it is taken out of his

  1879
  hands and placed in those of Civil Commissioners. Civil Commissioners select the subjects for examination and conduct the examination, and to Civil Commissioners are entrusted the arbitrary powers of the competitive system, unknown in any other State or Army, except the Chinese, of qualifying or disqualifying candidates for the service of their Sovereign and country—dangerous powers, because secret, as regards the award of marks to answering papers and not controlled or mitigated by any right of appeal or complaint, a right recognized in the most despotic countries—the right of subjects to complain. The rejection of a candidate entails the loss of his career and livelihood. Surely then, my Lords, complaints of unfair rejection should have a hearing?—such as, firstly, refusal to produce candidates' answering papers, which suggests an unfair award of marks; secondly, candidates seated on the back benches at examinations do not hear, on account of the numbers seated in front of them, the questions put by the Examiners, and consequently lose marks; thirdly, that the organic defects of the competitive system make a successful test a matter of chance. It is dependent on the relative proportion of candidates and vacancies. Lastly, my Lords, parents of candidates complain that the literature on which I have commented is opposed to the principles which they have inculcated in them from childhood. Their earnest wish is that their sons should receive a proper education, which would fit them for the Army and all its duties, as well as for educated society. But they complain that the study of sciences, from chemistry to magnetism, added to other subjects, is too great a strain on their mental and physical powers, and deprives them of rest and exercise, and brings on illness. This rigorous and ill-devised education has caused nothing short of unhappiness throughout the country; and it is impossible to go to any gathering without seeing numerous young gentlemen of the best material for the Army—intelligent, with good manners—whose hopes are blighted, and who are thrown on the hands of relatives who have spent, sometimes, all they possess on an unsuccessful education. The powers of the competitive system afford a scope to bias, that innate imperfection characteristic of
  1880
  our fallibility. There is the bias in favour of the War Office, who appointed the Civil Commissioners, and of their educational system. Secondly, there is the bias of literary men for the literary test; and for friends of relatives who come up for examination. Thirdly, there is the bias of the advocates of the policy of the change of the present class of officer, which is the necessary consequence of a wholly literary test. Justice in this country acknowledges bias as innate by the precautions which it has taken against its influence in the administration of the law, without imputing blame to those who entertain it—and I make this observation entirely in the same sense—such as challenges of jurors, mixed juries for foreigners. And in the Army a commanding officer cannot sit as President of a court-martial on one of his men, and an officer of the regiment of a candidate cannot be a member of a board examining him for promotion. As regards the desire to change the present class of officer, as it is called, the proofs of their intentions are unmistakable. A high functionary, in the company of a colleague, stated the intention, some time after the abolition of purchase, to do away with this class; and, about the same time, some not very prudent observations were made in official speeches in Parliament reflecting on these misnamed purchase officers which elicited comments from Members of your Lordships' House, of whom I was one. Recently a very painful sensation was created in your Lordships' House by speeches from two noble Lords on a point which affected most deeply, as understood by the House, the military feeling of numerous officers of two distinguished regiments. Dates and facts disprove one imputation, and an apology was made; and the other statement, which derived importance from being attributed to a Commander-in-Chief, dwindled into nothing when it transpired that the writer was an anonymous writer in a newspaper. Still, my Lords, these sentiments show the current of feeling against this class, particularly when coupled with two ominous omissions in recent educational regulations. The first is the omission of the Commander-in-Chiefs authority over the system; the second is the omission of the word "gentleman" as a qualification for candidates, although it still has a place in the Articles of War

  1881
  as a condition which, if forfeited, subjects an officer to cashiering. I venture to think that I have said enough to show that the present civil test for military candidates, whilst most objection-able in some essentials, does not impart to him any knowledge of his profession, and that it is, besides, unfavourable to discipline. It usurps the time and the powers of the mind which would teach the rudiments of the art of war, so simple and yet so important that the neglect of them has lost within the last few years Empires. How much greater would not be the disadvantage were regiments ordered abroad on a sudden emergency? Our system is not the Prussian system. They have their preparatory schools; they have no Shakspeares or Chaucers, but they combine instruction for the Army with that which is necessary for educated society. We should do well to follow their example in making athletic exercises, especially equitation and running, tests for officers' examinations. To such an extent do they carry this out in Prussia, that a Cavalry officer is not allowed to join his regiment till he has received a certificate from a master of hounds that he can go across country. The combination of a military training with the instruction for educated society during the four or five years of youth the best suited to study, which I have mentioned, is easily accomplished. What public opinion complains of is, that the eccentric and degraded literature on which I have commented takes the place of the very valuable first principles of war, such as judicious skirmishing, the system of outposts and vedettes, ambuscades, knowledge of ground, the first step towards geographical strategy, turning a flank and defending it, and other simple movements, with a strategical object. And I think, my Lords, when you have heard that extract from Othello, as given to candidates as a test of entrance for the Army at this present July examination, you will agree that the substitution of this important but easy military instruction for the really abominable literature I shall quote would be a desirable change. The back shelves of any library would be too good for it—it sins against all good government, civilization, and morality:—
  "OTHELLO.—Act I., Scene I.
  "Iago. Zounds, sir, you are robb'd; for shame, put on your gown;
  1882
  Your heart is burst, you have lost half your soul;
  Even now, very now, an old black ram
  Is tupping your white ewe. Arise, arise;
  Awake the snorting citizens with the bell,
  Or else the devil will make a grandsire of you. Arise, I say."
  "Iago. Zounds, sir, you are one of those, that will not serve God, if the Devil bid you. Because we come to do you service, you think we are ruffians: You'll have your daughter covered with a Barbary horse; you'll have your nephews neigh to you; you'll have coursers for cousins and gennets for germans.
  "Brab. What profane wretch art thou?
  "Iago. I am one, sir, that comes to tell you, your daughter and the Moor are now making the beast with two backs."
  Moved to resolve, That in the opinion of this House an inquiry ought to be instituted into the working and efficiency of the existing system under which candidates for first commissions in the Army are selected and appointed, with the view of ascertaining whether that system is calculated to insure the admission to the Army of those best qualified for the discharge of military duties.—(The lord Strathnairn.)
  LORD WALSINGHAMsaid, that although it was contended that the present examinations were not military examinations, yet he felt it was good that officers should be instructed in subjects which did not bear directly on their profession. Referring to the examination in Experimental and Natural Science up to May, 1873, the number of marks awarded for them was in fair proportion to the possible maximum, and many candidates chose to be examined in them; but in May, 1873, the Examiners seemed to have come down in one fell swoop upon the Science papers, and out of 93 candidates taking them up 72 got no marks at all, while 18 scored only 1,356 among them, or less than any one might have obtained. From that time the number of marks awarded continued proportionately low, and the candidates in Science sensibly diminished. He would not trouble the House with figures, but they went to prove that no candidates were allowed to obtain any appreciable number of marks, and that the Science examination was really almost annihilated. To show that it was not from any falling-off in the proficiency of the scholars, he would mention that in 1872 one gentleman obtained nearly 500 out of a maximum of 1,000, while the same candidate, in May, 1873, obtained only 60 out of a maximum of 2,000, although he had been reading

  1883
  diligently in the interval, and really knew far more than before. Apart from the obvious advantage and interest which attached to such subjects as electricity, magnetism, chemistry, physical geography and geology, they were subjects which were important both for Sandhurst and Woolwich after these examinations were over, and it was to be regretted that by the system pursued with regard to them, candidates were now almost entirely prevented from taking them up. He was told that whereas in other subjects certain test-books were generally accepted, the whole range of literature and science was open to the scientific Examiners, and the result was scarcely fair to the candidates; indeed, questions were asked in the papers on electricity, for instance, about terms of which the exact meaning had never been precisely defined, and on which the highest authorities differed. He did not know what might have been done in the examinations for direct commissions just concluded, but as the same electricity paper had been set which was set for the much more severe examination of candidates for Woolwich, it was evident that there was a disposition on the part of the Examiners to prevent a reasonable and fair approach to the maximum of marks apportioned to these papers. He would be very glad to hear any assurance from the Government that fair proficiency in these scientific subjects would be more generously and liberally dealt with than it had been since May, 1873. If not, he could not see the use of retaining them on the examination list with the attractive maximum of 2,000 marks.
  THE EARL OF SHREWSBURYwas understood to concur in much that had been said as to the desirability of abstaining, as far as possible, from insisting on students acquiring proficiency in useless subjects. In his opinion, much of the examination at present enforced was unnecessary, and in some respects it was simply a farce.
  EARL CADOGANsaid, the noble and gallant Lord who asked for an inquiry into the existing system of competitive examinations (Lord Strathnairn) had to some extent negatived his Motion by his speech—for he had so far prejudged the question as to render any inquiry wholly unnecessary. If he understood his speech aright, the noble and gallant
  1884
  Lord objected altogether to the present system of competitive examinations, and appeared also to wish that the education to be required of candidates for direct commissions should be of a more technical character. Reference had been already made to the Report of the Commission appointed by the noble Lord behind him (Lord Hampton) to inquire into the training of candidates for admission into the Army. The Commissioners in their Report, published in August, 1869, recommended that the examinations at Sandhurst and Woolwich, as well as those for direct commissions—all of them on non-professional subjects—should be transferred to the Civil Service Commission. They also made recommendations as to the general character of the education to be required of candidates for admission into the Army. This brought him to the competitive examinations for first appointments, established in 1871. He thought he was entitled to say that the establishment of those examinations was a direct consequence of the abolition of the system of Purchase. The examinations were never intended as tests of military acquirements, and their general design could not be better described than it was in the Report just referred to. Personally he had no objection to saying he had no great predilection in favour of competitive examination for the Army. He thought many of the arguments used by the opponents of the system were, if not unanswerable, at least plausible. It appeared to be at least probable that a man whose youth had been spent in deep study, and who had earned for himself the name of "bookworm," would not necessarily be the best man to lead a forlorn hope or quell an Indian Mutiny. Many who might have proved valuable officers had been excluded from the Service by the system of competitive examinations. There was in these examinations a great element of luck. Sir John Burgoyne said that it was possible for a man to fail in an examination with one set of candidates and to come first with another. He could not agree, however, with some of the arguments that were adduced by the opponents of competitive examinations. With respect to the allegation that they encouraged cramming, he was much struck by the argument of a noble Friend of his opposite (the Earl of Camperdown), who, in in-

  1885
  troducing the subject of examinations for the Navy the other evening, dealt with this subject. He agreed entirely with his noble Friend, that if we were to establish a uniform test examination for candidates, cramming would be much more facilitated than it was by the present system. With regard to the question of health and want of physique, he did not think it necessary that the examinations as at present constituted should cause injury to the health of any successful candidate. Even if a candidate for a commission did suffer in health from the excess of his labour, all candidates would be inspected by a medical man, and no officer would be allowed to proceed to examination unless he were certified by the Board to be free from bodily defects and ailments, and in all respects as to height and physical qualities fit for Her Majesty's service. He was sorry to find the noble and gallant Lord (Lord Strathnairn) was of opinion that the training of candidates for direct commissions should be technical. In that opinion the noble and gallant Lord was opposed by many persons quite as well qualified to form a correct judgment on the subject. If the noble and gallant Lord's arguments were carried to their legitimate conclusion, all examinations except simple test examinations must be abolished, and we should then be face to face with that bugbear of modern politics—patronage. The tendency of legislation of late years had been to diminish, if not to abolish, all patronage, whether public or private, and he could not help thinking that any Government would take a somewhat bold course which endeavoured to re-establish the system of patronage as an introduction to the Army unless it could be protected and guided by some safeguards which he confessed were at present unknown to him. He trusted he had said enough to justify Her Majesty's Government in arriving at the conclusion to resist the noble and gallant Lord's Motion for an inquiry.
  THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, that this was not the first occasion on which complaints had been made with reference to these examinations; but it appeared from the arguments of noble Lords that evening, that it was not the particular authors selected to whom objection was felt, but that the attacks were directed against the system
  1886
  under which the examinations were conducted. But the system depended upon the Report of the Royal Commission, which was signed by the noble Earl who now presided over the Dominion of Canada (the Earl of Dufferin), a noble Lord holding a high office in the present Government, the present Governor General of India (Lord Northbrook), and five distinguished military Officers. The Commission examined the Field Marshal Commanding-in-Chief, 15 General Officers, and four Members of the Council of Military Education; and with such evidence before them they came almost unanimously to the decision which had been quoted. There were three cardinal points in the Report of the Commissioners of 1860 with regard to candidates for admission into the Army. One was that it was unreasonable to expect of a lad of 16 or 17 any wide professional attainments, but that it was reasonable to expect of him such a general degree of culture as an English gentleman ought to possess. The second point was that the best form of general culture was found in the education given at the great public schools; and the third was that the examination being nonprofessional, it might conveniently be committed to non-professional men. That position seemed to be almost unassailable. He understood open competition to mean this, that, the Army still being popular, for every commission Her Majesty was able to dispose of, two or three candidates were forthcoming, and the Civil Service Commissioners selected for such commission that candidate who they believed was most likely to serve with credit to his country, and submitted his name to the Commander-in-Chief. This was not a state of things, it might be supposed, of which friends of the Army could complain. Their Lordships had been told that open competition led to cramming; but cramming existed before these examinations, and was indeed an inevitable incident of every system of examination. As to "crammers," he might observe that there had been a long struggle between them and the Examiners, and he was happy to say that of late the crammers had had the worst of it. It was difficult to obtain exact information on the subject, but he had reason to believe that out of every 100 candidates who, during the last three years, had gone to Woolwich from seven of our public

  1887
  schools, over 60 went direct from the schools themselves, and a minority only passed through the hands of crammers. Those figures had been supplied to him from a private source, but he believed they represented with a fair degree of accuracy the existing state of things. Their Lordships had been told that competitive examination not only failed to furnish the best men to the Service, but actually tended to the selection of those who were the least qualified. That heresy was quoted by his noble Friend on the front bench opposite. He (the Marquess of Lansdowne) believed that that was a most mischievous fallacy. He feared that young lads hearing such theories as had been propounded by men in the position of the noble Lords who had spoken that evening they would be disposed to say—" Let us throw our books on one side, and go in exclusively for cricket and rowing. "On a matter of this kind a very little experience was worth a very great deal of theory, and he hoped the illustrious Duke on the cross-benches would not fail to say whether the candidates who had come into the Army under the system of open competition were worse in any respect than those who had been admitted under the system which preceded it.
  LORD NAPIER AND ETTRICKsaid, he could have supported the Motion of his noble and gallant Friend with more satisfaction if it had been simply directed against the system of competitive examinations for first commissions in the Army, instead of being drawn in the modified form in which it appeared upon the Paper. He did not think much would be gained by an inquiry into the subject, because the Report would be that some good and some indifferent officers had been appointed under the system. As to those who were reputed good, nothing would be gained by the discovery, and as to the indifferent it would be invidious that some should be reported inferior to others. Competitive examinations were all very well in the case of Civil servants requiring special qualifications or of officers in the scientific branches of the Army or Navy, but they were not suited to the selection of officers to serve in the Infantry and Cavalry of the Line. The qualifications required for such officers were not such as were likely to be either created or tested by a competitive examination sys-
  1888
  tem. The qualifications to which he referred were, in the first place, courage; in the second, physical health and strength, together with a passion for athletic exercises. These qualifications might be in part ascertained under a competitive system of examination; but they had never been adopted into that system. Moreover, officers should be possessed of the authority and respect which belonged to family connection and position, for there was nothing more respected in the Army than name and family position—they were the elements of solidity and order. In the fourth place officers of the British Army should be in the possession of private means, without which an officer could not maintain himself under the existing conditions of service in the Army—no one could keep his son in a decent and honourable position in the Army without allowing him about twice as much as he received from the State. These qualifications were not to be, as he had before remarked, either fostered or tested by means of a system of purely intellectual examination; and if it were necessary to strengthen speculative argument by experience, it might be mentioned that no such system of examination prevailed in any of what could be called the military nations of Europe. It was with regret that he felt himself bound to differ from many noble Lords who sat on his side of the House, and especially from the noble Viscount (Viscount Card-well), who had taken a very conspicuous part in the military alterations of recent years. No one recognized the great service of the noble Viscount to the Army more than he did. By the abolition of purchase, the establishment of depôt centres, and the introduction of practical and strategical exercises on a large scale the noble Lord had rendered great services to the country, the value of which would be recognized more and more as time rolled on. But he ventured to doubt whether he had taken the wisest course with reference to the system of examination. It was urged in favour of the present system that it obviated the obligations and responsibilities of patronage, but he believed that in all respects patronage was destined to be extinguished; and as for the contention that the system of nomination was objectionable, inasmuch as it put those who were anxious to obtain ap-

  1889
  pointments for their eons into the painful position of soliciting favours, he thought the inconvenience, such as it was, ought to be suffered for the general good. He believed, however, that no great inconvenience would be experienced by applicants so long as the patronage was vested in the present Commander-in-Chief, who belonged to the Royal Family, and who was thus placed far above the obligations of family connection. Under these circumstances, he hoped the Government would not lose sight of the question, and that at some future time they would see their way to the introduction of such changes in the system of competition as would give a more prominent place to physical and social qualities than was now the case.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYwas understood to restate his objections to the adoption of Chaucer's works as a subject of examination. It was in no way in accordance with the recommendations of the Royal Commissioners. They recommended that in the preliminary examination such subjects were to be submitted to examination as came in the ordinary course of good public schools. Now, however attractive any public school might wish to show itself to English literature, he had never heard that anyone had introduced Chaucer into its course; and, if so, its introduction was at variance with the recommendations of the Royal Commissioners, and was forcing on the young men intending to enter military service a study totally useless to their future or any ordinary career. He had no objection to the study of Chaucer in itself.
  LORD CARLINGFORDsaid, that if Shakespeare and other old English authors were to be tabooed because they sometimes appeared indelicate and coarse when judged by the modern standard, there would be very little of our best literature left. Under such a rule, the classics, such as Horace, Juvenal, &c, would, of course, go; and, indeed, he did not know how far the rule would not carry them, even to the highest of all literature.
  THE MARQUESS OF BATHremarked that he himself and a good many noble Lords on his side of the House disapproved of the system of open competition, and he wished to know why they were called upon to vote against the Motion? He wanted to know
  1890
  why there had been such an ominous silence on the part of the Government? This was a question on which he thought the Government ought to offer some explanation to the House whether the system of competition was to be maintained, or whether those were right who considered it objectionable. Was the system one that ought to be maintained, and would the Government state, if they were not now disposed to condemn it, whether they were making inquiries for the purpose of testing the soundness of their previous opinion on the subject?
  LORD STRATHNAIRNdenied that he had ever said or thought of saying, as attributed to him by his noble Friend (Earl Cadogan), that technical education ought to be the only education of officers; on the contrary, his opinion was that military training was not perfect unless it went hand in hand with the education of enlightened society; and precisely because he was opposed to an isolated education he disapproved so much of the wholly civil education as a test for officers of the Army. He had been equally misrepresented—he had no doubt involuntarily—as to what he said about equitation:—what he said was that the Prussian Army attached the greatest importance to good education for all classes of officers—for the Staff especially, and equally so for the Cavalry—and to such an extent that no officer was allowed to pass for the Cavalry unless furnished with a certificate by the two officers who kept packs of hounds at the Government expense for the express purpose of training officers that they could go across a country. The noble Lord who represented the War Office (Earl Cadogan) had spoken in terms of high eulogy of the sanatory state of the candidates at the July examinations; but he (Lord Strathnairn) had heard a very different account from good authority, that so many of the candidates had exhibited such symptoms of overwork and illness that the medical officer, of whose competency it was, had inspected them, and had found it necessary to direct them to leave off their studies. His noble Friend (the Marquess of Bath) had completely represented the state of feeling on his side of the House, and he agreed with him that if he (Lord Strathnairn) had brought forward his Motion two years ago he would have been supported by a large majority.

  1891
  However, he (Lord Strathnairn) derived much satisfaction from the manner in which the representative of the War Office in their Lordships' House had spoken of the competitive system. He had said that he himself was not well disposed towards it; and as his opinions indicated the desire to make changes in the system, and as the feeling of some noble Lords was not to press the question to a division, he would conform to that opinion.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

NATAL.

  ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE.
  LORD BLACHFORDmoved an Address for the production of Correspondence relating to certain proposed alterations in the Constitution of Natal. He did so, because he had long thought that this small Colony was, from its liability to a serious native war, the most dangerous in Her Majesty's dominions, and because he was apprehensive lest the measures of Her Majesty's Government might diminish, instead of increasing, their power of dealing with that danger. Natal was occupied by 17,000 or 18,000 Europeans scattered among 250,000 Natives, submissive, no doubt, and grateful at present, but liable to become discontented, and in case of disturbance to be recruited or assisted by the inexhaustible tribes of Zulus and Kaffirs beyond our frontier. In New Zealand 50,000 Natives, cut off by the sea from all assistance, were pitted against almost an equal number of Europeans, and the result was before us. It could be hardly doubted that a serious African war might be far more disastrous to the colonists—more costly to this country and, what ought not to be left out of sight, would involve far greater slaughter of the Natives than that which we had lately brought to a close against the Maories. The form of government in Natal was most unfitted to meet such dangers. The administration was conducted by an Executive Council of which Government officials formed a large majority. Laws were made and money voted by a Legislative Council in which the Representative Members bore a majority of two to one. Let it be considered what would be the state of Ireland, if it were governed by an elective Legis-
  1892
  lature representing a small minority of the inhabitants, while the administration consisted of permanent officials sent from England, proclaiming that they existed for the protection of the majority. Such a constitution would certainly not conduce to the peaceful transaction of business. Nor had it done so in Natal—which had long been about the most troublesome colony in the British Empire. It was the A B C of constitutional history that a representative Legislature, with the power of the purse, would persistently struggle for control over this Executive. This struggle had been for some time continuous in Natal. Nor was this to be complained of. It was the natural course of colonial development. And the differences had been almost uniformly on questions which, though important, were not dangerous—finance, public works, loans, the distribution of political power, and so on. But now a fresh element was brought into view. The case of Langalibalele, whatever its merits, served us with notice of two dangers—one the combination of Native tribes against our authority—the other, that in the face of such a combination the British authority might be weak or divided. He (Lord Blachford) was strongly of opinion, that in any colony where a powerful body of Natives existed, the Government should be one of two kinds. The conduct of native policy should be with that power which was responsible for the safety of the Colony. Either the Colony should conduct its own Native policy, and be left to take the consequences of conducting it badly—which meant the establishment of responsible government and ultimate withdrawal of troops, or the Home Government charging itself with the protection of the Colony, should have thorough control over the Native policy; which meant the presence of British soldiers and government by a Crown Council. For in what might be called the leading case of New Zealand, there was a general concurrence of opinion that the attempt to separate the Native policy from the general administration of the Colony was a failure which ought not to be repeated. These being the necessities of the case, what was now proposed. It was proposed to establish a somewhat cumbrous Legislature of about 30 persons, composed of elective Members and Government nominees—but so

  1893
  constituted that the elective portion should have a hare majority. It must be remembered that Government nominees were not a Government party. If the office of nominee were to be respectable, the nominee must be allowed a large independence; and if nominees were to be largely independent the Government might find, when they had to confront a popular feeling, that though they might pick up a few votes among the elective members, they would be almost equally likely to lose some among their own nominees. Such a condition of things, therefore, did not furnish a firm foundation for a steady Native policy; nor, therefore, such a guarantee for the peace of the colony as this country had a right to expect. But it might be said the proposed constitution was at any rate better than the existing one. Was that so? The existing constitution was most inconvenient; but it contained one valuable clause—a power of revocation, which, in the prospect, or on the actual occurrence of serious danger, Her Majesty's Government might use to sweep aside obstacles and assume all necessary powers. That was the point at which he had been driving. What he earnestly desired Her Majesty's Government to consider was this—whether their proper course was not boldly to use the power which they had in their hands, to establish that form of constitution which in their hearts they believed to be best for the Colony and the country; or failing that, whether it were right to abandon a power which in case of actual or anticipated danger, might be used to lift them beyond the reach of embarrassment, in order to obtain a mitigation of existing evils which, he could not but fear, would prove wholly delusive.
  Moved, "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for, Papers relative to the recent change in the Constitution of Natal."—(The Lord Blackford.)
  THE EARL OF CARNARVON: My Lords, no one certainly has a better right to criticize the course which has been adopted in Natal, because no one can do it with fuller knowledge than my noble Friend opposite. He has watched all proceedings there for many years—proceedings which he admits to be full of difficulty in the ordinary administration and legislation of the Colony; and
  1894
  no one should be better able to appreciate, than he does, the difficulty' which not only the Home Government but which the Colony itself has to contend with in dealing with this subject. My Lords, it has been a very difficult question, and one which has taxed not only the ability of the singularly able administrator whom it has been our good fortune to have on the spot, but also the good feeling and the good sense of the Colony. And I desire thus early in my remarks to bear my testimony to the fair and, on the whole, dispassionate manner in which a question, raising, as it must have done, the gravest issues for the Natal Legislature, was discussed by that Assembly. My Lords, while I readily admit the weight of the criticism offered by my noble Friend, I entirely disagree from him in thinking that the change which has been made is either a small or a barren one. I believe, on the contrary, that it will bear fruit—I am sure that it will bear fruit if the measure which has now been passed receives at the hands of the Natal Legislature that fair consideration for which, to judge from the antecedents of the last few months, I am quite willing to give them credit. The original Constitution was one in which the Executive Power was lodged in the hands of a Governor appointed from this country and a permanent staff of Officers; while the Legislative power on the other hand was intrusted to an Assembly, not composed, as the noble Lord described it, of two elected Members to one nominated Member, but of three elected Members to one nominated Member—which made it more difficult to work. The Bill which has just been passed by the Natal Legislature reverses, it may be said, in most of its features that state of things. There have been eight Members added to the Council, all the eight being Government nominees. The total number will therefore be 28, or 15 elected and 13 nominees. Those new Members are required to have a real property qualification of the value of £1,000; they are to be on the voters' list for two years at least; and some other conditions are also laid down. Lastly, of the eight additional Members four are taken from the coast districts and four from the up-country districts, between which there has always existed a rivalry which I think their interests hardly bear out. That is the alteration

  1895
  which has been effected, and I quite differ from my noble Friend when he says it is small. My noble Friend seems to think there can be but one or two modes of Government applicable to a colony under the conditions which exist at Natal—either total and complete freedom, such as is accorded by the grant of responsible Government; or, on the other hand, absolute and direct control from the Home Government in England. Now, my Lords, the Constitution of Natal lies somewhat between those two extremes, and I am not disposed to quarrel with it on that ground. I value as highly as any man responsible Government, and he is a dull man who has watched the progress for some years past of Canada and the Australian Colonies without appreciating the marvellous effects produced by responsible Government in a congenial soil and under fair conditions. But its success depends on the elements from which it is to be drawn, and on the means by which it is to be worked; and the conditions which exist in Natal render responsible Government there totally out of the question. For many years past there has been a growing conviction on the part of all authorities, not only in this country, but even on the spot, that the existing Constitution of Natal which is just passing away was not only highly unsuitable, but impracticable. In 1865 a memorial was sent by the Legislative Council praying for a change. In 1869 a Bill was actually passed for the reform of the Constitution. That Bill erred, I think, on the side of giving responsible Government to the Colony, and effect was not given to it. Two years later a memorial was addressed to the Secretary of State from the coast districts praying for an increase of representation. In the following year, I think, the noble Lord opposite (the Earl of Kimberley), then Secretary of State, used the powers to which the noble Lord (Lord Blackford) has referred for the purpose of reserving to the Government a much larger control over the finances of the Colony than it had before exercised. Lastly, in 1874—only a twelvemonth ago—another Bill was passed by the Legislative Council of Natal, which was still more in the direction of responsible Government, and which I found myself obliged to advise the Crown to disallow. All this shows, at least, that even the Colony itself was dissatisfied with its Constitution.
  1896
  Well, what is the result? The Constitution has been tried and has undoubtedly failed. There have been repeated difficulties between the local Executive Government and the Legislature. There have been equally numerous difficulties between the Colony and the Home Government. I could quote passages from the despatches of my noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Kimberley), and those of his predecessor (Earl Granville), which point to the perfect hopelessness, in the existing state of things, of working that Constitution. At the present moment, no doubt, owing to the want of due administrative arrangements in the public offices, business of mere ordinary routine is to a great extent stopped. Moreover, I am satisfied that there has been a very large expenditure of public money on objects not always worthy of it; while, on the other hand, matters of vital consequence have been neglected; and in spite of the ability and conscientiousness of Mr. Shepstone, whose name is well known in this country, there has not in my opinion been that control over Native affairs which is required by the public interest. The result is that there has been a stagnation, so to speak, of many of the industrial interests of the Colony. There has been—as I think Sir Garnet Wolseley pointed out to the Legislature—that want of internal security which leads, in the long run, to a want also of external confidence—which hinders emigration and which prevents the real development of the Colony. Meanwhile, there have been in that Colony questions of the very highest moment to be settled. The question of emigration is one of the greatest complexity. There is also the question of public works—such as those connected with roads, with the harbours of Natal, and with the railway, which, above all things, is required there. There has been, moreover, a force of 30,000 armed Natives resting like thunder clouds upon the frontier of the Colony. I must say it seems to me impossible that those questions can be satisfactorily or safely dealt with if you have not a strong Government in the Colony itself. My Lords, that strong Government you have not had. In a great measure this is owing to the fact that, in the Legislature at least, the Government has always been in a minority and has been obliged to conciliate here and conciliate there in

  1897
  order, if possible, to satisfy contending parties. Not only has the Colony been often in danger, but that Native element, which I agree with my noble Friend in regarding as an element of great insecurity, is keen-sighted enough to perceive the weakness of the Government and has sometimes taken advantage of it. Under these circumstances, I felt that the time had come when the change could no longer be delayed. Now the question is, whether that change has been wise or not? My noble Friend (Lord Blachford) pointed, as I understood him, to two alternatives—one, complete Responsible Government, and the other a strict form of Crown Government. I think I have shown the House that responsible Government is not suited to the present condition of Natal. As to the other alternative, I will not say that a strict form of Crown Government would not work well, but I think it is prudent statesmanship never to insist upon more than is absolutely necessary—especially when the freedom of Englishmen is concerned. I would rather go upon the principle of trust than upon the principle of rigid restriction. The Colony has had its difficulties. The Legislature, like all other Legislatures, may occasionally not have been wise. But within the last few months it has consented to a change which must have been repugnant to the feelings of many of its Members, and I think we shall be right in trying first the principle of trust. My noble Friend talks of it as a very cumbrous machinery which is being set up. I cannot see that it is so cumbrous as he seems to think it. I believe that the Legislature will be very evenly balanced, and that with proper management it ought to work well. At all events, this is a compromise which on the one hand strengthens the Executive, while it does not take away the representative institutions which exist. If, unfortunately, it should be found, after all, that the Legislature is incapable of dealing with the questions which will come before it, then, and then only, will be the time to tighten the knot and to take greater powers than are now exercised. In the first instance, however, I would rather accept the spontaneous and free gift of the Colony than impose, in an uncompromising and, perhaps, ungracious spirit, fetters which I do not think are deserved. It may be satisfac-
  1898
  tory to the House to know that the result already achieved is considerable. I may mention here—what your Lordships have, perhaps, been made aware of by the public prints—that the Cape Government has acceded to the release of the Kaffir Chief Langalibalele. By this time I trust he has left Robben Island and gone to the place assigned to him for his future residence, where his family will have a reasonable amount of access to him, at the same time that all due precautions are taken with a view to the safety of the Colony. At the time when this subject was under discussion in your Lordships' House there were gloomy anticipations as to what the Cape Government would do. I ventured to say on that occasion that the Cape Government on a re-consideration of the matter would feel that there was nothing very exacting in the request addressed to them, and that they would meet us in the spirit in which we endeavoured to approach them. That confidence has been justified, for they have done all I thought they would do. The tribes have been allowed to go back to their own parts of the Colony; but it has been provided—and I think wisely—that the locations should be small and, as far as possible, separate one from the other. One tribe, which was broken up on a mere suspicion, for which it appears there was no good foundation, has been restored to its position, and the sum of £20,000 has been very judiciously laid out by Sir Garnet Wolseley in cattle, stock, agricultural implements, &c, which were to be given to the tribe by way of compensation. Farms have been assigned to White settlers between some of the Native locations; and in other respects steps have been taken to carry out the policy which was sketched in the despatch laid before your Lordships two or three months ago. That policy is one which, no doubt, raises many very grave questions. It is one which must be carried out with extreme caution. I have great confidence, however, in those to whose hands the execution of it has been intrusted. It may be that the security of the Colony will have to be provided for still further in a military point of view while this policy is in progress; but that is a matter which requires consideration. I am satisfied, however, from the reports I have received as to the progress of affairs, that though much has

  1899
  not been actually accomplished much has been commenced, and the way has been paved for still more. I cannot conclude without expressing my acknowledgments and the acknowledgments of Her Majesty's Government to the very eminent Officer who at a few hours' notice undertook the singularly difficult task which was intrusted to him. Sir Garnet Wolseley has given evidence of the highest military capacity, and all I would now say is that he has shown in the administration of civil affairs in the midst of very great difficulties an amount of ability, tact, and prudence which are equal to the military qualities he has displayed on other fields. My Lords, I have confidence also in his successor. Sir Henry Bulwer comes of a family whose name is illustrious in this country—of a family that has done great and good service. I entertain the hope that in the new sphere of action to which he has been transferred he will maintain the traditions of his race and name. In conclusion, I will only venture to say this much, and I shall be glad if my words go to Natal—I would earnestly entreat those who have taken part in these transactions, whatever their views may be—whether it be the Bishop of Natal, whether it be others who have taken a leading part by influence, by word, or by action—I would entreat them to allow the past now to be forgotten and to address themselves to the future. I would entreat them to bury the past discords which have agitated the society of Natal, to allow the sleeping lions of future controversy to slumber for awhile, and to give a fair, a friendly, and a loyal support to that Constitution which they have discussed freely, and which now is in existence.
  LORD CARLINGFORDthought that the noble Earl the Secretary for the Colonies implied—and, if so, he was not able to agree with him—that there was no choice between a Constitution in which the popular element should be dominant and the reduction of Natal to the position of a Crown Colony—namely, a Colony governed by a purely nominee Legislature. Surely this was not the only choice? He regretted that when the noble Earl made this change in the constitution of the Colony he did not go a step further and place the nominated members in the majority. The noble Earl hardly did justice to the main reason
  1900
  which rendered a popular form of Government inapplicable to a so-called Colony like Natal, where a certain number of European settlers were surrounded by a much larger proportion of uncivilized men, who could never be represented in a Legislature, and who presented a constant danger to the safety and stability of the Colony—a danger which made it always necessary for the colonists to look to the Home Government for their protection. This being the case, surely it was necessary that the Home Government should be able to control the local affairs and legislation of the Colony. The noble Earl had stated that that would be practically the effect of the change, and in most cases it probably would; but would it not have been better if the noble Earl had fully and frankly informed the colonists that the Government must secure the power of controlling the colonial policy. He believed the moral influence of a popularly elected body in the Council, although in a minority, would have been very great in all purely domestic matters. When, however, it came to questions of Native policy, in which colonial interests and feelings were often so strongly felt and so hotly excited, he was not so sure of Government being able to carry its points; and when the balance was very close it would give an awkward degree of power to one or two members of that small elected majority, who would be able either to support or overthrow the policy of the Government. If the noble Earl had gone a step further, he would have put the Home Government in a much safer position than it would now occupy, both in regard to the protection of the Native people and the assertion of its own rights and duties.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he could not entirely agree with his noble Friend behind him (Lord Blachford). No doubt it was a plausible thing to say that in the Colony of Natal it was desirable for the Government to have the power it possessed in a Crown Colony. He agreed that we could not establish a responsible Government in such a Colony as Natal; but what he wished to point out was that, although there was something neat, as it were, in the dilemma—"Either have a responsible Government or a simple Crown Colony," yet he thought the course taken by his noble Friend oppo-

  1901
  site was the wisest under the circumstances. Here was a Colony which for some time had enjoyed a very considerable measure of self-government: moreover, it was placed near other Colonies which enjoyed free institutions; and, on the whole, he thought his noble Friend had done wisely in being content with what he had attained. The willingness with which the colonists had accepted the advice of the Home Government showed their great good sense and self-control. With the liberty allowed to them by the new Constitution, it might be possible to establish a strong Government, and ultimately to pave the way to the full measure of self-government, so as to relieve the Home Government from the heavy responsibility which for a time must attach to it in respect of this Colony.
  LORD BLACHFORDasked whether the noble Earl would produce the Papers?
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONreplied that he would produce extracts from them after he had looked them through.
  Address agreed, to.

ENTAIL AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 214.)
(The Lord Chancellor.)
ENTAIL AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 214.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said, that it had come from the other House, and so anxious were Members of the other House that it should become law this year, that, although they would have desired to make alterations in it, they declined to propose any alterations in order that it might pass through as rapidly as possible. The Bill had been approved by the three great bodies representing the legal opinion of the metropolis of Scotland—the Faculty of Advocates, the Writers to the Signet, and the Society of Solicitors to the Court of Session, and by the two which expressed the legal opinion of the provinces—the Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow and the Society of Advocates in Aberdeen. The reason that had induced the Government to introduce the measure was that the restrictions under the Scotch Entail Act of 1685 had be-
  1902
  come so rife and so great that, as Lord Rutherfurd had said, a nobleman could not alter the inscription on a button worn by his livery servant. That state of things was to some extent remedied by the Rutherfurd Act of 1848, and it was not proposed by the present Bill to affect or alter the Law of Entails in Scotland, which were analogous to English entails with one exception. In England, as their Lordships knew, the tenant for life and the tenant in tail in remainder might, since 1848, by consent with each other break the entail, and the tenant in tail might do that as soon as he reached 21 years of age. In Scotland a tenant in tail could not give his consent until the age of 25. He supposed that the Scotch character was so incautious upon the subject of money or property that a greater amount of protection was required to be thrown around a young gentleman in Scotland than was required to be thrown around a young gentleman of similar position in England. Her Majesty's Government had arrived at the conclusion that, whatever might have been the state of the Scotch character in 1848, the time had arrived with the gradual progress of enlightenment in that nation that a Scotchman who had attained 21 years should be allowed, as in England, to take part in disentailing an estate. It was strongly expected that the Rutherfurd Act, which was passed in 1848, would by this time have extinguished all the perpetuities which had existed under the old Scotch Law of Entail, and that had to a great extent happened—a great many Scotch entails had been opened since 1848. But nevertheless, the Rutherfurd Act had not opened entails to the extent that was anticipated. It imposed several conditions with regard to the opening of entails which had practically prevented the opening of entails. Among other things, it provided that if there was only one heir in existence, he might himself disentail property whether he was born before or after 1848, provided he was unmarried. If he was unmarried, though he had no children, he could not do so. As he had said, a considerable number of estates had been disentailed, but a large number still remained, and the result was that they created destinations so remote that the relatives could hardly be traced, and the remaindermen could hardly be found, and were sometimes

  1903
  not known by sight to the owner, the consequence being that it was next to impossible in the first place to trace them, and when traced they would not give their consent except on payment of an extortionate sum. It was proposed to provide by this Bill that in all cases the consent of the nearest heir was to be required before an entail could be barred, and that in the case of remoter heirs the Court should have power to fix a value upon their expectancy, and to take steps for having the amount paid over to them before an entail could be barred. It was also proposed to enable married heirs who had no issue to disentail, and to extend the limit at present existing with regard to the kind of improvements the making of which could be made chargeable upon estates, as also the mode in which those charges might be levied upon the properties. These were briefly the main provisions of the measure which he asked their Lordships to read the second time.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, that he did not rise to oppose the Bill, but thought that it would require very careful consideration, because it had not passed through any ordeal of examination in the House of Commons. With regard to the change of the ages, he thought that it was extremely doubtful whether it would not be better to retain the age of 25, except for one reason—namely, that it seemed very invidious that in Scotland a young man should be considered to be of age at 21 for every other purpose but this. The 9th clause enabled an heir of entail to make a perpetual charge for improvements, and the objection felt was that the improvements would wear out and require renewal, and therefore there ought not to be a permanent charge made for them; and he complained that this proposal was even contrary to the principle of the Scotch Agricultural Holdings Bill. The true principle was to make a charge for 20 years, and there was nothing to oppose to that but the present custom. It might happen under this Bill that for improvements executed 50 years before the whole of the cost might be imposed upon the heirs. He thought that most unjust, and complained that
  1904
  the Bill enabled the life-tenant to charge his posterity with the full value of all the improvements he had made during his life. If other noble Lords did not put Amendments on the Paper, he should do so in Committee, where he hoped the clauses would be fully discussed.
  THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHsaid, that the Bill had slipped through the other House without discussion. It might be described as a Bill to enable half-a-dozen noblemen in the North of Scotland to relieve themselves of their difficulties at the expense of all the rest. He objected to the measure because it gave greater facilities to cutting off entails; and that the age of 21 was substituted for 25, for the obvious reason that a young man, for the sake of an increased allowance, and to relieve an embarrassed father, would more readily consent to cutting off an entail than if he had arrived at a more mature age. What he termed the burthening clauses would require the most careful consideration. There was no doubt that some cases existed which justified the introduction of the measure; but it would have to be most carefully examined in Committee.
  THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANapproved of the Bill generally, but should be sorry to see it passed without some of the safeguards referred to by the noble Lords who had spoken. He thought the provisions with reference to charging improvements were much too wide.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid, he looked upon the Bill as a step towards the practical amendment of the Law of Entail in Scotland. He was gratified that Her Majesty's Government had undertaken to introduce it.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORpointed out that the reason why it had gone through the House of Commons without discussion was the great unanimity with which it was supported by the Scotch Members, who did not wish to imperil its passing by debating its provisions. The real aim of the Bill was to carry out further the principle of the Act of 1848, and not to put an end to entails in Scotland.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

  DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND ART BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill for making further provision respecting the Department of Science and Art—Was presented by The LORD CHANCELLOR; read 1a. (No. 221.)

  FOREIGN JURISDICTION BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill for amending the Foreign Jurisdiction Acts—Was presented by The LORD CHANCELLOR; read 1a. (No. 224.)
  House adjourned at Ten o'clock, to Monday next, Eleven o'clock.