Lords Sitting of 18 February 1878

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading— Consolidated Fund (£6,000,000)*; Exchequer Bonds and Bills (£6,000,000)*; House Occupiers Disqualification Removal (Scotland)* (29).
Second Beading—Parliamentary Elections (Metropolis) (12).

THE EASTERN QUESTION—THE ARMISTICE—THE TREATIES OF 1856 AND 1871.—OBSERVATIONS.
THE EARL OF DERBY: My Lords, seeing my noble Friend (Lord Campbell), who has a Motion on the Notice Paper, in his place now, I wish to make an appeal to him, with which, I think, he will not be indisposed to comply. The subject of that Notice has been considered by myself and my Colleagues, and we are satisfied that a discussion relating to the terms of the Armistice entered into between the two belligerent Powers in a war in which, so far, Her Majesty's Government have remained neutrals would not be a discussion calculated to advance the public service, and certainly would not be one in which any Representative of Her Majesty's Government in this House could take a part. My noble Friend, of course, may proceed with his Motion or not, as he thinks proper; but I think it right to inform him before he begins his statement that, in the event of his doing so, we do not intend to take part in any debate that may ensue and shall meet the Motion by the previous Question.
EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I entirely agree in the observations that have fallen from the noble Earl. I am not aware whether this Motion is intended as a Motion for a Vote of Confidence in the Government or a Vote of Want of Confidence; but I can only say for myself—and I believe I speak also for my noble Friends near me—that in either of those two courses we are not at present disposed to concur.
LORD CAMPBELL,whose Notice of Motion was—
"To move to resolve, That in the opinion, of this House the terms of the armistice between Russia and the Porte are such as to justify Her Majesty's Government in taking every precaution to discourage the encroachments by which the Treaties of 1856 and 1871 are unfortunately threatened,"
said, there was only one rule by which any noble Lord could be guided on an appeal of this kind from the Government. When the Government affirmed that discussion on a given Notice was likely to be detrimental to the public service, the announcement of their views—whether their conclusions be well founded or not—created a hostile feeling in the audience which nobody with Parlia-
1842
mentary experience would think it prudent to encounter. There was no room for deliberation on the point; but as to noble Lords who might be disposed to criticize his Notice, and whose language might create an incorrect impression out-of-doors, he would take this opportunity of adding that the drift and design of the Motion was merely to place their Lordships in accord with the House of Commons, which had lately put on record a Vote of Credit to strengthen them against an overbearing Power. As to the Motion, he postponed it in deference to the appeal of the noble Earl the Foreign Secretary, as he would always do on similar occasions; reserving to himself a perfect right to move in the same or in a different form a Resolution, to the same effect, whenever the obstacle referred to by the Government had been disposed of.

THE EASTERN QUESTION — MOVEMENTS OF THE FLEET.—QUESTION.
EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I wish to ask the noble Earl, Whether there is any truth in the rumour of a further movement of the Fleet in Turkish waters; and, if so, whether that movement has been the result of any communications between Her Majesty's Government and the Russian Government? I wish, also, to ask if it is convenient for the noble Earl to state whether any further progress has been made in respect of a Conference of the Great Powers for the purpose of bringing about Peace?
THE EARL OF DERBY: My Lords, in answer, first, to the latter Question put by the noble Earl, I am sorry to say that since the House last met no further progress has been made, so far as I am aware, for the assembling of a Conference or Congress. On that point it is scarcely necessary for me to observe, that whatever delay may have arisen, has not arisen on the part of Her Majesty's Government. With regard to the other Question of the noble Earl, respecting the movements of the Fleet, what has happened is this—Admiral Hornby was sent up the Sea of Marmora with full discretionary power of selection as to the place of anchorage. It was suggested to him by the Admiralty that Prince's Islands would be the safest and most convenient; he had, however, full power to act to the best of his judgment

1843
in the selection of the place that might be thought most advisable; and, after communication with Mr. Layard, Admiral Hornby thought it desirable to move the vessels to the Bay of Moudania, which is rather further from Constantinople; but where, I believe, there is better anchorage, and where he will be in telegraphic communication with the capital, while at Prince's Islands he would not be. I may add, that the movement which has been effected has not been the result of any negotiations between this Government and that of Russia.
EARL GRANVILLE: Can the noble Earl give the House any information with regard to the threatened advance of the Russian troops on Constantinople?
THE EARL OF DERBY: No, my Lords. At present, as to an advance on Constantinople, I am not aware of anything. As regards a subject on which there have been communications—a possible advance on Gallipoli—I have received a communication, but it has arrived only within the last few hours, and the Government have not as yet had time to consider it. I shall, however, take an early opportunity of stating the purport of it to your Lordships' House.

THE EASTERN QUESTION—THE BRITISH AMBASSADOR AT THE PORTE.

  PERSONAL VINDICATION.
  THE EARL OF DERBY: My Lords, I have received a telegram from Mr. Layard which, inasmuch as it contains a vindication of his personal character from attacks publicly made, and which have obtained much notoriety in this country, I think it desirable that I should make known at the earliest date. Accordingly, I shall proceed to read it to your Lordships—
  "February 17, 1878.
  "Great indignation is felt here at the statement attributed to Server Pasha in a telegram which appeared in The Daily News of the 7th instant.
  "The Sultan and the Prime Minister have expressed to me their great regret at so flagrant a breach of duty on the part of a high functionary, and have promised, that justice shall be done in the matter. Server Pasha himself denies absolutely that he made the statement, and he says that the observations attributed to other members of the Turkish Mission are mere gossip.
  "I deny that I ever encouraged the Turks to go to war or to continue the war, or ever pro-
  1844
  mised or encouraged them to expect material aid from England. On the contrary, I have always striven for peace.
  "If sympathy for human suffering, a desire to uphold the interests and dignity of my country, and efforts to promote the cause of religious and civil liberty are considered offences, I confess to having been guilty of them."
  That is the communication I have received from Mr. Layard; and, considering what is the responsibility of Mr. Layard's position, I thought I was bound in justice to him to place that communication before the House at the earliest moment.

PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS (METROPOLIS) BILL—(No. 12.)
(Earl Cadogan.)
PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS (METROPOLIS) BILL—(No. 12.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Beading, read.
  EARL CADOGAN,in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that the Bill, which had come up from the other House, was not a Government measure; but it was thought desirable that some one connected with the metropolis should take charge of it in their Lordships' House, and he had agreed to do so with the consent of his Colleagues. The object of the Bill was to extend the hours of polling in metropolitan boroughs at Parliamentary' Elections. If the Bill should become law, the hours of polling in those boroughs would be from 8 A.M. in the forenoon till 8 P.M. in the afternoon. The question of an extension of the hours of polling was first raised by Sir Charles Dilke in the House of Commons in 1871. In the following year, during a discussion of the Ballot Bill, there was a division upon an Amendment of the hon. Baronet in favour of a general extension of the hours of polling from 8 to 8, and the proposal was rejected. In 1872 Mr. Gladstone's Administration, through Mr W. E. Forster), opposed a general extension of hours, but they promised to propose a compromise. Their compromise, however, was rejected, and the Ballot Bill came up to the Lords leaving the hours as they stood. On June 17, 1872, the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Shaftesbury) carried a proposal for a general extension similar to that which had been rejected by the Commons; but, on a subsequent stage of the Bill, the

  1845
  Government induced their Lordships' House to accept a compromise instead of the from 8 to 8 extension. This compromise was again rejected by the House of Commons, and the Ballot Bill when it became law left matters as they had stood. A general Bill, introduced by Sir Charles Dilke, was thrown out in 1874. In 1877 the hon. Baronet moved a Resolution in less sweeping terms, and was seconded by his Conservative Colleague in the representation of Chelsea (Mr. Gordon). Ultimately, on the Motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Resolution of the hon. Baronet was negatived, and a Resolution agreed to to refer to a Select Committee the Question—
  "Whether any and what alteration can without inconvenienee he made in the hours of polling at Parliamentary and Municipal Elections in the Metropolis and towns so as to afford greater facilities to electors desiring to record their votes."
  The Chairmanship of the Committee was offered to and declined by Sir Charles Dilke, who wished the Committee to be a Government Committe, and after some delay a Government Chairman was obtained. The Committee decided to consider the case of the metropolis first, and evidence was taken from the whole of the metropolitan boroughs. The Bill now before their Lordships was introduced by one Liberal and four Conservative metropolitan Members; it was assented to by Mr. Cross on behalf of the Government, and passed through all its stages without opposition or Amendment. The Bill simply proposed to enact that at every Election held after the passing of this Act to return a Member or Members to serve in any of the boroughs named in the Schedule—namely, London, Westminster, Chelsea, Finsbury, Greenwich, Hackney, Lambeth, Marylebone, Southwark, and the Tower Hamlets— the poll should commence at 8 o'clock in the forenoon and be kept open until 8 o'clock of the afternoon of the same day.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a"—{The Earl Cadogan.)
  VISCOUNT ENFIELDasked his noble Friend who had charge of the Bill whether before the next stage he would not consider the propriety of extending its provisions to the case of other large towns, where the working population
  1846
  was in considerable numbers, such as Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds, Sheffield, &c, and whose position did not vary much from those in London, to whom the additional hours for polling would prove a great boon?
  EARL CADOGANsaid, he could not undertake to do what his noble Friend suggested. The Committee of last Session reported in favour of immediate legislation in the case of the metropolis, and inquiry during the present Session by a new Committee in the case of towns. That inquiry was now proceeding, and it would not be advisable to attempt legislation for the towns until the Committee of the present Session had reported.
  THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURYsaid, he was in favour of a general extension of the hours of polling in all large cities and towns. It was much needed by industrious workmen in the towns.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.
  House adjourned at half past Five o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past One o'clock.