Lords Sitting of 3 June 1878

MINUTES.
Sat First in Parliament—The Lord Hastings, after the death of his father.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Gas and Water Orders Confirmation * (93).
Committee—Medical Act, 1858, Amendment (90–104).
Referred to Select Committee—Telegraphs * (77).
Third Reading—Acknowledgment of Deeds by Married Women (Ireland) * (87), and passed.

PRIVATE BILLS.
Ordered, that Standing Orders Nos. 72 and 82 be suspended for the remainder of the Session.

THE EASTERN QUESTION—THE CON- GRESS.—MINISTERIAL STATEMENT.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I have to inform the House that the German Government have issued an invitation to the Signatories of the Treaty of Paris to a Congress, and that Her Majesty's Government has accepted that invitation. I will read the terms of the invitation—and I will ask your Lordships to remember that an invitation in the same terms has been sent, and has by this time been accepted, by all the other Powers, Russia included. The invitation is as follows:—
"London, June 3, 1878.
"The Undersigned, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of His Majesty the Emperor of Germany, King of Prussia, has the honour, by order of his Government, to convey to the knowledge of his Excellency the Marquis of Salisbury, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Empress of India, the following communication:—
"In conformity with the initiative taken by the Austro-Hungarian Cabinet, the Government of His Majesty the Emperor of Germany has the honour to propose to the Powers signatories of the Treaties of 1856 and 1871 to meet in Congress at Berlin, to discuss there the stipulations of the Preliminary Treaty of San Stefano, concluded between Russia and Turkey. The Government of His Majesty, in giving this invitation to the Government of Her Britannic Majesty, understands that in accepting it the Government of Her Britannic Majesty consents to admit the free discussion of the whole of the contents of the Treaty of San Stefano, and that it is ready to participate therein. In the event of the acceptance of all the Powers invited, the Government of His Majesty propose to fix the meeting of the Congress for the 13th of this month.
"The Undersigned, in bringing the above to the knowledge of his Excellency the Marquis of Salisbury, has the honour to beg his Excellency to be good enough to acquaint him as soon as possible with the reply of the British Government. The Undersigned avails himself of this opportunity to renew to his Excellency the assurance of his highest consideration.
"MUNSTER."
That invitation has been accepted in the following terms:—
"Foreign Office, June 3.
"The Undersigned, Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, has the honour to acknowledge the receipt of his Excellency Count Münster's note of this day, inviting Her Majesty's Government to take part in a Congress at Berlin for the discussion of the stipulations of the Preliminary Treaty concluded at San Stefano between Russia and Turkey.
1056
"The Undersigned, taking act of his Excellency's verbal intimation that the invitation has been sent in the same terms to the other Powers signatories to the Treaty of Paris, and understanding that those Powers, in accepting this invitation, assent to the terms stated in his Excellency's note, has the honour to inform his Excellency that Her Majesty's Government will be ready to take part in the Congress at the date mentioned.
"The Undersigned avails himself, &c.,
"SALISBURY."
EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, perhaps I may be allowed to say a few words with regard to the announcement which has just been made to your Lordships' House. I shall only say for myself—and, I believe, on behalf of those behind me—that I most heartily congratulate the House, and, if they will allow me, Her Majesty's Government, on the prospect of this matter being discussed in a Congress of the European Powers. I wish to ask another Question—whether the reports are true with regard to Her Majesty's Plenipotentiaries at the Congress being the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary?
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: Yes, my Lords, it is so.
EARL GRANVILLE: Then, I take the liberty of saying that I cannot equally congratulate Her Majesty's Government on this determination. I remember that in February, when the question of going into Congress was under discussion in this House, Lord Derby, the late Foreign Secretary, whom I regret not to see present, made a statement on the subject. We know that there are precedents for Foreign Secretaries attending as Plenipotentaries at Congresses of an important character; but Lord Derby then stated expressly, on behalf of the Government, that the attendance of the Foreign Secretary as Plenipotentiary at this Congress would be most undesirable; he thought that, however it might be with foreign Governments, with a Parliamentary system of Government like our own, and having regard to the way in which the Government of this country is carried on, such a course would be most inconvenient. He stated that if it were adopted, the Foreign Secretary would be cut off from all communication with his Colleagues, and would have to act upon instructions which he himself would have no share in framing.—[3 Hansard, ccxxxviii. 45.] I entirely acquiesced in the course which

1057
Her Majesty's Government then proposed to take; and, my Lords, it appears to me that if the objections made by the noble Earl then were valid against the appointment of the Foreign Secretary as Plenipotentiary, they are much more than doubled by the fact that two such important Members of the Cabinet as the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary will be absent from their posts in this country. My Lords, if the two noble Lords go to the Conference, either of two things must exist. Either—which I trust is the case—everything substantial is settled between the Powers before going into Congress; in which case there will only be details to settle—and, without the slightest disrespect to either of the noble Lords, I think that could be as well done by trained diplomatists of great experience as by two of the ablest men in England who have not the slightest experience in matters of the kind. If, on the other hand, there be anything of substance still to be settled, or if anything should suddenly arise, then the two Plenipotentiaries will either agree or disagree. It is theoretically possible that they may not agree; and in that case the Cabinet would be called on to decide without having the advantage of hearing the two noble Lords, and without either of the two noble Lords being able to bring to bear upon its deliberations that personal influence which Colleagues so distinguished must possess. If, on the other hand, they agree on any sudden emergency upon an important point—and I have seen this claimed as one of the great advantages of this plan—is the Cabinet to be left entirely outside their decision? I think, my Lords, that would be very undesirable. The other day my noble Friend behind me, who has had great experience at the Foreign Office (Lord Hammond), stated—we thought rather more broadly than was warranted—the important positions held by the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary in regard to the conduct of foreign affairs. The same remark applies equally to the duties, rights, and responsibilities of the whole Cabinet. I appeal to my noble Friend whether he would approve a course by which those two Ministers would be absent from this country and separated from their Colleagues, and by which those Colleagues would be placed—I say it without the slightest disre-
1058
spect—somewhat in the position of ciphers in dealing with a very important question? I trust the House will pardon me for having made these remarks. I wish to ask the noble Earl whether there is any precedent for a double appointment such as this to any Congress or Conference?
THE EARL OF BEACONSFIELD: My Lords, I will admit to the noble Earl at once, on his last point, that I am not aware that there is any precedent exactly similar to the course which Her Majesty's Government are going to take. The decision of the Government on such a matter must be one which can only be arrived at after long deliberation, and also after an acquaintance with the facts in great detail, which it would be most inconvenient, at present, to introduce into a discussion before your Lordships' House. I cannot understand exactly the reasoning by which the noble Earl who has just addressed us (Earl Granville) has come to the conclusion that the absence of my noble Friend and myself from the Cabinet would reduce our Colleagues whom we have left behind to the position of ciphers, when it seems to me that the consequence of our absence would be rather to increase their importance. I can only say that we have undertaken this important and laborious task with the full concurrence and at the wish and instance of our Colleagues; and as our Colleagues feel that in taking this course we are only fulfilling their wishes, I think the noble Earl will hardly be able to persuade this House and the country that we have slighted our Colleagues, or placed them in a position in which their influence and importance may be diminished. When the noble Earl asks for a precedent, I frankly admit that I cannot furnish one; but in matters of this kind we must not be guided merely by precedents. There are considerations which are quite independent of precedents, and which must guide us in the course we have to take. In the first place, I may remark that when the Conference was first spoken of there was a general understanding that the Powers should be represented by Ambassadors of the different Courts. But that course has not been adopted in this instance. It is a fact that the chief Ministers of Austria and Germany will certainly be present at the Congress; and, as I am

1059
reminded, the chief Minister of Russia will also be present. We had, therefore, to consider that in the altered circumstances, the Government of Her Majesty should be represented in a different manner from that which was first proposed. But, my Lords, on the whole, I can only say that we feel the great responsibility of the step we are taking; that we look in these circumstances to the support of your Lordships' House and of the country; and that if we fail in our duty—if it can be shown hereafter that any failure that may occur has arisen from the mode in which the Representatives of the Government of the Queen have been selected—we shall abide the consequences which we shall certainly entirely deserve.
EARL GREY: My Lords, I concur with the noble Earl (the Earl of Beacons-field), that these appointments are to be considered with reference to the circumstances of the time, and not entirely by the light of precedent. I also agree that they are not to be regarded as any slight upon the Colleagues of the noble Lords who have been selected as our Plenipotentiaries. But it appears to me that the noble Earl has not adverted to another general question which was raised by the noble Earl behind me. I want to know how far it is consistent with our principle of Government that the whole Cabinet is responsible to Her Majesty and to the country for every important step taken by the Government, that, in relation to foreign affairs, the Cabinet should be separated from two of its most important Members during the progress of the Congress, and that important questions which might arise during the Congress should be settled by those Colleagues without consultation with the Cabinet as a whole? I am not prepared to express any decided opinion on this point; but I think it is a very grave question, indeed, and one requiring to be carefully considered, whether the course proposed is altogether consistent with the Constitutional principles and practice of this country. Are important questions which may arise at the Congress to be decided, as far as this country is concerned, by the two noble Lords, without consulting with their Colleagues—and, especially, without verbal consultation. No doubt, there may be consultation by letter or telegram, but we all know how inadequate this is as compared
1060
to personal communication and discussion Are decisions taken by the two Ministers in such circumstances to be binding? If they are, certainly Parliament would not have the same security which it would have if it knew that the decision was that of the Cabinet. The noble Earl said that the Members of the Cabinet in this country will have their importance increased by their being left behind. Is it possible to imagine that the Cabinet at home would overrule the decision of two such powerful Members of the Government as the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary? This appears to me scarcely possible, and, therefore, the course proposed to be taken by the Government does imperil the security which the Government has hitherto had. I think that questions of the deepest importance to the country should not be decided except on the collective responsibility of the whole Cabinet.
EARL GRANVILLE: I must say that my recollection does not accord with that of the noble Earl at the head of the Government, and that in the reason he gave for his change in policy his recollection deceived him. In February, on the occasion to which I have alluded, Lord Derby explained that one or two other Powers intended to take a course different from that which would be adopted by Her Majesty's Government. He said that Germany would be represented by Prince Bismarck, and Austria by Count Andrassy; but that, so far as this Government was concerned, we should not depart from the ordinary course of sending an Ambassador.

ATTEMPTED ASSASSINATION OF THE EMPEROR OF GERMANY.—QUESTION.
EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I now wish to put a Question, of which I have given private Notice, to the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. It is with regard to the fearful attempt which has been made for the second time on the life of the Emperor of Germany. I wish to know, Whether Her Majesty's Government have recently received any recent information as to the state of the Emperor's health?
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I have to say that we have had the great satisfaction of hearing from

1061
the German Ambassador that the latest accounts which have been received as to the health of the illustrious victim of this, abominable attack are satisfactory. It is, of course, too soon to use any stronger language; but, from all I have heard in the matter, I trust that Europe may have the joy of soon welcoming back to perfect health one of its most respected Potentates.

THE EASTERN QUESTION—ALLEGED AGREEMENT BETWEEN ENGLAND AND RUSSIA.—QUESTION.
EARL GREY: I wish to ask the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether there is any truth in the statement which appeared in The Globe last Friday as to the terms agreed upon between this country and Russia?
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: The statement to which the noble Earl refers, and other statements that I have seen, are wholly unauthentic, and are not deserving of the confidence of your Lordships' House.
EARL GREY: I could not suppose that what was stated in regard to the retrocession of Bessarabia was true. It appeared too monstrous to be believed that Her Majesty's Government could have made such a stipulation as was alleged.

ARMY—THE AUXILIARY FORCES—THE MILITIA ARTILLERY.—QUESTION.
LORD WAVENEYasked the Under Secretary of State for War, Whether the rule for embodiment of brigades of Militia Artillery is analogous to that adopted in regard of regiments of Militia Infantry, by retaining them in their respective districts on withdrawal of the Royal Artillery; and whether they might in the meantime be employed supplementally in arming the respective works and forts to which under the scheme of localization they were attached?
VISCOUNT BURY,in reply, said, that in the event of the Regular troops going on foreign service, they would, in many instances, be replaced at home by the Militia. The brigades of Militia Artillery would be treated on the same principle as brigades of Militia Infantry; but the noble Lord was under a misapprehension in supposing that the Militia Infantry would necessarily remain in the dis-
1062
tricts to which they belonged—they would be used to replace the garrisons of towns from which the Regular regiments were withdrawn, and the Militia Artillery would be sent to man the fortresses where necessary. The localization scheme would not apply to cases of invasion. As to the employment for the Militia Artillery suggested in the Question of his noble Friend, it was to be borne in mind that the Militia Artillery were only out for a short time, and that a large number of them were young soldiers who were engaged in learning other portions of their duty than those which had to be discharged on these works and forts. If the noble Lord wished to have his regiment of Militia employed in the manner he suggested, the course for him would be to apply to the General of the district.

MEDICAL ACT (1858) AMENDMENT BILL—(Nos. 44, 90.)
(The Lord President.)

COMMITTEE (ON RE-COMMITMENT).
House in Committee (on Re-commitment) (according to Order).
Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.
Clause 3 (Necessity of obtaining qualifying certificate from Medical Board, and obligatory establishment of Board).
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, he had to propose an Amendment by which midwifery would be included in the examination necessary for a qualifying certificate.
Amendment moved, in line 23, after ("medicine and surgery,") to insert ("including therein midwifery.")
Amendment agreed to.
THE MARQUESS OF RIPON THE MARQUESS OF RIPON moved an Amendment, by which the terms for the establishment of the Medical Board was altered from the 31st December 1879, and 31st July 1880, to 30th June 1879, and 31st December 1879.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 4 (Registration of persons in medical register).
On the Motion of the Marquess of RIPON, an Amendment made, after the words "after the commencement of the

1063
joint Board system having obtained a qualifying certificate under this Act," strike out "has received a medical diploma from one of the medical authorities."
Further Amendments made.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Clauses 5 to 11 agreed to.
Clause 12 (Committee of Medical Council for purpose of erasure from and restoration to the register).
On the Motion of the Duke of RICHMOND and GORDON, the maximum number of the Committee was amended by leaving out ("five") and inserting ("seven.")
Other Amendments made.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Remaining clauses agreed to, with Amendments.
The Report of the Amendments to be received To-morrow; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 104.)

NAVY.—H. M. S. "EURYDICE."

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD DORCHESTERasked Her Majesty's Government, Whether any, and if so, what steps have been taken since a first attempt, that failed, to raise Her Majesty's ship "Eurydice," sunk off Dunnose on the 24th of March last;
  Whether any consultations relating thereto, between the dockyard or other naval authorities, and whether any eminent engineers, civil or military, have been invited to give their opinions;
  Also, whether any firms, such as "The Steamship Salvage Company," or other persons experienced in such matters, have been invited to afford assistance towards or to tender for raising the vessel;
  And, whether there was any objection to produce any Papers relating thereto?
  The noble Lord said, he believed it to be the fact that the Government had received offers to raise the Eurydice from private individuals of great eminence as engineers, and from several large firms, who had special appliances for raising sunken ships. One of these companies, he believed, was already under a contract for raising the Vanguard. The attempts
  1064
  made by the Admiralty and Dockyard authorities had been denounced as in no way likely to succeed, whereas the Salvage Company had raised a very large ship from the bottom of the sea within four miles of the very spot where the Eurydice was sunk, not on a sandy, but a hard bottom. Only four weeks before the accident to the Eurydice, the vessel they had raised was towed into Portsmouth harbour. He could quite understand the failure to raise the Vanguard, but he could not understand the failure of the authorities to raise the Eurydice. It was, he thought, scarcely creditable to the first Maritime Power in the world, that a ship should have been lying for 10 weeks in 10 fathoms of water, within a short distance of one of their greatest naval arsenals.
  LORD ELPHINSTONE: Before answering the Question of the noble Lord, I will avail myself of the opportunity to answer a Question put to me on Friday night by the noble Lord on the Cross-Benches (Lord Oranmore and Browne) with respect to a Naval Review. There is to be no Naval Review, but the Reserve Fleet will assemble at Portsmouth this week. With regard to the Question put to me by the noble Lord now, I am not surprised at it, because I know that many persons interested are imperfectly acquainted with what is doing and has been done—are unaware of the difficulties to be overcome, and express surprise at the apparently slow progress which has been made in raising the Eurydice. I am very glad that the noble Lord has given me the opportunity of explaining at somewhat greater length than on previous occasions the difficulties the Naval authorities have to contend against. The Question of the noble Lord embraces four distinct subjects—namely, what steps are being taken? whether any engineers, civil or military, have been invited to give their opinions? whether any private firms have been invited to afford assistance? and whether there is any objection to produce Papers? First, with regard to Papers, there really are none except the short daily journal kept by the officer in charge of working parties. This will show better than any words of mine the difficulties which have had to be encountered. It is made up to the 29th of May, and will show that out of the 67 days since the

  1065
  ship sank the working parties have only been able to work during portions of 27 days, and sometimes for not more than two hours out of the 24. For 40 days they were unable to work at all on account of the weather. The divers have only been able to work 80 hours in all; and the lighters have had to slip their moorings and run into harbour for shelter no fewer than 11 times; and they had to slip again last Saturday. No objection exists in respect to laying that journal on the Table. The next Question put by the noble Lord is, whether there have been any consultations between the Dockyard or other naval authorities? I think I mentioned on a former occasion that the Admiralty decided from the first that the business of raising the Eurydice should be intrusted to the Dockyard authorities at Portsmouth, where there is a most efficient staff of officers, both scientific and practical, who meet in consultation almost daily. They are presided over by the Admiral Superintendent, Admiral Foley, who is assisted by the Chief Constructor, Mr. Robinson; Captain Polkinghorne, Master Attendant; Captain Batt, Master Attendant of Chatham Dockyard, who was employed for a considerable time in connection with operations at the wreck of the Vanguard; and Captain Datham, Captain Moss, and Captain Palmer, Staff Commanders. In fact, it would be difficult to get together a stronger or a better Board. They are all agreed in thinking that under the circumstances of the case, and with the appliances at their disposal, no plan could be adopted more likely to insure success than the one they were at present endeavouring to carry but. They are animated but by one desire, and that was to succeed, and no exertions were being spared in order to attain that result. The next Question is whether we have invited the opinion of eminent engineers, civil or military? The Admiralty have not invited the opinion of any civil engineer. The matter was one with which the scientific and the practical skill the Department have at its disposal at Portsmouth Dockyard is quite able to deal; and I very much doubt whether there is any civil engineer who has had any experience whatever in raising weights, such as that the authorities have had to deal with, under similar circumstances. I need
  1066
  scarcely add that it has not been considered necessary to invite the opinion of any military men. As to the Question, whether any private firms have been invited to afford assistance, I may say that, for the same reason that I have already mentioned, we have not invited the assistance of the Steamship Salvage Company, or any person experienced in raising vessels; and I am not aware that either the Steamship Company, or, indeed, any other person, has any experience whatever in raising vessels under the circumstances of the present case. There are cases of ships having been saved, and, indeed, of having been raised in smooth water and out of a strong tide-way. But there is no instance on record of a ship having been raised under circumstances similar, or in any way approaching, that in which the Eurydice is placed. The only case at all resembling the present is that of H. M. S. Pincher, a schooner of 180 tons, sunk in 14 fathoms off the Owers in 1837, and it was four months before they succeeded in getting her into Portsmouth Harbour. Of course, we have been inundated with offers. As to what steps are being taken, I have to remark that we have to deal with a dead weight of between 400 and 500 tons, lying 12 fathoms below water, in a strong tide-way, with a current running between four and six knots an hour, and with slack water varying from 30 to 90 minutes only. Indeed, it would be difficult to find a spot on the whole coast of Great Britain where greater difficulties exist—difficulties not only below on account of tide, but difficulties above water on account of tide and weather combined—for a nasty sea gets up at that spot very quickly with the slightest provocation. The Eurydice sank on the 24th of March, and it was not until the 27th that we were able to make an attempt to move the wreck. We did so by means of two corvettes—the Rinaldo and Pearl—which had been temporarily converted into lighters, assisted by two smaller lighters. This attempt failed, owing to the breaking of one of the hawsers; and then, after consultation, it was determined by the Board to which I have referred, to adopt what may be called the overlift principle, which simply means that instead of placing the lighters round the sunken ship as before, they will be placed immediately over her. They will be attached,

  1067
  to the wreck by eight steel hawsers toggled through her main deck ports, and six jewel hawsers will also be passed round the ship. In addition to this, it is intended to make use of her two bower cables, and also of the Russian air bag, which has a lifting capacity of 40 tons. That will give your Lordships some idea of the difficulties to be overcome. No fewer than 16 different attachments have to be made, and an equal strain brought to bear upon them all. Should it come on to blow, or any sea gets up, they must all be slacked up, and probably let go, and the lighters would have to seek shelter in port, as they have had to do 11 times already, and the whole work have to be begun again when the weather is settled. But that is not all. It was supposed that the bottom where the Eurydice sank was hard ground; and so it is. There is a crust of hard ground, but below that is fine soft sand. It would appear that the ship struck the ground with great force, for her starboard cathead is knocked away, and a portion of her keel is sticking out under her stern. The result is the hard crust is broken, and the ship has been gradually settling in the soft sand. During the late gales she was settling at the rate of 2 inches a-day; but, fortunately, she is not settling any more at present, but she is 11½feet in the sand, and out of that hole she has to be lifted and placed upon a new bed. That once done, the difficulty would be practically overcome, and, if the weather will only hold up, I hope it may soon be successfully accomplished, although I am bound to say that I no longer look upon it as a matter of certainty. We have not asked assistance of any civil or any other engineers, because the Dockyard authorities are fully equal to the task; but this I will say, that not all the eminent engineers, civil or even military, aided by the Steamship Salvage or any other private firm, could have hastened the raising of that ship by one hour. In conclusion, I have a plan of the manner in which it is sought to raise the ship, which I shall be happy to show the noble Lord.
  LORD DORCHESTERasked, whether the attempt to raise her would be made to-morrow?
  LORD ELPHINSTONEsaid, that would depend entirely on the weather.
  Then, on the Motion of Lord DORCHESTER, Papers respecting the raising of H. M. S. "Eurydice" ordered to be laid before the House; to be printed, (No. 105.)
  House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.