Lords Sitting of 5 July 1881

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Supreme Court of Judicature (147).
Second Reading—Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 1)* (125); Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 2)* (126); Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 3) * (135); Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation * (122); Lunacy Districts (Scotland) (108); Burial Grounds (Scotland) Act (1855) Amendment (131).
Committee—Summary Procedure (Scotland) Amendment (99).
Report—Veterinary Surgeons* (127); Summary Jurisdiction (Process) * (124).
Third Reading—Gas Provisional Orders* (97), and passed.

NEW PEER.
The Right Honourable Sir Odo William Leopold Russell (commonly called Lord Odo William Leopold Russell), G.C.B., G.C.M.G., Her Majesty's Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Emperor of Germany having been created Baron Ampthill of Ampthill in the county of Bedford—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.

ARMY—DEATHS BY SUNSTROKE AT ALDERSHOT.—QUESTION.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNasked the Under Secretary of State for War as to a statement appearing in the morning papers that at the Review at Aldershot yesterday two men died from the effects of the heat, while two more were not expected to survive, and a number of others were admitted to the military hospitals suffering from the effects of the heat. He would be glad to hear any facts with regard to the matter, and any explanation of how it was that the troops were exposed several hours to the greatest heat of the day.
THE EARL OF MORLEY: My Lords, I regret to say that a certain number of men who took part in the Review at Aldershot yesterday were subsequently admitted to hospital suffering from the effects of the extreme heat, and no fewer than four have since died. This is a very sad occurrence. The Secretary of State for War, on hearing of it this morning, telegraphed to the General commanding at Aldershot for information. We have not yet received as full information as we could wish; but if my noble Friend will repeat his Question

3
on Thursday I shall probably be able to answer it satisfactorily.
THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGE: My Lords, I was actually present at Aldershot yesterday, and I had no idea that anything of the kind had occurred. I was so astonished when I heard of it, that I did not believe a word of it. When I came home from Aldershot, everybody said—" What a dreadful day you have had!" I said—"No; it was warm, but not unpleasantly warm." I asked my Staff, who gave the same answer. It certainly was a very hot day, but there was a very fair breeze on the hill, and it only became unpleasantly warm as I came towards London. I have certainly been out at field exercises 50 times on much hotter days, and I can assure your Lordships that there was nothing unusual in the weather, and as for falling out, I never saw so few men fall out on a field-day. There was no review at all; it was a simple field-day. The troops were ready to advance when I arrived, and the whole of the affair was over in a short time. There was no standing in the sun for a long period. The troops only marched past on their way home, and did not even come round again. I never was so surprised in my life, and I do not see how these accidents could be prevented.

LUNACY DISTRICTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 108.)
(The Earl of Dalhousie.)
LUNACY DISTRICTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 108.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE EARL OF DALHOUSIE,in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that the aim of the Bill was to amend a state of matters created by the Prisons Act of 1877. Previous to that time power to alter the lunacy districts was vested in the Commissioners of Lunacy, who were able to act on receiving an application through the local Prison Board. The Prisons Act, by abolishing the local Prison Boards, deprived the Lunacy Commissioners of the initiative by which alone they were able to act. By this Bill the powers would be conferred on the Commissioners after the permission of the Secretary of State for the Home Department had been obtained.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Earl of Dalhousie.)
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.

SUMMARY PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 99.)
(The Earl of Dalhousie.)
SUMMARY PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 99.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to order).
  LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGHasked for an explanation of the 4th clause of the Bill, which provided that a table of fees in Schedule A and no other higher fees would be allowed on taxation. A subsequent clause provided that the costs in a case under this Act should not exceed £1. How was that clause to be carried out when Schedule A provided a higher scale of fees, for if Schedule A fees were to be exacted under the Bill they would amount to a larger sum than £1. How, then, was this consistent with the other clause of the Bill that no more costs than £1 were to be exacted?
  THE EARL OF DALHOUSIEsaid, he could not answer the Question; but if their Lordships would allow the Bill to pass as it stood, he would undertake to get the explanation of that point when it came forward on the Report.
  LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGHsaid, he was satisfied with the promise of the noble Earl.
  An Amendment made: The Report thereof to be received on Thursday next.

BURIAL GROUNDS (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1855, AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 131.)
(The Earl of Camperdown.)
BURIAL GROUNDS (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1855, AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 131.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN,moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, its objects was to give to parochial authorities increased powers with regard to burial grounds or cemeteries in Scotland. At the present time, when a parochial authority wished to supply a burial ground they were obliged to set aside the half of the ground for the use of the poor. It was found, in practice, that the portion set aside for

  5
  general use was all allocated before that reserved for the poor was used up. It then became necessary to purchase new ground, which had to be subdivided in the same proportion, notwithstanding that the ground of the poor was not nearly exhausted. The arrangement was needlessly expensive, and the proposal of the Bill was that, with the consent of the Sheriff, the parochial authorities should be allowed to allocate burial grounds for such purposes and in such proportions as might be found most convenient.
  Moved,"That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Earl of Camperdown.)
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly.

TRIPOLI.

  ADDRESS FOR PAPERS.
  EARL DE LA WARR,in rising to ask a question of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs as to the alleged statement of M. Tissot, the French Ambassador at Constantinople, to the effect that instructions had been given to the general in command of the French troops to cross the Tunisian frontier into Tripoli, if necessary for the preservation of order; also if any information can be given with regard to the military organization which is stated to be taking place in Tripoli under the Turkish governor, Nasif Pacha, in consequence, as alleged, of the occupation of Tunis by the French; also to move that an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for papers and correspondence relative to Tripoli? said, he felt that he ought to offer an apology for again bringing this question under the consideration of the House. His apology was the great urgency of the case, and the more than usual reserve on the part of Her Majesty's Government in withholding information, and in not giving the least information as to what would be their policy on a question which, he was sure, the noble Earl opposite would admit was one of a very grave nature. Arising on all sides were alarming indications of what might result in massacre and bloodshed, and what had begun in Tunis might not end there. Already we heard of a large mobilization of French troops, of the probable bombardment of Sfax, which was not very far distant from the Fron-
  6
  tier of Tripoli, of the pillage of the town by the Natives, of British subjects being killed, of hundreds of Europeans, including British subjects, taking refuge on board ships, though no English ships of war were there; of the probable occupation by French troops of the town of Cabes and of the Island of Djerba, near the extreme limit of the Frontier of Tunis adjoining Tripoli—these, and other rapidly progressing events, pointed most unmistakably to two things—the French occupation of Tripoli, or a rising among the Natives, which could only be repressed by military force. Granting, as he believed the noble Marquess below him (the Marquess of Salisbury) did, that there was a legitimate exercise of French influence in Tunis, of which this country need not be jealous—granting this, he would say that the question had now assumed a new phase, as the occupation by French troops of a portion of the territory of Tripoli might at any moment take place. It had been stated, and if incorrectly, he hoped the noble Earl opposite would say so, that the French troops had received instructions to cross the Tunisian Frontier into Tripoli, if necessary, for the preservation of order. Now, there was a very remarkable resemblance between this statement and what had occurred in connection with the crossing of the Frontier between Algeria and Tunis. A pretext was only wanting, and an Arab Tribe had only to be irritated, and the pretext was at hand. But what would be the consequences? Tripoli was an undoubted portion of the Ottoman Empire. It was protected by Treaties as fully as any other part of the Sultan's Dominions; and was it for a moment to be supposed that Turkey would allow French troops to enter any portion of the territory of Tripoli without the consent of the Sultan? He trusted that the noble Earl would tell their Lordships whether the Governor of Tripoli had not been making military preparations in the event of this emergency. Was it likely, he asked, that Italy could remain unmoved by events which were passing almost within sight of her own shores—events which must have a great influence upon her future prospects? This country had long been on friendly terms with the countries of Northern Africa, and they had placed confidence in England's good faith and in English

  7
  influence; but their trust had been much shaken by recent events. He desired to give credit to Her Majesty's Government for their intention to serve the interests of this country, and he regretted to be obliged to differ from them upon this important question. He sincerely hoped, however, that they would be able to give some indication of the policy which would be pursued with regard to the daily increasing difficulties in the countries of Northern Africa.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, the recent complaint of the French with regard to the measures taken for the protection of Tripoli had no more foundation than the complaint of the wolf against the lamb. Tripoli was 12 degrees to the East of the Province of Oran, where the Algerine insurrection had taken place, and it was impossible for news to have been carried in that short space of time from Tripoli to near Oran through the Desert. There were, besides, no direct lines of communication between Tripoli and the district South of Oran, for in the Sahara the roads ran mostly North and South, and there were no lateral communications. The cause of the insurrection in Algeria was due to the French themselves, and to their conduct only, in invading Tunis, and to the excesses committed by some of their forces on entering the Regency of Tunis. Since that it was reported that the division of General Logerot, on its way back to Constantina, about 12 days ago, had burned the crops and date trees of the tribes, and carried off 18,000 cattle and 700 women, the women having been subsequently released. The French papers had also lately adopted a plan of writing of affairs which were totally distinct and geographically distant in the same paragraph, so as to mislead ignorant persons to imagine that they were connected with one another. Thus they had connected the Khroumirs with the slaughter of an expedition in the Sahara, and now they were mixing up a rising in Tunis with that in Oran. It had been stated that the French Government had entered into a Convention or understanding with the Spanish Government under which Spain was to occupy Morocco and France take Tripoli. He did not believe that such an understanding had been actually come to, but it was probable that it had been attempted; and he would ask the
  8
  noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he had any information on the subject? In the recent insurrection in the Province of Oran a large number of Spaniards had been killed and taken prisoners. From the accounts in the French papers it appeared that the civil and military authorities were mutually casting the blame upon one another for the neglect of proper precautions, which had rendered possible the loss of life which had occurred, and the feeling in Spain had been turned against the French on account of their neglect of their countrymen; and it was not to be feared that this unnecessary loss of life would lead the Spaniards to assist the French in their designs, since it was clear that the French alone were to blame for it. If the Government continued to be as inert as it had lately shown itself to be, more harm would be done, and a beginning on the part of the French would be made, when it would be more difficult to stop them than before they had entered upon a further course of aggression on Tripoli. Moreover, it was not Tripoli only that was threatened; the French papers were preparing the way for designs on Syria. He valued the friendship and goodwill of the French for this country as much as any man did; but the goodwill of Her Majesty's Indian Mussulman subjects, and the goodwill of the population of Western Asia, was equally valuable and necessary to this country, and Her Majesty's Government appeared to be quite indifferent to the loss of it. If Tripoli were interfered with by the French a very large British trade would be lost, for the trade with Central Africa went from Tripoli through Mourzuk, and not from Tunis, as had been stated on a former occasion. He therefore trusted that his noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs would take steps in conjunction with the Ottoman, Italian, and French Governments in order to prevent further aggressions.
  Address for papers and correspondence relative to Tripoli.—(The Earl De La Warr.)
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I am bound to say that the noble Earl opposite (Earl De La Warr) always gives me Notice of the numerous Questions which he is in the habit of address-

  9
  ing to me, which my noble Friend at the Table (Lord Stanley of Alderley) does not. I imagine that the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury), to whom the noble Earl referred, and all your Lordships agree with the Government that the cases of Tripoli and Tunis are of a perfectly distinct and separate character, and that any arrangements which may be arrived at in respect of Tunis are not in the slightest way applicable to Tripoli. I agree so far with the noble Earl; but I repudiate the noble Earl's interpretation of my great reticence about this matter. A Government is placed in great difficulty in regard to giving information, charged, as they are, with the affairs of the country in relation to foreign Powers, and is under a disadvantage in furnishing information to the public that depends upon the consent of foreign Governments. But no Government can be blamed for not giving information which they have not received, and, therefore, do not themselves possess. My noble Friend at the Table, who gave me no Notice of his Question, asks me to give him information as to what has happened between France and Spain with regard to the partition of Morocco. Now, all I can say is, that I have not heard a word of any Treaty concluded between France and Spain with regard to Morocco. I utterly disbelieve it; and it is, therefore, impossible for me to give any information about it. The noble Earl (Earl De La Warr) complains of my not having given information as to the first part of his statement in reference to M. Tissot. But I have to say that I have heard nothing about the military occupation of Tripoli. The only report we have heard was that on the 28th of last month a Turkish ship of war had arrived at the port with a Turkish General of Division on board and two battalions. That is the only report we have heard. The noble Earl moves for Papers. I shall be only too ready to accede to his request if he thinks they will be of the slightest importance to him.
  Address agreed to.

SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE BILL.

  BILL PRESENTED. FIRST READING.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR,in rising to present a Bill to amend the
  10
  Supreme Court of Judicature Acts, and for other purposes, said, that the Bill was, in some respects, of considerable importance; but he hoped that it would not excite much difference of opinion. A number of changes were proposed, some of considerable magnitude, others comparatively simple. Their Lordships were aware that the High Court of Justice had contained three separate Divisions called respectively the Queen's Bench, the Common Pleas, and the Exchequer Divisions, and that these three Divisions had recently been consolidated. In consequence of that consolidation there was now but one Division on what was popularly called the Common Law side of the High Court, and one Lord Chief Justice. There had been five ex-officio Judges of the Court of Appeal—namely, the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls, the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, and the Lord Chief Baron. Owing to the cessation of the two latter offices, the ex-officio Judges were now reduced to three. The Court of Appeal further consisted of six ordinary Judges; and a vacancy had lately taken place in that number by the loss of a Judge whose merits it would be very difficult to do justice to and impossible to exaggerate—Lord Justice James. He spoke from long knowledge, and an intimate personal friendship of many years; and he could not speak of his official services to the country without recollecting the generosity of his noble nature, which greatly endeared him to his numerous friends. But, speaking of him only as a Judge, he would say that the country had never been served by a Judge of higher character—of a sounder and more rapid discrimination; a more ardent love of justice as distinguished from technicalities; a more accurate knowledge of law, or a greater power of immediately applying that knowledge, with an uncommon share of common sense, to the determination of the cases which came before him. For several years those qualities had been exhibited by the late Lord Justice as a Vice Chancellor, and for more than 10 years in the Court of Appeal; and whatever arrangements might be made for filling the vacancy, it would be impossible for any man to bring to the fulfilment of the duties of the office higher qualifications, as a lawyer and

  11
  a man, than those possessed by Lord Justice James. Now, with regard to the Court of Appeal, although the business of the Court had been ably administered, and arrears prevented from accumulating, yet it was of an arduous and important character, and it required strong Judges, as well as able Judges, to prevent it from falling into arrear. When the question arose what should be done to meet this state of things, it was impossible not to call to mind the proposals which had been made by the Judicature Commission. In their first Report, on which the Judicature Act of 1873 was mainly founded, they advised that the Master of the Rolls for the time being should be a Judge of Appeal only, and that there should be in the Court of Appeal three Judges of the Court of First Instance, annually selected by the Crown. This proposal was not followed in the Act of 1873, which provided for one Final Court of Appeal, comprehending all the judicial strength now distributed between the House of Lords, the Privy Council, and the present Court of Appeal as actually constituted. But that arrangement, as their Lordships were aware, was afterwards changed; and, in the Act of 1875, his noble and learned Friend (Earl Cairns) proposed to introduce into the Court of Appeal three Judges of First Instance—and, under extreme circumstances, it would have been possible to have four—affording temporary assistance. Now they had come to a time when the number of ex-officio Judges was reduced from five to three. What he asked their Lordships to do with regard to the constitution of the Court of Appeal was this—He proposed, in the first place, to take the opportunity of reverting to the recommendation of the Judicature Commission with regard to the position of the Master of the Rolls in connection with the Court of Appeal. Of the special qualifications of the Master of the Rolls he need not speak; they were well known and appreciated by the country at large. It was his proposal that the Master of the Rolls for the time being should be transferred to the Court of Appeal. The present Master of the Rolls was willing to undertake that position. Instead, therefore, of filling up the vacancy now existing among the ordinary Judges in the Court of Appeal, he proposed that the Master of the Rolls should take
  12
  up the position which seemed more in accordance with the superior rank of his office than that of being one of a number of Judges of First Instance, sitting separately in different Courts of the Chancery Division. At the same time, the Master of the Rolls would continue to exercise all the duties of his office as Keeper of the Rolls, and would retain his present rank, salary, and official patronage. The Master of the Rolls, therefore, would be—he did not say transferred—but confined to the Court of Appeal; and, practically, that would make it unnecessary to fill up the present vacancy in that Court. Then he came to the consideration of the ex-officio Judges. There were now two less than had been contemplated, and if the Master of the Rolls was removed from the High Court, there would be three less. He proposed that the President of the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Division, who was not now an ex-officio Judge of the Court of Appeal, should, without any other change in his position, become such a Judge. He proposed, in the next place, that three other Judges should be annually selected from the Judges of the High Court of Justice, who might serve in the Court of Appeal when their other duties permitted. The question remained—in what way should those annual appointments be made? He did not propose that they should be nominated by the Crown. A more convenient mode of selection, he thought, might be found; they might be selected as the Election Judges were now chosen. The Judges of the High Court might meet together, and from year to year nominate for the succeeding year three of their body to serve in the Court of Appeal. They would not be called upon to do duty in the Court of Appeal, so as to interfere with their primary obligations as Judges of the High Court; they would be called upon to assist when the state of business in their own Courts admitted of that assistance being given. Provision was, of course, made for the appointment of a new Judge in the Chancery Division of the High Court, to take the place of the Master of the Rolls. These proposals would not subject the country to any substantial increase of expense. It was also sought to remove a doubt as to the effect of the Act of 1877, under

  13
  which an additional Judge of First Instance was appointed for the Chancery Division of the High Court. The language of that Act did not make it absolutely clear whether it authorized an appointment on a single occasion only or an appointment from time to time. He proposed to remove that doubt, and to enable the power given by that Act to be exercised from time to time. Occasion had also been taken to alter, in some respects, the existing law as to appeals. By the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Acts certain appeals from the Divorce Court Judge were given to a Court which was called the Full Court for Matrimonial Causes. He had consulted with the learned Judge who presided over that Court, and found that he, as well as others, was of opinion that it would be desirable that that appeal, which was, practically, to that Judge himself, with the assistance of others, should no longer be to the full Court for Matrimonial Causes, but should, like all other cases, go to the Court of Appeal. He also proposed, very much at the instance of that eminent Judge, to correct what, in practice, had turned out to be an unsatisfactory provision in the same Acts, which gave the right to appeal from decrees for dissolution or nullity of marriage, not in the first instance when the decree nisi was given, but when it had been made absolute after a certain lapse of time, which, if no cause were shown in the meantime, was a matter of course. He proposed that, for the future, the appeal should be from the decree nisi, and there should not be a further appeal. With regard to the Acts which related to Parliamentary registration and elections, they had proceeded on the footing of giving final authority on matters of law to the Court to which Parliament had thought fit to intrust that class of cases. This was overlooked, or not sufficiently considered, when the Judicature Act of 1873 was passed; and no distinction was then made between orders on those subjects, and other orders of the High Court. It was now proposed to make the decision in such cases final and conclusive, unless the Court thought fit to give a right to appeal, in which case the Court of Appeal would have jurisdiction. The Bill also gave a power to regulate the holding of Assizes, which, having
  14
  hitherto been limited to Winter Assizes only, would now extend to all Assizes, by which means it was hoped that an inconvenience, at present felt, would be mitigated. The measure likewise dealt with the power under the Act of 1875 for making rules to govern the practice of the High Court. It also contained a clause enabling the time of holding the Sessions of the Central Criminal Court to be fixed, not, as was now required by Act of Parliament, by eight Judges, but by four Judges of the Queen's Bench Division. It further contained provisions as to the appointment of officers of the Courts and the filling up of vacancies in the staff of all the Courts. There were various other minor provisions in the Bill, on which he need not now trouble their Lordships.
  Bill to amend the Supreme Court of Judicature Acts; and for other purposes—Presented (The LORD CHANCELLOR).
  EARL CAIRNSsaid, it became desirable to re-consider the question of the construction of the Appellate Court when it was deprived of two of its ex-officio members, the Lord Chief Baron and the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas. He agreed with his noble and learned Friend that the occurrence, so much to be lamented in regard to the Court of Appeal, of the death of Lord Justice James made it necessary to consider the constitution of that Court. In all that his noble and learned Friend had said about that very eminent man and his loss he wished to express his entire concurrence. He himself, like his noble and learned Friend, had known Lord Justice James for a very long time, and had been an observer of the manner in which he discharged his duties; and he must say that in his experience he had never seen a Judge who brought to the discharge of his duties a more admirable knowledge of the law which he had to administer, and a more admirable share of common sense—which, after all, was as great a quality for a Judge as a knowledge of the law—than the late Lord Justice James had always done. Turning to the Bill which his noble and learned Friend had presented to their Lordships, he did not desire to express any definite opinion as to some of the changes which were now proposed. He could only say he was glad that the

  15
  Master of the Rolls was willing to preside in the Court of Appeal. With regard to future holders of the office of Master of the Rolls, he did not know what would be their position as regarded emoluments. The present Master of the Rolls received a higher salary than the Judges of the Court of Appeal. Of course, it was quite proper that the present Master of the Rolls should have that advantage continued to him; but, with regard to future holders of the office of Master of the Rolls, it appeared to him that it would be somewhat objectionable to have one Judge receiving a higher salary than that of the other Judges. He could not quite follow the noble and learned Lord as to the position of the new Judges to be selected annually from the rest of the Judges to be Judges of the Court of Appeal. He would, therefore, reserve any expression of opinion on that proposal until they had the Bill before them. All he would say was that the reason for having ex-officio Judges in the Appeal Court was that they should be independent of the Court below; but he did not see how that was to be secured by taking the Judges by election annually from the Court below. If it was necessary to strengthen the Court of Appeal he should prefer to do that by adding another Judge.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORwas understood to say it was proposed that every future holder of the office of the Master of the Rolls should receive the same emoluments as the present Master of the Rolls, because the holder of that office had certain duties to perform with regard to the Record Office.
  Bill read 1a; to be printed. (No. 147.)

UNITED STATES—ATTEMPTED ASSAS- SINATION OF THE PRESIDENT.
  OBSERVATION.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I am sure the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack and the noble and learned Earl opposite will forgive me for the irregularity of interposing in the Business of the House; but I wish to inform your Lordships that later telegrams which have been received this evening give a much more favourable account of the condition of the President of the United States than those received in the earlier part of the day.

THE GOVERNMENT AND THE LAND LEAGUE.
THE EARL OF ANNESLEYasked the Lord Privy Seal, Whether it was true that Mr. Farrell, the president of the Local Land League at Mullingar, who was confined in Galway Gaol under the provisions of the Coercion Act, and was lately liberated on a medical certificate, was still on the commission of the peace, and signed several commitments to gaol last week?
EARL SPENCER,in reply, said, that Mr. Farrell was still a magistrate, and he believed it was true that he was in the discharge of the duties of the office; but the Irish Government had brought the matter under the consideration of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he understood that Mr. Farrell was an official officer.

CENSUS OF ENGLAND AND WALES, 1881—PRELIMINARY REPORT.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD CARRINGTON: My Lords, the Census Act requires that the Preliminary Abstract of the Census taken on the 4th of April last should be laid before Parliament within three months after the 1st of June. It is satisfactory that the Registrar General has been able to complete this abstract at so early a date. This is not the time to go into particulars; but it may be interesting to know that the total population of England and Wales is now 25,968,286, being an increase since 1871 of 3,256,020. The rate of increase was higher than in any decennium since 1831–41. The birth-rate was unusually high, while the death-rate was still more unusually low. The higher birth-rate in 1871–81, as compared with 1861–71, implies the addition of 26,774 persons beyond the number according to the previous rate, while the lower death-rate implies that 299,385 persons survived, who, according to the previous rate, would have died—a result which seems to show that modern sanitary legislation has produced useful and important effects. It may be added that the population of the Metropolis is now 3,814,571, showing an increase of 560,311, while the population of the City of London has decreased by 24,414.

  17
  Preliminary Report and Tables of the Population and Houses enumerated in England and Wales and in the Islands in the British Seas on 4th April 1881: Presented (by command), and ordered to lie on the Table.
  House adjourned at a quarter before Seven o'clock, to Thursday next, a quarter before Five o'clock.