Lords Sitting of 4 August 1882

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Customs and Inland Revenue*.
Second Reading— Wellesley Bridge (Limerick) (207).
Committee—Turnpike Acts Continuance* (198).
Committee—Report—Civil Imprisonment (Scotland) * (208).
Third Reading—Bills of Sale Act (1878) Amendment * (203); Local Government (Gas) Provisional Order* (144), and passed.

EGYPT—THE RIOTS AT ALEXANDRIA—MASSACRE OF EUROPEANS.
  EXPLANATION.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I rise to correct a misapprehension which has appeared in the papers. Yesterday, in answer to the noble Earl opposite (Earl De La Warr), who asked the number of Europeans who were killed at Alexandria during the first massacre on the 11th of June, I presume that I said —as all the reports agree—that the number was 20. I certainly thought that I said, and I meant to say, 60. That number was on the note that I wrote down before I came here.
EGYPT (POLITICAL AFFAIRS).

  MOTION FOR PAPERS.
  LORD LAMINGTON, in rising to ask, Whether the Government will endeavour, through the Khedive, to obtain a peaceful solution of the Egyptian Question before commencing active military operations? and to move for further Papers, said, that since he gave Notice of the Question the aspect of affairs had changed; but he did not think it necessary on that account to alter the wording of the Question. He wished to ask it, in order that the Government might have an opportunity of serving one of the objects of his inquiry, by the noble Earl opposite the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in his reply, giving
  728
  some explanation to the House of the present state of things in the East, and of the manner in which it was proposed by Her Majesty's Government to carry out the policy announced by Mr. Gladstone. He brought forward this question in no Party spirit. He felt the great responsibility of the noble Earl, and he would not enter upon any controversial matters. It was useless to look back on a past, which could not be recalled, but from which a lesson might yet be learnt. He wished to point out one matter of importance. He referred to the Dual Note, the Dual demonstration, and the Dual demand, which resulted in the sittings of the Conference, according to which we were the declared allies and almost the partners of France. He would not for a moment detract from the general importance of the Anglo-French Alliance; but, in regard to our relations with the Porte and the Moslem world at large, its consequences, it must be admitted, had been singularly unfortunate. France had been, and was, the aggressive European Power par excellence in North Africa. France had a few months before our common action seized Tunis and defied Turkey. In the present position of affairs, and linked as we were with France, it was impossible for the Sultan to act as he desired; and, therefore, he found himself unable to comply with our requests, because his acting, as the noble Earl wished, as our mandatory, would have destroyed his prestige as Sultan, and still more so as Caliph, in the eyes of the North African Arabs— the Native race inhabiting the whole of the great southern shore of the Mediterranean. Now matters had changed. France had left us, and there was no reason why Turkey should not deal with us in accordance with the friendly traditions of the past. It, therefore, appeared to him that our only course now consisted in a loyal observance of Treaties—and especially those Conventions guaranteeing the vital interest of the Ottoman Empire—and in a loyal regard for International Law and the comity of nations. The Government had brought forward the question of the Suez Canal, and a few weeks ago he (Lord Lamington) had pointed out that our interests in Egypt began and ended in it, and he should have had no objection to our sending our ships of war to protect our means

  729
  of communication with India; but he did not think that we had any right to land troops for the purpose of regulating the internal affairs of Egypt. This country should not take any step to prevent the Sultan from exercising his fair rights as Suzerain, or, as had been stated in the other House, as Sovereign of Egypt. Why he feared that full justice would not be done to the Sultan was, because he found a paragraph in the last despatch of the noble Earl, in which he called attention to Arabi Pasha having received a mark of favour from the Sultan, and then called upon His Majesty, before the despatch of any troops to Egypt, to issue a Proclamation upholding Tewfik Pasha, and denouncing Arabi Pasha as a rebel. The Porte said that when they landed troops they would issue a Proclamation that Arabi was a rebel. It should be remembered that Arabi was now the great leader of a great Party. The noble Earl first asked that he should be removed from his position in the Army; but he now demanded that he should be denounced as a rebel. Now, as to Arabi himself, he found that he had received the support of Mr. Blunt. That gentleman, he understood the noble Earl to say, lie knew nothing of; but he had been employed by the Government in Egypt, and he had been of great assistance to our officials there; and, at any rate, Mr. Blunt, a friend of Arabi Pasha and in communication with him, was also in communication with the Foreign Office. He should like to know what were the intentions of Her Majesty's Government with regard to Mr. Blunt, who was, after all, nothing but Arabi Pasha in a frock coat. Although we had not directly employed Mr. Blunt, he had been of considerable service to us, as was testified by Sir Edward Malet, who stated in his despatch, dated Cairo, December 28, 1881, that, although he disagreed with that gentleman as to the advisability of the publication of the national programme in The Times, he was bound to record that he considered himself under serious obligations to him for the manner in which he had dispelled misunderstandings which might have led to difficulties, and that he was anxious to acknowledge that he had in this matter already been of great assistance, and that he felt sure that the confidence which the Egyptians, with whom he was in contact, reposed in him would
  730
  enable him to render further and essential service to the cause of moderation in the conduct of the movement which was in progress. And yet this man was the personal friend of Arabi Pasha, whom it was now intended to compel the Sultan to declare a rebel. Lastly, he wished to say that we had no reason as yet to believe in any double-dealing on the part of Turkey; and, such being the case, he asked Her Majesty's Government to place the fullest confidence in her action now. He also trusted that we should allow her to fulfil the mission she had undertaken in Egypt at the mandate of Europe, leaving on her the fullest responsibility for its faithful execution. To do otherwise would be most inevitably to launch us on an enterprize, the perils, the dangers, the difficulties, and the extent of which no man could foresee. The noble Lord concluded by asking the Question of which he had given Notice, and moving for further Papers.
  Moved, "That there be laid before this House further papers respecting the Affairs of Egypt."—(The Lord Lamington.)
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, that what the noble Lord (Lord Lamington) had just asked for from the Government was no more than was required by the law of nations, by the law of the land, and by the higher moral law. The tribute of admiration due to Mr. Bright for his consistency had been withheld in some quarters, on the ground that he ought to have left the Cabinet earlier; but some of his Friends said that this was not possible, as he and a portion of the Cabinet did not know of the orders for the bombardment until it was too late. He (Lord Stanley of Alderley) had only lately read that Mr. Goschen was one of a firm which had largely contributed to raising the Egyptian loans; if that were so, it was not fitting that Her Majesty's Government should have sent him as Ambassador to Constantinople. The noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Earl Granville) denied that that war was for the bondholders; but the sending of the Dual Note and of the Fleet was on their behalf, and it might be asked how was it that the greater part of the noble Earl's despatch to Lord Dufferin of July 11 referred to the

  731
  Egyptian Debt and the Control, and but a very small portion of it to the Suez Canal and other British interests? How-was it, too, that the Foreign Office had disregarded the remonstrance of the Egyptian Government with regard to the smuggling carried on by the large European population, who contributed nothing to the Revenue of the country; and yet, in March last, the Foreign Office had instructed the Consul General to secure the retention of Mr. Caillard at his post of Director General of the Customs, with a salary of £3,000 a-year. What excuse, again, was to be offered for the law of liquidation passed by a European Commission in April, 1880, by which £17,000,000, paid by the Egyptian cultivators to redeem in perpetuity half the rent of their land from 1885, was confiscated? That was done by repealing the law of Monkabala. Her Majesty's Ambassador at Constantinople could, indeed, argue that this was just and honest, on the ground that he himself had in a similar manner been deprived of some £20,000 with which he had bought up his Ulster tenant right. The noble Earl's despatch to Lord Dufferin of July 28, which had lately been delivered to their Lordships, was not written in very suitable language, and it was diplomatically wrong, since it spoke of the Sovereign power as though it had only the same rights in Egypt as any other of the European Powers. The withdrawal of France from supporting Her Majesty's Government by the recent Vote in the French Chamber was a reason of expediency which should influence Her Majesty's Government to listen to the entreaty which the noble Lord had just addressed to it.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I do not think the House will expect me to follow the remarks of the noble Lord who has just sat down (Lord Stanley of Alderley), except to express my great astonishment that he has thought it right to repeat insinuations against a man of such high character and honour as Mr. Goschen—insinuations which have been utterly disposed of amid cheers from both sides of the House in "another place." With regard to the Question which was asked by the noble Lord (Lord Lamington), your Lordships will remember that, a short time ago, a very interesting debate took place on Egyptian affairs, when I asked the
  732
  House to sanction the course taken by the Government, to which it appears the noble Lord is himself opposed. The speech which the noble Lord has just made would have been a valuable contribution to that debate, although whether it would have succeeded in preventing your Lordships giving your sanction to that policy—which you did unanimously, though with some strictures on the past policy of the Government—I do not know. But I do think this is an inconvenient way of renewing that debate, by leaving a Question upon the Paper which the noble Lord does not ask, and which he admits is no longer applicable. However desirable, therefore, the noble Lord may think the discussion, I must declare that for the present I do not think it would be convenient again to go over the same ground that we so lately travelled.
  LORD HOUGHTONsaid, he desired to call the attention of the noble Earl opposite (Earl Granville), as well as that of their Lordships, to the recent Proclamation of Arabi Pasha which had recently been extensively circulated in Egypt, and in which he declared that he was the Representative of the Sultan, and that troops were to be sent from Turkey to assist him. It was important to notice that among the signatures attached to the Proclamation of the Government established at Cairo there were those not only of persons connected with Arabi Pasha, but of persons who were at the head of the Christian and Mahomedan religions, and also of two Members of the Family of the reigning Khedive. These signatories declared that they adhered to the rebel cause. The document was of great importance, as it bore upon the question of succession to the Khedive, and that was one of the principal factors in the consideration of the ease; and it was significant that the Representative of the reigning Family had also signed the document which would place the Khedive in a position of hostility to his immediate relatives, and also in a position of strong hostility to that Party at Constantinople which had supported his rival to the Throne of Egypt. It was unfortunate that the difficulty of a disputed succession—always a matter of vital importance in an Oriental country—had arisen in the country; but there could be no doubt that it was so. Indeed, it was

  733
  quite possible that the troubles which had grown up in Egypt might be traceable to no other cause than the intrigues connected with this question of succession. He trusted, therefore, that, in dealing with the question, the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs would keep that fact carefully in view, and that it would be fully considered by the Government, who had pledged its honour to support the Khedive.
  THE EARL OF FEVERSHAMsaid, he wished to make a few observations. He bad to complain of the difficulty which existed in obtaining information from Her Majesty's Government—
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES): My Lords, I rise to Order. There is no Question before the House, and I do not think the noble Earl is in Order in discussing this matter upon a mere Question which has not been put.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: It is always understood that in this House a Question may be discussed; but I understand there is a Motion for Papers.
  THE EARL OF FEVERSHAMsaid, he would not detain their Lordships long. He must say he was sorry when he thought that the answer which the noble Earl opposite (Earl Granville) had given would not be considered satisfactory. It would have been more so, both to that House and the country, if the noble Earl had told them that the Government were determined to act in a friendly manner with the Government of the Sultan; but he had made no declaration of that sort, and any measures which should bring this country into open acts of hostility to the forces of the Sultan would be a grievous calamity.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, at the risk of being considered disorderly, I wish to say one word in answer to the request of my hon. Friend (Lord Houghton), who speaks with considerable authority on this subject, and it is that I do not in the least share with him his apprehensions as to the importance of the document or the signatures attached to it, and issued by Arabi Pasha under his Proclamation. Whether the document has been signed by those persons, and whether it has been done under compulsion or not—as to which I am entirely ignorant—is a matter of little importance.
  LORD ELLENBOROUGHsaid, he had been desired by his noble Friend (Lord Stanley of Alderley), who could not speak again, to say that he did not intend to cast any aspersion on the character or reputation of Mr. Goschen. He was a great admirer of the ability of that right hon. Gentleman. As to the question before the House, the irresponsible speeches made by another right hon. Gentleman long since were really at the root of these difficulties.
  LORD LAMINGTON, in reply, said, he had no wish to embarrass the Government; but those who desired to maintain our alliance with the Ottoman Empire were bound to express their feelings, but he would, by permission, withdraw his Motion. In bringing the subject forward, he had merely vindicated his right, as a responsible Member of the Legislature, to express how much he desired to see Treaty obligations fulfilled and maintained.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

AFRICA (SOUTH) — CETEWAYO, EXKING OF ZULULAND — VISIT TO THIS COUNTRY—OFFICIAL RECEPTION.—QUESTION.
LORD NORTONasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, What caution he has taken that taking Cetewayo out of the hands of the Cape Government, and bringing him round through England to his own country again, may not appear to implicate us afresh in South African war, which may consequently revive, and relieve the Colonists from the understanding of their primary responsibility for self-defence which was recently impressed upon them; and what official reception Cetewayo was to have from the Government?
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he thought there must be some misapprehension in the mind of his noble Friend (Lord Norton) in putting the Question, for his noble Friend asked, in effect, what precaution had been taken in bringing Cetewayo from the hands of the Cape Government; and, whether that would be construed as a part of the policy of the Government, and relieve the Colony from their responsibility for self-defence? His noble Friend must have forgotten that the Cape Government, for convenience, only undertook the charge of

735
Cetewayo, and it had nothing whatever to do with the Zulu War, and was in no way responsible for the peace of the frontier of Natal. The fact of the Cape Government having taken charge of Cetewayo had, therefore, nothing to do with the question of the Cape Colony defending itself; and Cetewayo, being no longer in the custody of the Cape Government, had no bearing upon the question of policy. Cetewayo had all along been looked upon as a prisoner of war taken by the Imperial Government; and the Zulu War, and the whole of those proceedings, were very largely conducted by Imperial Forces, and in pursuance of Imperial policy, and any step taken with regard to Cetewayo by the Imperial Government, that Government would hold itself responsible for. He entirely agreed with his noble Friend that it was highly desirable that they should do nothing to diminish the responsibility of the Colonists in South Africa for their self-defence. The Home Government thought it of the highest importance that the Colonists should be encouraged to undertake their own defence; and they had shown their feeling on that subject by the course they had taken in regard to the Basuto War, and also by the proposal they had made in respect to responsible government for Natal. He must confess, with regard to the latter part of the Question, that he was somewhat embarrassed with respect to the official reception of Cetewayo in this country. He did not know what was meant by official reception by the Government, neither was he aware that the ex-King would have any official reception, except such a reception as might be given him when he would be asked to call at the Colonial Office to say what he had to say. Anything like an official reception he certainly would not receive, for to speak of one being about to be given him was giving him a sort of importance, which, though he was no doubt a person as to whom a good deal of interest was excited, did not properly belong to him; and it seemed to be elevating him to a kind of pedestal which would give him a wrong idea of his position. Cetewayo would have every opportunity of communicating with the Government; but there would be nothing of the nature of an official reception.
THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of
736
Kimberley) had not noticed all the points put by his noble Friend (Lord Norton), the first of which was that, if the result of Cetewayo's visit to this country was to provoke a war, in that case the Colonists would have a right to complain. By bringing him to England they did incur some danger of creating disturbance in Zululand; and the responsibility for the consequences of that would ultimately lie at the door of the Home Government. Another point was that the fact of their having brought the ex-King to England was likely to convey a wrong impression to his mind; and on that point he (the Earl of Carnarvon) had been rather gratified to hear the noble Earl minimize the reception Cetewayo was likely to receive on visiting the officials of the Colonial Office, and that it was to be confined within the narrowest limits. To his (the Earl of Carnarvon's) idea, the wisdom of bringing him to this country was mistaken and doubtful, because, whether intentionally or unintentionally, it was calculated to create a false impression in the minds of his countrymen that it was but the prelude to his restoration.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, that the noble Earl (the Earl of Carnarvon) seemed to misunderstand the question. The noble Earl seemed to think that the visit of Cetewayo was a prelude to sending him to Zululand. Whatever might be the result of that visit, if it was followed by his return to Zululand, it would bring a certain amount of responsibility on Her Majesty's Government. Of course, if they took any decided steps in that matter, they would be taken in full appreciation of their responsibility; and the question would be whether these steps were steps of sound policy or not. If any step was taken by Her Majesty's Government in regard to Cetewayo that had an important bearing on South African policy, there was no doubt they would be responsible for it.
LORD ELLENBOROUGHheld it to be most unfortunate that Cetewayo should have been brought to England; and if he were permitted to return to Zululand, and a war ensued in consequence, Her Majesty's Government and this country would be bound to pay every shilling of its cost.
LORD NORTONsaid, that he understood most distinctly, when the question was brought before their Lordships a

737
few days ago, that it was the noble Earl's intention that Cetewayo should return to Zululand.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he could assure his noble Friend that he had never made any such announcement whatever. Whatever Her Majesty's Government might intend to do in regard to Cetewayo, their intentions had never been announced. Although Questions had been frequently put to him on the subject, he had always replied that the Government were not in possession of sufficient information to enable him to give a satisfactory reply.
LORD NORTONsaid, that the noble Earl the Secretary of State for the Colonies was understood to imply as much in the answer he gave the other day to the noble Duke (the Duke of Somerset), when the noble Duke questioned him with regard to the object of making Cetewayo take such a roundabout course as to visit this country on his way from the Cape to Zululand. The noble Earl then replied in effect that it was very desirable, in the event of Cetewayo returning to Zululand, that he should in the interval see something of the greatness of the resources of this country, so that he would go back a very different man from what he was before, and know something of the position in which he would put himself if he placed himself in conflict with such a country as this. The assertion of the noble Earl, that the Zulu War was undertaken simply for Imperial purposes, was one which he (Lord Norton) altogether disputed. That war was waged primarily for local interests, and Imperial interests were but secondary in it. He could only say that if Cetewayo's going from this country to Zululand should lead to any revival of the war there, this country would be held to be responsible. As to the reception that might be given to him, he maintained that, while it was hoped that he was not going to be made a "lion" of, even such a reception as the noble Earl had hinted at was calculated to raise Cetewayo's opinion of himself and of his position, and, what was much more important, give the Colonists probably an erroneous view of the relations subsisting between Cetewayo and the Home Government. It seemed to him, however, that the reception he would get was not such as would make him less pretentious on his return to Zululand.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, it was important that his words should not be wrongly interpreted, for his noble Friend (Lord Norton) had put words into his (the Earl of Kimberley's) mouth which he had never said. He had never said that the war in Zululand was undertaken for Imperial purposes. If he had said so, it would have been contrary to his own opinion. What he had said was that it was conducted by the Imperial Government, and at the expense of £5,000,000, to which the Colonists contributed a very small part.

MERCHANT SHIPPING ACTS—EMIGRANT SHIPS (CANADA).

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD EMLY, in rising to ask Her Majesty's Government, What steps the Board of Trade have taken on account of representations made to them as to the defective arrangements for the separation of the sexes in the ships of the Dominion Line? said, their Lordships were aware that among the emigrants going out to Canada were a number of unmarried women. Means were provided on the other side of the Atlantic for their reception on their arrival; but it did not appear that sufficient protection was provided for them during the passage. He thought that a proper female officer should be appointed to each steamer to see that the regulations for the separation of the sexes were properly carried out. He would be glad to hear from his noble Friend who represented the Board of Trade (Lord Sudeley) what arrangements would be made to remedy the present unsatisfactory state of things.
  LORD SUDELEY, in reply, said, that, in the first place, he should explain that the Board of Trade had never taken the extreme view-that was sometimes entertained that, in all cases, the sexes, married and single, should be kept separate on board emigrant ships proceeding across the Atlantic. The Board rather held to the view that it was better, in the interests of order and morality, that husbands and wives proceeding in the same ship should proceed together, rather than suffer a temporary divorce. It had been made clear to them that a husband and wife could look after and assist each other and their young child-

  739
  ren by being together, much better than they could be looked after and helped if strict separation were the rule. What the Board of Trade had done was this —They had endeavoured to get the Companies to adopt a strict rule whereby the single men's quarters should be in the fore part of the ship, and the single women's quarters in the after part of the ship, with permanent bulkheads, and the married people's quarters between, so that there should be no connection between these several parts of the ship; and that separate and distinct ladder-ways should be provided for each of the three descriptions of passengers. Among the suggestions by the Board of Trade that had been made and were being carried out was that in every emigrant ship, there should be a matron, as the noble Lord wished. The duties of the matron were that she should be present at meal times; should receive complaints, if any were made, that any single female passenger or young person did not get due allowance of food or proper attention; that she should play the part of an ever-present domestic inspector, her special office being to encourage decency and order, and suppress any indecorum among the single females. He was very glad to be able to say that in the Companies doing the best trade in emigrant passengers, these suggestions, or nearly all of them, had been or were being carried out most effectively and loyally, with great benefits to all concerned; and it was only fair that he should, as was their due, congratulate those Companies on the way in which they had received the Board's suggestions and had acted on them. With regard to the particular Line referred to, he had not had sufficient time to ascertain particulars; but he was able to say that the last of the Dominion Line ships which left England had carried out all the suggestions of the Board of Trade, and it was hoped from this that the Company intended to carry them out in all their ships.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, he wished to call the attention of the noble Lord (Lord Sudeley) to the fact that no condition was required by the Board of Trade as to the existence of watertight compartments in emigrants ships, these being, he believed, necessary for the safety of the passengers in the event of an accident.
  LORD SUDELEYsaid, he was unable to give the noble Earl any information; but the subject was one which, no doubt, deserved attention, and he would take care it should be brought before the Board.

IRELAND—THE LABOURERS' LEAGUE.—QUESTION.
EARL FORTESCUEasked the Lord Privy Seal, To what counties is there reasonable ground for believing that the Labourers' League, as distinguished from the Land League, has extended in Ireland, and what outrages during the last three months can be reasonably referred to it in the opinion of the Government?
LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRIVY SEAL), in reply, said, he had been able to obtain some information on this subject by telegraph from the Irish Government which had been supplied by the special Resident Magistrates of the different districts, each district embracing several counties. In the first district it appeared that in Carlow, Kildare, King's and Queen's Counties, attempts had been made to establish a Labourers' League, but so far it had shown practically no vitality. In the second district it had spread slowly in Longford, and had just shown itself in Cavan, Leitrim, and Westmeath. In the third district it was found not to exist in the county of Sligo, but it did in a slight degree in Mayo and Roscommon. In the fourth district it had shown itself in some parts of Clare and Limerick, but there was nothing there worthy of special report. As to the fifth district, there had been a few meetings in the counties of Cork and Kerry, but nothing had been done to disturb the public peace. The Labourers' League existed in a weak state in Kilkenny and Tipperary, and was strongest in Water-ford. He was not able to find that any outrage had been directly traced to this League; but some violent speeches had certainly been delivered, chiefly against farmers.

WELLESLEY BRIDGE (LIMERICK) BILL.
(The Lord Thurlow.)
WELLESLEY BRIDGE (LIMERICK) BILL.

  (NO. 207) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD THURLOW, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that it was a useful measure, which their Lordships would do well to pass.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a" —(The Lord Thurlow.)
  THE EARL OF LIMERICKsaid, he agreed with the noble Lord (Lord Thurlow) that it would be very useful for facilitating communication between Limerick and the county of Clare. The matter had been always regarded as one of the greatest interest in the district, especially in the city of Limerick, although the inhabitants of the county would probably use the bridge very little. The work was one which ought to be proceeded with, and he was glad the Government had introduced the measure. There was one matter connected with the Bill to which he should like to draw the attention of the noble Lord. By Clause 2, which dealt with the proportions in which the money would be raised, it was provided that of the cost Clare County should pay three-eighths and Limerick City five-eighths. Why the cost should be thus unequally divided he could not understand.
  LORD THURLOWsaid, he had no doubt the matter would be taken into consideration, and put right by the noble Earl (the Earl of Redesdale) in Committee.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)said, he was not aware that the Bill would come before him. It was a hybrid Bill, to which there was some slight objection; but it could be amended in Committee. From the Preamble of the Bill he saw that the original cost was £10,000, and that the sum had now been reduced to £7,076. He thought the Bill, as a whole, was rather carelessly drawn, and he hoped the noble Lord in charge of it (Lord Thurlow) would see that an improvement was effected.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed for Monday next.

THE ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWNasked the Lord Privy Seal, Whether he can give
  742
  the House any details with regard to the alleged strike for increased wages which is said to have taken place among the members of the Royal Irish Constabulary? In putting this Question, he wished to observe that almost the only bright spot which was to be seen for the last two miserable years in the gloomy picture which Ireland presented was the unswerving loyalty to the Crown, very often under circumstances of great difficulty, exhibited by the members of the Royal Irish Constabulary; while the manner in which they had performed their difficult, arduous, and very often most irksome duties had won the respect and admiration of all honest men. It was, therefore, with feelings little short of dismay that he read the reports which had appeared in the newspapers of the discontent, if not disaffection, which had appeared in their ranks. He saw in a newspaper that morning a statement to the effect that the men in a certain district were so disgusted with the manner in which the Government had treated their mild demands, that they had come to the determination, if the Government did not at once take their grievances into consideration, to lay down their arms, and refuse to obey orders. If the report were true, nothing more startling had been heard of since the Indian Mutiny. He had no doubt, however, that it was a statement which was much exaggerated, and he trusted not only that the Government would be able to re-assure their Lordships on that point, but also that they would state that they were prepared to deal both fairly, fully, and generously with the question, and thus satisfy a body of men of whom it might well be said they were sans peur et sans reproche.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRIVY SEAL), in reply, said, he was happy to be able to inform the noble Earl (the Earl of Milltown) that the report that had appeared in the newspapers on this subject was greatly exaggerated. There was no reason to believe that the Royal Irish Constabulary had exceeded their legitimate rights in the manner in which they had urged their views upon the Government as to their position. It was perfectly true that they did think that their condition, in certain respects, ought to be improved, and some of the matters to which they

  743
  attached importance would be provided for out of the grant of £180,000 which was now on the point of being voted in the House of Commons. The remaining questions which they had raised were being carefully inquired into; and he might mention one gratifying circumstance which would show that the Royal Irish Constabulary was not an unpopular Force—that it was not looked upon in Ireland as a Force which it would be disadvantageous for any educated Irishman to belong to—the fact, namely, that the recruiting of the Constabulary for some months past had been going on in the most satisfactory way.
  House adjourned at Six o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter past Four o'clock.