Lords Sitting of 25 July 1882

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading— Wellesley Bridge (Limerick) * (207); Civil Imprisonment (Scotland) * (208); Common Prayer (Priestly Absolution) * (209).
Referred to Select Committee—Bills of Exchange (183).
Committee—Report —Friendly Societies (Quinquennial Returns) * (194).
Third Reading —Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders * (148); Copyright (Musical Compositions) * (204); Beer Dealers' Retail Licences Act (1880) Amendment * (192); Vagrancy, now Casual Poor * (200), and passed.

EGYPT—LETTER OF ARABI PASHA.

  QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVON: My Lords, as I see the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in his place, I beg to ask him a Question of which I have given him private Notice. I have no doubt that the noble Earl's attention, and that of your Lordships, has been called to a very singular letter which appeared in yesterday's Times, purporting to be addressed by Arabi Pasha to the Prime Minister. From a cursory observation, it will be clear that the letter was drawn up by an English rather than an Egyptian hand. But, at the same time, it would be satisfactory to the House to know, and I am sure the noble Earl will tell us, if he is able to do so, how that letter was addressed, and how it reached the Prime Minister, and, above all, whether that letter formed the whole or only part of a corre-
  1670
  spondence—that is to say, whether anything else can be laid on the Table?
  EARL GRANVILLE: In reply to the Question of the noble Earl, I can only state that that letter is the only communication which the Prime Minister has received from Arabi Pasha. I am not able to say how it reached the Prime Minister; but I can state that the Prime Minister has not answered it.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I wish to ask the noble Earl whether any communications have reached the Prime Minister through any agent of Arabi Pasha in this country, and whether the noble Earl is at liberty to give us any information on the subject?
  EARL GRANVILLE: I am at a loss to guess to what the noble Marquess refers, when he speaks of communications by the agent of Arabi Pasha in this country. I can give the noble Marquess no further information; but I may say that no agent of Arabi Pasha has yet been accredited to Her Majesty's Government.

ARMY RESERVE FORCE.

  MESSAGE FROM THE QUEEN.
  EARL GRANVILLE: I may inform the House that, in order to save time, and to enable the Queen in Council to issue the Proclamation calling out the Reserves, I communicated to your Lordships' House the Message announcing Her Majesty's intention during the Morning Sitting for Judicial Business.
  The said Message was as follows:—
  VICTORIA R.
  The present state of public affairs in Egypt, and the necessity in connection therewith of taking steps for the restoration of order and tranquillity in that country and for the protection of the interests of the Empire, having constituted in the opinion of Her Majesty a case of great emergency within the meaning of the Acts of Parliament in that behalf, Her Majesty deems it proper to provide additional means for Her military service, and therefore in pursuance of those Acts Her Majesty has thought it right to communicate to the House of Lords that Her Majesty is about to cause Her Reserve Force, or such part thereof as Her Majesty shall think necessary, to be forthwith called out for permanent service.
  V.R.
  Ordered, that the said message be taken into consideration on Thursday next.

  BILLS OF EXCHANGE BILL.—(No. 183.)
  (The Lord Chancellor.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the matter dealt with in this Bill was one of considerable importance, although the Bill was not a lengthy one. Since the second reading he had received communications from several quarters asking that the Bill might receive very careful consideration at their Lordships' hands, and he thought it was necessary that it should receive that consideration. With that view he would propose that it should be referred to a Select Committee. The attempt to codify the law of England was an experiment; but he ventured to think that it was an experiment which would repay the trouble incurred by noble Lords who gave their services on the Committee. He understood that it was not the first time the Bill had been brought forward, but that it had already been introduced last Session in the House of Commons. During the interval it had been very carefully considered, and great pains had been taken to make it as efficient as possible; still, it was a matter of the greatest importance to the commercial world, and its discussion by a Select Committee of their Lordships would prove of great service. He therefore moved that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee.
  LORD BRAMWELLwished to observe that he could not say the Bill was urgent, as the law was not altered— only codified. He should not oppose its reference to a Select Committee. At the same time, he thought the promoters of the Bill had some cause for complaint. They had been pressed to extend its operation to Scotland, and, having been induced to consent, were now the victims of their own good nature, for the objections raised against the Bill chiefly came from those persons who had asked that Scotland should be included in it.
  Order discharged.
  Bill referred to a Select Committee.
  The Committee to be named on Friday next.

STREET OBSTRUCTIONS (METROPOLIS).

  MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWN, in moving—
  "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for Return of the gates, bars, and obstructions which are placed across certain streets of the Metropolis, with particulars as to the parishes in which they are respectively situated, the street or other place they obstruct, with the width of such street or place; whether the roadway of such street or place is repaired by the local authorities; whether, if such street or place were opened as a thoroughfare, much traffic would be likely to pass through it, and from what points, with a description of each bar or obstruction, with the authority for its erection and continuance and date of first erection; also what powers such authority confers, and to what extent those powers are now put in force,"
  said, he trusted the Government would have no objection to give these Returns. He referred particularly to those obstructions which existed on the Duke of Bedford's property between the Strand and Ruston and St. Pancras Stations. A traveller hastening to catch a train, and turned back by the porter and obliged to make a long detour, would learn with surprise that the autocrat at whose instance he was thus delayed was a great Liberal Peer, a supporter and Member of the present Radical Government, which had, just deprived, without compensation, the landlords of one portion of the Kingdom of the legitimate rights of property exercised in every portion of the civilized world. It was chiefly in the Bloomsbury district where the greatest amount of obstruction was to be found, for their Lordships knew that the gates and bars there were kept closed during many hours out of the 24 of each day. In modern times the whole of that district had been built upon, and the obstructions were now much felt. The Metropolitan Board of Works and the citizens of London had for a long time past been anxious to get rid of these obstructions, but had not been able to do so. The inhabitants of London were very long-suffering; but their patience was becoming exhausted, and he trusted they might see the unreasonable restrictions upon a large body of traffic soon removed. He understood that a similar Motion was made in the House of Commons four months ago; but the Returns would not be so full

  1673
  and complete as he now wished to obtain.
  Moved, "That an humble Address he presented to Her Majesty for Return of the gates, bars, and obstructions which are placed across certain streets of the Metropolis, with particulars as to the parishes in which they are respectively situated, the street or other place they obstruct, with the width of such street or place.; whether the roadway of such street or place is repaired by the local authorities; whether, if such street or place were opened as a thoroughfare, much traffic would be likely to pass through it, and from what points, with a description of each bar or obstruction, with the authority for its erection and continuance and date of first erection; also what powers such authority confers, and to what extent those powers are now put in force."—(The Earl of Milltown.)
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid, it was no part of his duty to enter upon a discussion of the subject which the noble Earl had called attention to; but he wished to point out that, owing to the somewhat conflicting interests of the various local authorities in the Metropolis, it would not be practicable to obtain such a Return in the form in which it was moved for. Returns of a very similar character had been asked for on the 6th of March in the House of Commons, and those Returns would shortly be laid before their Lordships. Under these circumstances, the Government had not thought it advisable to incur over again the expense and trouble which would be necessary in preparing fresh Returns in order to furnish information which had already been substantially supplied. He must, therefore, ask the noble Earl not to press his Motion at present, particularly the last part of it.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWNsaid, that if the Vestries objected to furnish that information he had nothing more to say; but his impression was that the Vestries were most anxious to get rid of those obstacles to traffic.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

EAST INDIA (EXPENSES OF MILITARY EXPEDITION TO EGYPT).

  RESOLUTION.
  VISCOUNT ENFIELDsaid, he rose, pursuant to Notice, to move—
  "That, Her Majesty having directed a military expedition of Her forces charged upon the revenues of India to be despatched for service in Egypt, this House consents that the revenues
  1674
  of India shall be applied to defray the expenses of the military operations which maybe carried on by such forces beyond the external frontiers of Her Majesty's Indian Possessions."
  In asking their Lordships to assent to that Resolution on behalf of the Government, he believed he was acting strictly in accordance with Constitutional usage and precedent. When the Act for the better government of India passed through Parliament in 1858 it was clearly contemplated that at some time or other the use of Her Majesty's Indian Forces would be required beyond the Frontiers of India. That Act contained the following clause:—
  "Except for preventing or repelling actual invasion of Her Majesty's Indian Possessions, or under other sudden and urgent necessity, the revenues of India shall not, without the consent of both Houses of Parliament, be applicable to defray the expenses of any military operations carried on beyond the external frontiers of such possessions by Her Majesty's forces charged upon such revenues."
  That clause was proposed very nearly in the terms in which it now stood by the present Prime Minister in the passage of the Act through the House of Commons. It was altered to some extent by Mr. James Wilson, and opposed by Lord Palmerston; but it was carried in substantially the same form in which it now appeared on the Statute Book. But, in passing through the House of Lords, the late Lord Derby added certain words which rendered it necessary that the assent of Parliament should not only be obtained before Her Majesty's Indian Forces might be moved out of India, but before any portion of the Indian Revenues could be applied to defray the charge for those Forces when employed out of India. Various expeditions with which their Lordships were, no doubt, familiar, and in which both English and Indian troops had been employed, had taken place during the last 30 years. There had been the expedition to China, the expedition to Persia, the expedition to Abyssinia, and the expedition to Afghanistan; and on the last two occasions the assent of Parliament wag asked before Her Majesty's Indian Forces were employed on such duties. With regard to the Abyssinian Expedition, it was decided upon within the last few days of the Session of Parliament in 1867, and it was practically entered upon without the assent of Parliament; but so jealous were Her Majesty's Ministers of that day

  1675
  as to the Constitutional duty which devolved upon them of asking the assent of Parliament to the employment of Indian troops, that they summoned Parliament in November of that year, when its assent was obtained. As to the expedition to Afghanistan, those who now sat on the Ministerial Benches were opposed to that expedition; but he believed that no objection was taken to the Constitutional course which Her Majesty's Advisers then adopted; and the noble Viscount opposite, then Secretary of State for India (Viscount Cran-brook), and Mr. Stanhope in the other House, asked for and obtained the assent of Parliament to the employment of Her Majesty's Indian Forces outside the Frontiers of India, and also to the Indian Revenues being charged with the expenses of that 'expedition. There had been another assembling of Her Majesty's Indian Forces subsequently to the Abyssinian and the Afghan expeditions on which he might say a word. The noble Marquess or the noble Viscount opposite might ask why did the present Secretary of State for India, who objected to the despatch of Indian troops to Malta in 1878, now ask the assent of Parliament to the despatch of Indian troops to Egypt? He was authorized to say, on behalf of his noble Friend the Marquess of Hartington, that the exception he then took to the course which Her Majesty's Advisors then followed was based on a strictly Constitutional and legal ground. His noble Friend then objected that in time of peace Indian troops should have been brought to Europe without the assent of Parliament being previously obtained. He ventured to make that explanation, because it might be said that they seemed to have changed their policy in having objected in 1878 to Indian troops being brought to Malta, and in now themselves despatching Indian troops to Egypt. It would be only wasting their Lordships' time wore he now to dwell on the paramount necessity and importance, both to India and England, of a safe passage to India through Egypt by the Suez Canal. If that necessity was, as he believed, recognized on all hands, the Government did not think it unreasonable that a small portion of Her Majesty's Indian Forces should be employed in the proposed expedition to Egypt. He believed that by their training and
  1676
  physical qualifications Indian troops would be eminently fitted to act in cooperation with troops sent from this country in such an enterprize. It was originally intended that a force of something like 7,600 men should be despatched from India, with a reserve of about 1,400, to be located at Aden. But within the last few days the number had been somewhat altered, owing to representations which had been made to the India Office by the War Department; and he was not in a position to state what would be the exact number of the proposed contingent; but he thought it would not exceed 6,000 with the small amount of reserve he had mentioned. He believed there would be three regiments of Cavalry. He was also authorized to say that, at a sitting of the Indian Council that day, those provisional arrangements were accepted by the Council and passed without any dissent on their part. He might add one word as to the financial aspect of the matter. As at present arranged, he believed it was intended that the Indian Revenues should defray the ordinary and extraordinary charges for that Indian contingent. With regard to the future financial arrangements, they must depend on the opinion of the Government at home and the views of Parliament. In conclusion, he thought that Her Majesty would rely with confidence on the fidelity, the loyalty, the bravery, and the discipline of the troops who were des-spatched from this country; and he felt certain that those qualities would be equally shown by that Indian contingent for the employment of which he had now to ask the assent of their Lordships in the terms of the Resolution which he had placed on the Table.
  Moved to resolve, "That, Her Majesty having directed a military expedition of Her forces charged upon the revenues of India to be despatched for service in Egypt, this House consents that the revenues of India shall he applied to defray the expenses of the military operations which may he carried on by such forces beyond the external frontiers of Her Majesty's Indian Possessions."—(The Viscount Enfield.)
  VISCOUNT CRANBROOKsaid, that there could, of course, be no objection to the acceptance of that Resolution by their Lordships. The singular nature of the contest in which they were about to be engaged was one which specially demanded troops who were inured to a

  1677
  climate like that of Egypt. The peculiar circumstances of Egypt, and the fact that the operations were intended for the purpose of securing peace in that country, and a free passage through the Suez Canal for our merchandise and our communications with India, also rendered it fitting that that expedition should be authorized; and, therefore, it seemed not unreasonable that a contingent of Indian troops should be furnished for that service, which concerned India fully as much as it did any part of the Empire. The noble Viscount had told them that at present the question of finance remained open, and he (Viscount Cranbrook) would not, therefore, now enter upon it; but it might become the subject of discussion hereafter. At the same time, he must say that the employment of Indian troops upon this special service, and in connection with this question, was a matter which con-corned India as much as any other part of the Empire. The noble Viscount had not informed their Lordships at what time the troops would be prepared to leave India; but it was to be presumed that they had had warning given them long ago, and that they were quite ready to start. He should be glad to know when they would reach their destination, because that was a point of no little importance?
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, he objected to that part of the Motion which proposed that the cost of those troops should be defrayed out of the Indian Revenues. He objected to the Revenues of India being charged with the expenses of a war undertaken in the interests of the Egyptian bondholders. This war was already sufficiently unpopular with a large portion of Her Majesty's Indian subjects, and it would be injudicious to make it more so, by also making them feel the burden of it through taxation.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that he did not know whether the noble Lord intended to move any Amendment or not.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY: No.
  EARL GRANVILLE: Then he did not think it necessary to answer the observations of the noble Earl; in fact, they had been already answered by what had fallen from the noble Viscount. He, however, wished to say that, whatever might be the merits or demerits of the
  1678
  question, he must entirely deny, and he hoped that their Lordships would agree with him, that they were entering into a contest on behalf of, or in the interests of, the bondholders.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he was very glad to hear that intimation from the noble Earl, because, inasmuch as the word "bondholders" had been mentioned, it might have led to some misunderstanding. He could only say, as he was giving his humble support to the Government, that if it were a question of going to war on behalf of the bondholders he should earnestly resist imposing any burdens, not only upon the Indian, but the English people, solely in their interests.
  VISCOUNT ENFIELDsaid, in reply to the noble Viscount opposite, that the Government had foreseen that it might be necessary to convey troops from India to Egypt, and that precautions had been taken. Troops were in readiness, and he believed that transports had already been taken up.
  Motion agreed to.

ARMY (AUXILIARY FORCES)—THE MILITIA —VOLUNTEERS FOR SERVICE ABROAD.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF GALLOWAYrose to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, 1. Whether those Militia regiments, or any of them, which have been warned they may be required to remain out for fifty-six days' training, instead of twenty-seven days will be so required; and, if so, to name the regiments to which this will apply; 2. Whether the commanding officers of any Militia regiments have volunteered in the name of their regiments their services for garrisoning foreign stations; 3. Whether this is permissible by the regulations of Her Majesty's Service; 4. If not so permissible, and it should be deemed desirable that such volunteering should take place, whether a circular will be sent to that effect to all Militia regiments at present undergoing their course of training? With regard to the first Question, it would be a great convenience to both officers and men to know whether they would be required to remain out for 56 days. With regard to the other three Questions, he had received communications from various commanding officers

  1679
  of Militia battalions in England and Scotland with reference to the course to be pursued as to volunteering. He had seen in the newspapers that several Militia regiments had volunteered for foreign service. He had considered the subject in March, 1878, when it seemed probable that the services of some of the Militia regiments might be required; and he then came to the conclusion that before a commanding officer of a Militia regiment volunteered its services it was His duty to receive the sanction of every officer, non-commissioned officer, and private in the regiment. Every noncommissioned officer in every Militia battalion in Her Majesty's Service would, of course, be ready at any moment to volunteer, and he had very little doubt but that the men would be equally ready to do so; but he should himself feel great compunction in addressing his own regiment and asking them to volunteer, unless he had previously received the sanction of his officers. It would, in His opinion, be of great advantage to the Service and to the country if his noble Friend would state what were the views of the Secretary of State for War upon the subject.
  THE EARL OF SANDWICHsaid, he wished to call the attention of the noble Earl to the disadvantage of sending Militia regiments from their head-quarters to drill with small depot battalions, instead of with large bodies of troops. He complained also that, although military garrisons were maintained for the purpose of obtaining military recruits for the Militia, as a matter of fact, no recruits joined at these places. He held that it was not necessary to maintain such a large staff at these depots, seeing that they were comparatively useless.
  THE EARL OF MORLEYsaid, he was not surprised at the Questions put by his noble and gallant Friend, and he would do his best to answer them. With regard to the first Question, the Militia regiments which were now out for their annual training had been warned that they might be required to remain out for 56 instead of the usual period of 28 days. In each case the commanding officers had been consulted, and asked whether the prolongation of training would seriously interfere with harvest operations in their districts. In all cases except one—Berkshire —the reply received bad been favourable to an exten-
  1680
  sion of the training; and, consequently, 28 Militia regiments would remain out this year for 56 days. As to the other Questions, no doubt a considerable number of commanding officers of Militia regiments had shown their zeal to serve nor Majesty by offering their regiments for garrisoning foreign stations. The Militia were not embodied, and there was no present intention of embodying them; and therefore, perhaps, the officers were not strictly regular in offering the services of their regiments. If the Militia were embodied, the Secretary of State would select those required for foreign service. Those selected would not necessarily be taken from the list of regiments which had already volunteered for foreign service. However, the numerous offers that had been made showed the zeal and readiness on the part of the Militia officers and men to serve when required. With regard to the observations made by the noble Earl who last addressed the House, he failed to see what connection they had with the Questions that had been put to him; but he believed they had reference to a speech he made some time ago having no connection with the present subject.
  LORD ELLENBOROUGHsaid, he must protest against the way in which every time a war broke out it was taken as a matter of course that the Militia was to be sent out of the country, contrary to the purpose for which they were originally raised, which was for the protection of this country; and he protested against ignoring the Constitutional question every time it was found convenient to do so merely for the exigencies of the Government, and to hide the fact that the Army was not equal to the services required of it.
  THE EARL OF MORLEYsaid, he did not think the sending of them out of the country for the defence of our garrisons abroad would be in contradiction of the purposes for which the Militia was raised.

EGYPT—ARRESTS.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, By what right under the Law of Nations persons have been arrested by Her Majesty's Forces on board the mail steamer "Khedivieh" at Alexandria, when no war or blockade has

  1681
  been declared? The noble Lord observed that it would be in the recollection of their Lordships that on the 8th of November, 1861, at the commencement of the war between the Northern and Southern portions of the United States, the United States man-of-war San Jacinto stopped the British mail steamer Trent in the Bahama Canal, and forcibly took out of her Messrs. Mason, Slidell, and two other Americans. On the 30th of November Lord Russell, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, wrote to Lord Lyons to claim the liberation of those four gentlemen and their delivery to him, with a suitable apology for the aggression which had been committed. On the 6th of January, 1862, Lord Lyons reported that the four Americans taken out of the Trent had been delivered over by the United States authorities to the commander of Her Majesty's ship Rinaldo. He ventured to remind the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of this event, and of the Correspondence which had ensued, in order to prevent his reply to the Question of which he had given Notice being, from inadvertence, in contradiction to what the Foreign Office had held in 1861 on a similar occasion.
  EARL GRANVILLE: In answer to the noble Lord's Question, I have to say that, probably, this person was arrested by the authority of the Khedive, and that I know the matter is now under the cognizance of the Native tribunal appointed by the Khedive.

  COMMON PRAYER (PRIESTLY ABSOLUTION) BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to amend certain passages in the Book of Common Prayer relating to priestly absolution—Was presented by The Lord ORANMORE and BROWNE; road 1ª. (No. 209.)
  House adjourned at a quarter past Five o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.