Lords Sitting of 6 July 1883

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Committee—Tramways Provisional Orders * (110).
Committee—Report—Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 6) * (122); Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 8) * (123); Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 10) * (117).
Third Reading—Registry of Deeds (Ireland) * (97), and passed.

LAW AND POLICE (SCOTLAND)—THE CLYDE DISASTER.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  VISCOUNT SIDMOUTH: My Lords, seeing the noble Earl opposite in his place, I beg to ask him a Question of
  580
  which I have given him private Notice. It is, Whether the Government intend to take any steps to ensure that an inquiry will be made into the Clyde catastrophe? From all the information that has been published, it is impossible to come to any other conclusion than that there must have been gross mismanagement; and I think the Government should take immediate steps to see that a searching investigation into the circumstances should be made.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, on receiving the Notice of the noble Viscount I communicated with the President of the Board of Trade, but I found it was not a case that will come under the Board of Trade. The matter is one that will have to be considered by the Procurator Fiscal in Scotland, and I have not had time to communicate with him since I received Notice of this Question.
  VISCOUNT SIDMOUTH: I understand an investigation is being made, and I should like to know if the Report will be laid on the Table before the House rises?
  EARL GRANVILLE: If the noble Viscount will revert to the usual practice of giving Notice of his Question, I will be glad to do my best to answer him. It is very inconvenient to be called on to answer Questions of this kind without Notice.

WESTERN ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC—THE NEW HEBRIDES—OCCUPATION BY FRANCE.—QUESTION.
VISCOUNT SIDMOUTH: I hope I may be allowed to ask a Question on another matter. On coming down to the House a telegram from Sydney was put into my hands, stating that a French gunboat had been sent with orders to hoist the French flag on the New Hebrides. I should like to know Whether the Government have any information on the subject?
EARL GRANVILLE: I have not had time to communicate with my noble Friend (the Earl of Derby). If the noble Viscount will give Notice, according to the usual practice of the House, I have no doubt that my noble Friend will answer the Question on another occasion.
VISCOUNT SIDMOUTH: I will repeat the Question on Monday.

INDIA-CRIMINAL LAW—PUNISHMENT OF FLOGGING.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD TRURO, in rising to ask Her Majesty's Government, What steps (if any) have been taken in regard to the abolition of the punishment of flogging for minor offences in India; and to ask whether any returns on the subject will be furnished, and, if so, when? said, that it was not until last year that an assurance was given in that House which led him to believe that some activity had been shown on the part of Her Majesty's Government with the view of remedying the evils to which his Question applied. An assurance was given by the then Under Secretary of State for India that the subject was receiving the attention of the noble Marquess who at that time presided at the India Office. He was inclined to believe, from observation of the Indian journals, that the noble Marquess had acted in the matter with his accustomed energy and promptitude. Flogging in India was in itself a punishment that inflicted the deepest indignity upon the Natives, and was the cause of far more grievous suffering than corporal punishment inflicted in this country. The Returns showed that sentences of flogging were passed in India for the most trivial offences; while in this country flogging was only used to punish the most heinous offences, such as robbery with violence. He wished to bring before the attention of the country the dreadful horrors which were perpetrated under the British Government in India by the indiscriminate infliction of flogging for trivial offences. He had collected information on this subject from public journals enjoying, and rightly enjoying, the respect and confidence of the Indian public—The Englishman of Calcutta, The Madras Times, and The Bombay Gazette—and the cases which he had selected were not old ones, but had occurred as recently as 1882. For stealing eight annas, value 1s., a sentence of 30 lashes and three years' rigorous imprisonment had been inflicted. On a previous occasion he had been told that severe punishments were inflicted because the subjects were old offenders. The House should remember that they were administering British justice in India according to English law, and
  582
  there was no such thing in English law as accumulative punishments. But even if there were, unless for offences of a most grave character, such a punishment as 30 lashes, administered with a cat or rattan, in addition to three years' rigorous imprisonment, ought not to be inflicted. The theft of a bottle of whiskey was punished with 20 lashes and two years' imprisonment; for stealing seven annas, value 10 d., the sentence was 30 lashes and two years' imprisonment; stealing cloth, value 6s., 25 lashes and one year's imprisonment; the theft of a tiffin box, 35 lashes; stealing gold ornaments, value £15, 50 lashes and two years' imprisonment; the theft of a pocket-handkerchief, 18 strokes with a rattan; stealing a bottle of brandy, 10 lashes; stealing a pocket-handkerchief, 15 strokes and two months' imprisonment; while a boy of 12 years of age received 12 strokes for stealing a bottle of Eau de Cologne. The theft of a pair of shoes was visited with three years' imprisonment; and stealing 3d. was punished with eight months' rigorous imprisonment and one month's solitary confinement. Stealing a necklace was punished by three years' imprisonment and two months' solitary confinement; stealing 9d., three years' imprisonment, with two months' solitary confinement. To show the inequality of the punishments, he would point out that for stealing £2 10 s. only two months' hard labour was given; and for stabbing, only sis weeks' imprisonment. The theft of £150 and other articles was punished with four months' imprisonment; while three years' was given for stealing 3d. He did not suppose the noble Lord the Secretary of State for India would justify these cases on the ground of cumulative punishments. What was the cause of these small offences? The cause was the most lamentable that could be conceived. It was admitted on all hands that these trivial thefts took place because 40,000,000 of the population were in a state of chronic starvation. Many of the thefts that were committed and punished with flogging were committed by the offenders for the purpose of relieving the chronic hunger from which they suffered. Labourers were only paid 4s. a week. Out of every sum of 5d. expended in the purchase of salt, 4½d. went to the Government. It was further to be remem-

  583
  bered that this was in a country where £4,000,000 out of the £60,000,000 of Revenue was paid as pensions and deferred pay to persons not resident in the country. These circumstances explained how it was that the working people were sometimes driven to commit theft. Hunger was the cause of their misconduct; and that being so, the British Government deserved severe censure for having permitted the practice of flogging to extend to such proportions as it had readied in late years. In a recent year there were 17,032 cases of corporal punishment for offences committed in gaols. That was an enormous number; and what made the matter worse was that the flogging in those cases was ordered to be inflicted by the prison officers, without the intervention of any magistrate. He trusted that the Secretary of State for India would give the House an assurance that the punishment of flogging would, in the future, be much less frequently resorted to, if not abolished altogether.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, it was quite understood in that House that when a noble Lord had given Notice that he would call attention to one subject he was allowed to speak on all other subjects, however remote their relevancy might be. But his noble Friend behind him had extended their Lordships' privilege very greatly on that occasion, for he had referred, not only to the subject of flogging in India, but to questions that had very little connection with the subject matter of his Question—such questions as the condition of the population of India, the food supply of that country, and its taxation, not one of which subjects could be discussed adequately in less than a whole Sitting. If his noble Friend wished to have them discussed, perhaps he would be good enough to give Notice of his intention. Passing by the figures of his noble Friend, which were not all of them accurate, he said that he feared that the noble Lord could not have read the Papers presented to the House last August on the subject of flogging, because in those Papers, although he did not say that they would remove all the censure which the noble Lord had passed upon the Government of India, there was very full information upon the whole question; a statement of the inquiry made by the Indian Government on the subject; the answers of the Local
  584
  Government; the view taken by the Indian Government; and the despatch of Lord Hartington stating his views upon the whole question. In order to understand the present position of the matter it was absolutely essential that those Papers should be referred to, and his natural answer to the noble Lord, therefore, would be—" Read those Papers." He was not prepared to deny that the great amount of flogging which had been inflicted in India for minor offences was a subject deserving of attention, and that it was most desirable to diminish the number of such punishments. His noble Friend would find, if he would look at the Papers, that the Government of India quite recognized those considerations; but the replies received from the local Governments disclosed practically an unanimity of opinion as to the propriety and necessity of retaining whipping as a form of punishment. The inhabitants of India had always been familiar with that form of punishment, and in the opinion of the Indian Government the advances made by the people in civilization were not yet such as would justify the Government in abolishing flogging. It was for reasons connected with the question of caste, a less severe punishment than imprisonment, and it relieved the gaols. It was also preferable to imprisonment in that it left the bread-winner, supposing him to be the offender, with his family. The Indian Government, however, thought that magistrates of the second class should alone have authority to order a prisoner to be whipped, and suggested other limitations to the punishment. the Governor General added that indiscriminate flogging should be checked, especially in times of distress. Lord Hartington approved generally the views taken by the Governor General; but he added that he desired that the Viceroy in Council should take into consideration the question of a further reduction in the class of offences to be punished by flogging. That was the last despatch on the subject. He had no doubt that Lord Ripon's Government would consider whether a diminution could not be effected in the number of offences for which whipping was inflicted; but while it would be necessary to preserve in India a punishment which would not be necessary in this country, where the ways of life and the habits of the people

  585
  were very different, at the same time he strongly felt, as everyone must feel who considered the subject, that every effort should be made to diminish the number of floggings. There was one piece of information which would be satisfactory to his noble Friend, and that was the number of corporal punishments for gaol offences had been largely diminished. While in 1880 the number was 17,057, in 1881 it was 8,921, or a reduction of 47 per cent. Further and more complete Returns would be shortly received. The ordinary Returns had been received already, but not those for which Lord Hartington called, distinguishing the kinds of offences and the nature of the punishment. When his noble Friend saw those Returns he would be better able to judge how far an advance had been made towards the object he had in view.
  LORD TRUROsaid, that he had been in communication with a medical man who had been 10 years in India, and who told him that after seven or eight lashes of the rattan, he had seen the flesh fly from a man's back, and that he had witnessed scenes really disgusting and horrible. It was partly owing to his representations, and the terrible nature of the punishment, that he had brought the matter before their Lordships. He had no doubt that Her Majesty's Government would do their best to reduce the punishments; but he hoped they should be able to see their way to substituting some other punishment for that of flogging.

RAILWAY SERVANTS—HOURS OF DUTY.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD FORBES, in rising to ask Her Majesty's Government, If a Return could be obtained of the number of hours in the day or week that the railway servants were on duty? said, the subject was one of national importance, inasmuch as now-a-days all the community were, if not travellers themselves, at all events deeply interested in the convenience and safety of those who were; and it was well known that many of the accidents that occurred were attributable to the long hours that railway servants were employed. Quite recently the Irish mail escaped from a terrible; accident by an engine with two men asleep on it being
  586
  providentially discovered just in time to be removed. While asking for information on this subject, he would like to know the powers of the Board of Trade in regard to signals, brakes, composite trains, and other matters of that kind. In regard to brakes, he thought we were far behind Continental countries; and as to the danger of forming composite trains of passenger carriages and goods waggons, they had a strong proof in an accident that occurred on the Alford Branch of the North of Scotland Railway. He did not make any charge against any particular Company, but thought he was justified in urging on the Government the necessity of introducing more stringent regulations.
  THE EARL OF ABERDEENsaid, that, before his noble Friend answered this Question, he should like to be allowed to make an observation. The number of railway servants in the United Kingdom was about 240,000, and, therefore, the information referred to in the Question would indicate a vast mass of statistics. He did not mean to suggest that it would be impracticable for the Board of Trade to obtain from the various Railway Companies a copy of their time-sheets during some given week; but the items ascertained would, if they were to be turned to any practical purpose, require so many explanatory qualifications that the result might become somewhat uncertain and complicated. A pointsman at some local station might be nominally on duty for, say, 20 hours; but that might be occasioned by the fact that he had to start an early goods train at 3 o'clock in the morning, and he might then be without actual work till many hours later when the regular traffic commenced; and the Railway Company would, of course, be entitled to insert all such extenuating circumstances. At the same time, the general fact remained that it was exceedingly common for railway servants to be employed for periods which were undesirably long. That might be explained partly by the varying and peculiar requirements of railway traffic, but also he thought by the fact that there was a certain attractiveness in railway work, which secured a constant and superabundant supply of applicants for that kind of employment, and that enabled the Railway Companies to make terms of a more stringent kind than those which were practicable in

  587
  other kinds of business. What he would I suggest, as he could not, of course, put a formal Question to his noble Friend without Notice, was whether it would not be quite feasible to arrange that, as every casualty on a railway, however slight, was by regulation reported to the Board of Trade—in the year 1881, for example, there were 3,734 cases of injury to railway servants duly reported—it should be at the same time stated in the Report for how many hours the railway servant, or servants, concerned had been employed at the time of the occurrence, or what was the average length of their day's work?
  LORD SUDELEY: My Lords, this question of the hours of employment of railway servants has been brought before Parliament on several occasions. In 1877, the noble Duke (the Duke of St. Albans) brought in a Bill to limit the length of time during which railway servants could be employed; it being stated to be—
  "Detrimental to the proper working of railways, and dangerous to the public, that the hours of employment should be excessive."
  That Bill was discussed by the House at some length; but it was thrown out as likely to cause needless interference with Railway Companies, and because it would, to a great extent, reduce their responsibility. The Board of Trade have no legislative authority, and can lay down no special binding rules in the matter; but they have indirectly great moral power. It is found that, when accidents happen and inquiries are made, the publicity given by the Inspectors to cases of working overtime is far more efficacious on the Companies than any law on the subject could possibly be. As a matter of fact, the Board of Trade have reason to know that, on the whole, the Railway Companies are most anxious to prevent this sort of irregularities happening, and take stringent steps to prevent them; but it is clear that sometimes under special circumstances they will happen, as, for example, when goods trains are delayed from fog, snow, and other causes. A few cases, therefore, do sometimes arise, though the Board of Trade are convinced they are very rare. The case to which the noble Lord refers appears to have been due solely to the great desire of the men to get back to their homes; and they distinctly made a wilful misstatement to the
  588
  night porter to the effect that they came out at 12.45 mid-day instead of 8 o'clock that morning. The London and Northwestern Company state to the Board of Trade—
  "The delay to the Irish mail was caused through an engineman and fireman falling asleep on their engine when returning empty without waggons. They reported themselves at Bangor to the night foreman and were allowed to return to Chester. This would not have been done if the men had not wilfully made a misstatement to the effect that they had commenced work at 12.45 mid-day instead of 8 o'clock. The men stopped in obedience to signals at Llanfairfechan and fell asleep. The signalman at Llandudno exhibited great presence of mind, when the light engine ran through that station, in telegraphing to Colwyn Bay for the protection of the line. Both driver and fireman were asleep, but perfectly sober.… Although a delay of 22 minutes occurred to the mail owing to its being stopped at the various block points, no danger whatever could arise, as the signalman and other servants on duty took the usual precautions necessary under the block regulations, nor was there any possibility of the engine exploding, as the fire had naturally died down."
  There is no doubt the signalmen deserve the greatest credit. The policy of Parliament has always been to show that it thought it would be a dangerous precedent to interfere between the employer of adult labour and the employed as to the number of hours he was to work. It has always considered it far better to leave the responsibility on the right shoulders—namely, on those of the Railway Company. The whole question of Government taking additional responsibility and interfering with the Railway Companies was also most fully discussed before the Royal Commission in 1878. As regards the question raised by the noble Lord on the judgment of Major Marindin, one of the Board of Trade Inspectors, about three years ago, I have not the Report by me; but I can say that it is the practice of Inspectors to point out all matters connected with accidents that appear to have tended to cause them. There are several occasions on which it has been pointed out that mixed trains are an element of danger. I have one here, in which it is stated that—
  "Mixed trains are always more or less an element of danger; but the risk of accident is far greater when the goods waggons are in front of the passenger carriages, although, doubtless, it is more convenient to place them there for shunting purposes."
  This is not done because the Board of Trade have any legal power to enforce

  589
  it, but merely, by giving full publicity, to let it operate on the Railway Companies. It must be remembered that it is the direct interest of the Companies to prevent accidents; and up to a certain point there can be no doubt, provided you obtain uniformity of practice, it is far better for a Public Department not to interfere more than is absolutely necessary. In the present instance, where a strong case has been brought to light of a fireman and engineman working over hours, the Board of Trade consider that it is their duty to point it out as a caution to all other Railway Companies, to show the great and urgent care that is required to prevent overtime. They propose, therefore, to issue a special Circular to the Railway Companies, calling their attention to this case, and to the necessity of providing for the regularity of the hours of labour. I have only to add that I hope the noble Lord will not press for the Return for which he has moved. It would be a most voluminous document, and, besides being very difficult to obtain, would, I believe, be found altogether useless.
  LORD NORTONsaid, he agreed with the noble Lord that, if the Board of Trade were to obtain such powers of interference, it would be undertaking the conduct of the railways, and with it the responsibility of their management. The Return asked for might very probably not be as voluminous as the noble Lord opposite supposed; but there could be no objection to a Return of the hours of labour of such classes of workmen as engine-drivers and signalmen, whose long periods of duty were often injurious to their health, as well as dangerous to the safety of the public. The rule of dividing the 24 hours into three sections of eight hours for signalmen had been departed from by the Companies, except in the neighbourhood of London and other large towns. The time was now often divided into two equal parts, and thus a signalman had to remain in the box every day for 12 hours continuously, with, perhaps, a good many signals constantly to attend to. He knew of several cases in which this stress of duty had injured the health and even the sanity of those employed. This, of course, involved serious risks to the public. He thought there was great cause for a general Circular on the subject of hours; and, as in the case of
  590
  continuous brakes, the Board of Trade would do well to lay down some general standard rules, which would serve as tests of responsibility in inquiries about accidents.
  LORD COLVILLE OF CULROSSsaid, that the ordinary practice was that the drivers and firemen of passenger trains were employed from seven to ten hours a day, and those of mineral trains from nine to twelve hours; but the fixed hours were subject to exceptional delay by reason of bad weather. Passenger guards did 10 hours' duty. It was now rather the exception for signalmen to work the long hours that had been stated. At all important stations the time was eight hours; at some out-of-the-way places it might be longer. If attention were turned to some other employments, it would probably be found that the hours of work were longer than they were on railways. For instance, omnibus drivers in London were on duty from 12 to 15 hours a-day. As to the inspection of works and bridges by the officers of the Board of Trade, as he was a Director of the Company that was building the new Forth Bridge, commenced three months ago, he might say that the officers had been there and had made a rigid inspection of all the material that was to be used in the work.

OFFICE OF THE GENTLEMAN USHER OF THE BLACK ROD.

  RESOLUTION.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN, in rising to move—
  "That the Select Committee on the Office of the Clerk of the Parliaments and Office of the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod he directed to inquire into the department of the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, with the view of ascertaining whether the appointments in that department, or some of them, may not in future be conferred upon persons who have served with distinction in the army or navy or some department of the public service,"
  said, he could not bring forward the Motion without expressing his deep regret, in which he was sure their Lordships shared, that they would never again see Sir William Knollys take his place in that House. The late Sir William Knollys led a long career in the service of his country and in the service of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, and when he was appointed to the Office of Gentleman Usher of the

  591
  Black Rod, the general feeling was that he well deserved the tribute that had been paid to his services. Sir William Knollys was the personal friend of most of their Lordships, and, therefore, it was not necessary for him to say anything further; but he was sure that his name would never be mentioned in that House with any other feeling but that of the deepest esteem and regret. This was not the first time that the propriety of making this Motion had occurred to him; but for obvious reasons he had postponed it until it could be discussed on some such occasion as that, when nothing of a personal character could be supposed to be attached to it. The offices attached to their Lordships' House were valuable offices. There were two principal door-keepers who received a salary of £300 a-year; one who received £250, and 18 who received salaries from £70 to £170 a-year. These appointments were formally made by the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod. He himself was not in the primary sense an officer of the House; he was senior Gentleman Usher of the Queen, and was deputed as such to attend upon this House. In point of fact, he was the representative of Her Majesty in that House. Formerly, he was paid by fees, which were commuted into a salary. Originally, when there was only one door, he was the only officer admitted into the House during the debates, until the increase in the number of doors had involved an increase in the number of door-keepers. The appointments were made under the authority of the House, which at no time relaxed its control over them, and they were in no sense attached to the office of Black Rod. They were made by him simply because the House had permitted him to make them. In early times the offices were disposed of by sale, and a Committee reported with satisfaction that the practice had ceased, intimating that it ought not to be revived. The duties attached to the offices were not laborious. With regard to that portion of his Motion which alluded to the Army and Navy, he thought it would be admitted that there was a growing desire in the country to do what was possible to elevate those two great public Services in public estimation by reserving for those who distinguished themselves in those Services
  592
  appointments of the character of those under consideration. The civil employment of soldiers and sailors had occupied the attention of both Houses of Parliament; a Committee of the House of Commons had reported strongly in favour of it; the Commander-in-Chief had advocated it; some of the Public Departments had recognized the claims of soldiers and sailors; and preference was given to them at the Admiralty and at the War Office respectively. Their claims had been urged on a Committee of the House of Commons, which had not yet reported. If it was urged that the appointments in that House must be filled by responsible persons, what better guarantee of responsibility could there be than the training of the Services and the recommendation of the commanding officers? It seemed to him that there was every reason in favour of this Motion. There were many of their Lordships, and he was one of them, who owed their seats in that House to the services rendered to the country either by themselves or their Predecessors in the Army and Navy. Therefore, he thought it was only right that they should seize every opportunity of recognizing the debt they owed. Large numbers of commissioned officers would, he believed, be keen candidates for such places. For his own part, he would far rather be a principal door-keeper of that House with £300 a-year than the Governor of a gaol. Yet whenever the Governorship of a gaol became vacant there was sure to be a large number of candidates for the post, including many officers in the Army and Navy. He was certain that both Services would consider the acceptance of this Motion by their Lordships as a very great compliment. He had proposed the Motion simply for the reasons he had stated, and without any reference to any of the present officers of the House. If there were anything in the terms that might seem to be too stringent he should be perfectly willing to accept a change in the words. He might mention that he did not wish to limit these appointments necessarily to persons who had served in the Army or Navy. All he desired was that candidates from the Army and Navy should have a preference given to them. In conclusion, he begged to move the Motion of which he had given Notice.

  593
  Moved, "That the Select Committee on the Office of the Clerk of the Parliaments and Office of the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod he directed to inquire into the department of the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, with the view of ascertaining whether the appointments in that department, or some of them, may not in future he conferred upon persons who have served with distinction in the army or navy or some department of the public service."—[The Earl of Camperdown.)
  THE DUKE OFCAMBRIDGEsaid, he entirely agreed with every word the noble Lord had said. He had no wish to find fault with anything that was going on now; but he was of opinion that if this Motion were accepted an opening would be given to the valuable men who were now serving their country in the Army and Navy, and there would be an immense inducement to men to enter and continue in those Services. It would, he thought, be a great pity if they did not attempt to introduce a system of giving such appointments as these to naval and military officers. At the same time, he should be sorry if it were made an exclusive system; but the noble Lord distinctly guarded himself against that. He hoped the noble Earl at the head of the Admiralty would, on behalf of the Navy, support the Motion. For his own part, he cordially approved it.
  VISCOUNT ENFIELDsaid, that during his connection with the Civil Service Commission it had fallen to his lot to see the excellent characters and the creditable examinations passed by the pensioners both of the Army and Navy. These very deserving non-commissioned officers came before the Civil Service Commissioners for the very small number of appointments which they were now able to receive. Such appointments were very few, both at the Admiralty and the War Office. He felt certain that if some scheme, such as his noble Friend had sketched forth, could be entertained by those in authority, it would constitute one of the greatest inducements possible to recruit even a better class of men than we had at present in the Army and the Navy. The excellent testimonials of soldiers and sailors produced in Cannon Row had come under his notice, and it was a subject of regret to the Civil Service Commission, of which he had the honour to be the head, that there were so few of these appointments that could be given to them. If
  594
  the scheme proposed by the noble Earl could be entertained, it would be viewed by the Civil Service Commissioners with the most hearty approbation.
  THE EARL OF NORMANTONsaid, there was one point on which he could confirm everything the noble Earl had said. The noble Earl had remarked that he would far prefer to be a doorkeeper of that House than the Governor of a gaol. It had been his evil fortune more than once during the last few years to act on a Committee appointed for the purpose of choosing the Governor of a gaol. On one occasion there were upwards of 300 candidates, and he was astonished to find that among them there were not only subordinate officers of the Army and Navy, but officers of high rank—General Officers and Admirals of the Fleet—who were most anxious to obtain the appointment. On one occasion he was so astonished that he spoke to one of the candidates—an Admiral who had since held a high command. He at first thought it was impossible that he could be aware of what could be the duties of the office; but to his surprise the Admiral told him that he was prepared to go through them all, that he could get nothing to do, and that he was in the greatest possible distress. If this Resolution were carried, he believed it would be found that a large number of applications would be received, not only from non-commissioned officers and men, but also from commissioned officers of Her Majesty's Army and Navy.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, the evidence adduced before the Select Committee of 1876 was strong and conclusive as to the important effect on recruiting that would be produced by giving civil appointments to non-commissioned officers. It was recommended that more of these places should be placed by the Government at the disposal of deserving non commissioned officers. At the War Office the number of military clerks was very small as compared with the number of civil clerks. He thought that the War Office should be entirely manned by soldiers; and that even the higher appointments in that Department of the State should be filled by officers. Many officers would gladly compete for such appointments, especially if they found promotion in the Army slow. In Germany and France

  595
  the War Departments were wholly manned by soldiers.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAREMAN of COMMITTEES)said, that the late holder of the Office was an officer in the Army, and his Predecessor was an Admiral, and there had been no impediment to their appointment because they were in the Army and the Navy; but it might be carrying the matter a little too far to say that the Office should not be conferred upon any others than officers in the Army and Navy. It was surely fair that domestic servants throughout the country should have opportunities of getting these places. The evidence was clear that these appointments rested with Black Rod, and down to the present time there had been no dissatisfaction as to the manner in which they had been filled up. He did not resist the Motion, though he was a little sorry that new restrictions should be placed upon a public officer at the time of his appointment.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, it was impossible not to sympathize with those who had advocated the cause of the Army and Navy on the present occasion. He thought, however, that other officers in the Public Service besides those in the Army and Navy were entitled to consideration. He was glad the noble Earl (the Earl of Redesdale) had given them some advice upon the matter. No doubt, the habits of discipline acquired by officers in the Army and Navy rendered them peculiarly fitted for certain situations; but he understood that the noble Earl (the Earl of Camperdown) who made the Motion only wished for an inquiry into this matter. He thought, however, that one subject of inquiry should be not only the rewards given, but what would be most for the convenience of the House. Some noble Lords had pushed their arguments to an extreme length. Some of the officers of the House had to perform duties of a menial character; and he should himself be very unwilling to order a retired Admiral or officer in the Army to perform duties of that class. It was, he thought, necessary to appoint men who could deal with distinguished foreigners and ladies when they visited the House; and that, no doubt, required a certain amount of training, which was not necessarily, but might be, possessed by a gallant soldier or sailor. Though he
  596
  adopted the Motion, it would be quite understood that it should be an Instruction to the Committee to inquire, not only into the character of the rewards, but also as to what was most for the convenience of their Lordships' House.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, he disclaimed any intention of interfering with the convenience of the House, and expressed his gratitude at the manner in which his Motion had been accepted; also his willingness that the Motion should be adopted in the sense placed upon it by the noble Earl.
  Motion agreed to.
  House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock.