Lords Sitting of 12 June 1883

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Lunatic Poor (Ireland) * (85); Colonial Prisoners Removal * (86); Consolidated Fund (No. 3) *; Local Government Provisional Order (No. 2) * (87); Indian Marine * (88).
Second Reading — Stolen Goods (78); Sea Fisheries (83).
Committee — Municipal Corporations (Unreformed)* (59).
Committee — Report—Cathedral Statutes * (58); Lands Clauses (Umpire)* (71).
Third Reading—Pier and Harbour (Provisional Orders) * (68); Representative Peers (Scotland) (84), and passed.

STOLEN GOODS BILL.
(The Lord Chancellor.)
STOLEN GOODS BILL.

  (NO. 78.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he hoped the noble and learned Earl would allow the Bill next in order (the Pawnbrokers Bill) to stand over for a while. The trade stated that they had been taken a good deal by surprise by some of the provisions, which seemed very severe, and they asked that more time might be given for consideration.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that, in reply to requests which had been made to him, he had expressed his willingness to postpone the Bill for nearly a fortnight. In the Bill now before the House all the clauses which had special reference to the pawnbrokers were omitted. With some other exceptions, which he explained, the Stolen Goods Bill was the same that was introduced last year; and having made that explanation, ho hoped the House would allow the Bill to he read a second time.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday the 21 st instant.

SEA FISHERIES BILL.
(The Lord Sudeley.)
SEA FISHERIES BILL.

  (NO. 83.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD SUDELEY, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said: The object of this Bill, which is of importance, is to give effect—so far as statutory enactment is necessary—to the provisions of an International Convention, which has been agreed upon between this country, Belgium, Denmark, France, North Germany, and the Netherlands, for the proper regulation of the Police of the Fisheries in the North Sea, outside the territorial waters. The great increase during the last 20 years of the sea-fishing industry in this and other countries—especially as regards the method of fishing known as trawling—has caused fishermen to pursue their operations more and more at a distance
  320
  from the shores of their respective countries. In consequence, the fishermen of countries bordering on the North Sea have been meeting one another with increasing frequency on the favourite fishing grounds in the seas between England, and Belgium, and Holland, and off the Dogger Bank. The constant encounter of fishermen belonging to various nationalities—who often could not understand each others' language, and who carried on their fishery in different ways, and with different implements—gave rise to misunderstandings, disputes, and the infliction of injuries by one class of fishermen upon those of another. This was especially the case where drift-net fishing and trawling were carried on upon the same grounds. A long trail of drift-nets—extending, perhaps, for a length of two miles or more, and floating near the surface of the water—may be easily damaged, and, to a great extent, detroyed, by a trawler sailing or steaming into them. On the other hand, the trawlers' operations will be arrested if his gear becomes entangled in the drifters' nets. This state of things was aggravated by the use, by some trawlers, of an instrument commonly called the "devil," which is an instrument with a shank and sharpened flukes, hung over-beard, and intended for the sole use of cutting fishing nets which the beat comes across at sea, and which impedes its progress. Of late years, it was represented by the British drifters that the treatment which they met with at the hands of foreign trawlers had become intolerable, and it transpired that the misunderstandings between foreign fishermen and our own were giving rise to conflicts, in which the stones, carried by the beats as ballast, were used as missiles, and firearms were, on occasions, resorted to. In the year 1880 Her Majesty's Government appointed a Special Commissioner to inquire into the matter, and an investigation was made at several of the fishing ports into the outrages committed by foreign and British fishermen. In the following year, the Report of this inquiry was published, which left no room for doubt that a number of illegal acts had been committed during recent years, to the prejudice of British fishermen. Complaints as to the lawlessness of British fishermen bad also been made from time to time, to Her Majesty's Government by the Governments of other

  321
  countries. This Report was communicated by the Foreign Office to the foreign Governments concerned, with an invitation to co-operate, by means of a Conference or otherwise, with a view of devising remedial measures. In consequence of this invitation an International Conference, to which all the Powers whose coasts bordered on the North Sea sent Representatives, assembled at the Hague during October, 1881, with the object of bringing about an International agreement. The deliberations of that Conference resulted in a unanimous recommendation of a draft Convention for regulating the police of the fisheries in the North Sea. This draft was, with slight modifications, accepted by all the countries concerned, except Norway and Sweden; and the Convention was signed at the Hague in May of last year by the Plenipotentiaries of Great Britain, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, and the Netherlands. The Convention in question is scheduled to the present Bill. It provides simple and intelligible rules as regards the marking fishing vessels, with a view to easy identification, and as regards the measures to be observed by fishermen in order to avoid doing injury to each other, and it absolutely prohibits the use of any such instrument as the so-called "devil." It further contemplates the imposition of penalties for infractions of these rules, and provides for the superintendence of the fisheries by cruisers of the countries parties to the arrangement. By Article 35 of the Convention the high contracting parties agreed to propose to their respective Legislatures the measures necessary for insuring the execution of the Convention by imposing penalties and otherwise, and it is in fulfilment of this engagement that the Bill is now introduced by Her Majesty's Government. The Bill, if passed, would take effect from a day to be fixed for the purpose after the ratifications of the Convention have been exchanged. The provisions of the Convention are so far obviously for the benefit of the fishing industry at large that it seems unnecessary to offer any detailed observations upon them; but it may be mentioned that the rules are, in many respects, similar to rules which, for many years past, have been adopted in pursuance of Treaty arrangements between this country and France
  322
  with regard chiefly to fisheries in the English Channel. The provisions of the present Bill are, in the main, similar to those provisions of the Sea Fisheries Act, 1868, by which it was sought to give effect to the French Fisheries Convention of 1867. There exists another source of complaint, which it was hoped would have been dealt with under the Convention—namely, the regulation of the floating grog-shops. These beats were described by the Commissioners, in 1880, as being "Coopers," "bumboats," or "floating grog-shops," of the worst possible description, uncontrolled and unregulated by any superior power or force whatsoever, and fruitful sources of evil, including theft, gross breaches of trust, assault, and occasionally even violent deaths. Unfortunately, it was found that the fiscal laws and regulations of the various countries prevented the matter being embodied in the Convention. A Protocol was, however, entered into by all the Delegates for the purpose of preparing another Convention for this object; and it is hoped that an International understanding may be arrived at for preventing these abuses, as well as the barter of fish, nets, &., which result from them. There is every reason to hope that the firm and judicious enforcement of the North Sea Convention will insure the peaceful conduct of fishery operations, and favourably affect the development of the fisheries in that sea.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a." —(The Lord Sudeley.)
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, he did not rise to offer any opposition to the second reading of the Bill, although he thought it had been pressed forward with undue haste. It was a Bill of great importance; it dealt with property; it imposed penalties of a stringent character, some of them being as high as £50; and infractions of its provisions were even to be visited with imprisonment, with or without hard labour. The Bill was presented on the 8th instant, and it was only delivered that morning, so that those who were interested in the subject had had no time to see what the Bill proposed to do. The 9th clause said that—
  "There shall not be manufactured or sold or exposed for sale at any place within the British Islands, any unlawful instrument within the meaning of this Act;"

  323
  but he could not find any definition of an unlawful instrument in the Bill. There were other provisions of a stringent character. One of them was that the use of any instrument for destroying nets was forbidden. It might, however, be desirable to have such an instrument exposed for sale. He did not propose to oppose the second reading; but he protested against a measure of this sort being delivered to noble Lords in the morning and read a second time on the same day. It would have been more in accordance with the usual practice if a longer period had been allowed to elapse before the second reading was taken. He wished to press on the Government the desirability of not taking the Committee stage for some time, so that those who were interested in the subject might look into the Bill and see how it affected the various interests in this country.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that many great evils had been found to exist in connection with sea fisheries, for which a remedy was sought to be found in an International agreement. Of course, it was in the power of Parliament not to sanction that agreement; but the object of the Bill was one to which no possible objection could be raised. He hoped, therefore, that the second reading would be agreed to. He thought, however, it was quite fair that they should not go into Committee until the noble Duke and other Peers had had an opportunity of considering the details of the measure.
  VISCOUNT BURYsaid, that it was important that they should know the limits of the water covered by this Bill, and that it was advisable that the second reading should be postponed for a few days.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, he had not asked that the second reading might be postponed, but the Committee.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYpointed out that the Bill was founded upon a Convention which had been before the House for some considerable time. That was the reason for proposing the second reading without very long Notice. The question whether a particular piece of rock near Jersey was or was not the exclusive possession of one Power, Alas not to be determined by any Fishing Bill which laid down the
  324
  conditions of fishing in those waters, which were acknowledged to be exclusively British.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday the 25 th instant.

REPRESENTATIVE PEERS (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 84.)
(The Lord Chancellor.)
REPRESENTATIVE PEERS (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 84.)

  THIRD READING.
  Order of the Day for the Third Reading road.
  Moved," That the Bill be now read 3k." —(The Lord Chancellor.)
  THE EARL OF KINTOREsaid, he did not wish to impede the third reading of the Bill; and, knowing that it was a Bill of minor importance to many of their Lordships, he should not have risen but for statements made by the noble and learned Earl on the Woolsack when the Bill was in Committee. The noble and learned Earl stated that if the Amendment proposed by the noble Earl (the Earl of Stair) were agreed to, the effect would be—
  "To introduce into the first Election Roll, and that by the deliberate act of this House, two Earls of Breadalbane, two Earls of Eglinton, two Lords Belhaven, and two Earls of Mar."
  The noble and learned Earl added that he was not prepared to put on the Roll the name of any person who had not at present proved his title, and stated that he could verify what he had said respecting the effect of the Amendment. In answer to these statements, he (the Earl of Kintore) had replied that these Peerages had no bearing on the Bill, inasmuch as protests against the holders of these Peerages were not made by Peers voting at elections. This being contradicted by the noble and learned Earl, with the authority which he naturally possessed, he (the Earl of Kintore) might be forgiven for not having discussed the matter further at the moment. He had since had an opportunity of inquiring into the matter. It was by this Bill essential that to go on the Roll any person must have voted without protest at an election of Peers since 1862. On the title of Lord Belhaven being called at the election on August 4, 1870, Colonel Robert William Hamilton gave in a statement claiming the title, but waiving

  325
  his right to vote on that occasion; and when the votes of the Peers present were called, they all voted—
  "With the exception of the said Robert William Hamilton, who had waived his right to vote as Lord Belhaven."
  On March 7, 1872, Mr. John MacCallum voted, under protest by four Peers, as the Earl of Breadalbane; but in 1876 and 1879, when the Lord Chancellor said he had voted, and had had one protest presented against his right so to do, this gentleman, as a matter of fact, was travelling in the Transvaal State, South Africa; and so far from the protest being made by a Peer against his voting, the only protest presented was by his mother, the so-called "Countess Regina," in his favour. The Earl of Breadalbane (Gavin Campbell), whose right had been established under Resolution of the House of Lords in 1872, voted by signed list in 1876 and 1879. On the 18th of February, 1874, when the title of the Earl of Eglinton was called, Mr. William Stephen John Fulton gave in a protest, and lodged a signed list, claiming to vote as Earl of Eglinton, but "the said list was refused to be counted" among the votes. On the 16th of April, 1880, he again tendered a protest, which was not allowed to be read. No vote was given at this election in respect of the title of Eglinton. In none of these instances would the persons referred to by the Lord Chancellor be put upon the Roll, for the simple reason that they did not fulfil the first condition—namely, that of voting—excepting in the case in 1872 of the Breadalbane claimant, who would be excluded by the four protests against him in any case. The noble and learned Earl's case thus utterly fell to the ground, and afforded no argument against the noble Duke's (the Duke of Sutherland's) Amendment; but it was worth noting that if the claimants had voted as asserted, they would not have been excluded from the Election Roll by the Lord Chancellor's own clause, which required for the purpose of exclusion a protest against the vote by "a Peer at the same time voting." This condition of exclusion was not fulfilled in the Belhaven case, because the protester, Gavin Hamilton, who turned out eventually to have been the rightful claimant, and so a Peer at the time, did not vote. It was not fulfilled in the Breadalbane case in the instances of
  326
  1876 and 1879, because the protests were not made by a Peer, and were directed against a totally different person—namely, Gavin Campbell, the real Earl; and it was not fulfilled in the Eglinton case, because the protests similarly were not made by a Peer, and were not made against, but by the claimant, who protested against the real Earl. He would not have detained the House at such length were it not that he was anxious to clear himself from the possible imputation of having asserted as facts statements which, on cause shown, he was not prepared to substantiate.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he was not sorry that the noble Earl had made the statement to which their Lordships had just listened, because whenever, through any cause, he had made a misstatement to the House he was glad when an opportunity was taken to put it right. The noble Earl was perfectly right in everything he had said, and he (the Lord Chancellor) had only to explain how he had fallen into error. He had desired to have extracted from the Papers which had been laid before the House a list of all the instances in which there were protests recorded by Peers against Peers. He was afraid that he must have convoyed his instructions for that purpose in a manner which was not understood, because they were given to one whom he had not only every reason to confide in, but who was generally most accurate in all that he did; but the extracts which were made included, in point of fact, protests made by persons who were not Peers against those who undoubtedly were, without showing that such was the case. As no other protests were of any use for his purpose than those made by Peers, he had assumed that the contrary was the case. This did not at all affect the principle of what he said, or the other reasons which he gave for objecting to the Amendment moved by the noble Earl (the Earl of Stair). But, undoubtedly, a great deal that he said upon that occasion would not have been said if ho had not fallen into that error. No gentleman claiming to be a Peer, whose right to that Peerage was open to controversy, and was controverted, ought, in his judgment, to be placed upon the Roll. He doubted whether, if the Amendment

  327
  had passed, it would have had the effect contemplated, and whether the Lord Clerk Register would have been entitled to put that name on the Roll. At any rate, he should not be performing his duty if he had been any party to such a change in the Bill as would cause such an unproved claim, which had never been admitted by any competent authority, to be entered upon the Roll.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, there could be no question that the argument originally brought forward by the Lord Chancellor for rejecting the Amendment, to which reference had been made, exercised a great influence on the House. But the effect of the Bill as it stood was reduced to this—that, as regarded keeping Peers off the Roll, it would have effect upon one individual Peer, and one only. The fact remained that the Peer in question was on the Union Roll now. ["No, no"] The gentleman representing the ancient Earldom of Mar had voted on several occasions. The House having, in 1872, declared that the title of Mar only dated from 1565, the noble Duke (the Duke of Buccleuch) had had the courage, in 1877, to come forward and ask the House to amend the Roll, and place this name in its proper place. On the advice of the present and the late Lord Chancellors, their Lordships recoiled from doing so; and what were they going to do now? They were going to do by Statute what they had recoiled from doing by Resolution. This Bill would be marred by what had taken place—marred by, the resistance to what was a fair and just Amendment. He regretted that the Lord Chancellor, having resisted the Amendment upon certain grounds, which he admitted to be no longer tenable, still held to the Bill in its original form. Clause 7, going forth in its original form, would perpetrate an injustice on one of the Peers of Scotland. He would ask the Lord Chancellor to state clearly what was to be the position on the Roll, as regarded dates, of the Earldom of Mar, after this Bill had passed? He thought the noble and learned Earl would have a difficult task; and he did not expect that their Lordships' House, with the assistance of this Bill, would be able to get out of the mess which, rightly or wrongly, this question had got into.
  328
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 3a accordingly.
  Moved, "That the Bill do pass."—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  THE EARL OF GALLOWAYsaid, that after the very frank statement made by the Lord Chancellor, that ho had been made the victim of misplaced confidence, he would much rather have kept his seat without saying a word; but there was one particular sentence of the noble and learned Earl, used on the occasion which had been alluded to, with regard to which he hoped the same frank declaration would be made. The noble and learned Earl used the following words on that occasion:—
  "That before the adjudication in favour of the Earl of Kellie, the gentleman I refer to"—

  that was, the owner of the ancient Earldom of Mar—
  "presented himself, and claimed the Earldom of Mar on no less than six occasions"—
  the noble and learned Lord referred to the Holyrood elections—
  "and on each of these occasions one protest was recorded against him."
  As regarded the protests, up to that time he believed the noble and learned Earl was perfectly accurate; but he went on to say that after the adjudication in favour of the Earl of Kellie, the gentleman—that was, as he (the Earl of Galloway) described him, the owner of the ancient Earldom—never presented himself, and had, therefore, given Ho opportunity of ascertaining whether one protest, or more than one, or none at all, would be recorded against him. He could inform the noble and learned Earl that he (the Earl of Galloway) and other noble Lords in the House had been present on a memorable occasion since 1875, the year of the decision of the Committee of Privileges upon the claim of the Earl of Kellie, when the gentleman referred to got up and asked to be allowed to record his vote. He had seen the late Lord Clerk Register, who was then very aged, and consequently somewhat weak in body and mind, take the paper, and on the spur of the moment throw it on the ground and say—"I cannot take this, Sir, because you are a Peer of your own creation." ["Hear, hear!"] The noble Earl the Chairman of Committees cheered that statement. Perhaps he would not cheer the statement that the late Lord Clerk Register, before he died,

  329
  expressed himself as very deeply regretting the course ho had taken upon the point, because on investigation he found that he was utterly and entirely wrong in what he had done. The Lord Chancellor had been entirely misguided in this matter. He had trusted to information which was entirely incorrect. Here was a clause of a Bill directed against one individual, who had gone through the same legal course as was usual to every other Scotch Peer to go through upon his succession to the previous owner of a title, and which was perfectly sufficient in Scotland. He did not think that the Bill should be allowed to pass without a protest on the part of those who knew the facts.
  LORD SALTOUNsaid, he thought the noble Earl who bad just sat down was quite mistaken in saying that Mr. Goodive Erskine had gone through the same course as every Scotch Peer. When he (Lord Saltoun) succeeded his uncle, he had to prove his right to the title before the Committee of Privileges of their Lordships' House, as every Scotch Peer then had to do.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES), referring to the remarks of the noble Earl (the Earl of Wemyss), said, that no doubt there had been a proposal by the noble Duke (the Duke of Buccleuch) to place the Earldom of Mar on the Roll on the date that was found by the Committee of Privileges to be the date of the creation. This was objected to on the ground that no alteration had ever been made upon the placing on the Roll, however inaccurate some of the placings had been.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that the noble Earl (the Earl of Galloway) had appealed to him to make another admission of error. He could not exactly do that. He might have used a rhetorical expression, which he certainly should never have used if he had thought it would have given pain to anyone. He did not, of course, know anything about the claimant to the Earldom of Mar presenting himself beyond what was stated in the Returns.
  Motion agreed to; Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

  THE ORDNANCE SURVEY.

    QUESTION.
    LORD BRAYErose to ask, What progress has been made by the Ordnance
    330
    Survey during the past year; and to inquire whether, in view of the future increase of sale of land under the Settled Land Act of 1882, and consequent need of an official map to fix the acreage of landed estates, the Government will accelerate the completion of the map of England and Wales?
    VISCOUNT BURYsaid, he had for a long time taken a great interest in this matter of the Ordnance Survey. Some 21 years ago, when he was a Member of the House of Commons, a Select Committee, of which he had the honour to be Chairman, was appointed to inquire into the whole question; and, as the result of their Report, the sum of money sot apart for the development of the Ordnance Survey was increased to something like £98,000 a-year, Sir Henry James, then the Director of the Survey, having stated that that was the largest sum which he could employ with any advantage. Twenty-one years had elapsed since then; but still, looking to the Report of the Ordnance Survey for the past year, it appeared that a large proportion of the Kingdom was still altogether, as regarded accurate survey, entirely untouched. A small portion only in these 21 years of the 25-inch scale had been completed, and only a very little of the 1-inch revision, and this had dawdled on in such a way that the 1-inch revision was itself getting out of date. The other day he purchased the sheet representing the few miles around the centre of London, and, although his examination did not go far, he found Wandsworth Bridge was not in it, nor the mile and a-half of road leading out to Ealing Common. Thus the 1-inch Survey, which was to give an accurate map of the country, was itself out of date, and by the time it was completed it would be perfectly useless. The progress with the 6-inch and the 25-inch scales was equally unsatisfactory. They were told the whole Survey would be completed in 1890; but he hoped it would be conducted on a more systematic plan than at present, because surely something could be done to make the work more quickly available.
    LORD SUDELEY, in reply, stated that in the year 1880 the attention of the Government was specially directed to this subject on the Report of the Committee upon Land Transfers and Titles, and the Government came to the

    331
    conclusion that it was of importance that the Ordnance Survey should be accelerated. He was afraid the noble Viscount was in error in stating that the £98,000 which had been voted annually so many years was as much as could be used—the real fact being that it was owing to the amount of money not being larger that the Survey had been retarded. When it was resolved to accelerate the service, steps were at once taken to obtain larger Votes, so as to increase the number of people employed, and during the last three years the numbers had been greatly increased. At the present moment Scotland had the Survey completed, and the last man left there in November; and what had been done during the three years was this. In 1880 there were 224 men employed on the Survey, and they surveyed 1,070,000 acres; in 1881 there were 381 men employed, and they surveyed 1,500,000 acres; and in 1882 there wore 467 men employed, and they surveyed 2,174,000 acres. If they sought to accelerate the work, or to get it performed quicker than it was now being done, there would be a danger that they would not get that high standard of accuracy which was greatly to be desired in such a matter as this. As to the complaint that the Survey made some years ago was not now out of date, there could be no help for that; but it was the desire of the Government to have the present Survey completed as soon as possible, and when it was completed the necessary alterations might be made. In making arrangements originally for carrying out the Survey, it was found requisite for military purposes that particular districts in different parts of the country should be surveyed first. It was also considered that, in the public interest, preference should be given to the mineral districts. The work would now, however, be carried out in a uniform manner. He could assure the noble Lord (Lord Braye) that there was little doubt the Survey would be completed in 1890, and it was even hoped that it might be finished a short time before that date.
    EARL FORTESCUEwished to press on the Government the necessity of the Survey being completed as soon as possible. Great inconvenience resulted from the existing state of things, especially to those interested in land, for
    332
    the present maps were very incomplete and unreliable. Roads in Devonshire which had been in existence for half a century, to his knowledge, were not laid down on the maps. Ireland had long got the largest share of Government aid, and the Ordnance maps of Ireland saved the expense of having estate maps made. But it was too bad that wild moors in Scotland should have been mapped in the greatest detail for the benefit of their owners alone, and a few of the most picturesque scones only of some tourists; while the greater part of the cultivated lands of England were left by the Ordnance with nothing better than the old obsolete map on the 1-inch scale.
    THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he could also bear testimony to the enormous amount of inconvenience which had been caused by the delay that had taken place in the publication of the 6-inch map. Any envy expressed of the superior facilities that foreign nations had of transferring land with little or no expense or difficulty was really hypocritical, as long as no measures were taken to furnish the maps which must be necessary for such purposes. They seemed to have gone on the principle of serving first those parts of the Kingdom which were the most disagreeable to the Government, and which were not in so much need of the maps as England. The most disagreeable part of the Three Kingdoms was Ireland, and, therefore, Ireland had a splendid map. Next to Ireland, Scotland was the most disagreeable part of the country to the Government, and, consequently, Scotland had a map; but poor, meek, humble, submissive England was necessarily left to the last.
    In reply to Viscount BURY,
    LORD SUDELEYsaid, that the dates given for the completion of the Survey included the time of publication of the 25-inch and 12-inch maps, but not the 1-inch; and with regard to the complaint respecting the long delay in publishing the 6-inch maps, he pointed out that, owing to the invention of General Cook, the late Director General of the Ordnance Survey, of photo-zincography, the production of these 6-inch maps would be very much accelerated, and a saving of £100,000 made in their cost.

  ARMY—RECRUITING FOR THE ARMY AND MILITIA—OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD ELLENBOROUGH, in rising to call the attention of the House to the general state of the Army, and particularly in reference to recruiting for the Army and Militia, remarked, that the question as to the causes of deterioration in recruiting for the Army was a very wide and important one, and he did not think that the causes which had been previously given for this deterioration embraced the whole of the reasons for it. One thing which the Army certainly wanted was rest; and no arrangement that was contemplated by this or any other Government would have immediate effect, because they had got to undo the want of confidence which had been created among the classes from which the recruits were drawn. Many illusions existed on this subject, and there was not one so great on any subject as that with reference to corporal punishment in the Army. His opinion on the question of corporal punishment was that, by its abolition, they deterred the better class of men from joining the Colours, because they removed the protection which it gave to steady and well-conducted men. The objection to it was absurd, and rested entirely on prejudice. The absurdity was seen in the fact that a man discharged from the Army as a bad character, might afterwards be sent to gaol by the Civil power, and there corporal punishment might be inflicted on him. Yet it was not to be enforced in the Army for the sake of discipline. He was not so young a soldier as some persons might suppose, for he entered the Service 44 years ago, and he was convinced that a great portion of the old system might be far more economically and advantageously followed in the Army than the present one which had superseded it. As to looking forward to the Reserve, as it had been looked forward to, he believed that would be found to be most illusory. In political life it was not usual for critics to say what they would do themselves; but military critics could say what they would do. Without alarming the country at all, it could be said that our ranks were thin. The strength of the regiments ought to be what it was under the old system; the actual strength being less than depots should be, and were under the old four-
  334
  company regimental depot system. The sooner the country appreciated the great interests at stake, and what they had to lose, the better. Their Army was necessarily very small, and, therefore, it ought to be more efficient than any other Army. In regard to filling the ranks of the Army, he would have the English and Scotch Militias embodied for six months, after the harvest of the present year. The best soldiers came from the Militia, and such soldiers cost the country nothing. At present, even the lists of officers were not filled up, and which could have been done without expense. He would implore the Government without delay to have a plan of their own, and to have a fixed time when it would be acted upon. A Government that would forget Party in the matter for a sufficiently long period would disarm opposition. Yielding too easily to sentimental feelings, they had abolished marking and corporal punishment, both of which were valuable for the protection of well-behaved men. He did not suppose that corporal punishment in the Army would be re-introduced, nor was it, strictly speaking, necessary, on the old system. He would prefer seeing at the head of the War Department a real soldier, or a real civilian, not a man a little bit of one and a little bit of the other — that he did not like to see; but, at all events, he hoped that the Secretary of State for War would form an opinion of his own, and not follow those of other people, or obtain it from the hustings. There had been many unjust and untrue statements made in regard to the infliction of corporal punishment. In 1855, he was with his regiment at Gibraltar, and during a whole year only one man was flogged, though there was every temptation open to the men. During the years that he had been in the Army he never heard that the use of corporal punishment was abused. It was abolished for the sake of change, without anything better being introduced in its stead, or indeed any substitute whatever. He implored the Government to consider the expediency of providing a substitute for it in the field, or honestly own that there was not any to be found, by re-introducing it for the Army in the field. Under the Purchase system there was never such heartburning among officers as now. Under that system the poor

  335
  man was benefited; but now he remained at the top of the list, to the injury of discipline. He hoped that that Constitutional Force, the Militia, would not be so ignored as it had been. With regard to the Volunteers, he knew it was an unpopular thing to say, but he believed the Volunteer movement had caused the greatest injury to recruiting for the Army. It deprived the Army of the best men, as non-commissioned officers, who saw Volunteers wearing military uniform, and obtaining the glory of soldiers without the risk of active service abroad. It would be more economical to encourage the Militia, and to obtain recruits for, and from, that Force, for the Army. When the Militia furnished recruits, they were not boys, as now; but they were, by comparison, old soldiers, who had seen from six to 12 years of service. The mind of the Government ought to be made up, and they ought to make their determination known before the end of the Session.
  LORD TRUROsaid, it must be remembered that the Volunteers were undoubtedly efficient for the defence of the country in case it were attacked. He pointed out that since the commencement of the Volunteer movement a very large number of Volunteers had acquired a certain taste for military service, and when out of employment had joined the ranks of the Army as a means of livelihood.
  THE EARL OF MORLEYsaid, he would answer, in a very few words, what had fallen from the noble and gallant Lord opposite. He had listened to his speech with the greatest attention, and was most anxious to obtain from the great experience of the noble and gallant Lord some hints which might be useful in assisting them in obtaining a larger number of recruits for the Army. But he confessed that when the speech came to an end he felt very much disappointed. He could not see how the re-introduction of the punishment of flogging would bring into the ranks a much larger number of recruits. He did not think it was necessary to go over the ground again; but he should like to repudiate, in the strongest way possible, one statement made by the noble and gallant Lord—namely, that the Army was made a battle-ground of Party. He felt assured that the only object of the noble Viscount opposite (Viscount
  336
  Cranbrook), and of his noble Friend who was now in Office (the Marquess of Hartington), was to make the Army thoroughly effective. The way in which the Reserves came up the other day, and in which they would come up at any other time when they were called upon to serve their country, was a sufficient answer to the imputation cast upon them. The noble and gallant Lord had suggested that the Militia should be called out for six months. That might not be worse than the suggestion made the other night that they should be called out for 300 days' training; but to act upon either of those suggestions would put them in such a position that they would have no Militia at all to call out. He entirely agreed as to the desirability of obtaining recruits from the Militia for the Line, and the Government had been doing all that they could to encourage that process. A very short time ago he heard that in one regiment alone no fewer than 50 Militiamen had volunteered for the Line in the past month. That was an example of what was occurring to a large extent throughout the country. As he had so recently gone at length into all these matters he was unwilling to detain their Lordships any longer on this occasion.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSwished to ask the noble Earl what was the force of effective men that could be put into the field? The best way to ascertain that at the present time would be to lay on the Table a Return of the Queen's Birthday Parade state at Home Stations.
  THE EARL OF MORLEYsaid, he thought there would be very great objection to do as suggested. It never had been the custom to give such a Return, and it would be a dangerous precedent.
  THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGEsaid, he could not agree at all with the noble and gallant Lord near him (Lord Ellen-borough) as regarded the Volunteers being a great drawback to recruiting good men for the Army. On the contrary, he looked upon the Volunteers as so much additional strength to the Army.

CONTAGIOUS DISEASES ACTS.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  VISCOUNT LIFFORD, in asking Her Majesty's Government, Whether their

  337
  attention had been directed. to the moral condition of naval stations, especially Portsmouth, since the practical repeal of the Contagious Diseases Act, said, that he considered it would have been a great calamity if those Acts had been suspended for a day; but it was much worse to prevent their operation altogether; and it was a marvellous thing that that should have been done by the Government without any appeal to Parliament—done at the mere bidding of one man and by one-third of the House of Commons, and against the views of their Lordships' House and the opinion of every Committee and Commission that had considered the question. There had been au outcry against the course pursued by the Government from every protected place or district; and he trusted that the Government would look seriously into the matter, and see what could be done to restore that feeling of security which previously existed.
  VISCOUNT CRANBROOKsaid, he thought it was the duty of everyone who had had anything to do with the administration of those Acts to raise his voice against the course which had been taken by the Government. At the War Office ho entered on the examination of this question with great anxiety, and with an instinctive feeling against the regulations; but he came to the conclusion that, whether looked at in their moral or physical aspects, these Acts were advantageous. They conduced to the better conduct of women and to their reformation. He contended that the course which had been pursued by those who had opposed these Acts was most inconsistent and unreasonable; and he hoped that there was more force in the Government than could be overcome by the sentimental objection of those persons, and that they would not be led by the few objectors in the other House. The Town Councils and principal inhabitants of the towns affected, including the clergy, had petitioned against the repeal of the Acts. At Cork a Roman Catholic priest expressed himself strongly in favour of the Acts, and had by means of them been able to restore many unfortunate girls to their families; and this, as was well known, had been the case at Chatham.
  VISCOUNT HARDINGEsaid, he had had the honour of serving on the Royal Commission on this subject, and he
  338
  quite agreed with the two noble Viscounts' observations, and that unfortunate consequences would follow from the repeal of those Acts. The efficiency of the Acts depended entirely on the periodical examination. The Government had now suspended that, and nothing but a considerable increase of contagion could be the result. The medical evidence on this head was overwhelming. The Metropolitan Police, to whose discretion and efficiency the success of the Acts were mainly indebted, had been generally withdrawn. The moral effects of the Acts, the efforts made in the hospitals to reclaim these unfortunate women, and the control exercised over them, would now be at an end, and much of the good already attained would be nullified. Their Lordships were about to legislate for the protection of young girls; and it would be found that the Metropolitan Police had done more in clearing the streets and restoring young girls to their parents who were on the verge of prostitution than, in all probability, legislative enactments would be able to bring about. He wished to ask the noble Earl the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the whole of the Metropolitan Police had been withdrawn from the places that were protected? If they had been, what police had taken, or were to take, their places; and how far the county and borough police authorities had power to carry out what remained of these Acts?
  THE DUKE OF SOMERSETsaid, he wished to impress upon the Government the necessity of considering the question further. In 1864 there was an Act for voluntary examinations, but it did not succeed. Then in 1866 all persons of the class referred to were brought under compulsion, and the Act did succeed most effectively. The moral question was a very much more important one to the whole country; and, according to all evidence from the towns where these Acts were in force, they had prevented the young girls from entering into a course of vice and prostitution. These Acts should be maintained, as they were great sanitary measures, and they ought not to be withdrawn without an Act of Parliament; but they had been, because some Members of the Government seemed to wish to gain a little popularity. He intreated the Government to bring forward their Bill, and let the

  339
  House and the country see what they proposed to do.
  THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGEsaid, it was quite evident that great mischief would arise to the Services if these Acts were not kept in operation. If it were merely a question which affected the Army and Navy he might not consider it right to press the matter so much; but it was a question which affected the whole morals of the country, and instead of the Acts being repealed they should be extended far more than they had been. Where the Acts had been applied they had not been objected to—on the contrary, there was a decided wish on the part of the local authorities to retain them in force. These who agitated for their repeal were persons living at a distance. In the towns in which the Acts were in operation there were 250 fewer houses of ill-fame since the introduction of the Acts than there had been before.
  LORD STRATHNAIRNagreed that the Acts had been of the greatest value to the towns which had come under their operation. He considered that the opponents of the Acts were patrons of immorality.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSwould suggest that, as the Government were so fond of Local Option in the matter of drink, that principle should be acted upon in the present case, and garrison towns given their own wish in the matter.
  THE EARL OF NORTHBROOKsaid, he was afraid that this was one of the questions which occasionally arose upon which the feeling entertained in their Lordships' House was not altogether in accordance with that expressed in the other House of Legislature. There was no change whatever in the action of the Government with regard to the position of persons under treatment in hospitals. They were still liable to penalties if they left without a medical certificate. With respect to the value or otherwise of these Acts, he could only repeat that he was in favour of them. He believed that they had done some good in regard to the health of the Army and the Navy; though, from a statistical point of view, the result in regard to the Navy was by no means so great as some people supposed. That was accounted for by the fact that sailors were less stationary than soldiers. He was satisfied also that the
  340
  Acts were popular, for the most part, in the places where they were in operation. Besides, whatever benefit had been done to the health of the Services, undoubtedly the indirect effect of the Acts had been a considerable improvement in the condition of the streets in those towns; and it was greatly to the credit of the Metropolitan Police, who had been engaged in administering them, that young girls had been kept off the streets, and many women brought back from their vicious course of life to respectable occupations in society. But the Government had to deal with a practical question—namely, that the other House of Parliament, after a long debate, had by a majority of between 60 and 70 decided against compulsory examination. Now, seeing that the money required under the Act had to be voted by the House of Commons, the Government considered that it would be idle to continue compulsory examination in the face of so deliberate a vote. It was thought, under these circumstances, that the only practical course was to withdraw the Metropolitan Police from the compulsory part of the examination. With regard to the arguments as to the general effect of these diseases on posterity, they led very much further than the Acts themselves, because it must be recollected how few places in the country the Acts touched. Although, personally, he regretted the vote of the House of Commons, ho must add that, in his opinion, it was impracticable to extend the system over the whole country, for which alone any general benefit to health would be derived.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that when the noble Earl spoke with regret of the action of the House of Commons in regard to these Acts, it was necessary to bear in mind that 19 Members of the Government voted or paired in favour of the Resolution, including the Prime Minister, which the noble Earl, on behalf of the Government, deplored. But what he rose to point out was that this question had two aspects. It had one of a social, a sanitary, and an administrative character, in respect to which much had been said in which he entirely concurred. The evils which had been brought back to these towns were of the very gravest character. But there was another aspect of the question with respect to which he wanted in-

  341
  formation. He wished to know precisely how far the Government had, on their own authority and without the consent of Parliament, suspended the operation of an Act of Parliament? If it were only the case that they had simply abstained from that action which absolutely required the vote of money by Parliament to sustain, and if they had not gone an inch beyond that abstinence, of course he did not blame them from the Constitutional point of view, for they could not expend money which they had not got. But, as he understood, they had suspended compulsory examination. They had not merely ceased to pay special officers for doing it, but they had given orders that that which the Act prescribed should no longer be done, or, at all events, they had given orders that that which the Acts empowered them to do should no longer be done; and they had done that, not at any bidding of Parliament, but simply by a snatch vote, obtained at a single Sitting of the House of Commons. It was not merely a question as between the two Houses; but a decision on a grave question of public policy had been taken without any of those safeguards of repeated deliberation which, in regard to every Act of Parliament, wore in both Houses required. He wanted to ask the noble Earl whether he would lay on the Table all Letters and Orders given with reference to this subject since the vote of the House of Commons to which he had referred?
  THE EARL OF NORTHBROOKsaid, he did not think there would be any objection to produce the Letters which the noble Marquess asked for; but he would make inquiries before giving a final answer.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYrequested an answer to the question whether the Government had merely left off paying money, or had forbidden the proceedings directed by the Act from being carried out?
  THE EARL OF NORTHBROOKsaid, that certainly the intention had been simply to withdraw the Metropolitan Police, who were paid out of the Vote, from taking part in the compulsory operation of the Acts. They had no power to prevent the operation of the Acts apart from that. That was their intention; but they issued certain instructions to the Visiting Surgeons, and these
  342
  were comprised in the Papers which the noble Marquess would like to see, and he did not think there would be any objection to produce them.
  In reply to Viscount BARRINGTON,
  THE EARL OF NORTHBROOKsaid, that the Government had no power to interfere with the local authorities in respect of any powers which they enjoyed under the Acts.

  LUNATIC POOR (IRELAND) BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to make better provision for the care of the Lunatic Poor and for the inspection of Lunatic Asylums in Ireland; and for other purposes relating thereto—Was presented by The LORD PRESIDENT; read la. (No. 85.)
  COLONIAL PRISONERS REMOVAL BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to make further provision respecting the removal of Prisoners and Criminal Lunatics from Her Majesty's Possessions out of the United Kingdom—Was presented by The Earl of DERBY; read 1a. (No. 86.)

  INDIAN MARINE BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to provide for the regulation of Her Majesty's Indian Marine Service—Was presented by The Earl of KIMBERLEY; read 1a. (No. 88.)
  House adjourned at half past Seven o'clock, to Thursday next, a quarter past Ten o'clock.