Lords Sitting of 12 March 1883

MINUTES.
Took the Oath for the first time— The Lord Archbishop of Canterbury.
SELECT COMMITTEE—House of Lords (Construction and Accommodation), appointed.
PUBLIC BILL—First Reading—National Gallery (Loan)* (18).

HOUSE OF LORDS (CONSTRUCTION AND ACCOMMODATION).

  MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE.
  EARL CAIRNS: My Lords, in moving the Resolution of which I have given Notice—and with which I think your Lordships will not be disposed to disagree—I may mention that, as long ago as 1868, a Committee was appointed which sat for two Sessions, to consider, the construction of the House with reference to its acoustic properties. That Committee made a Report, and offered some suggestions; but I do not think anything was done in consequence of their Report. More recently—I think two or three years ago—a Committee was appointed to consider the question of reporting; and that Committee made a Report, though not without some difference of opinion amongst its Members, and the suggestion they offered in reference to the accommodation of reporters in the side Galleries did not meet with your Lordships' approval. I ask your Lordships to appoint a Committee "to consider the construction and accommodation of the House and Galleries." The question of reporting is by no means the only one to consider; but the Reference has regard generally to the seating and accommodation of Members of the House as well as of the reporters. I do not think any opposition will be offered to the Motion; therefore, I will merely move in the terms I have given Notice of, and which are on the Paper.
  Moved, "That a Select Committee be appointed to consider the construction and accommodation of the House, including the galleries, more especially in reference to seating, hearing, and reporting; and whether any and what improvement therein can be made."—(The Earl Cairns.)
  LORD DENMANsaid, he was opposed to the Motion; but as he was so accus-

  141
  tomed to being treated as a mere cipher in the House, he was not surprised at the assertion of the noble and learned Earl (Earl Cairns), that no opposition would be offered to his proposal. As he (Lord Denman) had seen in the newspapers that the noble Earl the Leader of the House (Earl Granville) was in favour of the Motion, it was to be regretted that the noble and learned Earl had not said more in favour of it. He (Lord Denman), for his own part, believed their Lordships were extremely well reported, and no one more so than the noble and learned Earl: and he really thought that if they appointed this Committee, they would be doing that which would encourage some noble Lords to speak in a low tone, and others to shuffle about in the House and make a noise, so that no one would be able to hear. It would not, therefore, be of the slightest use to appoint the Select Committee. They knew that the noble and learned Earl who made this proposal had some notion of a new Gallery underneath the existing Gallery, which would act as a sounding board; but they had seen so much of demolition by way of improvement, and there had been so much doubt as to whether demolitions really led to improvements, that he did hope they would now let well alone. The noble and learned Earl had often said that he did not treat with asperity those who differed from him; and he (Lord Denman) hoped the truth of that statement would be exemplified in his (Lord Denman's) case, seeing that he now, and often before, had the misfortune to differ from the noble and learned Earl. He thought it was a pity there should be such continual complaints of the reporting amongst their Lordships, seeing what excellent reports were furnished of their speeches, particularly of the speeches of the noble and learned Earl.
  EARL GRANVILLE: The noble Lord who has just sat down (Lord Denman) has stated that I am in favour of this Motion, and I certainly am, though I am not aware that I confided the fact to anyone longer than half an hour ago, when I mentioned it to the noble and learned Earl (Earl Cairns) himself. I am glad that some little opposition has been offered to the present proposal, because, on several previous occasions, there has been perfect willingness to ap-
  142
  point Committees; but there has not been the same willingness to adopt the Reports of those Committees. As there is now a little opposition to the appointment of the Committee, I hope there will be only a little opposition to the adoption of its Report.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he wished to point out that the words of the Motion were—"To consider the construction and accommodation of the House and galleries," and that the inquiry would not extend to the accommodation furnished in the rooms outside this Chamber belonging to the House of Lords. Having regard to the future, it was desirable that better accommodation should be furnished for the Lord Chancellor's Office in the House. His staff had not the accommodation which it was desirable it should have, and the interests of the public suffered in some respects in consequence. He would suggest that words should be inserted in the Motion to enable the Committee to consider the accommodation furnished in the rooms connected with their Lordships' House.
  EARL CAIRNSsaid, he would certainly amend the Motion, if the noble and learned Earl (the Lord Chancellor) believed that the word "House," as it stood on the Notice, would be taken in the technical sense as meaning the place in which they spoke. There were rooms, corridors, and offices provided for the accommodation of noble Lords, the condition of which might be a proper subject of inquiry; and it might be very desirable to consider especially the accommodation afforded to the noble and learned Lords who, from time to time, might have to preside over their debates. If the noble and learned Earl would suggest any words he would like inserted in the Motion to make these points quite clear, he (Earl Cairns) would be quite willing to adopt them.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)said, there would be great difficulty experienced in giving better accommodation to noble Lords in the rooms connected with that Chamber. The House of Commons had already robbed them of a number of their rooms, and, instead of being satisfied, was seeking more. There was, undoubtedly, scant accommodation for Parliamentary purposes in the Palace of Westminster.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORproposed that, after the word "galleries," they should insert the words "and rooms belonging to them."
  EARL CAIRNSsaid, he would amend the Motion by inserting, after the word "House," the words "including the galleries and rooms belonging thereto."
  Motion, as amended, put, and agreed to.

STOLEN GOODS BILL, 1882.

  QUESTION.
  EARL BEAUCHAMPasked the Lord Chancellor, What course the Government intend to take in reference to the Stolen Goods Bill of 1882?
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR,in reply, said, that, in deference to the objections of the trade, the course which the Government intended to take in regard to this Bill was to separate the question so far as it affected pawnbrokers, and to include this portion with the new regulations, which might he thought desirable in a distinct measure. The new Bill would not be introduced till after Easter, but whether in that House or the House of Commons he could not at present state.

LUNATIC ASYLUM (WORCESTER).

  MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
  EARL BEAUCHAMP,in rising to move—
  "That an humble Address he presented to Her Majesty for copies of a correspondence between the Clerk to the Visitors of the Lunatic Asylum for the County and City of Worcester and the War Office,"
  said, that the Correspondence in question had reference to the cost of maintenance of a pensioner in the Royal Engineers who was an inmate of the asylum. Only a portion of the pension possessed by the man was paid by the War Office for his maintenance; and although the clerk to the visitors had written several times upon the subject to the War Office, they had not succeeded in eliciting any satisfactory reply. The amount paid for his maintenance did not recoup the asylum for the expenses incurred. He thought that the War Office had exercised their discretion in this matter in a way to cause great injustice to the ratepayers in withholding a portion of the pension earned by the lunatic without stating any reason
  144
  for so doing. They were entitled, in his opinion at least, to the production of the regulations under which the War Office had acted.
  Moved,"That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for copies of a correspondence between the Clerk to the Visitors of the Lunatic Asylum for the County and City of Worcester and the War Office."—[The Earl Beauchamp).
  THE EARL OF MORLEYsaid, he had to express his regret at the delay which had taken place on the part of the War Office in conducting the Correspondence, and by way of explanation would point out that some portion of it was due to the number of inquiries from different authorities that had to be made. They had to find whether the pensioner had a wife and children, and to ascertain the exact amount of the pension that was paid and the exact sum that was stopped. It had been found that the unfortunate man's lunacy was due to the elopement of his wife, and the War Office had had to take into consideration the cost of the maintenance of his children. The War Office had thought it undesirable that the whole of the pension should be applied to the maintenance of the lunatic, as the children would have to be supported in some way or other. The part of the pension which they did not feel justified in handing over to the asylum authorities they considered should be allocated to the maintenance of the children.
  EARL BEAUCHAMPinquired if the balance of the pension was given to the children?
  THE EARL OF MORLEYsaid, that it was not allocated, but was held in reserve for their maintenance if required.
  EARL BEAUCHAMPobserved, that there was nothing to show that the children required the money. It had never been stated in the Correspondence that a portion of the pension was required to maintain the lunatic's children.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

METROPOLITAN DISTRICT RAILWAY.

  RESOLUTION.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWN,in rising to call attention to the ventilators now being erected by the Metropolitan District Railway Company on the Victoria

  145
  Embankment and in Westminster; and to move—
  "That the evidence taken in 1879 by the Select Committee on the Metropolitan and Metropolitan District Railways (City Lines Extension) Bill, and in 1S81 by the Select Committee on the Metropolitan District Railway Bill, and also the report of the proceedings of those Committees, so far as they respectively relate to the subject of the ventilators, be printed and circulated,"
  said, that the storm of indignation which had arisen outside of the House in consequence of the carrying out of works, the effect of which would be to spoil the noblest public work in London, rendered it unnecessary that he should make any apology for bringing this matter under their Lordships' notice, the more that it was to that House, rather than to the House of Commons, where the railway, or rather the "directorial" interest was so powerful, that the public looked for the protection of their rights, properties, and interests from the grasping and devouring jaws of aggressive Railway Companies. When, some 15 years ago, the Victoria Embankment was on the point of completion, some uneasiness was caused in the public mind by its being disturbed for the construction of the Metropolitan District Railway. The alarm was, in some measure, dissipated by the assurance that little was to be heard and nothing seen of the railway, but the two hideous stations at the Temple and at Charing Cross. The Victoria Embankment was to be a beautiful boulevard, embellished with gardens, and to be a source of delight to the toiling masses of the Metropolis, who were to take their pleasure under the shade of its plane trees. Such was the state of things until a short time ago, when Loudon awoke one day to the knowledge that the Metropolitan District Railway Company were proceeding coolly to utterly mar and destroy this magnificent public work by erecting on it, at short intervals of 100 yards, these hideous and abominable structures on the Victoria Embankment. The construction of these ventilators, as he had said, would utterly destroy the beauty of one of the noblest public works in the Metropolis; and he would remind their Lordships that the Embankment, combined with the series of landscape gardens which had sprung up during recent years, formed such a boulevard, and was
  146
  the source of such an amount of pleasure and delight as had been anticipated. These ventilators would belch forth volumes of smoke, steam, and stench upon the luckless citizens who frequented the gardens or walked along the Embankment itself. He (the Earl of Mill-town) quite agreed with the President of the Board of Trade that this was nothing less than an outrage, and an outrage which aroused the greatest indignation; and people demanded, with surprise, what Parliament had been about to grant such powers as enabled the Company to put up these odious structures,' and they asked what had become of the safeguard provided by the Act of 1864, by which it was enacted that no erection should be placed on the Embankment without the consent of the Metropolitan Board of Works. He wished to know what had happened in the 13 years that the railway had been in existence to cause such a sudden and urgent necessity for the construction of those ventilators? On that point he would read an extract from a newspaper which might be considered somewhat of an expert upon this question. Speaking of the ventilation of the railway between Charing Cross and the Mansion House, The Engineer said—
  "It is a mistake to suppose that the Company want to make the air in this section better for the sake of its passengers; as a matter of fact, the air is not so bad there as it is in many other places on the line. What the Company want to get rid of is steam, with which the tunnel—especially between the Temple and the Mansion House—becomes so charged, that it is impossible for the drivers to see the signals until they are within a couple of yards of them. We state this as the result of observations personally made, not from the carriages, but from the footplate of an engine. There ought to be no steam in the tunnel of the Metropolitan Railway; and there would be none, if the Company provided proper means of condensing the exhaust steam of the engines. For that purpose, nothing more is required than a sufficient supply of cold water in the 6ngine tanks. The Metropolitan engines making the round trip, as we may call it, from Moorgate Street, have lost all power of condensation long before they reach the section under Queen Victoria Street. It will be understood from what we have said that the proposed ventilating shafts will give forth a great deal of steam; and the dwellers in Queen Victoria Street will find, all too late, that they will have far worse trouble to contend against than invisible foul-smelling gases. Of course, the proper remedy does not lie in discharging steam and bad air into the centre of a great public thoroughfare, but in preventing the accumulation of either in the tunnel."

  147
  It was said by other eminent authorities that the ventilating shafts would give forth a great deal of steam, the evil effects of which would soon be felt by the dwellers in Queen Victoria Street. He understood that the railway did not require better air, but that they wanted to get rid of their steam. There were several alternatives that might be introduced, besides the obvious remedy of condensing their steam. There were compressed air engines, which had been tried with success in various places, and there was the endless rope system, which had also been proved satisfactory; but, even if ventilating shafts were to be used, there was no reason why they should be sent vertically into the Gardens. Less inconvenience would be caused if lateral, instead of vertical, shafts were erected. Why could they not be placed on property of the Company, where they might, in many quarters, smoke to their heart's content? Greater expense would be involved, it was true; but were they to be told that the beauty of the Thames Embankment was to be destroyed, and the comfort of millions of the inhabitants set at nought, in order that the District Railway Company Directors might declare a better dividend? In justice to the public, whose trustees their Lordships were, and in the hope that steps might be taken, even at the eleventh hour, to avert the establishment of an offensive system, and prevent what would be nothing short of a national calamity, he begged to move the Resolution of which he had given Notice.
  Moved, "That the shorthand-writer's notes of the proceedings of the Select Committees on the Metropolitan and Metropolitan District Railway Companies Bill, 1879, and on the Metropolitan District Railway Bill, 1881, and of the evidence taken before the said Committees, be laid on the Table, and that such portions of the said proceedings and evidence as relate to the ventilation of the railways be printed."—[The Earl of Milltown.)
  THE EARL OF BELMOREsaid, that, as he had acted as Chairman of both of the Committees before whom the question of the ventilation of the Railway had come, he must trouble their Lordships with some observations. What seemed to be the prevailing impression was that, in 1881, Parliament gave the Metropolitan Railway Company a perfectly new power of roving about the Metropolis, and doing generally what they pleased in the way of making
  148
  ventilators. He would show that this was not the case. He had understood his noble Friend (the Earl of Milltown) to say that the ventilation of the railway tunnel had been good enough for many years, and was therefore good enough still, and the same had been said by people out-of-doors. He had also said that there wore alternative systems of ventilation which would obviate the necessity of building these ventilators. Now, the first portion of the Underground Railway opened was that which ran under the Marylebone Road, past Portland Road and Baker Street, over which line Sir Edward Watkin now presided. It did not appear that, at that time, the smoke difficulty was anticipated, as no provision was made for any ventilation. The Metropolitan Railway, however, were ultimately compelled to get certain powers to enable them to ventilate the tunnel in the Marylebone Road. This they did by agreement with the street authorities. In 1871 a Bill was passed through Parliament, authorizing a railway to commence somewhere near Charing Cross, and to run to the North of London. That line had, it appeared, fallen through, but it was bonâ fide intended to be made. Provision had been made in that Bill for the ventilation of the line into the streets, by agreement with the street authorities, or, failing that, in such manner as should be decided by an engineer appointed by the Board of Trade. This was the first occasion that an arbitrator was provided for—now 12 years ago. Again, in 1874, a similar provision was inserted in an Act called the "Inner Circle Completion Act." This line was generally known as "Mr. Newman's line," and the Act was, perhaps, obtained to sell. At any rate, the powers were abandoned by an Act of 1879, in which the Metropolitan and Metropolitan District Companies agreed to give Mr. Newman's Company a sum, upon arbitration, not exceeding £50,000, in compensation for their expenses in obtaining their Act, and for some mysterious advantages they were supposed to possess, the nature of which he did not quite comprehend. The whole of this amount was, he believed, ultimately paid. He would now ask their Lordships' attention to the Committee of their Lordships' House that sat in 1879 to consider the Bill he had just referred to, and which was a measure dealing with many

  149
  matters, among which the question of ventilators was only one. That question was fought out on principle. Three proposals were at the time put forward, the first being to construct an open-air station in Trinity Square. That the Committee refused to allow, unless the Elder Brethren of the Trinity House should give their consent. The second was that ventilators should be constructed in various places, as at Queen Victoria Street; and the third was to make lateral shafts from the sides of the tunnel under the houses, and from the back of the houses to run up chimneys to admit fresh air. Sir John Hawkshaw, who always gave his evidence in such a straightforward manner as to carry conviction to one's mind that he was giving the result of his own practical experience, and not merely theorizing, was called to give evidence before the Committee, and expressed a strong opinion that the only proper mode of ventilating the tunnel would be by making openings into the air. Before the Committee of 1881, the evidence of the District Railway Company went to show that it was not a shareholders' question at all, but one which concerned the convenience of the 35,000,000 who travelled over the line every year. The Metropolitan Board of Works, who were opponents of the Bill, did not for a moment dispute this; but the point of difference was whether the Board of Works should have an absolute veto, or should be subject to the decision of an arbitrator. But between Westminster and Black friars the Metropolitan Board of Works were not the only persons interested in this question. There was a gentleman owning property on the Embankment—Mr. Keyser, the proprietor of the large hotel near Black friars Bridge—and there was the property on which the City of London School was now built. The owners of these properties had strong objections to ventilators being run up beside their buildings. At this spot there happened to be a subway under the Embankment between the railroad and the carriage road; and, at Mr. De Keyser's instance, the Committee of the House of Commons had decided upon a ventilator being opened through the crown of the tunnel into this subway, which would carry the steam out to the river. The Corporation of London objected to this;
  150
  but the Committee decided to leave the clause as it came from the House of Commons. Next, as to the Embankment itself, the Committee considered the point whether mechanical means could be employed for ventilating the tunnel, so as to dispense with the use of shafts. As to those means, Mr. Myles Fenton, formerly manager of the Metropolitan Bail way, and now manager of the South-Eastern, gave evidence to the effect that he had gone into the matter in connection with the Metropolitan Line. Mr. Fowler, the Company's engineer, thought that, by having a fan as part of the machinery, something might be done by way of exhausting the foul air, and admitting fresh air; but after some experiments at the Portland Road Station, the worst ventilated station on the line, it was found that that would not answer. Again, when Sir Edward Watkin became Chairman, he thought something might be done, and consulted Mr. Ramsbottom, a gentleman of great experience in such matters, and then tried some further experiments in this direction, but without any good result. He (the Earl of Belmore) had seen it stated that the Metropolitan Board of Works made but a lukewarm opposition. The fact was, however, that they made as good an opposition as they could. One of the principal witnesses in opposition to the Bill then under investigation was Mr. Richardson, Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee of the Metropolitan Board of Works; and he stated that between Black friars and Westminster alone 20 openings would be required, so that no one could walk in the gardens without receiving the fumes from the tunnel. Mr. Richardson admitted there must be openings somewhere, and the only question was where those openings should be placed. And as to the fumes arising from the tunnels, Mr. Richardson, when asked if the Metropolitan Board of Works would say where the openings for their emission should be placed, said he would rather have them come into the road than into the gardens, because the gardens were for the enjoyment of the public, and their comfort would be less interfered with if the ventilators were in the road; and that somehow these fumes did disappear within a few yards of the openings. Still, the witness considered the openings a nuisance. Then Sir Joseph

  151
  Bazalgette, the engineer of the Metropolitan Board of Works, came into the box. He must trouble the House with a few extracts from his evidence. [The noble Earl then quoted from Sir Joseph Bazalgette, and particularly from an answer of his in cross-examination, in which he admitted, with regard to a plan suggested by him for ventilating tunnels by exhausting the air, that he had only known it tried in a tunnel closed at one end—that was, in construction.] He (the Earl of Belmore), therefore, regarded the evidence as applied to tunnels in use as mere theorizing. He would refer to a discussion which had taken place between the counsel and himself, with a view of showing that the Committee had taken every pains to make the powers of the arbitrator as ample as possible. He (the Earl of Belmore) wished to remind the House of what had been done already, and what the scheme precisely involved. He had visited the sites of the ventilators on Saturday last, and he found that in Queen Victoria Street there were to be four ventilators, none of which were as yet finished. On the Embankment, between the City of London School and the Temple, two ventilators, from which steam and smoke issued freely, were already in existence. The first of the new ventilators other than the subway was on the other side of the Temple Gardens, and was agreed to by the Benchers of the Temple, who, in 18G4, obtained a clause providing that no ventilator should be made within 100 yards of their Gardens. They now accepted a clause reducing the distance to 30 yards. Another new ventilator was to be placed in the Savoy Gardens, on the Embankment, where three others had been now for some time in working order, one adjoining Charing Cross Railway Station, and the two others at a very short interval. There would also be a new ventilator between Charing Cross and Westminster Bridge, another near St. Margaret's Church, opposite the Aquarium, and another near the Westminster Palace Hotel. The latter would, no doubt, be a nuisance; but no one had appeared to oppose it, on behalf of the Hotel Company, before the Committee. These, together with the five smaller shafts already existing, were all that were proposed for the ventilation of this part of the Railway. The Duke of Westminster had
  152
  come to terms with the Company about another in Eccleston Street, and had agreed to sell them some land for the purpose, as provided for in the Bill. He did not think that the refuge ventilators, such as the one now being constructed on the Embankment, would be open to very serious disadvantages. He did not pretend that ventilators of any kind were an improvement; but ventilation of some kind was an absolute necessity, and he contended that the Committee had decided, in the best possible manner, the question how to give, in the least hurtful manner, the ventilation which was absolutely necessary. As to alternative means of ventilation, he thought that a number of lateral shafts from the top of the tunnel of the Railway, leading to the river, running under the Embankment, and unseen from the road, might possibly be substituted in that part of the line, and might answer the purpose. He thought that if their Lordships would allow the evidence given before their Lordships' Committee to be printed and circulated, it might be of service, and would justify the action of that Committee, as showing that they had come to a decision in accordance with the weight of evidence.
  VISCOUNT BURYsaid, the question appeared to have been treated as one which was to be fought over between the Metropolitan Board and the Metropolitan District Railway Company; but it seemed to him (Viscount Bury) that there was another party to be considered, and that was the public at large, who were jealous of sacrificing one of the few beautiful places the Metropolis had recently obtained, which had no sooner been given up to public recreation and enjoyment than all who had to carry out a public work sprang forward to seize a part of it. The noble Earl (the Earl of Belmore) gave up the whole point he had been contending for when he said that it was not at all necessary to use the Embankment if an alternative scheme of shafts from the tunnel to the river wall by means of the subway were practicable. In that case, they had an alternative scheme in no way open to the same objections as the other. It might be useful to have the evidence given before their Lordships' Committees published; but the noble Earl had given very copious extracts from that evidence which would probably be sufficient. What they

  153
  wanted was that the public at large, who enjoyed the Gardens and the Embankment, should have the case reopened, because they believed that both the Metropolitan Board of Works and the Railway Company had neglected the interests of the public. It was also requisite there should be a pause during which the question might be reconsidered with a view to obviating the very grave objections to this mode of ventilating the railway. Against the award of Captain Galton there was nothing to be said, because he was tied down by the terms of reference. He (Viscount Bury) had been over the whole of the line where the proposed ventilators were to be placed, and he would only say that they would entirely destroy the character of those beautiful Gardens on the Embankment. A compromise might be effected, and lateral openings made under the road of the Embankment to the river.
  LORD SUDELEYsaid, that the position of this matter was very peculiar. The Railway Company had the law on their side beyond a doubt. They had gone through all the usual forms, and, after the fullest investigation before the Committees of both Houses, had obtained an Act of Parliament. That being the state of the case, the Board of Trade were powerless to interfere in the matter, and could express no opinion or take any steps whatever as regarded it. On the one hand, their Lordships must be convinced, after the statement of the noble Earl who was Chairman of the Committee of that House (the Earl of Belmore), that every care was taken to go thoroughly into the question submitted to them, and that the Committee considered fully, on their merits, all the points which were then raised in opposition to the Bill, and gave their decision only after full and mature deliberation. On the other hand, their Lordships must sympathize most deeply with the feelings expressed by the noble Earl who introduced this question (the Earl of Mill-town). Although unable to express any official opinion, yet, speaking as a private Member of the House, he (Lord Sudeley) apprehended there could be no doubt that it would be a great public scandal and disadvantage that the great highway which had been such a magnificent improvement to the Metropolis should be defaced, and to a great extent
  154
  blocked, by hideous brick ventilators. The Gardens formed so material a part of what we proudly regarded as the "lungs of London," where in summer months crowds of people resorted for fresh air and to enjoy a view of the river, that if they were turned into a pestilential quarter, where sulphuretted hydrogen and steam would be continually poured forth, it would be a national loss. It seemed to him that there could be no practical use in printing and circulating the evidence taken before the Committee last year, and in incurring a large expenditure. Suppose the evidence were all printed, the utmost it could show would be that, so far as the matter then rested on the evidence given two years ago, the Committee did their duty. After the statement made by the noble Earl they might take that as granted. Whatever that evidence was which was then tendered, it was certainly not equal to what they now found in actual results. Nothing would alter their opinion as to the present position of the case, and the possible magnitude of the evil. Under these circumstances, he ventured to submit that, so far as the Paper were concerned, to print the evidence would be useless. The matter rested with the House, but the Government did not recommend it. The great difficulty and practical question was, what ought now to be done? As he had said, the Board of Trade did not see how they were to interfere in the matter, and could express no opinion whatever; but it was hoped that when the Railway Company saw that Parliament and the public were distinctly and unanimously hostile to this scheme, and that there was a widespread expression of public opinion upon the point, they would see that it was to their interest to bow to that opinion, and make such alterations as might be desirable.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES)said, he fully agreed with what had been said by the noble Lord opposite (Lord Sudeley) that there would be very little good in printing the evidence. They knew what it was, and what was the decision of the Committee. The question was whether anything could be done now to remedy the evil. There could be no doubt that in putting up these ventilators the Railway Company had power to do what was conferred on them by Par-

  155
  liament. No doubt, if they came again to Parliament and asked for that sort of thing, some condition would be made. At present, the Company had the game in its hands, unless Parliament should do what it had never done, in order to take away privileges given by Act of Parliament. Therefore, in his opinion, some other remedy must be sought. If new evidence were taken, persons practically acquainted with the subject might suggest alternative schemes; but, perhaps, the best thing that could happen in the form of relief would be that, by the great improvement of electrical power, the use of steam on these railways should be dispensed with. It was a strong consolation if the travellers by the railway were benefited, for the passengers under the Embankment were far more in number than the persons who used its surface.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWNsaid, that, after the discussion which had taken place, he would withdraw his Motion.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

INDIA (NATIVE STATES)—HYDERABAD— ILLNESS AND DEATH OF SIR SALAR JUNG.—QUESTIONS.
The Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY having given Notice of certain Questions—
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: Before my noble Friend (Lord Stanley of Alderley) puts the two pages of Questions of which he has given Notice, with reference to the death of Sir Salar Jung, I wish to make an appeal to the House as to whether those Questions ought to be put. The greater part of them are directed to most flagrant and unjust aspersions on a most distinguished public servant; for, my Lords, I believe we have no more distinguished man in the Indian Civil Service than Sir Richard Meade. Your Lordships will see that these Questions are not Questions at all in the real sense of the word, but are simply a long string of accusations. The 4th Question, for instance, is as follows:—
"Whether in 1877 the British Resident, Sir Richard Meade, though fully cognizant of these facts, and that Vikar-ul-omra was a deadly enemy of Sir Salar Jung, forced him on Sir Salar Jung as his colleague in the Regency against Sir Salar Jung's strongest protests?"
Again, your Lordships will find that the 7th Question is in these terms—
156
"Whether the Resident, Sir Richard Meade, and his assistant, Major Euan Smith, did not openly support their spoliations, and whether their support of them did not end in disgraceful rumours to the effect that they both had been corrupted by the said Vikar-ul-omra?"
Here, as your Lordships will perceive, is an allegation of corruption against Sir Richard Meade. Then my noble Friend asks whether the editor of a certain London newspaper could not furnish some evidence as to the truth of the above-mentioned disgraceful rumours. Another Question has reference to "a heavy wooden case," and all the Questions throw on Sir Richard Meade the very gravest imputations. The noble Lord then refers to the death of Sir Salar Jung; and although it is not plainly stated, yet I cannot help feeling that, looking at the commencement of these Questions and at the end of them, there is some kind of imputation that some person mentioned in this long string of Questions is connected with the death of Sir Salar Jung. It seems to me that these Questions constitute a speech, if they constitute anything. They are not Questions in the ordinary sense of the word. If my noble Friend has a speech to make in this House, and proofs to bring forward on the subject, it will be our duty to listen to him; but in the form of Questions these imputations ought not to be made.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I confess that I quite concur in the opinion of the noble Earl who has just spoken (the Earl of Kimberley), and I would add to the considerations which he has pressed on the House that my noble Friend at the Table (Lord Stanley of Alderley) imputes to Sir Richard Meade acts of administration for which there are persons responsible—namely, the Government of the day, who authorized Sir Richard Meade. In Question No. 4, my noble Friend asks, Whether in 1877 the British Resident, Sir Richard Meade, though aware that Vikar-ul-omra was a deadly enemy of Sir Salar Jung, forced him on Sir Salar Jung as his colleague in the Regency against Sir Salar Jung's strongest protests? Now, in 1877, the Government of Lord Beaconsfield was in Office, and if anybody is responsible in this matter and ought to be gibbeted it is myself, and not Sir Richard Meade. I protest, in the strongest way, against putting into an official document language imputing responsi-

157
bility to a man for that which he did in obedience to the orders of his superiors. There are Constitutional ways of dealing with those superiors. As to the rest of these imputations, that somebody poisoned Sir Salar Jung, that somebody stole something in a wooden case, and that somebody accepted a watch, if my noble Friend wishes to make a charge, he can move a Resolution, and the matter can be debated; but it appears to me that it is an utter misuse of the power of putting Questions to insert imputations of this kind. If this had occurred in the other House, the Speaker would not have allowed such Questions to appear on the Paper; but we have no such power in this House.
EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I think it is unnecessary for me to add anything to what has been stated by my noble Friend near me (the Earl of Kimberley) and by the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Salisbury). Therefore, I will take the liberty of moving that these Questions be not put, and that they do not remain on the Minutes of your Lordships' House.
Moved, "That such questions be not put."—(The Earl Granville.)
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, it was rather irregular that an attempt should be made to stop Questions before they were put. He had put this series of Questions on the Paper in order that he might not be accused of taking the noble Earl (the Earl of Kimberley) by surprise, and in order that he might get an answer. With regard to the charges he would go into them first of all. ["Order, order!"]
EARL GRANVILLE: I rise to Order. It is perfectly irregular for the noble Lord to go on arguing after I have moved, "That the Questions be not put."
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYwished to say a few words in explanation. He had not taken this course lightly. Nine years ago he made some charges against a Colonial Governor; and the then Secretary of State for the Colonies (the Earl of Carnarvon) and the present Secretary of State for India attacked him for what he had said, and laid down that charges should not be made except for the purpose of their being investigated. The noble Earl
158
could not blame him for bringing these Questions forward unless he could produce despatches from Lord Hartington and the Government of India showing that these matters had been investigated.
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: I rise to Order. I shall be ready to give a plain and distinct answer at the proper time to any accusations which may be made. We are not now, I submit, discussing what Lord Hartington said, but whether these Questions are Questions which ought to be put.
LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY: Will the noble Earl state in what form I am to put these Questions?
THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: It is not for me to state that.
On Question? agreed to.

NATIONAL GALLERY (LOAN) BILL [H.L.]
A Bill for enabling the Trustees and Director of the National Gallery to lend works of art to other public galleries in the United Kingdom—Was presented by The Karl GRANVILLE; read 1a. (No. 18.)
House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Ten o'clock.