Lords Sitting of 19 February 1884

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, 1878, Amendment (5); Law of Evidence Amendment (9); Contagious Diseases (Animals) (14).
Committee—Report—Bankruptcy Appeals (County Courts)* (7).

THE METROPOLITAN POLICE FORCE.

  QUESTION.
  LORD ELLENBOROUGHbegged to ask a Question, of which he had given private Notice—namely, what was the number of men recently added to the Metropolitan Police Force, in consequence of the staff withdrawn to watch the public buildings?
  THE EARL OF DALHOUSIE: I believe the number is somewhere about 715; but I am not able to give the noble Lord the particulars at the present moment.

EGYPT (AFFAIRS OF THE SOUDAN)—GENERAL GORDON'S PROCLAMATION.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBUEY: My Lords, I wish to ask the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs a Question, of which I gave Notice yesterday. I wish to ask as to the Proclamation of General Gordon, published at Khartoum, in favour of giving permission to revive the trade in slaves, Whether it was issued under instructions from Her Majesty's Government; and, if so, whether the noble Earl has any objection to lay those instructions on the Table of the House? I also want to ask whether, in making that Proclamation, General Gordon was representing an Egyptian or a British authority, because there are difficulties in each case. If he was representing an Egyptian authority, I should like to know whether any steps have been taken to bring the law of the Ottoman Empire—or the Egyptian law, which, in that respect, I believe, agrees with that of the Ottoman Empire—into conformity with the Proclamation of General Gordon; because, as matters stand, Egyptian subjects on one side of the Border would be covered by General Gordon's authority, but on the other side would be liable for acts performed with General Gordon's permission. The same difficulty would arise if General Gordon represented a British authority. I do not know whether the noble Earl has looked at the Statutes of 1806 and 1807, which abolished the Slave Trade; but I imagine that if there are any British subjects in the Soudan—and I fancy there may be some Maltese—they would be encouraged by General Gordon's Proclamation to do that for which, if they came within the jurisdiction of the Queen's Courts, they would undoubtedly be punished. Has the noble Earl taken the contingency into consideration? Then, further, what is the area within which this permission is to be allowed? Is it the whole of the Soudan, or up to the Second Cataract, or up
  1290
  to the Borders of the Red Sea? And, also, how long does the noble Earl contemplate this permission shall exist? Because, of course, if it is offered, as it appears to be, as a consideration to the inhabitants of the Soudan to induce them to do, or to abstain from doing, certain things, there would be something like a breach of faith if, immediately after they have done or abstained from doing those things, we altered our attitude with regard to the Slave Trade so revived among them. I put these Questions because I understood from the noble Earl yesterday that the Proclamation was authentic; and, therefore, I thought I was justified in directing his attention to the matter.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, the noble Marquess, with his usual courtesy, gave me Notice of the Questions which he proposed to ask, and to which it appears that he has since added another. I hope he will not think it discourteous of me, if I am unable to give explanations, or enter into details of a Proclamation which I have never read or seen. We have a short telegram on the subject, which does hot coincide exactly with those published in the papers, but the Proclamation itself has not yet arrived. It is sure to be forwarded in due course, but in consequence of the interest which it has excited, I have telegraphed to Sir Evelyn Baring to forward it as soon as he gets the text. Until I have seen the Proclamation, the noble Marquess will easily understand that it is impossible to give any explanation on the subject.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: As I understand, there is nothing in the instructions of the noble Earl sanctioning——
  EARL GRANVILLE: I beg pardon. I shall be very glad to read all the instructions given to General Gordon on the subject. They are as follows:—
  "In connection with this subject, you should pay especial consideration to the question of the steps that may usefully he taken to counteract the stimulus which it is feared may possibly be given to the Slave Trade by the present insurrectionary movement, and by the withdrawal of the Egyptian authority from the interior."
  These were the only instructions given to General Gordon. I may add that I am perfectly aware that what fell from the noble Marquess on the first evening of this Session was a condemnation of

  1291
  the mission of General Gordon; but I own that the confidence in General Gordon which I then felt and expressed is rather increasing instead of diminishing; and if there is one thing with reference to which I have special confidence in General Gordon, it is that he is not likely to do anything to help practically the trade in slaves in the Soudan.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I trust that in future, when Questions are put, or criticisms passed with respect to what is being done in the Soudan, the noble Earl will not shelter himself behind the authority of General Gordon. Our tongues are in a measure tied; according to well-known Parliamentary usage and courtesy, we cannot criticize the acts of absent officers of the Crown, and it would be very wrong to do so. But we abstain from doing so on the understanding that all that is done is done under the sanction and with the authority of the Ministers of the Crown, and it is not competent for Ministers to cover themselves under the acts of their officers.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I am not aware that I have used a single word which could be interpreted into the expression of a wish to shelter myself or the Government behind General Gordon. But when the noble Marquess, after a strong condemnation of the mission, takes the first opportunity of criticizing something which it is supposed General Gordon has done, there is no shirking of responsibility in declaring our undiminished confidence in that distinguished officer, and that we take the responsibility for anything he does. We have given General Gordon large discretionary powers, and for anything which he does without disapproval from us we are fully responsible.

CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACT, 1878, AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 5.)
(The Duke of Richmond and Gordon.)
CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACT, 1878, AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 5.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON, in rising to move that the Bill be now read a second time, said, he did not propose to go into matters of ancient history, as the noble Lord the I Lord President did the other night when he discussed, with reference to this
  1292
  subject, the provisions of a Bill which was proposed, but did not become law, about 20 years ago; but he should confine himself to the Act of 1878. That Act, which he proposed to amend, was based mainly on the Report of a Committee of the other House, which went into the subject very fully, and gave their opinions as to the state of different diseases affecting animals in this country. These opinions with regard to foot-and-mouth disease were very much stronger and more decided than those which apparently were entertained by the Lord President. In that Report occurred these passages—
  "But cattle plague is not the only question. It was abundantly proved in evidence that the ravages of cattle plague since the Act of 18G9, and the diminution of the breeding herds of the Kingdom from the fear of breaking out of cattle plague, are as nothing compared with the losses inflicted and the enterprize checked by pleuro-pneumonia and foot-and-mouth complaint. In addition to the losses to the community of animals actually destroyed by either of those diseases, or slaughtered to prevent the spread of pleuro-pneumonia, the agricultural and other witnesses laid great stress on the fact that, whatever loss fell upon the farmer from the deterioration of his stock through foot-and-mouth complaint, re-acted injuriously on the consumer, by the diminution in the number of fat stock which the farmer was able to place on the market in a given time."
  The opinions so expressed in the Report were well worth consideration. In 1878, when he introduced a Bill dealing with cattle disease, he shared with many persons the belief that slaughter at the port of landing would be sufficient to prevent the spread of foot-and-mouth disease through the country, and he hoped that that expedient would be as effective in the case of foot-and-mouth disease as it had been in the case of pleuro-pneumonia. When he left Office in 1880 there was no case of foot-and-mouth disease in the country. There had been a severe outbreak in 1879, and it was stamped out, and effectually put an end to, by means of the Act of 1878, which was then put into operation. In the autumn of 1880, there was another outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in the country, and he was certain he would have the Lord President with him on this point, that the outbreak which appeared in October, 1880, was due to a cargo of cattle from France landed at Deptford. The foreign origin of the outbreak was pointed out in the Report of the Veterinary Department of the Privy Council

  1293
  Office for the year 1880. Very great precautions were always taken at the Foreign Animals Wharf at Deptford, but the disease was so insidious that no amount of care at that wharf could prevent it from spreading through the country. In the course of business, as many as 1,000 persons sometimes passed through the Foreign Animals Wharf in a day. It was, therefore, easy to understand that there must always be great difficulty in preventing the extension of the disease beyond the wharf. He had always held that the loss caused by the prevalence of foot-and-mouth disease was a question of as much interest for the consumer as for the producer. In the Report of the Royal Commission over which he had presided this view was also taken. The Commissioners said—
  "These diseases (pleuro-pneumonia and foot-and-mouth), which are both of foreign origin, are Drought into the Foreign Animals Wharf from time to time. Although every precaution is taken, there can be no doubt that foot-and-mouth disease has been introduced into this country from abroad by these means. This has led to the demand for the exclusion of live stock from infected countries which has been urged by so many of the witnesses, to whose evidence upon the subject we have already referred. The evidence as to the discouragement which was given to the breeding of cattle and sheep in Great Britain, and the diminution in the supply of meat which arose from extensive disease in the country, appears to us to be conclusive. Looking to the great importance to the home supply of meat, as compared with the supply of live animals from abroad, and to the facility with which dead meat can be imported in the place of animals that are alive, we recommend that the landing of foreign live animals should not be permitted in future from any countries as to which the Privy Council are not satisfied that they are perfectly free from contagious disease."
  The noble Lord opposite (Lord Carling-ford) had rather minimized the quantity of disease brought into this country. In 1881, there were 4,833 outbreaks, the number of animals attacked being 183,046. In 1882, the outbreaks were 1,970, and the animals attacked 37,950; but in 1883 the outbreaks were no fewer than 18,732, and the animals attacked 461,145. It was a remarkable fact that, concurrent with the increase of the disease in this country, and of the number of outbreaks, was the increase in the number of cargoes imported from abroad. He found that, in 1883, the foreign cargoes landed in which foot-and-mouth disease was discovered were 90, and the animals affected 1,172.
  1294
  There were probably many other animals which had contracted the disease from the others because they might be 14 days at the wharf before being slaughtered, and they had the whole of those 14 days to develop the disease which had been brought here by the 90 cargoes. In point of fact, it affected thousands of animals. Professor Brown said—
  "The disease thus introduced into the Deptford Cattle Market continued to spread among the animals landed there, and as the lairs at that time were overcrowded with animals from America as well as Europe, no opportunity was afforded for the effectual disinfection of the places where disease had existed, and, consequently, animals which were perfectly healthy on landing became infected soon after entering the lairs."
  Professor Brown also said—
  "It is a well-established fact that foot-and-mouth disease is one of the infectious maladies which can be transmitted to healthy animals without contact with others affected with the disorder. The mode of communication is technically known as 'mediate contagion,' and it includes all possible means of conveyance of the infective matter short of the direct intervention of a diseased animal."
  In fact, it was impossible to overrate the enormous risk we ran of having foot-and-mouth disease propagated throughout the country by means of the animals which came from abroad. The remedy was very simple, and it was contained in the Bill—namely, that no animal should come from a country in which this disease existed. He confined the Bill to foot-and-mouth disease. The Lord President and himself viewed this matter from a totally different standpoint. The noble Lord's desire was to deal with the matter by very severe restrictions at home in order to stamp out the disease. The object which he had himself in view was to prevent the disease from coming into the country. The Lord President, when he talked of carrying out the restrictions, must have forgotten that there were between 300 and 400 local authorities throughout the country; and anyone who was brought into contact with the local authorities and was acquainted with the manner in which they conducted their business, and the different views they entertained in different parts of the country, must be satisfied that it was not reasonable to assume that a uniform system would be carried out by those 400 local authorities. He was quite ready to admit that the Privy Council,

  1295
  under the direction of the Lord President, I had carried out the restrictions during the past three years with a vigour and determination which reflected credit on the noble Lord. But the Lord President must know that those restrictions were not only very onerous, and hampered the farmer very much in the manner of conducting his business, but very seriously interfered with his income, and with the prices which he got for his stock. He would give their Lordships an instance. In a part of the country in which foot-and-mouth disease prevailed, and the Privy Council by their powers had stopped fairs and markets, by licence of the local authority an auction sale was allowed, the animals sold to be slaughtered within six days. A gentleman sent his sheep to the sale, but the butchers had it entirely their own way, and did not give anything like the value of the sheep, which were sold at 10 s. a-head less than what they ought to fetch. It might be said that the gentleman knew very well when he sent in his sheep that he would be obliged to take what he could get, as he could not bring them back again. But he was obliged to send them, because he had no keep, and if he were to try to feed them at home he would have lost more money than he did by the sale. That was nothing more than what was going on in all parts of the country which were subject to the disease. Therefore their Lordships were bound to see what they could do for an interest which had suffered far too much and far too long. That was one reason why he had brought in this Bill when he found that the Government had no thought of dealing with the matter, at least so far as could be gathered from the Speech delivered by command of Her Majesty. He believed they would not have heard of the Government measure at all had it not been for the strong and serious reminder of the condition of things given by the hon. Member for Mid Lincolnshire (MR. Chaplin), who gave Notice of an Amendment to the Address censuring the Government for not having given effect to the Resolution on the subject which had been carried in the House of Commons last Session. There was one other point upon which he should like to touch, and that was the opinion of the Prime Minister upon this subject. The right hon. Gentleman was a great
  1296
  authority upon all subjects, and not very long ago, at a meeting of his tenantry, he was bound to admit—as all were bound to admit—that great distress had afflicted the agricultural interests of this country. The Prime Minister sympathized with his tenants, and suggested that they should grow more fruit and make jam. That was a branch of agriculture of which he (the Duke of Richmond and Gordon) was totally ignorant, and he must decline to enter upon the subject. He would, however, wait and see what would be the result of the experiments that were to be made by the Prime Minister and his tenants in the manufacture of jam, and how far those experiments would alleviate the existing agricultural distress. But, in the second place, the right hon. Gentleman offered a more practical suggestion, and advised his tenants to turn their attention, where it was possible, to dairy-farming. That was a very good piece of advice; but if there was one branch of agriculture which required immunity and protection from disease more than another branch it was dairy-farming. If, therefore, it was right that dairy-farming should be developed, it was necessary that there should be immunity from disease so far as it could be obtained. He thought he had said enough to justify the course he had on that occasion adopted. He had shown their Lordships that the country was free from disease in 1880, that disease was re-introduced by a foreign cargo in the beginning of 1881, and continued to exist up to the present time, inflicting serious losses upon a class which had already suffered from a series of calamitous seasons; and he thought their Lordships would endeavour to prevent a similar disaster in the future by passing the Bill which he had the honour to ask them to read a second time.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Duke of Richmond and Gordon.)
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)said, that the noble Duke had not, from the beginning to the end of his speech, made the smallest reference to the provisions of the Bill.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON: I explained that it was a Bill to prevent animals coming from a country where disease existed. That is the whole Bill.
  LORD CAELINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)said, he had heard no explanation of the provisions of the Bill. The noble Duke had stated that, in the course of his speech upon this subject the other evening, he minimized the amount and evils of foot and-mouth disease in the country. He could assure their Lordships that he never intended to convey any idea of that kind. What he minimized was, not the amount of disease, but the amount of foreign infection which was believed to be introduced into this country from the foreign animals' wharves. While he admitted that foreign infection might have originally made its way into the country through those channels, there was no proof nor indication that it had been introduced from the wharves since the year 1880; and there was no reason to believe, from a comparison of facts and figures, that foreign infection continued to be introduced at the present time, or that the recent prevalence of foot-and-mouth disease depended in any way upon it. Certainly, during the year 1883 there could be no connection traced between the prevalence of foot-and-mouth disease in a greater or less degree and the introduction of foreign infection such as the noble Duke imagined. As to the Government Bill not being mentioned in the Queen's Speech, he would say frankly that no fresh legislation upon the subject was announced, because the Government did not think it essential. They knew the misconceptions and exaggerations which had prevailed throughout the Recess; they knew the panic which had been created in the minds of the farmers by an elaborate system of agitation; but they hoped that when the real facts of the case were brought out in Parliamentary discussion those alarms would be removed. The Government also hoped that their action in 1883, in using for the first time against foot-and-mouth disease the powers of prohibition contained in the Act of 1878, and the assurances they were prepared to give in the same direction, would have had the effect of re-assuring the mind of the country. They found, however, that that was not to be the case.' They found that nothing short of fresh legislation would suffice to restore confidence to the agricultural classes; and, knowing that the Act could not be efficiently administered unless that confidence was restored,
  1298
  they felt that it would be better to make it quite clear to all the world, not only that they had the power, but that they also had the will, and that they were under an obligation to protect the country from the importation of foot-and-mouth disease from abroad. The noble Duke said there was a complete difference between himself and the Privy Council as to the treatment of foot-and-mouth disease, and he quite agreed that the noble Duke thought of nothing in connection with this matter except exclusion. So entirety had he abandoned his own Act of 1878 that prohibition and exclusion seemed to have taken entire possession of his mind. On the other hand, he could not admit what the noble Duke had said—namely, that he and his Colleagues thought of nothing but internal restriction at home. So long as they succeeded, as they were now succeeding, in keeping out fresh infection from abroad, it was evident that the stamping out of the disease depended upon what was done at home. He was not able to accept the noble Duke's recipe in that Bill, because it would reduce the Privy Council to a mere piece of machinery in the matter; no rational discretion would be left to them; they would not be able to consider circumstances as they arose; but, on the discovery of a single case of disease happening in a foreign country, no matter how strict were the rules and careful the precautions observed in such foreign country, the Privy Council would be mechanically compelled to prohibit importation from it, although it might not have sent us a single diseased animal for any length of time. On the other hand, though he could not approve the noble Duke's proposal, he fully admitted that, in certain circumstances, the system of prohibition must be applied to foot-and-mouth disease. It was, indeed, the Government's intention to use the powers given by the existing Act for that purpose, and they would feel themselves under a positive obligation to do so. But he could not be a consenting party to the noble Duke's Bill, and should say "No!" to it without troubling the House with a Division.
  THE EARL OF JERSEYsaid, he did not think the statement of the noble Lord the Lord President of the Council would be considered satisfactory by the country. He could not agree with the

  1299
  noble Lord that there was no connection between the landing of animals from abroad and the prevalence of the disease at home. There was undoubtedly such a connection, and it was unquestionable that the disease had first been introduced from abroad; and it was not too much to say that unless some strong measure was taken by the Government, it would be impossible, in the event of another outbreak, to carry out the restrictions that were already in use. The farmers had patiently borne with these most vexatious restrictions. The noble Lord's Bill would simply throw the responsibility on the Privy Council, and they had had enough of that. What was wanted was a clearly-defined rule, which all could understand, to oblige the Privy Council to put the law in motion; and he hoped the noble Duke would press his measure to a Division.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, there could be no doubt of the enormous loss, not only to the farmer, but to the consumer also, which was caused by the prevalence of this disease. The Lord President had told them that in the first three months of 1883, 58 diseased cargoes were landed. The risk of loss implied in that statement was enormous. He had found by reference to the Veterinary Reports of the Privy Council that there was a pretty close correspondence between the importation of animals from countries in which the disease was prevalent and the number of diseased animals in this country. That correspondence clearly appeared in the Returns for each year from 1879 to 1882. It was high time, and the idea generally prevailed, that something should be done to stamp out foot-and-mouth disease, which had caused such terrible havoc since its importation from France in 1880 among valuable herds of cattle. He regretted the internal restrictions had not been enforced with uniformity; still, no one could say that they had not been severe in their operations. Early last spring, when markets and fairs were stopped, there was a considerable fall in the value of cattle and sheep, and particularly of sheep. If such restrictions were enforced at home, why could we not regulate the importation of cattle from abroad as all other countries and all our Colonies had done? But the method proposed by the noble Duke was hard and inelastic. It was that if
  1300
  it could be shown that foot-and-mouth disease existed in any country, whether by Consular Report, Letter, or otherwise, the Privy Council were to have the power of prohibiting importations. On the whole, he preferred the Bill of the Lord President, with the modifications that might be made in it. As long as we had a Privy Council, we must entrust it with certain discretions; but we ought to use every means we could to prevent the importation of foot-and-mouth disease. We ought also to make it clear that the object was not to raise the price of cattle in this country, but simply to extend reasonable protection to our own animals in the interests alike of farmers and consumers.
  Motion agreed to; Bill road 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.

LAW OF EVIDENCE AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 9.)
(The Lord Bramwell.)
LAW OF EVIDENCE AMENDMENT BILL.—(No. 9.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD BRAMWELL, in rising to move that the Bill be now read a second time, said, that the object of it was to make a person charged with a crime a competent witness; also to enable a husband or wife to give evidence when either was charged with a criminal offence; and also to enable any one of two or more persons charged in the same indictment to give evidence. He did not propose to compel these persons to give evidence, but simply to remove the disqualifications which prevented them doing so if they wished. Only 40 years ago no one who had the smallest interest in a case could give evidence in it, but this disqualification had been removed; husbands and wives had been made competent witnesses in civil cases; plaintiffs in breaches of promise might be examined, and last year the Explosives Act admitted as witnesses the persons who were charged with offences under it. The disqualifications he proposed to repeal were the last that were left. Our old Law of Evidence seemed to have been based on the principle that juries must be taken care of, and be told what evidence they were to receive, instead of hearing all and judging for

  1301
  themselves of its value. That seemed to him a bad principle. It was better to let juries hear evidence and judge of it than to shut it out. The proposed change would be beneficial to the innocent, and, as regarded the guilty, it would promote justice. He believed that wrong convictions were rare, but the possibility of their occurrence would be diminished if the accused was allowed to tell his own tale on oath, subject to cross-examination. If the accused did not offer his own evidence he would be exposed to the remark that he dared not do so, while if he had been examined it would not be competent for his counsel to use the now common argument that the mouth of the prisoner was closed, and that if it were not he would be able to rebut the evidence against him; ingenious speculations would fall to the ground, and the prisoner would be asked to account for his conduct. The changes were proposed, not for the benefit of the accused, but for the benefit of justice; and he had been in favour of them ever since he had to do with the administration of the Criminal Law. The correspondence in the newspapers had brought this matter within the range of practical politics, and had suggested to him the desirability of bringing forward the present Bill; but he wished to say that he had always believed the principle of the measure to be a right one, and that he did not adopt it in consequence of what had been said recently. He believed that the opinion he held was also held by the Judges generally. A Bill similar to this would be introduced in the other House: but their Lordships would not have the trouble of discussing the matter twice, because if that measure came to that House he would not proceed further with his own. If, on the other hand, their Lordships should pass his Bill and send it to the other House, he should be quite willing that both Bills should be dealt with there in the manner which might be deemed best. At all events, he had given their Lordships an opportunity of discussing the question once, and this was more than could be said of many important measures last Session. In conclusion, the noble and learned Lord moved that the Bill be read a second time.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord Bramwell.)
  EARL CAIRNSsaid, it would very ill become him to offer any opposition to the Bill, for it proposed to do what was proposed to be done by the Government of which he was a Member, and it was included in the large measure for the codification of the Criminal Law which was brought into the other House of Parliament by that Government. That measure was about to be re-introduced into the House of Commons; and he hoped the Bill now under consideration might become law as part of that larger measure, instead of being an isolated Bill. He admitted, however, that they might have to wait a long time for that larger measure, and, perhaps, it was better to deal with this pressing subject in the way now proposed. Another reason he had for supporting the Bill was that the Explosives Act, and some other recent Statutes, enabled persons charged under their provisions to be examined as witnesses. He was informed that in the trial which took place under the Explosives Act this provision "was brought into force, and that it acted extremely well. If it were wrong for a counsel to state to the jury the prisoner's version of what had occurred a great hardship was inflicted on the accused; but if a counsel were allowed to give the prisoner's version, it was still more absurd that the prisoner himself should be prevented from stating it on oath to the jury.
  VISCOUNT CRANBROOKwished to point out that the Bill made a prisoner competent as a witness, not only on his trial before a jury, but in all processes preceding his trial. He would, therefore, suggest the desirability of abolishing the declaration which at present a magistrate was by statute bound to make warning the accused of the consequences of making a statement. They did not want him to make a statement upon oath; but if he wished to make it on oath as a witness they ought to repeal the Statute.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he rose to express, on the part of the Government, entire concurrence in the object which his noble and learned Friend (Lord Bramwell) had in view. The Bill about to be introduced in the House of Commons by the Attorney General was not only the same in substance with that now under consideration, but he believed it would be nearly, if not quite,

  1303
  the same in form. Still, he had no objection on that account to the course taken by his noble and learned Friend in bringing the matter before their Lordships, for in many possible contingencies the present Bill might further the object which all who agreed in its principle had in view. Even if only a few cases of injustice could be shown to arise, that would be a sufficient reason for altering the law; but in point of fact he believed that the number of cases in which there was at least some appearance of injustice due to the present state of the law was constantly on the increase. Nothing could be more difficult to justify than the principle that when a man was charged with a criminal act, alleged to have been committed in the presence of a single witness, the mouth of the accuser should be opened while the mouth of the accused was closed; and that when—as had happened in several cases—the witness was afterwards indicted for perjury, this process should be reversed. He was sanguine as to the success of this measure, because a similar one, introduced in the House of Commons in 1878 by his hon. Friend MR. Evelyn Ashley, passed the second reading by a considerable majority.
  LORD FITZGERALDsaid, in his opinion the Bill should be extended to include the examination of prisoners before magistrates. The principle of the measure was to be found in the Explosives Act, and it was one that had been called for for 20 years past. He had had a long experience in the administration of the Criminal Law, and had seen cruel cases resulting from shutting the mouths of prisoners. He should certainly support the Bill.
  LORD BRABOURNEsaid, he might point out that where a prisoner was undefended, it was the duty of the presiding Judge or magistrate to call upon the prisoner at the proper time to make his defence, and therefore every prisoner had the opportunity of stating his version of his case. As a matter of fact, a prisoner had every opportunity of stating his case, which he usually did to an attorney, who employed counsel at his discretion. If he was allowed to appear as a witness, an ignorant rustic, though he might be innocent, would suffer by the cross-examination of a clever counsel; and if he refused to be a witness, a presumption would be at once raised
  1304
  against him in the minds of the jury. He thought, too, that counsel should not be permitted to state to the jury what a prisoner had stated to them, as it was far better that any such statement should be made by the prisoner himself; and no Judge that ever tried could prevent a counsel from meeting the prisoner's statement in an hypothetical way, or from introducing it in such a manner as he thought would best serve the interests of his client. He did not, however, wish to oppose the Bill.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly.

CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) BILL.—(No. 14.)
(The lord President.)
CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) BILL.—(No. 14.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Heading read.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Lord President.)
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, he proposed in Committee to offer some Amendments to this Bill; but he would point out to the noble Lord the Lord President of the Council the very great desirability of explaining more distinctly the provisions of Clauses 2 and 3. There was very great misapprehension as to what they were intended to meet, and they alarmed a great number of people. He thought probably that if the noble Lord would explain them thoroughly he would facilitate the passage of the Bill. He should himself propose an Amendment to Clause 1, which he hoped would be satisfactory to both sides of the House. In that clause the Government had already gone some way in the direction in which the hon. Member for Mid Lincolnshire (MR. Chaplin) desired them to go, and he trusted that they would be willing to go a little further on the same path. He objected to the clause limiting the operation of the Bill to a period of two years. If the measure was necessary now for the prevention of the introduction of foot-and-mouth disease, why should it be less necessary to take similar precautions two years hence? Who would embark any large amount of capital in agriculture, in the hope that foot-and-mouth disease would be reduced to a minimum, when it should come to

  1305
  be known that in two years' time the precautions which the farmers now desired would no longer be taken? In Committee he should ask their Lordships to reject the clause.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)said, that there was nothing unusual in providing that a Bill should have a limited duration. Why should not Parliament be given an opportunity of considering at a future time the particular means laid down in the Bill for the prevention of foot-and-mouth disease? He thought it would be well if he reserved his explanation of the reasons for the introduction of the three clauses to which the noble Duke objected until Thursday, when he hoped the Committee stage would be taken.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.

CENTRAL ASIA—MERV.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD ELLENBOROUGHasked Her Majesty's Government, If there is any confirmation of the news respecting the submission of the Merv Turkomans to Russia; and if there have passed any explanatory communications on the subject of a re-assuring nature; and when Papers on the subject will be submitted to Parliament; and, if such an acquisition of territory in the immediate neighbourhood of Merv be not in direct violation of Treaty obligations to this country on the part of Russia? The noble Lord said, the question of the acquisition of this territory by Russia was one of paramount importance, and as important to this country as the question of Egypt. The subject of the communication between Merv and Herat had been discussed by many persons in many forms and at many times, who had shown the importance of it to our Empire in the East. The facility of communication between the two places was so great that a slight alteration in the road was all that was necessary for the construction of a railway. He would not, however, detain their Lordships with any further remarks on the present occasion.
  LORD LAMINGTONsaid, he did not think that was a fitting time (6.15 P.M.) to discuss so important a question. He had been much interested in the question,
  1306
  and had brought it forward more than once in the House of Commons. If he mistook not, it had been said, in a despatch to Prince Gortchakoff, that any occupation of Merv by the Russians would be considered by this country a most serious matter; in fact, he had always understood that the occupation of Merv would approach very nearly to a casus belli. Merv led to Herat, and the occupation of Herat might have very serious results for India.
  EARL GRANVILLE: I cannot agree with the reason given by the noble Lord for not discussing this question—namely, because of the late hour of a quarter past 6. That would not be a valid reason according to my idea; but there is a more important reason why we should not discuss it now. We have this day received despatches on this subject from St. Petersburg, and I have not had time to communicate them either to my noble Friend the Secretary of State for India or to the Prime Minister. It is clear, therefore, that it would be premature to enter into any discussion on the subject at the present moment; but I may say that the news to which the first part of the Question alludes is confirmed.
  THE EARL OF LYTTON: May I ask whether the matter can be discussed on Thursday?
  EARL GRANVILLE: It will be desirable to allow more than two days to elapse before a discussion is raised. It would be hurrying matters to discuss the subject only two days after the receipt of the despatches.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I confess there is a necessity for a sufficient time to be allowed to consider despatches; but if a long interval must always elapse after the receipt of despatches from St. Petersburg, my experience with regard to Central Asiatic matters shows that the noble Earl would put us off step by step altogether. Although I quite accept his plea for sufficient time, I hope he will allow a serious discussion to take place at an early period on an event of which it is scarcely possible to exaggerate the importance.

EGYPT (EVENTS IN THE SOUDAN)—EMPLOYMENT OF INDIAN TROOPS.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD STRATHNAIRNasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs,

  1307
  Whether it is the intention of the Government to employ any of Her Majesty's Indian forces in co-operation with the English troops for the defence of Suakim, or in operations out of it; and whether they do not consider such troops, by reason of their acclimatization, peculiarly adapted for the operations proposed? The noble and gallant Lord said: It is due to your Lordships that I should explain why I withdrew, on the 11th instant, my Question as to the Soudan. The reason was, my Lords, that when I sent in the Question for insertion in the Notice Paper of the House of Lords, I was entirely ignorant of my noble Friend's (the Marquess of Salisbury's) intended and important Motion on the same subject the next day. But when I heard it, I felt at once that it would not be fair to my noble Friend that my solitary query should take precedence of, and perhaps embarrass his Motion on a State question, supported by his superior talents and position. I therefore withdrew my Question. It is only just to myself to repeat what I intended to say, that I was actuated, in asking this Question, by no other motives than the desire for the success of British policy in Egypt. And it will be in the memory of my noble Friend (Earl Granville) that, in the first stage of the Egyptian Question, I made two suggestions of a military character which proved that desire, and for which my noble Friend, with his usual courtesy, thanked me. And, in the same sense, I introduced, in my intended Question of the 11th instant, the strategical advantages of the strong military occupation and fortification of Suakim, and of the concentration there of English troops from Suez, and of Indian troops from Aden, and of Her Majesty's ships of war for moral as well as for service effect, all of which has since been acknowledged by Her Majesty's Government by acting on the suggestion, except the concentration of Indian troops from Aden. And lastly, my Lords, with the same object and for the good of the Service, I ask this Question as to the employment of Her Majesty's Indian troops with British troops. One of the great advantages of England's possession of India is the rapid concentration of her excellent Indian troops, born in sun, and trained in sun, for any military operations in the East, or in a tropical
  1308
  climate. The importance of the employment of Indian troops can only he appreciated by officers whose experience shows them that to neglect this precaution is to court a disaster. And, in support of this opinion, I beg to quote a few facts acquired by a command in the field in India, acting on my own belief, and, what was far better, the best medical advice on this matter, which I have always so much respected. For, my Lords, there never existed a more devoted or talented Department than the Medical Department on the regimental system, and I share the regrets of the Army at its disappearance from the Service. To save from sun the English troops of the Central Indian Field Force, I made all the marches from sunset to sunrise in executing the strategical movement I was ordered to perform from Bombay to Calpee, which I was to take, a strong fort on a high rock on the Jumna, near its junction with the Ganges, and give my hand to Lord Clyde's Army in its operations in Rohilkund. I sent on the tents to the halting places the previous day by Native engineers and Native fatigue parties, who pitched the tents for the force. So that the English troops, after marching all night in the cool, rested during the heat of the day under canvas, with numerous exceptions, such as my force being engaged during the day in general actions, actions and sieges, when they were necessarily exposed to the full power of the sun. But I shall exemplify, by a few facts, the sufferings which they had to endure from fighting in the sun. In the general action of Koonch, between Jhansi and Gwalior, with the Gwalior Army, perfectly drilled by selected British officers, I had sent a company—I could not send more on account of the weakness of my force—of the then 71st Highland Light Infantry to make a feint, under the shade of a small wood, to protect them from the sun, with orders only to let themselves be occasionally seen, in order that the enemy might think they were a large body. But, in neglect of my orders, the men were posted in the open in the full power of the sun, which caused 12 men to fall down dead in the ranks. Another time, after the taking of Koonch, I received information from the political officer that the enemy were going to take possession of the right bank of the

  1309
  Jumna, close to its junction with the Granges, and to forestall them I made forced marches to the Jumna, leaving three companies of the same regiment, the 71st, to bring on the baggage and tents. But the tents had been thoroughly wetted in a storm, and were so heavy that the bullocks soon tired and could not move the carts, and the English soldiers, all day in the hot sun, were prostrated, many of them senseless from severe sunstroke, on the road. The enemy were hovering all round, and I had to sent out a strong detachment of Native soldiers to bring the English soldiers in on carts. In the operations round and against Calpee and its inextricable network of ravines, I had sent a spy into that fortress to obtain information of the enemy's movements. He came to me at midnight, and informed me that the Gwalior Contingent and other mutinous Horse Artillery and Cavalry regiments, under the Queen of Jhansi and Rao Sahib—commanding the rebel troops in and near Calpee, brother to Nana Sahib, the beginner of the Mutiny, and the per-pretrator of the Cawnpore atrocities—were to make a feint against my left, in order to make me weaken my right and strengthen my left, and then rush out with their whole force in some thousands from the ravines in which they were concealed and fall on my weakened right. I took my precautions accordingly, and strengthened my right. I had received a few days before an intercepted correspondence from the Queen of Jhansi and Rao Sahib containing circular orders that the rebel troops were never to attack the English before 8 o'clock in the morning, as the sun from that hour onwards was the most intense and fatal to them, as proved by the fact that the English were much reduced in strength by sunstroke, and that the hospitals were full of these cases. In coincidence with this circular, and in confirmation of the spy's report, two days afterwards the enemy, at 8 o'clock in the morning, headed by the Queen of Jhansi and Rao Sahib, and in the order I have described, descended from the rock of Calpee to make their feint on my left, on which they made a fierce attack, to conceal their real attack on my right. This was followed immediately by the mutinous regiments in red jackets swarming in great force from
  1310
  the ravines, and falling on my right with great impetuosity. A desperate general action ensued, and the enemy were beaten in every direction and Calpee taken the next morning. But the number of soldiers struck with sunstroke in action from the summer heat proved what English troops suffer from sunstroke in its worst form, particularly skirmishers. It was most painful to see these good soldiers throwing down their rifles, some, in mad fits, jumping in the air shrieking with laughter; others, in melancholy fits, crying and throwing themselves on the ground; all this in the heat of action. The intense heat this day also gave me sunstroke, but in a much less serious form—the same as I had at Koonch and previously, when the headquarters' surgeon, as a precaution for the future, directed a "bheestie," a water carrier, to follow me in action and apply cold water when required. The sunstroke only paralyzed me from the shoulder downwards, causing me to fall off my horse. But I did not leave the field. The cold water and restoratives soon brought me round. Finally, my Lords, Sir R. Arnott, senior medical officer of the force—a first-rate surgeon, made a K.C.B. for his excellent medical services in the field, a model of that good medical regimental system, now, alas! abolished for an inefficient and unpopular one—wrote me an official letter, stating that if I did not take Calpee in 14 days, he would not guarantee that the whole force, from the Commander downwards, would not be totally prostrated. But Calpee was taken in 10 days by my gallant and devoted troops, English and Native. I mention these details to show the dangerous effects of the sun on English troops in tropical heat. I summarize, my Lords, these remarks, which relate to the military aspect of the question in the Soudan, and I now pass with great regret to the military and political causes of the late disastrous events in that part of the world. I say great regret, because for the sake of that frank truth, Pempire du fait, which alone prevents the recurrence of former events, by the knowledge of their causes; that for every reason, political as well as military, nothing could be more unwise in its conceptions and dangerous in its consequences than the failure of the Government to make use of the power which they declared they possessed in

  1311
  the despatch of my noble Friend (Earl Granville) of January 4, of this year, that—
  "The responsibility which for the time rests on England obliges Her Majesty's Government to insist on the adoption of the policy they recommend, and that it will be necessary that those Ministers and Governors who do not follow this course should cease to hold their offices."—[Egypt, No. 1 (1884), p. 176.]
  It is true that these instructions were written after the defeat that befell that brave, but unfortunate officer, Hicks Pasha, and his Army; but the causes which existed in Egypt and induced Her Majesty's Government to write these instructions existed as far back as the 28th of March, 1883, when General Hicks started on his disastrous expedition, which ended in the destruction of himself and his forces at Kasghil, near Obeid, the headquarters of the Mahdi in Kordofan, with the loss of several Krupp guns, which may now be used against our own troops. The last of my thoughts is to blame the issue of those instructions. On the contrary, I believe not only were they justifiable, but fully called for by the state of Egypt, and the responsibility of England for that state. All I regret is, that, knowing they possessed those powers, Her Majesty's Government should not have made use of them, and frankly told the Egyptian Government, in the words of the despatch of my noble Friend, "that they must insist on the adoption of the policy they recommend;" and that the projected expedition of General Hicks into the Soudan could not, must not, be executed. It is inconceivable, my Lords, that the causes which proved not only the improbability, but the impossibility, of the success of the expedition which was so apparent, should not have been known and appreciated by Her Majesty's Government. The Commander of the expedition, General Hicks, was a brave, and, I believe, deserving officer, and with the best intentions, who had seen a good deal of service in India; but there was nothing in his statements of services which would justify his selection, if he were selected by any person other than the Khedive, for this most difficult and arduous command—far more difficult from the religious sympathies of the soldiers he was to lead with the fanatical, gallant, and warlike tribes, whom he was to attack in the Soudan. Be-
  1312
  sides, the nerve and military qualities of the Egyptian soldiers whom he was to lead, as proverbially known throughout the East, are, as the Marquess of Hartington frankly said, of "light calibre;" and, moreover, so far from possessing esprit de corps, their feelings were humiliated by their recent defeat by English troops in the Egyptian Expedition; and the thought that they were now to march against their co-religionists, bigoted Mussulmans, of whose courage and warlike qualities they had only had too many proofs, was not an encouraging one, when they had acted against them or with them as allies. These Egyptian soldiers could not look back upon past annals of military fame, for, though well equipped and paid, and acting for their Suzerain, the Sultan, and in alliance, as strict Mussulmans, with their brother Mohammedans in the Russo-Turkish War, whose successes, gallantry, devotion, and discipline under privations of every sort had won for them the esteem of a universal public and military opinion, they failed in every respect in the field, although commanded by an Egyptian Prince of the Khedivial House, and were sent home. All these dispiriting causes were aggravated by the large arrears of pay due to the Egyptian soldiers, some of two years' standing; and they had neither commissariat nor field hospitals. Even the want of 5,000 men and the failing of water in the onward march to Kasghil, although the Government and Sir Evelyn Baring were in constant communication by telegraph with him, never suggested to the Government the necessity of recalling an expedition which had been planned and executed under the influence of a total disregard of its insurmountable obstacles, ruinous consequences, and in misprision of every principle of the art of war.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, when the noble and gallant Lord began putting his Question, it appeared to me that, being a military matter, it would have been more properly addressed to my noble Friend the Under Secretary for War, but there was a certain political flavour at the end of the noble and gallant Lord's speech on arguments which I have heard upon two occasions in this House this Session. The noble and gallant Lord has given an interesting account of a campaign in India in which

  1313
  Native troops rendered very great service, and in which a gallant and distinguished General shared; but there was one incident which he did not choose to tell your Lordships, and it was that that gallant General was struck down three times by sunstroke, and yet he was not in the least discouraged by his physical sufferings, but successfully struggled on to the end of the campaign.
  LORD STRATHNAIRN: I was not aware of that fact.
  EARL GRANVILLE: I have always been told that the noble and gallant Lord himself was struck down three times by sunstroke.
  LORD STRATHNAIRN: Oh, I thought you were referring to some other officer.
  EARL GRANVILLE: I was alluding to the noble and gallant Lord, and I can assure him that it was most creditable to him. With reference to the Question, it is only necessary for me to state that I do not think the employment of Indian troops is necessary, owing to the very weighty considerations, both political and military, with regard to the employment of such troops in the Soudan. But there is one very strong reason against it, which stands by itself—namely, that it would take more than double the time to send them than to send the force which the Government believes to be quite sufficient for the purpose.

POST OFFICE—THE PARCEL POST.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF BRADFORDasked Her Majesty's Government, Whether any steps are being taken to extend the benefits of the new parcel post system, so as to enable parcels to be delivered by the letter carriers in the rural districts? At present, in many parts of the country—indeed, in all parts in which letters were carried by postmen walking on foot—it was obviously impossible that, in addition to the ordinary letters, books open at each end, tradesmen's circulars, &o., several parcels of the weight of 5 lbs. or 6 lbs., and measuring, perhaps, 4 feet by 2 feet, or 3 feet by 3 feet, could be carried to their destination. Therefore, persons living in some parts of the country not only derived no advantage from the parcels post, but were under a positive disadvantage, because the par-
  1314
  cel which was directed to them, and the sender of which had complied with the tariff and regulations of the Post Office, and had prepaid it, was only conveyed to the nearest town or village at which there was a railway, or as far as a mail cart now travelled, and then the person to whom the parcel was directed had to pay something additional for its conveyance by private means. Thus the transmission of the parcel was paid for at both ends. If the parcels post system was to continue, it seemed right that its benefits should be conferred on all alike, in the rural districts as well as in the urban; and the only way seemed to be that light carts, or some vehicles, should be provided which would reach all the post offices in the Kingdom. If that could be done, it would confer the additional benefit of expediting the delivery of letters in all parts of the Kingdom. Now, and as long as the Post Office was a paying Department of the Government, it seemed wrong to tax one part of the community for the benefit of another, and no revenue arising from it ought to be appropriated till similar facilities for sending and receiving letters and parcels were afforded as much as possible to all.
  LORD THURLOW, in reply, said, that, as a matter of fact, very full use was now made by the Post Office of the rural postmen in all parts of the country, both in the collection and delivery of parcels; but if the noble Earl would state more specifically in what respect he desired to indicate a still further development of the parcel post careful consideration should be given to his suggestions. The parcel post was a new and complicated institution, requiring the experience of a few years before it could be perfected. In the establishment of so large a branch of business by the Post Office, it was difficult at the outset to provide against every individual case of hardship; but since they had been brought to his notice the Postmaster General had investigated and dealt with on its merits each case that had been brought before him, and he would be thankful to the noble Earl if he would draw his attention to any remaining cases. The public had already derived very great advantage from the new system, both directly and indirectly—directly as an additional means of transit, and in-

  1315
  directly by the competition brought to bear on Railway Companies, which had induced them all to reduce their rates for the conveyance of parcels by about one-half—a reduction which, it was believed, would be completely recouped by them by increased traffic. The Postmaster General was fully alive to the fact that there might be some improvements made in the new system, and, being most anxious to perfect it in all its branches, would carefully consider any suggestions made by the noble Earl.
  House adjourned at Seven o'clock, to Thursday next, a quarter past Ten o'clock.