Lords Sitting of 26 May 1884

MINUTES.
— Sat First in Parliament—The Lord Mostyn, after the death of his grandfather.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading— Smoke Nuisance Abatement (Metropolis) (109).
Second Reading—Commons Regulation Provisional Order * (100).
Third Reading—Water Provisional Orders * (92); Electric Lighting Provisional Order (No. 2) * (84); Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law) (Alton-Barnes, &c.) * (85); Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law) (No. 2) (Bovey-Tracey, &c.) * (86): Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law) (No. 3) (Ashill, &c.) * (87); Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law) (No. 5) (Acton, &c.) * (88); Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law) (No. 6) (Ashen, &c.) * (89); Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law) (No. 7) (Abberley, &c.) * (90); Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law) (No. 8) (Abergwilly, &c.) * (91); Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Order (The (Labourers Act) (Enniscorthy, &c.) * (64); Greek Marriages * (96); Colonial Prisoners Removal (44), and passed.

RAILWAYS—CONTINUOUS BRAKES— LEGISLATION.—QUESTION.
EARL DE LA WARRasked, Whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to proceed with the Continuous Brakes Bill as proposed this Session?
LORD SUDELEY: The Regulation of Railways Bill was introduced and read a first time on Thursday last in the House of Commons. It has been distributed this morning; and Section 10 provides that the- Board of Trade may, at any time, order a Railway Company, within a limited time, to provide continuous brakes of some pattern approved by the Board. This provision will, I trust, meet the noble Earl's wishes in the matter.

THE WELLINGTON STATUE.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, that he wished to ask, after the decision of that House last week in reference to the Wellington Statue, Whether the Government have decided upon the course which they would adopt? There were a great many schools of thought as to what should be done with the statue;

  1265
  but none, he believed, who wished to leave it as it was. He was told that a Vote of £6,000 had been taken in the House of Commons for the erection of a new statue. It was obvious that that would not be sufficient in the present state of the statue to do all that was required. He wished to know what action Her Majesty's Government intended to take; and, whether they proposed to ask for a further Vote from Parliament to carry out the intention which had been expressed?
  LORD DE ROSsaid, he did not consider that this was the case.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)said, he would like to know who had paid for cutting off the head?
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he understood that there would be no further application to Parliament beyond the Vote which had been sanctioned. The present statue would be removed by the military authorities to Aldershot, where it would be erected upon a suitable site. The cost of the removal of the statue would be borne by the fund to be raised by the Prince of Wales's Committee. With regard to the Question put by the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Redesdale), he had to say that his right hon. Friend (Mr. Shaw Lefevre) was very sorry indeed for what had happened. The taking of the statue to pieces was begun early next morning after the Vote. Out of deference to their Lordships' decision, his right hon. Friend had sent early in the morning to the military authorities to stop the taking of the statue to pieces; but the men from Woolwich were already at work, and he could not stop them in time to prevent the head being taken off.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYASKED whether the cost of the decapitation was to be borne out of the Prince of Wales's fund?
  [No reply.]

SMOKE NUISANCE ABATEMENT (METROPOLIS) BILL.

  BILL PRESENTED. FIRST READING.
  LORD STRATHEDEN AND CAMPBELL, who had given Notice to call attention to the means of abating smoke in the Metropolis; and to present a Bill upon the subject, said: My Lords, it would take up too much time and verge
  1266
  too much on egotism to explain all the circumstances which have led me to this Notice. It may be enough to say that during many Sessions I have been on the point of giving it, whenever the moment seemed to be propitious. It occurred to me some time ago to suggest to a few persons the formation of a society for abating smoke in the Metropolis. Although my efforts were not of much value, the same impressions afterwards led others to organize a body in the very sense which I had contemplated. It exists under the auspices of the noble Duke the Master of the Horse. It is sustained by various distinguished Members of the Legislature. A considerable movement has grown up under its auspices. At the South Kensington Museum the best contrivances for abating smoke have been exhibited. An extraordinary stimulus has been given to invention with regard to them. Last year, on the 16th of July, a public meeting to abate smoke was held at the Mansion House. The support of the late Lord Mayor was obtained, and the whole subject powerfully ventilated. The upshot is that many propositions, which ten years back it would have been necessary to establish slowly and minutely, may now be rapidly submitted to the House without much fear of having to contend with them. For instance, it is now widely known that so early as 1300 a Royal edict against smoke was promulgated by one of the most enlightened as well as the most active of our Sovereigns. In the Reign of Queen Elizabeth the matter occupied the Legislature. In the Reign of Charles II., Evelyn, the author of the celebrated Diary, brought the question before the King, who urged him on to prosecute it further. During the present century there have been various inquiries—in 1819, in 1843, and in 1845. They led on to the measures of Lord Palmerston just before the Crimean War, when he presided at the Home Office. Reduced to what might seem for him an insignificant Department, he took advantage of obscurity to promote the interests of daylight, and, unable to act upon the world abroad, conceived a germ of Metropolitan improvement of which the fruit may long survive the Treaties he originated. However, the essential point to be remarked is that these Acts were but preliminary in their character.

  1267
  They are imperfect for two reasons. They do not reach the aggregate of smoke arising from domestic houses. They are but partially enforced, in consequence, if I am not mistaken, of that very limitation. It is in some degree invidious to proceed against furnaces, which at least contribute to the public wealth, and leave untouched the ordinary fireside, which only burns for the advantage of the circle who surround it. Although, perhaps, it ought not to exist, there is a lurking conscience in executive authority. Inspectors, constables, and others, in theory machines of State, are not devoid of an unconscious sensibility, which makes them rigorous or lax, according to the estimate they form of laws intrusted to their maintenance. The Acts of Lord Palmerston, as a first step, have been invaluable. But they will not be thoroughly enforced till something more is done, and if they were enforced in every case, would leave an intolerable residue of evil to be otherwise disposed of. So much is commonly admitted, and there are other points, which, owing to the labours of the movement, are deemed to be beyond the range of controversy at this moment. It has been shown by the Hon. Mr. Russell, in a striking pamphlet which the Society under the noble Duke the Master of the Horse has circulated, that fogs which must, in. any case, arise from exhalations of a tidal river, derive their yellowness, their blackness, and their odour from the smoky or carbonic particles which mingle with them; that if these particles were absent the fogs would not be graver than those which now exist at Eton and at Windsor, or than the mists which frequently repress the latent sunshine of the Highlands. It has been shown that the actual type of fog is deadly in its consequences, not only fertile of disorder, but conducive to mortality. In the week ending February 7th, 1880, remarkable for fog, the number of deaths, above the average, was 1,657, of which 1,118 were put down to complaints in the respiratory organs. Without statistics, we are well aware that, from the atmosphere which smoke involves, London is avoided more than otherwise it would be; that after Parliamentary Divisions, which bring men from a distance, there is a rush into the Provinces; that down to the beginning of the Session the Metropolis is nearly empty;
  1268
  that when the Session closes no one will remain more than a week, who has the power to absent himself. We know also that many hundreds who are prosperous and educated prefer the heavy inconvenience of daily locomotion to their offices and warehouses by railway to the evil of residing altogether in the capital, thinking it better to shorten life, which probably they do, than to depress vitality, the solo alternative presented. It is not necessary either to insist with much detail on the advancing nature of the influence which smoke exerts over the atmosphere of London. It is calculated in the works which the Society distribute that every year adds more than 25,000 houses. If we allot three chimneys to a house, 75,000 chimneys increase the aggregate of smoke during the twelvemonth. Even in 1819 it was shown by medical authority to the Select Committee of the House of Commons to what injurious extent the atmosphere was vitiated. Let such a process be permitted to go on till the end of the century to adopt another and a smaller capital will be a probable necessity. It is true that if you glance over the world, or think of St. Petersburg, Madrid, or Berlin, capitals have frequently been altered. But there are many risks in the transition. Public Offices and Parliaments might be located elsewhere without insuperable difficulty. But a serious decline in the value of house property would follow. This tendency was shown in Dublin after the Irish Union. Lord Cloncurry, in his Memoirs, has given curious examples of it. Leaseholders would sell at no little disadvantage. Proprietors would lose immensely on the leases being exhausted. The middle classes, in the absence of society, would see their profits rapidly declining. The demand for labour would be in consequence impaired; and although, no doubt, the labour would be wanted elsewhere, you cannot, without a period of much embarrassment, replace it. The conclusion which arises is, that an evil which threatens to impose another capital upon us requires much consideration, and even justifies enactments which would not otherwise be tolerated. My Lords, my first intention was only to move for an inquiry by a Select Committee of your Lordships. Those who are entitled to be heard, and whose support I was bound to aim at, were not

  1269
  disposed to such a method. They may have deemed that the evidence collected before the Acts of Lord Palmerston were carried now suffices; or that the Association of the noble Duke the Master of the Horse is better qualified than any other body to augment it, where deficient. It has, undoubtedly, augmented it, and may augment it further. I have been forced into the position of a legislator on the question. When it is remembered that Governments, with the command of every intellect, of every adviser, of every document they wish for, with Chancellors to warn, Law Officers to guide, the most accomplished Bill-drawers to help them, are often hurried into errors which form the staple of discussion, both in Parliament and out of it, it is not likely that an unofficial person will entirely avoid them. At least, instead of needing, as some do, three hours and three-quarters to explain it, this Bill may be at once submitted to the judgment of your Lordships. It will give authorities the power of directly acting against what may be termed exceptional and aggravated smoke in dwelling-houses by repealing a few words in the Sanitary Act of 1866. But this is not a leading or even necessary feature of the measure. It enables local bodies to form bye-laws, under the revision of the Home Office, by which in all existing houses smoke may be gradually abated. It enables local bodies, who now administer the Building Acts, to form bye-laws, also under the revision of the Home Office, by which in a short time new houses will be rendered smokeless. It extends—but this is an entirely subordinate provision—the area in which the Acts of Lord Palmerston are valid. My Lords, every project has a tendency to arm the mind against itself. Men may be inclined to listen to the proofs of a considerable evil. They may hear with moderate indulgence a train of reasoning to show that some new measure is desirable. But when its character is stated, when its modes of acting are betrayed, antagonism usually and unavoidably suggests itself. It is well, perhaps, that it should do so, otherwise the Statute Book would be more full of crude and mischievous enactments than it is at present. The defence of this scheme resides in the impossibility of all alternative proposals. To compel its adoption at once, directly, universally in London has been
  1270
  objected to by a noble Lord who once presided at the Home Office on the ground of its indicting a whole people. It would not be supported by opinion, the essential basis of all coercive legislation. Again, Parliament might choose a quarter, such as South Kensington, or May fair, or the squares of London, in which trees deserve a vigilant protection, and thus tentatively operate. I have dwelt much on that expedient, and unwillingly renounced it. But it might lead to many controversies as to the quarter to be chosen, and even reclamations from the quarter when preferred. The transfer of the power to local bodies is the only mode of settling the difficulty. If one local body acts the object is attained. Either the example would be followed by the others, or stringent legislation would be based by Parliament itself on the experience afforded. There are many reasons for anticipating that at least one local body will exert the powers which are given to it. I shall not mention them this evening. It is not worth while, by a measure which involves so little hazard and so studiously consults the temper of the age, to prevent London from being abandoned as a capital, which, if the evil is allowed to grow unchecked, is not a visionary prospect. It may, indeed, appear to some that however much the atmosphere deteriorates, that result will never happen. But there are still considerations which may guide them to the necessity of legislative action if the existing capital is certain to remain. The influence of smoke on architecture to those who value London is a melancholy drawback to improvement. Until this obstacle is gone London can never rank with Florence, or even Paris, Berlin, and St. Petersburg in the approach to classical perfection. Not only colour is important, but light is known to be indispensable to excellence in building. When light is wanting effort languishes, conception fails, and there is a perpetual struggle between beauty and deformity. That struggle is the ruling character of London at this moment. St Paul's excites the admiration of the world, and there is a hideous viaduct in front of it. The Thames Embankment is regarded justly as a Metropolitan improvement, and it is effectually marred by railway bridges which no edile would have sanctioned. St.

  1271
  Martin's Church is allowed to do honour to its great designer, Sir Christopher Wren, and almost in a line we see the long-regretted domes of the National Gallery. The cause of the deficiency is found in the collision of two principles which springs out of the want I have referred to. At one moment it is felt that London exists only for purposes of commerce and of business; that it is not a home for the Fine Arts; that no sacrifice to beauty is desirable within it; that economy, convenience, and despatch, are the only aims to be considered. At another, it is fancied that as a seat of Government and Empire it ought to assert itself and challenge admiration by its edifices. In this frequent balance of ambition and despondency, wealth is lavished, splendour unattained. To remove smoke is not the only course essential to a different principle arising. It is a requisite preliminary. No Pericles would have succeeded in making Athens what it afterwards became, unless the atmosphere had seconded his effort. The object is not unimportant, or confined to a small number of appreciating judges. The architecture of a city is the only education the grown-up masses cannot possibly escape from. You may have lectures, galleries, and theatres; but it is not compulsory to profit by or enter them. It might be shown easily that men engaged in public, and still more in official life, are deeply interested in this question. But they are a minority, and they may frequently absent themselves from London for a day or two. The burden of the climate falls more heavily upon large classes without the power to escape it. We should reflect upon the distant melancholy suburbs of Islington and Camden Town without the life which Clubs or Courts of Justice, or Legislative Bodies furnish, and which would scarcely be inhabited except by families too much reduced to find refuge elsewhere—their means would not permit them to escape from time to time into the country. We should reflect upon the condition of domestic servants, who must be more stationary than the masters they live under. It well becomes also the dignity of this House to realize the state of men and women behind counters who must be all the year, except a week or two, in the Metropolis. Your Lordships will remember also that
  1272
  the whole female sex, from the highest to the lowest, have not the same facilities as men for moving a short time out of the smoke of the Metropolis. As regards the over-crowded numbers who inhabit Eastern London, whose cause has been so ably and so conspicuously supported, there is something to be added. Do what you will, their mode of life must act unfavourably on the domiciles they enter. To allot space to inmates—the essential change—demands such legal interference that in a free country it is scarcely possible to compass it. But while you can do little for their domiciles, you may do something for their atmosphere. The happiness of these classes must be mainly out-of-doors, because it cannot, from their narrow circumstances and sordid hearths, be indoors. But if out-of-doors they are exposed to darkness instead of light, to leaden fogs instead of purifying breezes, they have no escape from their depression except the public-house, which, in the long run, inevitably aggravates it. The whole tide of recent agitation on the domiciliary condition of the most abandoned class may fairly be directed to the object which this Bill is meant in some degree to forward. It may be asked, however, when the Bill is read a first time, what consequence will follow. It is not easy for anyone, unless the Leader of a Party, to carry a Bill through all its stages in this House, and it would not be possible to do so in another. But it is a maxim, not I think unknown in political society, that if a Bill adapted to an object which requires legislation is launched in either House it never perishes, however great the obstacles it meets, however long the interval which bars its entrance to the Statute Book. It may be but a stitch in legislation, but such a stitch is wanted at this moment. It is not likely to complete itself until the Liberal majority is more awakened to its great responsibility as to measures and to men, and thus more free to act in unison with those who labour for its object. I now present the Bill, and move that it be read a first time.
  Bill to amend the Acts for abating the nuisance arising from the smoke of furnaces and fireplaces within the Metropolis—Presented (The Lord STRATHEDEN and CAMPBELL).
  LORD MOUNT TEMPLEsaid, that it was characteristic of the British public that they liked to grumble at the laws and the administration of them, and especially with local government. It was another British characteristic that when a man had had his grumble he was often content to let the grievance slumber. But his noble Friend, after a good grumble, had attempted to deal with his grievance in a practical manner, though his threat, that a continuance of smoke might drive the Legislature to some other town, was not very alarming. There was no doubt that further legislation was required on the subject. The clumsiness of our mode of warming our dwellings caused a large portion of the fuel to escape unconsumed. It mixed with the air, concealed the sunshine, scattered showers of "blacks" everywhere, and made London dull, unhealthy, and murky. The Smoke Act of Lord Palmerston in 1853 was the best that could be passed at the time; but the area in which it was applied was smaller than the present Metropolis, and its application was imperfect. The fines imposed were frequently below the minimum mentioned in the Act. The overindulgence towards the offenders might have arisen from the circumstance that the magistrates had not the scientific knowledge that might enable them to determine whether the smoke could have been properly consumed. They ought to be assisted by experts or scientific officials, as tinder the Alkali Acts. The river steamers also ought to be brought under the Act. Their smoke might easily be diminished to one-fourth of what it was at present. Furnaces belonging to many trades were not brought under the operation of the present Act. Open grates were still a difficulty, for they had not yet been contrived to burn bright, cheerful coal without smoke. He was grateful to the noble Lord trying to deal with this question, and hoped he might be successful.
  Bill read 1a; and to be printed. (No. 109.)

METEOROLOGICAL OFFICE— "UN WARNED STORMS."

  MOTION FOR A RETURN.
  THE BISHOP OF CARLISLE, in rising to move for a—
  "Return of the storms which have visited the British Islands between 1st January 1874 and
  1274
  31st December 1883, and of which no warning has been issued from the Meteorological Office; with a notice of the quarter from which each unwarned storm has reached the coast,"
  said, the Motion which stood in his name on the Paper was a renewal of the Motion in reference to which he had the honour of addressing their Lordships a week or two ago. He, therefore, need not address their Lordships on the present occasion at any length; but there were two points on which he desired to say a few words. A suggestion was made to him by the noble Earl on the Front Bench that he should alter the extent and scope of the Motion. He had taken counsel on that matter, and had come to the conclusion that for the purpose he had in view the Motion as it stood was more simple and more likely to be effective. Consequently, he had not altered his Motion. The other point was this. Since the last discussion of this subject, the noble Lord who represented the Government in matters of this kind had placed in his hands the Report of the Meteorological (Council of the Royal Society for the year ending the 31st of March, 1883. There were in that Report some sentences which entirely supported his Motion. For example, it was stated that last year formed no exception to its predecessor in the fact that more than once serious storms occurred of which no warning was issued. The Report went on to describe the arrangements, which certainly could not be regarded as satisfactory, for signalling the approach of storms. There was some little difficulty in identifying storms, and in guarding against the error of counting them twice over; but, as far as he could make out, about 10 storms reached our coasts in the year 1882 without any warning having been issued by the Meteorological Office. The matter, therefore, was a very serious one, and deserved careful consideration. The Report to which he had already referred stated that in the month of May the Council was requested by the Foreign Office to express its opinion on a proposal emanating from the Danish Government to lay a telegraphic cable to Faroe, Iceland, and Greenland. The Council thought that the scientific importance of such a cable was indisputable, but added that the financial considerations did not come within the province of a conference of meteorologists. In point of fact, the

  1275
  whole question was one of money; and, consequently, it must be decided by the nation. If we could increase the number of our stations and improve our system of telegraphing, he trusted a mere question of money would not prevent this great nation from doing its duty.
  Moved, That there be laid before this House—
  "Return of the storms which have visited the British Islands between 1st January 1874 and 31st December 1883, and of which no warning has been issued from the Meteorological Office; with a notice of the quarter from which each unwarned storm has reached the coast."—(The lord Bishop of Carlisle.)
  LORD THURLOWsaid, there was no objection to be made to the Return, provided the right rev. Prelate thought it worth while, and was desirous to persevere with his proposal; but he might, however, point out that much of the information required was already accessible in Blue Books. Would the right rev. Prelate be satisfied if the whole of the information sought for by the Return were included in the future publications of the Meteorological Office?
  THE BISHOP OF CARLISLEsaid, that the noble Lord's reply would be satisfactory if it were merely a matter of satisfying his personal curiosity. What he wanted to do was, if possible, to bring this matter before the mind of the public, and to influence public opinion upon the subject; and he thought that for that purpose a tabular statement for 10 years would have a very useful effect.
  Motion agreed to.
  Return ordered to be laid before the House.

HYDE PARK CORNER (NEW STREETS) BILL.—(No. 98.)
(The Lord Sudeley.)
HYDE PARK CORNER (NEW STREETS) BILL.—(No. 98.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD SUDELEY, in rising to move that the Bill be now read a second time, said, its object was to enable the Metropolitan Board of Works to direct what proportion of the expense of the improvements should be defrayed by the parishes.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY, interposing, inquired whether this was not a privileged Bill?
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, the Bill simply affected the rates, and the practice was less severe with regard to rates than it was with regard to taxation.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYobserved that this might be made a precedent for future occasions.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, it was remarkable that when it suited the Government they pleaded that Bills were privileged; but, on the other hand, when they wanted to go on they ignored the question of privilege. He hoped the question would be settled on this Bill.
  LORD SUDELEYsaid, that as there appeared to be some doubt on the matter he begged to postpone his Motion for the second reading of the Bill until after Whitsuntide.
  Second Reading put off to Tuesday the 17th of June next.

CUSTOM HOUSE—SEARCHES OF PAS SENGERS' LUGGAGE—THE NEW RE GULATIONS.—OBSERVATIONS.
LORD LAMINGTONrose for the purpose of calling attention to the new Custom House Regulations at Folkestone and other English ports, under which every small box or parcel belonging to innocent travellers was opened and its contents examined with rigorous strictness. In his own ease, a small despatch box had been stopped because the key was not forthcoming at the moment, although his name was painted upon it. He was quite sure that it did not contain anything like such explosive matter as was introduced to the notice of the House every night by the noble Earl in those ominous-looking red boxes which were brought to him. In another case a box containing a wedding cake, sent to a friend of his, was not only broken up, but the wedding cake itself was chopped up to see whether it contained dynamite. He hoped that something would be done to mitigate the severity of these regulations; they were absurd, and more especially be when they were carried out in the case of persons who could not be expected to have any complicity with dynamite outrages. He did not object to a reasonable examination; but he thought that such instructions should be given as would enable it to be carried out with as

1277
little inconvenience as possible, and without that ridicule which at present attached to the proceeding.
EARL GRANVILLE: I am not personally responsible for these instructions, which were simply issued through the Foreign Office; but I have no desire to escape from any responsibility that may attach to me officially for their promulgation. I can entirely sympathize with the annoyance which the noble Lord must have felt at his luggage being stopped; but the necessity for these examinations has arisen from a very odious reason, and as some justification for the issue of these regulations I can point to the fact that only yesterday at Dover a large quantity of dynamite was discovered in one of those innocent-looking carpet bags to which the noble Lord has referred. As it is necessary in the present state of circumstances to make these examinations, it would only make them much more unpopular and invidious if the luggage of any particular class of persons were exempted from them. Anyone who has the most superficial acquaintance with my noble Friend must be convinced that he would not bring over dynamite. But the very fact of his not having the key of his box, and of the box being therefore passed without examination, would have created what would have been little short of a mutiny on the part of his fellow-passengers.
THE LORD CHANOELLOR: I am very glad that the noble Lord has brought this matter before the House, because his speech will convince some of my correspondents that they are not the only persons who are subject to these regulations. A learned and excellent gentleman who has been a candidate for a seat in Parliament, and who may be so again, seems to be incapable of being persuaded that there is no special suspicion directed against himself. He will now probably alter his opinion when he sees that the luggage of the noble Lord has been subjected to the examination of which he complains.

IRISH LAND COMMISSION (SUB-COM MISSIONERS)—MR. WILLIAM GRAY.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  VISCOUNT MIDLETONsaid, he rose to ask Her Majesty's Government, Whether Mr. Gray, just appointed a Sub-
  1278
  Commissioner of the County of Cork, was the same Mr. Gray who had been acting in a similar capacity in Donegal? This gentleman was a farmer, and previous to his appointment in 1883 he had been known as a stump orator in the North of Ireland. He had in his hand a list of 14 speeches made by him during the years 1880, 1881, and 1882; but he did not propose to refer to those delivered in the two former years, inasmuch as great excitement prevailed, and as with others so with him there might have been much said which it was not desirable should be revived. He would, however, quote from two speeches made in the year 1883, and one particularly, in which, referring to the uselessness of Griffith's valuation, he said, if he took it and found that ground was valued by it at £1 per acre, he should deduct the taxes, 3s., and then reduce the amount by half. Thus the unfortunate landlord would get something like 8s. 6d. per acre. In the next speech he denounced Mr. Justice O'Hagan, Lord Monck, and others. Mr. Gray, however, was effectually muzzled by being appointed a Sub-Commissioner. He (Viscount Midleton) did not wish to blame the Government for having appointed Mr. Gray, for from the manner in which recommendations and testimonials were given, not only in Ireland, but elsewhere, it was quite possible that they had been led to believe that he was a proper person to be appointed a Sub-Commissioner. But since Mr. Gray's appointment the attention of the Government had been called to the matter, and the Lord Privy Seal had promised to look into it. That was no more than he expected of the noble Lord, because he remembered that Lord Spencer, in a letter to Sir Thomas M'Clure, mentioned that the qualifications that would be looked for in Sub-Commissioners were judicial experience, independence of character, and complete impartiality. He asked them, now that they knew something of Mr. Gray, to say whether he possessed these qualifications, especially in view of the fact that about 80 appeals from his decision had been made to the Land Commissioners? It was important that Sub-Commissioners should command the confidence of both parties; and the fact that there were so many appeals from one Sub-Commissioner was more inconvenient to the tenant than to the land-

  1279
  lord, because of the expense that was involved. It was now reported that Mr. Gray was to be transferred to the South of Ireland to exorcise his duties in that part of the country of which he knew nothing, whether as to the character, the climate, or the conditions under which agriculture was carried on. Was it fair or just to those who were to be the subject of Mr. Gray's decisions that a gentleman who had failed to command confidence with those with whom he had had to deal in the North should, as a matter of convenience, be sent to the South of Ireland, where he would be more completely ignorant of his business than he could possibly be in the North? He did not mean to say Mr. Gray would administer justice in the South of Ireland worse than he had administered it in the North. What he was now dealing with was Mr. Gray's fitness for the post, and he denied that he possessed any one of the three qualifications which Earl Spencer said were absolutely necessary for the office.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)said, that he was, of course, not personally responsible for Mr. Gray's appointment. It had been his duty, however, to acquaint himself with the facts of the case, and he would give all the information in his power. As to the transfer of Mr. Gray as an Assistant Commissioner from the North to the South of Ireland, he was not able at that moment to toll the noble Viscount the particular reason for that change in the composition of the Sub-Commission. But then he (Lord Carlingford) knew that, whatever else might be said about Mr. Gray, he was at least admitted to be a first-rate farmer, and a man of the fullest and best agricultural experience; and he (Lord Carlingford) did not doubt for a moment that he would be perfectly capable of performing his duty in the county Cork, or any other county, so far as skill and experience as a farmer were concerned. As to the express language said to have been used by Mr. Gray in a certain speech or speeches, he (Lord Carlingford) had not been made aware of the number of speeches to which the noble Viscount had referred: but there was no doubt that before his appointment Mr. Gray had taken rather an active part in connection with certain meetings in the North of Ireland. With respect to the speech which had been the
  1280
  main subject of inquiry—namely, a speech delivered by that gentleman at Armagh before his appointment, Mr. Gray had been asked for explanations, and had given them. Mr. Gray entirely denied that he was correctly understood, or reported, as laying down that 8s. 6d. per acre was the proper rent for a landlord to obtain for his land. The reference to 8s. 6d. an acre was not given as an opinion of his own, but was used in illustration of an argument which he was directing against the doctrine that Griffith's valuation was a fair and proper valuation for rent. He argued that the proper basis upon which to fix rent was contained in the actual capabilities and situation of the farm, and not Griffith's valuation; and he stated that the sentence referred to by the noble Viscount was never intended to bear the construction which the latter put upon it, and was not used as expressing any opinion held by the speaker. What passed at the meeting had been totally misrepresented. Mr. Gray had been made responsible for certain seditious cries which were raised at that meeting in favour of persons who were at that time called "suspects." The fact was that those cries which were raised by a small number of persons were directed against Mr. Gray and his friends. As to those speeches by Mr. Gray which had not come to the knowledge of the Lord Lieutenant, he (Lord Carlingford) must say—and the noble Viscount seemed to be aware of it—that the Lord Lieutenant had received the most favourable recommendations and testimonials as to, Mr. Gray's fitness in all respects for the post of Assistant Commissioner. These testimonials included some from land-lords—from Mr. Gray's own landlord, he believed—certainly from his own agent— and were of the strongest kind as to his experience, ability, intelligence, and impartiality. Nevertheless, the Lord Lieutenant would not have appointed Mr. Gray if his attention had been called to the fact that he had taken a somewhat active part in the land agitation in Ireland. But the Irish Government had ascertained from the Laud Commissioners that they had no evidence that would justify them in recommending the dismissal of Mr. Gray. The legal Assistant Commissioner with whom Mr. Gray had been working (Mr. Ulick Burke) had given very strong testimony

  1281
  to the fairness and impartiality, as well as ability, with, which Mr. Gray had fulfilled his duties since his appointment. He had said that Mr. Gray was a perfect farmer, and that he did not care in the slightest degree whether he offended landlord or tenant. Under these circumstances the Lord Lieutenant, feeling bound to look, not to the speeches at land meetings which Mr. Gray had made before his appointment, but to his conduct since then, did not consider it his duty to take any action in the matter.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, that although, when the Act was passed, it was stated by the Government that these appointments would not be of a partizan nature, unquestionably many of the appointments had given rise to the impression that they were of that character. As he had previously pointed out, there could be no doubt that much difficulty arose in the choice, not only of the Sub-Commissioners, but of the Chief Commissioners. It might be possible there was no one in the whole Kingdom more fitted to fill the post of one of the three Commissioners than Mr. Litton; but unquestionably the fact was that Mr. Litton had throughout shown himself a thorough partizan with regard to the law that he was called upon to administer.
  THE MARQUESS OF HERTFORDsaid, he was sorry that his first address to their Lordships should be of a personal nature; but, as his name had been mentioned in connection with this matter, he wished to say that he had not strongly recommended Mr. Gray for the appointment, and he was surprised if anything which he wrote concerning the gentleman caused the appointment to be conferred upon him. He denied that he really made such a recommendation. To the best of his belief, for he had not kept a copy of his letter, what happened was this—Mr. Gray, who was a small tenant of his, wrote to ask him to recommend him for the post of Sub-Commissioner. He declined; but some time after he received another letter from Mr. Gray saying that he thought he was likely to be appointed, and asking for a character. Upon that he wrote back saying that Mr. Gray was a very respectable man and a good farmer. That was all that passed until the other day, when he received another letter
  1282
  from Mr. Gray asking him to recommend him for reappointment, and that he declined to do. He could not vouch for the actual wording of the letter, but these were, he believed, the true facts of the case; therefore, he thought it hardly fair to attempt to throw the responsibility for Mr. Gray's appointment on his shoulders, as he believed had been done in "another place."
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)said, he did not desire to make more of the noble Marquess's testimonial than was justifiable. The letter was not addressed to Lord Spencer, but to Mr. Gray himself. It was practically the same as had been described by the noble Marquess, but it was only fair to all parties that he should quote the exact words. The letter contained such statements as these—
  "I regret that the letters have remained so long unanswered. I cannot write to Lord Spencer himself, as I hardly know him; but I shall he happy to answer any questions that may be put to me as to your character and ability as a farmer, as I believe you to be a thoroughly respectable man and a good farmer as far as I can judge."
  And again—
  "Having heard that you are anxious to be appointed Sub-Commissioner, I have every reason to believe that if you obtain the appointment you will discharge the duties successfully."
  He (Lord Carlingford) thought that was a distinctly favourable letter; but it was not that letter alone, but others of a similar nature, which had induced the Lord Lieutenant to appoint Mr. Gray. A much stronger recommendation was received from the noble Marquess's agent, whose letter testified to Mr. Gray's great skill, and his knowledge of land, and the successful manner in which he had cultivated a large farm, and spoke of him as a model for the other tenants. The agent also said that he had every reason for believing that Mr. Gray would discharge his duties conscientiously.
  LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNEsaid, it was satisfactory that they had now for the first time a distinct acknowledgment from the noble Lord that a certain Sub-Commissioner would not have been appointed if the Lord Lieutenant had been acquainted with his antecedents. In that case, he thought if the antecedents of the Commissioners from the highest to the lowest had been con-

  1283
  sidered they would never have been appointed, because their antecedents were such as would have shown that it was impossible they could have acted impartially.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)said, that the antecedents to which he had referred consisted in the fact that the gentleman in question had taken an active part in tenants' meetings in Ulster.

THE SUGAR TRADE—WEST INDIAN SUGAR.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, he rose to ask, Whether the Secretary of (State for the Colonies had arrived at a decision with regard to the questions relative to the West Indian sugars, submitted to him by a deputation from the West India Committee on 4th of April last? The total amount of sugar imported from the West Indies had fallen off since 1878 by nearly one-third, while side by side with this there was a large increase in the consumption of sugar. It was perfectly clear, therefore, that while the West Indies exported less, the United Kingdom imported more. On the Continent, on the other hand, the production of beet sugar had, since 1878, greatly increased. The result was that the West Indies were in danger of being completely shut out of the market. The United States were importing large quantities of beet sugar, and they had agreed to Treaties with Mexico and the the Sandwich Islands, by virtue of which sugar would probably be introduced in very large quantities. In that direction, again, the West Indies were likely to be very badly off, and their trade to be placed in a position of very great difficulty. The Petition of the West India Committee submitted three questions to the noble Earl—Whether Her Majesty's Government would be prepared to promote an International Conference with a view to the abolition of bounties; secondly, whether they would do all in their power to procure a Favoured Nation Clause from the United States; and whether they would encourage the West Indies to conclude an arrangement of a reciprocal character with the United States. They had no power of themselves to make such tariffs, and it could only be done subject to the control of
  1284
  the Imperial Government. He was afraid a West Indian Conference would have very little chance indeed, because it was hardly likely that any argument that could be used with foreign, nations would induce them to abolish the bounty system. The Favoured Nation Clause, he believed, would be a reasonable proposal. The West Indian Colonies had had so much trouble and difficulty that they deserved the favourable consideration of the Government. The noble Earl concluded by asking the Question of which he had given Notice.
  THE EARL OF DERBY: My Lords, it is not a difficult or disagreeable task to answer the Questions which have been put by my noble Friend, because in his statement of fact to which I have listened there is nothing from which I can dissent. It is quite true that there has been a very considerable falling off in the importation of sugar from the West Indies coincident with the very large increase in the general consumption in this country; and although that is partly balanced by the increased exportation from the West Indies to other countries, there is no doubt that the sugar-growing interest in the West Indies is in a state of depression. That does not imply a corresponding depression in all industries, because the Native population are developing various others, some of them with considerable success; but the planting interest is still by far the most important. I am afraid that the history of that interest during the last 50 years would show that its condition in that time has been much more frequently disastrous than prosperous; and I do not at all dispute the noble Lord's proposition that the condition of the planting industry is such that we are bound to do anything which may reasonably be in our power to remove the difficulties under which it labours. Now, the noble Earl referred to three questions that were raised by the deputation which called upon me at the Colonial Office and to which I gave a reply. The first question is that of bounties given by Foreign Governments to exporters of sugar from their country; the second is that of extending the most-favoured nation treatment by the United States to the West Indian Colonies as regards their production of sugar; and the third is the question whether special arrangements of a reciprocal character shall be

  1285
  made between the West Indies and the United States. Upon none of these points have I anything material to add to what I stated to the deputation. As to the bounties, I do not see any more now than I did then any prospect of inducing Foreign Governments to depart from the system which they have adopted. They are not likely to yield to any representation from us. They are within their rights, and it would be impossible, consistently with present ideas, either to give bounties ourselves or to impose differential duties on goods which have received bounty in their own country. We could not tell them that they should alter their system because it injured the trade of the West Indies, for, if we did, I anticipate they would reply that they found it benefited their own trade, and that was what most concerned them. The only question is whether we can take any steps to make it to the interests of those countries to abandon the system? I do not think that in this country the idea of granting corresponding bounties prevails to any great extent, or that it is likely to prevail. A system of bounties is, undoubtedly, faulty in principle, and not likely to be acceptable to the English taxpayers. No doubt, we might impose countervailing duties upon the goods corning from the countries where bounties prevail; but there, again, we should be acting contrary to all modern practice; and apart from that question, with regard to which a great deal may be said, the attempt to return to differential duties would lead to many complications and difficulties, and hold out such opportunities for fraud that the disadvantages arising would be far greater than the benefits. As to the system of foreign bounties, I am not going to defend it in principle; I think it indefensible; but, taking the English nation as a whole, it is not to us an absolutely unmixed evil. In effect, France and Germany are giving some hundred thousands yearly to provide England with sugar at an exceptionally low rate. Frenchmen and Germans may have much reason to complain; they are taxed that we may buy cheaply; but to the English consumer it is a gain. Sugar is an article of universal consumption, and the price of it affects the poor more than any other class. It may be asked, further, are the present low prices likely to last? I do not think
  1286
  that the present state of things is likely very long to continue. There is overproduction of sugar just now, and exceptionally low prices follow as a natural consequence; but if all our beliefs in these matters are not delusions, overproduction will remedy itself, prices will return to their normal level, and the superiority of cane sugar over beetroot will show itself. We may hope, therefore, that our sugar manufacturing industry will hold its own, notwithstanding the disadvantage of bounty. As to the practical step of calling an International Conference to deal with this question, I told the deputation that I would consider the matter. I have considered it, and consulted my noble Friend at the Foreign Office, who came to the conclusion, in which I entirely agreed, that, at any rate, at the present time it would be useless to call a Conference for the purpose. I am bound to add that I do not believe that there is any chance of Foreign Powers agreeing to a Conference with a view to abolish bounties. If it were possible, this Government would readily join; but it does not seem possible now. The next proposal of the deputation was to obtain the most favoured-nation treatment from the United States for the West Indian Colonies. The matter has often been discussed before, and we have not hitherto succeeded in attaining that object; but we hold the case to be a strong one, since we give the most favoured-nation treatment to the United States. I have been in communication with the Foreign Office on the subject, and a despatch has gone, or is going, out to Washington upon it. It is better, if possible, to obtain what we want in that way rather than by separate negotiations between the West Indies and the United States, because these might involve giving to a Foreign Power advantages in regard to the trade of a British Colony which the Mother Country and the other Colonies do not enjoy, which is a contingency not to be overlooked, and certainly not to be desired. But I do not ignore the fact that the natural market for West Indian produce lies rather in America than in Europe, and I am not disposed to veto any special arrangement which might have the effect of increasing that traffic if it did not seem likely to inflict practical injury on our trade here. The first thing to do will be to endeavour to obtain the most

  1287
  favoured-nation treatment from the United States with the West Indian Colonies, and then, if that negotiation fails, we shall have to consider some other and more special arrangement, if any of a satisfactory character can be come to.

CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACTS — FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE IN CAMBRIDGESHIRE.

  MOTION FOR PAPERS.
  Moved, "That there be laid before the House all correspondence relating to the recent outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in Cambridgeshire, and to that brought by the steamship 'Toronto.' "—(The Lord Harlech.)
  THE MARQUESS OF HUNTLYasked whether it was true that there had been an alarming outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in Lincolnshire which had not been properly dealt with by the local authorities?
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)said, he regretted there had been several cases in that county, and he looked upon every outbreak as alarming, because the disease had been reduced to such a small compass in this country, and any neglect which might lead to its spreading again was certainly a matter for alarm. He was sorry to say that in Lincolnshire there had been the greatest neglect on the part of the local authorities; but the Privy Council had sent down an Inspector, who was now in communication with those authorities, and they had complied with all the advice given to them, and the infected places were carefully watched by the police, as they ought to have been at the first. He should be glad to give the Return moved for by his noble Friend.
  Motion agreed to.
  Return ordered to be laid before the House.

LITERATURE, SCIENCE, AND ART— THE BLENHEIM PICTURES.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  EARL CADOGANasked Her Majesty's Government, Whether it was true that some of the most valuable pictures of the Blenheim collection had been offered for sale to the country by the Duke of Marlborough; and, if so, whether such offer bad been finally declined by Her Majesty's Government? Since he had
  1288
  come down to the House he had heard that a legal decision had been given upon the question whether the Duke of Marl-borough had a right to dispose of those pictures. That decision left very little doubt that those pictures, in some form, or other, would before long be offered for sale. Under these circumstances, and considering the historical and artistic value of the pictures, he ventured to hope that the noble Earl would inform the House whether any negotiations had been carried on between the Government and their owner, and whether the correspondence could be produced for the information of their Lordships without detriment to the Public Service or to the negotiations. He would further express a hope that the Government would not come to a final decision in the sense of refusing to treat for the purchase of these valuable works of art until after the Whitsuntide Recess.
  EARL GRANVILLE: It is perfectly true that the Duke of Marlborough is prepared to sell the pictures at Blenheim—12 for £420,000, or five for £173,250. The offer was communicated to the Director and the Trustees of the National Gallery, and the reply of Her Majesty's Government to the Trustees was, that the Government were prepared to entertain and consider with care any definite proposal which might be made for the sale and purchase of these valuable pictures, but that the scale of price asked by the Duke of Marlborough was excessive. The Trustees were further asked to state a sum at which they valued any picture the purchase of which they recommended. I conceive it would be inconvenient if the negotiations for the purchase of pictures with a Government agent were published and placed in the possession of other agents.
  EARL CADOGANsaid, he would again say that he hoped the Government would not come to any final decision until after the Whitsuntide Recess.
  EARL GRANVILLE: I very much doubt whether the negotiations for the sale of any of the pictures will be brought to a close within a fortnight.
  VISCOUNT HARDINGEsaid, that, as a Trustee, he wished to mention that the pictures in question comprised the famous Ansidei Raffaelle—an equestrian portrait of Charles I.—by Vandyck; two full-length portraits by Rubens, probably the finest pictures he ever painted; also other

  1289
  allegorical pictures by Rubens. The Government had declined the offers, and there did not at present seem any great chance of the negotiations ending successfully in a national purchase; but the letter of the Government to the Trustees did not preclude further negotiation. The responsibility of recommending a purchase rested with the Trustees. Undoubtedly, the prices asked were high, but the pictures were unique; and, in every way, it would be deplorable if they were allowed to be bought by another country.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, there was a strong feeling at Oxford that these treasures should not, if it could be avoided, be allowed to leave the country, as works of art, books, and manuscripts had done within the last two years.

PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION— THE BOROUGHS OF IRELAND.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD WAVENEYsaid, he rose to call the attention of the House to the numerical proportion of the boroughs of Ireland. The urban boroughs had a most remarkable history. They had been an important means of administering English law in the country some 300 years ago. In some there was a distinct line of demarcation between the English city and the Irish city, and in others between the Scotch city and the Irish city. By modern changes those towns had ceased to be the centres of political and municipal life which they used to be. There were three periods at which such Returns as he asked for had been given. The first was in 1832— the period of the great Reform Act, the second in 1851, and the last in 1866. Out of the 32 Irish boroughs two, Cashel and Sligo, had been disfranchised. Almost every one of those boroughs had diminished in population, both absolutely and relatively to the increase in other parts of the United Kingdom. It was evident, therefore, that some change must be made. Since he had the opportunity of placing the Question on the Notice Paper a valuable Return, which was moved for by the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Limerick), had been presented to the House. That Return contained most accurate information. The new suffrage would be
  1290
  a household suffrage, and the Return to which he referred gave the number of inhabited houses in Ireland, dividing them into four classes. First, there were houses of £12 a-year and over; next, those between £4 and £12; then those between £1 and £4; and, lastly, those under £1. In most of the boroughs the last class needed hardly to be taken into consideration; but under the first three classes were included no fewer than 130,715, as against 58,051 on the present register. It was quite evident that in such a state of facts some new arrangements would have to be made. Now, there were few boroughs in Ireland, excluding Dublin, Cork, Belfast, Galway, and Waterford, which were entitled to independent representation. There was one method of dealing with the subject which he hoped would not be adopted, although it had been adopted in Scotland and England to some extent—that was the grouping of boroughs. The circumstances of Ireland were totally different from those of Great Britain, and the principle of grouping was totally inapplicable to that country. The Bill which was now being discussed in the other House would soon come before their Lordships, and it was desirable that they should be prepared to deal with the vast questions which would shortly come like a flood upon them, and it was for that reason that he had ventured to bring forward the question for their Lordships' consideration. In conclusion, the noble Lord said he had carefully formed the opinions which he had expressed, and which he believed would be verified whenever the subject was fully discussed by their Lordships.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL): I rise for an instant, in order that I may not appear to treat my noble Friend with any want of civility, but also for the purpose of saying that I have nothing to say in reply to the speech which he has just delivered. Whatever valuable observations I might make on that speech, if I chose, is a secret known only to myself; but it is not my duty, on the part of the Government, to express an opinion on the subject of redistribution of seats in Ireland. The whole question of redistribution as applied to the Three Kingdoms the Government hope in due time to take in hand, and it will not be their

  1291
  fault if their proposals are not laid before Parliament in a very early future. In the meantime, I think my noble Friend will hardly succeed in forcing the matter upon the attention of your Lordships' House. I must leave without comment the remarks he has made, which, from the circumstances of the case, must be somewhat in the nature of a soliloquy.

COLONIAL PRISONERS REMOVAL BILL.
(The Earl of Derby.)
COLONIAL PRISONERS REMOVAL BILL.

  (No. 44.) THIRD READING.
  Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 3a." —(The Earl of Derby.)
  VISCOUNT SIDMOUTHpointed out that, under one of the provisions of the Bill, the sentences passed on soldiers and sailors by courts martial in the Colonies might be altered and reduced at the pleasure of the Secretary of State. He did not object to such a power being vested in the hands of the present Secretary of State for the Colonies; but persons might be appointed to the Office who entertained peculiar views concerning military and naval discipline, and he should object to their having power to interfere with the sentences of courts martial without first referring to the First Lord of the Admiralty or to the military authorities.
  THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he was glad that the Bill had been scrutinized by the noble Viscount with such minute care. He thought, however, that the danger apprehended by the noble Viscount was of an imaginary kind. No doubt, the Bill conferred upon the Secretary of State the power to alter and shorten sentences in the case of a prisoner being removed from one Colony to another; but the object was not to lessen the punishment, but to prevent its being aggravated in consequence of the prisoner's removal. In regard to the removal of naval or military prisoners, the Colonial Secretary would, doubtless, in all cases consult the naval or military authorities as a matter of course.
  Motion agreed to.
  Bill read 3a accordingly; Amendments made; Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

LAW AND POLICE—POLICE PROTEC TION OF HER MAJESTY'S MINISTERS.

  QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF ASHBURNHAMinquired of Her Majesty's Government, How many members of the police force are employed in the protection of Her Maiesty's Ministers; what is the total annual cost of such protection; and what proportion of such annual cost is borne by the ratepayers of this Metropolis?
  EARL GRANVILLE: I have communicated with the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and he is distinctly of opinion that it is not desirable that I should make any statement in reply to the Question of the noble Earl. I venture to remind your Lordships of the great authority with which the Secretary of State for the Home Department speaks upon this subject, and of the immense responsibility of the constant and continuous duty of the police to meet threats and attempts of a perfectly monstrous and unusual character against life and property in this country.
  THE EARL OF ASHBURNHAMasked whether the noble Earl would object to answer the latter portion of his Question?
  EARL GEANVILLE: I have no statement to make in reply to the latter part of the noble Earl's Question.
  House adjourned at a quarter past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Ten o'clock.