Lords Sitting of 13 April 1886

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Report—Burgh Police and Health (Scotland) (69); Marriages (Hours of Solemnization) * (73); Sporting Lands Rating (Scotland) * (36).
Third Reading—Contagious Diseases Acts Repeal (No. 2)* (58); Bankruptcy (Office Accommodation) Act (1885) Amendment* (67), and passed.

EASTERN ROUMELIA.—QUESTION.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: Seeing the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in his place, I
1420
wish to ask him, Whether he has any information to give to the House in respect to the state of the negotiations between the Prince of Bulgaria and the Porte on the one hand, and the Powers on the other; and whether he has any intimation as to the result of the recent negotiations?
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Earl of ROSEBERY): My Lords, I have to state, in answer to the noble Marquess, that on April 5 there was signed at Constantinople by the Representatives of all the Great Powers a Protocol embodying what is called, though erroneously, the Tsanow proposal. The effect of that is that the Government of Eastern Roumelia should be confided to the Prince of Bulgaria under the terms of Article 17 of the Treaty of Berlin. We have heard to-day from Sofia that Prince Alexander, while still maintaining his objections to the condition which makes his appointment as Governor General of Eastern Roumelia subject to renewal at the end of five years with the assent of the Powers, has announced to the Grand Vizier of the Turkish Government that, in view of the unanimous decision of the Powers, he is ready to defer to the authority of the International Act signed by their Representatives, and to nominate at once the Bulgarian Members of the different Commissions specified in the arrangement.
THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: Will Papers be laid on the Table of the House?
THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: Yes; as soon as possible.

BURGH POLICE AND HEALTH (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 69.)
(The Earl of Elgin.)
BURGH POLICE AND HEALTH (SCOTLAND) BILL.—(No. 69.)

  REPORT.
  Amendments reported (according to Order).
  THE EARL OF GALLOWAYproposed the insertion of an Amendment, the object of which, he said, was to provide that where a person was fined by the Court the penalty "pounds Scot" should be altered to "pounds sterling." He was induced to make the proposal, because he was informed, on good authority, that the Corporation of Glasgow, the Convention of Royal and Parliamentary Burghs of Scotland, the Gene-

  1421
  ral Assembly of the Established and Free Church, the Synod of the United Presbyterian Church, as well as other Religious Bodies, were in favour of it. He submitted that the phrase "pounds Scot" was obsolete, and that the feeling of the important Bodies to whom he had just alluded as being anxious for the acceptance of this Amendment held the view that if the ancient Statute in regard to Sunday trading was still in force, in that case the penalty should be made a reality in case of conviction.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, he did not see how his noble Friend made out that he proposed no increase of penalty, as the conversion of "pounds Scot" into "pounds sterling," would more than quintuple it.
  THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (The Earl of DALHOUSIE)said, that the point had been considered by the Select Committee which discussed the Bill, and a similar proposal was unanimously rejected. He must, therefore, oppose the Amendment.
  Amendment (by leave of the House) withdrawn.
  Further Amendments made; and Bill to be read 3a on Thursday next.

IRELAND (REPRESSION OF CRIME).

  MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
  LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNE, in moving—
  "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for a Return, from 1830 to the present time, of all coercion Bills (by whatever title they may be called) passed by Parliament, and by whom they were proposed: Also, a Return of agrarian crime committed 18 months previous to, and 18 months after, the passing of the said Acts,"
  said, that the term "coercion" had become detested in Ireland, though he hardly knew why such should be the case, because coercion merely affected those who joined in unlawful combinations. The Executive Government existed for the purpose of enforcing the law; and if the law could not be enforced in one way, it must be enforced in another, and Coercion Acts enabled the Executive to enforce the law more effectually than could be done without them. These Acts did not affect law-abiding people in Ireland, but only those who engaged in illegal acts. He hoped that these Returns would be granted.
  Moved, "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for a Return, from 1830 to the present time, of all coercion Bills (by whatever title they may be called) passed by Parliament, and by whom they were proposed: Also, a Return of agrarian crime committed 18 months previous to, and 18 months after, the passing of the said Acts."—(The Lord Oranmore and Browne.)
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Earl SPENCER)said, he hoped their Lordships would not think he was reluctant to give any information on this important subject with regard to any matters which required elucidation; but he confessed he was under some difficulty in this instance. He thought almost all the information which the noble Lord wished for could be obtained by himself or his secretary from the Papers laid before Parliament. Besides, this Return would throw an enormous amount of work upon the Department. He considered that some distinction should be made between these two classes of information. The term "coercion" might apply to some laws passed for England; it was, therefore, extremely difficult to know where they were to stop in the preparation of so elaborate a Return. With regard to agrarian crime since 1844, the information asked for had been supplied by a Return moved for by Mr. Forster, and this Return was complete down to 1881, and since then Reports had been furnished monthly.
  LORD ASHBOURNEsaid, he was disposed to think, owing to the stress laid on the subject by the Prime Minister a few nights ago, that it would be convenient if they had these figures in an authoritative form, and with something like historical continuity. He must, however, object to the term "coercion;" he would rather describe the legislation as special measures of a repressive character with regard to criminal acts. He suggested that the Motion should be postponed until Thursday; and the noble Lord in the meantime could consider the matter, and ask for the information in a more clear and succinct form.
  THE EARL OF NORTHBROOKalso suggested that the term "coercion" should not be used, and complained that the noble and learned Lord himself had used the word.
  LORD ASHBOURNE: I never used it; on the contrary, I suggested that the

  1423
  word "coercion" was inapplicable and should not be used.
  THE EARL OF NORTHBROOKsaid, he was glad he was mistaken. They could not describe Acts to protect life and property as Coercion Acts. It was a misnomer. They all knew the result of giving a dog a bad name.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (The Earl of KIMBERLEY)said, these Acts ought not to be called Coercion Acts. The Return moved for seemed to apply to those Acts directed against agrarian crime; but when he was Lord Lieutenant the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act was not directed against that class of crime, which was not particularly rife at the time, but against Fenianism.
  LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNEsaid, he would explain more fully upon Thursday evening what information he desired to obtain.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWNsuggested that the Return should include all similar Acts passed in the last century by the Irish Parliament.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.
  House adjourned at Five o'clock, to Thursday next, a quarter past Ten o'clock.