Lords Sitting of 15 February 1887

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Church Sites (Compulsory Powers Repeal)* (22).
Second Reading—Glebe Lands (16).

GLEBE LANDS BILL.—(No. 16.)
(The Viscount Cross.)
GLEBE LANDS BILL.—(No. 16.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Viscount Cross.)
  THE EARL OF POWISobjected to the individual trustees, as involving expense and trouble of renewal. He did not see why property now held by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners or Queen Anne's Bounty should not continue vested in them when re-invested, though the sale might be conducted by the Land Commissioners.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, he did not rise for the purpose of offering any opposition to the second reading. On the contrary, he sympathized with the object of the Bill; and he earnestly hoped that the Bill would become law, as nothing could be worse than the present position of the law respecting glebe lands. He, however, took the opportunity of reminding his noble Friend opposite (Viscount Cross) that, under the Act constituting sanitary authorities in rural districts, they were authorized to appoint a Committee which might exercise all the powers of the Board; and he doubted whether it would be satisfactory or safe that a Committee so appointed should be entrusted with the carrying out of the provisions of the Bill relating to allotments for labourers. As for the proposed County Authorities to whom the powers given by the Bill to Sanitary Authorities were to be transferred, he was not sanguine that an Act creating new County Authorities would be passed in this Session of Parliament. Even if such an Act were passed, he also doubted whether a new Central Authority would be a convenient body for exorcising the powers to be given by the Bill. He did not think it would have the local knowledge of the

  1495
  persons to be benefited, which would enable it to judge what it was expedient and desirable to do in the matter of allotments; but perhaps this difficulty might be overcome by its delegating the duty to local Committees.
  EARL STANHOPEthought the House would gladly accept this measure as a means of facilitating the sale of glebes. At the present moment of extreme agricultural depression, it was impossible for incumbents in many cases either to let, or sell their glebes, and all this time tithes were much depreciated. His noble friend the Secretary of State for India had stated, when introducing this Bill, that the two chief objects to be attained were cheapening of sale, and rendering the operation of sale more expeditious. As regards the first point, the Ecclesiastical Commissioners under the Ecclesiastical Leasing Act had sold many glebes since the powers had been conferred upon them, and at a low rate so far as their own solicitors' charges were concerned; but he (Earl Stanhope) despaired of seeing cheap transfer of land so long as the present cumbrous and complicated system of conveyancing continued. He thought the only remedy, which he hoped to see law some day, was compulsory registration of land. As regards speedy and expeditious sales, this would depend upon the rules laid down (under Clause 13) by the Land Commissioners. He was glad that the noble Viscount had introduced a clause that sales only should be sanctioned which would be for the future benefit of the living; otherwise we should have all impecunious parsons selling their glebes when we were, he hoped, at the bottom of the hill of agricultural depression. Believing that this Bill would be a relief to the clergy, he earnestly trusted the House would accord it a second reading.
  THE EARL OF ONSLOWsaid, that the Bill was another step in the reform of the Land Laws, which had been mainly promoted by the Conservatives, having been initiated by the Settled Land Act which the late Earl Cairns succeeded in passing when he was in Opposition, an Act which enabled the owners of entailed estates to deal with them, precisely as if they were the owners of the fee simple. The Bill would remove another disability which interfered with the transfer of land, be-
  1496
  cause it would enable the owners of glebes to sell as freely as laymen could sell. If the edifice of Land Law Reform should be crowned by the passing of the measure to be introduced by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack (Lord Halsbury), to enable all lands to be transferred cheaply, readily, and quickly, not only would the difficulty pointed out by the noble Earl near him (the Earl of Stanhope) disappear, but these reforms would remove the popular prejudice which existed in the minds of many persons that landlords were interested in maintaining an antiquated system of land tenure, in order to prevent the mass of their countrymen from having a share in that particular form of property from which most of their Lordships derived their income—the possession of land. He (The Earl of Onslow) did not think that the Conservative Party ever intended that this measure should be the only one to remove the alleged want of allotments. When the Conservative Party was last in Office, the statement was distinctly made that it was intended to embody in a County Government Bill, clauses dealing with the provision of allotments for labourers; and from the Speech from the Throne, it would be seen that it was the intention of the Government in the present Session to introduce a separate Bill dealing with allotments. He congratulated the noble Viscount (Viscount Cross) upon the improvement in this Bill, as compared with its Predecessor introduced in the other House last Session. It was proposed in the Bill of last Session, that the local authority to acquire land and sublet it in allotments should be the Board of Guardians; but he did not think that it would have been wise to entrust to such bodies the delicate and difficult duties of landlord to working men. The sanitary authority, moreover, proposed in the present Bill was in rural districts, only the Board of Guardians with another name; but he was glad to observe that the noble Viscount had gone a step further, and that the powers proposed to be acquired, and which were to be exercised by the rural or urban sanitary authority, should be handed over to the new County Authorities when elected. At present, he was satisfied that there was nobody exercising authority in the counties which commanded the confidence of the labourers

  1497
  Although it was possible that the County Authorities of the future would not be able collectively to deal with local allotments, they would be able to depute to local committees the duty of inquiring into local circumstances and making due provision for allotments. Their Lordships would remember that there was great anxiety as to the manner in which the agricultural labourers would exercise the vote, in the event of a momentous crisis arising. Well, such a crisis did arise in connection with the separation of the Empire, and the new electors had proved that they were not less to be trusted than the old. If they had trusted the agricultural labourers with the vote for the Imperial Parliament, why should they not be allowed a voice in the management of their own local affairs? There were, at present, a great variety of allotment authorities, and be hoped that, either in the Committee stage of this Bill, or in the proposed Allotments Bill, the noble Viscount would see his way to insert some provision which would consolidate all these bodies, and by which the rules of management in each might be assimilated. He must say, that although the Bill would be a very useful one, it would have been of much more use if it had been introduced a few years ago. Indeed, he was convinced that, if a forced sale of the glebe lands was to be made at the present time, they would realize very little more than the auctioneer's charges. He trusted, however, that if trade increased, agricultural prosperity and the value of land would increase also, and that the Clergy would avail themselves of the opportunities offered by the Bill, and that working men would invest their savings in allotments.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, his feeling was one of deep regret that a Bill similar to this was not introduced many years ago, with the general consent of the clergy; because, if that had been done, the clergy would have been spared much of the serious loss and diminution of income which, he was sorry to say, had lately fallen upon them. According to the measure, the endowment trustees were to consist of the incumbent, the Bishop, and the patron; but he could not help thinking that among the trustees there ought to be one layman or more representing the parish. It would be in the true interests
  1498
  of the Church that its property should be identified with the parish as much as possible; and he would suggest that the additional trustee should be the churchwarden or some individual not elected by the incumbent. It was further provided that the securities relating to the property dealt with under the Bill should be kept by the trustees, and he would like to ascertain where the securities were to be kept. Their Lordships knew how parish records were often kept, and it seemed to him that if these securities were to be kept in the same manner, it was quite possible that some of them might be lost.
  THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: I do not rise to oppose the second reading of this measure in any way; but I cannot but be sorry that it should be necessary, to enable the Church now to part with any of its real property—that property which, in the past, has always been held to be its substantial property—and still more grieved I am at the cause which seems to render this step necessary. It is impossible, however, to close one's eyes to the conviction which has been growing that the clergy, the holders of these glebe lands, are suffering more and more, and that a pitch has been reached when it is necessary to take legislative action. There is, however, this consolation in thinking about it, that if the sale is really made for the benefit of the benefice, as the Bill tries to provide, it will, in the long run, lead to the benefit of the whole Church. I will only ask of the Government that time enough may be given before the Bill goes into Committee for its various points to be fully discussed, and that communications may take place with those who are most deeply interested in it. That is most desirable. I may point out that there is not, in the Bill, any arrangement for ecclesiastical review. It may be said that in dealing with this question no ecclesiastical consent is required; that there is none in sales effected by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners; but then the Ecclesiastical Commissioners are themselves so familiar with Church affairs and Church property that no one would wish to introduce any further ecclesiastical consent. Now, however, in the Land Commissioners, a civil body is proposed, which has no connection whatever with the Church, so that we shall have a needy

  1499
  incumbent face to face with a civil body, unconnected with the Church, and able at once to conclude the transaction. I entertain some little doubt, whether it is possible to combine so entirely the interests of the buyer and the seller. The Land Commissioners are charged to sell, if possible, for the good of very email buyers; they are equally charged to consider the best interests, not of the seller himself only, but of his property in the future. I doubt whether two such interests can be guarded in one hand. This is a matter which deserves ample consideration. I entertain also some doubt as to endowments of so large an amount being in the hands of trustees liable to perpetual change. It is a mere A B C trust, and the Bank of England does not recognize such a trust. It would regard the endowment trustees simply as individuals. I think there should be a permanent body similar to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, or those presiding over Queen Anne's Bounty Fund, associated in the trust, for there will be frequent applications for the appointment of a new trustee, and constant trouble and expense would be incurred. There are some other technical points to which I might refer; but they would be better dealt with in Committee. This, I hope, will not be pressed on in a hurry, but postponed until those moat deeply concerned have had an opportunity of considering the provisions of the Bill.
  THE BISHOP OF LICHFIELDsaid, it was laid down that the sale of the glebe was to be for the benefit of the living. He contended that land, which had been the property of the Church for a longer period than any property belonging to their Lordships, ought not to be so readily disposed of without a power of veto on the part of some ecclesiastical authority. He ventured to think that the Commissioners would not be the best judges as to what would be for the benefit of the living, and would therefore suggest that the Bishop of the diocese should have the power not only of expressing his opinion, and of exercising a vetoing power in regard to these sales of glebes. He also said that, under the Bill, the Commissioners were obliged to re-invest the money in the public funds and certain debentures. Now, he knew that a great deal was thought of the "sweet simplicity" of the Three per Cents; but
  1500
  he should be sorry to see any much larger portion of the endowments of the Church invested either in the funds or in railway stock. He thought it might be desirable to re-invest the money in land. No doubt, land was at present at a very low value, but things in that respect might hereafter undergo a change, and he trusted that they did not all take the pessimist view of that matter. It might, therefore, be desirable to give the Commissioners power to re-invest in land. The noble Earl (the Earl of Camperdown) had suggested that there should be some lay representative of the Church on the trust. He (the Bishop of Lichfield) quite agreed with him; and he thought that it was undesirable that the Bishop should be mixed up with this purely business matter. Therefore he ought to be out of the trust altogether; but only if he had the right of veto. He hoped that the noble Viscount who had charge of the Bill (Viscount Cross) would kindly give his attention to those points before the House went into Committee on the Bill. The provision of allotments for the labouring poor was, no doubt, an excellent object; but, unless the Sanitary Authority had power to purchase land from some of the other neighbouring landlords, it might appear as if that was a measure to provide allotments for the labouring poor at the expense of the Church, and that glebe lands were the corpus vile on which the experiment was to be made. He hoped that that would not really be the case.
  LORD GRIMTHORPEsaid, that if any additional trustees were to be appointed, they should neither be the churchwarden of the parish nor any person to be chosen by popular election. The moment there is any power to be wielded it will be fought for, and churchwardens are elected by Dissenters as well as Churchmen. It would be far better to have a fixed body than a fluctuating one; one, for instance, such as the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, or Queen Anne's Bounty, would be far better because, at every change in a fluctuating body, there was some cost incurred, and one of the objects of the Bill was to diminish the cost of selling glebes. For that reason he should be sorry to see the introduction into the trust of any one possessing the churchwarden character—an arrangement which would also involve all the

  1501
  inconveniences attending a parochial election.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Viscount CROSS)said, he was glad to find that the principle of the Bill had mot with universal assent from every quarter of the House; and that, with very few exceptions, all the objections that had been raised only referred to points of detail. As to the endowment trustees, the great object was to have a body of trustees who should, at all events, be local; and that, if there was a sale, the purchase-money should not be placed either in the hands of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners or of Queen Anne's Bounty, but that it should, to a certain extent, be localized in the diocese as far as possible. Then how were they to get a simple body of trustees? It had been thought wise to put in the Bishop, the patron, and the incumbent; but, after the observations which had been made, he would endeavour to see if the arrangement could be simplified in any way. He quite agreed with the noble Lord who had last spoken (Lord Grimthorpe) in the idea that the suggestion that a churchwarden should be included was open to the objection that they must have an election for the purpose. It was quite true that the incumbent and the churchwardens might be incorporated for that particular purpose; but against the incorporation of the trustees in a case of that kind there was the objection that, if they became incorporated, they would not be individually liable, and it was deemed desirable to maintain the individual liability of those who had to deal with that particular money. He would say, however, that the point urged by the noble Earl (the Earl of Camperdown) might well be brought forward in Committee. Turning to another point, it was intended by the Bill that anything that could really he held to be necessary for the convenience of the person who had the parsonage house should be retained, whether it was an outbuilding, a garden, or other appurtenance. Next, he agreed that the proposed power of the Sanitary Authority, so long as it remained, should belong to the Sanitary Authority as a whole, and not be confined to a committee. With regard to the cost of the conveyance under the Bill, when the Commissioners were satisfied about the sale, had received the money, and had
  1502
  given the purchaser a certificate, that gave him an absolute title the moment he took it to the Land Registry and registered it, without the least expense. That was a great simplification of the conveyance of the land, and it tended to cheapness. It was not quite fair to say, as the most rev. Prelate (the Archbishop of Canterbury) had done, that they provided no ecclesiastical check on the sale; because the application could not be made, in the first instance, to the Land Commissioners without notice being given, not only to the patron, but also to the Bishop. Therefore, the Bishop had the power of laying the whole case before the Land Commissioners, who would not sanction the sale unless they were satisfied that the objections of the Bishop, or the patron, were not such as ought to prevent it. The right rev. Prelate (the Bishop of Lichfield) had suggested that the purchase-money should be reinvested in land; but as the object of the Bill was to facilitate the sale of those glebe lands, he did not think it would be well that the purchase-money should be re-invested in other land. What had happened in the case of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners? They had sold Church lands to the amount of £2,000,000. By Act of Parliament, they were absolutely bound to re-invest in land; but they had never made up their minds to buy the land. That he wanted to avoid; and, therefore, he objected to giving any power by that Bill to re-invest in land. By the Bill they allowed the money to be invested only in Government securities, or in railway stocks, under certain specified conditions, which afforded ample guarantees for its safety. With regard to the safety of the documents which were to represent the money invested in these new securities, that money could only be invested, and if the certificate were lost twenty times over it would not affect the securities, as it would only be necessary to go to the Bank of England, or to the Railway Company, as the case might be, to get the certificate renewed. He had been asked not to take the Committee on the Bill for some time, in order that it might be read and considered in the country by all who were interested in the matter. That he thought was a very reasonable request, and if it would meet the convenience of their Lordships he would fix

  1503
  the Committee stage for that day fortnight.
  THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYsaid, that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners were not bound to re-invest in land. They had a discretion to retain a considerable sum of money in stock, and though a large portion of the £2,000,000 which had been referred to so remained, yet a third at least had been invested in ground rents, tithe rent-charge, and the like.
  VISCOUNT CROSSsaid it might be as the most rev. Primate had said; but, at the same time, as regarded the Commissioners' obligation, he felt bound to adhere to his previous statements on the point.
  Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday the 1st of March next.

POLICE ACTS (IRELAND)—THE CORPORATION OF LIMERICK—EXTRA POLICE.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE DUKE OF ST. ALBANS: I beg to ask Her Majesty's Government, What is the present position of the claim against the Corporation of Limerick for extra police; whether it can be legally enforced; if so, why this has not been done; and, if part or all of such claim has been relinquished by the Government, on whom this payment will fall; also to ask whether it is true, as reported in the newspapers, that the Corporation of Limerick has recently repudiated its liability to contribute to the repayment of the money advanced out of the Public finances for the purposes of the district lunatic asylum? I desire to point out that this is an old story, but I trust your Lordships will not consider that I have unduly trespassed on your attention in the Question which stands in my name. I have no wish to embarrass Her Majesty's Government in their very difficult task of governing Ireland in bringing this matter forward. The circumstances to which my Question refers occurred during the Viceroyalty of the noble Earl (Earl Spencer) and not during the Administration of the noble Earl (the Earl of Carnarvon) or of the noble Earl (the Earl of Aberdeen). I have no desire of seeming to censure the noble Earl (Earl Spencer) for his conduct of
  1504
  the early stages of this dispute, for which I suppose the noble Earl must be held responsible, but I think that what is known of this matter your Lordships will agree that it is a state of affairs eminently unsatisfactory. The cost of extra police was resisted by the Limerick Corporation during the Viceroyalty of Earl Spencer; the question dragged on during that of Earl Carnarvon and Earl of Aberdeen, and is still unsettled unless the Government has decided to abandon their claim. A contumacious Corporation had during this long time flouted the power of the Executive and the authority of the Courts of law, because I believe this claim has received the sanction of the Queen's Bench in Ireland. The facts were these—At the Summer Assizes of 1882, at the Spring of 1883, and Summer of 1883, the Judges of Assize fiated three several presentments for the cost of extra police to be raised off the city of Limerick, and amounting in the whole to £1,450 3s. 3d. The Corporation of Limerick, on whom had developed the fiscal powers of the Grand Jury, were bound peremptorily to raise that amount, but refused to do so. Proceedings were instituted in the Court of Queen's Bench by the Attorney General to compel them to do so. On the 14th of May, 1884, the Queen's Bench made an absolute order for a mandamus commanding the Mayor and Corporation to raise and pay over the amount. The Corporation met and resolved—
  "That this Council declines to comply with the mandamus, inasmuch as the Council are of opinion that the tax is unjust and tyrannical, and if now imposed illegal."
  The return of the writ of mandamus was a copy of this resolution. At the Spring Assizes of 1884 the Judges fiated a further presentment for an additional sum of £466 4s., and on July 4, 1884, a second mandamus was obtained to compel payment of that amount. The Corporation, however, again refused and made a similar resolution and return. No further steps appeared to have been taken. The effect of this action on the part of the Limerick Corporation, and that no step had been taken to follow up the mandamus—which, I am afraid, was the object desired—had brought the Government into contempt in Ireland. There could be no greater misfortune in the administration of the affairs of a country that

  1505
  that a Local Authority should be able to set at defiance the legal power of the Crown and jurisprudence of a country. I suppose it is a just claim, and, therefore, machinery should exist to enforce it, otherwise the only thing which surprises one is that any locality in Ireland has paid this extra police tax. As regards the latter part of my Question, it is founded on a statement in the Irish intelligence of The Times to the effect that—
  "The Limerick Corporation having been successful so far in their persistent refusal to pay the Government demands for a portion of the costs of extra police drafted into the city during the land agitation, adopted to-day a similar course of opposition with regard to the claim of the Governors of the Limerick District Lunatic Asylum. The Town Council for some years past have been petitioning the Lord Lieutenant for the time being for representation on the Asylum Board on the ground that large sums of money for the cost of the city patients are voted annually by the Corporation, and that the latter, through not having the power to appoint Governors, have no control over the expenditure of the institution. Acting on the statements put forward, the Mayor and his successors in office were appointed ex officio Governors, and some members of the Town Council were from time to time appointed Governors by the Viceroy. This, however, did not satisfy the Nationalist Members, who consider that the Corporation should be represented directly by members selected from the Town Council in virtue of their office, and as representing the city taxpayers. To-day it was proposed, and passed unanimously, that the Corporation should refuse to grant any more money towards the support of the asylum until the Lord Lieutenant granted the Town Council a representation on the Board of Governors."
  Under these circumstances, I should like to ask Her Majesty's Government to say on whom the burdens the Limerick Corporation refused to bear would fall in the event of the victory remaining with the Corporation? Will it fall upon the broad shoulders of the British taxpayer, which seem to me to be both unjust and undesirable? I should also like to ask what the Government propose to do in the future to compel the Corporation of Limerick to meet their liabilities. If such a state of things as the present is to be tolerated, it seems to me that Government could not be said to exist in Limerick, and would retain its title, conferred by the late Earl of Beaconsfield, as the worst and weakest Executive in the world.
  THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (Earl CADOGAN)said, he had paused before rising, because he thought that perhaps
  1506
  the noble Earl (Earl Spencer) would feel it his duty to reply to the noble Duke (the Duke of St. Albans). It was true that this was an ancient matter, the circumstances to which allusion was made having occurred between the years 1882 and 1884. The noble Duke had correctly stated what had taken place; but he asked what was the present position of matters, and what were the present powers of the Government with reference to the recovery of the tax for extra police, and which, undoubtedly, was still owing by the Corporation of Limerick? In reply, he (Earl Cadogan) might state that in December, 1884, the then Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant explained in the House of Commons that the only further legal procedure open to the Government was to apply to the Court of Queen's Bench for an order for the committal to prison of the defaulting members of the Limerick Corporation—an extreme proceeding that it was not then considered desirable to adopt. He (Earl Cadogan) was afraid that it was not more desirable now than it was then; but he might inform his noble Friend that the claim on the Town Council had not been formally relinquished by the Government; and that in the meantime the expenses of these extra police had been charged to the Constabulary Vote. The debt had not been increased for some time past, inasmuch as the proclamation under which the extra police were required had expired some 18 or 19 months ago. With reference to the second part of the Question, the refusal of the Corporation to present payment towards the district lunatic asylum, the facts were these—The Corporation had demanded on behalf of the ratepayers of Limerick a larger representation of the City of Limerick on the Board of Governors of the asylum than they now possessed, and they had adopted a resolution declining to present, the maintenance of the asylum unless the demand was complied with. The Government, however, felt that the Corporation had no ground for making their demand, as an analysis of the list of the Board of Governors of the asylum showed that the city ratepayers—as distinguished from the county ratepayers—were already amply—if not unduly—represented, having regard to the population and valuation of the city and county respectively. Should the Corporation

  1507
  persist in their refusal to make the presentment, there was an express statutory provision under which the Judge of Assize could make an order for the levying of the necessary rate, and which will have the force of a presentment. With regard to the apprehension of the noble Duke as to the money having been advanced out of the public finances, there had been no such advance. It is not a matter of "repayment of money advanced out of public finances," but entirely one of local finance; the old system of Treasury advances for the maintenance of asylums having been given up.
  EARL SPENCERsaid, he thought it was his duty to make some observations on the question which had been put by his noble Friend (the Duke of St. Alban's), and the answer which had been given on the part of the Government by the noble Earl opposite the Lord Privy Seal (Earl Cadogan). It was quite true that tins unfortunate, and, he thought, disastrous incident occurred during the time that he (Earl Spencer) was Lord Lieutenant. He did not wish to trouble their Lordships by going over all the facts of the case. It was a very long and a very complicated history, and it would only cause weariness to their Lordships if he were to go through every stage of the proceedings. All he would say was this—that in consequence of the disturbed state of Limerick in 1882, when he arrived there he found that the Police Authorities in the city declared that they would not be able to fulfil the ordinary duties of the police without an extra force. There were two provisions under which this force could be provided under the Act of William IV. One of these provisions was that so many magistrates could petition the Lord Lieutenant for an extra force to be sent down; and the other provision was the 13th section, which said that the Lord Lieutenant, on the advice of the Privy Council, if he considered that the state of the town was bad and required extra police, should have power to send the extra force to the city, the moiety of the charge for such force falling on the city. It was his painful duty on that occasion to propose to the Privy Council, and on their advice to carry out, the Proclamation ordering a certain number of extra police for Limerick. From
  1508
  time to time that question was before him—indeed, hardly a month passed in which the Limerick police did not come before him. He was most anxious to come to an amicable arrangement with the Corporation on the matter; and at the earliest moment possible he took what steps he could to diminish the force. He diminished it first by 20 men, and then again by so many more, until, at last, the moiety the Corporation had to pay was for 10 men. Under another section of the Police Acts power was given to the Inspector General to send from time to time from one I county to another, or from a county to a city in Ireland, extra police if it was found to be necessary. His Predecessor in the Viceroyalty had found it necessary to increase the force from time to time. When they found that the Corporation of Limerick were unwilling to pay this tax, it became a matter of grave consideration what should be done. He quite recognized the importance of getting Acts of this sort carried out, and of seeing the authority of the Government obeyed, and not set at defiance. The Irish Government proceeded in the ordinary way for obtaining payments of this kind. They applied to the Court of Queen's Bench, through the Crown Law Officers; and the Court, after going into the question, issued a mandamus. They had hoped that the result of these proceedings would have been that the Corporation would have paid an imperative tax. There was no question before the Court as to the legality of it. It was decided to be legal; and he had no doubt, personally, that the necessity was a great one for sending the extra force. Her Majesty's Government, seeing that the Corporation had refused to obey the mandamus of the Court of Queen's Bench, had to consider what should be done. His noble Friend opposite (Earl Cadogan) stated only part of the decision of the then Government. He stated that the ordinary course in the the circumstances was to apply to have the mandamus made absolute; but the only way of doing that, according to the advice of their Legal Advisers, was to attach the persons of the Council who took part in these proceedings—in other words, to take steps for the arrest of the Mayor and Corporation of Limerick. That would have been a very serious and grave act. Although he would not say

  1509
  that on certain occasions it might not have to be done; it was a step which would have created immense excitement, and it would not have brought the Government one whit nearer to obtaining the money owing by the Corporation. The matter was referred by him to the Cabinet in London; and the decision of the Cabinet was that, instead of proceeding by attachment against the persons of the Corporation, they should proceed by way of legislation, and obtain powers for the Government in such cases to levy the tax themselves. That was announced by the Chief Secretary (Mr. Campbell-Bannerman) in the House of Commons, and it was stated that the Government would introduce a Bill on the subject after Whitsuntide. As their Lordships knew, the Government came to an end; but he maintained that, so far as the Government of which he had the honour to be the head in Ireland was concerned, they were not to be taxed with having allowed the matter to lapse; that they took every step they could at the time short of putting the whole Corporation in prison; and that they could not have acted in a different way to what they did. Then the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Carnarvon) succeeded to the Viceroyalty in Ireland, and received a deputation from Limerick; and it was understood in Ireland that the noble Earl had practically dropped the whole case, and given up the claim against the town and Corporation.
  THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (Earl CADOGAN). interposing, said, what the noble Earl (the Earl of Carnarvon) did was to suggest a compromise; he did not think Lord Carnarvon relinquished the claim.
  EARL SPENCERsaid, he did not know what the compromise was—they could only judge from what they saw in the newspapers—but it was understood at the time that they had dropped the claim.
  EARL CADOGANsaid, he only wished it to be understood that the noble Earl (the Earl of Carnarvon) did not relinquish the claim.
  EARL SPENCERsaid, he could only say that when the Liberal Government returned to Office it was understood—and he made inquiry about it—that the claim had been practically relinquished; and during the few months last summer when the Government remained in Office
  1510
  the question was never even brought up for disposal. He should like to say a word on the subject of the lunatic asylums. He disapproved of the manner in which the managers and governors of lunatic asylums were appointed in Ireland. It was one of the things that must one day or other be dealt with. Those governors were nominated by the Lord Lieutenant; and there was considerable dissatisfaction that the ratepayers, who had to pay towards their maintenance, had no voice on the governing body. He had himself had no little difficulty on this subject; because, while the Lord Lieutenant might be very anxious to carry out the wishes of any Corporation or other local body concerned in a lunatic asylum, it was impossible for the Government and the Viceroy to divest himself of responsibility for an appointment. It would be well, therefore, to alter the law in that regard. While speaking of these matters, he could not help referring to a case which had arisen in the Courts of Law in Dublin. A learned Judge in this country inherited property in Tipperary, of which a lease had been granted by his predecessor in title to the Local Government Board, the premises to be used for a lunatic asylum. The learned Judge two years ago failed to obtain any rent, and he accordingly applied to the Local Government Board, who refused to pay. Thereupon he applied to the Courts in Dublin to mark judgment against the Local Government Board. He (Earl Spencer) believed they did mark judgment; and the Local Government Board would, he presumed, have to pay the money out of the sum voted to them by Parliament. Now, that was a different case to the other, because here the Local Government Board had power to levy, although he did not say it was a power which it was desirable to enforce; but he was curious to know what the Government proposed to do with regard to it. He imagined that the guardians refused to levy the rate, and that in future it would be paid by the taxpayers, of the United Kingdom.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, he was quite certain that the noble Earl (Earl Spencer) who had just sat down was fully justified in strengthening the police force of Limerick, and he was certain that any measure he could have pro-

  1511
  posed to take to collect the rate would have been supported by Parliament and the country. But what he wished to submit to their Lordships was this—that it was of very little public interest whether it happened under this or that Viceroy—this or that Government. What was important was, what was the position of the case now, and in what way did it reflect upon Parliament? What was the position? A rate had been levied upon the town of Limerick, and the Mayor and Town Council had undertaken not to pay it. The noble Earl said that the Government of which he was then a Member did not think it right to proceed to arrest the Mayor of Limerick, and the following Government took the same course; but how stood the case? What means were there of collecting the rate? They had just been told there were none except by attaching the Mayor and Corporation of Limerick, or some of them; and what he had to ask was whether the Mayor of Limerick was superior to the law of the country? If that was so—and it was apparently recognized both by the late and present Government—then he (the Earl of Camperdown) said that the position was a very serious one indeed. But let him leave that part of the question, and refer to the second Question brought forward by the noble Duke. It appeared that the Town Council had been petitioning the Lord Lieutenant for representation on the Asylums Board, on the ground that large sums of money were voted annually for the city patients by the Corporation. The Lord Lieutenant appointed the Mayor and his successor in office as town governors; but that did not satisfy the Nationalists, and on the 3rd February they passed a resolution that the Corporation refused to grant any more money towards the support of the asylum until the Lord Lieutenant granted the Town Council adequate representation on the board. The Town Council took up that position, not because they did not obtain representation, but because they did not obtain it in the precise manner in which they wanted to have it. He (the Earl of Camperdown) questioned whether it would have been legal for the Lord Lieutenant to have granted what they wished. If it was true that, under the circumstances, the Mayor and Corporation had refused the contribution for which the town was liable; and if, as
  1512
  they were told, the only means of onforcing the rate was by issuing a mandamus which the Corporation declined to obey, he would ask their Lordships if Parliament and the Government were going to allow the Mayor and Corporation of Limerick to defy the law? So far as he saw, it was without sufficient reason, for they did not contend that they had not obtained what they asked, but that they had not obtained it in the way they asked for it.
  LORD FITZGERALDsaid, that the whole debt amounted to £1,800, and the question was whether the Corporation of Limerick should be permitted to repudiate legal obligations and defy the law. He did not propose to enter into the policy of the present system of imposing a tax for extra police in Ireland, although he had some doubts as to whether that policy was sound. At all events, it was the law, and the law ought to be obeyed, or, if it was erroneous, altered. In this case the Town Council of Limerick bad refused to levy a rate to pay the demand made upon them for extra police employed during a period of alleged disturbance. The noble Earl (Earl Spencer) who had then been Viceroy had made every inquiry as to whether any injustice had been done, and on one occasion had invited the Corporation of Limerick to meet and confer with him, in order that he might see whether he could reduce the amount in any manner consistent with the law. The Town Council had put forward a somewhat contemptuous refusal, and the Government of the day could do nothing but proceed against them. Once that had been done, it ought to have been carried on to the end. A mandamus had been obtained from the Court of Queen's Bench, nobody appearing on behalf of the Town Council to show cause against it. The Town Council refused to comply with the mandamus on the ground, as stated in a resolution, that the tax was unjust and had been illegally imposed. To put such a document as this resolution upon the file was undoubtedly a great contempt of the Court of Queen's Bench, and the one answer to it should have been an attachment for contempt. He could understand, however, that the Government of the day had been very unwilling to single out any particular person. The only other remedy was to proceed by legislation, and to allow the

  1513
  Government to make the rate themselves, and then send it down to the Local Authority to be collected. As he had said before, he had some doubt as to the soundness of the policy of the present law in regard to this question; but if the law was unwise or unjust, let it be altered, but they must have no paltering with the law, and they should allow neither repudiation or contempt of the law. In his opinion, legislation such as he had suggested was the only true method of providing against similar difficulties in the future.

ARMY—THE ROYAL ARTILLERY—RUMOURED REDUCTION OF THE FORCE.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD NAPIER OF MAGDALA,on rising to ask Her Majesty's Government. Whether a considerable reduction in the officers, men, and guns of the Royal Artillery has been in contemplation by the Government; whether Her Majesty's Government will reconsider any such contemplated reduction, seeing that our force of Artillery is at present below the strength necessary for our Army? said, they had heard rumours of large Artillery reductions; but they had not been brought before the public except in Regimental Orders. It was not with a view to embarrass the Government that he had put this Question, but rather in the hope that they might be induced to refrain from reducing a part of our most perfect armament, which took a long and careful training to bring to perfection, and the loss of which was sure to be followed, at no distant time, by increased expenditure, if by no greater evil. The effect of the proposed reductions would be that five batteries of our force of Artillery would cease to exist as batteries, and that 28 guns would cease to be Horse Artillery guns; while, with regard to men, more than 600 trained and skilled artillerymen would be taken from that important arm, and would have to revert to other duties which required much less training. He understood that the ground on which the anticipated reduction was based was that our Horse Artillery was in larger proportion to the Field Artillery than in any other European Army; and as a considerable reduction of guns was said to be intended, he presumed that the number of our field guns generally was assumed to be in excess of our
  1514
  requirements. He would, therefore, endeavour to show how the case stood. He took the number of our batteries, horse and field, from the published Army List; and though a considerable number of batteries had been reduced from six to four guns, yet he assumed that on emergency we might be able to complete them to six guns per battery. According to The Army List, then, we had 26 Horse Artillery batteries at home and abroad, and 80 Field batteries, giving a total of 106 batteries, or 636 guns. The troops, according to the Establishment, were—British Cavalry, 19,023; Infantry, 143,093; Indian Cavalry, 22,732; Infantry, 105,112; giving a total of 289,960. Our 636 guns would stand to them in the proportion of 2.2 guns per 1,000 men. It would be said that a large deduction of Infantry must be made for garrisons; but against that they had to set off the Militia and Reserve—let them say, 100,000 men. Now, the proportion which Napoleon laid down was three guns per 1,000 men, and that, for the present day, was a low estimate. According to that standard we should require 869 guns, or 233 more than we possessed. The German standard was now 3·6 guns per 1,000 men, according to which we ought to have 1,043 guns instead of 636. The German proportion of guns to their whole Effective and Reserve Force was 2·5. If we took the very moderate number of 100,000 men as our Reserve and Militia, our Artillery would be for the whole Force of 389,960 in the proportion of nearly 1·6 gun per 1,000 men. As to our Horse Artillery bearing a larger proportion to the Field Artillery than in any other Army in Europe, he might point out that it was true that the proportion was larger than that of the German Army, and slightly larger than that of the French Army; but he submitted that the Horse Artillery had no obligatory dependence on the Field Artillery. It was a question that depended on the circumstances of a country and the nature of its warfare. The experienced Artillery officers of the British Army were better judges of their requirements than any foreign officer could be; and he would ask how many experienced Artillerymen outside the Department had been consulted on this matter? The Horse Artillery had much closer relation to the Cavalry, with which it was so often

  1515
  connected, than with the Field Artillery. The Germans had 4·6 guns per 1,000 Cavalry; the English only 3·6 per 1,000 Cavalry. The Horse Artillery was required for rapid movement from one part of the field to another to strengthen an attack or to prepare the way for Cavalry charges. In the German Army lately a practice had been adopted which probably we might think it wiseto follow—namely, that of organizing a considerable body of Artillery which was called Corps Artillery. That Corps Artillery was separate and independent, and would be able in action to send aid to whatever point of a field of battle it might be required. It was the opinion of many German officers of repute also that Corps Artillery should be formed entirely of Horse Artillery, but that he thought would scarcely be possible, because no country would be able to provide a sufficient number of horses. The Field Artillery could not change ground rapidly for the purpose of strengthening an attack or preparing the way for Cavalry charges. The working complement of gunners might be carried on the limbers and waggons; but if they suffered heavy loss it took a long time for the Foot Artillery to come any distance to reinforce them. He would refer their Lordships to the testimony of Prince Hohenlohe, who had had great experience in active service on the Continent, as to the value of Horse Artillery in the field. In these days of rapid movements Artillery were required to move rapidly. We were even thinking much of Mounted Infantry; how could Field Artillery support them? It was the power of bringing up Horse Artillery at a gallop that enabled Lord Gough to complete the destruction of the Sikh army in its retreat across the Sutlej at Sobraon. Anyone who had seen Horse Artillery in the field would understand how many valuable qualities were required to fit a soldier for that service. Our Service was different from that of most other nations, spread about in every quarter of the globe. It was very often in countries little traversed by roads, where the lighter and more movable Artillery was required. Our Service was one of small armies and detachments, for which a larger proportion of Artillery was required, as it could not be subdivided like other Armies. In the present unsettled state of Europe, with a possi-
  1516
  bility of a demand from India or Africa, the reduction seemed untimely and a most wasteful and dangerous one, and he trusted the Government would reconsider it.
  LORD ELLENBOROUGHsaid, he fully endorsed all that had fallen from the noble and gallant Lord who had just addressed their Lordships, considering that the statement just delivered deserved the serious consideration of Her Majesty's Government, for the following reasons—that from the existence of short service it would take about three years to replace these skilled soldiers—that is, by equally efficient ones—whose esprit de corps would not be enhanced by being removed from the élite of their corps, as it were, to the position of ordinary artillerymen; this applies more or less cogently to the reduction of Cavalry, since a lancer or hussar is not made in a day, which is further emphasized by the short service in vogue depriving us of the efficient non-commissioned officers available to make raw recruits into efficient soldiers. The effective use of Horse Artillery was evidenced in a marked degree on the the occasion referred to by the noble and gallant Lord at Sobraon on a retreating enemy crossing, and on the opposite of the river; and considering that this action was fought 40 years since, there are not very many to tell the tale when about 10,000 gallant Seikh soldiers lost their lives. And had it been otherwise, and also not been followed by a rapid march of Cavalry and Horse Artillery, the enemy would doubtless have made a stand halfway between, or at, Lahore, and thus prevented the gates of that city being seized by Cavalry—the 9th Lancers—supported by Horse Artillery, and the city consequently taken possession of without further bloodshed. This compelled him to say that the proposed reduction of Horse Artillery, coupled with the 24 Horse Artillery lieutenant-colonels, a few young subaltern officers were a poor substitute for the more experienced officers reduced; and, necessarily, the proposed reductions were the height of folly, considering the present state of Europe, since that was not the time, or desirable, to thus hastily part with such efficient soldiers as those composing what might be termed a portion of the élite of the Army. The deficiency of Horse Artillery was felt by the German Army in the late War, and was now

  1517
  being made good, and was further evidence for the retention of that efficient force, which could not be replaced in a day; and although not admitted, Parliaments and Governments acted as if money only had to be voted to produce an efficient Army, which notion led, and would lead, to a further waste of public money, the real economy being in the reduction of the civilian element of the Army and Navy.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Lord HARRIS)said, that the great experience and knowledge of the noble and gallant Lord who had introduced the subject (Lord Napier of Magdala) no doubt well entitled all he said on military affairs to the highest respect. The noble and gallant Lord, however, would not expect him to offer any opinion with regard to the proportion which our Artillery ought to bear to other arms of the Service as compared with the proportions in other armies. This was a technical matter, on which it would be unwise in him to enter into competition with the noble and gallant Lord. But he could not, in his present position, admit that the proposed changes merited some of the terms that had been applied to them, such as unnecessary, wasteful, and dangerous. He knew—and he thought the noble and gallant Lord himself must know—that the changes could not have been undertaken and brought forward by the Secretary of State without the closest consideration and full conference with his Military Advisers. He could assure the noble Lord that the closest attention had been given to the whole question; and he must also say that the noble and gallant Lord painted the reduction—as the change was in part simply a conversion—in rather too high a colour. The noble and gallant Lord seemed to be under a misapprehension as to the exact extent of the reduction. The actual reduction of the batteries was, in fact, only two; but there was a further conversion, he admitted, of 16 guns which were sent into store in order that these batteries should be on a peace footing, and not on a war footing. The actual reduction was, therefore, 12; in the other eight cases the batteries were placed on a peace instead of a war footing. This course was adopted, he understood, by most of the Continental armies when they put the Army Corps
  1518
  Artillery Establishment upon a peace footing. As regarded the officers referred to in the Question, there was a reduction, undoubtedly, of 24 lieutenant colonels; and this was because the proportion in that rank was far higher than it had been for a long time in the Artillery, and than it was in any other branch of the Army. He believed, however, it was in contemplation to reduce that reduction, to a certain extent, by increasing the number of subalterns. As regarded the Artillerymen, there was not, taking the whole Force, a reduction; but there was an increase of something like 300 men. There was a reduction as regarded Field and Horse Artillery; but a considerable increase as regarded Garrison Artillery, making the increase in the whole something like 300. The changes which were contemplated would not take place until the commencement of the next financial year. He could assure the noble and gallant Lord that these changes had been contemplated solely with the idea of placing the country in a better military position than it had ever occupied before, in order that two Army Corps fully equipped might be placed in the field, and that our garrisons at home and abroad might be thoroughly provided for.

  CHURCH SITES (COMPULSORY POWERS REPEAL) BILL, [H.L.]
  A Bill to repeal the provisions of the Church Building Acts relating to the compulsory purchase of sites for churches and burial grounds—Was presented by The Lord Bishop of Lichfield; read 1a. (No. 22.)
  House adjourned at half past Six o'clock, to Thursday next, a quarter past Ten o'clock.