Lords Sitting of 3 July 1893

NEW PEER.
John Wogan Lord Bishop of St. Albans—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.
TOOK THE OATH.
The Lord Savile.

INDIAN REVENUES (MILITARY CHARGES).
MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLL, in moving a humble Address to Her Majesty for copy of letter from Sir Thomas T. Pears to the Under Secretary for War, dated the 9th of August, 1872, said, he had ascertained from his noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Kimberley) that there was no objection on his part to the production of this letter, and he would have moved for it without saying a word, but that circumstances had arisen which made it expedient he should make a short statement to explain the nature of the Paper. A few weeks ago their Lordships' attention was called by Lord Northbrook to the home charges made against the Government of India, which were now becoming a more and more important subject of discussion every day. A better proof of it could hardly be given than the speech delivered the other day by the Secretary of State for India to a deputation, in which he pointed out the difficulties in which the Government of India was now placed with regard to Revenue and Accounts. There was no doubt that those difficulties arose to a large extent from the home charges made against the Indian Revenue by the Government here. Since that, a step on the part of the Government had been announced which he hoped might have a favourable effect. He did not intend to rush in where angels might well fear to tread—into that terrible currency question in which he did not profess to be an expert, for it was one of the most difficult and obscure subjects which could occupy public attention. But, at all events, he con-
638
sidered that the noble Earl had at last moved in the right direction towards the establishment of a gold currency in India. The intermediate stage, of which he could not approve, was giving an artificial value to silver. The step of giving a general monetary value to the rupee seemed to be inconsistent with that principle, though it might be found that an important saving would be made to the Government of India in its home remittances, which would enable the Government to balance its accounts. The noble Earl told the deputation which waited upon him that India, as a whole, its trade and commerce, were in a thriving condition, but that the Government, as regarded Revenue, was in a position of serious difficulty. That fact made the question of the home charges a matter of great urgency and importance. In his speech in the House the other day, in answer to Lord Northbrook, the noble Earl gave a very fair account of the arguments used in the communications between the different Departments—the India Office, the Treasury, and the War Office—upon this subject. He represented the isolation in which the India Office was placed and the difficulty it was habitually under in dealing with those two important Departments, the Treasury and the War Office. The Paper now moved for threw an important light on the subject, especially in the circumstances under which it was written. Their Lordships would remember that in consequence of the Indian Mutiny it was resolved to abolish the Company's local European Army. He had the honour of recommending that measure, of which he had charge, in their Lordships' House, and well remembered the great objection to it entertained by Lord Derby, Lord Grey, and others, and it was also opposed by many of the old Civil servants in India; but he thought the balance of argument was in favour of the amalgamation of that Army. It seemed to follow upon the assumption of the government of India by the Crown. The Company had become a mere name, and when the Crown assumed in reality as well as nominally the administration of the Government of India it seemed a natural thing that the European Armies should be amalgamated, and that they should no longer remain a local European force. The East India Company had

639
raised a large force of European troops. They began with one Infantry regiment for each Presidency, afterwards increased to two; and at the time of the Mutiny there were three regiments for each Presidency, besides about 7,000 Artillery, a force of about 16,000 Europeans, in addition to the Native Armies. The East India Company and the Government of India had had, of course, under that system a long experience of the cost of raising their European troops in this country, and they found they could raise them at an average cost of about £26 per man. The European recruits had not cost the old East India Company more than that. When the amalgamation came into force the Government had thrown upon them the additional expenses entailed, especially under the re-organisation which took place at the time. He had then the honour of holding the Office now filled by his noble Friend opposite. After that change had come into full operation it was found at the India Office that, instead of the European troops costing £26, the new cost was £63 per man for the Infantry and £136 for the Cavalry, imposing, therefore, an enormous new charge upon the Revenues of India. That was 22 years ago, and some of the details had escaped his memory when the previous discussion took place. One of the most unpleasant episodes through which he had ever passed in his public life had been brought to his recollection. When that was discovered the India Office determined to send a remonstrance to the War Office and Treasury on the enormous cost of the home charges. At that time Lord Cardwell was at the War Office, and Mr. Lowe was Chancellor of the Exchequer. The letter to the War Office was dated September 8, 1871; but no answer was received till April 24, 1872, seven mouths afterwards. That answer was couched in most aggressive terms; it took no notice of part of the letter of September 8, 1871, as to the possibility of obtaining European recruits more cheaply, and it announced an absolutely new principle—namely, that no abatement would be given, and that India would be liable to pay, in proportion to the troops she used, the full expense of the home establishment. The India Office was entirely isolated, and had to fight its own battles; and during the six years he was there,
640
only on two occasions were they able to bring questions before the Cabinet. They saw that it was absolutely necessary to protest against the new principle laid down by the War Office, for its danger could hardly be exaggerated, that India was bound to pay a proportion of the cost of the entire machinery of recruiting and training under the existing organisation. There was no limit on the expenditure thrown on the Government of India. And not only was that principle laid down by Lord Cardwell and Mr. Lowe, but they claimed to go further, and distinctly intimated that they reserved their right to charge against the Government of India further indirect expenses. The War Office were kind enough to give a hint of the number and variety of subjects on which India might be called upon to pay. The reserved demands made by the Imperial Government upon India included the cost of the military staff at head quarters of the British Army in proportion to the troops employed in India, which would take in the whole cost of the Horse Guards; the regimental staff of all corps which might be employed in India; the full cost of relieving regiments; the full cost of educational establishments, the cost of experiments in arms and ammunition, the cost of rewards to inventors, and the cost of medical, engineer, and other officers in education. This meant that India was called upon to pay a tribute to this country. Under his responsibility to the Government of India he felt it was impossible to let that Despatch stand without entering a very strong-protest against it, and the Paper he now moved for was a copy of his answer. It had been contended that the Imperial Army was in reality the Army of Reserve of India. That was one of the great arguments put forward at that time, and it was still used in the Departmental contest which the India Office had to sustain. But the fact was just the reverse, and the Indian Army was a reserve for the Home Army, having been employed over and over again for military purposes not strictly connected with the Government of India. Possibly one-third of the British Army was kept in India. It was said that, consequently, India should pay one-third of the cost of the British Army, including the home charges, which he held constituted an

641
unjust and illegal tribute to England. On looking into the matter the India Office discovered that the Native Army had been largely used as an Army of Reserve for Imperial purposes. At the time he wrote that Despatch, only in three cases had the Imperial Army acted as the Army of Reserve of India. It had done so in 1846 in the case of the Sutlej Campaign, when some two or three regiments, not more, were sent out; in 1849 in the case of the Punjaub Campaign, and in 1857–8 in the case of the Indian Mutiny. On the other hand, native Indian regiments had been employed abroad in the Imperial Armies in 1801 in the expedition to Egypt, in 1810–11 in the expedition to the Mauritius and Java, when Indian troops were largely used by the Government; in 1842 in the Chinese War, when six native regiments were sent from India; in 1855 in the Crimean War, a war entirely unconnected with India, when considerable reinforcements of troops were sent from India to the Crimea; in 1856–7 in the expedition to the Persian Gulf, when no less than 11 native regiments were sent from India; in 1859 in another Chinese War; in 1860–1 in the New Zealand Wars, which were purely Colonial; in 1867 in the Abyssinian War, when 12 native regiments were used; again in the Russian scare Indian troops were moved, and in 1881 in the Egyptian War. Indian Forces employed in the Imperial Service were paid out of Indian Revenue, but English Forces employed in India were saddled on India from the day the order for their embarkation was issued. In his view, these charges were exceedingly unjust, and were illegally exacted from India. The sums chargeable against Indian Revenue were regulated by 21 & 22 Vict., c. 106, the words of which were, "for the purposes of the Indian Government alone. "He did not profess to be a lawyer; but he failed to understand for what purpose the word "alone" had been introduced if the principle laid down by the Treasury and War Office could be maintained that a large part of the home charges and cost of the English Army were to be thrown on the Government of India. The letter for which he now moved was the record of the argument of the India Office on that grave question, which from day to day and from hour to hour was
642
assuming greater importance in the minds of the people of India. In presence of the silver question it was becoming most serious, and would not cease to be so in spite of any tinkering with the currency which any Government might undertake. He desired as far as he could to assist his noble Friend and the India Office, which he knew had a hard battle to fight in this matter; and he fully recognised the difficulty of his noble Friend's position, when everything was made to depend upon a successful Budget. On the other hand, he would be sorry to say anything which would excite unnecessary jealousy and suspicion in the minds of the people of India, though he certainly thought they ought not to be called upon to pay anything in the nature of a tribute, or more than the actual charge of our troops when employed in India, which was the old legal and Constitutional principle. Yet he thought the balance of benefit was enormously against India, and in favour of England. We had only to consider what India would have been but for English rule to see the enormous benefit she had derived from it. It was no exaggeration to say that our government of India was such a government as the world had never seen before. The Roman Empire in its greatest extent was not so wonderful. We governed 180,000,000 men of opposite races and religions, sometimes fanatically opposed to each other, and governed them more quietly, calmly, and peacefully than we could govern our own people in Ireland. He desired to say nothing which would diminish the loyalty and sense of obligation which the Indian people felt and ought to feel towards us; and it would have the worst possible effect if there were any suspicion aroused in India that, for the purposes of making convenient Budgets or of Party Government, the people of India were being charged with expenses which ought really to be defrayed by the Home Government.
Moved—
"That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for copy of letter from Sir Thomas T. Pears to the Under Secretary for War, dated 9th August, 1872."—(The Duke of Argyll.)
THE EARL OF NORTHBROOKsaid, the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) stated very forcibly the main arguments in favour of India in this matter of the home charges, and he would only sup-

643
plement his noble Friend's statement in respect to the Reserve constituted under the Short Service Act, and from which regiments were filled up to their complement for foreign service, in reference to the question whether India got the full benefit of that Reserve, having been put to no charge in respect of it. He had himself, when in India, written a Despatch on the subject. It was not a tenable proposition that the Indian Government paid nothing towards the Reserve. The Indian Government paid for the training of all the young soldiers who served their time in India. Nothing could be more frank than the speech of the Secretary of State for India the other day, when he said that India had been unjustly taxed with respect to the effective and non-effective charges of the Army. But his noble Friend did not say that the injustice would be remedied. These matters were very technical, and it required almost an education in the subject to be able to follow the arguments which might be brought forward. If this were an English and not an Indian question, upon the admission by the Leader of that House and his Colleagues that an injustice existed would have followed an announcement that it would be remedied. It was not a satisfactory condition of things that a Minister of the Crown should make such an admission without being able to say that it should be removed. He hoped, however, that now his noble Friend would be able to say that he had taken steps to bring his Colleagues to his own sense of the equity of the case. Lord Cardwell had admitted before a House of Commons' Committee that India paid more than she ought to pay in respect of these charges for the Army, and permanent officials of the Treasury had made the same admission. But nothing whatever had been done, and it was hopeless to expect that the matter would be taken up by the other House, for its present occupation was too exacting for such an expectation to be entertained. Secretaries of State, Viceroys, and Commanders-in-Chief in India were all unanimous on the question. There could be no doubt that the matter would be discussed in the Legislative Council of the Viceroy of India; and how could a Viceroy resist an Address from the India Legislature to the Crown praying that the question should be grappled with and
644
settled? He trusted that the matter would not be put on one side by the Secretary of State, and that he would distinguish his occupancy of the India Office by putting an end to the difficulty, which, if not remedied, would create uneasiness in the minds of educated people in India. He would suggest that this was a case where the Constitutional rights of the Indian Council might be exercised to the public advantage. The India Council had certain rights with respect to the expenditure of money; and if the Secretary of State for India was unable to effect an arrangement, and if he himself had the honour of occupying a seat on the Council, it would for him be a matter of grave consideration whether he should not decline to be a party to expending the Revenues of India upon the full charges now made by the War Office. The Act provided that no grant or appropriation of any part of the Revenues of India should be made without the concurrence of a majority of votes at a meeting of the Council; and if his noble Friend was unable to effect an arrangement he would be supported by all the authorities that could be brought to bear upon the subject if he declined to be a party to throwing these full-home charges upon India, including such matters as the results of the abolition of purchase in the British Army. Those charges had been admitted to be too high in some cases; and he should decline, in respect of putting on India the results of the abolition of purchase in this country, to pay some portion of the non-effective charge, until he knew how much of that charge was directly to be attributed to the compensation for the abolition of purchase. As to the effective charge, however, he should admit that some reasonable sum might fairly be charged. Even so late as a few years ago, £6 10s. per man was named by the Treasury as the sum payable and was nearly agreed to, and he should take that or some other reasonable figure, and should press upon his colleagues that in all equity the charge should be limited to that sum, and decline to give his vote for any larger charge. A Despatch was addressed by the Government of India to the Secretary of State on March 25, 1890, inclosing an elaborate Paper drawn up by the Military Secretary and one of the principal officers of military accounts in India going into the whole question of these charges, and

645
putting forward the principles upon which the Government of India desired to see them settled. His noble Friend the other day expressed a doubt whether the Despatch could with advantage be laid on the Table of the House, and on that ground he would abstain from moving for it; but if at the end of the present Session nothing had been done in the matter, it was only fair that that Despatch, accompanied by other Papers sent by his noble and gallant Friend on the Cross Benches to the Government of India, should be produced in order that public opinion might be brought somehow or other to support and strengthen the Secretary of State in the difficult position in which he was now placed. In that case he should move the presentation of a humble Address to Her Majesty for copies of financial letter from the Government of India to the Secretary of State, No. 406, of 23rd September, 1874; and of military letter from the Government of India to the Secretary of State, No. 63, of 10th March, 1876.
Moved, "That a humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for—Copies of financial letter from the Government of India to the Secretary of State, No. 406. of 23rd September, 1874; and of military letter from the Government of India to the Secretary of State. No. 63, of 10th March, 1876."—(The Earl of Northbrook.)
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (The Earl of KIMBERLEY): My Lords, I am much obliged to the noble Duke and the noble Earl for the observations they have made. I do not differ largely from the views which my noble Friends have expressed, though there were one or two remarks made to which I am disposed to demur. My noble Friends, in putting the case in favour of India, seem to me to go too far; and I do not think that a reasonable and just settlement of this matter is at all likely to be furthered by overstating the case. The real point to consider as regards the various expeditions which have been made by Indian troops is to what extent India was interested in those particular wars. My own feeling is that in some of them India had practically no interest; but, while admitting that, I may cite the case of Egypt as one wherein India had considerable interest. Indeed, the
646
special interest of this country in Egypt, and the steps taken there, were largely influenced by our position in India; and it is only fair and equitable that in those cases where she is interested India should be called upon to bear a proportion of the military charge. The question has been raised as to how far the British Army is a Reserve for India. In speaking upon that subject the other night I had in my mind the Reserves now existing in England, which are the result of the short service system. The Reserves amount to a considerable force, and there cannot be a doubt that, as a Reserve, the force is most valuable to India, and might be called upon to assist India. When I had the honour of holding Office last time but one there was what was called the Russian scare. Large preparations were made for the purpose of taking steps to defend India, and in this country a portion of the Reserves were called out to be sent there. The Reserves obeyed the call in the most satisfactory manner; and if war should have unhappily broken out the Government could have despatched 25,000 of these men to India, where they would have arrived at the most critical moment, and would have supplied India with a most valuable reinforcement. It appears to be thought also that I can compel my Colleagues in the Cabinet to adopt my views on this subject. But when the noble Marquess, who I am sorry is not present (the Marquess of Salisbury), was Secretary of State, he was exactly in the same position in relation to the Treasury of that day, and was not more successful in pressing demands than I have been. The same remark applies to the noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Argyll); and, therefore, I do not think that I can fairly be expected to exercise more influence than those noble Lords were able to exercise before me. I can only press this question in the most convenient way. I was rather apprehensive, as I said the other night, that demands might be made upon the Indian Government for further payments; and, being unable to resist present demands, I thought it desirable that I should be in a position to resist further demands. Though I do not say there will be such a proceeding, it is possible that this matter may be made the subject of a large and extensive inquiry; but the opinion of the distinguished and able men who

647
render me valuable assistance at the India Office is that those inquiries have generally resulted in an addition to the burdens, and they look upon them with considerable jealousy. It is exceedingly difficult to draw a line with perfect fairness in this matter, and I am afraid the old saying has here considerable force—"Les absents ont toujours tort." We have to deal here with Departments entrusted with English affairs and English finance, whilst India is far away; and absence in this, as in a great many other cases, prevent Indian questions, important as they are, from receiving all the consideration which I think they deserve. It is of enormous importance that all these matters should receive careful consideration. I trust it will never be forgotten, as the noble Duke has said, in words far better chosen than I could use, what a marvellous fabric the Indian Empire, and what an extraordinary success it has been; and it is an immense glory to the people of this country that such an Empire has been created and maintained. If it is still to be maintained, we must give reasonable care to the great questions affecting its welfare, and such questions are as important as any that can come under the attention of the Government or of Parliament.
LORD ROBERTS: My Lords, I did not intend to speak on this occasion, indeed I was not aware that this question was going to be discussed; but as it is one on which I feel deeply interested, I do not like to pass it by altogether in silence. I venture to say, my Lords, that I entirely agree in what the noble Duke has said, and I also agree with the noble Earl on my left (the Earl of Northbrook). I trust the matter will be gone into most thoroughly, and, if possible, settled before the time comes for the preparation of the next Budget; for I feel certain that this matter is one which will not be passed over in India, but will be, no doubt, brought forward for discussion in the Legislative Department of the Viceroy.
LORD NORTONsaid, having had something to do in Parliament with the relations between Imperial and Colonial affairs, he had always considered it a monstrous proposition that Imperial matters should be thrown upon the charge of this country alone. It would be impossible, even if we attempted it from a feeling of
648
pride, for this little Island to fight all the battles of the British Empire at our own charge; and we should not only find it an impossible task, but we should do a great deal more harm than good in attempting it. The whole Empire ought to contribute to Imperial purposes, and certainly each part of it to wars, which specially affected it. The noble Duke said that India had no. interest in the Crimean War; but no part of the Empire had a greater interest in it than India, looking at the position and claims of Russia. India was as much interested as England. And the same statement must be made with regard to the Egyptian and Chinese Wars. If this Metropolitan Island announced itself ready to fight all the battles of the world—if we at home once assumed a sort of grandmotherly position towards the various parts of the Empire, we should soon be involved in all sorts of difficulties. Such an attempt would breed wars everywhere, for, in many cases, it would be absolutely an advantage to the Colonists for England to undertake a war for them. The New Zealand Wars were kept up as long as England sent troops to carry them on, and ceased the moment they were withdrawn.
Motions agreed to.

ELEMENTARY EDUCATION (RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION) BILL.—(No. 158.)
REPORT OF AMENDMENTS.
Amendments reported (according to Order).
LORD LINGENmoved to insert, in Clause 7, as to appeals to the Education Department in case of delay, that copies of the appeal and the decision, and of the grounds for the decision, should be laid before both Houses of Parliament. He moved this Amendment because the Bill made a great change in the principles embodied in the Elementary Education Act of 1870, and acted upon for now 23 years. He would not, at this stage, again occupy the time of the House by discussing the many important points raised by the Bill, and would only urge that the changes made were such as to call for Parliament being kept fully informed of what was done. If it were urged that the Bill dealt with somewhat petty details, he would point out that it

649
was only to cases of appeals to the Education Department, and in which the Education Department had come to a decision, that he proposed to direct the attention of Parliament. If the Bill should have any success, the majority of the cases under it would he settled by agreement between the parties interested. It would only be right that Parliament should be kept informed of the action of the Department when appeal was made to it. As an old official, he knew that periodical Returns to Parliament had a very steadying and controlling effect. No doubt, the administration of this Bill would turn on details which seemed petty; but important principles would be constantly involved. For instance, in a country parish two rival schools might exist—one a Board and the other a National school. In the former, two pairs of parents having between them five children would be able to demand their own religious instruction; but in the latter, Dissenting parents must be content with the Conscience Clause, which was purely negative. He was not going to discuss the merits of the Bill, but would only say it was of sufficient importance to justify Parliament in keeping an eye upon it; and he hoped the Amendment would not be opposed by the promoters of the Bill. A negation of the proposal to bring its working, in the more important cases, under the cognisance of Parliament would hardly commend itself TO the other House.
Amendment moved,
In page 2, line 36, after ("act"), insert ("Copies of every such appeal, and of the decision thereon, and of the grounds of such decision, shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament if Parliament be sitting at the date of such decision, and if Parliament be not sitting, then within 14 days of the next meeting thereof.")—(The Lord Lingen.)
LORD NORTONsaid, he not only supported the Amendment, but contended that the publication of decisions on appeals to the Education Department was absolutely essential to the working of the Bill. On this subject it was well-known that the Education Department was even more hostile to religious education in the Board schools than the Boards themselves; and these appeals would be, consequently, from a hostile to a still more hostile body on every point in the
650
Bill. Religious teaching must be, in the opinion of the Board, with injury to the efficiency of the school and to the interests of the other children. On another point, the parents of the children receiving the religious instruction had to pay for it in a manner satisfactory to the Board. Was it likely that they would go very far in a matter which was not satisfactory to the Board? Again, the Board might withdraw the teacher if they considered his conduct unbecoming; and nothing would be more unbecoming, in their view, than what they must always be ready to consider religious propagandism. Further, it was provided that the religious teaching must not conflict with the ordinary duties of the school. The Board would, no doubt, take it always as an evasion of their system, and a deduction from the curriculum which they considered it their sole duty to look after. He hoped the right rev. Prelate in charge of the Bill would accede to the Amendment, as it would tend to check, to a certain extent, the action of the Appellate Body in support of Board objections, if its decisions, and the grounds of them, were made public.
LORD SHANDsaid, the effect of the Amendment would be that whenever any point was brought before the Education Department by any of the School Boards both Houses of Parliament were to be troubled with a Return upon the matter. Matters of small detail, such as the general arrangements for giving religious instruction, the appointment of teachers, where the teaching was to be given, the hours for it, and so on, were the subjects of appeal. On such matters as those the Education Department were to lay Returns before Parliament. Such an addition to the Bill would be cumbrous and bad, and even if it were made no suggestion was offered that Parliament had power to interfere with the decisions of the Department. He could not understand what practical advantage was to be obtained by it; and without it any matter of the least public importance could easily be brought under the notice of Parliament. He was, therefore, opposed to the Amendment.
THE BISHOP OF SALISBURYsaid, he had no objection to the Amendment, though he had no desire to introduce into the Bill anything which would show suspicion of the Department, or anything

651
that, in the opinion of those who represented the Department, would cause any difficulty in the working of the Bill.
Amendment agreed to.
Bill to be read 3a on Thursday next; and to be printed as amended. (No. 186.)

THE SPANISH GOVERNMENT AND H.M.S. "HOWE."

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  VISCOUNT SIDMOUTHasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether thanks on behalf of Her Majesty's Government had been conveyed to the Spanish Government for the courtesy shown to this country in permitting Her Majesty's Ship Howe to be docked and repaired at Ferrol; if so, whether the Despatch conveying such thanks could be laid on the Table of the House? He said the Howe had occupied the dock at Ferrol for a period of several months, and her repair must have occasioned considerable inconvenience to the Spanish Government. He was told that the courtesy and kindness shown by all the authorities at the port were all that could be desired, and more than we had a right to expect. Had it not been for the fortuitous circumstance of a dock being at hand and available to us at Ferrol capable of receiving so large a vessel, she would probably have been lost to the country.
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Earl of ROSEBERY): My Lords, I have constantly taken every opportunity of thanking the Spanish Government for the service they have rendered to Her Majesty's Navy, and of which no one can think more highly than I do. It is a great pleasure to Her Majesty's Government to owe this debt of gratitude to that generous nation. We have paid it as far as we can in the matter of thanks. The Howe came out of dock on the 15th ultimo, and on the 18th a formal Despatch was sent to Her Majesty's Ambassador at Madrid instructing him to offer the thanks of Her Majesty's Government in the warmest terms for the services rendered by the Spanish Government in this matter. Her Majesty has also expressed her anxiety to confer various marks of re-
  652
  cognition on those who have assisted in the work; and Her Majesty's Government are awaiting the answer of the Spanish Government as to whether it would be agreeable to them that these marks should be given. There was a final Despatch sent of a complimentary nature; but I do not think it necessary to lay upon the Table a merely complimentary Despatch. If, however, the noble Viscount presses for it, I will offer no objection to its production.

THE NAVIGATION OF THE KARUN RIVER.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  VISCOUNT SIDMOUTHasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether information had been received at the Foreign Office respecting any works in progress or in contemplation by British or Native enterprise for the opening up of the navigation of the Karun River from the Persian Gulf? He said, the question had reference to the concession made while the late Government was in Office. The Karun River was the means of access from the head of the Persian Gulf for a length of 115 to 120 miles, and would, if it could be utilised, give the Persian Government an opportunity of carrying her produce down the. Gulf to India or to England. It would also give our own vessels access to Ahwaz. He understood there was an obstruction at Ahwaz; and he wished to. inquire whether any steps were being taken to remove that obstruction, so as to give access to the higher waters of the Karun, and thereby to the heart of Persia? He was anxious that the trade of those parts should be in the hands of the British people, and should not fall into the hands of a Foreign Power.
  THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIANsaid, he believed that a tramway was now being constructed from the waters above to below Ahwaz. He might state, from personal observation on the spot, that the obstruction, or bund, referred to was partly natural and partly artificial, and a large sum of money would be required for its removal, or to make a sufficient water-way through it. Moreover, the effect of its removal would not be what the noble Viscount seemed to think. A canal would be an alternative method of overcoming the difficulty; but a more

  653
  practical mode would be the construction of a light tramway, which, he believed, was actually in contemplation. Another point in which he had taken great interest was as to how far British commerce might be encouraged. His impression was that the whole commerce of the Karun River was opened up by British merchants named Lynch; but a Persian Company had done much to hinder British commerce, and the British Company had been placed in a rather difficult position. He hoped the noble Earl would be able to give some indication that that Company, which had first opened up the Karun River to commerce, would not be placed at a discount by the selfish proceedings of the Persian Company.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: I think, from what I can gather, my noble Friend who has just sat down has shown himself more able than I am myself to answer the question of the noble Viscount. It is correct that a tramway is being constructed to form a connection between the upper and lower waters of the Karun at Ahwaz. Meanwhile, the traffic is being carried by Arabs and donkeys. With regard to the traffic, Messrs. Lynch are endeavouring to come to some arrangement with the Persian Government for obtaining proper accommodation for storing their goods. The traffic in the upper part of the Karun is reserved to the Persian Government, and is only carried by steamers in their service. Under the regulations of the Persian Government, it is stipulated that shipowners shall not erect anything of their own on the banks of the river; but Messrs. Lynch are trying as much as they can to push their trade on the Upper Karun. As regards the obstruction at Ahwaz, the noble Marquess has answered the question with much greater knowledge of the river than I possess. For a certain distance the river is open to the vessels of all nations. One of the Companies possesses a small steamer, which is used principally as a tug, and has put up a building on the left bank. New Government buildings, with excellent accommodation, are being constructed at Mohammara. I do not think I have any other information at my disposal. The noble Viscount made the remark that I attach little or no importance to the trade now being carried on under the
  654
  concession to the Russian Government. That is not so, but I do not attach to it sufficient importance under the advice of experts upon the spot to offer any opposition to it. And, indeed, it is rather a dog-in-the-manger policy to obstruct the development of an ancient State because that particular development is not being carried out by ourselves. I do not think that is a policy which the Government or this House would care to be responsible for, and we can only oppose a concession of this kind when the interests of this country are in any way vitally at stake. However, I hope the noble Viscount will not think I am indifferent to what takes place in that part of the world.
  VISCOUNT SIDMOUTHwished to know whether the Persian Government had absolutely prohibited any foreign vessels on the upper waters of the Karun River?
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: I do not think there is any absolute prohibition; but I think there is a tendency on the part of the Persian Government to insure a monopoly of the traffic on the Upper Karun, and Messrs. Lynch are endeavouring to break through that monopoly.

  LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (GENERAL POWERS) BILL.
  Reported from the Select Committee with Amendments.
  WEAVER NAVIGATION BILL [H.L.]
  Returned from the Commons agreed to, with Amendments.
  PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES.
  Report, &c. of the Select Committee of the House of Commons, communicated pursuant to Message of Tuesday the 13th of June last, and to be printed. (No. 185.)
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 4) BILL.—(No. 126.)
  House in Committee (according to Order): Amendments made; Standing Committee negatived: The Report of Amendments to be received To-morrow.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PRO VISIONAL ORDER (No. 6) BILL.—(No. 153.)
  Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 7) BILL.—(No. 162.)
  Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 8) BILL.—(No. 169.)
  House in Committee (according to Order): Bill reported without Amendment: Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 9) BILL.—(No. 170.)
  House in Committee (according to Order): Bill reported without Amendment: Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.
  ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 7) BILL.—(No. 168.)
  House in Committee (according to Order): Bill reported without Amendment: Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a To-morrow.

  EDUCATION PROVISIONAL ORDER CONFIRMATION (LONDON) BILL [H.L.] (No. 94.)
  Amendments reported (according to Order), and Bill to be read 3a Tomorrow.
  House adjourned at ten minutes past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Five o'clock.