Lords Sitting of 19 June 1903

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificate from the Examiners that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bill have not been complied with: Alexandra Park and Palace.
The same was ordered to lie on the Table.
Great Northern Railway Bill; The Lord Chancellor informed the House that the opposition to the Bill was withdrawn: The orders made on the 14th of May and Monday last discharged, and Bill committed.
Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 2) Bill [H.L.]; Reported from the Select Committee with Amendments, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.
Mid Yorkshire Tramways Bill [H.L.]; Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
Manchester Southern Tramways Bill [H.L.]; Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
Metropolitan Police Provisional Order Bill (No. 120); Broughty Ferry Gas Provisional Order Bill (No. 121); Hamilton Burgh Provisional Order Bill (No. 122); Military Lands Provisional Orders Bill (No. 123); Brought from the Commons; Read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners.
Baker Street and Waterloo Railway (Transfer) Bill; Brought from the Commons; Read 1a, and referred to the Examiners.
St. Luke's Church and Parish Quoad Sacra Edinburgh Order Confirmation Bill. [H.L.]; Returned from the Commons agreed to.
Winchester Water and Gas Bill; Midland Railway Bill; Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 5) Bill; Order of yesterday for the Commitment of the Bill to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next discharged, and Bill committed: The Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 4) Bill; Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.
Water Orders Confirmation Bill [H.L.]; Read 3a (according to Order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.
Naval Work Provisional Order Bill: Committee of the Whole House (which stands appointed for this day), put off to Monday next.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
  AFRICA No. 6. (1903.)
  Report by His Majesty's Commissioner on the East Africa Protectorate.
  WELLINGTON COLLEGE.
  Report of the Governors, for the year ended the 31st December, 1902; with accounts.

  LIGHT RAILWAYS ACT, 1896.
  Orders made by the Light Railway Commissioners and modified and confirmed by the Board of Trade.
  Authorising the construction of light railways between Stockton Heath and Northwich, and elsewhere in the County of Chester.
  Authorising the construction of light railways in the County Borough of Warrington and in the parishes of Stockton Heath and Latchford Without, in the County of Chester.
  Authorising the construction of light railways in the County of Kent, in the County Borough of Canterbury, and in the rural districts of Bridge and of Blean, and in the urban district of Herne Bay.
  Authorising the County Council of Middlesex to take lands for widening roads on which light railways will be laid in the parishes of Edgware, Finchley,

  1407
  Friern Barnet, Hendon, Kingsbury, Little Stanmore, Southgate, Tottenham, Willesden, and Wood Green in the County of Middlesex.
  Authorising the compulsory purchase of lands for the purposes of the Cole and Trawden Light Railways Order, 1901, and for other purposes.
  Presented (by Command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  BISHOPRICS OF SOUTHWARK AND BIRMINGHAM BILL [H.L.]
  [SECOND READING.]
  Order of the day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD BELPER: My Lords, I understand that a wish has been expressed by some noble Lords that more time should be given for the consideration of this Bill. If that is the general wish of the House I will postpone the Second Reading until Monday.
  EARL SPENCER: I certainly did hear that there were certain persons very much interested in this Bill who did not have the print of it in their hands until last night. I understand that copies of the Bill were circulated to your Lordships early on Wednesday morning, and if that is so I think a little longer time should be allowed before the Second Reading stage is taken. It is true that it is on the lines of a Bill introduced last session, but it goes a great deal farther, as it deals also with Birmingham. I am glad, therefore, that the noble Lord has expressed his willingness to postpone it.
  Second Reading postponed accordingly until Monday next.

  PREFERENTIAL TARIFFS—GERMANY AND CANADA.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN, who had given notice "To call attention to the statement of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, made on 15th June, that 'it has been intimated by the German Government that if other British colonies follow the example of
  1408
  Canada and give a preference to British imports, Great Britain probably will not be allowed to continue in receipt of the most - favoured - nation terms;' and to move that Papers may be laid upon the Table of the House as soon as the public interest will permit" said: My Lords, the Foreign Secretary the other night, in the course of the debate upon preferential tariff's, let drop certain very important words to which it was not possible to draw sufficient attention at that time. The subject which was before the House was not our relations with Germany, but the question of preferential tariffs. The noble Marquess, who never speaks without care and deliberation, made a very important statement, as I thought, and he concluded by saying that what had happened had created a very serious situation. I think, therefore, that it is desirable that the attention of your Lordships should be called, and that of the country directed, to the correspondence which appears to have been recently passing between our Foreign Office and the German Government. The noble Marquess, speaking at the time of the difficulties which had arisen between Canada and the German Government with regard to the preferential terms which Canada had conceded to this country, told us that it was quite possible, and, indeed, likely, that the German Government might proceed to put further surtaxes on Canadian produce; and then he used these words, that it had been intimated by the German Government that if other British colonies followed the example of Canada and gave a preference to British imports, Great Britain probably would not be allowed to continue in receipt of the most-favoured-nation terms.
  Now, my Lords, what is this notice that has been presented to us by the German Government? The German Government say that if any other British colony chooses to concede to this country preferential terms punishment is to follow. Who is to be punished? Is it the colony? That, I presume, goes without saying. But, in addition to the colony, Great Britain, although she may not have asked for this preference, although she may not even be desirous to have it, yet because one of her colonies has chosen to place her upon preferential

  1409
  terms, is to be removed from the most-favoured-nation clauses as far as Germany is concerned. That is a notice which is quite unprecedented so far as I know; I am not aware that any independent nation has ever sent such a notice to another. But, my Lords, what is Germany's position? Germany argues, in the first place, in this wise. She says—"We claim to differentiate against Canada because we contend that Canada, having a fiscal system of her own, and being a representative colony, is not, for fiscal purposes, part of the British Empire, and we have the right to treat her as an independent Power." But she alters her ground after that. Then she says—"But we inform you, Great Britain, that if any other of your colonies concedes to you a preference, then you are responsible for that colony, although it is representative, although it has a separate fiscal system of its own. We will punish it, but we will also punish you, and we will no longer concede to you the most-favoured-nation terms."
  My Lords, were such inconsistent arguments ever before brought forward? Can any one say that there is any justice in such a course? Now, what is the meaning of this notice? It must be one of two things. It may be a threat to terrorise the colonies and prevent them from drawing nearer to this country, and also a threat to this country that if she allows her colonies to draw nearer to her she is to take the consequences. Are German statesmen so ignorant of the whole character and temper of this country that they really believe that a course like this is likely to succeed? The policy of the "mailed fist" may do very well in Germany—though even there discontent and Socialism appear to be spreading very rapidly, according to what we see and read—but in this country that policy is of all policies the least likely to succeed. Yet we are told that Great Britain is to be placed on a stool apart from all the other boys as an example to the world of what happens to a naughty boy when he dares to disregard the directions of the master. If it is not this—and I see that some of the organs of the German
  1410
  Press have been contending just within this last day or two that it is not intended for a threat—then what else can it be except a direct challenge to this country to a war of tariffs? I can hardly believe that that is the case, but if it be so the levity of such a course as that is only exceeded by its unwisdom.
  Does Germany really wish to enter upon a commercial war with this country? Is it wise, in her own interests, that she should do so? If you look at the trade between Germany and this country—I take the three years which immediately preceded the South African war and which therefore may be regarded as the last normal years—you will find that in 1897 Germany exported to this country goods to the value of 699,000,000 marks, and imported from us goods to the value of 567,000,000 marks; in 1898 she exported to us 740,000,000 marks, and imported from us 566,000,000 marks; in 1899 she exported to us 801,000,000 marks worth of goods, and imported from us 672,000,000 marks. Therefore, if Germany chooses to enter upon a commercial war with us, she is doing away with one of her very best customers. Of course, Germany is the best judge of what is good for her own commercial interests, but I do not think that any of us would have advocated a course like that if we had been speaking of the interests of Great Britain. Germany has declared commercial war upon Canada. What is the effect likely to be there? The trade is not a very large one, but Germany's exports to Canada are five or six times what her imports from Canada are. Pray how is Germany benefited if she places a surtax on Canada which merely produces a surtax in retaliation on her own goods? But she promises to carry this policy further, and she says that if any other British colony gives a preference to Great Britain it will be treated in a like way. I presume she therefore wishes to throttle her growing trade with Australia—a trade which at the present time is a very important one; and I presume also that she wishes to throttle her trade with British South Africa if the resolutions which were passed the other day at the Bloemfontein Conference are adopted by the various British

  1411
  colonies there. One can only say how unwise this is, but it is for Germany to take her own course.
  Let us look nearer home. It is very evident from the German Press that this policy of preferential tariffs between this country and her colonies, which is at the present time under discussion, is a matter which creates considerable concern in Germany, and, as we know, the Secretary of State for the Colonies is not very popular in Germany. He has had to express his opinion, on one occasion at all events, very clearly to a German statesman, and he is not regarded with much favour in the German Press. He is the chief advocate of preferential tariffs. Pray how is Germany advancing her own cause by taking the line she has taken? If she had wished to assist to her utmost the cause which the Colonial Secretary is advocating, what better method could she possibly have adopted than by explaining to this country so graphically the lesson of retaliation? There is nothing like an object lesson to inform the public mind in this country with regard to any public question. This country never would have understood the South African question if ex-President Kruger had not declared war; and when Germany informs this country that if she draws nearer to her colonies she shall suffer by being taken out of the most-favoured-nation clause, that is a thing which, as soon as it is realised, will be thoroughly understood, and, as I believe, deeply resented.
  I say it with regret, but unfortunately this is by no means a solitary instance in which the German Government has done its best to annoy and to irritate this country in late years. When the German Empire was founded there were a very large number of people in this country—I believe the majority—who thought that the German Alliance was the natural alliance and the best alliance for this country. We all respect the energy, the steadfastness, the thoroughness of the character of the German nation, and we admire many other of their high qualities, and it would seem that an alliance and a close friendship between the two nations was most natural. But I regret to say that on many occasions—I need not give instances, for there is no use in ripping up old sores, and your Lordships know them
  1412
  well—German statesmen and the German Press seem to have been actuated by a desire, and they certainly have known how, to annoy this country deeply in more than one way, and a conviction has been gaining ground, during the last two or three years I am afraid rapidly, that when we look for friendship we had better look somewhere else than to Germany. What the reason of this may be I am sure I do not know. All I can say is that I deeply lament it; but you may depend upon it that irritating messages such as this, even if for the moment their effect may pass away, are not likely to be forgotten. It is very desirable, I think, that we should see the correspondence that has taken place on this matter, and that we should see it with as little delay as may be. I do not think that it is possible that this correspondence, or this part of it, can be long. To any such communication as that which the noble Marquess said he had received there could be only one answer—a very simple one. No British Government could give any answer but one. What is wanted, I think, in this matter is plain speaking, and it does not at all follow that plain speaking means a diminution of friendship. The German Government, I hope, has already been made to understand that the relations between ourselves and our colonies is an affair which concerns us alone, and that messages or threats or warnings which are conveyed to us by any foreign nation with regard to our colonies, whatever may be their object and their intention, are only likely to confirm us more in taking the course which we choose to take. I beg to move for the correspondence which has taken place with the German Government on this matter.
  Moved, That an humble address be presented to His Majesty for correspondence relating to the statement of the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, made on 15th June, that "it has been intimated by the German Government that if other British Colonies follow the example of Canada and give a preference to British imports, Great Britain probably will not be allowed to continue in receipt of the most-favoured-nation terms."—(The Earl of Camperdown.)
  *THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of LANSDOWNE): My Lords, I will not

  1413
  attempt to follow the noble Earl through the whole of the interesting speech which he has just delivered. That speech was mainly devoted to enforcing an argument which I used myself the other night, and I therefore listened to it with feelings of concurrence and approval. The noble Earl, of course, was able to speak with an amount of unofficial freedom which I could not use in the course of my remarks the other evening. I have, I think, however, said enough to show the noble Earl that I fully realise the great importance of the question which he has brought before your Lordships, and I do not feel that I am called upon to-night to add to, or to take away anything from, what I ventured to say on the subject the other evening. My Lords, I will only make this observation in passing. The noble Earl indulged in some severe strictures upon the conduct of the German Government on this and on other occasions. My Lords, I desire to deprecate the assumption that in this matter the conduct of the German Government has been actuated by deliberate hostility to the Government of His Majesty. I think the German Government have taken a course which it was perhaps nit unnatural that they should take, knowing, as they did, the manner in which up to the present time we have been in the habit of dealing with questions concerning the treatment of our colonies. What I think is necessary is that we should do what the noble Earl says we should, I mean that we should make our position in regard to these matters perfectly clear and intelligible to Germany and to all concerned, and I have very little doubt that when this is done we shall find it possible to bring about a settlement of these questions on terms satisfactory to ourselves and to the colonies. With respect to the Papers, the noble Earl and every Member of your Lordships' House is, of course, fully entitled, after the argument which I used the other evening, to require their production. I am having them got in in order. The noble Earl is, of course, aware that when Papers are laid including communications which have passed with a foreign Government that Government has to be consulted before the
  1414
  Papers are finally put in shape for presentation; but I see no reason why that process should take up any length of time, and I hope within a few days to lay the Papers before the House, and the noble Earl will find that they carry the history of this matter up to the present dafe.
  VISCOUNT GOSCHEN: How far will the Papers go back? I understand that there are some important despatches going back as far as 1897.
  *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My idea was to begin with the Papers of 1897, and bring the correspondence up to the last despatches which have passed. Some of the 1897 Papers have already been laid, but I think it would be desirable to include them in the new Blue-book.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: As the noble Marquess has consented to lay the Papers on the Table when they are ready, I beg to withdraw my Motion.
  Motion, by leave of the House, withdrawn.

  THE SERVIAN MASSACRE.
  LORD NEWTON, who had the following notice on the Paper, viz.—"To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government propose to take any common or concerted action with other Powers with regard to the new Government of Servia," said: My Lords, the Question which appears in my name has already been answered in another place, but I have left it on the Paper, and propose to put it so as to afford the noble Marquess an opportunity of making a more ample statement, if he thinks fit, than was made in the House of Commons. I do not wish to detain your Lordships at any length in discussing this matter, but I cannot help remarking upon the extraordinary apathy, amounting I might almost say to callousness, with which this most atrocious crime has been received throughout Europe. I cannot but think that if this event had taken place in the neighbouring country of Turkey we should have heard from many a platform and pulpit eloquent denunciations and assertions that such an occurrence could not have been possible in any Christian country. Although the

  1415
  statement has been made by the Provisional Servian Government that—
  "Highly satisfactory despatches have been received from the Governments of London, Paris, Berlin, and Rome,"
  I have very little doubt in my own mind that this is an impudent fabrication on the part of the Provisional Government. But the fact does remain that so far only two protests have been publicly made against this most atrocious crime—one in the message addressed by the Emperor of Austria to the newly elected king, and the other in the communiqué published to-day from the Official Messenger of St. Petersburg, in which the hope is expressed that condign punishment will be inflicted on the perpetrators of these murders. It is, however, extremely difficult to see how this can be carried out, because the new king, it is perfectly evident, can only be the creature of the conspirators who have been the means of securing his election. So far as Servia itself is concerned, the feelings of nobody appear to have been outraged at all. On the contrary, the assassins are glorified as heroes, the National Assembly has passed a vote of thanks to them, and their action has been effusively and solemnly blessed by the clergy. As a matter of fact, this is a crime that does not possess one single redeeming feature—it has no justification of patriotism. We are assured that the country sympathises with the disappearance of the Obrenovitch dynasty, and that popular feeling is in favour of the change which has occurred. Anyone who knows anything about the Balkan States knows perfectly well that popular feeling in the ordinary acceptance of the term is nonexistent, and that it is solely created, formed, and regulated by the set of politicians who happen to be in power, and who control it through the police and the other means at their disposal. This has been nothing but a sordid military conspiracy carried out in an atrocious way, and inspired by sordid motives. It is evidently a purely military conspiracy of the ordinary kind, and it has been carried out by an army which is obviously a much more efficient instrument for effecting a palace revolution than for encountering a neighbouring country on the field of battle. I am the last person who wishes to see sentiment imported into foreign politics. If the Servian people really like to be governed
  1416
  by assassins and conspirators that is their own look-out, and we have no title to interfere, provided British interests are not affected, but I venture to express the opinion that there is something actually revolting in the continuance of ordinary relations with persons responsible for a crime of this nature; and whatever may be the intention of foreign Governments, whether they propose to exact reparation for this crime or not, I trust that His Majesty's Government will take an early opportunity of expressing in the most emphatic manner their abhorrence of this crime, not only because it is a disgrace to civilisation, but because a crime of this kind must re-act in the very worst possible manner far beyond the boundaries of the country in which it has been committed.
  *THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, I can assure the noble Lord that His Majesty's Government do not yield to him in the abhorrence which he has expressed for the events which have lately disgraced the capital of Servia. That abhorrence has not been diminished by any later intelligence which has reached us in regard to those events. I think it would be no exaggeration to say that it would be hard to find a parallel, even in the annals of States which have no pretence to be included amongst civilised communities, for outrages of such a character as those which we are discussing this evening. The noble Lord asked me "whether His Majesty's Government propose to take any common and concerted action with other Powers with regard to the new Government of Servia." I am not quite sure whether I understood him to suggest that it was our duty to concert with other Powers measures of a punitive character directed against the authors of these outrages. My Lords, no proposal of that kind has been made to us, nor, I conceive, could we usefully have made such a proposal to other Powers; but when we pass from that to the question of diplomatic relations, then I am certainly prepared to tell the noble Lord that nothing is further from our thoughts than to maintain what he spoke of as ordinary relations with persons who were implicated in these events. Our action in the matter has already been publicly

  1417
  explained. Our diplomatic relations came to an end with the death of the late King, and they have not been renewed. We had it at first in contemplation to mark our indignation by the immediate withdrawal of our representative, Sir George Bonham, from Belgrade, but we came to the conclusion that it was better, at all events for a time, that Sir George Bonham should remain at his post. We desired that he might be there to watch over British interests and to report to us as to the progress of events; but he was specially instructed, by a telegram which I addressed to him on the 15th inst., that his intercourse with the authorities was to be strictly limited to what is necessary for these purposes, and he was told that he was to be careful to do nothing which might be construed as an official recognition of the Provisional Government, whose freedom from complicity in the Acts of the night of June 10th has not yet been established, or as pledging His Majesty's Government to recognise the authority which may be set up in succession to the dynasty. With regard to the action of other Powers, although there has been no attempt at combined or concerted action, we have taken measures to inform ourselves as to what is intended, and I believe I am correct in saying that three, at least, of the Great Powers—France, Germany, and Italy — are maintaining an attitude corresponding to that which we have maintained. Two other Powers — Russia and Austria — are, we understand, prepared to recognise the new régime; but Russia, at all events, appears to have made it plain that she expected the punishment of the persons concerned in these crimes. I may, perhaps, add, that we have come to the conclusion that it would not be desirable that Sir George Bonham should be at Belgrade when the new reign is inaugurated. We have, therefore, instructed him to leave the capital for a time.
  EARL SPENCER: My Lords, I only wish to say that I have heard with great satisfaction the statement of the noble Marquess. It seems to me that it would have been very unfortunate, and not at all in accordance with our position
  1418
  as a great civilised Power, to pass over without some marked comment the terrible tragedy which took place at Belgrade. What the noble Marquess has told us seems to put in a satisfactory way the view which His Majesty's Government very properly took of these events, and which the country will, I am sure, support. It is satisfactory to learn, at all events, that certain of the Great Powers are viewing them in the same way. I hope, therefore, that, though it may not be very strongly marked, it will show the horror which the action of the conspirators has aroused in all the civilised countries of Europe.
  THE DUKE OF RUTLAND: My Lords, I wish to say that I have heard with great satisfaction the statement of the noble Marquess, especially the part of it which informed us that Sir George Bonham was not to remain at Belgrade during the investiture of the new Sovereign. That, at any rate, will be a sign of the intense disapprobation and horror felt universally throughout this country at the atrocious deeds perpetrated the other night, and I am pleased that the noble Marquess has placed that view of the case before your Lordships.

  MUSICAL COPYRIGHT BILL [H.L.]
  [THIRD READING.]
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.—(The Earl of Lytton.)
  On Question, Motion agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LYTTON: My Lords, I have two Amendments to move, the first of which is rendered necessary by the omission of the original Clause 5 of the Bill, which took place in the Standing Committee. But I wish to make one small alteration in the wording of the Amendment which now reads—"If any person shall sell or offer for sale, or carry for the purpose of sale, in or through any street or place of public resort," etc. I propose to substitute the words "public place" for the words "place of public resort."
  Amendment moved—
  "After Clause 4, to insert as a new Clause, 'If any person shall sell or offer for sale, or

  1419
  carry for the purpose of sale, in or through any street or public place, any pirated copy of any musical work, such person may be apprehended by any constable without warrant, if the true name and address of such person are not known to, and cannot then reasonably be ascertained by, the constable, and on the request in writing of the apparent owner of the copyright in such work, or of his agent thereto authorised in writing, and at the risk of such owner, and shall be taken as soon as reasonably may be before a Court of summary jurisdiction to be dealt with according to law.'"—(The Earl of Lytton.)
  LORD BELPER: The Home Office approve of the wording of the Amendment with the slight alteration which the noble Earl has made and which appears to be necessary, as otherwise it might be possible, in a place of public amusement, or a station, or other place of public resort, to call in the police, which is not desirable.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LYTTON: The second Amendment is a purely drafting one, which I am told is necessary to make the Bill work.
  Amendment moved—
  Clause 6, to leave out Sub-sections 3 and 4, and to insert as anew Sub-section: 'This Act and the Musical (Summary Proceedings) Copyright Act, 1902, shall extend to the Isle of Man (and all penalties recoverable and all acts authorised to be done by, or in any Court of summary jurisdiction in the island, may be recovered or done before or by a high bailiff, or two justices of the peace).'"—(The Earl of Lytton.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Moved, That the Bill do pass.—(The Earl of Lytton.)
  On Question, Motion agreed to, and Bill sent to the Commons.

  JUSTICES OF THE PEACE BILL [H.L.]
  Read 3a (according to Order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.

  COAL MINES (CERTIFICATES) BILL.
  Read 3a, with the Amendment, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
  House adjourned at ten minutes past Five o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock.