Sitting of 21 July 1864

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Ordered—Masters and Servants*.
First Reading—Mutual Surrender of Criminals (Prussia)* [Bill 231] (Lords); Masters and Servants * [Bill 232].
Committee—Consolidated Fund (Appropriation); Fortifications (Provision for Expenses) [Bill 218]; Pilotage Order Confirmation (No. 2) (re-committed)* [Bill 226]; Bank Post Bills (Ireland)* [Bill 211]; Cranbourne Street (re-committed)* [Bill 154]—R.P.; Corn Accounts and Returns (re-committed)* [Bill 214]; Stamp Duties Act (1864) Amendment * [Bill 225].
Report—Consolidated Fund (Appropriation); Fortifications (Provision for Expenses) [Bill 218]; Pilotage Order Confirmation (No. 2)* [Bill 226]; Bank Post Bills (Ireland)* [Bill 211]; Corn Accounts and Returns * [Bill 214]; Stamp Duties Act (1864) Amendment * [Bill 225].
Considered as amended—Corn Accounts and Returns* [Bill 214]; Poor' Removal * [Bill 222].
Third Reading—New Zealand (Guarantee of Loan) [Bill 150]; Contagious Diseases * [Bill 212]; Public Works (Manufacturing Districts)* [Bill 204]; Corn Accounts and Returns* [Bill 214]; Westminster Bridge Traffic* [Bill 205]; Scottish Episcopal Clergy Disabilities Removal [Bill 161] (Lords); Improvement of Land Act (1864)* [Bill 187] (Lords); Cathedral Minor Corporations * [Bill 220] (Lords); Criminal Justice Act (1855) Extension* [Bill201]; Armagh Archiepiscopal Revenues * [Bill 202], and passed.
Withdrawn—Metropolis Management Act (1862) Amendment* [Bill 219].

NAVY—PAYMENT OF OFFICERS.

  QUESTION.
  MR. C. P. BERKELEYsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, If he considers that the officers of long standing and high rank in the Navy are satisfied with the recent distribution of pay, as lately gazetted, by which it appears that their juniors will receive more than themselves; and if he considers that the fact of officers receiving more on the Retired Lists than those who remain on the Active Lists, will act beneficially in inducing officers to seek service; and if, considering the anomalies which have arisen in the various rates of pay, half-pay, retired pay, and reserve pay, Her Majesty's Government will cause any inquiry to be made, either by Royal Commission or otherwise?
  LORD CLARENCE PAGET,in reply, said, he had heard of no complaints to the effect that the officers of the navy were dissatisfied with the distribution of pay as recently gazetted. With regard to the junior officers receiving more pay than their seniors, that was undoubtedly true, but he had to observe that that was the only way in which officers could be induced to retire from the service, and make room for others more active. That arrangement was, therefore, inseparable from all schemes

  1791
  for retirement. His hon. Friend also asked whether he considered that the scheme would act beneficially in inducing officers to seek service; and he (Lord Clarence Paget) had to reply that he was not aware of the existence of any reluctance on the part of officers to seek service. On the contrary, there were repeated applications from officers for active employment. With respect to the latter part of the Question of his hon. Friend, he had to state that Her Majesty's Government had given great consideration to that subject, and that they were not at present disposed to cause any inquiry to be made, by Commission or otherwise, into the various rates of pay in the navy.
  MR. C. P. BERKELEYsaid, he would give notice that he should call attention to the subject at the earliest opportunity.

BRITISH AND FOREIGN STATE PAPERS.—QUESTION.
MR. HENRY SEYMOURsaid, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether a publication, called The British and Foreign State Papers, issued annually, and edited by the Librarian of the Foreign Office, is printed either wholly or in part at the public expense; and if so, whether such a selection might not be distributed to Members at the ordinary price of Parliamentary Papers instead of being charged 30 s. a volume; and whether it might not be brought up to the present time like the French collection?
MR. LAYARDsaid, in reply, that The British and Foreign State Papers were printed at the expense of the public, and sold at a certain rate, the proceeds passing to the public account. As to the distribution of the publication at the ordinary price of Parliamentary Papers, there was, of course, no objection to that if the House were willing to incur the expense. As to the work being brought down to the present time, that was impossible. The French publication referred to was of a different nature. It was a collection, hastily brought together, of documents published in various ways on the Continent. The State Papers, on the other hand, which were published by the British Foreign Office, were very carefully edited. They could not be brought down to the present day, because many of the papers were not printed till four or five years after they had
1792
been made use of. Some years ago the collection was very much behindhand. The present Librarian of the Foreign Office, however, who was a gentleman of great intelligence and zeal, had published two volumes a year, and was anxious, if possible, to increase the annual issue to three volumes. The work required so much care and attention that it was not desirable to undertake more than two or three volumes a year. By 1867 or 1868, he believed the collection would be brought up to within five years.
MR. HENRY SEYMOURsaid, that as far as he was aware they were not secret papers.

CONVICTION FOR SALE OF DISEASED MEAT.—QUESTION.
MR. CRAWFORDsaid it appeared from the Report of the Sanitary Committee of the City of London that in the twelve months ending September, 1863, not less than 114,000 lbs. of diseased, and 76,000 lbs. of putrid meat, were seize and condemned in the City of London. He therefore would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether Alexander Stewart, who was convicted at the Central Criminal Court in December, 1863, of the offence of sending diseased meat from Scotland to London for sale, and sentenced to the payment of a fine of £50, and imprisonment for the term of twelve calendar months, has been liberated from gaol without payment of the fine; and, if so, that he will state the grounds on which Stewart was so liberated and the fine remitted; and whether applications are not now before the Secretary of State for the Home Department for the remission of punishments and penalties in other similar cases.
SIR GEORGE GREY: I find, Sir, that Alexander Stewart, the person referred to, was convicted in November, 1863, for exposing for sale meat unfit for food. An application was made for a mitigation of the sentence, which was refused. But at the end of May, when he had undergone six months of the sentence, the Visiting Justices of Holloway Prison recommended his discharge on medical grounds, sending a certificate from the surgeon stating that his life was in great danger, and that unless soon liberated he would die; upon which he was discharged. The only other case of a similar kind in which, so far as I can ascertain, any application has been

1793
made is that of a man named George Thompson Smith, sentenced to March last to six months' imprisonment, and that application has been refused.

RESERVOIRS.—QUESTION.
MR. FERRANDsaid, he rose to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If it is an illegal act for the owners of a hill reservoir to fill it with water, and keep it full, or nearly full, for several successive weeks, without having had it duly certified by two Magistrates; if so (the Secretary of State having declared that he has no official authority to interfere), whether it would be an illegal act for the inhabitants whose lives are in danger to resist the filling of the reservoir until duly certified, for the purpose of securing their self-preservation, and their homes from destruction?
SIR GEORGE GREY: Sir, there is no general law to the effect stated by the hon. Gentleman, and I am not aware that in any case it is necessary to obtain the certificate of two magistrates before a reservoir is filled. But there is a clause in some Private Acts authorizing the construction of water works (and it is in the Bradford Waterworks Act), by which, on a representation being made to two justices by the owners or occupiers of any premises liable to be injured, that the embankment of the reservoir is in a dangerous state, such justices, if satisfied on an inquiry of the truth of such representation, shall require the Company within a given time to repair it. And the Act empowers the magistrates to take certain steps in the event of the Company not complying with the order. In this case, therefore, the law has provided an effectual remedy against danger. In answer to the latter part of the question of the hon. Gentleman, I can only say that I should advise him, or those who apprehend danger, to avail themselves of the provisions of the law, instead of taking the law into their own hands.
MR. FERRANDsaid, he wished to know whether there was any power to make the magistrates act?
SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, the words of the clause were, not that the "magistrates may," but that "the magistrates shall" do such and such things. The Court of Queen's Bench would deal with the magistrates if they wilfully neglected their duty.

WINE LICENCES.—QUESTION.
MR. COXsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been called to the injustice done by five Magistrates of the county of Middlesex, sitting in Special Sessions, to a Mr. Weston, not only in refusing him a "Gladstone" Wine Licence for the Retreat Tea Gardens at Kentish Town, but also in refusing to give the grounds of their objections when called on so to do by the Counsel of Mr. Weston, to enable him to appeal to Quarter Sessions; and whether he will bring in a Bill next Session making it compulsory on Magistrates refusing applications for such Licences to state their reasons for refusing to grant the same?
SIR GEORGE GREY: Sir, a short statement of this case was placed in my hands a few days ago by the hon. Gentleman. I can only state in answer to his question, what the law as to granting Wine Licences is. By the Act of 1860 (23 &c 24 Vict. c. 27, s. 13), on an application for a Wine Licence for the first time being made to the Commissioners of Inland Revenue, the Supervisor of Excise for the district is required to send notice of the application to the Justices of the Petty Sessions, stating that the licence will be granted after thirty days, unless the justices send a written notice that they object to its being I granted on some or one of the grounds specified in the Act. It is further provided; that no such objection shall be sent by the justices until they shall have heard what the applicant has to say against the objection, unless he refuses or neglects to attend before them on a summons, which summons must state the grounds of objection. Mr. Weston, therefore, must, I presume, have been summoned and the ground of objection stated to him before the notice of objection was sent to the Excise by the magistrates. It does not appear that there is any appeal to the Sessions in the case of a first application, the appeal being limited to an objection to the renewal of a licence already granted. The Act was one brought in by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and I cannot give any assurance as to a Bill for altering its provisions.
MR. COXsaid, he would give notice that he should to-morrow ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he will bring in a Bill to compel magistrates to give their reasons for refusing applications for licences?

NAVY—THE "RESEARCH" AND "ENTERPRISE."—QUESTION.
SIR FREDERIC SMITHsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether he has any objection to lay upon the table of the House, Copy of the Reports of Captain de Horsey on Her Majesty's Ships Research and Enterprise?
LORD CLARENCE PAGET,in reply, said, he had already stated that Captain de Horsey's Reports upon these two ships were partly favourable and partly unfavourable. They were very voluminous, and were accompanied by various diagrams, so that they could not easily be published. He had further to observe that they were to all intents and purposes confidential Reports from officers to their superiors; and if he were to make a practice of laying Reports of this nature on the table, the Admiralty would never receive papers which were not drawn up with a view to publication.

TROOPS FOR JAPAN.

  QUESTION.
  LORD NAASsaid, in the absence of his hon. Friend (Mr. Seymour Fitzgerald), he would beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether a force of Marines has been sent from this country to Japan, of how many men it consists, and when it was despatched from this country?
  LORD CLARENCE PAGETstated, in reply, that on the 21st of December last Her Majesty's ship Conqueror was sent to Japan with a limited crew and 500 marines.

PASSPORTS IN FRANCE.

  QUESTION.
  SIR WILLIAM FRASERsaid, he wished to say a few words in putting the Question of which he had given notice. At this time of the year there were a great many British subjects travelling in France; and it was of great importance that they should know whether or not they were required to carry passports; and, if so, whether the French visé was necessary? No one who had any experience of the subordinate officials of the French Government could fail to be aware that they were rather difficult people to deal with, and occasionally went beyond the orders of their superiors. A year or two since the French Government gave out that no inquiries would be made of British
  1796
  subjects travelling in France; but cases had come to his knowledge in which these orders had not been carried out. He hoped the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs would be able to give a clear and definite statement as to whether passports were required on the part of British subjects in France.
  MR. LAYARDsaid, it was well known that the Emperor of the French, with great liberality, had removed all restrictions upon British subjects travelling in France. He had never heard any complaints of the nature mentioned by the hon. Gentleman. French visés were not required for British subjects, nor was a passport necessary; but occasionally a traveller might be asked for his passport in order to identify his nationality. But although a passport was not essentially necessary, he should advise travellers to provide themselves with passports. He had always received the greatest civility from the French authorities when travelling, and he had never heard of a bonâ fide British subject being subjected to inconvenience. The countries in which a passport was not required at present were Bavaria, Belgium, Denmark, Holland, France, Italy, Prussia, Spain, Sweden, and Norway. In all other Continental countries passports were required.

POOR RELIEF IN THE METROPOLIS.

  QUESTION.
  LORD CLAUD HAMILTONsaid, he had a Question of considerable importance to bring under the notice of the House, and that he might put himself in order he would conclude with a Motion for adjournment. The subject to which he wished to call attention was one of great magnitude. A very extraordinary proceeding on the part of those who administered the poor relief of the country had been resorted to, in passing the second reading of a Bill yesterday in so hurried a manner that the Bill had not first been printed, and consequently no copy of the Bill was at the time in the hands of hon. Members. The effect of the Bill was to subvert the whole system upon which the administration of the relief of the poor was founded—namely, a combination of the principles of taxation and representation. He had not had time to give notice to the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Poor Law Board of his intention to bring forward the subject; but the right hon.

  1797
  Gentleman could scarcely complain, as he himself had given no notice to the House of the nature of his Bill. The object of the Bill was to provide for the relief of the casual poor of the metropolis, and it enabled certain persons who had not heretofore been connected with the administration of the Poor Law system to pay money to any amount and throw the whole burden upon the property within the metropolitan district. Never had such an attempt been made to smuggle through an important measure, involving a totally new principle, in so objectionable a manner. The Bill was not printed in time to be distributed to hon. Members yesterday morning, although it was down for a second reading yesterday afternoon: he went to his Club, and the Bill was not to be found there; and on inquiring at his own house, at six o'clock, he found that a copy of the Bill was not delivered there until three or four o'clock in the afternoon. Yet the Bill, which he might say had been smuggled through the second reading, contained a provision that the Metropolitan Board of Works should be able to give any sum of money the guardians of unions might be pleased to ask for, without having the slightest knowledge whether it was honestly, properly, or judiciously administered. The Metropolitan Board of Works was understood to be established for the better management of the metropolis in reference to sewerage, paving, draining, lighting, and cleansing; and he saw no reason why they should be introduced into the administration of the poor relief, and the proceeding that had been taken was contrary to all Parliamentary usage. He wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Poor Law Board, if he intended to go on with the Bill during the present Session, and in order to afford him an opportunity of explaining his views he would move the adjournment of the House.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."
  MR. SPEAKERsaid, it was perfectly competent for an hon. Member to invite the attention of the House to anything which he thought irregular in its course of proceeding; but it would not be regular on a Motion for the adjournment of the House to enter into a discussion of the merits of the Bill which stood for consideration to-morrow.

EDUCATION—INSPECTORS' REPORTS.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. HUNTsaid, he wished to take that opportunity of making an appeal to the noble Lord at the head of the Government with regard to a Motion which stood on the paper, for rescinding a Resolution of the House relating to the Education Inspectors' Reports. The House would recollect that the Resolution was passed on the 12th of April last, and that in consequence of that Vote of the House, the Vice President of the Committee on Education retired from his office. A Committee was subsequently appointed to inquire into the matter, and it had now presented its Report, which referred to the evidence taken and to an appendix setting forth certain Inspectors' Reports that had been marked, or returned, or otherwise dealt with by the Department. Well, the evidence and the appendix to which the Report referred were not yet in the hands of Members; and in addition to that reason for not now proceeding with the Motion he begged to remark that it would be a most unusual and most objectionable course, at the very end of the Session, when probably there would not be half the number present which passed the Resolution, for the Government to attempt to rescind it. He did not wish now to say a word about the merits of the Motion, and whenever it came on he should be prepared to give it a fair and candid consideration; but as a matter of principle he must enter his protest against that attempt to smuggle through the rescission of a Resolution which had been passed when the House was tolerably full. It might be said that the Department against which the Resolution was directed ought not to be left under the imputation which that Resolution might be supposed to cast upon it till Parliament met again. But he must observe that the Government had not shown any great hurry to remove the stigma from the Department, because the Resolution was passed on the 12th of April, and the Motion for appointing the Committee was not made till one month afterwards. Therefore the Department sat very comfortably under whatever imputation might have been thought to rest upon it for a month; and they might, therefore, very well allow the Motion of which notice was now given to stand over till next Session, when it could be fairly and properly considered. It was a very unusual thing to more to rescind a Resolution of the House. It

  1799
  might be quite right to rescind that Resolution, but it ought to be done deliberately and after all the Members of the House had had a full opportunity of reading the evidence on which the Report was founded; then, if the House thought fit to rescind the Resolution, well and good. But he wanted to know whether the noble Lord could point to any case where it had been attempted to rescind a Resolution during the last few days of the Session, when, as they well knew, the whole of the business was entirely under the control of the Government. He did not know whether the Department, the conduct of which was supposed to have been impugned, would be very well satisfied with such a rescission, because what would it amount to? A Resolution had been passed, after due notice, and in a tolerably full House; and if the noble Lord made his Motion on Monday, when probably the House would consist of about half the number of Members who voted in the minority on the previous occasion, what would be the validity and effect of such a decision? He did not think it could be very satisfactory to the Department, and it could hardly satisfy the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lowe) who had felt so sore on the point as to throw up his office. Certainly, if he were the right hon. Gentleman, he should prefer that the Motion be postponed till another Session, when, if carried, it might really afford some consolation to him. He begged, therefore, to suggest that the noble Lord should postpone his Motion.

JAPAN—DESPATCH OF TROOPS.
  QUESTION.
  LORD ROBERT MONTAGUsaid, he wished to know upon whose authority the troops of the Line and Marines have been sent to Japan? If they are sent by the authority of the Cabinet they can state their reasons. If not, they must have been sent by the authority of some subordinate authority. He should like to know whether it is constitutional for anybody to involve the country in war, and whether the Despatch of General Brown will be laid on the table previous to the debate?
CASUAL POOR (METROPOLIS) BILL.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. HARVEY LEWISsaid, he had received a copy of the Casual Poor (Metropolis) Bill before ten o'clock yesterday morning, and he confessed he had learnt
  1800
  with surprise that a measure of such importance had been brought forward at the fag end of the Session. He had had a great deal of communication with his constituents on that question, and while every body must be convinced that something should be done with regard to casual destitution in the metropolis, yet the general feeling was that having waited so long they ought to wait till an opportunity should be afforded for the proper consideration of the Bill, without hurrying it through the House in the manner now proposed. He thought it impossible that the measure should pass in the present Session, but if the Government persisted in going on with it, it would be his duty in Committee to move Amendments which would be likely to raise considerable discussion.
  MR. T. J. MILLERsaid, that at present the Metropolitan Board of Works had had no opportunity of discussing that question; but they were to meet to-morrow, when they would be able to do so, and to give their opinion upon it.
  MR. LYALL,as a Member of the Poor Law Committee, which had sat for three years, wished to say that the Committee were unanimous in the opinion that the subject of this Bill should be early considered, and its principle carried out. They all knew what great distress occurred last winter in the metropolis, when they heard many harrowing tales respecting the condition of the casual poor; and it was therefore a matter of urgency that this question should be dealt with promptly.
  SIR JOHN SHELLEYsaid, that the President of the Poor Law Board made his statement with reference to this Bill about two o'clock in the morning, when not fifteen Members were present; but the right hon. Gentleman gave no notice that he intended to hurry the measure through so rapidly as actually to read it a second time before it was printed. [No!] At least he did not get his copy before the second reading. The Bill was one of the greatest importance, and he could not understand why it had been brought in so late in the Session, when it could not possibly receive due consideration. He had a great objection to the Metropolitan Board of Works being mixed up with the relief of the poor.
  MR. C. P. VILLIERSsaid, he had no idea the noble Lord (Lord Robert Montagu) would have taken that opportunity of stating his views regarding this Bill. He had stated, in reply to a Question put by the hon. Member for White-

  1801
  haven (Mr. Lyall), that he did intend, in deference to the unanimous opinion and recommendation of the Committee, to introduce a measure on this subject. It was not possible to collect the opinions of the guardians of unions in the metropolis, but he thought it his duty to bring it forward even at that late period of the Session; and, as he did not expect any opposition, he hoped it would pass. On the following evening he moved for leave to bring in the Bill, but not at so late an hour as had been stated by his hon. Friend. [Sir JOHN SHELLEY: At five minutes to two.] It was very shortly after one, immediately after the Orders of the Day had been disposed of. It was very important and urgent that some provision should be made for the objects of this Bill before the coming winter set in. It in no sense transferred the poor from the Boards of Guardians to the Metropolitan Board of Works; but he said he thought that the Metropolitan Board might collect the trifling sum that would be necessary for the support of this class of the poor. The Bill was under their consideration, and he hoped they would consent to do that. He anticipated certainly the opposition of his hon. Friend the Member for Westminster (Sir John Shelley), but he certainly did not anticipate any opposition from the other side. Before he proceeded to move the second reading, he had taken care to in-form himself that the Bill was in the hands of Members generally, having ascertained at the Vote Office that the Bill was printed and delivered to Members with the Votes. [Lord CLAUD HAMILTON said, he did not receive his copy till between three and four in the afternoon.] Well, that must have been a solitary instance. He had even been urged to put the Bill for Committee to-day, but thought it better to place it in the Orders for to-morrow. There would be ample opportunity for hon. Members to express their opinions on the subject on the Motion that the Speaker do leave the Chair. He could not, therefore, admit that the House had been at all taken by surprise. He certainly, however, was taken by surprise at the objection which had been stated. There was no novelty in the case. The Committee had been sitting for three years upstairs; they had carefully considered the matter; they were unanimous in their recommendation; and the hon. Gentleman who was most urgent for the adoption of the measure sat on the other side. When, therefore, he (Mr. C. P. Vil-
  1802
  liers) saw the urgency of the case, he saw no reason to postpone the Bill. He hoped hon. Gentlemen opposite would consider whether they had any good reasons for opposing it.
  MR. H. BAILLIEobserved, that the right hon. Gentleman adopted the course of the young woman who when charged with having had a bastard child vindicated herself by saying it was a very small one. The right hon. Gentleman said this was a very small Bill; but it was a very important one, and it was disrespectful to the House—indeed it was treating the House with contempt—to bring forward such a Bill at that period of the Session, when most of those who took an interest in these questions had left town. He trusted the Government would reconsider their decision. The charge was, not that the Bill was read a second time before it was printed, but that in the very last days of the Session—after the Appropriation Bill had been brought in, and when there were very few Members present besides the occupants of the Treasury Bench—a Bill involving such a total change in the constitution of the Poor Law was attempted to be shuffled through the House.
  SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, he was present when the right hon. Gentleman made his communication to his hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven (Mr. Lyall), and he certainly did not understand that the Bill involved the new principle, that the Metropolitan Board of Works should be made an engine for levying the poor rates. He believed there would be found to be a difference of opinion on the Bill when it came to be discussed, and he thought the fullest opportunity should be given for the consideration of so important a proposal.
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: In answer, in the first place, to the noble Lord the Member for Huntingdonshire (Lord Robert Montagu) who asked, by whose authority it was that troops of the line and marines had been sent to Japan—whether it was or was not by order of the Government?—I have to state that this force was sent on the decision of the Government. We thought it desirable to increase the defensive force on that station. With regard to the observations of the hon. Member for Northamptonshire (Mr. Hunt), I have to state that I thought it my duty to take the earliest moment, after the Report of the Committee was in the hands of Members, to ask the House to do justice—as I

  1803
  conceive—to my right hon. Friend the Member for Calne (Mr. Lowe), and the Department to which he belonged. I apprehend there will in all probability be as large an attendance on Monday as when the Resolution in April passed. There were not 200 Members present on that occasion; and that number at least, in all probability, will be present on Monday. That will be the time for the hon. Gentleman to put forward any objection he may entertain to the proposition. I cannot, in deference to his wishes, postpone the Motion of which I have given notice.
  LORD HOTHAMsaid, he regretted very much that the noble Lord had refused to give way in this matter. He entirely agreed with the objection of his hon. Friend on the score of time and usage. Considering the period of the Session—considering that the Appropriation Act had been brought in—connsidering the small attendance they could expect—considering the importance of proposing to rescind a solemn Resolution of the House—and considering how difficult it would be to adduce any instance of such a proposal as that of which the noble Viscount had given notice—being made at such a time and under such circumstances, he did deeply regret the decision of the noble Viscount, and he did sincerely hope he would reconsider his determination. He should be glad to know what was the particular object of the Motion? Was it for the sake of the Department or for the sake of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lowe?
  MR. SPEAKERwould remind the noble Lord that he was now entering upon the subject-matter of a Motion that was fixed for to-morrow.
  LORD HOTHAMwould bow at once to the decision of the Chair. His object simply was to impress on the noble Viscount the impolicy, on every account, of bringing forward such a Motion at that period of the Session. He begged it to be understood that he could have no hostility to the right hon. Gentleman, his objection applied solely to the proposition itself. He did not know whether he was at liberty to allude to what had transpired within the Committee of which he was a member; but this, he might be allowed to say, that the Members of the Committee were perfectly satisfied that, as far as the right hon. Gentleman was personally concerned, everything had been satisfactorily explained; and he would say, moreover,
  1804
  if his (Lord Hotham's) wish had been followed it would have been this—that while the Committee made its Report on the case generally, the Chairman should have been instructed by the Committee to state to the House, on the Motion for printing the Report, that in the opinion of the Committee the difference which had existed between the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Calne and the noble Lord below (Lord Robert Cecil)—the direct contradiction on a matter of fact—had been satisfactorily explained, and that it was the unanimous opinion of the Committee that the resignation of the right hon. Gentleman was totally and entirely unnecessary. Under these circumstances, it was not to be supposed that he had any hostility to the right hon. Gentleman. He was acting solely on principle, and feeling strongly that the usual course of proceedings in the House should not be departed from. There was yet another objection to be urged against the course proposed to be taken by the noble Viscount. There were two parties to this unfortunate misunderstanding. There was the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lowe) who was then in his place, and would most probably be there on Monday, on the one hand, and there was the noble Lord the Member for Stamford (Lord Robert Cecil) on the other. Whether the noble Lord was in London or in England he could not tell; but certainly he could not have expected that such a proposition would have been made at this period of the Session. He asked, therefore, whether it would be decorous to enter upon a question of this sort when one of the parties was absent? Again, he implored the noble Viscount, for the sake of the Department, which he thought might rest satisfied after the Report of the Committee, and for the sake of the right hon. Gentleman opposite, not to ask the House to come to a conclusion to which, supposing the questions were brought forward at a proper time and in a proper manner, every one might readily assent. He said that without committing himself to any opinion at present; but if the Motion were pressed on Monday, and a difference of opinion were expressed upon the point of form, it would be easy for the country to suppose that it was based upon the facts of the case, and, therefore, it might be injurious to the right hon. Gentleman, a result which he (Lord Hotham) had no desire to see.
  LORD FERMOYappealed to the President of the Poor Law Board to reconsider

  1805
  the arrangement he had made in respect of the Metropolitan Casual Poor Bill. He would be prepared at the proper time to show that the Bill as it was drawn would not work, and therefore, in Committee, much discussion would arise. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would bring on the Bill at a time when it could be fully discussed, whether at a morning or an evening sitting.

NAVY—THE "LORD WARDEN" TARGET.

  QUESTION.
  SIR JOHN HAY: I rise to ask a Question of which I have given private notice to the noble Lord the Secretary of the Admiralty. It will be in the recollection of the House that on a recent occasion I stated that the "Lord Warden target" had been completely penetrated by shot more than once at the trial of that construction. The noble Lord denied that the target had been penetrated at all, though he said it had been roughly used. I ask him, therefore, whether, in stating that the 300-pounder Armstrong gun had failed to penetrate the Lord Warden target, he alluded to 300lb. rifled shot, or to the 168lb. steel spherical (smooth-bore) shot; and whether the Lord Warden target was not completely penetrated by three shots, one of them being the 300lb. rifle shot fired from the 300-pounder 10½-inch gun, with 45lb. of powder, as I stated to the House?
  LORD CLARENCE PAGET: I regret that I did not sufficiently explain my meaning upon the occasion referred to, and I also regret that the hon. and gallant Gentleman had not then amplified his statement, as in either case this misunderstanding could not have arisen. It was the 300lb. smooth-bore gun to which I referred when I said it had failed to penetrate the Lord Warden target. [Sir JOHN HAY: What size of shot?] With 168lb. shot. That is the only gun of the size in use in the navy—the same as is on board the Royal Sovereign. But it is true that one of the 300lb. rifled guns carrying a 300lb. shot did pierce the target after it had been fired at for a long time and was much shaken. I must remark, however, that the gun then used was one concerning which there were grave doubts whether it was strong enough to bear the concussion of such heavy shot, and consequently whether it was a gun fit to be introduced into the navy.

CAPE OF GOOD HOPE—KAFFIR WAR.

  QUESTION.
  MR. S. WESTERNsaid, he wished to ask, Whether there were any grounds for the apprehensions expressed in the newspapers of another Kaffir war?
  MR. CARDWELLsaid, that by the latest intelligence received by the Hydaspes, he was informed that the Governor had telegraphed on the 27th of June for all available troops to be sent to the frontier, as there were apprehensions that Kreli intended to cross into the Trans-Kei territory. A later telegram of the 28th announced that there were hopes that such an occurrence would not take place; and still later, on the 29th, a confident hope was expressed that no difficulty of that kind would occur.

JAPAN—DESPATCH OF TROOPS,

  QUESTION.
  LORD ROBERT MONTAGUsaid, the noble Lord at the head of the Government had only answered one of his Questions—that as to the expedition of Marines to Japan. He would, therefore, ask, Whether the troops were sent to Japan in consequence of a decision of the Cabinet; and also whether the despatch of General Brown would be given before the debate of tomorrow night?
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: The troops I which were sent from Hong Kong were sent in consequence of a requisition from Sir Rutherford Alcock in Japan, and not in consequence of orders from the Government hero. The troops were sent to Hong Kong in order to be in readiness in case they might be wanted; but the immediate cause of their removal was a requisition from Sir Rutherford Alcock. The noble Lord asks whether the despatch of General Brown will be laid on the table to-morrow in time for the discussion? That I am not able to say. I cannot say whether that despatch by itself is one which should be laid upon the table without other accompanying despatches, but I will inquire.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

NAVY—SHIPS OF WAR—ARMOUR- PLATING.—EXPLANATION.
MR. LAIRDhoped to be allowed to make a personal Explanation of a circumstance which occurred on Tuesday. In the course of the debate upon the Motion of the hon. and gallant Member for Chatham (Sir Frederic Smith), he had ventured

1807
to make a few remarks. The noble Lord the Secretary to the Admiralty also spoke and made one observation which he (Mr. Laird) did not catch at the time, and of which he was not made aware until he was leaving the House. He (Mr. Laird) had stated, as was reported in The Times, referring to the Enterprise, that at the request of the noble Lord he went to the Admiralty to see the plans, and he found the armour-plating was only one foot above the water. [Lord CLARENCE PAGET said, that was a confidential communication.] The facts relating to that visit were these. Upon March 10 he put this Question to the noble Lord, which, with the answer, he would read—
"Mr. LAIRD said, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what is the depth from the deep-load water-line at the fore and aft ends of Her Majesty's ships Enterprise and Research to the top of the armour-plating; and what depth of side above that is unprotected by armour-plating?"
"Lord CLARENCE PAGET: the armour-plates of the Enterprise are only to the water-line, and that part of the ship which contains her batteries. With regard to the Research, a much larger vessel, she has armour-plates right up to the beam of the lower deck. I do not think it desirable to state the exact number of feet and inches, the hon. Gentleman asked for, but if he will come to the Admiralty I shall be very happy to show him full details of each ship."—[3 Hansard, clxxiii. 1737.]
Upon that invitation he went to the Admiralty and saw the plans; but if he had believed that the information thus afforded him was to be regarded as confidential, and that he was not to use it, he should not have gone to the Admiralty. He had asked the question for public information, and not for himself. Since he had put that question he had seen in print, in a book published last year, an exact description of the vessels in question, the depth of armour-plating, and all details, and he had also seen in the public prints a full description of those vessels.
LORD CLARENCE PAGETsaid, he fully acquitted his hon. Friend of any intention of making an improper use of the information he had received. He should state that the hon. Gentleman had moved for many Returns as to armour-plating, with statements of dimensions of vessels, and other information. These Returns had been conceded to the hon. Gentleman, but he was bound to say that for granting it he (Lord Clarence Paget) had been blamed by officers of the navy. The hon. Gentleman then asked what was the depth
1808
of the armour-plating above or below the water-line in certain ships? The Duke of Somerset was strongly of opinion that those were details which ought not to be published. If those details had been published, and this country had been at that time unfortunately engaged in war, it would have afforded to our enemies information as to the exact spots in which to plant their shot. The Returns were, therefore, refused; but as the hon. Member was one who was held in great respect at the Admiralty, he was told that he could see the details for his own information. It was to be regretted that the hon. Gentleman had made public that information; but after his explanation there was no doubt he had done so under a misapprehension.

ROYAL ACADEMY.—QUESTION.
MR. GREGORYsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether, pending future arrangements, the Royal Academy will be allowed to continue as heretofore?
SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he was not aware of anything to prevent the Royal Academy from continuing its functions pending future arrangements.

EAST INDIA REVENUE ACCOUNTS.

  COMMITTEE.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  SIR CHARLES WOOD: Sir, when I had the honour of addressing the House this time last year upon the subject of Indian finance, I stated that, so far as it was possible to judge, the experience of the preceding year had fully verified the predictions which I had ventured to utter in the year 1859, that, in three or four years' time, we should witness the restoration of our Indian finances to a prosperous condition. I am now happy to say that the experience of another year does but confirm that opinion. I was told at the time I uttered those predictions, that the hopes which I was holding out were entirely fallacious; but I am glad to say that the course of events has proved that I was not mistaken. In the third year from 1859—namely, in the year ending the 30th of April, 1862, the equilibrium of the Indian revenue and expenditure was so nearly restored, that on a revenue and

  1809
  charge of about £44,000,000 the deficit, was no more than £50,000. In the year ending the 30th of April, 1863, the accounts of which are now before the House, instead of a deficit, there was a surplus of £1,827,000. In the year ending the 30th of April last the surplus is estimated at £257,000, and Sir Charles Trevelyan anticipates that the surplus at the end of the current year will amount to £823,000. This increase has been accomplished mainly by a great reduction of expenditure in India, but to a great extent by an increase in the important branches of revenue; and although we were compelled to increase many of the taxes, and to impose some new ones, a considerable portion of these have already either been repealed or reduced. I am not aware that the demands of the public service have been in any instance stinted in the expenditure which was necessary for them, or that there has been any neglect of the measures which should be adopted to encourage the development of our resources in India; and I think the House will concur with me in the opinion, that it is a most satisfactory state of things when, so soon after so extraordinary a depression of the finances as for three years together took place in India, so large a surplus follows a year in which the expenditure and revenue were nearly equal. But, beyond this, I am happy to say that we have discharged a considerable amount of debt in the course of the last two years. Sir Charles Trevelyan stated in India that this payment of debt had amounted to £9,000,000, and though I think that calculation is rather in excess of the real sum, I do not believe that the difference is very great, because we have paid off in this country a temporary loan of £1,500,000, £256,000 of India bonds, and also debentures which fell due during the last year, to the extent of £5,557,000. The amount of debt paid off in this country is, therefore, £7,313,000. In addition to this, £1,000,000 was paid off in India, so that in the last two years the sum which has been cleared off amounts to £8,313,000.
  MR. HENRY SEYMOUR: Do those figures appear in any accounts?
  SIR CHARLES WOOD: I am not quite sure.
  SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY: What years?
  SIR CHARLES WOOD: From the 1st of May, 1862, to the 30th of April, 1864. I stated last year that, in conse-
  1810
  quence of the apprehension entertained in India by the falling off of the revenue, and of a deficiency of payments by the railroad companies at home, we had at one time borrowed more than we actually wanted. I must now say that the alarm entertained in India was entirely unfounded, and before the end of the year the railway companies paid in to the full extent of the estimate, so that the sum borrowed was not required, [An hon. MEMBER: Was the sum borrowed £5,000,000?] £4,000,000. It is not true, therefore, that the amount; of debt paid off has been liquidated from the surplus of the revenue. ["Hear, hear!"] My hon. Friend cheers, as if there were some wonderful discovery in this fact; but he might have easily seen that £8,000,000 of debt could not possibly be satisfied by £3,000,000 of surplus. The financial state of India as it now stands shows that there has been a steady surplus for three consecutive years, following a year in which the revenue and expenditure were pretty nearly balanced; that upwards of £8,250,000 of debt has been paid off. Nor have we accomplished this by unduly reducing our balances, for on the 20th of April the estimated amount of the balances at the treasuries at home and in India is about £19,000,000. Satisfactory as this statement is, I must beg the House not to attach too much importance to the amount of the sums which I have mentioned as indicative of what must necessarily occur in future years; because one item of revenue—opium—will always remain a source of anxiety to the Indian financier. The amount of revenue received from opium in the year 1861–2 was about £6,359,000; and in the year, the accounts of which are now before us, it is £8,055,000, showing an increase of £1,696,000. In the year, however, ending in April last, the receipts in this Department of the revenue fell to the extent of £1,205,000. Therefore, hon. Members will at once see that the revenue from opium cannot be depended upon with any certainty. In fact, by the falling off of the opium revenue in the year which has just closed, the surplus in India was reduced to £30,000. It so happened, however, that by some arrangements made at home with the other Departments of the Government, a larger sum than we expected was received here, and the surplus was thus brought up to £257,000. [Colonel SYKES: The Income Tax?] I will speak of that tax with the other taxation. I do not think it

  1811
  worth while to enter into a detailed statement of the estimates and receipts, as I have sometimes done in former years, when there has been a question as to how the balance turned the one way or the other; and I think it will be more interesting to the House if I give the figures rather more generally. Now, the maximum charge in the year 1858–59 was £50,248,000 and the revenue £36,060,000 leaving a deficit of upwards of £14,000,000. In the next year the deficit was reduced to £10,000,000, and in 1861–2 to £50,000, the charge amounting to £43,880,000, and the revenue to £43,830,000. In the current year Sir Charles Trevelyan has estimated the revenue at £46,163,000, and the charge at £45,340,000, leaving a surplus of £800,000. For the last few years the receipts from the main articles of revenue have been steadily increasing. I will give the House a comparative statement of the receipts of this year and the year 1856–7, the year before the Mutiny, when matters were in their ordinary and normal state; but I must inform them that I cannot specify the amount on every article in that year, because, although we have the receipts on each item separated in the accounts before us, they were not so distinguished in the former year. Since 1856–7 the increase on the land revenue forest and abkarry (that is, the Excise) was £3,500,000, and on opium £3,000,000, I am obliged to put the Customs and salt duties together, because owing to a change which has taken place, the importation of salt from this country having entirely superseded the manufacture of salt in Bengal, the receipt of duty, formerly in the Excise, is now in the Customs. The revenue from salt and Customs has increased in that time about £3,000,000; stamps have increased about £1,100,000; and the whole increase, therefore, amounts to £10,600,000. The land revenue has steadily increased, owing to a larger quantity of land being brought into cultivation, and that is one of the best proofs of the increased prosperity and of the development of the resources of the country. Opium has increased, as I before stated, in a most extraordinary manner, and they anticipate even a larger revenue from it in the course of this year than was received two years ago. The salt revenue, in like manner, has increased in the last two years to the extent of £700,000; but, as I have already mentioned, a great change on this head has taken place. The manu-
  1812
  facture of salt by the Government in Bengal has entirely ceased, and the objections which the natives entertained to English salt seem entirely to have vanished. After communications with the Salt Chamber of Commerce in this country, orders have been issued for the sale of the Government stock of salt in India; and henceforth I trust that the importation of sail from this country will entirely supply the province of Bengal. With respect to the income tax, I must observe that it was imposed under the pressure of circumstances, and it certainly is not a tax that has been very successful in India. With regard to the small holders of land under what would here be called Schedule A, hardly any portion of them pay the tax, and the tax on profits in trade, which I fear is not very honestly paid in this country, is hardly paid at all in India. The richest merchants in India somehow or other contrive to evade any considerable payment, and the result is that nearly the whole produce of the income tax in India has proceeded from a few largo landholders, from the public fundholders, and from persons receiving salaries. It is not a tax which it is desirable to impose in India, except under circumstances of pressure. Last year 1 per cent was reduced on the income tax, and next year it is proposed to repeal the whole, as a general tax, leaving only a portion for the purpose of defraying certain local expenditure, which ought to be defrayed by the inhabitants of the particular districts. With respect to the Customs duties, hon. Gentlemen are aware that under the pressure of circumstances they were raised from 5 per cent to 10 per cent. Within a couple of years the duty on piece goods and yarns was reduced to the former amount of 5 per cent, and 3½ per cent ad valorem. The duty on beer was considerably reduced last year, and this year the remaining 10 per cent duties will all be reduced to 7½ per cent. Therefore, with respect to all articles imported into India, nearly the whole of the temporary duties are already reduced. It is true, however, that the Customs duties are not very productive, and, omitting the duties on piece goods and salt, the whole amount is not much above £1,000,000. Of that sum of £1,000,000, more than one-half is paid on articles consumed by Europeans, such as spirits and wine, or which hardly ought to pay duty at all, such as metals, railway articles, and the result is that the whole amount of the Customs

  1813
  duties levied on articles consumable by the natives little exceeds £400,000. When it is considered that the people of India are improving in condition, and that in this country £38,000,000 are raised by duties on the great articles consumed by the mass of the people, sugar, tea, spirits, wine, &c, it is a striking circumstance that so small an amount of revenue should be derived from articles imported into India for the use of the mass of the inhabitants. When pressed by the people of Manchester to repeal altogether the duty on piece goods, I can only say that without these two duties on salt and piece goods, the mass of the people in India would be practically untaxed. It appears that the first articles of luxury in which the people indulge are gold and silver ornaments, such as bracelets, armlets, &c. No duty is paid on these articles, and the extent to which they are used accounts in a great measure for the way in which the large importations of gold into India have been absorbed. Consequently, we do not derive in India in respect of taxable articles of consumption the same advantage which other countries do from the improved condition of the people. That improved condition, however, is evidenced by the great rise which has taken place in wages, which has made it necessary for the Government to take into consideration the emoluments, not only of the native army, but of the lower-paid civil servants. The pay of the Native officers and soldiers has been increased chiefly by-additional good conduct pay. The expenditure on public works is much larger now on account of the rise in the rate of wages; and the administration of justice, in like manner, is much more expensive. As a country advances in civilization the expense for the administration of justice is greater than in an uncivilized country. The administration of justice in patriarchal style, under the shade of a tree, is cheaper than its administration in a judicial court by an English barrister. The increase of charge in India in two years has been £2,000,000, under the following heads:—Public works, £1,000,000; law, justice, and police, £500,000; surveys and settlements, £500,000. This sort of additional charge must be made if we are to do justice to the country. The increased price of food, which has necessitated an increase of wages, is, to a certain extent, due to the quantity of land diverted to the
  1814
  production of cotton from the production of grain and cereal crops. The distress caused by the failure of the American cotton supply has not been confined to the manufacturing districts of this country. The native manufacture of cotton has been pretty nearly destroyed in India. In one district the people had to resort for support to the public works, and at another place there were disturbances which we were obliged to suppress by force. Hon. Gentlemen will be not a little astonished, I daresay, at the extraordinary increase in the prices of different articles of produce. I have a return which illustrates this in a very striking manner:—
  "In 1859 one could buy for a rupee 810 tolas of rice in Ahmednugur; in 1863, 660 tolas; and in the same year in Dharwar, a cotton district, only 525 tolas. In 1859 a rupee procured 2,670 tolas of wheat in Ahmednugur; in 1863, 1,080; and in 1863, in Dharwar, 642. In 1859 a rupee procured 3,240 tolas of bajree in Ahmednugur; in 1863, 1,080; and in 1863, in Dharwar, 568. In 1859, a rupee procured 3,960 tolas of jowaree; in 1863, 1,260; and in 1863, in Dharwar, 595. Again, in 1859, a rupee would fetch 2,760 tolas of grain in Ahmednugur; in 1863, 1,170; and in 1863, in Dharwar, only 536."
  It is not difficult to imagine the extent of the distress which has been occasioned among the working classes by this extraordinary rise in the prices of provisions. So far, however, as this country is concerned, it is very satisfactory to observe the increase in the importation of cotton from India, Rather exaggerated expectations were, at the outset, entertained as to what could be done at once in procuring cotton from India. In no country is it possible that the permanent supply shall very much exceed the permanent demand. If people cannot sell produce they will not grow it. After the experiment tried some years ago of growing cotton for the English market in India, which was entirely superseded by the supply of superior quality from America, and great loss thereby caused to the growers in India, it is not surprising that they were not ready to produce on demand a large quantity of cotton, which but for that sudden emergency would not have been required from them. The first effect of the sudden demand was to bring out all the old stores of cotton, much of it of very inferior quality. It is said that even mattresses and beds were ripped open, and that the cotton inside of them was sent to this country. There was thus a considerable increase in the supply of cotton; but, in order to test the amount of production, we

  1815
  must compare the amount we got last year with the amount we received the year before this sudden demand arose, and not in the year after the increased demand. Even before the extraordinary demand there was a considerable increase in the amount of the supply. In 1858 the quantity of cotton imported from India was 1,185,000 cwt.; in 1859, 1,717,000 cwt.; in 1860, 1,822,000 cwt.; in 1861, 3,295,000 cwt.; in 1862, 3,505,000 cwt.; in 1863, 3,878,000 cwt. Last year I quoted one of the best publications I have seen on the production of cotton in India—letters addressed to a Bombay newspaper by a cotton broker, Mr. Smith, of Liverpool, who travelled over a considerable part of India and made some most sensible observations. Mr. Smith stated very truly that it was absurd to expect a sudden rise in the supply; but if prices were kept up there would be ultimately a steady but gradual increase in the production of cotton. Referring to the accounts of the importation of cotton into this country for the first five months of the year, ending on the 31st of May, the House will see that there has been a steady and remarkable increase in the last years. In the five months of 1858, 1859, and 1861 respectively, the cotton imported from India amounted to about 340,000 cwt. In the five months of 1861 it was 342,000 cwt.; 1862, 734,000 cwt.; 1863, 962,000 cwt.; 1864, 1,247,875 cwt. We are fairly entitled, therefore, to say that the production of cotton in India and its importation into this country have been pretty nearly quadrupled in those periods. In Berar, Nag-pore, and the other cotton districts of Central India, the number of acres under cultivation in 1861 was 380,000; in 1862, 427,000, and in 1863, 588,000. Similar progress, I have no doubt, is observable in other parts of India where cotton can be grown. On the score of quantity, therefore, we have every reason to be satisfied with what India has done for us in regard to cotton. I am afraid, however, I cannot say as much as to the improvement in the quality of the cotton. That is, of course, necessarily a much slower process. The grower who receives a high price by weight, has in many cases been tempted to enhance the weight and his profit by unfair means. So great did the evil become, that the Bombay Government passed an Act for preventing the adulteration of cotton; and from the Report of the Inspector who was appointed to carry out the law, I understand he has been very successful in accomplish-
  1816
  ing that object. The main difficulty, at present, consists in preventing the mixing of different qualities of cotton. Superior and inferior kinds are grown in the same field; and great care is required both in sowing the seed and in picking the pods to prevent a mixture. I have no doubt that when the Indian growers find that they can get a higher price for a better quality they will be clever enough to produce a superior kind of cotton. Of the other articles of produce the return is really very satisfactory. Between 1858·9 and 1862–3 the quantity of coffee exported to this country has increased from about 11,000,000 to 21,000,000; lbs.; of indigo, from 9,000,000 to 11,000,000 lbs.; and of jute, 317,000 to 1,266,000 cwt. The export of wool has increased from 15,000,000 lbs. to 21,000,000 lbs. With regard to the tea grown in India, I am afraid that there is some prejudice against it at the present moment, but I believe that it has very much improved in quality. The extent of the plantations has considerably increased. In Assam the cultivation has been introduced and is carried on by private enterprise, and the result has been so successful that the Assam Tea Company have been enabled to pay their shareholders a dividend of 25 per cent. It has also been successfully introduced by the Government into the North of India, and so successfully that at the present moment all the Government plantations are to be disposed of with the exception of one which has been reserved for the production of seed. I do not possess an account of the quantity of tea exported for a period of years, but the value of that exported in 1858–9 was £60,000, and in 1862–3 it had increased to £223,000. A plantation for furnishing tea seeds and plants has been formed in the Neilgherries. There is another matter which is likely to prove advantageous not only to India but the world at large. Mr. Markham, a clerk in the India Office, has succeeded in introducing from South America the seed of the cinchona tree, from which quinine is obtained, and the cultivation of that plant in the Neilgherry Hills has proved most successful. In January, 1862, 8,600 plants were growing, but in April last the number had increased to 341,000; and what is still more remarkable, the bark of the few trees which have attained sufficient size to enable the quality of the bark to be tested, gave a produce exceeding that of the hark of the same description of tree in South America. The

  1817
  cultivation of the cinchona plant is now being greatly extended, and I believe that the superintendent of the Dutch plantation at Java, who went over to inspect the plantations on the Neilgherry Hills, has declared that the plants are superior to anything they have in Java. The great increase in the exports from India has led to an extraordinary importation of gold and silver. In the last five years the amount has been £50,000,000 of silver and £25,000,000 of gold, but a considerable portion must have been employed by the natives in the manufacture of ornaments for themselves, their wives, and families, A large proportion of the gold and silver imported seems to have disappeared in this way, as it has not been exported anywhere. [Colonel SYKES: Has there been an increase in the coinage?] There has been a great amount of coinage. I do not intend to advert to the subject of the currency, as that question was discussed in the House a short time ago, but I shall be happy to answer any question which may be put to me upon it. [Mr. J. B. SMITH: Has a gold currency been adopted in India yet?] I stated when the subject was before the House a short time ago, that I was not prepared to take any steps in the matter until I had received a report from the Government in India. I have not yet received that report, but I have every reason to believe that I shall do so before long. The public works have been carried on with great vigour, and without any limit as to funds. The only difficulty which has been experienced has been one which we were not prepared to anticipate in India—namely, want of labour, I, in common with others, was for some time under the impression that the supply of labour was abundant in all parts of India; but I am informed that in all districts where the public works are going on, it has been found extremely difficult to obtain an adequate supply of labour. In the central districts in India the railroads and other public works have been in competition with the agriculturists for labour. The consequence has been that the price of labour has been raised, and the cost of the construction of the public works increased. In Assam, South Canara, Central India, Scinde, and the North Western Provinces there is a great want of labour, and unfortunately these are the districts in which English capital and English settlers can be most beneficially employed. So great is the inconvenience which is
  1818
  experienced from the want of labour, that I have been asked to do something towards importing Chinese labourers into India, which is a proposition not a little startling to those who have always been led to believe that the population of India was more than sufficient for the requirements of the country. Railroads are being carried on with great activity in all parts of India. A number of gentlemen have come forward and have undertaken the construction of what is called a light branch railway communication through the northern parts of India. They have done this without a guarantee upon obtaining the land from the Government and a contribution for a certain number of years. The terms are much more favourable to the Government than anything we have hitherto been able to obtain. I sincerely hope that the undertaking will succeed. It will show that works of this kind may be done by private companies, not only with advantage to the country, but to the shareholders themselves. The gauge is the same as that of the great railroads. Beyond that, in the course of the winter, a telegraphic cable has been laid down from Kurrachee to the head of the Persian Gulf. The recommendations of the Commission presided over by the noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn (Lord Stanley) to inquire into the sanitary condition of the Indian army, have been followed up by the appointment of Sanitary Commissions in each presidency, who have already commenced their labours, not only with regard to the barracks, but also in reference to the condition of the town of Calcutta. For a long time, to the disgust of the more civilized inhabitants, it has been the practice in Calcutta to throw dead bodies into the river, the result of which was to aggravate during last year the ravages of the cholera, which broke out very severely. It was thought desirable to take some precautionary measure, and the first step taken was to prohibit the throwing of dead bodies into the Ganges. There was no intention on the part of the Government to interfere with the prejudices or wishes of the Hindoo inhabitants of Calcutta; and it will be a consolation to the hon. and gallant Member (Colonel Sykes) to know that the prevention of the abomination of throwing dead bodies in the river had the entire; approval of the Hindoo municipality of Calcutta. [Sir JAMES FERGUSSON: What I about the state of the gaol?] The last

  1819
  report we have received was that the gaol was in a satisfactory state. It had been inspected by the magistrates at Calcutta, appointed under an Act of Parliament, who are bound to inspect it at least once a month. The progress of internal affairs in India is also most satisfactory, and there is no disturbance within our frontier. If there has been some little disturbance just outside our North Western frontier it has turned out to be a matter of very little consequence. Early in the Session, in answer to a question, I stated very shortly what had happened in that case, and perhaps it is right that I should now recur to it. Many years ago a Mahomedan fanatic established himself and his followers in the district beyond the Indus when Runjeet Singh ruled in the Punjab. He contended for some time to defy that ruler, and was ultimately killed, but the remainder of his companions took refuge in the hills and made marauding incursions into the territory of that ruler. When we took possession of the Punjab they had no more love for us than they had shown for Runjeet Singh, and they had been a thorn in our side, more or less, ever since. They were settled on the western bank of the Indus, just on the outside of our frontier, and were in the constant habit of making inroads upon our territory, murdering and plundering the inhabitants of the villages, and disturbing the peace of the district in every possible way. In 1857 an expedition was undertaken against them under Sir Sidney Cotton, who destroyed two of their strongholds, and took engagements from the neighbouring tribes that they would not allow them to harbour among them, or come thence to harass our frontier as they had been wont to do. For a year or two they gave us no further trouble, but being partially strengthened by some mutineers who took refuge among them, these marauders recommenced their incursions. They advanced into our territory and into one of the States under our protection, and committed their usual outrages by murdering the persons whom they came across and burning the villages. We called upon the tribes through whose territory they passed to perform their engagements and arrest their progress. One of those tribes was divided in feeling, one-half of it being disposed to do what it could to prevent these marauders from coming through its territory, the rest not being disposed to do so, and saying that they were too strong for it, and that if we wanted to stop them we must do it ourselves.
  1820
  After considerable hesitation Lord Elgin authorized an expedition against the marauders, but the officers on the spot were a little indiscreet in one respect in the course they took. They proceeded by way of the Umbeylah Pass, but they did not take into account sufficiently early the probability of their alarming the powerful tribe of the Bonairs by their advance. They had not the least reason to apprehend any opposition from the Bonairs, who on a former occasion took our part against these marauders, and we had not the least intention of injuring the Bonairs. However, our officers did not send a communication to the Bonairs until they had reached the top of the Umbeylah Pass, within a few miles of their territory, and, with the suspicion natural to an Oriental tribe, the Bonairs thought we were about to attack them. They, therefore, turned out in great force and resisted our troops. They were afterwards joined by other fanatical Mahomedans, but they were repulsed with considerable loss to themselves, but with some loss also among our force. While this was going on, the agent of the Governor General, who had been absent, returned and apparently succeeded in assuring the Bonairs that we had not had the slightest intention to injure them, and they were willing to withdraw. But the fanatical allies from other tribes, under the influence of a sort of Mahomedan prophet called the Akhoond of Swat, persuaded them to continue their resistance. A successful attack was made on their lines, and they were driven from their position, and after two days' fighting the Bonairs themselves, the very people who had commenced the resistance to us before, said they were ready to go with our force and destroy the strongholds of the marauders. That object was accomplished, and the expedition ended as satisfactorily as a matter of that kind could end. It was a most unfortunate circumstance that opposition should have been offered to our troops through a false alarm on the part of the Bonairs. But the greatest pains were afterwards taken to assure them we never had any intention to attack them; that our only desire was that our frontier should not be harassed by hands of plunderers who harboured in their territory; and that we should only be too happy to live on good terms with them. We have no reason to fear that anything of that kind will occur again. [Mr. VANSITTART asked whether the expense of that war had been brought into the accounts?]

  1821
  The expense is in the estimated expenditure for the past year, and it amounts to between £150,000 and £200,000. Perhaps I should next notice the civil war between the Ameer of Cabul and his brothers. We simply acknowledge the de facto ruler in that case, and refuse to take any part whatever on either side. We are leaving them to fight it out in their own way, and taking the greatest care not to give the slightest assistance to either party. There is only one other quarter which may to a certain extent disturb the peace of our frontier. I refer to Bhootan. For many years inroads have been made by plundering bands of Bhootans in our territory, and it had been determined to send an expedition there, but the mutiny prevented any thing of that kind being done, and Lord Elgin thought it better to come to some arrangement if possible with the rulers of that country. There was no reason to believe that the mission to them would not be well received, because on two former occasions such a mission had been favourably received. On the present occasion, the Envoy was grossly insulted. It is difficult to know exactly how he should have acted; but although I think it would have been wiser not to have gone on, we can hardly form a fair judgment after the fact, and I have no doubt of Mr. Eden's having acted to the best of his judgment in very difficult circumstances. It would be hard to blame him now. The country was in a state of complete anarchy. The recognized rulers of the country are a spiritual chief and a temporal chief; there are also an eastern viceroy, and a western viceroy, with subordinate chiefs. At present there are two temporal chiefs, two spiritual chiefs, two eastern and three western viceroys. These viceroys were in a state of hostility with each other. We have not the least notion of going into that country or maintaining any position there; but we do intend to take possession of a narrow strip of low country, and to occupy the passes to prevent inroads, and in that way we may be able to bring them to as much reason as is possible with a race of barbarians. There is another topic to which I should wish to refer—the result of experience with regard to those legislative measures which the Legislature of this country has passed for India. In 1861 three Acts of Parliament passed specially affecting India. One was for admitting in the Council of the Governor General not only Englishmen unconnected
  1822
  with the Government, but Natives of India. The Council of the Governor General and that of the Governor of Madras and of Bombay was increased in this way, and a council was given to the Lieutenant Governor of Bengal. As far as we can judge, that legislation has been successful, and, what is most satisfactory, the Natives who were to form part of the Council seem to have taken a very active part in legislation, and expressed their opinions with freedom, very greatly to the advantage of the Government. Three Natives were put in by Lord Canning, one of whom has since died. Lord Elgin put in three other Natives, and, I think, wisely brought a Native Chief of considerable influence from Madras. Three Natives have been put into the Madras Council, five into the Bombay Council, and eight into the Council of the Lieutenant Governor of Bengal. I believe the measure has given the greatest possible satisfaction to the people of India. The next measure passed was one for the improvement of the High Court of Justice. This too has worked well; the barristers, judges, and the civilians have acted very harmoniously together, and a very able Native Judge has been placed on the bench of the High Court of Calcutta. On the recommendation of a Law Commission which I appointed when I was President of the Board of Control, a code of civil procedure has been introduced into India. Upon that subject the Lieutenant Governor of Bengal says—
  "The result of all the inquiries I have made from the Native Judges, by whom nearly all original suits are tried, and of whom I have now seen many in different parts of the Lower Provinces, is that the new procedure in working has been successful even above all hope."
  Mr. Harington says—
  "As showing how successful the Code of Civil Procedure has been in expediting the administration of justice, it may be mentioned that in a Court of Small Causes in the North Western Provinces, established under the provisions of Act XLII., of 1860, the average duration of suits disposed of during the past year was only eight days, including the day on which the plaint was filed. Under the old system of procedure the average would probably have been between two and three months."
  The third measure was one to enable the Governor General to appoint officers from the civil service to certain offices for which they were not till then eligible. I have laid on the table this year the number of appointments under that Act, and I do not think it will be found that there is reason to complain of any one of them.

  1823
  The measure has been entirely successful in the objects it sought to accomplish. Since I last addressed the House on this subject we have been deprived by the stroke of death of the services of Lord Elgin, and I know no one better fitted to undertake the Government of India as his successor than that old and eminent servant of India, Sir John Lawrence. I believe it is the opinion of the people of both countries that this appointment is the best that could have been made. Sir John Lawrence will, I feel confident, justify all the expectations that have been formed from his former career, and from his intimate knowledge of the country. And I think that no one could have been found so well qualified as he to fill that high position with advantage. I am happy to think that the policy pursued of late years in regard to India has met with due appreciation on the part of the Natives of India. That policy is not mine. It is the policy of the Sovereign, the policy of this House, the policy of the country at large. I am grateful for the support which I have received from all sides of the House, and more especially the impartial and straightforward support which has been given to all those measures which he believed to be for the good of India by the noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn, from whom I have seldom differed in matters relating to India. The policy adopted towards the country has been, I repeat, the policy of the Queen and of Parliament, and all that I have done has been faithfully to carry it out. For this reason, that it has been the policy of the country, and that they are entitled to any expressions of gratitude from the people of India. I hope, without being accused of undue vanity, I may be permitted to advert to a resolution passed at a public Native meeting which was convened in Calcutta, and there an address was agreed to which was signed by 8,000 of the most intelligent and influential Natives of that city. At this Native meeting, which was attended by the most influential persons in Calcutta, a resolution was passed which expressed the opinion of all the persons who signed the address. It is as follows:—
  "That this meeting desires to record their high sense of gratitude for the wise and beneficent policy which has distinguished the administration and control of Indian affairs for the last five years (by Sir Charles Wood), a policy which has nobly sustained the authority and dignity of Her Majesty's Government in her Indian dominions; which has strengthened by new bonds of attach-
  1824
  ment the confidence and sympathy of the princes and chiefs of the country; which has, above all, steadily sought to govern the empire in consonance with justice and the true interests of her teeming millions."
  MR. HENRY SEYMOUR: What is the date of the meeting?
  SIR CHARLES WOOD: It was held in March last year. I claim no credit to myself for what has been done, for although I have received the expression of these thanks, it is not to me, but to the Sovereign and people of this country that the thanks of the people of India are due. Theirs has been the determination to pursue this policy. I have only been the hand to carry it out, and I feel convinced that this country will reap the fruits of this wise and beneficent policy long after I have ceased to take any part in Indian affairs. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving the following Resolutions:—

  1. That the total net Revenues of the Territories and Departments under the immediate control of the Government of India for the year ended the 30th day of April, 1863, amounted to £3,481,927 sterling, and the Charges thereof, for the same period, other than Military Charges, amounted to £3,040,501 sterling.

  2. That the total net Revenues of the Bengal Presidency, for the year ended the 30th day of April, 1868, amounted to £11,755,377 sterling, and the Charges thereof, for the same period, other than Military Charges, amounted to £2,060,713 sterling.

  3. That the total net Revenues of the North Western Provinces, for the year ended the 30th day of April, 1863, amounted to £5,162,401 sterling, and the Charges thereof, for the same period, other than Military Charges, amounted to £1,497,179 sterling.

  4. That the total net Revenues of the Punjab, for the year ended the 30th day of April, 1863, amounted to £2,612,517 sterling, and the Charges thereof, for the same period, other than Military Charges, amounted to £1,192,674 sterling.

  5. That the total net Revenues of the Territories and Departments under the immediate control of the Government of India of the Bengal Presidency, of the North Western Provinces, and of the Punjab, together for the year ended the 30th day of April, 1863, amounted to £23,012,222 sterling, and the Charges thereupon, including the Military Charges, amounted to £14,753,114 sterling, leaving a surplus available for the general Charges of India, of £8,259,108 sterling.

  6. That the total net Revenues of the Madras Presidency (Fort Saint George), for the year ended the 30th day of April, 1863, amounted to £5,819,048 sterling, and the net Charges thereof, for the same period, amounted to £5,383,285 sterling, leaving a surplus available for the above Presidency, for the general Charges of India, of £435,763 sterling.

  7. That the total net Revenues of the Bombay Presidency, for the year ended the 30th day of

  1825
  April, 1863,amounted to £7,831,597 sterling, and the net Charges thereof, for the same period, amounted to £4,831,841 sterling, leaving a surplus available in the above Presidency, for the General Charges of India, of £2,999,756 sterling.

  8.—That the total net Revenues of the several Presidences, for the year ended the 30th day of April, 1863, amounted to £36,662,867 sterling, and the Charges thereof amounted to £24,968,240 sterling, leaving a surplus Revenue of £11,694,627 sterling.

  9.—That the Interest on the Registered Debt of India, paid in the year ended the 30th day of April, 1863, amounted to £3,351,680 sterling, and the Charges defrayed in England, on account of the Indian Territory, in the same period, including Guaranteed Interest on the Capital of Railway and other Companies, after deducting net Traffic Receipts of Railways, amounted to £6,515,601 sterling, leaving a surplus of Indian Income for the year ended as aforesaid, after defraying the above Interest and Charges, of £1,827,346 sterling.

  MR. HENRY SEYMOURsaid, he was quite willing to endorse the commendation of the Calcutta meeting. He believed that the confidence of the Natives of India in us had increased in consequence of the policy we had pursued since the Mutiny—a policy which repudiated annexation. He believed that if that policy had been previously adopted we should have had no mutiny at all, and should have been spared all those harrowing scenes which had occurred. As to the finances of India, the House hardly seemed in a position to discuss them. The Estimates had been laid before the Indian public; but the House of Commons knew nothing officially of what the policy of Sir Charles Trevelyan for the next year might be. He trusted that either Sir Charles Trevelyan's speech or a précis of it would be laid upon the table. There were three sets of Indian accounts. Hon. Members had the Accounts of 1862–3, and the Estimates of 1863–4 before them. But the Estimates of 1864–5 were in the bureau of the Secretary of State for India, and were not accessible to the House. He could not understand the exact position of the land question; but he approved the redemption of the land tax, which had been carried out to a limited extent. The right hon. Gentleman insisted on his system of survey of the waste lands, although it would retard the process of reclamation, and was, he thought, much inferior to the American plan. The coffee plantations on the other side of India were very important. A portion of these were held by English planters and the rest by Natives. It was calculated that 100,000 acres would require capital
  1826
  amounting to £10,000,000 for its due cultivation. The difference, however, was that the English planter raised a great deal more coffee per acre than the Native planter, and it was therefore important to encourage the English planter. The planters desired to have the land sold to them out and out, because, in order that they might borrow money to invest in the culture of coffee, it was necessary that they should have the fee-simple. Many persons were anxious to start companies for the cultivation of coffee; but, in consequence of the refusal of the Government to part with the fee of the land, they could not succeed in their objects. At present it took an emigrant twelve months before he could get land at a public auction, and the expense of living for that time in a Presidency town was a very serious matter. While other countries were bidding for English labour and capital, in India it seemed to be treated as quite a favour that Englishmen should be allowed to engage in the cultivation of land. This spirit ran through all the dealings of his right hon. Friend and the Indian Government. The right hon. Gentleman had made some important observations as to the rate of wages. He said that the rate of wages was rising, and that labour was hard to be had in India. Yet emigration from that country was going on to a great extent, and large estates in Ceylon and Mauritius were cultivated by labour from India. There was some analogy between India and Ireland in this respect—that the people were underfed and the rate of wages was too low. He thought it highly desirable that the Native population should have better food than they were able to procure at present, and therefore he was glad that the rate of wages was rising. He did not think that would add anything to the real cost of the public works. It was impossible that half-starved Natives who only earned 3d. a day should do as much work as was performed by the same people when they went to Ceylon or the Mauritius and received 1s. or 2s. a day. It was the case of the Irishman over again. If you paid him 6d. a day in his own country, you got sixpenny-worth of labour from him, but he did not work as hard as he did when he went to the United States and received a dollar. His right hon. Friend was surprised at the slow rate at which the Customs duties increased, and so was he. The fact was that although the well paid Government officers were well clothed, and that entirely

  1827
  in cotton goods from Manchester, the cultivators of the soil were miserably clad in a mere rag each. He thought that a Finance Minister should not be satisfied unless he saw the Customs revenue increase, for they were a sure index of the condition of the people. He regretted that so little progress had been made with the construction of the Indian telegraph. The delay was mainly attributable to the right hon. Gentleman's adherence to the route by Bagdad and the Persian Gulf, against which he was warned by Sir Henry Rawlinson. He was glad that a line was now being constructed through Persia, and he hoped that we should soon have a complete telegraphic communication with India. Russia had completed a telegraph to the extremity of the Asiatic continent. The progress of railways was extremely satisfactory, but there were some lines which were still much wanted—for instance, lines from Indore to Agra and from Trichinopoly to the South. As to the general question of the construction of public works, he thought that it would be better, instead of raising £4,000,000 annually from the people of India for that purpose, to contract a loan in this country, as was suggested by Lord Dalhousie. There were at present in existence one or two taxes which, either in their nature or the mode of their imposition, were highly obnoxious. In the first class was the institution stamp, which ought at once to be abolished. The tax upon spirits, although proper in itself, was open to great objection in consequence of the mode in which it was levied. The spirits were manufactured by the Government and sold at certain places, under licences which were granted to the persons who undertook to dispose of the largest quantity. This acted as a direct encouragement of drunkenness. The sellers paid a large sum for their licences, and they were obliged to resort to all sorts of means to induce their neighbours to consume the quantity of spirits which they had undertaken to sell. Upon the whole the accounts were satisfactory. The events occurring in the United States had of course exercised great influence upon India, but he was convinced that if the right hon. Gentleman had allowed land to be more extensively sold in fee simple more capital would have been attracted to India, and there would have been a still larger increase in the growth of cotton. If the American contest were now brought to an end, he had no doubt our main supplies of
  1828
  cotton would again flow thence; but if proper measures had been taken during the five years the right hon. Gentleman had presided over the India Office, cotton might have been fixed as a staple production of India. The same care applied to the cultivation of the plant in India as was given to it in America would have greatly increased its value. It was the mixed and dirty cotton that was objected to, and improvement could not be looked for until capital and enterprize were permitted to engage in the trade. In 1858, when the noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn (Lord Stanley) was at the head of the India Office, he had many applications from gentlemen and companies to purchase land. How was it that now there were no such applications, or if there were applications why were they refused? The right hon. Gentleman should encourage the introduction of English energy and English capital into India, and thereby benefit both the Indian and Imperial exchequers. He believed, with Sir Charles Metcalfe, that every Englishman who went to India added to its security and resources. He trusted that in future the right hon. Gentleman would not overlook that important point, upon which might depend to a great extent the permanency of our hold upon India. He would remind the right hon. Gentleman that Russia, with nothing like our vast resources, was pressing forward in every direction. Only yesterday it was announced that she had concluded terms for railways through Herat and through Persia; she had an immense length of navigation up the Amoor, and she had telegraphic communication with China. Surely it would be well if we were to follow the wise example thus set to us. We ought to fix ourselves in India as firmly as we could, and the best way of doing so was to encourage our countrymen to go there with their capital. The more the Natives were encouraged to lay out their money in the purchase of land the more would they be attached to our Government. He hoped that when next the right hon. Gentleman addressed the House upon this subject he would be able to show that the important points to which his attention had been called had been practically considered. In that case the right hon. Gentleman would increase the claims which he already had upon the gratitude both of this country and of India for having so long administered the affairs of the latter great empire.
  MR. J. B. SMITHsaid, that while he congratulated the right hon. Gentleman on the improved state of India, he at the same time regretted that he had placed himself in such a position as to make it his (Mr. Smith's) duty to find fault. What he found fault with was—that the right hon. Gentleman had pursued the same course this year which he did last year, namely, of delaying his Indian Budget until two days before the Whitebait feast, when, as usual, not more than twenty Members could be got to listen to it. If the House was to take any cognizance whatever of Indian affairs, it was but just that they should have an opportunity of doing so at a time when they were not in an exhausted state, as they undoubtedly were at the end of the Session. The subject should be brought before the House at an early period of the Session. He had likewise to complain that the right hon. Gentleman had not furnished them with the speech of the Finance Minister of India. He could not account for the right hon. Gentleman objecting to furnish the House with that without which the Indian accounts were nothing but a mass of figures. What could the House make of the Exchequer accounts without the explanation of the Chancellor of the Exchequer? When he mooted the question on a former occasion, the right hon. Gentleman said that he might as well be asked for the Chancellor of the Exchequer's speech, as for the statement of the Indian Finance Minister. But there was this difference, that the latter statement was made in India, while the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was made in that House, and was printed in all the newspapers the next morning. He could see no just ground for withholding from the House that explanation which was given by the Finance Minister of India, and if the right hon. Gentleman should persevere in bringing forward his Indian Budget at the latter end of the Session, and declined to give the House the explanation of the Finance Minister of India accompanying the Indian accounts, he should feel it his duty in the next Session of Parliament to bring the subject under the notice of the House. He would again congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on the improvement which seemed to pervade all classes of Indian society. There had been a great demand for labour, and a great advance in the price of provisions. That was easily accounted for—the demand for labour had been for Indian rail-
  1830
  ways, and for the growth of a variety of products, especially of cotton. Labour had been transferred from the growth of provisions to the growth of other articles, and the consequence had been a great advance in the price of provisions. There was no question that there had been a great advance in the wealth and capabilities of India, but still he thought the resources of the country were very far from being developed. Their railways would do something in that respect; but he regretted to find that so little attention was still paid to opening out the navigable rivers, the natural highways of India. The Godavery with its affluents was a highway 2,000 miles long, but only about 400 miles of the river, was at present navigable; and he regretted to find from the Reports which had been laid on the table respecting that river, that there was little hope of those 400 miles being much extended. The right hon. Gentleman had made some observations about the Customs duty on cotton, which he said amounted to £500,000. He did not know whether the estimate of the duty on cotton goods was taken at 10 per cent or 7½ per cent. [Sir CHARLES WOOD: In 1862 the duty was reduced to 5 per cent.] Well, the duty might be said to be 5 per cent, but it was in reality 10 per cent, and he considered it altogether an unjust tax. It was founded upon a system of protection, so far as the Indian manufacturer was concerned. In India there was a protection which could not be taken away. There they had the cotton on the spot, and England had to fetch it 10,000 miles, manufacture it into goods, and then send those goods back to India. When, in addition to all the expense these processes involved, we had to pay a high Customs duty, protection to a very large extent was of course afforded to the Indian manufacturer. Sir Charles Trevelyan complained that the great embarrassment to the trade of India had been the want of imports to meet the large amount of exports, and he said every possible encouragement should be given to the import trade. In his (Mr. Smith's) opinion the best way to encourage imports was to abolish the duty on cotton goods, and they would thus meet the objection which Sir Charles Trevelyan made. But if it was necessary to raise that revenue on cotton goods, then the duty ought to be levied on a fair principle, which would give the English manufacturer a chance. If they levied a duty on the goods of the

  1831
  English manufacturer, they ought to levy a like duty on the goods of the manufacturer in the country, otherwise they afforded to the Indian manufacturer an unjust protection. Sir Charles Trevelyan, speaking of the sale of opium, said that one of the causes of the decline in the price of opium was the difficulties connected with the monetary system. He stated that in 1859 the price of a chest of opium was 1,429 rupees, while at another period it was 1,100 rupees, being a difference of 300 rupees a chest. This showed the importance of the right hon. Gentleman turning his attention to the gold currency for India. He (Mr. Smith) must confess he had little expectations of a sound measure from Sir Charles Trevelyan, and that was from this circumstance—he said the effect of the gold currency would be that the depreciation of gold would be arrested. Now he there assumed that gold had been depreciated, and any one who concocted a measure on that assumption would not be likely to make it a sound one. He hoped the Secretary of State for India would do something on this subject. In conclusion, he could only repeat his congratulations at the favourable report of the finances and prospects of India as made by the right hon. Gentleman, and he hoped he would be able to do something in reference to the complaints which he (Mr. Smith) had felt it his duty to make.
  MR. KINNAIRDsaid, he did not think any blame could fairly be imputed to his right hon. Friend the Secretary for India for not introducing his Budget at an earlier period of the Session when the difficulty of getting in the accounts was taken into consideration. Even if it could be brought forward at an earlier period, he scarcely imagined that the right hon. Gentleman would be able to secure a larger attendance of Members than was usual when Indian Questions were being discussed. The real point to be dealt with was, had India improved of late years? and he must say, after the speech which he had heard from the responsible Minister for the country, that there were the strongest evidences of her material progress. He regretted his right hon. Friend had made no allusion to the enormous duty on salt, than the bringing of which within easier reach of the poorer classes there could be no greater measure of relief. He should not enter into a detail of the great suffering which was occasioned by the existing state
  1832
  of things in that regard, but he hoped that, with the prospect of an increasing revenue before them, the matter would not escape the attention of the Government. Unless they took some steps in that direction, he should feel it to be his duty to bring the question under the consideration of the House early next Session.
  MR. VANSITTARTsaid, he quite concurred in much that had fallen from the hon. Gentleman who spoke last but one, and whom he was happy to see sitting on the Opposition Benches—an indication he hoped that those on that side of the House might look forward to receiving his valuable support in future. He also concurred with the hon. Member for Poole (Mr. Henry Seymour) in regretting that he had not the advantage of the speech of Sir Charles Trevelyan before him, for he had, he believed, set down his surplus at the modest figure of £20,000. However that might be, he did not entertain any confident expectation of a permanent improvement in the finances of India, while so many reasons existed to disturb the calculations of a Chancellor of the Exchequer. Our surplus this year would have been larger, but for the hastily conceived and badly organized proceedings on the North Western frontier; and the surplus of next year, he believed, would be swallowed up in consequence of that insatiate and insatiable desire to thrust our trade and commerce upon the inhabitants of Bhootan, which had resulted in our envoys being grossly insulted—the probable consequence of which was that war would be carried on in those sterile and mountainous regions, if it had not already been commenced. The taxpayers in this country would find their expenditure largely increased owing to our wars in New Zealand, China, Japan, Ashantee, the Cape of Good Hope, and, he believed, in Bhootan. These two hostile collisions in India might have been avoided if we had followed the plan which we had adopted at Cabul, where our negotiations were conducted through a Native. By this method the prejudices of the Natives were conciliated, and the terms upon which the British Government stood with reference to Cabul were of the most amicable character. It was notorious that even in time of profound peace, our surplus in India depended entirely upon the value of the sales of opium. There appeared to be two systems existing in India in reference to the cultivation of opium. The one was carried on in Bengal, where the Govern-

  1833
  ment was the producer; and the other in Malwa and Central India, where the Government did nothing but levy a duty on its exportation to China. This duty was originally 200 rupees or £20 a chest, but it was gradually raised by Sir Robert Hamilton to 500 rupees, or £50 a chest. Lord Canning was anxious to raise it to 600 rupees, but he was dissuaded, because, as long as the opium was grown by the British Government in Bengal, and was a Government monopoly in that Presidency, the producer in Malwa and Central India had not a fair market for competition. The actual cost per chest in Malwa to the producer varied from 300 to 400 rupees, or from £30 to £40, and the average selling price might be estimated at from £100 to £120, sometimes falling as low as £80 or £90. Taking, therefore, the cost of production at £35 and the duty at £50, there would remain a profit of about £15 to cover risk, insurance, and other contingencies. If the Bengal monopoly glutted the China market, the price of the chest would fall, and the loss to the Central Indian merchant would almost inevitably entail his ruin. Sir Robert Hamilton had proposed to check the monopoly of growth by the British Government in Bengal by placing an uniform duty of £50 a chest on all opium exported to China, wherever and by whomsoever grown, and thus adopt the Central India system uniformly throughout the whole of India. He believed that if this were done, we should not have any decrease in our revenue from the sale of opium, and that our China trade would be placed on a healthy foundation without involving in so disgraceful a speculation the British Government, the Secretary for India, and his Council.
  MR. CRAWFORDsaid, he desired to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the effect of the duty imposed on saltpetre. On the assumption that they possessed a monopoly, the Government of India, in 1860, raised the duty to 50 per cent on the value of the article. Previous to that period the export duty had been 3 per cent on the value. The price of saltpetre was 26 s. per cwt, and the duty £6 per ton, which was an enormous duty; and, in consequence of it, people of an inventive turn of mind had turned their attention to finding a substitute for it, and had discovered in a preparation from nitrate of soda an article which was applicable to many of the purposes for which saltpetre was used, and large quantities of this article were
  1834
  imported from Magdeburg and other towns of Germany. In 1859—the last year before the change in the duty—the quantity of saltpetre exported from Calcutta was 25,000 tons; in 1860 it was 19,000; in 1861, 22,600; in 1862, 31,000; in 1863, 21,000; and in 1864 the falling off it was calculated would be to a considerable extent. Now, up to 1860, there had been no saltpetre received from the German ports; but, in 1861, 1,591 cwts. were received; in 1862, 4,480; in 1863, 8,418; and in 1864, down to the 31st of May, no less than 12,510 cwt.; showing the extent to which we are receiving supplies of manufactured saltpetre from foreign countries to the exclusion of the saltpetre which we used to receive from India. The quantity of nitrate of soda supplied from Peru and Chili was in proportion to the quantity of saltpetre received from German ports. The quantity of Baltpetre received from Bengal and exported from this country had fallen off from 151,000 cwt. in 1862, to 74,000 in 1863, and this year to the present time the exports were 41,000. The deduction from this was, that the trade was in considerable jeopardy from the heavy duty on the export from Calcutta. If any advantage from this arrangement accrued to the public he would have no right to complain; but such was not the case, and on the part of those engaged in the trade in the City of London, he had taken the opportunity of laying the matter before his right hon. Friend, in order that it might be brought under the notice of the authorities in India. With reference to the introduction of a gold coinage into India he confessed he was one of those who did not anticipate much advantage from such a measure. The whole of the pressure which had been experienced at Calcutta and Bombay arose not from any want of money, but from the inability of the possessor of hard silver to convert it into current coin. It was within his own knowledge that a person in the possession of silver to the extent of thousands of pounds, had been obliged to pay 15 per cent per annum for the temporary use of coin while his silver was being coined at the mint. He (Mr. Crawford) thought the coining power of the mint ought to be increased at least threefold. The hon. Member for Stockport (Mr. J. B. Smith) was misinformed when he stated that the best cotton was grown in Dharwar. Considerable quantities had lately come from the interior of; India far superior in quality to any that

  1835
  had been grown in Dharwar, as he should be happy to show to any gentleman who would favour him with a call at his office. His hon. Friend the Member for Poole (Mr. Henry Seymour) talked about the Russian Government making a railway to Herat; but as Herat was thousands of miles from any civilized part of the Russian dominions, he (Mr. Crawford) received with utter incredulity the statement of such a scheme. His right hon. Friend the Secretary of State had adverted to the fact that the Government received but little in the shape of Customs duties from the Natives of India. That was a result which could not surprise any one who was acquainted with the mode of living of the people of that country. They drank hardly any wine or spirits, or tea; the sugar and the tobacco which they consumed were manufactured upon the spot, and they therefore made very few purchases of any of the articles on which Customs duties were principally raised. He entirely coincided in the statement of his right hon. Friend, that a considerable increase in wages had taken place in India during the last few years. The fact was, that since railway operations had been carried on in India the value of labour had risen to an extent which no person could a few years ago have thought possible. He was glad to be able to join the Members who had preceded him in congratulating his right hon. Friend on the very satisfactory state of affairs which he had been able to bring under their notice that evening.
  MR. TORRENSsaid, that he also would offer his congratulations to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for India on the very satisfactory statement he had made on that occasion; but he could not help regretting that it should be submitted to their notice at so very late a period of the Session. He was aware that that was occasioned by the period up to which the accounts were made up in India; but he could not see any reason why these accounts should not be closed at the end of December or November instead of April, which would allow the right hon. Gentleman to make his statement about the same time as the Chancellor of the Exchequer was making his statement here. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be slow to act on the suggestion of the hon. Member for Windsor (Mr. Vansittart), that the system of opium cultivation in Bengal should be assimilated to that in Malwa and the West of India. He should be sorry to see
  1836
  the ill-feeling which existed between the indigo planters and the ryots extended to the cultivation of opium. He did not think the matter of a gold coinage was so pressing as it had been represented to be, and he hoped that the Secretary of State, before taking any step with regard to it, would wait to receive suggestions from the local authorities. The right hon. Gentleman had adverted to the Act passed last year for throwing open certain civil appointments to persons not belonging to the covenanted service, and he seemed to speak favourably of that measure. But he (Mr. Torrens) believed that of the instances quoted by the right hon. Gentleman to exemplify the working of the Act, two at least were open to animadversion. In one case a gentleman of great local interest—brother-in-law to the Governor of Bombay—was put into an appointment contrary to the Act, and the right hon. Gentleman had thought proper to cancel the appointment. In another, a Native named Gopal Rao Hurry had been appointed to an assistant judgeship at Ahmednuggur, and the appointment was so illegal that it was taken up by the High Court of Judicature, and the Government was obliged to cancel it. This Native, however, was put into another appointment, which gave rise to a memorial from the whole Civil Service there. He hoped that memorial would be sent home.
  MR. GREGSONsaid, he quite concurred with the hon. Gentleman that it was desirable that the Indian accounts should be brought down to a later date; and he thought that by the employment of an additional staff at Calcutta that might be done. He also thought it desirable that the accounts should be closed on the 31st December instead of the 30th April. With regard to the opium question he entirely disagreed from the right hon. Gentleman, for he thought that the opium system of Bengal should be assimilated to that of the Western Provinces. He thought the monopoly of the opium trade by the Government of Bengal was injurious and ought to be abolished. He heartily congratulated the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State on the flourishing condition of the Indian revenue, as he had laid it before the House that evening. India had had three prosperous years in succession; and the Indian Treasury had been enabled not only to reduce the debt £8,000,000 but there was £19,000,000 in the Trea-

  1837
  sury. This was a highly satisfactory statement. But he perceived that the increase of revenue to the amount of £1,600,000 was from opium; but opium revenue was a precarious and dangerous source of income to rely upon. The increase upon the land revenue was in every respect satisfactory. But he did not think that the Indian finances had yet been put on an unexceptionable footing. The tax on salt was oppressively high. Salt was essential to the health of a population that lived chiefly on vegetable food, and he would therefore urge upon his right hon. Friend the propriety of reducing the tax at the earliest possible moment. He did not believe that the revenue would ultimately suffer by the reduction—on the contrary, he believed it would be rather increased than diminished. But in order to effect any good, the change must not be made in any niggardly spirit. The tax was at present from 1,800 to 2,000 per cent on the value of the article, and the diminution in the cost if the tax were reduced to a moderate amount would be certain to produce a vastly increased consumption. He thought there were many grounds on which the right hon. Gentleman might take into favourable consideration the introduction of a gold currency into India; nor did he think it would be attended with those difficulties the right hon. Gentleman anticipated. There was already a gold coin in India, but it was not in general circulation. He thought that the introduction of a more portable medium of exchange than silver would be received with favour. In conclusion, he congratulated the right hon. Gentleman and the House on the growing prosperity of India. It was a little more than one hundred years ago that the tragedy of the Black Hole occurred—now we reigned over nearly 200,000,000 of people, whom our Government had raised to a great degree of material prosperity. He believed that the whole of the intelligent Natives of India were well satisfied with our Government. Such indeed had been the improvement effected of late years in the moral and intellectual well being of the Indians, that he thought in course of time they might be trusted to govern themselves.
  SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, that at present he was hardly sanguine enough to believe in an Indian surplus; but, however that might be, the Secretary of State would do well to bring forward this question a little earlier in the Session,
  1838
  so that there might be a creditable debate and a fair audience. He did not object to the Resolutions of the right hon. Gentleman, except the sixth, in which there appeared to be a mistake of £2,000,000. [Sir CHARLES WOOD: It is a misprint; instead of £5,383,285, the figures should be £7,383,285.] When the revenue was £46,000,000 and the expenditure £45,750,000, it could not be said that a margin was left. Some £16,000,000 or £17,000,000 out of the revenue was gone, being bespoke as interest of debt, allowances, obligations under treaties, and expenses of collection, which according to his estimate amounted to nearly £6,250,000. Under our present system a deficit was just as likely to happen as a surplus. The cost of the army was very large, for in the last three years this charge had amounted to £37,000,000—nearly as large as the army expenditure for the United Kingdom. He wished to know what had been the expenses thrown upon the Indian revenue by the necessity of doing justice to the officers of the Indian army. The prophecies of those who deprecated the amalgamation had been fulfilled, and it seemed that having made the blunder and given the guarantee, the Natives of India were now being made "to pay the piper." He should be glad if the right hon. Gentleman would give some explanation of the state of this account at the present time. Did he understand that the late war with the Hill Tribes had cost only £150,000?
  SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, that was the estimated cost, but in order to cover contingencies a sum of £200,000 had been taken.
  SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYcould only say that the war had been a very cheap one; but he presumed that this was the extraordinary expenditure. The whole proceeding was rather in the nature of a blunder, and the war might have been avoided if the proper steps had been taken in the first instance. However, he did hope that we were not going to engage in another war with this wild people, and that we should be able to check the Hill Tribes, leaving their country alone, and thus avoiding the little wars which destroyed the Indian surplus from year to year. Nothing was to be got by attacking them, but they were very good shots and might give our troops a good deal of trouble. This was not the time to enter into the gold currency question, and it had recently been discussed in that House; but with

  1839
  regard to the salt tax, the Government should deal with it with great caution. It was necessary to consult the prejudices of the Natives. It was difficult to find a tax that they were willing to pay, but they would pay taxes to which they had been accustomed. Though the hon. Member for Lancaster (Mr. Gregson) hoped that the people of India would pay the income tax, he must say he agreed with Mahommedans and Hindoos in thinking the tax extremely abominable. He should, therefore, be glad to find that the Government did not press that tax on India. But, on the other hand, bearing in mind that there were not many means of obtaining revenue from the Indian people, he thought that the salt tax ought to be approached with the greatest caution.
  COLONEL SYKESsaid, that no doubt the financial administration of Indian affairs by the right hon. Gentleman the present Secretary for India, had been surrounded with a bright halo during the last few years, but all the rays of this crown of glory could hardly be said to emanate from the brilliant administration of the right hon. Gentleman, for many of them were traceable to the Government of the East India Company. The right hon. Gentleman boasted of the increase of land revenue; but that was the result of the establishment by the Court of Directors of a permanent system of taxation, which stimulated the Natives to lay out their money to extend their cultivation, with the certainty of themselves reaping the profit. The next statement the right hon. Gentleman made was, that the cash balances were in such a good state as enabled him to pay off a considerable amount of debt; and the hon. Member for Lancaster (Mr. Gregson) talked of the cash balances being £19,000,000. According to Sir Charles Trevelyan's last Report for the years 1863–4, the cash balances instead of being £19,000,000 were only £14,000,000; but in 1857—that was before the Mutiny broke out, and under the administration of the East India Company—they amounted to £15,389,000, and the Indian Government were then enabled to pay off a 5 per cent loan. He understood his right hon. Friend to say that the employment of Natives in judicial administration was a new thing within the last five years. [Sir CHARLES WOOD explained that what he stated was that Natives had for the first time been put into high class judgeships.] He approved that step, but, with respect to the administration of jus-
  1840
  tice, it was the fact before that 98 cases out of 100 were adjudicated on by Natives, as he (Colonel Sykes) had shown by publishing the official consecutive Judicial Returns for twelve years for all India. He gave the right hon. Gentleman credit for putting Natives into high places, but they were Princes and Royal personages that were so appointed; and they, no doubt, considered it to be a great honour to be associated with their governors; but they were not the persons best acquainted with administration, and he wished to know whether it would not be more advantageous if persons of a lower class with greater administrative ability were made members of these Councils? The right hon. Gentleman was, moreover, inconsistent in exercising his power in the appointment of Natives to office, in not allowing the employment of Natives in the medical service in India, notwithstanding that some Natives had come to this country to be educated at their own expense, and on examination had been rewarded with gold medals and full diplomas. He hoped such men would be included in the new medical service about to be established in India. He would not now touch on the still continued wrongs of the officers of the Indian army, in violation of Acts of Parliament, as there was no doubt that that question must be distinctly mooted next Session. The imports into India, though the House would scarcely believe it, had actually fallen off. According to Sir Charles Trevelyan's Report the Customs duty in 1861–2 was £2,876,139; but in the regular estimate for 1863–4 it was only £2,324,200, and the estimate for the next year was still less. On the other hand the exports had enormously increased, rendering the settlement of the balance of trade annually more difficult. The revenue from opium fluctuated greatly year by year. The Chinese were the only consumers of the drug, and what was the state of that country? Anarchy reigned throughout the land, and England had lent her aid to aggravate the desolation. They could not, therefore, look upon opium as a permanent source of revenue, but must be prepared for a time when it would, to a considerable extent, break down. In Bengal there was a vicious Government monopoly. The farmer had not control over his own land, for he was obliged to cultivate opium on a fixed portion of it, and sell the produce to the Government, who bought it at a low and sold it at a very high rate. That was neither

  1841
  a sound nor a creditable system. On the Bombay side of India an Excise duty was imposed on opium, and its cultivation was left to the discretion of the people. There was a great deal of talk about developing the resources of India; but the fact was that they had already been developed to such an extent that the balance of trade was annually increasing against us. We required Indian productions—indigo, sugar, cotton, oil seeds, jute, flax, &c, and must have them; but the people of India did not want our woollens or warming-pans. The demand for their products was increasing year by year, and we were obliged to pay for them in hard cash. Since 1800, by a Return which he (Colonel Sykes) had moved for, it appeared that the amount of silver and gold which has been introduced into India was £254,000,000 sterling. No part of this sum had come back again, or was likely to come, seeing that it could be lent at from 10 to 30 per cent. It was absurd to talk of the people burying their money, for they were much too acute to do that when they could get 20 or 30 per cent for it. His right hon. Friend, in his review of Indian progress, had not included the financial movements of 1863–4, which must be in his possession, as he (Colonel Sykes) held an official paper on the subject in his hand, and these figures would have been more acceptable than those of former years.
  MR. BAZLEYsaid, he joined with every other Member who had spoken in regretting that the Budget had not been brought forward earlier in the Session. An impression was growing in the public mind that there was a disposition to carry on the Government of India irrespective of the control of Parliament. If, as had been proposed, the accounts for the year were submitted to Parliament at a proper time, very valuable suggestions, no doubt, would be made in the course of the discussions, the result of which might be of great benefit to the Indian Government. He wished, however, he could congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on the services of the Government in regard to the cultivation of cotton in India, and its increased supply; but on the part of his friends in Manchester he had to complain that the Indian Government had interfered in the affairs of the Manchester Cotton Company in such a way that that concern had been reduced to comparative ruin. In describing the prosperity of India, the right hon. Gentleman was wanting in candour in omitting to state
  1842
  that the surplus price of cotton remitted to India at the present time amounted to little less than £50,000,000. But how were the Indian Government requiting Lancashire for the excessive price they were paying for cotton? Why this was the very moment which was chosen for in-forcing increased exactions on Manchester goods to the amount of 100 or 150 per cent, taking into account the high value of cotton. Such was the dissatisfaction in Manchester that a claim was raised not merely for a reduction of the duty on cotton manufactures, but for the admission of Lancashire goods into India free of duty. The practical effect was that the Lancashire manufacturers were carrying on very extensive works at a great pecuniary loss. There were individual establishments contributing to the revenue of India as much as £100 per week in the duties levied, which were about to be mulcted in £200 or £300 a week, thus, of course, adding to the losses they already sustained. It was cheering to learn from the hon. Member for London (Mr. Crawford) that an improved quality of cotton was now being received from India. He had never doubted that that country might be made to grow cotton which would not only compete with but even supersede the American supply; but it was of great importance that a superior quality of fibre should be cultivated in India. If, while the Indian supply was in its present condition, the American supply were suddenly to be restored, the manufacturers would prefer the latter, and the result would be that all the efforts that had been made in India during the last few years would be thrown away. Every effort ought, therefore, to be made to raise the character of the cotton which was produced in India. He trusted that next Session more time would be given to the discussion of Indian affairs.
  SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONEsaid, that they were met together on the 21st of July for the purpose of re-enacting the solemn farce which last year was performed on the 23rd of July. After a Session passed in laborious discussions, a mere fragment of the House of Commons met for the purpose of deliberating upon the Government of more than 200,000,000 of people. A more scandalous sight could not be presented to the British nation than the aspect of the House at that moment. The Government of 200,000,000 of people was confided to their care, and yet the welfare of that enormous population was muttered

  1843
  over to Benches almost empty. The statement of the right hon. Gentleman was to some extent encouraging, as it showed that the natural resources of the country, assisted by that Providential interposition which generally came to our aid when we had committed great blunders, had raised the revenue of India to a paying point. He, therefore, trusted that the Government of India would feel inclined to treat the two services in India with more liberality than they had hitherto displayed. It had been remarked that evening that the Speaker had heralded the finale of the I labours of the Session by his annual dinner, and he (Sir James Elphinstone) therefore felt justified in calling this a post-prandial discussion of a subject that was worthy of greater respect and attention by the House. By a formal decision of the House it had been declared that those services were entitled to consideration, and he gave the right hon. Gentleman fair warning, that if the subject was not satisfactorily dealt with or explained by the right hon. Gentleman, that at the beginning of the next Session the subject would be forced upon the attention of the Government and the sense of the House again taken upon it. The revenue and expenditure of India which they were now discussing were matters of history, and debates of this kind simply converted the House of Commons into a debating society for expressing opinions upon India in general. He was glad to hear that the Government had at length adopted the recommendation of the Committee, to transport our troops to India by the way of the Red Sea, rather than by the Cape. This was a course so consistent with common sense and economy the marvel was that the Government did not see the advantage of it before. He wished to ask on whom the expense for providing the passage of those troops from England to Alexandria was to fall, and whether this country or India was to provide the transports from England to Alexandria? He hoped that the Government of India had duly considered the periods of the year when the health of the troops would be seriously endangered by their transit. At the fall of the Nile fever set in, which lasted for three months afterwards, and therefore the troops should not be sent to India by this overland route between the months of June and November. Now that there was extensive railway communication in India it was time for the Government to look before them, and to con-
  1844
  sider seriously whether a reduction in the Indian establishments could not be effected. Sir Sidney Cotton—a most able and experienced authority—stated with those means of communication with India they could govern India with 30 per cent less of troops than they had heretofore thought necessary to have there; but that could only be done by the abandonment of the old system of cantonments, which was now entirely obsolete, and by availing themselves of the facilities afforded by the extension of the railway system. He recommended the Secretary of the Colonies to consider whether a similar course might not be advantageously pursued in the colonies for the development of railway communication. There was, however, one point to which the attention of the Government of India did not appear to have been sufficiently turned. The whole of our efforts for the last few years had been directed to the development of the internal traffic of India. No doubt that was of paramount importance, but in order to render it effectual it was also necessary to give increased facilities for the coasting trade of India. Much had been said about the scarcity of labour in India; he did not believe there was any such scarcity. No doubt the higher portions of the country were more sparsely inhabited than the alluvial portions of the country. The lines of communication which were now established in India appeared to be intended more for the transport of the products and commodities of the country than for the purpose of supplying food to the population; if the Government afforded proper facilities for conveying labour from one part of the country to another all the difficulty would cease. Three years ago he obtained a Committee to investigate the possibility and practicability of deepening a channel through Adam's Bridge, connecting the Continent of India with the Island of Ceylon, so as to enable large ships to go through the passage instead of going round the Island. There were between 3,000 and 4,000 yards of ground requiring to be cut through, but the work was not greater than was met with in any ten miles of railway out of Loudon, and it was most important with regard to the coasting trade of India. According to the evidence taken by that Committee it was quite clear that £100,000 or £150,000 was all that was necessary to open that channel for a line-of-battle ship. He asked the right hon. Gentleman whether any steps had been taken to open up

  1845
  that channel? The present extra expense of the coasting trade, arising from the necessity of taking a 350 miles' voyage for one year, would pay for the canal and enable the Princess Royal, the flag ship of the station, to sail through the Straits. Materials of excellent quality were on the spot, and the surplus which the right hon. Gentleman had in hand would enable him to carry out that improvement. We had peace in India, and revenue was springing up. The East India Company was constantly at war, coerced into it by the Board of Control; and when the Company had taken the chesnuts out of the fire they were set aside, and the right hon. Gentleman took credit for the present state of things. Another point on which he desired to have information was who paid for the British navy in India? The coasts of India were about 4,000 miles in extent, from Beloochistan to Singapore, and the whole police of these seas was managed by the Royal Navy. One of the first acts of the right hon. Gentleman was to extinguish the Indian navy. The Indian navy comprised more scientific men, for its numbers, than any other service in the world, excepting a strictly scientific service like the Royal Engineers. They were employed as ambassadors, diplomatists, residents, consuls; they explored countries, they investigated the ruins and antiquities of the country; they were linguists, surveyors, admirable seamen, and they maintained a post of the highest respectability and honour under the East India Company, and performed services of the very greatest importance in the survey and exploration of the country, not only of the East India Company, but adjacent to the Red Sea and in Abyssinia. That service was swept away with scanty-thanks or justice. He asked the right hon. Gentleman, out of his overflowing Budget, to temper justice with mercy, and to give the members of that profession some of the advantages which he was extending to the country which we had saved from anarchy and despotism. By what had that force been replaced? By the Royal Navy. And who paid the navy for this service? The taxpayers of England. Now, he would ask whether it was right that the taxpayers of England should send out a navy to do the business which should be done by the Indian Government, and enable the right hon. Gentleman to come down to the House with a flourishing statement about
  1846
  the revenues of India? Then, as to the alteration in the boundary between the East India Company's territory and the territories of the Crown. Formerly, when an officer passed the Cape of Good Hope, he came under Indian allowances. We had now established a command eastward of the Cape; we had established a naval command from the Cape of Good Hope to Singapore, where it joined the Chinese station. It was practically impossible to separate that portion of the sea from the territories of the Indian Government. The whole stream of our commerce went from the narrow neck round the Cape of Good Hope to the Southern Indian Ocean, and there ought to commence the subsidy of the Indian Government for the navy, and it was a practical injustice to this country to make it otherwise. It was a direct premium to the Admiral for spending the whole of his time in the Indian portion of his station. He' wished to know how the right hon. Gentleman intended to deal with these matters. He understood that an important alteration was to take place with regard to the States Settlements, and he wished to know in what that change was to consist. When Sir Stamford Raffles established the colony of Singapore in 1819, it was guaranteed as a free port. He (Sir James Elphinstone) was there in the year 1820, and he had been there occasionally during the next seventeen years. A more extraordinary increase in any port had never occurred, except in some of the mushroom places in America, than took place at Singapore. The whole of the trade of the Eastern Archipelago had been centred in that port, and the progress of the colony was mainly due to its immunity from all port charges. He understood that it was the design of the Indian Government to introduce port regulations for Singapore. He wished to know whether or not that was really the intention of the Government; because, if so, that opportunity might be obtained in the next Session which was denied him in the present of opposing a policy likely to be so mischievous. Then, as to the taxes in India, and especially the salt tax. He looked upon the cotton cultivation in India as ephemeral. The war in America must, in the nature of things, end some time or other. There were in the South 3,000,000 or 4,000,000 of slaves, and half a million would be quite enough to supply this country with all the cotton it required.

  1847
  The total destruction of the animals in Egypt had altered the position of that country, and instead of exporting large quantities of grain, Egypt was likely to become a great cotton field, and to import grain for its own consumption from the Black Sea. Under these circumstances, was it likely that we should take our cotton from a country 16,000 miles distant when we could get it from America and Egypt? India, no doubt, had benefited from the war in America, and as long as it pleased Providence that the war should continue India would be likely to benefit. But as soon as it came to an end the people of this country would fall back upon their old sources of supply. But since the people of India must consume a certain quantity of salt with their food, the salt tax, in his opinion, and in the opinion of those best acquainted with India, was the last tax with which the Government ought to interfere. He felt bound to enter his protest against the system inaugurated by the right hon. Gentleman of bringing forward his financial statement, when he might have acted far otherwise, at a time when the benches of that House were so empty. He should have been glad to see the noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn (Lord Stanley) present on that occasion. It was the proper function of an Opposition not to allow questions of such importance to be slurred over as they were that evening, and he hoped the House would support him next year when he should endeavour to bring about a better state of things.
  MR. GRANT DUFFsaid, that of all the wonderful political performances ever enacted on this terrestrial globe, the most astounding was the performance of the right hon. Gentleman. It was not merely that the Indian Budget was brought in at the end of the Session, when they were all wearied and jaded, but that they were wearied and jaded from listening not to a speech, for it could not be called a speech, but to a sort of concatenation of broken, interjectional remarks and sentences, jerked out by a Minister to whom Heaven had denied not only the power of lucid statement but almost the gift of articulate speech. ["Oh, oh!"] Assuredly the noble Lord at the head of the Government could find a colleague who, while not inferior to the right hon. Gentleman in administrative ability, might possess the power, he would not say of laying before the House such a statement as that which the Chancellor of
  1848
  the Exchequer was in the habit of making from year to year with regard to the financial position of England, but a person who could make that sort of clear and intelligible statement which the country had a right to demand. ["Oh, oh!"] He had listened year after year to the speeches of the right hon. Baronet, and he had never heard him make a speech which would be in any respect satisfactory, even if it appeared as an anonymous article in the pages of a Quarterly Review.
  MR. AYRTONsaid, with regard to what had been said of the state of the House, he believed these Indian debates followed only the ordinary course of such matters, and if there was any peculiarity in this debate it was to be found in the circumstance that there was an almost entire absence of all the Members connected with the manufacturing districts who had ever taken an interest in the affairs of India. The only two persons present who could be said to represent the manufacturing districts were the hon. Member for Manchester (Mr. Bazley) and the hon. Member for Stockport (Mr. J. B. Smith), and they had expressed themselves as satisfied on the whole with the state of affairs. He attributed the peculiarity to which he had alluded to the circumstance that from repeated discussion they had arrived at a better appreciation of the relations of this country to our Indian Empire, and they felt that the causes of complaint upon which they had formerly dwelt had ceased to exist. They no longer looked for that enormous supply of cotton which they had formerly anticipated, nor did they attribute the deficiency to the causes of which they had so often complained. While regret had been generally expressed that the House had not before it the financial statement delivered by Sir Charles Trevelyan to the Indian Council in the beginning of the financial year, an hon. Gentleman spoke of it disparagingly, and said that it had sent every Member of the Council to sleep, except Sir Charles Trevelyan, who was reading it. He (Mr. Ayrton), on the contrary, had received a copy of that statement, and he must say he considered it as deserving to be spoken of with the utmost respect, and that it reflected the highest credit upon Sir Charles Trevelyan. In former years some gentlemen went out to India with the most inflated ideas of their position; they called themselves Chancellors of the Exchequer, and delivered speeches which were not worthy of being reproduced in this country

  1849
  and of being laid in an official form upon the table of the House. But there was a total absence of any such assumption on the part of Sir Charles Trevelyan. Considering the tone of Sir Charles Trevelyan's address, he was of opinion that some arrangement should be made by which such a document should be laid upon the table of the House by the Secretary of State for India; not that the document should be looked upon as binding the Secretary of State to everything contained in it, but merely as an expression of the opinion of the Government of India on the finances of that empire. It was most un-satisfactory that they should be passing Resolutions relating to a state of affairs past and gone when Sir Charles Trevelyan had published a statement which brought the finances of India up to the April of the present year, and estimated them to the April of 1865, and had added a financial criticism relative to the increase or diminution of the income and expenditure of that country. He thought that with such information the House would be able to arrive at a better conclusion than by merely receiving the accounts which had been laid upon the table. It was not his intention to enter into discussions extending from the Himalaya to Adam's Peak, and from the chronicles of Adam to the present time; but he could not help recalling the attention of the Secretary of State to a subject which he had brought to his notice last year, and which showed a tendency on the part of the Government of India to fall into the evil course into which the Home Government had fallen. A hundred years ago it was predicted that if the Government of this country could raise a revenue from the vices of the people by the spread of intemperance, they would address themselves to promote the consumption of ardent spirits rather than to diminish it, and that prophecy has been thoroughly fulfilled. He thought there was a disposition on the part of the Government of India to fall into the same error. Nothing could equal the horrors produced by stimulating the consumption of intoxicating drinks in India, and it became the Government seriously to consider whether some improvement could not be introduced into this system. He must also again press on the right hon. Gentleman the condition of the salt revenue. That revenue had been raised very much during the last few years; and while every step taken in the remission of revenue was for the relief of the wealthy classes in India,
  1850
  they were putting on a tax on the first necessary of life for the poorer classes The increase of the salt tax had been attended with the most deplorable results. Those who are engaged in the curing of provisions had been compelled to reduce the quantity used, and the most lamentable evils, involving loss of life, had been the consequence, Serious effects had also been occasioned to cattle and agriculture. He was quite satisfied that the present amount of this tax was oppressive and ought to be reduced at the earliest possible period. With regard to expenditure, it was unnecessary to go into all the items that appeared in these accounts. He feared very little could be done in reducing the expenditure on account of the army and civil service. But there was one thing for which Sir Charles Trevelyan deserved the greatest credit. Instead of lending himself to the views of a few people in India who were desirous of carrying on a false system of finance, he had boldly applied himself to the proper appropriation of the surplus Indian revenue to the reduction of the public debt. That surplus had been created by factitious finance, and the debt ought never to have been created. Still, there had been a pressure put on the Government that the surplus should be applied to develop the resources of the country and the maintenance of a false system of finance. Every encouragement should be given to the Finance Minister in India in resisting that pressure. He had been placed in a position of the greatest possible difficulty, being surrounded by persons who fancied that the interests of India were coincident with their own, though these might be limited to the province or towns in which they resided, and by no means identical with the interests of the great mass of people for whose good government we ought to feel ourselves responsible. He thought the statement which had been made exceedingly gratifying. India was prosperous, notwithstanding the misfortunes of the Mutiny and in consequence of the war in America. Immense capital had been invested in India by the railway companies. There had been a vast increase in the value of its produce, which had tended to bring the finances of India into a more healthy condition. But he hoped it would not be thought, because we could collect revenue from a submissive people we should exact from them the last farthing they could pay short of driving them into rebellion, and that we were entitled to squander that

  1851
  revenue on anything that gratified the caprice of Europeans. They were now congratulating themselves on the great prosperity of India; but he would remind them that a few years ago Lord Dalhousie printed a Minute, in which he congratulated himself and the country on the prosperity which had resulted from his system of administration; and all concerned in that Minute—the Court of Directors, the Board of Control, and the Public Service in India—were extremely delighted by that state of things. But when the record came home it was found to be a factitious statement, and twelve months afterwards we were awakened by the astounding discovery that the statement was mere imagination; and that underlying our administration was a deep sense of injury and wrong, a growing state of dissatisfaction which burst out into open mutiny and sedition. Government would do well to consider what was the real state of India, and not build too much on the force they possessed, and the submissiveness of the people, for if they did, deriding Native prejudice and superstition, and exacting from the people the utmost farthing they could pay, without breaking out into open rebellion, the time would come when this country would be more startled than before, and would regret that it had not taken advantage of the pacific and humble disposition of the Natives of India.
  SIR CHARLES WOODwas very much obliged for the views which had been expressed on this subject by hon. Gentlemen who had spoken in the debate, and the kind expressions which had been used towards himself. It had been stated by the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Sir James Elphinstone) that the Indian Budget had been postponed, as a dodge on his part, till so late a period that he might be enabled to make what sort of statement he pleased. Now, the real facts of the case were these—till he became President of the Board of Control no Indian Budget was ever laid before the House, and no more information about the affairs of India was placed before the House than of any part of the world with which we had no connection. He could therefore hardly be accused with justice of wishing to keep the House in ignorance of Indian affairs. But how much earlier could he make his statement? The accounts on the table, up to the end of April, 1863, were made up in India in March and April, 1864. The regular Estimates for 1863–4 were made
  1852
  up about the same time, and did not arrive in this country till towards the end of April. The form of the accounts had been settled by the House of Commons, and the day on which they must be laid on the table was fixed by Act of Parliament. That day was the 14th of May. Generally speaking, they could not be laid on the table more than a day or two before the time fixed by Act of Parliament. The accounts were laid on the table before Whitsuntide this year, and they were of such a detailed character that they could not be printed before the middle of June. No doubt it might be possible to change the whole arrangement of business in India and to alter the date of the Indian year, which had been fixed for the convenience of India, and not of this country. He might by this means be able to make his statement about India at an earlier period of the Session. The House must see that it was a matter of perfect indifference to him whether he made that statement on the 1st of January or the 1st of July. But the financial year in England had been changed from the end of December to the end of March in order that the votes for the great services might be got through before Easter. If even one night were taken for the Indian Budget before Easter it would interrupt the course of business in that House, and it was, therefore, necessary to appoint such a day as would least interfere with English business. The House of Commons, however, did not vote the taxes of India, nor did it in the first instance control the expenditure of India. The object of the statement now made annually by the Indian Minister was to lay before the House the general state of affairs in India and to enable those hon. Members who took an interest in Indian matters to make such suggestions or ask for such information as might be useful. The House was asked for no vote that influenced the taxes of India. He had listened with great attention to the various suggestions which had been made; but if he adopted the suggestions of some hon. Gentleman he should have very little surplus left. He had never thought it desirable to maintain a high duty on salt; but when recommendations of its reduction were made, hon. Members must think of the present state of Indian revenue. The surplus in India was estimated at £30,000; but there were miscellaneous receipts in England that brought it up to £257,000. It must be remem-

  1853
  bered in how large a degree the Indian revenue depended on opium, the income from which sometimes varied as much as £1,000,000 a year or even more, and how difficult it would be to make up any possible deficiency which might not improbably occur in that source. The evils of the salt tax had been, he thought, a good deal overrated, for he remembered a report from a medical officer attached to a hospital in Calcutta who examined his patients on this subject, and found that out of 100 persons only three said that they had ever suffered from the diminished quantity of salt which they were able to consume in consequence of the high price. The land revenue was a rent, and not a tax, and the only taxes the Natives of India paid were Customs duties on piece goods for clothing and the tax on salt. The people of India had always been accustomed to taxes on salt. They bad a singular objection to a new tax, and it would therefore be most unwise to repeal the salt tax which had always existed in India, and substitute some other impost which the people of India had never paid before. It could not be said that the people of India were too heavily taxed. With regard to opium, he was ready to admit that the pass duty on Bombay opium was at present too high, and that it would be well that it should bear a fairer proportion to the amount of duty at Calcutta. The hon. Member (Mr. Henry Seymour) had not correctly understood the state of the case in regard to waste lands. What he (Sir Charles Wood) had stated, and that was on the authority of Lord Canning, was that he did not think a large amount would be available for sale in Bengal Proper; but that in Assam and the Neilgherries there was a good deal of waste land available for European cultivation. With reference to the telegraph, he did not see that he had been at all to blame. The Turkish Government insisted upon constructing the line in Turkey, and the Persian Government upon constructing that in Persia. He had completed all that depended upon himself, and had assisted those Governments as far as they would allow him in constructing the lines which passed through their respective territories. The complaints of the hon. Members for Stockport and Manchester as to the valuation of piece goods at Calcutta were not well founded. The duty was 5 per cent ad valorem, and as the value of the goods had risen, it was
  1854
  only fair that the rate at which they were charged should be increased. That had been done in concert with the Chamber of Commerce at Calcutta, which admitted that it was perfectly fair. The hon. Member for Stockport charged him with bad political economy in doing with reference to tea and the cinchona—that is to say, encouraging the introduction of those articles of produce—that which he refused to do with regard to cotton; but the hon. Member forgot that all that he was doing in the former cases had been done with regard to cotton ten or fifteen years ago by the East India Company, who, having introduced the best description of cotton and shown that it could be grown, handed the plantations over to private enterprize. Upon the subject of the duty on saltpetre, a letter had that morning passed the Council, and was about to be sent to the Government of India, informing them that saltpetre was being manufactured in Europe to a considerable amount from nitrate of soda, a fact which bore most importantly upon the duty, the existing rate of which was only justifiable upon the theory that India had a monopoly of the article. The inconvenience which had arisen at the mint of Bombay arose from the circumstance that in October last, there being then no bullion to coin, the old machinery was taken down for the purpose of substituting new and improved engines. While the establishment was in this crippled condition there came an extraordinary influx of; bullion, which, of course, could not be immediately coined into money. The hon. Baronet the Member for Evesham had found fault with him for not going more minutely into the estimates of revenue and expenditure. On former occasions he had done so—in fact, had made an Indian Budget; and he had only omitted to take that course on the present occasion because the experience of the last year or two had induced him to think that it rather bored than interested the House. The speech of Sir Charles Trevelyan was not an official document, and therefore could not conveniently be laid upon the table. He did not quite understand what the hon. Baronet meant by doubting the existence of a surplus. So far as last year went, the surplus was an ascertained fact. That of the current year was, of course, only anticipated, and might or might not be realized; but he had confidence in Sir Charles Trevelyan's judgment on this point.

  1855
  There must always be some uncertainty as to opium. As to the transport of troops, arrangements were now under consideration, in concert with the Admiralty, for sending them through Egypt. He was not so sure as he was at one time that the adoption of that course would lead to any considerable saving of expense, because the cost of building transports had been found to be much greater than had been anticipated. The troops would certainly be sent during the cool months of the year. Various suggestions had been made as to new taxes, but upon the whole he was inclined to believe that Indian finance could be better administered on the spot than by suggestions in that House. With respect to charges for the navy he would only observe that the external defence of India had always depended upon the Imperial forces, and the Indian navy was hardly more than a transport service. A question had been put about the Straits settlement which he scarcely understood.
  SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONEsaid, what he wanted to know was, Whether Singapore was to cease to be a free port, or whether duties were to be levied there by the authority of the Indian Government?
  SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, no alteration in the position of Singapore was intended; but questions had been raised by the Singapore Chamber of Commerce as to harbourmasters, and also as to moorings, and it was stated that no objection would be made to the levying of some small duty for the purpose of defraying any expenditure for these purposes. He believed that he had noticed all the points that had been raised, and had only further to thank the Committee for the patient attention they had given to his statement, and to thank hon. Members for the suggestions which they had made, and which he could assure them should receive his most careful attention.
  MR. TORRENSwanted to know, whether there was any probability of the plan he had suggested being adopted—namely, to close the Indian accounts at an earlier date—say the 31st of December?
  SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, he would communicate with the Government of India upon that subject, but he would remark that, even if he were enabled to bring forward the accounts earlier in the Session, he should not be able to make his statement earlier without interfering with the English business. The accounts before the Com-
  1856
  mittee were for the year ending the 30th of April, 1863. The local accounts might be made up earlier in India, but the accounts for all India were not made up until March, and did not reach this country till the middle of April.
  MR. TORRENSsaid, the accounts of India were closed on the 30th April—he could not see why they could not be made up to December 31, or to any preceding date, so that they might be laid before Parliament early in the Session. He had great experience himself in relation to those accounts, and could see no obstacle to the plan he suggested.
  SIR CHARLES WOODadmitted that the hon. Gentleman was better acquainted with the subject than himself, but he had spoken of the delay of arranging all the local accounts at Calcutta before reaching this country.
  SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONEthought that all the right hon. Gentleman had to do was to send out an order that the accounts should be made up to a particular day. With respect to the expenditure for barracks, he hoped attention would be given to that subject, as most of them were unhealthy and even pestilential; and if the Government would take the opinion of such men as Sir Sidney Cotton, they would soon learn where improvements were needed, and whether it would not be possible to do with some 20,000 or 30,000 less Europeans than were now kept in India. Then as to the Paumban Channel, he thought the expenditure of some £200,000 would be a most useful application of money, as it would greatly facilitate trade, and a small duty upon coasters would soon recoup the outlay.
  MR. HENRY SEYMOURsaid, that Sir Charles Trevelyan had made a statement in India of the estimate for next year, and yet the House was kept in ignorance upon the subject until the moment when the right hon. Gentleman spoke, and even then they were only informed of the general items, though the full accounts had been published in India. As to the home charges, that part of the accounts must be sent out from England; and why could it not be laid before the House? He complained also that the accounts which they had contained no column comparing the accounts with those of the previous year. The statement of Sir Charles Trevelyan was an explanation of the estimate of this year.
  SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, that if

  1857
  his hon. Friend would look at the papers which had been laid upon the table he would find that the accounts for 1862–3 were actually compared, page after page, with the estimated expenditure for the year 1863–4.
  MR. GREGSONsaid, he had not asked for the repeal of the salt duty, but for the reduction of it.
  In reply to Sir HENRY WILLOUGHBY,
  SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, that measures were being taken to consolidate various treasuries, which were now unnecessarily multiplied.
  SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONEgave notice that if the naval service was not placed on the same footing as the military service by next Session he should move the rejection of the Resolution.
  Resolutions agreed to.
  House resumed.
  Resolutions to be reported To-morrow, at Twelve of the clock.

CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPROPRIATION) BILL.—COMMITTEE.
Order for Committee read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: In moving that you, Sir, do now leave the Chair, I wish, with the permission of the House, to take the same course which I adopted last year, and that is to check—which I hope to be able to do in a few words—the figures set down in this Bill by a comparison with those I gave in the financial statement—to show the difference between the Bums estimated and the sums as they actually stand; in fact, to place before the House the rectified statement. Since that statement was made certain changes have taken place in consequence of Supplemental Estimates which it has been found necessary to lay on the table. The charges on account of the Debt and the Consolidated Fund remain as they were. The charge for the Army, too, stands precisely as they were then stated. One of the most important changes is in the charge for the Navy, which in the financial statement was set down at £10,432,000, and is in the Appropriation Bill fixed at £10,708,000—thus making a difference of nearly £280,000. Of that sum about £60,000 was announced by me
1858
in general terms in connection with the changes which were then under consideration in the pay of certain classes in the navy, and a reserve of £80,000 was actually made, principally for that purpose. Independently of that, however, there has been another most important additional charge imposed on account of the service—I allude to the purchase of the two ironclad vessels of which we have heard so much, and for which a sum, I think, of £225,000 was voted by this House. These charges will explain the difference between the estimate of £10,432,000 and the sum of £10,708,000, as stated in this Bill. Again, the Miscellaneous Expenditure was estimated by me at £7,628,000, whereas it appears here as £7,638,000. On the other hand the Packet Service, which was estimated to cost £883,000, has had actually voted for it only £860,000. Taking the entire of the changes made altogether, the result is as follows:—I estimated the Revenue for the present financial year at £67,128,000, and the Expenditure at £66,890,000, showing a surplus of £238,000; but while the estimate for the Revenue remains as I placed it—inasmuch as the financial proposals of the Government were adopted substantially as they were submitted to the House—the estimate of charge has been raised to £67,073,000, leaving on the figures as they now stand only a nominal surplus of £55,000. I do not think there is any reason to apprehend that there will be a deficiency on the balance of the year; but, at the same time, the estimated surplus has been reduced to a sum smaller than the Government would have been justified in submitting for the sanction of the House had they contemplated the additional charges which I have mentioned at the period of the financial statement. Almost the whole of the difference is caused by the purchase of these two vessels; and that is not to be regarded as a measure of finance as a measure of expediency for the protection of the public interest. It is possible—and, indeed, I hope not unreasonable—to express some confidence that the effect of the purchase of these vessels will be the reduction in the corresponding Votes of next year; but I am not able to give any definite estimate of the reduction upon these Votes in the present year, though I do not altogether abandon the hope of so doing. These, therefore, are the figures which express the ultimate finance of the year, and as far as the estimate of Reve-

1859
nue and Expenditure goes they show only a nominal surplus of £55,000.
SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, it was clear that the surplus had more than vanished; but he wished to know whether there were not other charges to be deducted? Had the right hon. Gentleman taken into consideration the Supplemental Estimate for the Army, the charges for the Yeomanry, and the £20,000 for Sir Rowland Hill.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that the figures were taken from the Appropriation Bill as printed, and were therefore authentic.
SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYthought it was unfortunate that the surplus had all vanished, and hoped that the right hon. Gentleman could give the House some assurance that the revenue was in such a state of buoyancy that there was every reason to expect a fair surplus.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER,as far as he could judge, was in a position to give such an assurance.
MR. WHITEwished to know if credit had been taken for the £500,000 which it was stated would be repaid to us by New Zealand if the House consented to the Guarantee of Loan Bill now before the House.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that if that sum were received it would go to increase the balance.
MR. WALPOLEsaid, he was glad to find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer anticipated that the balance would be maintained if no other disturbances should arise. He could not help, however, looking with the greatest alarm at what was going on in New Zealand, and he thought it would well become the Government to make a fuller statement as to the charges which might be expected in case the war should continue.
MR. AYRTONwished to know if it was competent for any hon. Member to bring on any question under the Appropriation Act arising out of the Votes appropriated by the Bill, or whether it was necessary to wait for the particular section of the Act to which the question referred?
MR. SPEAKER: I think the hon. and learned Member will be perfectly in order in proceeding with the notice which stands in his name.
MR. AYRTONsaid, he had given notice of his intention to call the attention of the House to the balance of power in Europe,
1860
for the maintenance of which most of the army supplies were voted. He said that one of the most important of the Votes was £15,000,000 which had been voted for the support of our standing army. In the Act which was passed at the commencement of the Session they were told that this standing army was supported for the purpose of defending our Colonies, for the safety of our own country, and for the maintenance of the balance of power in Europe. The amount voted for those purposes during the last five years was £84,000,000, so that, with the sums voted during the present Session, they had voted and were to spend no less a sum than £100,000,000 for those purposes. They had never been informed in what manner that enormous sum ought to be divided; how much for the protection of our Colonies, how much for ourselves, and how much for the balance of power; but if they were to divide it into three equal parts they would be able to appreciate the sacrifice which the people of this country were making for the attainment of some end of the nature of which they had no very clear idea. He had asked the noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) a few days since a question which appeared to him to be of some importance, and he regarded the answer which he received as highly unsatisfactory. He had desired to know whether the Government had taken steps, in consequence of the course pursued by the kingdom of Prussia, to relieve this country from the responsibilities which it had incurred in 1815 towards that country; and the noble Lord by his answer suggested that he (Mr. Ayrton) was proposing a very gratuitous violation of treaty to which he could not lend his countenance. He regarded the view taken by the noble Lord as erroneous, because he did not look upon our withdrawal from the responsibilities of the treaty as a violation of our agreement if we believe that Prussia was now engaged in violating the treaty in essential conditions which affected the character of our guarantee. He might remind the House that during the great war which ended with the peace or treaty of 1815, Saxony took a very conspicuous part on the side of the French, and that the Great Napoleon always manifested the deepest interest in the welfare and maintenance of that kingdom. Saxony naturally became antagonistic to the other Powers of Germany, more especially to Austria and Prussia; and when Russia and ourselves had by dint

1861
of great sacrifices and exertions of power destroyed the supremacy of the French in Europe, Prussia became awakened, as it were, from the stupor into which she had fallen, and mustered up courage sufficient to take part in the conflict which resulted in the overthrow of Napoleon. But no sooner bad the result been attained than Prussia, whose conduct resembled that of the jackal following in the footsteps of the hon. "eager to prey where she was powerless to conquer," assumed a remarkable attitude in the affairs of Europe, and immediately began to intrigue with Russia for the purpose of appropriating to herself the kingdom of Saxony. It required considerable diplomatic exertions on the part of England to frustrate these exertions; and ultimately Prussia was induced to relinquish some of her designs, and to content herself with the spoliation from Saxony of a portion of her territory. The result of these intrigues and negotiations was that England was induced to give a distinct guarantee, by the Treaty of Vienna, that Prussia should continue in possession of the provinces of which she had despoiled the kingdom of Saxony. That, I maintain, was a grave responsibility to incur, and one which we can only properly appreciate when we remember our insular position, and the fact that Saxony is situated in the heart of Europe. No doubt the conduct of this country was based upon the fact that we were making a great settlement which was to maintain the balance of power in Europe. But when Prussia accepted our guarantee she implicitly acknowledged that she was not strong enough to maintain her acquisitions by force without external aid. England in undertaking that guarantee must have felt and believed that she did so, not for the purpose of enabling Prussia to break the peace of Europe by attacking other States and countries, but in the conviction that Prussia was a peaceable Power, and that she would remain contented under the treaty which gave her so large an addition to her territory. The position, however, which Prussia had lately assumed was entirely at variance with the principles of the Treaty of Vienna. In these transactions we had been dealing with Prussia and Austria, not as part of the German Confederation, because they had been at some pains to impress upon us that they were acting as independent kingdoms in connection with the Germanic Confederation. Prussia could net screen herself by saying that she was
1862
merely performing a duty imposed on her by her obligations to the Diet. For her own aims she had chosen to act as an independent kingdom as well as one of the Confederated States of Germany, and in the attitude she had taken upon herself to break the peace of Europe. Under this very treaty the fundamental part of the Germanic Confederation was settled, and the article of guarantee was part of those provisions. Therefore the guarantee was an integral part of the territorial arrangements of the States of the Germanic Confederation in its internal and extra-territorial relations. It was equally clear by that treaty, Holstein alone was part of the Germanic Confederation, and that Schleswig had nothing to do with that arrangement. When Prussia therefore took on herself to invade Schleswig and Denmark Proper, she was entering on a course of proceeding entirely at variance with the Treaty of 1815, and was undertaking to break the peace of Europe, and unsettling the balance of power. He denied altogether the assertion of the noble Lord (Viscount Palmerston) that the acts of 1863–4 had nothing to do with the Treaty of 1815. They were intimately connected with each other; because it was impossible for any man to say what might be the consequences of those acts of 1863–4 in reference to the responsibilities undertaken by us under the Treaty of 1815. If Prussia had proclaimed to-day that there was to be a kind of parochial nationality, and that each parish and hamlet was to be asked whether it would belong to one kingdom or another, that feeling might spread, and what had taken place in Schleswig might occur in Saxony. The history of Germany showed that there was as much antagonism between the Bavarian and Prussian, the Saxon and the Austrian, as between the Hanoverian, say, and the Schleswiger; and if this new principle was to be acted on and enforced by war, without negotiation, the Saxons might apply the lesson taught by Prussia, and rally together, and it was impossible to tell what we might not be called on to do under our responsibilities of the Treaty of 1815. It was beside the question, therefore, to compare our position under that treaty with the question raised under the Treaty of 1852, when our Government justly told Prussia that she could not take advantage of the circumstances which had occurred to depart from the Treaty of 1815. We were entitled to say to Prussia, that if she were

1863
not content to rest her claims on the Treaty of 1815, and would not preserve the peace guaranteed by that treaty, we would no longer accept the responsibilities of that treaty. Instead of indulging in idle threats which the Prussians knew we should never perform, if the Government at certain critical portions of the negotiations had made such representations to Prussia, she would have been stopped in her course; whereas we had rather encouraged her by bluster, which she knew perfectly well we should never act upon. He had felt it his duty to take this opportunity of protesting in the name of the people of England, who had spent £100,000,000 within the last six years for the preservation of the balance of power against the imposition of such an enormous burden in favour of the Treaty of Vienna, and in favour of a Power which showed herself utterly regardless of treaties, and which, for its own purposes, had not scrupled to break the peace of Europe.
SIR JAMES FERGUSSONthought the House ought not to separate without some remarks being made on the altered position in which this country stood with regard to her engagements in Europe. There were treaties older than 1815, by which we were bound, which might prove highly inconvenient to us if the novel doctrines recently laid down were to be maintained. The hon. and learned Gentleman, however, need not feel much anxiety as to what we should do about the Treaty of 1815, when older and more solemn engagements had within a very recent period been utterly disregarded and set at naught. Within a very few years the noble Lord at the head of the Government had referred to the Treaty of 1720, by which Great Britain guaranteed the possession of Denmark Proper and part of Schleswig as a binding engagement; and in 1848 he appealed to it, as giving England a right to interfere to prevent the invasion of Denmark by Prussia. In that House too he had admitted the obligations of that treaty, and our ambassador at Vienna had been instructed to make representations upon it. And yet, on the 11th of April of the present year, the Foreign Secretary said in the other House that the Government had not made up their minds whether we were bound by it or not; and up to the present time it had never been stated distinctly that we were freed from those obligations. By this time, however, they were pretty well forgotten. If the new doctrine that
1864
treaties were put an end to by one Power engaged by them being at war was to prevail, we should hear no more of them, and the Treaty of Vienna would probably not trouble us much more. The same might be said of other treaties, such as that of 1856, by which we guarantee the provinces of European Turkey to the Porte. Certainly the noble Lord had not given his assent openly to the new doctrines, but it had been stated without shame by the principal newspapers of the country, that if our commercial interests were not involved, treaties were to be treated as waste paper. Such a principle tended to weaken the influence of this country; and nothing could be more lowering to our self-respect and national pride than to have to watch one of the weakest of our Allies dying by inches with her back to the wall and her face to the enemy, and then to walk of without paying the slightest regard to our treaty obligations. He thanked the hon. and learned Gentleman for having brought the subject forward, but he did not think that our responsibilities under the Treaty of 1815 need give him the slightest uneasiness.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: I am not going to follow my hon. and learned Friend in re-opening the subject of our recent discussions, and I can assure him that I am not going to stand up here as the champion of Prussia. My opinions as to the conduct of Prussia are pretty well known. But I cannot concur with him in thinking that because Prussia has made war on a country not belonging to the German Confederation, that on that account we are released from the engagements contained in the Treaty of Vienna, with regard to that portion of Saxony which was then allotted to Prussia. The two things have nothing whatever to do with each other. It was no part of the Treaty of Vienna, and no part of the guarantee which England—not alone, but with other Powers—gave, that Prussia should remain at peace for ever after that. The mere fact of Prussia having made war under such circumstances as those stated by my hon. Friend—objectionable as her conduct may be in every possible way—cannot release us from the treaty obligations which we contracted in 1815. It is quite true, as the hon. and learned Gentleman stated, that Austria and Prussia have started a principle of nationalities which, in its application, may become exceedingly inconvenient to themselves—more especially to

1865
Austria; but that is not the question at present. All I rise to say is, I still maintain that the transactions which have recently taken place, as between Austria and Prussia on the one hand, and Denmark on the other, in no way release us from the obligations which we contracted, in common with other Powers, in guaranteeing to Prussia that portion of Saxony which has been referred to by the hon. and learned Gentleman.
Question put, and agreed to.
Bill considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
Clauses 1 to 19 inclusive agreed to.
Clause 20,
MR. C. P. BERKELEYsaid, that the Vote referred to in this clause as "a sum of £18,355 for Civil Establishments on the Western Coast of Africa" included an item of £4,000 for the maintenance and repair of forts. Yet it appeared from official Reports that the forts at Cape Coast, Lagos, and other parts of the coast were in confusion and disorder, and in very bad repair. It was stated in a paper which he held in his hand, that if the Ashantees had marched on Lagos a few months ago they might have captured all the forts. As the £4,000 was not applied to the purpose for which it was voted, he begged to move the omission of the item.
MR. CARDWELLsaid, that the £4,000 was voted for "Forts and Establishments," and went in aid of the revenues of the colony, which amounted to only £7,000.
SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYthought that £4,000 out of the £18,000 was specifically applicable to the forts.
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUE,speaking from an experience of several years in the Colonial Office, could assure the Committee that it never had been intended that the £4,000 should be applied to the repair of forts.
MR. COXobserved, that in the Estimate on which the Vote had been moved, the £4,000 was stated to be for the "maintenance of Forts and Establishments."
MR. CARDWELLrepeated that the Vote had not been taken for the repair of forts.
MR. DILLWYNthought it right that the opinion of the House should be tested as to whether these Votes were a farce or not.
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUErepeated that these Estimates were in the same form as they had been for several
1866
years past, and that this was in no sense a military Vote.
MR. COBDENsaid, that this Vote was evidently intended to apply mainly to civil charges.
MR. WALPOLEsaid, he desired to speak on a point of Order. He had never witnessed the proposal of an Amendment to the Appropriation Bill, and he wished to know from the Chairman whether the Question could be put? When the House had granted £18,000 for a particular purpose, he wished to know whether it could be afterwards reduced to £14,000?
MR. COXsaid, that if the Resolution for the reduction of the Vote was carried, he apprehended that the hon. Gentleman would then move a clause appropriating the £14,000 according to the Vote.
THE CHAIRMANsaid, this Bill was the last act of the House ratifying the Resolutious passed in Committee of Supply; and if it was the pleasure of the House, upon a revision of the Votes taken in Supply, to reduce any one of those Votes, he could not say that it would not be competent for the House to take that course.
MR. E. P. BOUVERIEsaid, the Under Secretary for the Colonies had shown that the appropriation clause was drawn conformably with the Estimate, and the hon. Gentleman could not, by the forms of the House, appropriate the £4,000 to any other purpose than that for which it had been voted by the Committee of Supply.
MR. AUGUSTUS SMITHtrusted that the House would not relax its hold upon its privileges.
MR. NEWDEGATEsaid, if there had been any doubt as to the appropriation of the sum in Committee of Supply the objection would have been valid.
MR. C. P. BERKELEY,after the discussion which had taken place, would withdraw his Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause agreed to.
Remaining clauses agreed to.
House resumed.
Bill reported, without Amendment; to be read 3o To-morrow at Twelve of the clock.

NEW ZEALAND (GUARANTEE OF LOAN) BILL— [Bill 150.]—THIRD READING.
Order for Third Reading read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."
MR. WHALLEYthought, that if the Bill passed without further explanation, a very false and unfortunate impression would be produced in the colony. The statement of the Colonial Secretary as to the origin of the war in New Zealand had been perfectly satisfactory—namely, that it had originated not in the land question but owing to the massacre of British subjects yet Member after Member had risen to declare that the war was discreditable to this country. Such declarations would be most distasteful to the colonists, and very discouraging to our soldiers and sailors who were serving in New Zealand. Now he begged to call upon the right hon. Gentleman to state whether he had not reasonable ground to believe that there were causes for this war which had never been openly dwelt upon, and whether the imputations on the colonists were wholly justifiable? He had seen it stated in a New Zealand paper, that wherever Sir George Grey went he traced the war to the machinations of the Roman Catholic priests. Instead of explicitly answering the question which had been addressed to him on this point, the Colonial Secretary met it by an evasion. A writer in a New Zealand newspaper stated that certain flags were captured from the rebels after an engagement, and every one of those flags had upon it a Roman Catholic cross. He looked upon it as a most remarkable circumstance, which ought to be inquired into. Two years ago the head of the Roman Catholics in New Zealand visited France, and took back with him twenty-five of the most advanced pupils of the Jesuit College. He wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he had any reason to believe that such impressions existed in the colony?
MR. HENNESSYsaid, he could corroborate the statement of the hon. Member that some ecclesiastical influence was at the bottom of these proceedings; for he found that a Bishop in writing to the Governor of New Zealand stated that the most likely way to insure peace was to show a better disposition towards the Natives, whom he described as treating the settlers well. That, however, was a Protestant Bishop. And the Rev. Leonard Williams, in a despatch to the Governor, said that the settlers did not want to see the British troops coming there, and that several of the settlers had gone to Auckland, leaving their wives and children in lonely, unprotected situations, relying with confidence on the character of
1868
the Native inhabitants. The writer, moreover, said there was no evidence of their having joined in any hostile scheme until the dread of invasion drove them into a hostile alliance with other chiefs, and it was only the desperation of their condition which kept them in arms against the British Government. He wished to know whether the rumour was authentic, that despatches had been recently received from New Zealand conveying the information that a proclamation of a most sanguinary character had been issued by the authorities, not only directed to the confiscation of the land of the Natives, but also to deprive them of anything like a fair trial when taken in war. This contrasted strongly with the words of a message which they sent to one of our officers on the 2nd of March last before an engagement, and in which they stated that wounded and captured men and all women and children would be spared. Now it happened that in an engagement in which the Native loss amounted to seventy killed and some wounded, there was a large number of women among the sufferers. This was, no doubt, owing to some accident, but it was a most unfortunate circumstance. In many of these battles the number of Natives, even when they were successful, was less than the British troops, and the British Generals bore testimony to the valour of the Natives. The hon. Gentleman near him had the other night described the war as unjust and cruel and Lord Grey last Session spoke of it as being caused by the just discontent of the Maories. Some of the European population sold powder and shot to be used against the British troops. The British tax-payer was paying for a war in which no British interest was involved, but which seriously compromised the honour of this country. He moved as an Amendment that the Bill be read a third time this day three months.
SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYseconded the Motion. Before the battle of Taranaki it appeared that a large quantity of stores and arms were supplied to the Natives, and he wished to know whether the Secretary for the Colonies could give any information on that subject? It was monstrous that any portion of the colonists should be engaged in such a proceeding.
Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day month."—(Mr. Hennessy.)
MR. CARDWELLsaid, he was convinced that there was no truth in the imputation that the colonists furnished their enemies in the field with munitions of war. A large portion of the Native population were friendly to the British people; some were hesitating between the two sides, and in only a limited portion of the Island a hostile feeling existed. In that great Island the hostile population could not be prevented by any vigilance on the part of the Government or the commanding officers from obtaining a supply of munitions of war; but it was absurd to suppose that the British population, all of whom in the province of Auckland were in arms for the protection of their homes, were engaged in furnishing materials for their own destruction. If he did not with the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. Whalley) attribute the origin of the rebellion to the Roman Catholic priests, neither did he, with the hon. Member for King's County (Mr. Hennessy), attribute it to the brethren of our blood who had settled in the colony. He would not take statements gathered from any accidental source, but he would take the words of the Governor of New Zealand. After describing the murderous outrage in which the war began, the Governor went on to say—
"Just after these murders, plots were formed by the same people and their adherents in the Lower Waikato for an attack upon the settlement of Auckland. The Natives who formed these plots were all well armed, and had long been preparing themselves for such enterprises. They had drilled their men, dressed them in uniforms, and appointed them to different ranks. What would have been said of the Government which, having the then recent and lamentable example at New Plymouth before its eyes, had hesitated to provide for the safety of the Queen's subjects."
It was in that conspiracy that the war originated, and it was to put it down that we were then engaged in war. Reference had been made to the representations made by various persons on behalf of the Natives; but the object was not to justify the rebellion, but to obtain mercy and consideration for the Natives. Mr. Sewell, for instance, said—
"The Manipotos, under their chief Rewi, a powerful and numerous tribe, are a lawless, turbulent set of men, living in a remote and difficult country, and ready to engage in any work of mischief."
Chief Justice Martin also said, we were stronger because we were avenging bloodshed, and that the conflict had not been
1870
desired or brought about by the Maori race, but by a turbulent minority belonging chiefly to one tribe. They brought no charge against the Maori race. They were dealing only with one set of rebels in one district of the colony. They were endeavouring to secure not only for the settlers but for the Maories the tranquil enjoyment of good order and prosperity. Such being the nature of the war, what had been Sir George Grey's policy? At that hour they would not desire him to quote despatches; and he would only say that Sir George Grey spoke of mercy being shown, where-ever it was possible, after the war was concluded; and the instructions from the Home Government were based on the same principle. It was true mercy to bring this war to a speedy close; and when that had been accomplished, justice would be administered with mercy and consideration to the rebels, so as to restore tranquillity, and benefit both the British colonists and the great majority of the Maories. It was to further that view that the Bill had been introduced, and he hoped that at this stage the House would not withhold its approval. With regard to the question of the hon. Member for Peterborough, he could only say he was not aware of any statement of Sir George Grey's of the nature of that attributed to him by the hon. Member. There were some statements, however, in the despatches to which he deemed it desirable not to give any currency, as there was quite ill-feeling enough in the colony without adding to it.
MR. WARNERhoped the House would take an early opportunity of expressing an opinion against the pernicious practice of guaranteeing colonial loans. It was the colonists who reaped the whole of whatever benefits accrued from such wars as this, while all the burden fell on the mother country.
SIR WILLIAM FRASERsaid, that there never was an occurrence to which the term accidental could more justly be applied than to the deaths of the women which had been referred to. Due notice of the British attack was given; but the Native chiefs miscalculated their strength, and their resistance to our soldiers led to some shells being discharged which killed the women. He hoped the House would pass the Bill. As to the sale of weapons, the letter of the Natives distinctly asserted it.
Question put, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."
The House divided:—Ayes 75; Noes 32: Majority 43.
Main Question put, and agreed to.
Bill read 3½ Verbal Amendment made.
Bill passed.

FORTIFICATIONS (PROVISION FOR EXPENSES) BILL— [BILL 218.]

  COMMITTEE.
  Bill considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, that he rose to make the explanation which he had promised when the House assented to the second reading. The Bill was the same as that of last year, with the exception of certain small changes in the schedule. The total estimated cost of the works remained unchanged, but it was arrived at in a somewhat different manner. For instance, in the "Sandown Bay defences," £10,000 more was put down this year, chiefly owing to engineering difficulties, arising from the nature of the ground at Fort Bembridge. There would also be an increased expenditure of £15,000 for the works at the Isle of Grain. There was a reduction in the estimates for the Hilsea Lines, in consequence of the manner in which it was now proposed that Portsdown Hill should be fortified. It was now proposed to abandon certain outworks, which would reduce the expenditure by about £20,000, and there would be a saving of £5,000 in the works at Picklecombe. It was not intended to enter into any new work which did not appear in the schedule, but he proposed to ask the House to vote £25,000 for works to the southward of Milford Haven, on the Pembroke station. The estimated cost of the works was £80,000, but no money had been actually asked for until the present year. At Spit-head the contract was renewed last year, and the works had been recommenced. Great progress had been made with the Horse Sand Fort, and it was expected that the basement would be entirely completed and ready for the superstructure next summer. Upon No Man's Land the works were also advancing rapidly, although the basement would not be completed until the end of the year. The works at Spithead would be more expensive than was originally anticipated, as the special Commission appointed to consider the alterations requisite in the original plan for the defence of Spithead had recommended that
  1872
  works should be constructed on the Spit-bank and on the Ryde Sand, about 1,200 yards to the southward of the Sturbridge Shoal. The works completed, or nearly so, were—on the Portsmouth station, the Needles, Warden Point, Puckpool, Eastney, and Lump's Batteries, Stokes Bay lines, Forts Grange, Rowner, and Brockhurst; on the Plymouth station, Drake's Island, Eastern King, Western King, Mount Edgecumbe, Whitesand Bay, and Cawsand Bay batteries, Devonport lines, and Fort Tregantle; on the Pembroke station, South Hook, Hubberstone, and Popton batteries; oh the Portland station, a small battery on the Inner Pierhead; and on the Dover station, Dover Castle and the Western Heights. Considerable progress had also been made on other works at Portsmouth, Plymouth, Pembroke, Portland, Gravesend, the Medway and Sheer-ness, Dover, and Cork. Of all the works specified in the schedule only seven were not yet under contract.
  SIR JOHN HAYasked, whether it was intended to fortify Pembroke after the Report of the Select Committee recommending the sale of that dockyard?
  SIR MORTON PETOthought that before the site of the central arsenal was decided upon, the House ought to have an opportunity of expressing an opinion upon it.
  Clause 1 agreed to.
  Clause 2,
  MR. C. P. BERKELEYcomplained of the lumping together of the items for the different ports.
  SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYinquired whether any calculation could be given of the number of men which would be required to hold all these fortifications. It was said that 40,000 men would be required for Portsmouth alone, and probably 250,000 for the whole of the proposed works.
  LORD CLARENCE PAGETsaid, that the Resolution of the Committee recommending that Pembroke dockyard should be disposed of was carried by a majority of one only; and even assuming that hereafter that most magnificent dockyard was disposed of, which he trusted would not be the case for a long time, he sincerely hoped the House would not consent to leave one of the most magnificent harbours of the country undefended.
  SIR MORTON PETOwas surprised at the remarks of the noble Lord the Secretary to the Admiralty after the Report

  1873
  made by his own Committee. That Committee was at least entitled to have its recommendation respectfully considered, and he hoped the proposal as regarded Pembroke would not be pressed that night.
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, it was not intended this year to ask the House to vote any money for the cite of the central arsenal, but it was fully intended to do so at a future time. There were at present as many works in hand as could be conveniently proceeded with at one time. With regard to Pembroke, he was quite unable to give any opinion as to the propriety of abandoning the dockyard there or not; but even if they did abandon it, it would be expedient to complete the works in progress there, for which the Vote asked this year was required.
  SIR JOHN HAYthought that the explanation given by the noble Lord respecting Pembroke dockyard was most unsatisfactory. The noble Lord himself was Chairman of the Committee that decided against keeping up that dockyard, and the noble Lord himself suggested the reduction of its size. When the proper time arrived he (Sir John Hay) would certainly move the reduction of the Vote by £35,000, being the amount required for Pembroke dockyard.
  LORD CLARENCE PAGETsaid, his report had referred only to the small dockyards, but he looked upon Pembroke as a most important one.
  MR. E. P. BOUVERIEsuggested that the reference to the central arsenal should be omitted from the clause.
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, it was hardly necessary to strike out the words. The Act remained exactly the same as it had been. Hon. Members ought to accept the assurance of the Government on the subject. As to the estimated cost of the works at Spithead, he was informed that there was no doubt that the whole of the works could be executed for the original sum set down for the three works.
  MR. ANGERSTEIN MR. ANGERSTEIN moved that the words which referred to the central arsenal should be omitted from the clause.
  VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, he would consent to the omission of the words from the second clause, but not from the schedule, because the principle had been recommended by the different Committees who had considered the question. The Government had no intention this year to propose to purchase any land, nor could
  1874
  such a purchase be made without the sanction of that House.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause agreed to, as were the remaining clauses.
  Schedule—
  SIR JOHN HAYproposed to omit Pembroke. He could not consent to the Vote of £35,000 for works at that dockyard.
  MR. SCOURFIELDsaid, the fortification of Pembroke was as important as any works upon the southern coast.
  Amendment negatived.
  Schedule agreed to
  House resumed.
  Bill reported; as amended, to be considered To-morrow, at Twelve of the clock.

INDIAN MEDICAL SERVICE BILL.

  [BILL 213.]—CONSIDERATION.
  Order for Consideration, as amended, read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now taken into Consideration."
  MR. HENNESSY MR. HENNESSY moved the adjournment of the debate.
  Debate adjourned till To-morrow at Twelve of the clock.

SCOTTISH EPISCOPAL CLERGY DISABILITIES REMOVAL BILL— [BILL 161.]

  THIRD READING.
  Order for Third Reading read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."
  MR. KINNAIRD MR. KINNAIRD moved the adjournment of the debate.
  Motion made, and Question put, "That the Debate be now adjourned."— (Mr. Kinnaird.)
  The House divided:—Ayes 18; Noes 40: Majority 22.
  Original Question again proposed,
  "That the Bill be now read the third time."
  MR. WARNER MR. WARNER moved the adjournment of the House.
  Whereupon Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—(Mr. Warner.)
  MR. KINNAIRD*said, that the other night the hon. Member for the Elgin Burghs (Mr. Grant Duff) stated that the Church of Scotland did not object to the Bill, and quoted the authority of an eminent member of that Church, Dr. Lee. He (Mr. Kinnaird) would therefore, with the permission of the House, read some portions of a letter addressed by the rev. Doctor to himself. Dr. Lee wrote—
  "I hold the same opinions (substantially) which you have so well expressed regarding the Scottish Episcopal Church Disabilities Bill. My friend Mr. Grant Duff, in alluding to my proceeding in this matter in the General Assembly, quite mistook my position and sentiments. My own opinion of this measure was never any secret. I have always regarded it as a violation of the Articles of Union, and as involving a virtual establishment of the Episcopal Church in Scotland, of which surely the Church of Scotland has reason and right to complain. This Bill reaches much further than its immediate and ostensible object, and it is not on account of its ostensible object that its concocters and promoters chiefly value it. They know well that it will serve for ulterior ends of far greater importance. I believe, however, that the Church of Scotland would hardly have succeeded, however early or strenuous her opposition had been; and the attempt on her part to raise opposition now would probably result only in injury to ourselves. The Bill seems to be on the eve of passing the Commons. I cannot help expressing my wonder that no Scotch Member except yourself has taken the ground which you have taken. In fact, neither the Church of Scotland nor Presbytery is in any sense represented in Parliament. Most of the Scotch Members appear to know very little more about Scotland than the English Members, and with few exceptions they regard such questions as this through the medium either of Episcopal feelings or of some form of Dissent. There can be no doubt that a large body of the most intelligent of our ministers hold the sentiments you have expressed, and generally speaking the ablest of them hold these sentiments most strongly."
  Another leading minister of the same Church, referring to other real disabilities, which he hoped Parliament would consider another year, says—
  "The Church of Scotland would no more think of re-ordaining an Episcopal than a Presbyterian minister. Let the law of the Church of England be rendered such as to permit her Bishops to recognize Presbyterian 'orders,' and one objection to the Bill will be removed. If the Bill pass in its present shape, the members of the Established Church of England will be allowed to acknowledge as ministers those ordained by a particular section of Scottish Dissenters, but not those ordained by the Established Church of Scotland. A more monstrous piece of intolerance it is impossible to imagine perpetrated in this country.… Nothing can be more unjust than the exclusion of Her Majesty's Scottish chaplains from the royal chapels of England, and there being no provision for the maintenance of Presbyterian worship in the British Court and Legislature
  1876
  when they happen to be in England. Constitutionally the Church of Scotland is on terms of exact equality with the Church of England, and if men are to hunt out disabilities, let them find one in the Scotch Members of the Legislature being summoned to England, without their being provided with such means of worship as are enjoyed by their Colleagues of the Episcopal persuasion … Mr. Duff's account of what passed in the General Assembly was not correct. I am sorry I have not now a spare copy of the newspaper reports of the discussion, but both Dr. Robert Lee and I, though not agreeing in many things, expressed our opinion as opposed to that of the majority of the Committee, which was that the Assembly should not petition against the Bill.
  P.S.—I find I have omitted another very serious Presbyterian grievance, which ought to be redressed. Chapels are built with Government money for army stations, and yet chaplains of the Established Church of Scotland holding Her Majesty's Commission are refused admission into them, with the troops under their charge, because these chapels have been consecrated."
  Standing almost alone as he had done, he had been unable to stop this most mischievous and cunningly devised Bill; but he would fain hope that its originators had unwittingly awakened a slumbering feeling, which would not be hushed again till real disabilities were removed, and the Protestant Church of England was rescued from the would-be grasp of men who see a sister, though a corrupt one, in the Church of Rome, but a great schism in the National Church of Scotland.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  Original Question again proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."
  MR. WHALLEY MR. WHALLEY moved that the Bill be read a third time this day month.
  Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day month."—(Mr. Whalley.)
  Question put, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."
  The House divided:—Ayes 34; Noes 10: Majority 24.
  Main Question put, and agreed to.
  Bill read 3o, and passed, with an Amendment.
  The Order of the Day for the Third Reading of the Bill having been read about three o'clock in the morning, the discussion which followed was not reported.
  Sir W. HEATHCOTE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Mr. GRANT DUFF, Sir EDWARD COLEBROOKE Supported the Bill. Mr. KINNAIRD, Mr. WARNER, Mr. NEWDEGATE, Mr. WHALLEY, spoke against the measure.

  MASTERS AND SERVANTS BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. COBBETT, Bill to alter and amend the Law relating to contracts of service between Master and Servant, ordered* to be brought in by Mr. COBBETT and Mr. COX.
  Bill presented, and read 1o. [Bill 232.]
  House adjourned at half past Three o'clock.

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—On Highways Act Amendment appointed and nominated* (List of Members); Thames Conservancy appointed and nominated* (List of Members).
Report—Railways Construction Facilities* (No, 160).
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Exchequer Bonds (£1,600,000)* (No. 224); West India Incumbered Estates Acts Amendment* (No. 225).
Second Reading—Weights and Measures (Metric System (No. 164); Turnpike Acts Continuance, &c* (No. 214); Militia Pay*; Registration of Deeds (Ireland)* (No. 218); Poisoned Flesh Prohibition, &c. (No. 219); Expiring Laws Continuance * (No. 208); Highways Act Amendment* (No. 207); Ionian States Acts of Parliament Repeal* (No. 212); Turnpike Trusts Arrangements* (No. 211).
Committee—College of Physicians* (No. 114); Inclosure (No. 2)* (No. 177); Trespass (Ireland)* (No. 202); Sale of Gas (Scotland!* (No. 152); Naval Discipline * (No. 205) [H.L.]; Local Government Act (1858) Amendment* (No. 190).
Report—Burials Registration * (No. 144); College of Physicians* (No. 114); Inclosure (No. 2)* (No. 177); Trespass (Ireland)* (No. 202); Sale of Gas (Scotland)* (No. 152); Naval Discipline * (No. 205); Local Government Act (1858) Amendment* (No. 190).
Third Reading—Mutual Surrender of Criminals (Russia)* (No. 204) [H.L.]; Thames Embankment and Metropolis Improvement (Loans)* (No. 206); Isle of Man Harbours Act Amendment* (No.209); Militia Ballots Suspension *.

CUBA SLAVE TRADE.

  GENERAL DULCE.—EXPLANATION.
  LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he had received a letter from his noble Friend, Lord Howden, complaining that when, in the observations he made the other evening in reference to the Cuba slave trade, he accused the Spanish Governors of Cuba generally of having taken bribes and encouraged the slave trade, he made no exception of General Dulce. The fact was, however, that he did state on the occasion referred to, that General Dulce formed an exception, and ten days before, in contrasting the conduct of the Government of Spain with that of Brazil, he bore testimony in favour of General Dulce, and the noble Earl the Foreign Secretary had also commended General Dulce's conduct. But praise did not penetrate the walls of that House as vituperation did, and the reason was that the former did not bear the same price in the market. If all the Spanish Governors had been but half as good as General Dulce, the slave trade would now be probably at an end. Lord Howden had expressed a strong opinion that the Aberdeen Act ought no longer to be maintained, because the Brazilians had entirely abolished the slave trade. Lord Aberdeen himself in 1856 declared that either in the event of the slave trade ceasing, or the Convention being renewed, he would be disposed to move for the repeal of that
  1782
  Act. Though not liable to the charge of having neglected to praise General Dulce, he had made an omission of which the Jamaica petitioners complained, and that was that he had not given Admiral Hope the credit so justly due to him. Admiral Hope was a gallant officer who had in every respect performed his duty with respect to the Cuban slave trade, and had also distinguished himself in the East. It was with the greatest pleasure that he bore testimony to his merits, as he was the son of a revered friend, the late President of the Court of Session in Scotland.

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (METRIC SYSTEM) BILL.

  (No. 164.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  EARL FORTESCUE,having presented a petition in favour of this Bill from the Association of Chambers of Commerce of the United Kingdom, said, that the question of weights and measures had an hereditary claim upon his support, because he whose place he so unworthily filled succeeded in carrying through the other House of Parliament many years ago a measure establishing the system of weights and measures now the law of the land. After twenty years' experience of the; working of the present system, however, his late father was so convinced of the superiority of the metric system that he was one of the first to give his adhesion to the introduction, in a permissive shape, of the metric system in this country. The former Act was introduced in pursuance of the recommendations of a Select Committee, and the present Bill was equally the result of the unanimous recommendation of a Committee of the other House composed of men of all parties. It was unnecessary to remark that the present being a permissive Bill must necessarily remain a dead letter unless it were adopted by the free will of the people; but that it would be freely adopted by all persons engaged in trade, manufactures, and science, he had not the least doubt—in fact, the petition from the Associated Chambers of Commerce, which he had just presented, seemed to place the matter beyond doubt, as the petitioners might be fairly considered as representing the feelings of all practical men in the important towns they represented. Their Lordships must he fully aware of the variety of the measures

  1783
  of grain, wine, and beer which prevailed in different parts of the country. In some countries a bushel of wheat was 60 lbs., in some 64 lbs., in others 70 lbs.; sometimes it was sold by weight, sometimes by measure; the mode of measuring distances varied—in short, nothing could be more confused than the present system. The adoption of the metric system would cure this want of uniformity, and would substitute for that which was inconvenient and difficult to learn a system which was simple and easy to be acquired. The adoption of this system would save half the time which was at present occupied in making calculations. The very strongest evidence had been given in its favour by practical men. Among those who recommended its introduction, and some of whom employed it in the transaction of their own business, were the late Mr. Locke, the eminent engineer, who, having found the metric system in one of his foreign contracts so advantageous, that he adopted it for the transaction of his business in England; Mr. Whitworth, Mr. Robinson of the Atlas Works, Mr. Crossley, Mr. Anderson superintendent of the gun factory at Woolwich, Sir Rowland Hill, and Professor Graham the Master of the Mint. Scientific men were equally favourable to the metric system. The Jurors at the International Exhibitions of London and Paris said, that a great part of the benefit which might have arisen from the exhibition of the raw produce and manufactures of various countries was lost to thousands of persons in consequence of the difficulty of comparing the weights and measures and the moneys of one country with those of another. Professor Hoffman and Professor Owen, in their reports as Jurors of the Exhibition of 1862, referred to the confusion and discord which existed in the systems of weights and measures of different countries. The fact was that this confusion was so great, and so much time and labour were consumed in converting the weights and measures of one country into their equivalents in a foreign system, that practically the knowledge of one nation was a sealed book to the scientific men of others. As to the facility with which the system could be learnt there was the most conclusive testimony, and Professor Leone Levi summed up its general result to be that a boy could make the same progress in arithmetic taught according to the metric system in ten months as would according to
  1784
  the existing method take him two years and ten months to accomplish. Considering the value of youthful labour and the short time which could be spared to education by the children of the poor, this was a matter of some importance. He entreated their Lordships not to take any step which would impose upon these children two years of useless labour, and not to aid in preventing the free interchange of the manufactures and commodities as well as of the knowledge and information of all the people of the world. The noble Lord concluded by moving that the Bill should be read a second time.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a—(Earl Fortescue.)
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYadmitted that there was a good deal of confusion attached to our present system of weights and measures, but desired to point out that, notwithstanding the pound had become the uniform measure by which all things were 3old, and that to introduce the metric system would be only to add another element of confusion. He would ask their Lordships whether, at this period of the Session, and, as a consequence, without due time for its discussion, it was desirable to pass a measure whose operation would be to create confusion in every market town in England? Believing that it was not, he should move that the Bill be road a second time that day six months.
  Amendment moved to leave out ("now") and insert ("this Day Six Months").—(The Marquess of Salisbury.)
  THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREsaid, he thought the Government would not allow the Bill to pass through their Lordships' House without expressing some opinion as to its proposal. If this country had passed through such a crisis as France passed in 1789 it might not be disadvantageous to introduce the metric system; but under existing circumstances, it not being proposed to abolish the present system, but only to allow the introduction of the new system pari passu with the old, he thought the confusion would be augmented rather than diminished. Nothing, he would add, but compulsory legislation would induce the people of this or any other country to give up the system to which they were accustomed in favour of one even more scientific and simple.
  THE DUKE OF ARGYLL,speaking solely for himself, said that he had heard no valid argument urged against the Bill, and should

  1785
  vote in its favour. The fact, he contended, that almost all the Chambers of Commerce throughout the country supported it by their petitions was one of great importance for the consideration of the House, for it afforded a strong proof that many persons in the mercantile world were of opinion that to them, at least, the system would be advantageous. It was said that the operation of the Bill would be to add to the existing confusion; but it was, in his opinion, impossible to do that, at all events so far as Scotland was concerned. There were "bolls" and "bushels," varying in capacity, in almost every county in Scotland. He did not suppose that the habits of the people in various localities could be very easily altered in dealing with the local system of measures; but the proposed change would, he thought, be very generally adopted in the case of large mercantile transactions, particularly those transactions with foreign countries which were so greatly on the increase. It could only be used where both parties to a contract consented; they would only use it if they thought it convenient. It was not compulsory on any one, and therefore could do no one harm; but by allowing its use the effect might be that ultimately it would elbow out the present confused and defective system. The Bill, at all events, could do no harm, and he saw no good reason why their Lordships should not adopt it.
  THE EARL OF HARROWBYsupported the Bill, remarking that if men largely engaged in commerce wished for it, he saw no reason why the House should stand in the way of its passing.
  LORD BROUGHAMregarded the Bill as an important step in the right direction, and he hoped to live to see the decimal system in general use. He was, he might add, an advocate of the change not only in a commercial but in an educational point of view, and he had the testimony of Mr. Chadwick, to whose efforts the half-time system—one of the greatest improvements of our day—was due, to the effect that the introduction of the decimal system would shorten the time occupied in the teaching of arithmetic by one-half.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, it was a mistake to suppose that noble Lords on that side of the House were averse to the metric system as such. What they objected to was that a Bill of this importance should be introduced at that late period of the Session. Either the Government ought to take it up and pass it on
  1786
  their own responsibility, or there ought to be a Select Committee next Session to take the Bill into careful consideration. The argument that the Bill was only permissive was very much against it, for if it were right that all the weights and measures in the country should be equalized, it must be by a compulsory measure. A mere permissive Bill only added another element to the confusion.
  EARL FORTESCUE,in reply, said, that in all the countries in which the system had been introduced, its simplicity had caused it to work without any friction or opposition.
  On Question that ("now") stand part of the Motion? their Lordships divided;—Contents 34; Not-Contents 23: Majority 11.
  Resolved in the Affirmative: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

  CONTENTS.

  Westbury, L. (L. Chancellor).

  Brougham and Vaux, L.

  Camoys, L. [Teller.]

  Churchill, L.

  Armagh, Achbp.

  Dartrey, L. (L. Cremorne).

  Somerset, D.

  De Mauley, L.

  De Tabley, L.

  Westminster, M.

  Ebury, L.

  Foley, L.

  Chichester, E.

  Houghton, L.

  Clarendon, E.

  Llanover, E,

  Effingham, E.

  Mostyn, L.

  Fortescue, E. [Teller.]

  Portman, L.

  Harrowby, E.

  Saye and Sele, L.

  Shaftesbury, E.

  Seymour, L. (E. St. Maur)

  Wicklow, E.

  Somerhill, L. (M. Clanricarde).

  Falmouth, V.

  Leinster, V. (D. Leinster).

  Stratheden, L.

  Sundridge, L. (D. Argyll).

  Gloucester and Bristol, Bp.

  Taunton, L,

  Wensleydale, L.

  London, Bp.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Buckingham and Chandos, D.

  Hawarden, V.

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore). [Teller.]

  Bath, M.

  Salisbury, M. [Teller.]

  Chelmsford, L.

  Churston, L.

  Colchester, L.

  Amherst, E.

  Denman, L.

  Carnarvon, E.

  Dinevor, L.

  Doncaster, E. (D. Buccleuch and Queensberry)

  Egerton, L.

  Monson, L.

  Redesdale, L.

  Lanesborough, E,

  Silchester, L. (E. Longford).

  Malmesbury, E.

  Nelson, E.

  Templemore, L.

  Powis, E.

  Wynford, L.

POISONED FLESH PROHIBITION, &c., BILL—(No. 212.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD REDESDALE,in moving the second reading of this Bill, said, that it had frequently happened that valuable animals, the property of other persons, had been destroyed by eating poisoned meat laid for the destruction of vermin; and this evil the Bill was intended to remedy. The principle of the measure was precisely the same as was sanctioned by Parliament last year in reference to poisoned grain.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a—(Lord Redesdale.)
  LORD WODEHOUSEsaid, that the second clause imposed a penalty of £10 for placing poisoned meat or other matter upon any land; and the consequence would be that the owner of any house or stack could not place poison, even in his own garden, for the destruction of rats, without incurring a penalty. It would be for their Lordships to consider whether the clause should not be modified.
  LORD CHELMSFORDobserved that by an exception in the first clause, an owner or occupier of land in Ireland could not place poisoned matter upon the land without first posting a notice that such was done; but he (Lord Chelmsford) could not understand how this notice would prevent dogs eating the poisoned meat.
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, that he was not responsible for the details, for the measure had been altered in the Commons; and their Lordships know that in the other House exceptions with reference to Ireland were often inserted in measures which were under consideration. If the Bill were now road a second time the details could be considered in Committee.
  THE MARQUESS OF BATHthought that the exception practically excepted Ireland from the operation of the Bill, and in his opinion it was very desirable that England should be excepted also.
  THE EARL OF MALMESBURYthought it hardly desirable to proceed further with the Bill this Session.
  THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCHthought that the putting of poisonous substances upon land by gamekeepers for the destruction of vermin was a great and growing evil; and in the south of Scotland he could state of his own knowledge that where
  1788
  strychnine had been used valuable shepherds' dogs had been killed by eating the poisoned vermin.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsaid, he also knew that dogs and pigs were frequently poisoned, and pheasants likewise were destroyed. It was a curious and well-known fact in natural history, that though the maggots generated in the poisoned carcasses were not affected by the poison, yet they communicated the destructive effects to birds that eat them. Every reason which applied to putting poisoned grain upon land applied also to the placing of poisoned meat there.
  LORD WODEHOUSEsaid, he was certainly not in favour of laying poison for small birds, which, so far from being noxious, were extremely useful. If he could prevent the poisoning of foxes, and at the same time allow the poisoning of vermin, he would do so; but this Bill would prevent the latter, and would thus occasion serious inconvenience and injury. This was not a fox-preserving question on the one side and a game-preserving question on the other. It should be looked at as neither of those questions; but, believing that the Bill would be productive of mischief on the whole, he moved that it be read a second time this day three months.
  Amendment moved, to leave out ("now") and insert ("this Day Three Months").—(Lord Wodehouse.)
  LORD PORTMANhoped their Lordships would not reject this Bill on the second reading. Many of the points to which objection had been made could be amended in Committee. He was sure that if in the Bill for prohibiting poisoned grain which passed last year a clause had been introduced to prohibit poisoned flesh it also would have been passed. Some noble Lords were most anxious to destroy the birds and others to destroy the animals. He knew that it was a practice of keepers to poison rabbits with strychnine, and place them in preserves to poison vermin. Now, if one of these rabbits should be picked up by any passer-by and eaten, the consequences might be deplorable.
  On Question, That ("now") stand part of the Motion? Their Lordships divided:—Contents 31; Not-Contents 18: Majority 13.
  Resolved in the Affirmative: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

  CONTENTS.

  Westbury, L. (L. Chancellor.)

  Churston, L.

  Colchester, L.

  De Mauley, L.

  Buckingham and Chandos, D.

  Denman, L.

  De Talby, L.

  Dunsany, L.

  Westminster, M.

  Ebury, L

  Foley, L.

  Amherst, E.

  Llanover, L.

  Doncaster, E. (D. Bucleuch and Queensbury).

  Mostyn, L.

  Portman, L.

  Redesdale, L. [Teller.]

  Harrowby, E.

  Silchester, L. (E. Longford).

  Nelson, E.

  Romney, E.

  Somerhill, L. (M. Clanricarde.)

  Saint Germans, E.

  Shrewsbury, E.

  Stratheden, L.

  Falmouth, V.

  Taunton, L.

  Templemore, L.

  Camoys, L. [Teller.]

  Wensleydale, L,

  Churchill, L.

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Armagh, Archbp.

  Hutchinson, V. (E. Donoughmore).

  Somerset, D.

  Chelmsford, L.

  Bath, M. [Teller.]

  Dartrey, L. (L. Cremorne).

  Airlie, E,

  Hatherton, L.

  Chichester, E.

  Monson, L.

  De Grey, E.

  Stanley of Alderley, L.

  Malmesbury, E.

  Sundridge, L. (D. Argyll)

  Powis, E.

  Wodehouse, L.[Teller.]

  Hawarden, V.

  Wynford, L.

  HIGHWAYS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
  Select Committee appointed and nominated. The Lords following were named of the Committee; the Committee to meet To-morrow, at One o'clock, and to appoint their own Chairman:—M. Salisbury, Ld. Steward, K. Romney, E. Powis, E. Do Grey, E. Eversley, L. Wodehouse, L. Hatherton, L. Stanley of Alderley, L. Egerton, L. Llanover.

  THAMES CONSERVANCY BILL.
  Select Committee appointed and nominated as follows:—The Viscount Hutchinson (Chairman), The Lord Abercromby, The Lord Mostyn, The Lord De Mauley, The Lord Methuen; The Committee to meet To-morrow, at Eleven o'clock.
  House adjourned at a quarter before Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, Eleven o'clock.