Sitting of 7 June 1864

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—On Education (Inspectors' Reports), nomination of Committee (List of Committee).
PUBLIC BILLS—Resolution in Committee — Uniformity Act*.
Ordered—Uniformity Act; Railway Travelling (Ireland)*; Municipal Corporations (Ireland)*; Justices of the Peace Procedure*; Superannuations (Union Officers)*.

EDUCATION (INSPECTORS' REPORTS.)
Sir WILLIAM MILES reported from the General Committee of Elections: That, in pursuance of the Instruction of the House, they had nominated the following Five Members to constitute the Committee on Education (Inspectors' Reports):— John George Dodson, esquire; Sir Philip De Malpas Grey Egerton, baronet; Lord Hotham; The honourable Charles Howard; Edward Howes, esquire. And that they had also named The Lord Advocate and Lord Robert Cecil to serve on the Committee to examine Witnesses, but without the power of voting.
Report to lie upon the table.

VOTES OF CREDIT FOR CHINA.

  QUESTION.
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether it is intended to surrender to the Exchequer the £93,163 remaining in the Paymaster General's hands out of the Votes of Credit for China?
  MR. PEEL, in reply, said, the details of the expenditure had not as yet been made up. There were certain outstanding claims which would have to be met, and it was necessary for the Government to keep a

  1353
  sum in hand to dispose of them. When they were liquidated the balance would be paid into the Treasury.

NAVY—ROYAL NAVAL RESERVE.

  QUESTION.
  MR. H. BERKELEYsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, If he has any objection to lay upon the table of the House a Return of the number of men absent from the United Kingdom belonging to the Royal Naval Reserve, specifying how many are gone Foreign, and of those how many were gone to the Federal and Confederate States of America.
  LORD CLARENCE PAGETsaid, in reply, that he had no objection to lay on the table a Return of the Royal Naval Reserve, specifying how many of the men had gone Foreign. With regard to those men who might have joined the Federal or Confederate States services, the Admiralty were only aware that a few had done so, who, the moment the fact was ascertained, were discharged from the force. He should be happy to furnish the hon. Gentleman with a Return of the numbers of those men.

DISCRIMINATING DUTIES.

  PAPERS MOVED FOR.
  MR. LINDSAYsaid, he rose to move an Address for
  "Copy of any Correspondence between Her Majesty's Government and the Governments of France, Spain, and Portugal, from 1850 to 1863 inclusive, relating to the abrogation of the Discriminating Duties still levied upon British Vessels and their cargoes trading with those Countries."
  In 1850, when the repeal of the navigation laws came into operation, he was aware that there were many persons who entertained serious doubts of the wisdom of that important change. Many were of opinion that the repeal of those laws would seriously injure the merchant shipping of this country; and upon those grounds it was strenuously opposed, not only by numerous Members of that House, but by a large proportion of the shipowners of the country. He was desirous now of troubling the House with a statement of a few facts, with a view of showing how mistaken those persons had been in their apprehensions. In 1849, the year before the repeal of the navigation laws, the tonnage of the shipping of Great Britain amounted to 3,500,000 tons. In 1862, being thirteen years afterwards, our tonnage had in-
  1354
  creased to 4,950,000 tons. In 1849 we owned of steam shipping 167,000 tons. He estimated that we owned Inst year—for no Return had as yet been made—800,000 tons. In 1849 the aggregate of the entries inwards and outwards with cargoes amounted to 9,700,000 tons of British shipping. In 1863 the amount was no less than 15,000,000 tons. But, great as was the increase with regard to British shipping, and in our trade with foreign nations, that increase fell into insignificance compared with the enormous increase which had taken place in the exports of British manufactures and British produce; and the House must bear in mind that free trade in shipping had much to do with this enormous increase of our exports. In 1849 the declared value of our exports amounted to £59,000,000 sterling. Last year the value of our exports had increased to £146,000,000. Now, it would be apparent to every man, when he looked into this question, that the shipowners must be very largely benefited by this increase of our exports, because it proved that they obtained thereby a much larger field for the employment of their vessels. It was with that view that the Legislature in 1849 wisely resolved to do away with the navigation laws, and to allow ships of all nations to enter and to leave our ports upon the same terms as our own vessels, with the exception of small local dues which were still exacted in various outports in the shape of municipal and other private charges. The people generally of this country, as well as our shipowners, were large gainers by this change. When we resolved to repeal the navigation laws we entered into communication with all other nations on the subject. We told them of the policy we proposed to adopt, and asked them whether they were prepared to follow our example in this respect. All other nations did agree to adopt that policy, with four or five important exceptions — namely, France, Spain, Portugal, Holland, and the United States, each of whom declined to reciprocate our policy. France still maintained that it was for the interest of her shipping and her people that she should maintain a protective system. The other nations to which he had referred expressed themselves in a similar way. He would pass over the United States. Mighty events were now going on in that unhappy country, which would result in great changes, political and social, in the new

  1355
  world. Before long, no doubt, the navigation of America—the coasting trade of that mighty country, extending from New York to California—would be thrown open to the ships of all nations. When the separation between the Northern and Southern States took place, which must be the case sooner or later, the policy and interest of the South would assuredly he to adopt free trade; and, above all, free trade in ships. He had spoken of Holland as not having reciprocated our policy, because, although the Government of Holland had opened their ports to the ships of England upon the same terms as we dad opened our ports to the ships of Holland, it so happened that the trade between Holland and the Dutch possessions in the East Indies, the only trade which would be of any value to our shipping, was under the exclusive power of the Dutch East India Company, so that the trade with the Dutch possessions in the East Indies was still confined to Dutch ships, and British ships were not allowed to enter those ports. Now, he was by no means disposed to think that even the shipowners of Holland gained by this restrictive policy, although the Dutch East India Company, in endeavouring to encourage the trade, offered £10 a ton freight from Batavia and Java to Holland. In consequence of those high terms a large number of Dutch ships had been built for that trade; in deed the number became much greater than the trade could well employ. The result of such a state of things was that the majority of those chips were kepi waiting now 10, 12, and sometimes even 18 months before they could yet employment: and though the Dutch merchants paid £10 or £12 a ton freight for the sugars they required from the East India possessions, the shipowners after all, gained little advantage thereby, inasmuch as while they were kept waiting for a cargo at £10 a ton they could often make two voyages, and would be better compensated at £6 a ton by Continual employment, whilst the people of Holland would be enabled to obtain their sugar at so much less. He therefore contended Unit so long as the Dutch East India Company maintained this restrictive policy the people of Holland would be losers by that policy and the shipowners also. In reference to Portugal and Spain, they had always maintained a restrictive and protective policy. He had often had occasion to visit Portugal, and he had often been struck by the facilities which the Tagus
  1356
  afforded for the commerce of all nations, Their cumbrous commercial regulations, however, counteracted all those advantages which they would otherwise obtain. Spain, which was becoming rapidly developed by means of railways, would probably reap the most splendid advantages if she would only abolish her navigation laws and open her ports to the world. Spain imported from this country only £3,500,000 of British produce and manufactures annually. Now we sent last year to Gibraltar goods to the value of £1,500,000. No one would imagine for a moment that these goods were consumed in Gibraltar—we knew that they were imported indirectly into Spain. Consequently, in spite of all her restrictions, the produce and manufactures of England found their way into Spain, and the revenue of Spain lost all those duties which were levied for the protection of the produce of Spain only. But in regard to France, he must say he was surprised that that great and enlightened country should still maintain her restrictive policy. He had heard complaints from Frenchmen that France did not derive those benefits which she anticipated from the commercial treaty with this country. His answer to these complaints was, that France never would obtain those advantages unless she swept away her navigation laws We were large buyers of wine and other French produce; and the French were willing to be paid for their produce by the wools of Australia, the sugar of England, the silk of China and India, and by other articles in our colonies and possessions. But when we desired to pay her in those articles, the navigation laws of France stepped in and said that she could not take the silks of China or the produce of India in our ships, because they would be subject to a high differential duty. He had read with great surprise and regret a speech recently delivered by M. Thiers on this subject. Now, he was surprised that a statesman with such great experience of the world should at the present day propound doctrines so fallacious in regard to the navigation laws of his country. M. Thiers complained that French shipping was not advancing at the rate the people of France had a right to expect, and ascribed that circumstance to the fact of its not being sufficiently protected; and then in order to increase it that statesman said that French ships should not trade between two foreign ports—he wished to limit the field of em-

  1357
  ployment for French ships as a means, forsooth, of increasing their number. He desired to confine all the carrying trade of France to French shipping. Now, with the exception of the direct trade, the carrying trade of France was already confined to French ships. But what was the result to France of her maintenance of this protective policy? In 1849 she owned 680,000 tons of shipping. In 1862, thirteen years after the repeal of our navigation laws, her shipping had only increased to 980,000 tons, or an addition of 300,000 tons; whereas in Great Britain, by following that policy which M. Thiers condemned, British shipping had increased within that same period by 1,450,000 tons. But that was not all. Let the House mark how the people of France suffered by this protective system. He asked hon. Members just to look on Mercator'a Chart. We had, as the House was aware, lines of steamers sailing every week from Southampton to various foreign ports. The Peninsular and Oriental Company's ships were constantly returning home laden with silk and other produce, which the people of France eagerly desired to have. These ships were compelled to pass by Marseilles. The navigation laws of France forbade them entering the French ports, and they were compelled to proceed with their cargoes to Gibraltar. These ships then crossed the Bay of Biscay, and landed their cargoes at Southampton, from whence they were conveyed by railway to the bonded warehouses in London. From London many of those goods were carried in English bottoms to Havre or Bordeaux at a vastly increased price. He would ask every thoughtful man whether those navigation laws did not entail a heavy loss upon any people they were intended to serve? But hon. Gentlemen might say that this roundabout trade was only carried on to a small extent, and that the people of France were not sufferers to any serious amount. But what were the facts? Last year France imported 4,700,000lbs. of silk from this country, the whole of which had been brought from India and China. And yet the people and the manufacturers of Lyons, by their unwise, he might say absurd, navigation laws, were forced to bring that silk, which they had had likely enough in exchange for articles which we had had from them, into Southampton, have it bonded there, and then carried into the heart of France, there to be manufactured. Last year
  1358
  France imported 11,400,000lbs. of coffee, every ounce of which was first imported into this country; but if she had allowed it to be imported in ships of all nations, French shipping would no doubt have been employed in carrying a very large portion of it. On the contrary, the shipowners of France had gained nothing by those restrictive laws, and the French people had had to pay a greatly enhanced price for the articles they required from other countries, and thus the consumer had been a great loser as well as the shipowner. Take the case of sugar. Last year France imported from this country 8,000,000lbs. of sugar at greatly enhanced prices, and without any benefit to the shipowners of that country. Wool did not apply so much, because it was duty free; but last year France imported from this country, of colonial and foreign wool, no less than 31,000,000lbs.; and whether they looked to the inward or to the outward entries they would see how the trade of France was crippled by the operation of its navigation laws, and how the shipowners of that country, as well as the people, suffered from her restrictive policy. Last year 6,900,000 tons of shipping of all nations entered and cleared the ports of France, and that was the measure of her trade with other nations. France had a population of 7,000,000 or 8,000,000 more than this country, yet we required last year 23,000,000 tons of shipping to carry on our trade with other nations, showing how we had gained by our free trade policy, and more especially by our sweeping away our restrictive policy connected with our navigation laws. He was aware that foreign nations were not very much disposed to listen to the advice of others, but at the same time he thought they were open to consider what was best for their own interests, and he thought that if these facts were brought by the Foreign Office more prominently under the notice of foreign nations, they might have a beneficial effect in showing them that, whilst it was not merely just for them to grant to us what we had granted to them, it would be for their interest and that of their peoples to do so. There was, however, something cumbrous about our machinery for communicating with foreign Governments upon questions of trade, and he was glad to find that a Committee had been appointed with regard to it, and that the result would likely be the adoption of a plan whereby the Board of Trade could be put at once into immediate communication with

  1359
  foreign Governments. He had no doubt the Correspondence he had moved for would show that many communications had passed between Her Majesty's Government and the Governments of those countries, and that France, Spain, and Portugal were rattier shy in following our example; but when negotiations by letters failed he thought our Ministers at those places might have done a little more by showing the advantages England had gained by her change of policy, and what they might reasonably expect to gain by following our example. He was glad to find that the Government of France had ordered an inquiry into the subject by a Commission consisting of some of the most eminent French statesmen; and perhaps the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade might be able to inform the House what had been done in connection with it, and what prospect there was of the French Government making an alteration in their navigation laws. He, however, took that opportunity of stating that Lord Cowley had received him with great courtesy when in France in regard to the question, and had afforded him every facility; but it was not to be expected that be could be Acquainted with all the details of so technical a subject. It would, however, be well to instruct our young diplomatists in questions of this kind, because such questions were often the cause of great trouble between nations. He thought it was the duty of that House and Her Majesty's Government to use every exertion to have the restrictions to which he referred removed.
  SIR JOSEPH PAXTONseconded the Motion.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That an Address for Copy of any Correspondence between Her Majesty's Government and the Governments of France, Spain, and Portugal, from 1850 to 1863 inclusive, relating to the abrogation of the Discriminating Duties still levied upon British vessels and their cargoes trading with those Countries."—(Mr. Lindsay.)
  MR. MILNER GIBSONsaid, there was no objection to the Motion if his hon. Friend would insert after Copies "or Extracts." The documents would be given as fully as possible to make them useful, but there was much that did not bear upon the Motion. He quite agreed with the general sentiment which his hon. Friend had expressed—namely, that freedom of navigation must be a great benefit
  1360
  to all countries, and especially to those who were desirous of extending their foreign trade. It was not certain that trade and ships increased in the same ratio; and if freedom was not given to foreign ships for carrying the exports of a country, in all probability a cheek was put on the extension of the very trade it was intended to promote. In England our mercantile marine did not keep pace in tonnage with our trade; and we could not carry on our commerce exclusively in British ships; and he had no doubt the same principle applied to all other nations, and especially to France. His hon. Friend did not appear to him to make sufficient allowance for the difficulties Her Majesty's Government had to encounter in consequence of the prejudices of protected interests abroad. Foreign Governments were fettered and trammelled in their policy by class interests, and nothing but time and the experience of the effects of a free trade policy in this and other countries were likely to remove those prejudices, and enable foreign Governments although themselves enlightened to act as they thought best for the interests of the notion in this important subject. Her Majesty's Government, he could assure the hon. Gentleman and the House, had lost no opportunity of impressing on foreign Governments the necessity of revising their navigation laws; and when our own navigation laws were repealed, a circular was immediately addressed to Her Majesty's Ambassadors, Ministers, and Consuls in the various countries, directing them to invite all foreign Governments to adopt a reciprocal policy. They all responded with the exception of France, Spain, and Portugal. His hon. Friend on a former occasion carried an Address to the Crown that a treaty for effecting reciprocity with France should be negotiated. He was not sure whether his hon. Friend framed it with a view to a treaty; but Her Majesty's Government were invited to negotiate with the French Government an arrangement which would relieve British ships from the disabilities under which they laboured in going into French ports. We communicated with our Ambassador, who also communicated with the French Government, and made known to them that such an Address had been agreed to by the House of Commons, and memorials which were presented to Her Majesty's Government from various bodies of shipowners to the same effect were also

  1361
  communicated to them. Some short time after, in 1862, an inquiry was instituted by the French Government into the operation of their navigation laws. It was continued over some time; witnesses from different countries were invited to give their evidence, and amongst others his hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland. He had read his hon. Friend's evidence, and he advised those who took an interest in the subject to do the same, because they would find that his hon. Friend had put the matter in the clearest manner before the gentlemen who conducted the inquiry, and he could not conceive that any representation could be made by this country to France more likely to have the effect of bringing conviction to the minds of those persons who were interested in the subject in France than his evidence in reference to the effect of the French navigation laws upon the commercial interests of that country. Her Majesty's Government had not yet heard the result of that inquiry; but he presumed the evidence taken was being digested, and he hoped the result would be some relaxation of those restrictions under which navigation existed at present in France. Very little had been done by Spain towards a reciprocity. Very little encouragement had been given by the Spanish Government to the representations that had been made upon the subject. Although the Correspondence might not appear to be so extensive as his hon. Friend might think the importance of the subject required, he must bear in mind that many communications, both verbal and by private letter, had been made to the various Governments on this question that would not appear in the published despatches and Correspondence. British ships were formerly subject to a double charge of a differential character in Spanish ports—first, with regard to the ship, and then upon the cargo—but after much correspondence and negotiation the former was removed, and the cargo only was subjected to a duty of 20 per cent. A correspondence had also taken place with Portugal on the subject. All he could say was, that it was not from any indifference or want of endeavours on the part of Her Majesty's Government that more had not been done in Portugal, Spain, and France. As he did not object to the Motion, it was not necessary for him to detain the House with any further observations.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, that no doubt this discussion would reach the fo-
  1362
  reign Governments named, and he hoped it would have some weight with them. An allusion had been made to the Committee on a somewhat kindred subject now sitting upstairs; he hoped his hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade would take care that the Correspondence would be published in time to go before that Committee, in order that the Committee might be able to make use of any part of it bearing on the subject before the Committee. He was quite satisfied with the reply of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade; but he was sorry the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs was not in his place; for the Correspondence between this country and foreign nations relative to trade and commerce, was conducted by the Foreign Office and not by the Board of Trade. He hoped the Correspondence would include the inclosures, showing the instructions or advice the Board of Trade had given to the Foreign Office during the continuance of the Correspondence. The facts given, he thought, would show very clearly the immense interest it would be to foreign countries to adopt the change, and he could not but believe that if our Ministers abroad had had as much knowledge upon the subject as the hon. Member for Sunderland, no time would have been lost in effecting the required change.
  Motion, as amended, agreed to.
  Address for
  "Copy or Extracts of any Correspondence between Her Majesty's Government and the Governments of France, Spain, and Portugal, from 1850 to 1863 inclusive, relating to the abrogation of the Discriminating Duties still levied upon British Vessels and their cargoes trading with those Countries."

AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS.

  RESOLUTION.
  MR. CAIRD, in rising to move a Resolution—
  "That, in the opinion of this House, the collection and early publication of the Agricultural Statistics of Great Britain would be advantageous to the public interest,"
  said, that it would not be necessary to detain the House at any length, since the subject had received ample discussion on various occasions during the present Parliament. He had been much impressed with the extent to which this country was now dependent on foreign sources for its supply of food. The change had been very extraordinary in the last few years. The

  1363
  importations of foreign wheat and flour for the ten years previous to 1838 were considerably less than the present average yearly import; the imports for those ten years having been 6,200,000 qrs., while the average imports of the last five years were 9,000,000 qrs. If he took the five years previous to the abolition of the Corn Laws, he found that while at that time we were dependent on foreign countries for food to the extent of six weeks' consumption, we were now dependent upon them, according to the average of the last five years, for six months' consumption. Now, a matter of so much magnitude was well worthy the attention of that House and of the country. He did not say that the increased supply of corn was entirely to be attributed to matters not connected with internal agriculture, though it had been very much caused by it; but whilst be thought the immense increased supply should give to the people of the country a much greater abundance of food than it really did, at the same time he believed it had been caused by an alteration in the mode of agriculture in this country. Two years ago he referred to the change which he then believed was growing and had been growing for some years in consequence of natural causes that must be apparent to the House. When they took into consideration the diminished price of corn and the increased price of every other article of farm and dairy produce, and the increasing cost of labour, they would see that it naturally caused a gradually diminished growth of corn and an increased growth of those articles which were more remunerative to the farmer. It was difficult to form an estimate of what might be the consequence of that change, which was gradually overspreading the country. If each farmer took away one-tenth of his land from corn, and let it out in grass, we should require from 4,000,000 to 5,000,000 qrs. of corn more to be imported than before, and this very process might be going on without our having the slightest knowledge of the change. But if we had a return of the acreage under each crop we should know the extent of the change, and how it was gradually being brought about. Now, the first interest we had to consider in a matter of this kind was that of the public. When we fount that almost one-half of the bread consumed in this country was derived from foreign sources, we could not overestimate the extent of the interests which were involved But other countries as well as ourselves
  1364
  had appeared in the market for foreign corn. France, in 1861, competed with us in every country where wheat was produced to the extent of from 5,000,000 to 6000,000 qrs. It would be of the greatest advantage to us, then, to know at the earliest possible period what change was going on in order that we might enter the market on at least equal terms with other competing countries. He had always argued that the advantage to our own farmers of such a knowledge would be as great as to any other class. The farmer was to a great extent not only a seller but a purchaser of foreign corn—they were in fact corn dealers. If, as had been often argued by hon. Gentlemen opposite, this were simply and solely a corn dealer's question, the farmers were as interested as any others in having the earliest information, for then they would be in a position to put that information to advantage. The monetary and commercial interests of the country must necessarily be largely interested in these statistics, for the fluctuations which took place in the supply of an article of such magnitude were very great. The value of the imported corn during the last five years had been one-sixth of the value of the total imports of every foreign article of produce. During the last four years the fluctuations which had taken place in the cost of foreign corn had been extraordinary. In 1860–1 our imports of corn cost upwards of £40,000,000. In 1863 and that part which was now remaining of 1864 up to next harvest—which, of course, was partly a matter of estimate—it would be found, he believed, that we should not pay more than £20,000,000. A difference amounting to something like £20,000,000 sterling must seriously affect the whole monetary interests of the country, and if they looked to the commercial and shipping interests it would be seen that the transport of such a vast weight of corn was a matter of immense importance. In one year we should require 3,000,000 of tonnage, in another 1,500,000. The returns, therefore, must be of immense importance to the shipping interest. With regard to the advantages to be derived from returns of this kind he would appeal to the benefit which the country had derived from the agricultural returns collected with such success in Ireland. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had more than once borne testimony to their value in revealing facts of the greatest importance which could not be obtained from any other

  1365
  source. Whilst, however, he acknowledged the importance of the Irish returns he must say he considered them most incomplete until those of Great Britain were published. He did not desire to bind the House to any particular mode of obtaining these returns. It had been proposed that they should be collected by the police as in Ireland; but on the part of the Government and the House generally that was not thought a desirable means. He then suggested that they should be obtained through the Registrar General's Department. That office, from its diffused machinery and the accuracy with which its returns were always made, would be found, he believed, to be most successful, and the Registrar General himself was of opinion that he could obtain the returns, if ordered to do so, and if the money were voted by that House. He thought £15,000 would be a very small sum for such an object, considering its vast importance. But the Secretary for the Home Department was of opinion that as no compulsion could be used, the returns were not likely to be so trustworthy as to justify Parliament in making such a payment. He (Mr. Caird) believed if the system were once in operation most satisfactory statistics might be obtained from the office of the Registrar General. But he had turned his attention to another mode of obtaining them—a mode which had been tried by the Highland Society for two successive years in two different counties in Scotland with perfect success. It was that the returns should be taken according to the maps of the Ordnance Survey and under the direction of that Survey. But to prevent unnecessary expense, and because the maps were not complete for England, and were not likely to be for some years yet, it would be requisite to take type or sample districts throughout the country, from which accurate returns should lie obtained every year. The 6-inch Survey in Scotland was how complete, and, therefore, his plan might be adopted this year in that country, in which he would propose to select five sample districts. He would select ten districts in England, one in the south, one each in the south-west, midland, and south-east, in the west, midland, and east, and in the north, north-west, and north-east. Each of those districts might contain 100,000 acres, and so far they should insure absolute accuracy. The returns might be obtained from the whole of England in the course of the next year.
  1366
  He had proposed fifteen sample districts for the whole of Great Britain, those districts containing 1,500,000 acres, which would represent about one-tenth of the whole of the cultivated surface of Great Britain. It was a convenient quantity, but was not material to his object. All that was material was that the same sample districts should be taken each year in succession, for by doing so they would be able to find out the changes which were taking place in the cultivation, and if there were a fifth or a tenth of increase over the 1,500,000 acres, that would be an indication that a like increase had taken place in the cultivated acreage of the whole country. The plan had two advantages—the first being that it would be very little costly. From the cost of the Survey made by Sir Henry James, he was able to give a probable estimate of how much it would be. The whole cost would not exceed £3,000 a year, and such a small sum was hardly worth mentioning in comparison with the advantages to be derived from the possession of correct statistics. The second advantage of the plan was, that it would entirely do away with the complaint that had been urged on former occasions as to the inquisitorial character of the inquiry, because the officer, taking the Ordnance map of 100,000 acres, and filling up that map as cultivated, need not know the name of a single farm or farmer. The return so obtained of the surface of the country might be procured early and published towards the end of July, and the country would then be in possession of what it never had before—a satisfactory basis, on which every one interested in the purchase and sale of corn could calculate for himself what would be the probable result of the harvest about to be reaped. He would further propose that towards September, when some criterion might be arrived at as to the probable yield of the harvest, the same officers as had made the inquiry in the previous part of the year should again inquire as to what would be the probable produce of the crop when thrashed. That might be done by a very ingenious mode adopted by Sir Henry James and the officers of his department, the result of which had been very successful, and which might be carried out with great advantage throughout the country. Having developed the plan he suggested he would now place his Motion before the House, not asking the House to bind itself to that plan or any other plan, but only desiring that, as the

  1367
  question was of so much importance to the public generally, and as the returns could be procured for so very moderate an amount, the House would agree to the principle expressed in the Resolution which he now begged to move.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That, in the opinion of this House, the collection and earl; publication of the Agricultural Statistics of Great Britain would be advantageous to the public interest."—(Mr. Caird.)
  COLONEL BARTTELOTsaid, that if their agricultural statistics were to cost no more than £3,000, and were to be as advantageous as the hon. Gentleman had described, he could perfectly well understand that the House might feel disposed to agree to this Resolution; but if these returns were to be fallacious and inaccurate, then he could not understand what possible use such returns could be to the country. He would take the hon. Gentleman's last plan—he proposed to take certain counties from certain parts of England; but inasmuch as it was well known that even in adjoining counties there was frequently very great difference in the soil, one being poor and the other rich, these selected districts could not possibly be said to represent the whole agricultural districts of England. They knew how crops varied in different, though adjoining, counties; therefore, on that ground alone, it would be most unsatisfactory to select certain parts. This was not, however, the main point. The hon. Gentleman said this was not an inquisitorial plan, and yet he proposed that the most inquisitorial returns should be collected in September—that an officer should go round to each grower, and ascertain the amount of corn threshed.
  MR. CAIRDsaid, that the officers were to obtain an estimate of the average yield of the corn threshed.
  COLONEL BARTTELOT: If it was to be an estimate what was the use of it?
  MR. CAIRD: It could be nothing else.
  COLONEL BARTTELOT: Then it was of no use whatever. His hon. Friend said the statistics would be to the advantage of the public; but he entirely overlooked the feelings of the people on whose ground they had to go to get these returns. The farmers were entirely adverse to statistical returns of this nature. They might be wrong, and the returns might not do them the harm they feared they would; they, however, were of opinion these statistics would do them no good; and, therefore,
  1368
  the country ought not to be put to the expense of them. In conclusion, he hoped the House would not agree to a Resolution so undefined as this, because the House was pledging itself to a something, and what that something was they did not yet know; and, moreover, they were pledging themselves to carry out a project that could not be satisfactory to the country.
  MR. PACKEsaid, he entirely agreed with the hon. Gentleman who had just spoken. He had paid much attention to this subject, and had presented many petitions from various counties with reference to it, but he had never yet heard it shown that it would be any benefit to those who provided the returns now asked for. On that ground, and on that ground alone, he should be prepared to oppose the Motion. But when they considered the great injury which had been inflicted on the agriculture of this country—when they recollected the £6,000,000 taken from the agriculturists for the malt tax and that other £6,000,000 by the diseases of cattle—when they remembered the extreme low price of corn that had prevailed for some time past—it was far too much to call on them and compel them to say what was the result of the cultivation of their land. The hon. Gentleman first proposed to get the return through the Registrar's Office, but that would cost too much; he then proposed it should be got through the Ordnance Survey, and at the end of July the account should be taken of the cropping, and in September of the threshing. Now, the return obtained as proposed could not but be unreliable; for every one knew that whilst in some places land would scarcely produce five bushels, in others it would produce five quarters. No one could tell until he had threshed what the yield would be, and therefore £3,000 a year spent as proposed would be simply thrown away. Before they agreed to a system of this kind, they ought to have the consent of the farmers of the country, who certainly now objected to it, and naturally—for how would the shopkeepers of London or elsewhere like to have their places of business inspected and their takings inquired into? It was perfectly monstrous that such a principle should be applied to the farmers of this country. No benefit whatever could accrue from it to the corn-grower, and it was simply for the benefit of the corndealer.
  MR. PAGETsaid, with reference to the objection that the proposed returns would

  1369
  be unreliable, because the farmers could know nothing of the produce of their harvests until threshing time, he could state, that having been for forty years engaged in calculating what the probable yield of the harvest would be, he was certain that a very close guess might be made at it by this proposal. The objection to the taking of acreage of corn had considerably subsided; and he believed that the tenant-farmers had no objection to the acreage of their growing crops being known. He did not himself know a single tenant-farmer who objected to his acreage being known. As a matter of fact, every landlord and every steward must know, and it could not signify to the tenant farmer that the general public should know it. The gallant Colonel opposite said, that taking returns for these sample districts would not give a fair idea of what was being done all over the country; but, with the geological map in hand, it would not be at all difficult to mark out a sample district which would give the information desired. Of course weather which suited the lias strata would not be so good for the sandstone; but by taking a fair sample of the lias districts, it would not be difficult to ascertain what was going on in the same kind of lands all through the country. The practical form in which the hon. Gentleman had embodied his proposition removed many of the difficulties which had formerly stood in the way. The old objection on the ground of expense had been got rid of. The sum of £3,000 would be very little to pay for the valuable information which might be obtained. His (Mr. Paget's) impression was, that one result of the collection of this information would be, that it would tend to reduce the inequalities of price throughout all the country, and would thus confer a great benefit on the small farmers particularly, whose interest it was to be able to take their produce to market regularly and get a fair average price for it. Certainly, nothing would tend more to make prices steady throughout the country.
  LORD HOTHAMsaid, that his silence might not be misconstrued, he desired to state that his opinion on this subject remained unchanged. He believed that without some more forcible measures than he thought Parliament would be willing to sanction, it would not be possible to obtain returns of sufficient accuracy to be of the value the hon. Gentleman seemed to expect; and unless the returns so collected and issued by the Government were correct,
  1370
  the result would be totally different from that which was desired. He thought there was a good deal in what had fallen from his hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel Barttelot) as to the impracticability of making any such selections—any such "types" was the expression used — of the whole country as would give a fair representation of the produce of a harvest. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Caird) had abandoned his proposed collection of the returns by the police and registrars, and he now proposed to make the collection through the instrumentality of the Ordnance Survey—in point of fact, by private soldiers of the Royal Engineers. He (Lord Hotham) decidedly objected to the employment of any of Her Majesty's troops in the collection of such returns, and he believed that it would not give any satisfaction to the country to see Her Majesty's army so employed. He should very much like to hear what the Secretary of State would say to that suggestion, When the hon. Member said his present proposal would be divested of all the inquisitorial character which attended his former plans, and that it would only be necessary for the Ordnance Surveyor to go with the map in his hand to procure the returns, he would ask him where these soldiers were to go? Were they to take their stand on the public highway? It was very little information they would obtain in that manner. But if the proceeding was to be divested of its inquisitorial character he would ask by what right were they to go on the fields and inquire what were the crops under one head and what under another? For the purpose of procuring for the country the Ordnance Survey the law empowered the surveyors to go on the land. Was it intended to pass a law compelling the farmer to admit those men on his farm and to answer their inquiries? And if this was to be done, what became of the hon. Member's statement that the inquiry would be divested of all inquisitorial character? The hon. Member proposed that the first inquiry should be made in July as to what would be the probable crop, and another inquiry was to be made in September, when the farmers had commenced threshing. But he was surprised that the hon. Member, coming from Scotland, should propose that in the month of September those Inspectors should make such inquiry. He (Lord Hotham) never had the advantage of being in the hon. Member's country but once; but he remembered seeing the

  1371
  oats as green as grass in the month of October. In the county to which he (Lord Hotham) had the honour to belong, the harvest frequently lasted till the end of October. Within the last few years he had seen wheat cut in December. What, then, could the Inspectors learn in September? Another difficulty in the way of collecting these statistics arose from the unsettled state of the weather about harvest time. It had happened within the last three or four years that there had been two harvests which knocked all calculations and estimates on the head. In one of those years the harvest was immensely larger than was expected; in the other it wan infinitely smaller. If, then, the returns were not to be accurate, they would do more harm than good There was a general disposition to place reliance on documents emanating from the Government. If the Government would publish the returns stating at the head of them that they would not be answerable for their correctness, that would be one thing; but if they were to be issued in the ordinary form of Government Returns, the public would believe that the Government knew more on the subject than, in reality, they did. For how many years was his late right hon. and lamented Friend, Sir Robert Peel, charged with having said he would guarantee a price of 56 s. a quarter for wheat; whereas, all he did say was that he hoped or expected — he certainly did not go beyond this — that 56 s. would be about the price below which wheat would not fall. If these returns were not accurate people would still fancy they were; they would make their arrangements accordingly, and be woefully disappointed. People engaged in commerce would not be taken in by incorrect returns—they would obtain information for themselves; but he doubted whether this would be the case with the cultivators of land. Nothing was less desirable than to encourage speculation on the part of the farmers. Mercantile men must speculate; but he never knew a good practical farmer who would not tell him that the man who threshed his corn when ready, and sold it when it was threshed, would in the long run do more good than he who fancied he knew more than his neighbour, and kept his corn in hope of the price becoming higher. He did not care whether the collection of the statistics was to cost £3,000 or £15,000; but till he could see a plan
  1372
  for collecting them, calculated to effect the object which the hon. Gentleman had in view, and not subject to the objections which the present and all former plans were liable to, he could only say that, without presuming to tell others that they there wrong, he must give his opposition to Motions of this nature.
  MR. DENTsaid, he had never heard the accuracy of the statistical returns of agriculture collected in Ireland, or by the Highland Society in Scotland, impugned; and he could not understand why the proposed returns should be less correct. The noble Lord who had just sat down (Lord Hotham) deprecated speculation on the part of the farmer. Why was it so wrong for the farmer to speculate? Why, the main ground of the folly of their doing so was that they were entirely ignorant of what was likely to be the average of crops throughout the country. For himself, he would like to see agricultural statistics carried still further. He would like to see a return, not only of the corn crops, but of stock. With regard to this point, there existed a lamentable want of information. He cheerfully gave his support to the Motion.
  MR. HUBBARDthought the House ought to see clearly the grounds on which the Motion was opposed. The first was, that the expense of collecting the statistics was too great; the second was, that farmers objected to intrusion on their land; the third, that the returns would be delusive. If the latter objection were true, of course it was fatal. As to the first objection, whether the expense was £5,000, £15.000, or £50,000, the immense importance of these statistics could not be measured by any expense. In one season England had spent £20,000,000 in corn alone; and in 1847 as large a sum as £100,000 might have been saved by priority of information on a single day's transaction, when we had to compete with other nations in the markets of Europe and America. The House should, therefore, dismiss the matter of expense from their minds. Then so far as the feelings of the farmers were concerned, he thought that a great deal of misapprehension prevailed on that point. With regard to the small farmers, if they imagined these returns would injure them they were under an entire misapprehension. No parties were more interested in getting sound information on this subject than the farmers themselves. And why? Because they

  1373
  were sellers of the commodity. The buyers had agents north and south, surveying the length and breadth of the land; but there was no one to inform the farmer, to whose advantage it must undoubtedly be to be on a par with the buyer in obtaining information on the subject, and thus being enabled to judge whether there was not a coming scarcity which would justify him in asking a higher price for his corn than was offered by the buyer. It was not the importer or the corn dealer alone, but it was the community at large, including the farmer himself, who was interested in the compilation of these statistics. If we could not get returns of reliable authenticity, of course there was an end to the matter; but he took it for granted that in any scheme the House or the Government might adopt means would be taken to ensure accuracy. As to the prejudice of the farmers and their reluctance to see on their farms an inspecting intruder, the feeling would vanish when they reflected on the subject, and saw that they were more likely to be benefited than injured by the publication of these statistics.
  MR. THOMPSONsaid, he thought it desirable that agricultural statistics should be collected, but the acceptance of the Resolution of his hon. Friend would not bind the House to any specific plan. If the House agreed to this Resolution, and a Bill founded upon it were introduced, he begged to suggest a few alterations in the scheme indicated by his hon. Friend. Instead of having districts he was of opinion that the returns should be collected all over the country, and, for the sake of removing prejudice, he thought it would be well to confine them at first to the acreage — the area of the respective crops. These might be collected at a trifling expense, and without alarming the jealousy of the farmers. The number of acres being ascertained, we should be in possession of the largest factor in the multiplication, the one in which there was most room for error, and which no individual occupier could test or verify. The variation between a small and a large crop could be easily ascertained. Suppose, for instance, that ten bushels an acre were the difference between a minimum and a maximum yield, the farmer would know whether the crop was a good, a bad, or a medium one; and if he had any doubt on the subject, he could remove it by threshing out the produce of a given portion of an acre, and thus
  1374
  ascertain within a bushel or two the actual produce. This process would supply the other factors of the multiplication, and the farmer would thus possess a tolerably accurate estimate of the produce of the kingdom. Objections had been made to the proposed employment of the Ordnance Surveyors in collecting these statistics; and lie would suggest that it would be preferable to employ the clerks to the Poor Law Unions, who, being in constant intercourse with the overseers of parishes, would be able to compile the returns required without much labour, and would be satisfied with a very slight addition to their salaries. He threw out these suggestions as they occurred to him; but of this he was certain, that it would not be a matter of great difficulty to frame a plan for collecting these statistics.
  LORD NAASsaid, that as Ireland had been referred to he wished to make a few observations. Now, with regard to the collection of the statistics of the acreage and stock very little difficulty had been found in Ireland in obtaining full and accurate information; but when it had been attempted to discover the quantity of produce which had been raised in each year, he did not think that their experience had been so satisfactory. He knew very well how it had been attempted to obtain information with regard to the quantity of produce. It was done in this way. Forms were sent down from the head office in Dublin, and were directed to the magistrates, to police-officers, and in some canes to the large fanners, who filled them up according to their own opinion; the returns were sent in, and the calculation was made from them. It was quite impossible that these returns could in any way be accurate, for he knew of his own experience that many persons in a district to whom these forms had been addressed had differed most materially in opinion; and it would be found that the very best estimates, even with regard to the quantity of produce coming from the same parish, would differ as much as 50 per cent. Therefore the House would be under an erroneous impression if they were led to believe that, as regarded the returns of produce under the system of agricultural statistics in Ireland, they had been in any way satisfactory. He believed it was perfectly impossible to obtain anything like an accurate account of the produce of the country. The only way that an approximation could be made was by collecting the statistics of the quan-

  1375
  tity that was actually brought into the market. With regard to the machinery by which the agricultural statistics, as far as regarded the acreage and stock, were obtained, he believed they could be got in no other way than by employing enumerators, as was done in Ireland, to go about each farm and ascertain for themselves what was the amount of acreage under each description of crop. He perfectly agreed with his noble Friend the Member for the East Riding (Lord Hotham) that returns of this kind, unless perfectly accurate, were of no value whatever. His experience was that unless they were able to create machinery in this country which should perform the duties which the police discharged in Ireland with respect to agricultural statistics, they would be unable to collect these facts in such a way as to make them of any value whatever. He did not know whether that was possible or not. He was afraid the expense would be greater in England than it was in Ireland, because they had not a large body of men ready made to their hands for the performance of the duty. But at the same time he had not the least doubt that if such a machinery could not be applied it would be worse than useless to attempt the collection of agricultural statistics at all. Much had been said with regard to the objections made by fanners to give the returns of the stock they possessed, and of the acreage under various kinds of crop upon their farms. He was perfectly aware that these objections existed to a great extent in Ireland at first, and that the farmers were unwilling to give the information. But these objections had been wholly removed. He was sure the Registrar General, Mr. Donnelly, would be able to inform any hon. Gentleman that there was hardly an instance of any fanner objecting to supply the constabulary with all the information that was desired. As to the farmers not taking any interest in the matter, he knew that they took a great interest. These returns were published not only in the returns made to Parliament, but in every provincial paper in Ireland, and were read by the farmers with great and increasing interest. They were not in the least afraid of any inquisitorial inspection of their affairs. The number of stock and the quantity of acres were given, but no names were published; and it was impossible for any person to find out the private affairs of the farmer. He believed that the collection of agricultural statistics in
  1376
  England could be guarded against many of the objections which had been made in the course of this debate, and he therefore hoped that the House would agree to the Resolution of the hon. Member for Stirling.
  MR. MILNER GIBSONsaid, that he could not regard this as a mere abstract Resolution. If it were passed, his hon. Friend (Mr. Caird) would, he imagined, understand it as an encouragement, if not an approval of his plan.
  MR. CAIRDsaid, that he did not ask for the adoption of his plan.
  MR. MILNER GIBSONsaid, that surely the House had got past the stage of abstract Resolutions upon this subject. Bills for the collection of agricultural statistics had been more than once introduced. In 1846 he himself brought in a Bill for that purpose; and another Bill was subsequently introduced, and read a second time. There was no difference of opinion as to the importance of obtaining accurate statistical returns of the acreage under cultivation for particular crops, produce, and stock, not only to the agricultural interest, but to the mercantile interests of the country. The whole difficulty consisted in this—how to do it. His hon. Friend had submitted a new plan. He proposed to take certain typical districts in England and Wales, and he assumed that these typical districts were a fair sample of the whole country. He thought he could infer, therefore, from the statistics of the typical districts what was the acreage under cultivation, and what was the produce of the whole kingdom, if not with absolute accuracy at any rate sufficiently near for practical purposes. Now, unfortunately, this plan of his hon. Friend proceeded upon one important assumption — that they knew the extent of the cultivated land in Great Britain, and knew something of the character of the cultivation. They must know something of the whole in order to be able to select their sample or type; and unless they knew the character of the whole how could they say that their 1,500,000 acres were to be taken as a type or fixed part of the whole? He confessed he had very great doubts upon the point. Now they did know that in Ireland when the Ordnance Survey and constabulary were made use of to ascertain the cultivation of particular crops, it was found that the results of their inquiries were very different from the previous estimates which had been published

  1377
  by eminent writers upon the subject. The hon. Member (Mr. Caird) started with the assumption that there were 15,000,000 acres under cultivation, of which 100,000 acres was the 150th part.
  MR. CAIRDsaid, that it was of no importance that there should be a definite proportion between the typical portion and the whole. It would remain the same type year after year, and an intelligible result would be obtained by comparing the results of one year with those of another.
  MR. MILNER GIBSONadmitted that that would be so as between the typical districts; but how could they jump to the conclusion that that would be a fair comparison for the whole country? [Mr. CAIRD: It must be, of course.] We had no knowledge at present, beyond a mere estimate, either of the acreage under cultivation in the whole kingdom, nor of the quality of the soil in various parts of the country; therefore, he thought that it was going a great way to assume that the proportion between the typical districts in two successive years would hold good for the whole country. In Ireland we had estimates of the extent of land under cultivation similar to that which his hon. Friend had proposed for England; but an examination of the whole of Ireland showed that those estimates were entirely erroneous. Probably the estimate of 15,000,000 acres under cultivation for England was wrong. In Ireland the estimate of the land under barley was greater by one-fourth than the largest quantity actually sown, and too much land by about one-fourth was supposed to have been cultivated with potatoes. The fact was that the plan of his hon. Friend had not been long enough before the House. He would not go the length of condemning it; on the contrary, he guarded himself from the assertion that it might not prove hereafter to have great merits; but before it was adopted in whole or in part it was absolutely necessary to see that the calculations rested upon accurate data. Now, in Scotland, he found that in the typical counties the increase from 1855 to 1856 in the acreage under wheat was at the rate of 34 per cent; whereas over the whole of Scotland the increase was at the rate of nearly 37 per cent. In Ireland in the same years the increase in the typical counties was 14 per cent, while over the whole country it was nearly 19 per cent. Between 1856 and 1857 the increase in the acreage under wheat was 3½ per cent in
  1378
  the typical districts, while over the whole of Ireland it was little less than 6 per cent, or nearly double the amount. Taking the difference between the years 1859 and 1860 in the Irish typical districts, it was 2½ per cent, whereas over the whole of Ireland it was only ½ per cent; so that, if the typical districts were taken in that year as an indication of what was going forward in the country, the increase would have been represented at five times its actual amount. This showed how difficult it was to select typical districts, and that if returns were published under Government sanction professing to be accurate, great caution must he shown in approaching the subject. As regarded the employment of the Engineer Staff of the Ordnance Department in the collection of these statistics, he could conceive that as that survey was completed they might, by degrees, if they pleased, obtain year by year, as the survey permitted accurate knowledge of the acreage under cultivation. They might probably ascertain the crop, but it would be difficult to ascertain the produce. But he thought it would be desirable to wait until that undertaking was first completed, otherwise his hon. Friend would certainly run the risk of upsetting the plans which had been laid down for the gradual survey of the United Kingdom. The survey of Scotland and that of the six northern counties of England was already complete; and no doubt this map would afford valuable assistance in the collection of the desired information. But he held in his hand a letter from Sir Henry James, who, though favourable to his hon. Friend's plan, pointed out some difficulties which must arise in carrying it into execution at the present time. That gallant officer wrote as follows:—
  "Before any further steps are taken, the proposed system should be submitted to the judgment of competent persons. If it should be approved and Government adopt it, then we should require two years from the present time to complete the plans of the typical districts in England; but this would compel us to abandon the surveys of the counties now in progress, and would give rise to discontent in those counties; and if precedence is given to the agricultural districts, then we shall also have complaints from the mineral and manufacturing districts."
  And such obviously would be the case. His hon. Friend, therefore, must not expect that without a great deal more consideration than the House had yet given to the proposal it could receive even an indirect sanction. He was quite prepared to admit

  1379
  that the collection of agricultural statistics was most desirable, and that the interests of this country, both agricultural and mercantile, would be greatly benefited by them. At the same time he did not see the slightest necessity for any Resolution whatever on the point. He himself had proposed Resolutions, but then he had always some definite plan in view; and unless the House were prepared to carry out a definite plan they ought not to sanction this Resolution. There was no indisposition on the part of the Government to consider any plan which might be put forward; they were quite alive to the importance of the subject, but if his hon. Friend pressed his Motion to a division he should be compelled to move the Previous Question.
  MR. BASSthought there must be some misapprehension on the part of the right hon. Gentleman and Members opposite as to the proposition of his hon. Friend. What he proposed was to take 1,500,000 acres in different parts of the country every year as a type of what the average agriculture of the whole country would be—so that in a series of years the variation in these types would substantially show the variation in the cultivation of the different crops in the country. When he heard the President of the Board of Trade acknowledge that it would be most desirable to have these statistics collected, he was in hopes that he was about, to propose that they should be taken not over one-fifteenth of the kingdom, but over the country at large. The right hon. Gentleman quoted figures to show that a discrepancy of 5 per cent existed between the returns as given by the typical districts and those extending over the whole of the country. What did that difference amount to? One million in 20,000,000. But what was the extent to which the country was at present in the dark for want of these statistics? Writers of eminence had declared that the general average produce of Great Britain and Ireland was only 6,500,000 qrs. of wheat. The very highest authority in the kingdom, Mr. M'Culloch, on the contrary, placed the quantity of wheat at upwards of 13,000,000 qrs. Surely we ought not to be so far in the dark—to the extent of the difference between 6,500,000 qrs. and 13,000,000 qrs. The late Sir George Lewis, a few years ago, invited general co-operation in ascertaining the number of persons that could be fed in this country, and surely
  1380
  it must be of equal importance to know what they were to be fed with, and what proportion of their food was derived from our own country. He had on a former occasion ventured to speak of comparative degrees of ignorance among farmers, but the noble Lord opposite (Lord Hotham) had administered to him such a rebuke that it was still tingling in his ears. He would not, therefore, suppose that there were degrees of ignorance, and would only assert that there were degrees of intelligence among them. But hon. Members of that House who were among the best farmers in it supported a system of agricultural statistics. What harm, he should like to know, would it do the farmers? [An hon. MEMBER: What good would it do him?] He thought it no hardship that an exciseman, came to his house and inquired how many barrels of beer he brewed. After the declaration of the President of the Board of Trade that these statistics were most valuable and important, he thought the right hon. Gentleman could not feel that he was performing all the duties of his high position unless he brought in a Bill to provide for agricultural statistics.
  MR. HEYGATEsaid, that whilst he heartily supported the truism contained in the proposition they were now called upon to support, he expressly refrained from giving his assent to the plan sketched out by the hon. Member. On the contrary, he believed that the sample system proposed would be a very inadequate and unsatisfactory way of obtaining for the country statistics of the progress of one of the greatest resources of our material wealth. He held in his hand two short documents which fully corroborated what had been said by the noble Lord the Member for Cockermouth (Lord Naas) as to the way in which practically they managed these things in Ireland. The two chief objections to agricultural statistics were stated to be, in the first place, the inquisitorial nature of the inquiry; and secondly, the fact that these statistics could not be made compulsory, and that, unless they were made compulsory, they would be useless. The evidence derived from Ireland showed that both the propositions were untrue. It appeared from the statement of the Registrar General of Ireland that these statistics never disclosed the names of the tenant-farmers. The acreage under different crops and the live stock alone were given. The tenant-

  1381
  farmers of Ireland, therefore, did not find this mode inquisitorial, and had no objection to it. The same Gentleman stated, that although these Returns were not compulsory they were far from useless, and that in their collection they had the increasing co-operation of landed proprietors, of the clergy, and the tenant-farmers. Here was evidence that the collection was not objected to. On the contrary, Mr. Donelly, in a late Report, expressly says—
  "When the figures are revised, I do not appre-hand that any important changes will be required in them, as the increasing experience of the enumerators, and the continued generous cooperation of the landed proprietors, the clergy of all denominations, the tenant farmers, and the public press, all tend from year to year to greater accuracy in these statistics."
  He confessed he had always felt that this question had suffered as much from its friends as its foes, and that the advantage of these returns had been greatly overrated. They would not indicate the right time either to buy or sell. When it was proposed to pass from the region of fact to that of estimates, it was a mistake. He regarded, therefore, all calculations as to the prospective yield of crops which were still in the field as visionary and delusive. All they wanted to know was an accurate account of the various descriptions of ground under different crops every year, and the quantity of live stock, so that they might trace the increase or decrease of the agricultural wealth of the country. That was a species of information which no civilized nation, and especially a mercantile nation like the English, ought to be without. It was a reproach to us, that whilst nearly every European nation and even America possessed that information and highly valued it, we were still deficient in that respect. It was a reproach to us, and the sooner the reproach was wiped away, the better would it be for our credit and reputation.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he believed there was scarcely any difference of opinion upon the principle involved in the proposition of his hon. Friend. The Government were fully convinced of the advantages of agricultural statistics in the United Kingdom, and agreed that they ought to be collected and published at the earliest period. But the noble Lord (Lord Haas) had shown that these statistics would be of ' very little value if they did not extend over the whole country. His hon. Friend (Mr. Caird) had suggested various plans for ob-
  1382
  taining them, but if he understood him aright he did not wish to make these returns compulsory. His hon. Friend the Member for Derby (Mr. Bass) was, however, quite of another opinion. He said he was compelled to make returns of the beer he brewed, and he did not know why the farmer should not make returns also. It would, therefore, be necessary, according to his hon. Friend, to call for them from the whole of the kingdom, and to make them compulsory upon the fanners. He had communicated with the Registrar General, and a plan, according to the suggestion of his hon. Friend, for obtaining these statistics had been drawn up. It turned out, however, that it would cost £15,000 a year, and that it would, after all, be merely a collection of voluntary returns. The Government did not think, under these circumstances, that they should be justified in asking Parliament to grant such a sum for voluntary statistics. They objected to the present Resolution because it did not advance one step towards the practical attainment of the object in view. If he had misunderstood his hon. Friend, and if he thought the returns should be compulsory and should include the United Kingdom, then he ought to bring in a Bill, and the House would know the means by which he proposed to effect his object. The Ordnance Map would no doubt give facilities for obtaining these statistics, but it was as yet incomplete, and the plan, therefore, of making use of that map for the purpose was one which the House could not at present adopt.
  MR. CAIRD, in reply, said, there was a gradual progress of opinion among the farmers in favour of agricultural statistics, and he believed they would work more cordially with a voluntary system than under an Act of Parliament. Many modes of obtaining agricultural statistics had been proposed, and he should himself very much prefer a complete system. He thought an expenditure of £15,000 a mere bagatelle compared with the advantages it would bring. But what he was anxious to do was to get the Government to rouse up from its supineness, and compel them to act by a Resolution of that House. If he desired any recommendation for his mode of action he would refer to the authority of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Milner Gibson) on a similar occasion twenty years ago; and if a subject had been under discussion for twenty years, assuredly it was high time to act. In 1845 the right hon. Gentleman

  1383
  having brought forward the subject of agricultural statistics, was asked by a friendly Government to withdraw his Resolution; but he replied that of all the perplexing situations in which a man could be placed that was one of the most perplexing, because he did not like to take a course hostile to a Government which seemed favourable to his views, but at the same time, if an hon. Member did not carry his Motion to a division, but allowed it to pass away easily in another manner, he was open to censure. He (Mr. Caird) therefore begged to say that he should press his Resolution to a division.
  Whereupon Previous Question put, "That that Question be now put."—(Viscount Palmerston.)
  The House divided:— Ayes 74; Noes 62: Majority 12.
  Main Question put, and agreed to.
  Resolved,
  That, in the opinion of this House, the collection and early publication of the Agricultural Statistics of Great Britain would be advantageous to the public interest.

UNIFORMITY ACT.—LEAVE.
Resolution considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
MR. E. P. BOUVERIErose to move that this House will resolve itself into a Committee to consider certain portions of the Act of Uniformity. As he understood that his Resolution was not likely to meet with opposition in the present stage, he would not detain the House by many remarks. He wished to remind the House of the origin of this Bill. It had not originated in any hostility to the Universities, or the Church as connected with the Universities, but with a certain number of gentlemen practically interested in the education of the University of Cambridge, who finding defects in the existing system, proposed what they considered a simple and unobjectionable remedy. The proposal was simply this—that whereas all Fellows of Colleges were required at present by the Act of Uniformity to make a declaration of their conformity to the Liturgy of the Church of England, that requirement should be repealed, and it should be left to the Colleges themselves to make such provision in that respect as might to them seem best in the interest of the Colleges and the University. The requirements of the Act of Uniformity were but
1384
of comparatively little importance until about ten years ago, when the University Acts were passed, because at Cambridge no degree could be taken without a declaration that the person taking it belonged to the Church of England, while at Oxford no one could be admitted as a student unless he signed the Thirty-nine Articles. Having taken this test, it was comparatively immaterial to take a simpler and milder one. But by the University Acts of 1854 and 1856 degrees might be taken in Oxford and Cambridge without any religious tests whatever, and the consequence was that persons entered the Colleges and received education there who were unable to take this test required by the Act of Uniformity. It was true that with respect to most Colleges — three or four at Cambridge and one at Oxford excepted — the alteration he proposed would make no difference in the existing state of things, because, with the exceptions he had just mentioned, one of the conditions of fellowship was that the Fellow should be a member of the Church of England; but the reason why he asked the House to consent to the Bill was, because it was a proposal really to give freedom to the Colleges and to avoid Parliamentary interference. The existence of that clause in the Act of Uniformity was an interference with the freedom of those great educational establishments. It was unjustifiable in its origin, as well as in its retention. He did not ask the House to interfere with the free action of the Colleges in this matter, or to force them to choose Fellows to whom they objected on religious or other grounds. All that he asked was that the Colleges might be left to do their best for their respective bodies, and for the interests of the Church and Universities, without interference on the part of Parliament. He did not think that such a request could be justly designated, as it had been on a previous occasion, as an attack on the Church and the Universities. He would fix such a period for the second reading of the Bill as would give those who were opposed to the measure a full opportunity of stating their opinions. The right hon. Gentleman moved that the House resolve into a Committee to consider certain portions of the Act of Uniformity.
MR. SELWYNthought that, as a similar Bill was brought in last Session, it would only be consistent with courtesy and with usual practice to offer no opposition now to the introduction of the measure; but

1385
the objections to such a Bill which had been expressed by many hon. Members, and by himself among the number, were not in any degree lessened, and he thought; what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman that evening would tend, if anything, to increase them. It must be apparent that the Bill would not give religions liberty to the Colleges, but would introduce religious discord.
Resolved,
That the Chairman be directed to move the House, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to repeal so much of the Act of Uniformity as relates to Fellows and Tutors in any College, Hall, or House of Learning.
Resolution reported.
Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. EDWARD PLEYDELL BOUVERIE and Mr. POLLARD-URQUHART.

UNIFORMITY ACT.—LEAVE.
  RAILWAY TRAVELLING (IRELAND) BILL.
  On Motion of Sir COLMAN O'LOGHLEN, Bill further to secure to the public the means of travelling by Railway in Ireland, ordered to be brought in by Sir COLMAN O'LOGHLEN, Colonel VANDELEUR, Mr. MONSELL, Colonel DICKSON, and Captain STACPOOLE.
  MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. M'MAHON, Bill to assimilate the Law of Ireland to that of England as to the qualification of Burgesses in Municipal Corporations, ordered to be brought in by Mr. M'MAHON, Sir COLMAN O'LOGHLEN, and Mr. BLAKE.
  JUSTICES OF THE PEACE PROCEDURE BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. PAULL, Bill to consolidate and amend the Acts regulating Procedure before Justices of the Peace out of Quarter Sessions in England, ordered to be brought in by Mr. PAULL, Mr. RICHARD HODGSON, and Mr. STANILAND.

  SUPERANNUATIONS (UNION OFFICERS) BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. VILLIEES, Bill to provide for Superannuation Allowances to Officers of Unions and Parishes, ordered to be brought in by Mr. VILLIERS and Mr. GILPIN.
  Notice taken that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members not being present,
  House adjourned at a quarter before Eight o'clock.

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS —First Reading— Life Annuities and Life Assurances* (No. 116); Facilities for Divine Service in Collegiate Schools* (No. 117) [H. L.].
Second Reading—Union Assessment Committee Act Amendment (No. 102).
Committee—Penal Servitude Acts Amendment (No. 66); Admiralty Lands and Works (No. 88); Insane Prisoners Act Amendment* (No. 111).
Third Reading—Naval Agency and Distribution* (No. 83); Naval Prize* (No. 87), and passed.

UNION ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE ACT AMENDMENT BILL—(No. 102.)

  SECOND READING.
  LORD WODEHOUSE, in moving the second reading of this Bill, said, that its object was to remedy certain defects of detail in a measure passed in the year 1862 for the purpose of insuring a more accurate assessment to local rates. That measure had in general worked satisfactorily, but it appeared that alterations were required in some of its provisions. It did not give the Assessment Committees the power of appearing in appeals against their own decisions, and magistrates were thus compelled to decide upon these appeals without hearing the arguments upon both sides.

  1339
  The present Bill would remedy that defect by providing that the Assessment Committees should have an opportunity of defending, with the consent of the Board of Guardians, decisions at which they had previously arrived. It would also provide that justices should not be disqualified from sitting in quarter sessions on any appeal, by reason of their being rated in some other parish of the union than that by which the appeal was brought. These were the principal provisions of the measure, the details of which could be best considered in Committee.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.— (Lord Wodehouse.)
  LORD ST. LEONARDSsaid, that he did not object to some provision being made for supporting assessments on appeal, but no court in England had the power of appearing in defence of its own decisions as was now proposed, and he thought, therefore, that some other means should be adopted of enabling the magistrates to hear both sides in these cases.
  Motion agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS AMENDMENT BILL—(No. 66.)

  COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day for the House to go into Committee read.—(The Lord President.)
  LORD BROUGHAMsaid, he did not object to going into Committee; on the contrary, he highly approved of the Bill, and of one provision especially, which he found the Government intended to give up—the supervision of ticket-of-leave men between their liberation and the expiration of their sentence. This supervision was absolutely necessary for the safety of the community, and for the good of the convicts themselves. The ticket-of-leave was granted as a reward of good conduct, and a stimulus to further reform; and as their real struggle only commenced when they returned to the scene of temptation, it was in vain to suppose them fit for mixing in society on their release. The system of supervision under Sir Walter Crofton, to whom the country owed so much, had proved most successful in Ireland. Of this he could speak confidently; for at the Congress of Social Science three years ago in Dublin, Sir Walter Crofton's operations had been fully
  1340
  examined by his (Lord Brougham's) colleagues, and found to be in all respects admirable and perfectly successful. 160 convicts were superintended by no more than two policemen, and with complete success. Among those who examined this was his learned friend and great philanthropist, the Recorder of Birmingham, Mr. Hill, head of a family to whom the country, and especially the working class, were under such obligations — one of the family, Sir. Rowland, having yesterday been the subject of a Royal message. Mr. Hill, from many years' experience, decidedly considered the return of convicts to the community without supervision and warning to their employers to be of undoubted inexpediency and of questionable honesty. He would read a passage from a letter he had received from that experienced magistrate, who, after stating his opinion of supervision, adds—
  "I should, however, pause before pronouncing such opinions, if I believed supervision to be detrimental to the ex-convict who had determined to return to paths of honesty and continue in them. But I am well convinced to the contrary—namely, that supervision hits to the honest man many advantages with few or no drawbacks; and as to the persecution of well-intended persons by the police, which has been alleged, I have made this the object of inquiry for years, and believe the charge groundless; and that the rule, with no exception, is precisely the reverse."
  In fact, the convict has the advantage, besides his being kept to his duties, of receiving the support of his superintendent by the testimony to his character, which will weigh strongly with any employers. On the whole, therefore, he (Lord Brougham) felt most anxiously that the Irish system which had so completely succeeded, should be adopted in this country — all the difference, if any, between the character of the people in the two countries, being rather an argument in favour of the extension, as showing the supervision to be more difficult there than here. He should, therefore, earnestly entreat the House to reject the Amendment of which notice had been given, to omit the fourth or supervision clause.
  LORD LYTTELTONsaid, he approved both of what the Government had done and what they had refused to do, with regard to sending convicts to Australia. With the undoubted fact that the Australian colonies generally objected to receive our convicts, he thought we were bound to respect their wishes; but, at

  1341
  the same time, it was unreasonable and unjust for the South Australian colonies to object to convicts being sent to Western Australia, where the colonists were very desirous of receiving them. He hoped the Government would adhere to the course they had adopted, and would not allow memorials from the more powerful Australian colonies to override their judgment.
  House in Committee:
  Clause 1 agreed to.
  Clause 2 (Length of Sentences of Penal Servitude).
  EARL GREYmoved an Amendment that criminals, after two previous convictions, should be subject to a minimum imprisonment of seven years. He thought it perfectly absurd that where a criminal had been convicted some fifteen times he should only be sentenced to three years' imprisonment.
  Amendment moved at the end of clause to add the following words: —
  "And if Two previous Convictions of Felony, including summary Convictions under the Criminal Justice Act, shall be proved against a Prisoner found guilty of an Offence now punishable by Penal Servitude, he shall be liable to Penal Servitude for Seven Years, and this shall be the least Sentence that can be passed upon him."
  EARL GRANVILLEthought the Amendment was undesirable, and that it would be better to leave the punishment in the cases referred to to be apportioned by the Judges, as was the case at present.
  EARL GREYsaid, that was true; but they had exercised that discretion so leniently that it had become necessary that Parliament should interfere and prescribe a minimum of punishment. He had seen cases where criminals had been convicted fifteen times, and then a sentence of only three years' penal servitude was passed. That was a perfect mockery.
  LORD CRANWORTHsupported the Amendment, believing that to a man thrice convicted of felony it would be a mercy to sentence him to a long period of imprisonment, under circumstances best calculated to induce a reformed course of life. He suggested that the Amendment should be postponed till the Report, in order that the phraseology might be assimilated to the law as it now stood with reference to a second conviction.
  Amendment agreed to: Clause agreed to.
  Clause 3 (Punishment of Offences in Convict Prisons) agreed to.
  Clause 4 (Forfeiture of Licence).
  LORD HOUGHTONmoved an Amendment to omit certain words, the effect of which omission would be to do away with the proposed system of registration of criminals by the police. He thought the clause generally was very loosely drawn, and contained phrases hardly of ordinary legal import—the word "locality" he thought was one for the first time proposed to be introduced into an Act of Parliament. The ground of his asking their Lordships to reject these words was, because he thought the principle a bad one in itself, and especially bad in its application to the present Bill. He thought it bad, because it had always been the happy privilege of this country to use the police force for the purposes of subserving the law, of preserving the peace of society, and of detecting crime. They had never yet invested the police of this country with the powers which it was proposed to give them by this Bill. To make it a misdemeanor for a discharged criminal not to report himself to the police was a regulation far better adapted to the police system of other countries than of our own. But this feeling must give way if the peace of society required such a deviation from our usual habits. But, he asked, would the object which they had in view, namely, the return of the criminal to an honest life, be facilitated by such a regulation as this? If there was anything they desired to secure more than another, it was to remove the man as far as possible from the restraints of prison life, if he showed himself worthy to be removed from them. The object wus to send him into society as free as possible from the evil he had done, and that in no fantastic or sentimental sense, but simply that he might learn the maxim that honesty is the best policy. It had been said that this system worked well in Ireland. But would it be possible to do the system of Sir Walter Crofton any greater injury than by making a partial and inappropriate application of it to England? He would endeavour to show by one single figure what was the influence of police registration upon discharged prisoners in the neighbourhood of London. The Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society had for several years aided discharged prisoners to emigrate. In the year 1861 they aided 769 such persons. But when the system of registration was introduced, a falling off took place in this number. In 1862 they succeeded in as-

  1343
  sisting only 689, in 1863 only 451, and in half of the present year only 165 persons. So that their Lordships would see that the effect of this police supervision was that from 150 to 200 discharged prisoners were now at large, who, but for this supervision, would have been assisted to emigrate by the society. He earnestly wished the words to which he objected to be excluded from the clause. He looked upon the measure as an experiment, which deserved to be fairly tried. He only asked that it should be fairly tried, by assisting the criminal to re-submit himself to the action of the laws, instead of by embarrassing him.
  Moved, to leave out from ("therein") to ("or") in line 38.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONhoped the House would not consent to the Amendment. He was quite unable to understand what his noble Friend proposed to substitute. Were they to give the criminal a free and unconditional remission, or a remission accompanied by supervision, or a remission under a mere nominal supervision? A real supervision was intelligible, but his noble Friend took the supervision in part, and rejected a part. He wanted to have all the benefits of supervision without its inconveniences. If the Amendment passed, all that the public would have to depend upon, as far as the security of life and property was concerned, would be the changes recently effected in the discipline of prisons upon the sole authority of the Secretary of State, which changes had been made hastily, and might be recalled to-morrow; and when that took place things would exactly remain where they had been before. That would, he thought, be the most unfortunate result to which they could come after the numberless discussions they had had on this subject. The objections of his noble Friend to the clause resolved themselves into the single allegation that the police would be disposed to interfere with ticket-of-leave holders in their attempts to get employment. His noble Friend argued as if they were about to infringe upon the liberty of the subject; but he must distinctly protest against the doctrine that these convicts had a right to liberty. They had forfeited it by their crimes against the laws, and when they were released it was only by an act of grace or favour, which it was for the State to accompany with such restrictions as it thought fit to impose. The
  1344
  statement about the police preventing these persons from getting honest employment rested, it should be borne in mind, entirely on the story which some half dozen or dozen ticket-of-leave holders had told on their re-commitment for another crime. But he did not deny that there might not be some isolated cases of that kind. The police were a mixed body, like any other, and doubtless comprised some men who would occasionally abuse their power; but he maintained that in 99 cases out of 100 the abuse, when it actually took place, occurred, not from a system of supervision, but rather from the want of such a system. A policeman would suspect a man to be a ticket-of-leave holder, who was relapsing into crime, and he accordingly dogged his steps. It was impossible to distinguish an habitual offender from an occasional offender without a system of registration; and how were they to have a system of registration without the agency of the police? Turn the question how they would, they must always come back to the necessity of a regular machinery for a proper police supervision. It was far better to have an open and actual control and supervision than a secret one; and the way to get rid of the evils of an irregular and objectionable espionage was to establish a regular system of responsible police supervision. One of the objects which ought to be kept in view was that a distinction should be drawn between habitual and casual criminals, but how could that possibly be effected except by some system of registration. They must not, in the midst of all their abstract reasoning on this question, forget the plain fact that the system existing in Ireland, and which undoubtedly had worked successfully, was based on a strict police supervision; and it should, moreover, be remembered that in Ireland there had not been one instance of complaint against the police for abusing their powers in this matter. So long as the man was in prison he was free from temptation, but the moment he came out he was thrown back on himself, and the strength of his old habits was likely to influence him. The Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society had proved itself very useful in receiving prisoners on their discharge from prison, and many of them who had been benefited by it, had been convicted five, six, or eight times.
  LORD CRAWORTHsaid, that he feared that their Lordships might be in-

  1345
  fluenced in their views by a too liberal construction of the words of the clause, Many noble Lords in reading the clause in its present state thought they might be supporting the system of supervision by the police. He had no sympathy with those who advanced the argument, that to require a convict to place himself under supervision would interfere with the rights and liberties of the subject. The matter properly to be considered was, what system would answer best for the public. It was proposed that the convict should once every month report himself at the police station near his residence; but what security was there in this for his good conduct? And the very condition would prove an obstacle against his getting employment, but it would be no advantage to society. He could not leave his employer and report himself to the police without coming under the notice not only of his employer, but of his fellow workmen, and there was not an honest man but would object to be associated with convicts. The condition that he must report himself in London—the nest of rogues—would, perhaps, be complied with by his coming before Sir Richard Mayne; but this would be no guarantee. Under any circumstances, if a released convict violated any of the conditions of his ticket-of-leave, he would be sure to be pulled up by the police, whether he reported himself monthly at a station or not, and the provision in the clause under discussion, while it did not pretend to do any good, might, in reality, do a great deal of harm. In Dublin, or the metropolitan district of Ireland, to which so much allusion had been made, the police had never been employed to supervise released prisoners; and when the Commissioners recommended, not without hesitation, that it might be expedient to try the Irish system in England, they did not mean that there should be what had been absurdly called police supervision, which would give no security at all; but that the work ought to be done through the agency of an office connected with the convict establishment, and employing proper officials for the purpose. This was the plan really adopted in Ireland. It was of the very essence of useful supervision that it should be unconnected with the police.
  THE EARL OF LICHFIELDagreed that the clause as it stood would afford no additional security whatever to the public; and it was contrary to the experience of
  1346
  those most familiar with the question. The mere fact of a man reporting himself to the police once a month was no guarantee as to what he was doing during the rest of the time. Indeed, such was the cunning of habitual offenders, that he had no doubt when one was going to commit a crime he would take care to report himself beforehand, by way of keeping up appearances. On the other hand, he was satisfied that the system proposed would be very injurious to convicts who were anxious to obtain honest employment, because it would tend to attach to them a bad character in the eyes both of employers and fellow-workmen. Reference had been made to the Irish system, but he believed that under it there was a large number of re-convictions—as large a proportion as of those who had been in the English convict prisons. In any case, it would be quite inoperative in the large towns of this country. No attempt had been made to enforce it in Dublin, and Sir Walter Crofton had owned that, even if attempted there, it would not be efficient. At the same time, he was most anxious to see a system of supervision conducted either by the convict department or through the agency of the Discharged Prisoners' Aid Societies.
  LORD LYVEDENsaid, the clause had been inserted by the House of Commons, and he thought it one of the best portions of the Bill. A man who had broken the laws of his country was not entitled to the ordinary freedom of the subject, and he believed that the monthly Report would prove a constant check upon the ticket-of leave men. He thought the, masters were not unwilling to take them into their service; when they were detected by their fellow servants they were sent adrift. There was no doubt that there was a great difficulty about the matter.
  EARL GREYsaid, that the majority of prisoners being discharged in this country, it was important to consider what was the best mode of subjecting them to such supervision as was necessary to insure the enforcing of the conditions of the licence. The noble Earl (the Karl of Carnarvon) seemed to think that the Bill would leave things as they were, but that was a mistake. As the law stood, if a ticket-of-leave man committed a second offence, and was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, the term ran on simultaneously with his old sentence; but by this Bill he would be required to work the new sen-

  1347
  tence out when the old one had expired. At present there was no power of taking up a man suspected of being a ticket-of-leave man; and there were no means of formal investigation as to whether the conditions of the ticket-of-leave had been broken. By this Bill the breaking of the conditions of the ticket-of-leave became a substantive offence; and the charge would come before the magistrates and be formally adjudicated upon. It was true that there was an objection to requiring a man to appear once a month before the police; for if this regulation were enforced it would be impossible that his fellow workmen should not know of it; and when the fact become known it was fatal to his hopes of continuing his employment. On this ground the system had to be given up in Ireland. In laying down a number of regulations he thought that Parliament was stepping out of its proper place, and that it was not right to tie up the discretion of the Government in this way. The Government should be held strictly responsible; but, on the other hand, discretion should be left to them as to the measures they would adopt to attain the end. He should be disposed to strike out all the conditions mentioned in Schedule A of the Bill; for, if this were not done, it would be impossible for the Government to vary or improve them in any instance. It should be observed, in Dublin the supervision over convicts was not exercised by the police, but by a gentleman specially appointed for that work. In the rest of Ireland the system existed, but the fact that the supervision was not carried out in Dublin, showed that it was not considered practicable in large towns. He believed that the supervision of convicts in Western Australia was extremely good; but he had been informed by Colonel Henderson, who had the charge of penal discipline in that colony, that the rule requiring the convicts to call upon the police once a month, worked so badly that it had to be abandoned. He should support the Amendment, although he thought that it might have gone further.
  LORD PORTMANsupported the Amendment.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he did not thoroughly agree with either of his noble Friends. If a licence-holder were required to report himself once a month, it would be the same as if he were sent out of prison with a brand on the forehead: but, at the same time, it was im-
  1348
  possible to deny that some authority should have the power of noting where each one of these criminals was, and that they should be placed under some influence that should keep them under the impression that they were the objects of watchful superintendence. His wish was rather to modify the conditions of the licence, which were very vague and uncertain; and he knew not who was to be the judge whether they were broken or not. One was that the man should not lead an idle or a dissolute life—another was that he should not habitually associate with notoriously bad characters. What magistrate was to be intrusted with the power of deciding upon such offences? He proposed to strike out the words "once in each month," and insert the words "if required so to do by the conditions of the licence." The position of the licence-holder would then be this—that having once reported himself to the police, he would not be subject to report himself again unless required so to do, at such time and place, in such manner, and to such persons as the chief officer of police should from time to time point out. In this way the supervision might be modified according to circumstances, and might be so managed as to prevent the disclosure of the man's condition to his associates and fellow - workmen, and might be carried into effect so as not to interfere with the recovery of his character and social position. As to the Amendment, he suggested the withdrawal of that part of it which seemed to strike out of the Bill the words "or shall have changed his residence without having previously notified the same to the police."
  EARL GREYthought that the Amendment now proposed was hardly necessary, if they adopted the suggestion to leave the conditions of the licence to be settled by the Government.
  THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, that if he understood the suggestion of the noble and learned Earl it would be necessary that there should be different conditions to each separate licence; and that whether a convict should report himself or not should be left to the Secretary of State in each case. The clause was one which it was difficult to deal with without notice, and therefore he suggested that it should be accepted in Committee, and that the noble and learned Lord's Amendment should be printed and considered upon the Report.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he did not understand his noble and learned Friend

  1349
  to favour the principle of the clause, which was the obligation of these licence-holders to report themselves once a month to the police.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORagreed that it would be better to reserve the consideration of his Amendment. As to the principle of the Clause, he had explained that, in his opinion, this obligation to report once a month was equivalent to branding a man with a stigma.
  After a few words from The Earl of HARROWBY,
  LORD HOUGHTONsaid, he was willing; to modify his Amendment in such a way as that the necessity for the ticket-of-leave man to report himself every month should be done away with; but leaving him still under the obligation of informing the police of any change in his place of residence.
  On Question, That the words proposed to be left out stand Part of the Clause? their Lordships divided:—Contents, 49; Not-Contents 41: Majority 8.
  Resolved in the Negative.
  An Amendment made, by inserting the words "being a male" in line 36.
  Clause, as amended, agreed to.
  Remaining clauses agreed to.
  The Report of the Amendments to be received on Monday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 118.)

  CONTENTS.

  Richmond, D.

  Blantyre, L.

  Rutland, D.

  Brougham and Vaux, L.

  Castlemaine.L.

  Salisbury, M.

  Churston, L.

  Clinton, L.

  Amherst, E.

  Colchester, L.

  Bantry, E.

  Colville of Culross, L.

  Carnarvon, E. [Teller.]

  De Ros, L.

  De La Warr, E.

  De Saumarez, L.

  Derby, E.

  Dinevor, L.

  Malmesbury, E.

  Dunsany, L.

  Mayo, E.

  Egerton, L.

  Morton, E.

  Feversham, L.

  Orkney, E.

  Heytesbury, L.

  Powis, E.

  Lyveden, L.

  Romney, E.

  Monson, L.

  Shaftesbury, E.

  Polwarth, L.

  Raglan, L.

  De Vesci, V.

  Redesdale, L,

  Doneraile, V.

  Rollo, L.

  Hardinge, V.

  Silchester, L. (E. Long ford).

  Hawarden, V.

  Hill, V.

  Sondes, L.

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

  Tentenden, L.

  Walsingham, L.

  Wensleydale, L.

  London, Bp.

  Wynford, L.

  Oxford, Bp.

  1350

  NOT-CONTENTS.

  Westbury, L. (L. Chancellor).

  Down, &c. Bp.

  Ossory, &c, Bp.

  Devonshire, D.

  Boyle, L. (E. Cork and Orrery).

  Somerset, D.

  Churchill, L.

  Airlie, E.

  Cranworth, L.

  Albemarle, E,

  Dartney, L. (L. Cremorne).

  Belmore. E.

  Caithness, E.

  Foley, L. [Teller.]

  Cathcart, E.

  Houghton, L. [Tetter.]

  Chichester, E.

  Leigh, L.

  De Grey, E.

  Lyttelton, L.

  Forteseue, E.

  Mostyn, L.

  Granville, E.

  Portman, L.

  Grey, E.

  Seymour, L (E. St. Maur).

  Harrowby, E.

  Lichfield, E.

  Stanley of Alderley, L.

  Russell, E.

  Stratheden, L.

  Saint Germans, E.

  Talbot de Malahide, L.

  Sommers, E.

  Taunton, L.

  Truro, L.

  Eversley, V.

  Wenlock, L.

  Wodehouse, L.

  Cork, &c. Bp.

  Wrottesley, L.

ADMIRALTY LANDS AND WORKS BILL—(No. 88.)—COMMITTEE.
House in Committee (according to Order).
Clauses 1 to 13 agreed to.
Clause 14 (Exception from Incorporation of Provisions as to Sale of Superfluous Lands).
THE EARL OF POWISmoved to omit certain words which gave to the Admiralty power to sell surplus lands to others than the original owners. The power of selling surplus lands was of recent date, and he thought the Admiralty ought not to possess a power which might be exercised to the injury of individuals. If the Admiralty happened to buy land for the purpose of erecting defences or making docks, and afterwards found that they had some which they did not want, it was not right that it should be sold in the market, and thus deprive the original owner of the right of pre-emption.
THE DUKE OF SOMERSETthought the noble Earl had misunderstood the effect of the Bill, which contained no compulsory powers. By the terms of the Land Clauses Act land not required was to be offered to the original owners, if it were situate in the country, but if it were situate in a town, or was fit for building purposes, then it was to be sold generally. The Admiralty did not generally require to purchase land in the country, but bought it in the neighbourhood of towns. Thus, they had recently

1351
bought a street of houses in Plymouth, and if they were to resell the land to the former owners these persons would immediately rebuild a class of houses which it had been the desire of the Admiralty to get rid of for the benefit of the public service.
THE EARL OF DONOUGHMOREwas understood to have supported the Amendment.
THE LORD CHANCELLORdefended the clause. It would not be wise to impose these restrictions on the Admiralty. The land was taken by agreement, not compulsorily, under the Lands Clauses Act.
EARL DE GREY AND RIPONsaid, that the Amendment would have the effect of imposing greater restrictions upon the Admiralty than were applied by the War Department.
THE EARL OF POWISsaid, the land under the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act was taken by agreement, not compulsorily. By the proposed clause the land would be taken compulsorily.
THE LORD CHANCELLORdenied that that was the effect of the Bill.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, that the power sought to be taken by the Admiralty was certainly of a compulsory character. It appeared to him that the Admiralty ought to act under the same restrictions as were imposed by the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act. The noble Duke (the Duke of Somerset) admitted that the Admiralty desired to have the power of taking not only the land that was actually necessary for the purposes under the Bill, but also of acquiring possession of buildings and land in the immediate neighbourhood, with a view to a sale of the latter, as the noble Duke appeared to intimate, to persons who would make a better use of them than the owners.
THE DUKE OF SOMERSETobserved, that the object they had in view was to secure decency and order in the neighbourhood of those lands. He would, however, undertake to have the clause so framed that would carry out the view of the noble Earl.
Amendment withdrawn.
Clause agreed to.
Amendments made: the Report thereof to be received on Monday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 119.)

ADMIRALTY LANDS AND WORKS BILL—(No. 88.)—COMMITTEE.

  FACILITIES FOR DIVINE SERVICE IN COLLEGIATE SCHOOLS BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to provide additional Facilities for the Performance of Divine Service for Collegiate Schools and Colleges in Communion with the United Church of England and Ireland—Was presented by The Bishop of OXFORD and read 1a. (No. 117.)
  House adjourned at a quarter past Eight o'clock, to Thursday next, half past Ten o'clock.