Sitting of 2 July 1868

MINUTES.
SUPPLY—considered in Committee—NAVY ESTIMATES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Poor Law and Medical Inspectors (Ireland) * [188]; Fairs (Metropolis) * [205].
Committee—Registration (re-comm.) [190]; Clerks of the Peace, &c. (Ireland) * [194]; Assignees of Marine Policies (re-comm.) * [203].
Report—Registration (re-comm.) [190]; Clerks of the peace. &c. (Ireland) * [194]; Assignees of Marine Policies (re-comm.) * [203].
Considered as amended—Land Writs Registration (Scotland) * [111]; Burials (Ireland) * [204].
Third Reading—Railway Companies (Ireland) Advances * [177]; Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) Supplemental (No. 2) * [195]; Turnpike Trusts Arrangements * [200]; Revenue Officers Disabilities Removal * [76]; Bankruptcy Act (1861) Amendment * [145]; Libel (Ireland) * [199], and passed.
Withdrawn—Sen Fisheries (Ireland) * [101].

HIGH SHERIFF FOR THE EAST RIDING OF YORKSHIRE.—QUESTION.
ADMIRAL BUNCOMBEsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If he sees any objection to the appointment of a separate High Sheriff for the East Hiding of the County of York; and, if he will take the subject into his consideration, with the view of remedying some of the inconveniences arising from there being one High Sheriff for the whole County?
MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, in reply, that there was no doubt considerable objection to the present state of things in that respect in the county of York. The High Sheriff had very onerous duties cast upon him, and perhaps there ought to be two High Sheriffs; but the matter would be considered by the Government.

TREATY OF COMMERCE WITH AUSTRIA.—QUESTION.
MR. LAYARDsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the Treaty of Commerce recently in negotiation with Austria has been signed; and, if not, why not; and, whether he will lay upon the Table of the House, the Reports of Mr. Morier and Mr. Mallet, and any other Correspondence relating to the negotiation for the Treaty?
MR. E. C. EGERTONsaid, in the absence of his noble Friend (Lord Stanley),
516
he could state that a telegram was on the previous day received at the Foreign Office from the British Ambassador at Vienna, stating that the Treaty had been signed on that very day. There would be no objection to lay on the table, not only the valuable Reports of Mr. Morier and Mr. Mallet, but also any other Correspondence relating to the subject.

MILITARY KNIGHTS OF WINDSOR.

  QUESTION.
  MR. EYKYNsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he objects to lay upon the Table of the House, a Return of the Military Knights of Windsor deceased since the appointment of the late and the present Governor, the date of their decease, the dates from which their successors received their pay, the amount of their deductions in pay, the mode in which the deductions were disposed of; also, a Return of all sums applied to the use of the late and present Governors of the Military Knights?
  MR. GATHORNE HARDY, in reply, said, it was difficult to deal with a Question such as this, as he did not know what were the reasons given for the production of the Returns. He was not prepared to lay them upon the table, as he did not know for what purpose they were required. He had that day received a document from the Knights of Windsor deprecating any interference with them, and stating they were perfectly content with the mode in which the funds were administered.

PARISH MORTUARIES.—QUESTION.
MR. GODDARDsaid, he wished to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council, Whether his attention has been directed to a paragraph emanating from the British Medical Journal, headed "The Dead among the Living," and to inquire whether it is in their power to enforce upon the London vestries the fulfilment of that Clause in the Sanitary Act with reference to providing Parish Mortuaries for the use of the poor inhabitants of the metropolis, which both the interests of the public health as well as the cause of suffering humanity, so urgently demands?
LORD ROBERT MONTAGUsaid, in reply, that no doubt the British Medical Journal was a publication of considerable influence and authority; but his attention

517
had not been directed to the paragraph or article in question. It was, however, perfectly optional with the London vestries whether they enforced the clauses of the Sanitary Act or not, for the Government had, under the Act of 1866, no power over them.

WORKSHOP REGULATION ACT (1867).

  QUESTION.
  MR. POWELLsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he has reason to believe, from representations made to him by Factory Inspectors or otherwise, that local authorities fail to discharge the duty imposed upon them by Section 18 and other provisions of the Workshop Regulation Act, 1867, under which they are bound to enforce the Act; whether difficulties have arisen in cases where the local authority as described by the Act is "the Vestry or Select Vestry," and whether modifications of the Law are, in his judgment, there necessary, in order to invest the local authority with powers to carry out the Act and to raise the funds requisite for that purpose; and, if so, whether it be the intention of the Government to amend the Law during the present Session, with a view to render the local authority more efficient in these cases?
  MR. GATHORNE HARDY, in reply, said, he had not had any such applications made to him as his hon. Friend alluded to, nor had he received any notice of the existence of those difficulties, except from the hon. Member for Bradford (Mr. W. E. Forster), who had been kind enough to send him a letter that he had received on the subject. His attention had not been called to any defects in the present law; but the Inspectors in their next Reports would probably take notice of the matter.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he wished to know whether the Inspectors were instructed to report upon it?
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, that one of the Inspectors having been in town that day he had inquired of him, and he thought there would be Reports on the subject.

  ARMY—ARTILLERY PRACTICE AT PORTSMOUTH.—QUESTION.
  MR. SERJEANT GASELEEsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, If his attention has been called
  518
  to the following paragraph in the Hants Telegraph:—
  "The steamer Princess of Wales, belonging to the Port of Portsmouth and Ryde Steam Packet Company, left Southsea Pier on Thursday morning, at half-past nine o'clock, on her passage to Ryde. When opposite Fort Monckton a shot passed between the foremast and the jib stay, causing considerable consternation among the passengers, many of whom were so frightened that they laid down upon the deck. This occurrence will serve to show the immense amount of danger resulting from the shot practice at this fort, for if the shots had struck the vessel beneath the water line, the probability is that she would have been sunk, and that many lives would have been sacrificed;"
  and, if that statement be true, whether measures have been taken to prevent the recurrence of a practice so dangerous to the lives of Her Majesty's subjects?
  SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, in reply, that as soon as the statement to which the question referred appeared in the newspapers, a communication was sent to the Assistant Adjutant General at Portsmouth, desiring him to inquire into and report upon the facts; and he now held in his hand the answer returned by Lieutenant Colonel Peel, which was as follows:—.
  "Portsmouth, July 1.
  "Sir,—In accordance with instructions received in your telegram of this day's date, I have the honour to forward for the information of his Royal Highness Commanding-in-Chief the accompanying statements of Lieutenant Colonel Lovell, R.A., and Captain Girardot, R.A., the officers under whom the artillery practice from Fort Monckton was conducted on Thursday morning, the 25th of June, 1868. These officers both state most positively that no shot fired from Fort Monckton passed within 600 yards of any steamer during the practice. In consequence of the hour at which the telegram was received (5.20 p.m.) I have not been able to procure from the editor of the Hants Telegraph any information as to the source of the report contained in his newspaper, the office being closed. I understand that practice was also being carried on that morning from Her Majesty's ship Terrible, now laying at Spithead."
  Lieutenant Colonel Lovell wrote—
  "Fort Monckton, July 1, 1868.
  "Sir,—In reply to your memorandum of this day's date, requesting a full report upon a statement contained in the Hants Telegraph that on Thursday, the 25th of June, that a shot from Fort Monckton passed between the foremast and jib-stay of a Ryde steamer, I have the honour to state that I was superintending the practice carried on by Captain Girardot, R.A.'s battery on that date, and no shot fired on that morning passed within 800 yards of a Ryde steamer or any other steamer, and I am at a loss to understand what could have caused any report to such effect. I beg to forward a statement of Captain Girardot, R.A., commanding the battery,"

  519
  Captain Girardot's statement was to this effect—
  "I was in command of No. 7 Battery, 6th Brigade, Royal Artillery, during the hours of gun practice, from 9.30 a.m. to 11.30 a.m. on Thursday last, the 26th of June. The firing was conducted under the superintendence of Lieutenant Colonel Lovell, R.A. The greatest precautions were taken to observe the orders regarding the distance of vessels passing from the range, and I most confidently state that no shot was fired when any steamer was within 500 yards of the range."
  He could not allow that question to rest where it was. If the statement in the Hants Telegraph was a true one it was quite intolerable that the public should be exposed to such a danger. He should therefore make further inquiries in order to have the matter thoroughly sifted.
  MR. SERJEANT GASELEEsaid, he wished to say that he had a letter in his pocket from a passenger in the steamer—["Order!"]

  POST OFFICE—MAILS TO THE WEST INDIES.—QUESTION.
  MR. GRAVESsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, The cause of the delay in presenting the Correspondence [ordered 12th May] between the West India and Pacific Company and the Treasury and Post Office, relative to the conveyance of Mails to the West Indies?
  MR. SCLATER-BOOTHsaid, in reply, that the cause of the delay had been that parts of the Correspondence had to be furnished by the Treasury and other parts by the Post Office. The whole of it was now in the hands of the printer, and it would be distributed to hon. Members in a few days.

  EJECTMENTS SUSPENSION (IRELAND) BILL.—QUESTION.
  MR. KENNEDYsaid, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Not to displace the Ejectments Suspension (Ireland) Bill, which stands No. 1 on the Orders of the Day for the Evening Sitting of Tuesday the 7th instant?
  MR. DISRAELIsaid, he would not be unmindful of the hon. Gentleman's wish, but must frankly tell him that, desiring to bring the Business of the House forward at a reasonable time, he could not really pledge himself to comply with the hon. Gentleman's request.

  ARMY—EMPLOYMENT.OF OLD SOLDIERS.—QUESTION.
  SIR HARRY VERNEYsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, Whether, referring to his opinion that it is desirable to give Government employment to deserving old soldiers, it is true that the custody of the Parks, hitherto under the park keepers, almost all old soldiers, is about to be taken from them and placed under the Metropolitan Police; and whether, if this alteration is considered necessary in Hyde Park, it must be carried out in the other Parks, where the park keepers have hitherto done their duty perfectly well, and the custody of which afforded employment, with a small remuneration, to many meritorious old soldiers?
  SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, in reply, that his hon. Friend had quite correctly expressed the views he had expressed with respect to the employment of old soldiers; but his regard for old soldiers did not give him any authority over the Parks. He must refer his hon. Friend to the First Commissioner of Works for any information as to the future custody of the Parks.
  SIR HARRY VERNEYsaid, he would therefore put his Question to the First Commissioner of Works.
  LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, it had been thought highly expedient for the public service that old soldiers should no longer be appointed as park keepers, and he hoped that before long every Royal Park would be placed in the custody of the Metropolitan Police.

  CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS BILL.—QUESTION.
  MR. DARBY GRIFFITHsaid, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, considering the repeated personal pledges he has given to the House and the Country to take every means to pass a Bill for the repression of Corrupt Practices at Elections, he does not think it desirable so to arrange the Business of the House as to give precedence to that Bill over others of an ordinary character, if he wishes to redeem the pledges he has made on the subject?
  MR. DISRAELI: Sir, the hon. Gentleman has placed an argumentative Question on the Paper, which is a very inconvenient course, and one that might lead to discussion. He wishes to know if we

  521
  intend to carry out our intentions. All I can say is, that if we had not intended to carry out our intentions we should not have placed the Bill on the Paper in the position we have done.

  ARMY ESTIMATES.—QUESTION.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, If it is the intention of the Government to proceed with the Army Estimates on Monday, considering that the Papers connected with the Controller's Department have not been printed?
  SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, in reply, that he had promised the noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire (the Marquess of Hartington) that the Papers in question would be laid on the table in good time before Vote 18 was moved. The Papers had been laid on the table on Tuesday, but he was sorry to say it had been found impossible to complete the printing in time to allow them to be distributed to Members before Saturday next. He could not, therefore, bring on the Vote on Monday consistently with his promise to the noble Lord. Although, therefore, the Army Estimates might stand on the Paper for Monday, he should not, if it was the wish of the hon. Gentleman, proceed with them on that day.

  NAVY—CAPTAINS ON THE RESERVED LIST.—QUESTION.
  MR. O'BEIRNEsaid, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether he will place upon the Table of the House the Case submitted in 1862 to the Law Officers of the Crown, with their Opinion thereon, upon the Claims of the Captains on the Reserved List?
  SIR JOHN HAYsaid, that, in the unavoidable absence of his right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty, he would reply to the Question. He had to inform the hon. Gentleman that it would be contrary to all precedent to lay on the table Copies of the confidential communications which might have passed between the Law Officers of the Crown and the Heads of Public Departments. The case of those Reserved Captains had been carefully considered, as soon as the present Government came into Office. Nearly half of them, thirty-seven, had served one year at sea and so fulfilled the conditions which enabled the Board of Admiralty to grant the advantages for which
  522
  they asked; but the rest of them had not served a year at sea, and the Admiralty were therefore unable to pursue a similar course in their case.

  ABYSSINIAN EXPEDITION—VOTE OF THANKS TO HER MAJESTY'S FORCES.
  MR. DISRAELI: Mr. Speaker—I rise to move that the Thanks of this House be given to those who planned and accomplished one of the most remarkable military enterprizes of this century. When the invasion of Abyssinia was first mooted it was denounced as a rash enterprize, pregnant with certain peril and probable disaster. It was described, indeed, as one of the most rash undertakings which had ever been recommended by a Government to Parliament. The country was almost unknown to us, or known only as one difficult of access and very deficient in all those supplies which are necessary for an array. Indeed, the Commander of this Expedition had to commence his operations by forming his base on a desolate shore, and by a creating a road to the land he was invading through a wall of mountains. Availing himself for this purpose of the beds of exhausted torrents, he gradually reached a lofty table land—wild and for the most part barren—frequently intersected with mountain ranges of great elevation, occasionally breaking into ravines and gorges that were apparently unfathomable. Yet, over this country, for more than 300 miles, the Commander-in-Chief guided and sustained a numerous host, composed of many thousands of fighting men, as many camp followers, and vast caravans of animals, bearing supplies, more numerous than both. Over this land he guided cavalry and infantry, and—what is perhaps the most remarkable part of the Expedition—he led the elephants of Asia, bearing the artillery of Europe, over African passes which might have startled the trapper and appalled the hunter of the Alps. When he arrived at the base of this critical rendezvous, he encountered no inglorious foe; and if the manly qualities of the Abyssinians sank before the resources of our warlike science, our troops, even after that combat, had to scale a mountain fortress, of which the intrinsic strength was such that it may be fairly said it would have been impregnable to the whole world had it been defended by the man by whom it was assailed. But all these obstacles and all these difficulties and dangers were overcome by Sir

  523
  Robert Napier, and that came to pass which ten years ago not one of us could have imagined even in his dreams, and which must, under all the circumstances, be an event of peculiar interest to an Englishman—the standard of St. George was hoisted on the mountains of Rasselas. If we turn from the conduct of the Expedition to the character of the person who commanded it, I think it must be acknowledged that rarely has an Expedition been planned with more providence and executed with more precision. In connection with it everything seems to have been foreseen and everything supplied. It would be presumptuous in me to dwell on the military qualities of the Commander; but all must recognize, and all may admire, the sagacity and the patience, the temper and the resource, invariably exhibited. I shall, however, perhaps be justified in calling attention to the rare union of diplomatic ability and military skill in the conduct of Sir Robert Napier. Indeed, I do not think a public man has ever shown more discretion than he has done. Had it not been for his management of men—not merely in the skilful handling of his troops on an exhausting march, but in the way in which he moulded the dispositions of the Native Princes—the result might have been different. And he moulded them to his purpose without involving his country in any perilous contract or engagement. Under these circumstances, I am sure the House will heartily offer and vote its Thanks to this distinguished man. It has been said by the greatest soldier who ever flourished—at least in modern times—that the Thanks of the House of Commons were a compliment the most appreciated by military men, and that, next to the favour of their Sovereign, the acknowledgment of their services by Parliament was the reward which they most valued. I have no doubt that Sir Robert Napier is influenced by those feelings; but the House of Commons at this moment will remember that this is not the first time, nor even the second, that it has offered to him its thanks. Happy is the man who has been thrice thanked by his country! By his splendid achievements in Abyssinia, Sir Robert Napier has only fulfilled the promise of the plains of India, and consummated his exploits on the Chinese field. It is, I may add, not the least interesting part of our business this evening to recognize the merits of another great
  524
  branch of Her Majesty's forces. The army and navy have rarely acted together in the history of this country without successful results; but there have been, I think, few instances in which they have mutually assisted each other more effectually, and in which their combined exertions have been attended with greater success than in the Abyssinian Expedition. I need not remind the House how much depends on the skill and efficiency with which the transport of troops and stores is conducted in such an undertaking. But I may recall to the recollection of the House, in order that they may clearly understand them, the very great difficulties attending the Expedition in that respect, and the admirable manner in which those difficulties were surmounted. The number of vessels employed amounted to no fewer than 300, some of great tonnage, collected from all parts of Her Majesty's dominions, yet all brought at the right moment to the right place, under the superintendence of Commodore Heath. The exertions of the Navy were not, however, limited merely to this important branch of the public service. The unknown waters of Abyssinia were buoyed and lighted with a promptitude and certainty which cannot be too highly praised, and which were of the utmost importance; and it was mainly owing to the great exertions of the Navy that water, on which the success of the Expedition greatly depended, and the want of which for a moment threatened the successful accomplishment of the Expedition, was supplied. The building of the piers and the establishing of condensing machines were mainly owing to the exertions of the Navy, who on all occasions showed the utmost willingness to devote their labours to the success of this great enterprize. But it was not to the mere transport of troops, not to the mere buoying and lighting of Annesley Bay, nor the mere condensing of water that the duties and labours of the Navy were limited. They equipped and manned a most efficient corps, which took a very active part in the invasion of Abyssinia—the Rocket Brigade. They were present on that great march during which Sir Robert Napier handled his troops with so much dexterity—a march requiring so much endurance on the part of our forces—and they joined in that critical operation the scaling of the fortress of Magdala. Therefore, under these circumstances, the House will offer its most

  525
  Cordial and grateful Thanks to Commodore Heath, who commanded the naval force. In acknowledging the great services of the distinguished man who was the chief Commander of the Expedition, and of the eminent officer who commanded the Navy, we must not be unmindful of the conduct of the men, both in the Army and the Navy. I think we may fairly say that the conduct of the troops and sailors was alike complete and admirable. There have been instances, no doubt, of rapid marches and triumphant fields, which have occasioned greater sensation at the moment, in the history of modern times; but if you look to the exhibition of military virtue, I doubt whether the qualities of patience, endurance, and good temper, manifested under the most trying circumstances, have over been more fully exemplified. I doubt whether the force of disciplined man was ever more successfully asserted. There was shown that gallantry on which we can always count, and which enables our forces to meet any dangers and difficulties; but what was most admirable was the endurance and docility which were exemplified by the troops, and which enhanced the glorious result of the operations. The House therefore will, I am sure, acknowledge in a manner most grateful to the men both of the Army and Navy its sense of their services, and will take means by which that sense shall be made known to them through their respective commanding officers, making mention to each regiment the opinion of the House with reference to their services and conduct. There are many distinguished officers whose services they must also shortly acknowledge, and whose names were inserted in the Resolution. Before concluding, I would venture also to congratulate the House, not on the conduct of the Expedition, of which I have already treated, but on its character. When it was first announced that England was about to embark on a most costly and perilous Expedition merely to vindicate the honour of our Sovereign and to rescue from an unjust but remote captivity a few of our fellow-subjects, the announcement was received in more than one country?with something like mocking incredulity. But we have asserted the purity of our purpose. In an age accused, and perhaps not unjustly, of selfishness and a too great regard for material interests, it is something, in so striking and significant a manner, for a great nation to have vindi-
  526
  cated the higher principles of humanity. It is a privilege to belong to a country which has done such deeds. They will add lustre to the name of this nation, and will beneficially influence the future history of the world. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by proposing the Resolutions.
  MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, I believe it is my duty to second the Motion which has been made by the right hon. Gentleman and this is certainly an occasion on which the performance of such a duty must be regarded in the light also of a rare privilege. Indeed, Sir, if it were the custom of this House, as it is not, on any occasion to dispense with forms, and to give effect to its feelings, in the manner of some assemblies, by the method of acclamation, I believe that acclamation is perhaps the mode in which it would be most gratifying to us all to make known our decision on the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman. The right hon. Gentleman has described with great felicity of expression, and, so far as I can judge, without the smallest exaggeration, the general character of this Expedition, from which it derives its title to a place of no very common order in military history. I do not, of course, mean to claim for it—nor would it be wise to claim for those who have been engaged in it—precisely the same kind of fame as attaches to occasions in which desperate conflicts have been waged with equal or nearly equal force between nations or between armies alike possessed of all the resources of modern warfare. But we have lived into a time in which, if it cannot be said of the soldier, it must be said of the commander, that mere fighting, however arduous the task, mere tactics, and mere strategy have become, perhaps though still vital and essential, yet almost secondary parts of the qualities required to make a successful general. And it is in this department, which relates to the conflict that had to be carried on by Sir Robert Napier, with Nature, with distance, with climate, with all the diversities and difficulties presented by one of the most peculiar portions of the earth, with the civil government of the Army, with the provision made for every want, that this Expedition presents to our view a history alike complete and satisfactory. There is, indeed, something tame and feeble in the language of uniform and unbroken eulogy, and yet the occasion does not permit us to adopt any other language. We may look at what

  527
  has occurred with reference to the Commander, with reference to the officers by whom he was so ably seconded, with reference to the soldiers who moved and acted under their orders, and lastly with reference to the Government at home. The right hon. Gentleman has abstained from claiming any peculiar praise for the Government at home; but I am bound to say that we are indebted to them for the wise choice of the Commander. We are indebted to them, and we are indebted to those with whom they may have taken counsel, for the unbounded confidence they reposed in the abilities of the object of their choice; for the unsparing liberality with which, on deciding the difficult question of facing these great risks, they made the whole resources of the country available for the purposes that wore in view; for the care and forethought with which, so far at least as I am able to judge, all the necessary provisions were made. Here it would not be more than justice, I think, to distinguish among the Members of the Government that Minister who necessarily must have been charged with the chief share of the responsibility and labours of the Expedition—I mean the Secretary of State for India; and lastly, we are indebted to the Government for the firmness and decision with which, from first to last, they persisted—acting therein, I must say, in accordance with public opinion and the enlightened mind of the nation—in confining the operations of this Expedition to its legitimate purpose, and in refusing to be led beyond the line of duty and wisdom by any visions, however flattering and seductive. We have been permitted to gain on this occasion what may be called an almost tearless victory. Perhaps I shall not be going too far from this subject if I uttter a word of regret for the fate of Colonel Dunne, the only field officer who lost his life, though not by direct military operations, and who proved in the deadly charge at Balaclava the courage with which he was endowed, who received from the hands of his Sovereign the Victoria Cross, who sought active service as commander of his gallant regiment, the 33rd, which made the assault on Magdala; and who found a grave in the country to which he accompanied the Expedition, and a place of honour in the recollections of his fellow-citizens. But, though we know that all have done their duty well from first to last, it is impossible not to dwell with a peculiar interest on this special occasion on the
  528
  character of the man whose name first appears and most prominently in the Motion now made. Without him it might have been possible that great things might have been achieved; but there is a completeness in the work achieved that we cannot do otherwise than connect in a special manner with the special qualities of his mind and his capacity. Without him we scarcely could have hoped that this Expedition would stand upon record among those occasions when nations resort to the bloody arbitrament of war, as one in which not one drop was added to the cup of human suffering which any humane forethought could spare, and in which the severest critic, in reviewing the proceedings, will find nothing to except to in regard to the military, political, and moral aspect of the proceedings. No man can read the despatches of Sir Robert Napier, and especially the despatch circulated for our information to-day, without seeing that, after we have given him the praise of being a Commander apparently consummate in meeting every demand made on him for military qualities, there is something which remains beyond—there is the mind, firm of purpose, never losing for one moment its thorough balance, and among all anxiety and excitement, keeping an eye steadily fixed on moral aims, and remembering, under all circumstances, the duty of keeping and maintaining, untainted and in virgin purity, the honour and character of his country. Nor can anyone become acquainted with Sir Robert Napier—and we must all feel we become acquainted with him when we read his interesting, his manly, his simple, and his modest account—without feeling that we part from the consideration of the subject not only with gratitude and admiration of the General, but with respect, with regret—I would almost say, with affection—for the man. Sir, I reecho the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman, and I value highly the privilege that falls to me of seconding the Motion he has made.
  Resolved, Nemine Contradicente, That the Thanks of this House be given to Lieutenant General Sir Robert Napier, G.C.B., G.C.S.I., for the exemplary skill with which tic planned, and the distinguished energy, courage, and perseverance with which he conducted the recent Expedition into Abyssinia, resulting in the detent, by Her Majesty's Forces, of the Army of King Theodore, and the vindication of the honour of the Country, by the rescue from Captivity of Her Majesty's Envoy and other British Subjects, and by the capture and destruction of the strong Fortress of Magdala.

  529
  Resolved, Nemine Contradicente, That the Thanks of this House be given to Commodore Heath, R.N., C.B., for the indefatigable zeal and great ability with which he conducted the Naval Operations connected with the Transport of the Troops and Stores, upon which the success of the Expedition materially depended.
  Resolved, Nemine Contradicente, That the Thanks of this House be given to Major General Sir Charles Staveley, K.C.B., Major General G. Malcolm, C. B., Major General E. L,. Russell, Brigadier General W. Merewether, C.B., and the other Officers of the Navy and Army, for the energy, gallantry, and ability with which they have executed the various Services which they have been called on to perform throughout these arduous operations.
  Resolved, Nemine Contradicente, That this House doth highly acknowledge and approve the discipline, gallantry, and endurance displayed by the Petty Officers, Non-commissioned Officers, and Men of the Navy and Army, both European and Native, during these operations; and that the same be signified to them by their respective Commanding Officers.
  Ordered, That Mr. Speaker do communicate the said Resolutions to Lieutenant General Sir Robert Napier, and that he be requested by Mr. Speaker to signify the same to Commodore Heath, R.N, C.B., Major General Sir Charles Staveley, K.C.B., Major General G. Malcolm, C.B., Major General E. L. Russell, Brigadier General W Merewether, C.B., and to the several Officers of the Navy and Army who served in the said Expedition.—(Mr. Disraeli.)

  SUPPLY.
  Order for Committee read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."

IRRIGATION WORKS IN INDIA.

  MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
  MR. BOUVERIErose to move for Copy of any further Despatches, Telegrams, and Letters between the Secretary of State in Council and the Government of India, respecting the proposed purchase of the works of the East India Irrigation Company, or the advance of funds for the works thereof since July 16, 1867. There were two Bills of an important character before the House relating to the Government of India, affecting the relations between the Home Government and the Indian Government, and the relations between the Secretary of State for India and the Council. The Papers he wished to obtain would, he anticipated, throw an important light upon these questions, and assist them materially in arriving at a sound conclusion, as to the proper mode in which these relations should be estab-
  530
  lished. The House would remember that about two years ago there was a most fearful famine in the province of Bengal—one of the most frightful famines ever recorded in history. He was not about to dilate on the famine in Orissa; but it was necessary, in order to lay the ground for what he was going to urge, that he should state one or two circumstances connected with it; and he could not do better than read two extracts from papers now in the Library. There had been an inquiry in the province as to the nature and extent of the famine, and a great number of witnesses had been examined, from whose evidence he would select two passages almost at random:—The Rev. A. Miller, Balasore, said—
  "I think the mortality was greater than was reported. Hundreds died in the fields and out-of the-way places, where no one knew them. If one chanced to cross the country one saw the bodies lying about, and the jackals eating them. I should say, to be within bounds, that about one quarter of the population of Orissa has died. In this neighbourhood, I think the mortality has been about one-third, but I believe in other parts of the province it has not been so severe. But, as respects the general misery and suffering, I do not think it has ever been fully described; it would almost be impossible to exaggerate it. The people bore their misery with extraordinary quiet and submission. Nothing that I have ever read has enabled me to conceive anything equal to this famine. I have known no instance of Hindoos eating dogs, or cats, or cows. But they did cat their own children, when they were dead. I heard a well-authenticated instance, in which a mother and son were found eating a dead child."
  Abdool Ghunnee, zemindar, Balasore, said—
  "There were 18,000 people on my estates; of these 4,700 have died during the famine."
  He believed that the mortality occasioned by that great calamity was little short of 1,000,000. The inference he wished to draw from this deplorable state of things was that no effort they could make of an indirect kind should be spared, in order to avoid the recurrence of such a calamity as this. They were bound to do their best for the people they had undertaken to govern. Now, there was but one remedy that had ever been suggested, and which was admitted to be perfect against the recurrence of such calamities, and that was irrigation works. These calamities arose from the failure of water, owing to the great prevalence of drought, which would have been almost entirely obviated if those means of irrigation had been provided which engineers were perfectly able to supply, if they were furnished with the

  531
  necessary funds. This was a matter of great importance to India, and the Papers he asked for would show that the present Government had not acted as they should have done in regard to it. A private company of adventurers, encouraged by Lord Canning, when he was Governor General of India, did undertake to provide irrigation works for the province. They made great progress with the works, and laid out a large amount of capital in forming dams, canals, and other engineering arrangements, with the object of providing the means of irrigating a large portion of this very province—arrangements which, if they had been completed, would have obviated this dreadful famine. There were two sets of opinions with regard to the construction of public works in India; there was one set that believed that these great undertakings should be carried on by private enterprize; and there was another, more associated with the old notions of Indian government, which imagined that the less private capital and enterprize had to do with India the better for India, and that works of this kind had better be executed by Government officers, and with public revenue. Lord Canning was in favour of private entcrprize, whilst Sir John Lawrence belonged to the school that believed that such works should be executed by Government. There was upon the table of the House a Paper presented this Session, signed by the Queen in Council, and by the Council, in which it was recommended that the Indian Government should purchase the works of this great Company at a certain stated price. That despatch was withheld by the Secretary of State for India for a considerable time from the House, and in doing no doubt what he considered his duty he committed an act not becoming the head of a great public Department. The right hon. Baronet adopted the policy recommended by the Governor General and his Council, but he kept back the despatch containing the terms which were proposed as just and fair by them, while he endeavoured to drive a hard bargain with the Company. It was not in his opinion consistent with the dignity of a great Department of the State to endeavour to make a very good bargain out of the special necessities of a private company; neither was it within the duty of the Secretary of State for India to dispute the authority of the Governor and Council in a matter which they were peculiarly
  532
  fitted to determine. The right hon. Baronet having offered far less terms than Sir John Lawrence and his Council thought just, his offer was refused by the Company, and then the despatch was laid upon the table of the House, when the Company at once perceived that the Government had offered them less than the terms proposed by Sir John Lawrence. The Company, taking what appeared to him to be a reasonable step, offered the works to the Government on the terms mentioned in the despatch, but their offer was declined by the right hon. Baronet, no doubt for what he deemed very good reasons. It appeared to him essential that these great and beneficial works should be completed as early as possible, in order to prevent the recurrence of these dreadful famines, and if the right hon. Baronet refused to purchase them on the terms offered, he should lend all the assistance in his power, consistently with his public duty, to facilitate their completion, by which water, that great blessing and source of wealth in India, would be diffused throughout the province in question. This was not merely a question between a private company on the one hand and the Indian Government on the other, it was an illustration of the difficulties which beset all Indian financial questions. The Secretary of State had told them that in all matters of finance he was dependent upon his Council, who, by Act of Parliament, possessed the entire control of all matters relating to the expenditure of money in India; and that was the system which the right hon. Baronet proposed to continue. Instead of there being a Secretary of State in that House who was responsible for these matters, there was an irresponsible Council behind whom the Secretary of State could, if he were so inclined, always shelter himself. It had been his object to draw attention to that point, and having done so he begged to make the Motion of which he had gives Notice.
  MR. BAZLEY, in seconding the Motion, recommended that large basins or reservoirs, connected by canals, should be made in India for the purpose of storing the water and affording water communications throughout the country. Such works would be of immense importance to the development of the resources of the country, and would prevent a recurrence of that frightful calamity under which the district in question had recently suffered.
  Amendment proposed,
  To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, that She will be graciously pleased to give directions that there be laid before this House, Copy of any further Despatches, Telegrams, and Letters between the Secretary of State in Council and the Government of India respecting the proposed purchase of the works of the East India Irrigation Company, or the advance of funds for the works thereof since July 16, 1867,"—(Mr. Bouverie,)
  —instead thereof.
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEsaid, he had not expected that the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman, which was at the bottom of the list of Motions upon going into Committee of Supply, would have been reached at such an early hour, and therefore he had not obtained any special information upon the subject. He, however, was prepared to give a general answer to the observations of the right hon. Gentleman. In the first place, he had no objection to the production of all despatches and telegrams which had passed upon the subject. He regretted that the right hon. Gentleman should have thought it necessary to comment in the terms which he had employed on the fact that it had not been deemed right to communicate to the Directors of the Irrigation Company the despatch of the Governor General proposing certain terms for the purchase of the works of the Company. He believed the right hon. Gentleman would acknowledge that if it was the duty of the Council for India to offer less liberal terms than those mentioned in that despatch, it would certainly not have been their duty to have accompanied that proposal with a communication in which higher terms were mentioned, for the effect of such a course would simply have been to throw dirt on their own offer. The question really resolved itself into this—whether they ought to have at once acted upon the judgment of the Indian Government, or have exercised the right of judging for themselves? Now, Parliament had distinctly imposed upon the Secretary of State for India in Council the duty of superintending the expenditure of the revenue and finances of India, and as there was a difference of upwards of £100,000 in the terms mentioned in the despatch and the offer actually made, he
  534
  did not think that he would have been justified in offering so large a sum above what he believed to be the real value of the works. But the Government of India not only suggested those terms as the extreme point to which the offer should be carried, but contemplated moreover their exercising their own discretion in the matter. But he must take exception to one of the statements made by the right hon. Gentleman. The right hon. Gentleman had said that an offer below the real value of the works had been made in order to gain an advantage over the Company, and to force them to enter into a bargain which would be advantageous for the Government, and that therefore the Company were purposely kept in the dark as to the recommendation which had been made by the Government of India. That was not the case. The Government of India were not at all anxious to purchase these works, but they were desirous of purchasing the Behar scheme, which the Company would scarcely at present have the means of completing with reference to the Orissa scheme, however, it was not thought advisable to deviate from the policy which had been adopted from the days of Lord Canning and even earlier—of allowing works of this nature to be undertaken by private individuals, and though the Orissa Company had for some little time been in difficulties, they could not blind their eyes to the fact that the Company had made great efforts to raise money, and had actually succeeded in raising something like £800,000, which had been expended in carrying on the work in a very creditable manner. In case the offer made should not prove acceptable, the Government further offered to assist the Company with a loan on terms which, they thought, were fair, and on the condition that the Company would hand over the Behar scheme to the Government, but that offer was also rejected by the Company. The view of the Council for India—a view in which he entirely concurred—was this They did not think it right to give anything in the nature of a guarantee for the capital required to carry on these works, or that the Government of India should in any way identify themselves with the scheme as shareholders. They were prepared to abide by the offer they had made, or to aid the Company by a loan on the security of the works. Upon the latter point there had been a difference of opinion between the Directors and the

  535
  Government. The Directors stated that they were willing to accept the loan on the security of the works on this understanding, that when the Government had entered upon the works, in case of failure of payments, they should only retain possession until the advance with reasonable interest had been repaid. But to this plan—a plan which would give rise to vast and endless complications, and would be attended by very great inconvenience—the Government did not think that they could consent. As far as he was personally concerned, he had no ill-will towards the Company. He believed that they had done good service to the public, and he trusted that their labours would ultimately prove remunerative. He believed, however, that it would be for the advantage of the Company themselves as well as for that of the public that they should give up the Behar scheme. The Government had no arrière pensèe in this matter, and had not the slightest desire to get possession of these works by a side-wind. All they wished was to have a good security for their money. He was perfectly prepared to produce the documents for which the right hon. Gentleman asked, and would lay them upon the Table of the House.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Main Question, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put, and agreed to.

SUPPLY—NAVY ESTIMATES.

  SUPPLY—considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee).
  LORD HENRY LENNOXtook the opportunity of expressing his great regret that he was compelled to appear in the place of the First Lord of the Admiralty (Mr. Corry), who was laid up by a serious indisposition, which rendered it quite impossible for him to be in his place and to go on with the Estimates. It was thought better that the House should go into Supply, and that the Navy Estimates should be intrusted to him, and he should desire to give the same information to the Committee which his right hon. Friend would have done had he been present.
  (1.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £182,364, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Salaries of the Officers and the Contingent Expenses of the
  536
  Admiralty Office, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1869."
  MR. HANBURY-TRACYasked a question respecting the appointment of the Director General of the Ordnance, and also wished for information as to the enormous increase of the expenditure, especially in the Accountant General's Department? He trusted that the First Lord would endeavour to find situations at the Admiralty as messengers and porters for seamen who were discharged from the service with good characters. Some of the petty officers would be found quite fit for the smaller clerkships. The Secretary of State for War stated the other night that the experiment of employing non-commissioned officers and men whose terms of service had expired had succeeded very well in the army, and he believed it might be tried in a still greater degree for the navy.
  MR. ALDERMAN LUSKsaid, the expenses of the Admiralty Office had gone on increasing ever since the year 1858, when they stood at £149,000. They had now reached the sum of £182,364, the net increase for the present year being £6,346. He objected to the large number of persons employed in the Admiralty Office, not to the amount of pay of each. Surely it was quite unnecessary that 489 persons should be employed in this Office. The noble Lord had stated that we should now require fewer ships, and consequently 2,500 fewer men. If they were decreasing their ships and men, how could they need a greater number of clerks? The Press, the public, and the House agreed in declaring that the navy cost too much for the results; and he did not see why the expenses of the Admiralty Office should go on increasing to this extent. If the naval expenditure became more and more in this way the burden would soon become intolerable. He moved that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £6,300.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £176,064, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Salaries of the Officers and the Contingent Expenses of the Admiralty Office, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1869."—(Mr. Lusk.)
  LORD HENRY LENNOXsaid, he regretted to be obliged to oppose the reduction of the Vote, which had certainly increased during the last few years, nor could he see that that increase was likely

  537
  to come to a close. The clerical labour connected with rendering the accounts of the Admiralty had more than quadrupled of late years. The staff at Somerset House was quite inadequate to meet the requirements of the service, and it was constantly necessary to employ the clerks for many extra hours in order to prevent the accounts from falling greatly into arrear. The correspondence connected with the Admiralty had also vastly increased. The proposed reduction of the Vote would therefore tend to diminish the clerical efficiency of the Department, and he trusted that it would not be pressed. The hon. Gentleman had done good service by calling attention to the progressive increase of the Vote, and it was to be hoped the clerks would be induced to write faster, so as to enable them to do with less staff. But the Amendment, if carried, would be most detrimental to the public service.
  SIR JOHN HAY, in answer to the Question of the hon. and gallant Member for Montgomeryshire (Mr. Hanbury-Tracy) respecting the appointment of the Director General of Naval Ordnance, said, that in consequence of the great change that was taking place in our naval ordnance, the labours of the Director of Stores were so great that it was impossible for him to perform the duties of Director General of Naval Ordnance in addition to his own duties, and therefore it was found necessary to appoint Admiral Cooper Key to that Department. It was found necessary to continue the services of the gallant officer for another year; but it was hoped the day would come when our ordnance would all be of one pattern, and our ships have uniform armaments. He confessed he was afraid that day was distant, and in the meantime this additional labour must be discharged by some efficient officer.
  MR. DU CANEexplained, that an enormous increase had arisen in the work thrown on the Accountant General's Department by the Greenwich Hospital Act and by various other causes, and that it had been found necessary to divide that Department into two branches, with a deputy Accountant General to each.
  ADMIRAL ERSKINEcommented on the increased charge for temporary clerks and writers this year as compared with previous years.
  MR. CHILDERShoped the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Alderman Lusk) would not press his Motion to a division. The whole subject of the Admiralty ac-
  538
  counts had been under the consideration of a Select Committee, presided over by the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. Seely), and it would be certain that their labours would result in changes which would improve the efficiency and at the same time reduce the expenditure of the central administration. This would be the last year of the present system, and it would, therefore, be inexpedient to incommode the Admiralty unnecessarily by cutting down the Vote in the manner now proposed. Nobody could believe that the existing division of business at the Admiralty could stand on its present basis; and with respect to the lower class of clerks and copyists he thought it would be possible to effect by degrees a great saving to the public in the number and character of the staff employed by substituting, in the performance of work of a merely mechanical description, persons of the class of writers for persons in the class of clerks. A change of that kind had been adopted in the Revenue Departments with satisfactory results.
  MR. GRAVESsaid, that as several of the small dockyards must be reduced in a few years it must lead to a corresponding reduction of work at head-quarters. He had given notice of a Motion that would raise the question.
  MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSENsaid, he should be prepared at the proper time to defend the continuance of some of these dockyards, and especially Sheerness.
  LORD HENRY LENNOXsaid, a saving had already been effected in substituting writers for paymasters at one-fifth less the usual cost. The appointment of messengers was in the patronage of the First Lord of the Admiralty, and he would convey the hon. and gallant Member's (Mr. Hnnbury-Tracy's) wishes to him. Every precaution was taken that proper persons were appointed, for they had to undergo a Civil Service examination of so strict a character as officers in the army some years ago would have been hardly able to meet.
  MR. DARBY GRIFFITHsaid, he considered that the examination referred to by the noble Lord, which the messengers had to undergo, went far beyond what such an examination should be. There was a tendency to increase the severity of the examinations beyond the position of those who had to undergo them.
  LORD HENRY LENNOXsaid, what he meant to say was that the requirements of the present day would have puzzled gentle-

  539
  men who entered the army before the days when Civil Service examinations were instituted. The examinations were of a character to ensure the efficiency of the persons who were appointed messengers to the Admiralty.
  MR. SERJEANT GASELEEtook exception to the word "patronage," as used by the noble Lord the Secretary to the Admiralty. It was an odious word, and there should be no such thing. He also complained that the Civil Lord was the only official of his grade who was not provided with a house.
  LORD HENRY LENNOXsaid, that if the hon. and learned Gentleman would move an increase in the Vote for the purpose, the Civil Lord would support him.
  MR. SERJEANT GASELEEsaid, he understood that it was not competent for any Member to increase a Vote.
  MR. ALDERMAN LUSKsaid, the expenses went on from year to year increasing, and he did not understand why it should be so, considering the small number of ships which were in commission. He would not press his Motion.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  Original Question put, and agreed to.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £163,926, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Salaries and Expenses of the Coast Guard Service, the Charges for the Royal Naval Coast Volunteers, and for the Royal Naval Reserve, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1869."
  ADMIRAL ERSKINEsaid, that the sum for the Naval Reserve was in excess of what was required, and the Vote was going on gradually increasing. In this year there was an increase of £2,958 over the Vote of last year for nominally the same number of men. He observed that more deputy registrars and clerks were employed than during the previous year at a cost of £2,000, and the result was that only thirteen additional men were obtained. During the last three years £80,000 had been expended in matters analogous to this Vote which the House has not assented to. The Vote was not for the Naval Reserve at all. It was a kind of sponge, from which to squeeze money for purposes of which no one knew anything. He moved that the Vote be reduced by £20,000
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £143,926, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Salaries and Expenses of the Coast Guard Service, the Charges for the Royal Naval Coast Volunteers, and for the Royal Naval Reserve, which will come in course of Payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1869,"—(Admiral Erskine,)
  SIR JOHN HAYsaid, he thought it right to explain that the excess referred to by the hon. and gallant Member had arisen in consequence of the system adopted ever since the institution of the Royal Naval Reserve. At first it was considered that the number of 16,000 men might reasonably be anticipated from the Mercantile Marine to form the Royal Naval Reserve; and the Estimate was always framed on the assumption that that number would be completed. At present the number was 15,156. The number enrolled had been 24,704; but 9,548 had to be deducted for discharges and failures to re-enlist. The official Return on the 30th June was, as he had stated, 15,156 men available for the public service, if at any moment hostilities should break out. There was a sudden reduction in the number in 1866, 3,000 men being found not fit for re-enlistment; but since then, by very great care in enlistment and judicious selection, the force had again been increased to 15,156. As he had stated, an excess of £20.000 had been taken on the assumption that the number of 16,000 men would be enlisted and drilled; but that number had not risen to that amount, and he was free to confess there had always been a considerable balance on the Vote. This arose from the great desire not to check enlistment or drill. But if the House thought it undesirable that the extra £20,000 should be voted, the Government would have no objection to the reduction proposed. Of course, it would still be their duty not to check enlistment or drill, and he felt assured if the Vote were exceeded, the House would make it good. He was glad to assure the House that in the Royal Naval Reserve the country had a most admirable force, which might be entirely relied on in case their services were required—a most valuable class of men, who had shown their readiness to serve, as well as their zeal and energy, on the occasion of the Trent affair.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he was glad the hon. and gallant Member had expressed his readiness to accept the reduction. This was a simple matter of account, and he be-

  541
  lieved, after looking into the figures at the Public Accounts Committee, there would be a surplus of £10,000 after the reduction.
  MR. GRAVESsaid, he believed the reduction would not interfere with the efficiency of the force. The commanders of the various drill ships bore the highest testimony to the intelligence and efficiency of the Reserve. They were considered the superiors of the same class of men in the navy. They had broken down the prejudice that formerly existed, and now formed a connecting link between the navy and the Mercantile Marine. If they had done nothing more than this they must be considered to have rendered valuable service to the country. The Reserve had been taken as the cream of the Mercantile Marine, and were highly-skilled men. He thought from ordinary seamen and those under the age and standard of efficiency, especially from the deep-sea fishery men, a second-class Reserve might be formed. The latter consisted of the finest class of men around our coasts, who would be ready to join the Reserve at perhaps £1 a head per annum, and he strongly advised that both of these classes should be utilized. After the Trent affair the seamen of the North volunteered into the service, without waiting for the Royal Proclamation inviting them to do so. These were facts which tended to show that the force, as a rule, could be relied upon in the event of emergencies arising. It must not be supposed that the force was inefficient because it did not fill up the Navy, the force was instituted for a totally different object—namely, to man our ships in cases of emergency—the very constitution of the force was in itself a sufficient guarantee that it should not interfere with the manning of the Mercantile Marine unless in cases of absolute necessity.
  MR. CARDWELLsaid, he was glad that the efficiency of the force had not been impugned. The question before the House was one merely of account, and the Government had assented to the reduction asked for. Owing to the judicious course which successive Governments had adopted, the feeling of distrust that formerly existed between the men in the Mercantile Marine had given place to one of cordiality. It was no small advantage to have a body of 15,000 or 16,000 men ready to turn out in defence of the country. The Act had passed only in 1859. At the time of the affair of the Trent the men enrolled in the Royal Naval Reserve, which at that time
  542
  was scarcely formed, so far from standing on their strict rights, and refusing to serve except for the immediate defence of the coast, came forward and said that, knowing they were not bound to serve, they earnestly intreated that, nevertheless, they might be permitted to volunteer. So far they had provided for the defence of the country by sea, but the time was not distant when they would have to provide for its defence by land, and he hoped to-see men enlisted who, following other trades, were neither exclusively soldiers nor sailors, but who might yet be made available for the defence of the country. He should have been sorry if anything had been said to discourage the disposition of men to join this force. The hon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Graves) had truly stated that the force as it was at present constituted was imperfect, because the plan of the Committee upon which it was based recommended that there should be two classes of Reserve, one receiving higher pay than the other, and that, out of the saving to be effected in the Navy Estimates, training ships should be established for the purpose of training boys from the beginning for the Navy and the merchant service. He trusted that the present or some succeeding Government would be enabled to effect such a saving upon these Estimates as would permit of funds being provided for this most useful purpose. The time was approaching when it would be necessary that a large proportion of the men, not only in the Navy, but also in the Army, should earn their own livelihood, and, nevertheless, be trained so as to be available when emergencies arose.
  MR. LIDDELLinquired whether the Admiralty had determined upon the amount of remuneration which the shipping masters were to receive for enrolling and watching the movements of the men of this force, seeing that upon their assistance the efficiency of the body greatly depended?
  MR. SERJEANT GASELEEsaid, he objected to the time of the House being wasted and hon. Members being kept out of their beds in consequence of certain hon. Gentlemen persisting in delivering lectures to the House on this question after the Government had intimated their willingness to assent to the proposed reduction in the Vote.
  MR. HANBURY-TRACYasked whether any means existed for identifying the men enrolled in the force?
  MR. ALDERMAN LUSKsaid, he was desirous that the Estimates should be prepared in greater detail.
  COLONEL SYKESheld it to be highly unconstitutional to vote more than is superficially wanted.
  SIR JOHN HAYsaid, he had to inform the hon. Member for Northumberland (Mr. Liddell) that there was one item of £2,000 for the purpose of remunerating the gentlemen to whom he had referred. The distribution of it was in the hands of the Board of Trade, and he had no doubt it would be distributed with justice. The officers selected for the coast batteries were supposed to thoroughly understand their duties, and the drilling of the men had been reported as very satisfactory. The men were most anxious to make themselves efficient, and as they were, doubtless, well known at their place of joining, it was not, he thought, at all necessary to watch them with policeman like vigilance, because he believed that their patriotism might safely be relied upon when their services were required by the State.
  MR. STEPHEN CAVE, in reference to the question of the hon. Member for Northumberland (Mr. Liddell) said, that the payment by the Board of Trade was made according to the work done. This was, as he had explained the year before, represented by marks bearing a money value. At the end of the year a Return was made by each registrar—the number of marks was then calculated, and payment made accordingly. If there was any surplus, it was distributed as an extra gratuity among those registrars who had shown most zeal in the service.
  MR. OTWAYcomplained that the answers which had been given were based upon Returns which appeared to be fallacious, and which, he thought, betrayed great irregularities on the part of the public Departments with regard to the arrangement of the accounts.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  (3.) £63,565, Scientific Departments.
  (4.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £823,562, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Salaries of the Officers and the Contingent Expenses of Her Majesty's Dockyards and Naval Yards at Home and Abroad, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1869."
  LORD HENRY LENNOXsaid, that before asking the Committee to agree to this Vote, he thought it would be desirable for him to state the changes which had been made, and they were very few, since the introduction of the Estimates a few weeks since. At that time it had been pointed out that the programme anticipated last year had very nearly been carried out. The Estimate for iron-clad shipbuilding was 6,845 tons, the number of tons actually built were 6,829, and for unarmoured shipbuilding 16,699 tons, as against 16,427. During the Recess, the Government had come to the determination to reduce the amount for wages in the dockyards, and it appeared that there had been a reduction of £157,775 in wages, and 3,049 in the number of men. The Government were justified in making that reduction; but they had learned with regret that a great amount of distress existed in the dock-yards in consequence of the reduction. By the regulations made at the Treasury under which the hired men were employed, those who had served for twenty years were entitled to a gratuity on their discharge; but many of those thrown out of employment in consequence of the reduction had not served the prescribed time, and thus while oftentimes unable to obtain other employment, they also received nothing in the shape of a gratuity from the Government. He felt bound to state this circumstance, inasmuch as the Admiralty had received numerous applications on the subject. The Admiralty had reduced this item in consequence of the large amount of unarmoured ships which were not intended to be laid down this year. When the First Lord of the Admiralty moved the Estimates he stated that there would be built at Chatham two iron-clads—one of the Invincible class, and another of the Hercules class; and two other ships—one of the Monitor class, and another of the ram class, which were to be built by contract. The Government had so far uttered their programme on the suggestion of the hon. Member (Mr. Childers) as to build the Monitor ship in the Government dockyard, and the ship of the Invincible class by contract. The Osborne, that had been doing good service for twenty-six years, came to a sudden breakdown on her return from conveying the Prince and Princess of Wales to Germany. It was hoped that she might be patched up; but she had been found to be entirely rotten, and was obliged to be broken up. The vessel that

  545
  would take the place of the Osborn would be ready in two years, by which time the Black Eagle would be worn out. It was not intended to re-place her, and there would thus be a saving of one ship in commission. When the Estimates were moved, his right hon. Friend stated that the present as well as the late Government had the matter of river dockyards under their consideration. When a sloop, which was now in course of construction, and which would be launched within the year, was finished, it was decided that Deptford as a building yard, should be closed. A Committee had been appointed on his Motion to consider the subject of reducing the dockyard craft. The Chairman, Sir Thomas Symonds, had consented to place himself in communication with the officers at Devonport, and he and the Admiralty Superintendent had come to an agreement by which all the recommendations of the Committee would be carried into effect. The remaining yards would be visited in turn, and he trusted that the valuable suggestions of the Committee would be carried out with an important saving of expense. When the Navy Estimates were moved, many criticisms were expended on the Constructive Department of the Admiralty, and the iron-clad ships designed by that Department, and the Notice Paper of to-night promised other hostile criticisms on the same subject. These Notices, however, referred to ships now afloat, and of which a trial had taken place. These criticisms had, he thought, taken the shape of an attack upon the Department rather than a criticism of the designs that had issued from it. His hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Eye (Captain Mackinnon) had been profuse in such criticism; but it should be remembered that we were in a transition state as regarded shipbuilding, and that every new ship built must be more or less the result of a series of compromises. Usually they heard nothing of the good points that had been gained; but of all the daring pieces of criticism he had ever heard that of the hon. and gallant Gentleman was the most daring. He had instituted a comparison between the Bellerophon and the Achilles, and stated that as an engine of war the latter was superior. The hon. and gallant Member said that while the Bellerophon required more power, the engines of the Achilles cost £69,117, and those of the Bellerophon, which he said was the smaller vessel, £88,612, being an excess of £19,000
  546
  in the cost of the engines of the smaller ship. But his hon. and gallant Friend forgot that while the hull of the Bellerophon cost £256,114, the hull of the Achilles cost £375,473, being a difference of £119,359. On the whole there was a balance of cheapness of cost of £100,000 in favour of the Bellerophon. The late Board of Admiralty charged the Chief Constructor of the Navy to solve the problem whether they could build a smaller and less costly ship, that should be more handy, and should carry armour-plates of greater thickness and an armament of greater power. The Chief Constructor obeyed those instructions, and the Bellerophon was the result. The armour of the Bellerophon was 6 inches thick, while the armour spread over the long lines of the Achilles was only 4½ inches. But his hon. and gallant Friend said, "Oh, but the Bellerophon is not a fast sailer." Now, the result of recent cruizes proved that she had always held a good position in the squadron in that respect. His hon. and gallant Friend said, "True, she went 14 knots, but that was all done with a favourable tide." There again he was obliged to contradict his hon. and gallant Friend. The Bellerophon kept up her speed at the second trial at the measured mile, and during six hours in the open sea she kept up that very high rate of speed. Again, he could refer his hon. and gallant Friend to the opinion of distinguished officers as to whether the Bellerophon was or was not likely to turn out a dangerous customer, even in comparison with the Achilles. The officers of the Construction Department were subjected to such constant criticism, and, from the very nature of their position, were denied the opportunity of explaining matters, that it was only an act of justice to them that he should state the case fairly before the Committee. Another of the complaints made against the Bellerophon certainly much astonished him. The Committee was aware that the balanced rudder, as fitted in the Bellerophon, was one of the novel inventions of science, and his hon. and gallant Friend made it a reproach to the Chief Constructor of the Navy that the reason why she turned so much quicker and handier than the Achilles was because these latest inventions were introduced in building her. Let him mention what occurred in the Channel squadron last year. The Minotaur and the Lord Warden, the first

  547
  of which was 400 feet long and the second 280, had rudders alike; and yet at 10 knots the full circle was turned by the shorter ship in three minutes and forty-nine seconds, while the Minotaur required seven minutes and forty-five seconds to make a similar circle. That occurred during the cruize of the experimental squadron last year. The very name of the Constructor's Department seemed to act on his hon. and gallant Friend's nervous system as a sort of blister; and, not content with all those charges against the Bellerophon, he wound up with one which at first sight looked very formidable. His hon. and gallant Friend said she was deficient in coal supply. Now, the Minotaur carried 650 tons of coal, the Achilles 620, the Hercules 600, and the Bellerophon 520; but it should be remembered that the Hercules' engines, with super-heaters and surface condensers for economizing fuel, weighed nearly 300 tons more than ordinary engines of like nominal power; and the Bellerophon's nearly 200 tons more; so that their coal should really enable them to steam much further than either the Minotaur or the Achilles. There had therefore been an increase, not a decrease, of steaming power in the Bellerophon and the Hercules. Before passing from that subject he might mention, in reference to the opinions of certain critics of Admiralty ships, that when the same hand designed iron-clad ships for other Powers it was astonishing what a chorus of approbation rewarded the efforts of the Chief Constructor in that very same organ of public opinion which, perhaps, a very few days before had strongly decried him. The great leviathan of the Press hardly allowed a week to pass without giving the Admiralty a dressing. Now, it so happened that a very fine broadside ship was designed by the Chief Constructor of the British Navy, which was at first intended for the Government of Turkey; but she afterwards changed hands and became the property of the King of Prussia and was launched in the Thames. Her name was the König Wilhelm. That ship, being the design and handiwork of Mr. Reed, was thus spoken of on the 27th of April last—
  "And when she rode securely on the Thames with her vast hull and beautiful lines, dwarfing to more pigmies the vessels around, there was none who saw her, except the Prussian visitors themselves, who did not regret that the Admiralty had allowed such a vessel to pass into the hands of any foreign Power."
  548
  He was commissioned by two of his gallant Colleagues, one of whom had the command of the Channel squadron in 1865, when he had two iron-clads under his control, to state that in their opinion iron-clads were excellent ships, and that the Bellerophon was one of the most powerful and useful sea-going ships of war that any country ever possessed. But, further, Admiral Yelverton, when Admiral of the Channel cruize, thus spoke of those two ships, a comparison between which had been made by his hon. and gallant Friend, and much to the detriment of the Bellerophon. Referring to the Achilles, Admiral Yelverton said—
  "We must not lose sight of the fact that from the great length of the Achilles, with all her good qualities, she is most difficult to handle, and in action this defect might prove her ruin. I feel certain this ship might, and probably would, have to go out of action to turn round, thus exposing herself in almost a defenceless position to the fire of more than one of the enemy's ships."
  Next, with regard to the Bellerophon, Admiral Yelverton said—
  "I consider this ship to be a very successful specimen of our new ships."
  And, comparing her with the Achilles, he added—
  "I feel bound to award the first place to the Achilles. I am, however, of opinion that her great length is an insurmountable objection, and I have no hesitation in saying that ships of the Bellerophon class, from their size and general handiness particularly under steam, will prove more efficient and serviceable for war purposes."
  What was the testimony of Captain Macdonald? Writing to his right hon. Friend (Mr. Corry) from on board the Bellerophon, in the Sound, on February 21, 1868, Captain Macdonald said—
  "I hear various reports that this ship is a bad roller in a sea way; this I can with the greatest confidence contradict. I consider her a remarkably steady ship—so much so, indeed, as quite to surprise me after the Arethusa and other vessels I have served in. When she docs roll, which in an Atlantic swell must be the case, she goes so easy as rarely to upset furniture, &c., or to render it necessary to secure such. Coming home from Lisbon in December, with a heavy westerly swell, we undoubtedly rolled heavily—heavier than I ever saw her; but we were quite light, out of coals, provisions, and water. The Achilles is certainly steadier; but the difference between us and the Warrior, Lord Clyde, and Lord Warden is remarkable. I mentioned this to Mr. Reed the other day, and he thought you might like to have my opinion direct on the subject."
  The next evidence which he would lay before the Committee was somewhat remarkable, because it was that of the cap-

  549
  tain of the Achilles himself, Captain Vansittart, who said—
  "The Bellerophon joined yesterday, as ever, the most sightly among us, and of a right powerful battery, too. If she keeps up 14 (or 14½?) knots, the Achilles' wings will be clipped; but even at 12 or 13 knots she will always prove a precious awkward customer."
  In about a month or six weeks the Channel squadron left their quarters, and the Report of the gallant Admiral who was second in command was, to his mind, quite conclusive as to the excellence of the design of the Bellerophon. Admiral Ryder said—
  "I was most agreeably surprised, therefore, to find that she had not only made good a speed of 13·8 knots on her late six hours' trial, but is a remarkably steady ship, as the recorded angles of the squadron will show. She is also a very handy ship under steam alone, and for her small sail power a very handy ship under sail alone. This comparative handiness when she is compared with long ships—Minotaur, 400 feet; Achilles, 380 feet; Bellerophon being only 300 feet—is no doubt due partly to her comparative shortness, and partly to her balanced rudder with its large surface, The Bellerophon's magnificent battery of ten 12-ton guns, protected, as is also the case with three-fourths of the water-line, by 6 inches—only a quarter of the belt being tapered to a loss thickness—makes her, in my opinion, as far as I can judge at present, the most successful plated seagoing cruizing line-of-battle ship that I have visited; and, as far as I know, 6he possesses, taking all difficulties and clashing qualifications into consideration, in a larger degree than any such ship that has yet been on active service, the greatest possible development of the greatest number of the numerous qualities required to make an efficient man-of-war, with one exception—namely, the quantity of coals she can carry in her bunkers—000 tons, but restricted at present by the Admiralty Orders to 500 tons. I should here observe that this limited quantity is made the most of by the use of surface-condensers and superheating apparatus, which now works satisfactorily, and in the opinion of the chief engineer effects a saving of 8 per cent, making 600 tons equal to about 650. After giving this question the closest consideration, I am driven irresistibly to the conclusion that the Bellerophon is of all the ships here present the only type to be followed; and in saying this I purposely throw aside all consideration of her comparative economy in first cost. The Bellerophon's handiness under steam, arising from the combined effects of comparative shortness and the large-surfaced balanced rudder, is so invaluable a quality that I have not recommended any material increase in her length although the great importance of the 700 tons of coal weighs much with me."
  The next point to which he wished to draw the attention of the Committee was the very graphic language which had on a former occasion been urged by his hon. and gallant Friend, who said he thanked his stars that broadsides had come to an
  550
  end. That was language which he was sure the hon. and gallant Gentleman would be disposed to recall when he informed him that the voyage of the Ocean was made from the Mediterranean to Batavia, touching at Rio, and thence shaping the course for Tristan d'Acunha. When within 150 miles of the latter place the ship was turned southward for some time, in consequence of the wind having shifted to the eastward. In a letter which was written on the 9th of October last one of the officers on the Ocean, wrote of her as follows:—
  "I am sure, when we left the Mediterranean and it was known that our route was to be down to the southward of the Cape, among all the strong westerly gales that prevail there, that there were few on that fine-weather station who would have cared to belong to her, and perhaps not a few who thought we should not get there without going through loss of spars, accidents, and battening down of every sort; in fact, everyone seemed to think that every sea must wash clean over her—that she could never rise to them. Experience, however, has taught us that in both theories we are wrong, and from my own experience I can safely say, and so can 'all of us,' that if all iron-clads are like the Ocean there never could be better sea boats in heavy weather than they are… We have gone under sail alone 12 knots… We have been in three gales, the last one being a cyclone or circular storm of most terrific force, which we were obliged to run before under close-reefed fore and main topsails, and steaming, to make her steer easily. The other two gales, fortunately, both sprung up dead aft, so we were enabled to keep our course, merely steering to keep the sea from dead aft… It has always been our admiration in bad weather to see her so very buoyant and raising her stern so easily out of the water… Almost directly afterwards the wind sprung up foul from the eastward, so we made sail, standing to the southward, barometer falling rapidly, and every appearance of bad weather. Reef after reef followed in the night watches (I had all night in and the forenoon and first the next day), and at six the hands were turned up to reef, close reef topsails, and reef courses, at the same time steam being got up to make her steer easily."
  Again—
  "The sea, of course, was very heavy, and stove every boat we had at the davits; but, on the whole, I think we may congratulate ourselves that we made such excessively good weather as we did. No wooden ship could have gone through it better, and a good many worse."
  His hon. and gallant Friend went on to condemn the new class of sloops as utterly unseaworthy. That statement could, however, hardly be reconciled with the facts of the case, for the trials of the new sloops, such as the Danaë and the Blanche, which had left, or were about to leave for foreign climes, had fulfilled, he believed, to the

  551
  full the expectations of the Board of Admiralty. He was well aware that in that House whatever fell from the responsible Chief of a Department carried with it far greater weight than could attach to the words of one holding a subordinate position like himself; but his right hon. Friend at the head of the Admiralty was very anxious that it should be stated on behalf of his Department that, in their opinion, the Bellerophon fully carried out the requirements which had been laid down. The Admiralty, in short, were anxious to endorse the Minute which was made by the late First Lord before he retired from Office, which, he thought, bore the best testimony to the skill displayed in the Constructive Department. In that Minute the Admiralty expressed their high approval of the ability which Mr. Reed had displayed in the construction of the Bellerophon. On the same occasion to which he had just been referring another hon. Gentleman, the hon. Member for Tavistock (Mr. Samuda), made one or two remarks to which he wished briefly to advert. He stated that the Indian troop-ships had been a failure; but upon the part of the Admiralty and the India Office he must answer that statement by expressing it to be their opinion that they had been a great success. He was sure that the Committee would feel quite as much as the Admiralty for the misery which had fallen on many persons by the large reductions in the dockyards; but having determined to lay down no wooden ships this year, the Admiralty were bound to discharge those men, and to devote whatever money might be at their disposal in building iron-clads by contract.
  MR. PEMBERTONwished to ask whether it was the intention of the Admiralty to continue the system of selling the old and useless ships by private tender with their rigging and stores complete, instead of having them broken up in the Dockyard at Sheerness? The loss upon these sales by private tender is very great. By a Return which had recently been printed, it appeared that thirteen ships were sold in the lump, and their estimated value to be broken up was £144,000. They were, in point of fact, sold by private tender for £87,000, and in re-purchasing stores out of these ships the Government paid £38,000; so that all they received for the ships was £49,000, making a loss of £94,000 on the estimated value of the ships. The same Return showed that no less than twenty
  552
  ships had been re-sold by the Government, and afterwards the purchasers re-sold the stores to the Government at a loss that appeared perfectly astounding. The Raven was a ship of 180 tons, and the gross amount paid for her was £160; whilst the amount paid to the purchaser who resold stores to the Government was £214, so that the loss to the country was £54. The next ship was the Arrow, on which the loss by the same calculation was £75. He thought that it was very desirable that this mode of disposing of ships should be altered, and that the dockyards should be put to the use of breaking up these ships. He was informed that the cost of breaking up ships was about 6s. 6d. a ton, and therefore the cost of breaking up the Raven would have been about £35, and deducting this sum from the £214 there would have been a balance of £179 in favour of the Government, if they had broken her up, instead of a loss of £54. With regard to the Arrow also, there would, upon the same calculation, have been a gain to the Government, instead of a loss of £70. It is desirable that the men still engaged at the dockyards should be employed in this work, which would be a great saving to the country.
  MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSENsaid, that he very much agreed with the observations just made by his hon. and learned Friend. As he understood the complaint made, it was not that the ships referred to were sold for "breaking up" with rigging and stores complete, but that they were sold for other service, and sold for considerably less than might be realized by breaking them up in our own dockyards. He would not occupy the time of the Committee by quoting instances in which these disadvantageous sales have been effected; but, if his information was correct, the sale of the timber alone would pay for the cost of breaking up these ships in the dockyards, and the engines would still be available for the purposes of the Government. He might add that at the dockyard into which he had specially enquired (Sheerness), there were ample means for disposing both of timber and metal, and if ships were there broken up, under the eye of responsible officers, much of the old material might be found available for re-use. He would also say, though he could not pretend to speak with authority upon the subject, that it would be a popular, as well as a wise

  553
  movement, if the Admiralty would contract with the dockyard workmen for some of this work, whereby the men would be able to earn more, and the dockyard would be placed on a better footing in competing with private yards. The speech of his noble Friend (Lord Henry Lennox) had opened up a wider question, and there were two points to which he would allude—the reduction of the number of hired men, and the question of closing the smaller dockyards. He knew that there were some gentlemen, both in and out of that House, who looked with no favourable eye upon the Royal Establishments. He (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen) could not concur in such a view—although it is quite possible that there might be room for improvement in the internal arrangements of some of these dockyards, he confessed that it appeared to him that if the time should ever come when the Navy of England was entirely or mainly dependent upon private yards, great mischief would follow; these Royal Establishments, affording constant employment and the advantage of superannuation, must be able to command a certain regular supply of labour, not exposed to those different agencies—strikes, trades' unions, &c, &c.—which from time to time affected the operations of private yards, and it was most essential that the country should not be without that supply. But his immediate object was to elicit from Government an opinion favourable to the dockyard at Sheerness. He did so especially because there appeared to be some discrepancy between the words and the acts of Government, and, indeed, between their words at one time. and at another. A short time ago, when the hon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Graves) attacked the smaller dockyards, he spoke out with characteristic boldness, and said that, in in his opinion, "Sheerness, from its proximity to Chatham, was almost useless." The First Lord of the Admiralty, at that time, could say no more than this—that—
  "The proposal to abandon Sheerness was rather premature;" that "at present he thought it would be unwise, but that they would be able to form a sound opinion when the Chatham extension was completed."
  But very shortly after this debate came the East Kent Election. Certain words of his hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract were made a great deal of, and the partisans of the hon. and learned Member (Mr. Pemberton) declared that the Liberals were
  554
  agreed to abolish, and the present Government to preserve the smaller dockyards. Anxious to serve his Friends, the First Lord of the Admiralty thought it consistent with his high position to write a letter to the hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. Pemberton) during that contest, which he might read to a public meeting at Sheerness. On that occasion the candidate said, speaking evidently with authority—
  "He could only tell them that there was no intention on the part of the present Government of giving up or abandoning Sheerness Dockyard."
  He then read an extract from a letter written to him by the present First Lord of the Admiralty, in which he said that—
  "He had expressed it as his opinion in the House of Commons, that Sheerness Dockyard ought not to be given up, and that it would be very advantageous to the country in case of war."
  He (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen) thought that the House would at once see the discrepancy between these two statements. The First Lord of the Admiralty had said that Sheerness would be very advantageous to the country in case of war. He (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen) had thought that the only argument against Sheerness was its exposed situation in case of war. But for that, without wishing to disparage Chatham, he believed that the vast expenditure there would never have been incurred whilst we had Sheerness eleven miles nearer the sea, with much greater depth of water, and in every way more convenient for dockyard purposes. But it was always said that if an enemy had command of the Channel, all your works at Sheerness would be destroyed with the greatest facility. He did not speak without knowing that he was supported by authority when he answered that if an enemy once had command of the mouth of the Thames and Medway, other things besides Sheerness would be destroyed with the greatest facility. Chatham would stand a bad chance, and the mischief would not stop there. The true policy of England was to make the Channel her main line of defence, and never allow an enemy to obtain such a position. He, (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen) was not urging the claims of Sheerness as against Chatham. The expenditure at Chatham had been commenced and must continue; but he argued that if Chatham was to be our great building yard, there was all the more reason why Sheer-

  555
  ness should be maintained in full efficiency—and extended—as a fitting and repairing yard. If everything was done in one yard the mischief that might be caused by fire or other accident was incalculable, and the position of Sheerness pointed it out for every reason as the proper place for a large fitting and repairing yard in connection with Chatham. He (Mr. Knatchbull Hugessen) hoped that he should elicit from the Government an authoritative statement that they shared that opinion, that they had no intention of abandoning the dockyard; but that by maintaining and extending it, and further developing the advantages of the locality, they would be taking that course which would best add to the efficiency of the navy, and would be most conducive to the public interest.
  MR. PEMBERTONsaid, the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen) had committed two errors. No letter had been addressed by him to the First Lord of the Admiralty with reference to the dockyard at Sheerness, nor did the First Lord of the Admiralty make any communication whatever to him on the subject. But during the course of the election various statements were made as to the intentions of different Governments, and some gentleman, whose name he did not recollect, wrote to the First Lord, asking what the intention was. His recollection of that letter was simply this—it repeated what the First Lord had stated in the House, and that he thought it would be a very-great advantage to have a dockyard in the neighbourhood of the town for the re-fitting of ships. The gentleman to whom the letter was addressed was told that he was at liberty to make what use of it he pleased, and it had been placed in his hands. He had accordingly stated that he believed there was no intention of abandoning the dockyard of Sheerness. If the hon. Member had given him any intimation of his intention to refer to this matter, he would have endeavoured to obtain a copy of the letter; but he very much feared it was not now in existence. The other error which the hon. Member had committed was as to the question which most agitated the minds of electors at the last election; it was no doubt a question of disestablishment, but it was the disestablishment of the Irish Church, not of the dockyard.
  MR. KNATCHBULL-HUGESSENexplained that he had quoted from a local newspaper, which stated that the letter of
  556
  the First Lord of the Admiralty had been addressed to his hon. and learned Friend; of course, after the statement of his hon. and learned Friend, he had no difficulty in admitting that it was not so.
  MR. SHAW-LEFEVREsaid, the noble Lord (Lord Henry Lennox) had stated that there was a reduction on this Vote of £157,000 this year upon the corresponding Vote of last year. If this had been an absolute saving, no one would have rejoiced at the announcement more than he should have done; but, unfortunately, what was saved on one Vote was more than balanced by the increase of expenditure on other Votes. For instance, Vote 10 showed an increase of £250,000 over the corresponding Vote of last year, and thus upon shipbuilding and repairing there was a total increase of £100,000 over the expenditure of last year. The truth was, that the work, instead of being performed in the dockyards, was transferred to the yards of private contractors on the Tyne or at Liverpool. There was great hardship experienced in consequence of the reduction of the number of men usually employed in Portsmouth, because it was by no means easy for the men thus thrown out of employment to transfer themselves and their families to another part of the country. The Government had now adopted the policy urged upon them last year by the Opposition. The Government commenced last year to build fifty cut-and-run vessels, at a cost of about £1,000,000; they were to be used in cruizing, and not for the purposes of war. Of that number, thirty-seven were to be built in the dockyards, and thirteen by contract. He regretted the work was decided to be done in one year instead of two, because, instead of rendering the cession of these men's labour less sudden, the sudden change had fallen upon them with considerable hardship. At Portsmouth the number of shipwrights was 1,575 in March last, having been considerably increased during the winter, and it had since been gradually reduced, the contemplated number being only 938. A change of policy such as that which had been adopted in having vessels built in private yards ought to have been carried out gradually and with some consideration to the men employed in the dockyards. He thought also that so considerable a reduction having been made in the wages of artificers, the expenses of management and establishment charges should have

  557
  been likewise reduced, but these had undergone little or no alteration. In 1858 artificers' wages in the dockyards amounted to £986,000, and this year they were £918,000, while the management charges were in 1858 £150,000, and were this year £209,000, so that they now bore a much greater proportion to wages. He could not but think that the Vote had been most carelessly prepared, and that it had been carried out without a due regard to the interests of the men or to the real economy of the dockyards.
  MR. SAMUDAsaid, the amount of work to be performed in the dockyards this year appeared to be very considerably less than it was last year. Instead of 23,500 tons of shipping to be built, there were only 14,400, being 9,000 tons less than last year. From the declarations of the First Lord of the Admiralty, it appeared that the Government were building two vessels of the Monitor class, of 500 and 600-horse-power respectively, from which they proposed to obtain 9 and 12 knots speed. There was a great similarity between the two vessels, and the difference in the horse power, one being 500 and the other 600-horse power, would only represent about half a knot. If the Admiralty could give a speed of 12 knots to one vessel, and he did not for a moment pretend to say that they could not, he thought that, when speed was a consideration of so much value in the present days of shipbuilding, it was extraordinary that the Admiralty should give no higher speed to the second vessel than 9 knots. On a former occasion allusion had been made to an observation of his with respect to the Indian transports. But, to the best of his recollection, what be had done on that occasion was merely to point out distinctly the failure of the application to the private firms for a competitive design. He now came to the proposal which he had put on the Paper, and which was a very reasonable one. The two vessels which he proposed to substitute were of similar tonnage to those which the Government designed to build; the size and material were similar. Now, there were serious reasons why the country should not commit itself to the extent to which the Admiralty seemed bent on committing it with regard to vessels of the class to which he referred. It would be recollected that during the whole time that the re-construction of the navy with iron-clad vessels had been in progress there had always been one main
  558
  object which he had kept in view, and which, as far as he had been able, he had endeavoured to urge upon the Government, and that was that the ultimate aim of all their improvements should be to obtain a perfectly protected vessel. He had warned the Admiralty that it was useless to delude the country and to delude themselves—for none were so deluded as the Admiralty—by supposing that any vessel would become useful which had nothing but a patch of armour on a small portion of the hull, while all the rest of her was utterly at the mercy of any other vessel, however small. The Admiralty laid down as a condition for adoption at the time they were about to build their first iron-clad ships of the Warrior class that only the central part of the ship should be armoured. He gave the Admiralty full credit for this, that they believed the difficulties in the way of obtaining a perfectly armoured ship were too great to be overcome, and that they could not at the same time get a ship constructed of such a form as to give both a sufficient amount of displacement and that degree of speed which they justly looked on as indispensable. He felt at that time quite as strongly as he did now the impolicy of relying on a vessel so constructed and which he foresaw would be nothing but a log upon the water when the two ends were knocked away. In the proposal which he then sent to the Admiralty he had suggested that the ends should be protected. By continually pressing the same consideration upon them the Admiralty did by degrees depart from their original plan. In the vessels of the Valiant class they recognized the principle, though not to the full extent; but in the Minotaur class they covered with armour the entire vessel. They had then got something substantial, and if they had only applied themselves to decreasing the size and increasing the handiness of the vessel they would have arrived at a very useful and efficient class of vessel indeed. The hon. Member concluded by moving to omit the sums—
  "For building two Iron-clad Vessels of the Audacious class (four of which are already building, though as yet none have been tried), and to suggest in substitution for them two Turret Ships of the competitive designs submitted to the Admiralty by private firms, and which were rejected on the recommendation of the Controller and Chief Constructor of the Navy in favour of their own official design."
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding;£823,062, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum

  559
  necessary to defray the Salaries of the Officers and the Contingent Expenses of Her Majesty's Dockyards and Naval Yards at Home and Abroad, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1869."—(Mr. Samuda.)
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he thought it would be much more convenient to take the decision of the question on Vote 10, where there was a distinct sum for new armour-plated ships. That was the next Vote on which the question arose, and respecting which the hon. Member for Lincoln (Sir. Seely) intended to address the House. He sympathized with his noble Friend (Lord Henry Lennox) in the difficulty in which, he was placed by the unfortunate illness of the First Lord of the Admiralty; but the Committee would admit that no one could have explained the question more clearly, or stated the policy of the Government more intelligibly than the noble Lord had done. As to the alteration proposed in the programme of the year, he thought his noble Friend had done thorough justice to the Controller and the Chief Constructor; and he rejoiced that the Vote had not been passed without the questions being raised and the answers stated as to the first change he had originally offered to the Committee—a proposition to build a broadside ship and one of novel construction by contract, and one of each in the dockyard, instead of two broadsides in the dockyard and two of novel construction out of it; and he therefore approved the altered programme announced, for novel ships in private yards involved heavy extras for experience gained as construction proceeded. It was also judicious to reduce the class of vessels for special purposes from four to three on the completion of the new yacht in substitution for the Osborne, and to close Deptford as a building yard, which he hoped was the first step towards closing it as a naval yard. But in saying this he could not help referring to the unwise conduct of the Admiralty in deciding last year to build a small fleet of wooden vessels, and in going beyond their original intentions during the year as to the number of men in the dockyards. So fickle was their policy that, during the course of the year, and in spite of the assurances given in the debate on the Estimates, at Portsmouth the strength of the establishment was raised from 1,233 men to 1,562, and a sudden reduction was made
  560
  this year to 930 men. The result of that was that very great distress prevailed among the men, and similar consequences followed at Woolwich, where the number of shipwrights had been reduced from 1,021, which was the number in the month of October, to 525. That was the main fault to which he had to call the attention of the Committee in connection with those Estimates, for he looked upon the policy of the Admiralty in other respects as being, on the whole, sound. He hoped the Government would be able to get this Vote.
  MR. OTWAYsaid, that what the country desired was to have the very best vessels constructed; and the country was disappointed at not having vessels of a light draught of water which, nevertheless, could carry heavy armour plates and guns. Every other maritime Power was building vessels different from those we were building. At Chatham the distress was not so severe as in other dockyards; but there was one class in the dockyard—the rope-makers—who had been rather hardly treated. He should like to ask his noble Friend why no provision was made for the workmen in Chatham Dockyard to dine comfortably? Surely some shed could be constructed in which the men could dine with some sort of comfort. With regard to superannuation allowances, he thought that if a man died just before he became entitled to superannuation allowance, his widow ought to receive some payment out of that fund to which her husband had so long contributed. Since the introduction of iron for shipbuilding the number of accidents had greatly increased, and great complaint was made that no accommodation existed for the men at the hospital, and that they had to contribute out of their own wages towards the expense of the hospital.
  LORD HENRY LENNOXsaid, he hoped the Committee would allow this Vote to pass, in order that Progress might be reported, with a view to the Registration Bill being proceeded with.
  MR. M. CHAMBERSsuggested that the Vote now before the Committee should be postponed.
  MR. DISRAELIhoped that, as the feeling of the Committee evidently was in favour of passing the Vote and reporting Progress, the hon. and learned Gentleman would not offer any opposition to that course.
  MR. SAMUDAsaid, he would withdraw his Amendment.
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  Original Question put, and agreed to.
  House resumed.
  Resolutions to be reported To-morrow;
  Committee to sit again To-morrow.

REGISTRATION (re-committed) BILL.
(Mr. Secretary G. Hardy, Sir J. Fergusson.)
REGISTRATION (re-committed) BILL.

  [BILL 167.] COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
  COLONEL BARTTELOTsaid, he hoped the House would not think that he was going to offer a factious opposition to the Bill. It was not a party Bill, and it was not a Bill which could affect any individual Member; but it was simply a Bill to accelerate the registration of the voters in the country. But that was not the sole point for the House to consider. They were there to consider whether it was wise and prudent that a Bill of that kind should be passed for this specific year, and whether it would have the effect, which all wished, of placing on the register those whom they had admitted to the franchise. If the Bill was passed, it would prevent a large number of those whom they wished to enfranchise from getting that franchise, and there would be a universal cry when they met in December or January by those who were returned that their constituents were not fairly represented. The result would be that another election would loom in the distance, and he knew not if that was their wish. The Bill provided that the registration should be completed by the end of October. The elections were to take place in November, and they are to meet there in December. For what purpose? Simply to decide whether the Gentlemen opposite should sit on that side, and whether those who sat on that side shall go to the opposite Benches. Whether that was to take place time would show. If the registration was not complete it would matter little whether they met in January or December. Let them consider the complicated nature of the Bill. There was the compound-householder, a gentleman whom they thought dead and buried, but who, nevertheless would make alterations in the new registry necessary. There was also
  562
  the lodger franchise, and he believed that in towns where 30,000 or 40,000 would be added to the register that register would not be complete. He knew something of the towns, and he ventured to say that November was a very bad month for the elections. He believed it would be altogether a false move if they were to hurry on the registrations now, simply to decide who was to sit on this and who on the other side of the House in November next.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, if he thought that this Bill would in any way affect the rights of the electors by diminishing their chances of getting upon the register he would not have considered it his duty on the part of the Government to propose it. But those who sat on the Select Committee were satisfied that nothing would be taken away from the rights of voters. The only question was whether sufficient time was allowed for revision. Those who had most considered the question believed there was. He was himself satisfied there was, and therefore he hoped the House would go into Committee.
  MR. SMOLLETTsaid, he had a few observations to make on the Bill, which he thought had been but little discussed in the House. He must describe this as a Bill designed to slur over the registration and to hurry on the General Election at the earliest possible period. He dared say that some Gentlemen in that House were anxious to bring on an election; but he had asked himself, and he had asked persons out of that House, what possible object could be gained by the new House of Commons meeting in December. The only answer he could get to the question was this—" If we accept this Bill, and hurry on the elections, the new House of Commons will he able to meet in December, in order to decide which of the two factions in this House shall carry on its Business next Session." That might be a very important matter for those who expected Office; but hon. Gentlemen who were "outsiders" and the public at large did not care one farthing which set of statesmen might conduct the Business of the country during the months of December and January. When Parliament had passed a Bill enabling very large numbers to get themselves placed on the electoral roll, commonsense and prudence would dictate that the registration should be conducted in the most effectual manner. This Bill came before the House with great recommendations. It professed to be a Ministerial Bill;

  563
  but they all knew under what circumstances it had been brought forward. It had been brought forward under coercion. That was his opinion. There had been a threat made by Gentlemen sitting on the Opposition side that they would withhold the Supplies ["No!"]; but he believed that threat would not have been carried out. The Bill had been subjected to the ordeal of a select Committee. How was that Committee composed? Gentlemen connected with the present Administration served on it. That Administration had been for some time exposed to such taunts from the front Opposition Bench, and the House itself had been in such a state of chronic anarchy, that the retention of Office by its members was almost intolerable. It was on that account that he described the Bill as having been brought in under compulsion. There also sat upon the Committee a number of Gentlemen who had held Office under the late Administration, and who were not at all indisposed to hold Office under that which was coining. He dared say those Gentlemen would not think the drawing of their official salaries so irksome a task as the right hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had considered it during the past few months. ["Question!"] He would not detain them many minutes; but what he had to say he must say out. There sat, then, on the Committee a number of Gentlemen who were very anxious to obtain Office at the very earliest period. Indeed, that anxiety was so great as to lead to the belief that something more than patriotism actuated them when they strove to obtain the meeting of Parliament in December next. Upon the decision of such a Committee he, for one, placed no reliance whatever, knowing, as he did, that there existed no desire at all in unofficial quarters, nor out-of-doors, that Parliament should assemble at so early a date. Now, why should any independent Member on either side of the House go an inch out of his way to bring about a change of Ministers in December instead of six weeks later, in the ordinary course of affairs? What reason had any independent Member to bridge more rapidly than need be the gulf which still yawned between the right hon. Member for South Lancashire and Office? What had kept the right hon. Gentleman out of Office for the last lour or five months? He would himself answer that question with the utmost possible candour. It had been the
  564
  behest and desire of a very considerable number of Gentlemen on the Opposition side, of whom the right hon. Gentleman was the ostensible Leader. They probably thought, and with justice, that the intellect of the right hon. Gentleman matured much more rapidly in the winter of Opposition than in the summer heat of Office. The House had been in a very excited slate for the last four or five months. There had been in Office a Ministry which did not hold the reins of power. The Executive had been weak, not in ability, but in Parliamentary support. Then there had been a powerful Opposition, numbering at least 350 or 360 heads. If the Opposition had so willed it, they might in the early part of the Session have carried a Vote of Want of Confidence in the Ministry, and the result of such a Vote would have been to transfer the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Lancashire and the satellites who surrounded him to the right hand of the Speaker's Chair. What had prevented this from being done, and why had 350 Gentlemen allowed 300 Gentlemen to hold the reins of Office during the whole of the present Session? He would give an explanation of the circumstances. In doing so be should violate no confidence, as he should merely repeat what was openly spoken of and discussed at the Bar, in the Lobbies, in all political coteries, and very probably even in the sacred precincts of Brookes's. It was a well-known fact that there were on the Opposition Benches a number of Gentlemen who were esteemed Members of the Liberal party; but who refused to support a Vote of Want of Confidence in the present Government. In other words, they refused to be parties to any Motion the direct effect of which would be to place the right hon. Member for Lancashire in high Office. ["Question!"] There were scores of Gentlemen opposite who knew what he had stated to be an absolute fact. Those Gentlemen did not deny that the right hon. Member for South Lancashire possessed great abilities; but they distrusted his political sagacity, and were very probably not enamoured of his versatility; they had no confidence in his tact and his power to keep a party together. If, then, the right hon. Gentleman and his Friends had been kept out of Office by the behest and at the dictation of a considerable portion of Her Majesty's Opposition, what possible object could they have in now coming forward and desiring that

  565
  we should meet next December, in order to determine whether by the new elections the right hon. Gentleman can be placed in the position of First Minister of the Crown. Under these circumstances he should give his vote against the Bill, and if it went into Committee he trusted the House would have an opportunity of discussing it on its merits on the third reading.
  MR. MELLERsaid, the Bill would cause so much dissatisfaction that he must protest against it, and vote for the Amendment. For the last two years they had been discussing the desirability of making most important changes in the electoral system, and yet their labours were, after all, to have no fruition, as it were, because those whom it was sought to benefit, would receive no benefit at all, in consequence of the haste with which registration was to be slurred over. In the large towns and counties in the North great inconvenience would be caused, and he wished to point out that if the number of Revising Barristers were doubled, the number of election agents must be doubled also. The time at present allowed for registration was quite short enough, but it was proposed still further to shorten it, and as the Court of Common Pleas did not sit until some time on in the month of November, there would practically be no appeal from the decisions of the Revising Barristers. He did not like the idea of an election in November, for the reason that, as some two hours at least of the polling must take, place in partial, if not entire darkness, it would give great facilities for personations. The question put before the country was whether Catholicism or Protestantism was to have the superiority. ["Oh, oh!"] Members might object to that, so he would say it was whether Ireland was to be pacified or not. It was incumbent on them, therefore, to have a well-selected jury, and to commit the decision of the question to a respectable constituency.
  MR. MARSHsaid, he was of opinion that, on the whole, it was much better that this Bill should pass. It was possible that the Bill might be passed in a hurry; but then they would have the advantage of getting a Ministry established sooner. That difficulty even might be got over by the present Ministry resigning at once. The election gentry, et genus omne, might not, perhaps, have so much time to make up their books, and if an autumn Session were inconvenient they would all be there, and the Session would be a very short
  566
  one. Commercial matters were very much depressed, and that depression would not cease until the General Election was over. It would be better to get the election over, so as to have a fair start again.
  Motion, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," agreed to.
  Bill considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Clauses 1 to 5, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 6 (Revision of Lists in Counties).
  MR. CORRANCEsuggested, but did not move, the insertion of words binding the Revising Barristers to commence their operations on the 14th of September next at latest.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 7 to 28, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 29 (Application of certain Rating Sections to Counties).
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, that although it had been inserted by the Select Committee, in the spirit of caution which they had very properly exercised in dealing with the measure, he found, on careful examination, that it was quite unnecessary, and might possibly lead to mischief if permitted to remain in the Bill. The clause proposed to make the 30th section of the 2 Will. IV., c. 45, and the 75th section of the Act of 6 & 7 of the Queen, c. 18, the principal Act, applicable "to all cases of occupancy creating a franchise" by last year's Reform Act. But the 56th section of last year's Act made all Registration Acts apply to its provisions, and he feared the retention of this 29th clause would derogate from the full power of that 56th section.
  MR. LEEMANsaid, that the clause was well-considered by the Committee, and he hoped it would be retained.
  MR. AYRTONthought it would be better to strike out the clause, and give the voters to which it applied the benefit of the general law.
  THE ATTORNEY GENERALsaid, it was necessary to omit the clause.
  Clause struck out.
  Clauses 30 to 34, inclusive, agreed to.
  MR. DIXON MR. DIXON moved the addition of the following clause:—
  (List of voters to be made out by overseers.)
  "That the overseers of every parish or township in any City or Borough may, on or before the last day of July, make out or cause to be made out the lists of all persons who may be entitled

  567
  to vote in the election of a Member or Members to serve in Parliament for such City or Borough, so far as practicable, in the manner following, viz.:—In the alphabetical order of streets or places in each parish or township, or where such parishes or townships shall have been divided into polling districts, then in the alphabetical order of streets or places in each polling district; the names of voters being arranged in the order in which they appear in each street or place in the rate-books for such parishes or townships."
  The effect of the clause would be to make the register an exact copy of the rate-book, the streets being arranged in alphabetical order. At the present time expense is caused by having to re-arrange the rate-book and place the list of voters in alphabetical order. The authorities of Birmingham believe that this labour and expense are quite unnecessary, and they requested him to move the addition of this clause to the Bill, to avoid unnecessary expense, and for the purpose of furthering the objects of the Bill—namely, to save time. By adopting the Resolution there would be a very considerable saving effected for the candidates, because they would otherwise have to re-arrange the list of voters and undo what the overseers had already done. The expense of the operation in Birmingham last year was £250 on one side only, and the total expense was probably £500. The voters would be increased under the new Act, and it was not unreasonable to suppose that this particular item of expenditure would be increased considerably, perhaps trebled, if this clause should not be added to the Bill. The expense thus caused in Birmingham would probably reach £1,000; and one of their objects should be to make the elections as cheap, and not as dear as possible. He had altered the clause since it was first placed on the Notice Paper from "shall" to "may," so that the overseers might not be compelled to make out the lists in alphabetical order in places where it was not wished to put the clause into operation.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, that the proposal might seem suitable to Birmingham, which was only one parish, but it would cause great confusion in places where a borough contained several parishes. The clause appeared to be framed in order to save the candidate the expense of making out canvassing books. The result of making the clause permissive would be that some overseers would make out the register on one plan and some on the other. He was told that the overseers in some parishes had made considerable
  568
  progress in preparing the lists for the present year, and they were very anxious that the clause should not pass.
  MR. AYRTONthought that the clause would not work unless it was made imperative, or was added as a power to the overseers in addition to the duty which was now imperative. It would not do to have a permissive clause in substitution of the present duty.
  MR. LOCKEsaid, he did not think any great difficulty would arise by the overseer carrying out the plan proposed by the clause, or that any serious additional expense would be thrown upon parishes.
  MR. SERJEANT GASELEEsaid, he thought it would be much easier and cheaper for the overseer to be allowed merely to copy the rate-book, than to be obliged to arrange the list of name3 in alphabetical order.
  MR. BOUVERIEsaid, it was necessary at election times that they should be able with facility to turn to the names of the electors, and that could be done only when the list was arranged alphabetically. On the whole, if there was to be a choice between the two methods, it would be better to adhere to the present practice.
  MR. HIBBERTsaid, he thought the plan, if adopted at all, should only be adopted in those boroughs which consisted of one parish or township.
  Clause negatived.
  MR. FOLJAMBErose to move the following new clause:—
  "Where in any Borough the overseers shall, after the twenty-ninth day of September, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-seven, have rated the owner instead of the occupier of any dwelling-house or other tenement, in contravention of 'The Representation of the People Act, 1867,' the occupier of such premises shall, upon duly paying or tendering on or before the twentieth day of July next, the difference, if any, between the amount of poor rate payable on or before the fifth day of January, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight, in respect of such premises by such owner, and that which would have been payable by an ordinary occupier thereof, be entitled to be registered as a voter, as fully as if he had been rated and paid all rates in pursuance of the third and seventh sections of the said Act."
  The clause was very similar to the 30th section of the old Reform Act; and his object in proposing it was to do an act of justice towards a class of occupiers who were fully entitled to be put upon the register. In a parish in his own constituency (East Retford) several hundreds of such men had been omitted from the list, and it was fair to suppose that the same

  569
  thing might have occurred in other places. His clause would remedy that state of things.
  VISCOUNT GALWAYsupported the clause proposed by his hon. Colleague, and read a letter from the overseer of Worksop, explaining the circumstances under which between 500 and 600 persons there would be practically disfranchised unless some such clause as that were adopted.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, it was obvious that the clause was proposed to meet a particular case, and such legislation was always objectionable and dangerous. It was difficult to say whether it would meet that case, and still more difficult to say what its effect would be upon other cases. The persons whose names were said to have been improperly omitted by the overseer had a remedy at the time under the existing statutes, and if they had not then availed themselves of that remedy the passing of the proposed enactment in their favour would be giving them an unfair advantage.
  SIR ROBERT COLLIERsaid, that the persons to whom the clause referred ought not to be allowed to suffer from the wrongful act of others. He thought that a good deal was to be said for the proposition that when a man whose landlord paid the composition rate, and himself paid the difference, he should have a vote.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, there could be no party feeling in this matter. He conceived that it would be injudicious to pass a clause for the sake of one particular borough, for its operations might extend to other cases to which it would be improper to apply it.
  Clause negatived.
  MR. VILLIERS MR. VILLIERS moved the insertion of the following clause:—
  (Overseers may cause houses and buildings in streets to be marked with numbers.)
  "The overseers of any parish in England, the population whereof shall exceed ten thousand persons, according to the Census for the time being, may, with the consent of the Poor Law Board, from time to time cause the houses and buildings in all, or any of the streets, to be marked with numbers as they think fit, and the cost shall be chargeable upon and paid out of the monies to be raised for the relief of the poor of any such parish."
  The right hon. Member said that in the manufacturing districts there were large blocks of houses without any numbers, and streets without any names, the property belonging to owners who, under the Com-
  570
  pounding Acts, had been rated. Since the Reform Act of last year the compound-householder was done away with; and the clause he proposed would enable overseers to number the houses, so that the occupiers might be identified as the persons entitled to be placed on the register.
  MR. POWELLsaid, he thought it would be inconvenient to introduce the clause into the Bill, inasmuch as such a power was already given in the Local Government Act.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, that the clause was not a fit one to be incorporated in the present Bill, though it might be a very proper one to be inserted in a rating Bill. This clause, besides, would have no operation in the present year with, respect to registration, as the lists were now practically commenced.
  Clause negatived.
  MR. AYRTONsaid, that it would materially interfere with the progress of the proceedings before the Revising Barristers to have a large number of lodgers brought to their Courts to wait and see whether anybody would start up and challenge their votes. As these persons were to have their names in the lists long before the Revising Barristers held their Courts, it was only reasonable that those who wished to challenge the votes of any lodgers should give them notice before the holding of the Registration Courts. He hoped the Home Secretary would consider the expediency of introducing a provision by which notice should be given to lodgers of objections to their claims, without which they should not be compelled to come to the Court.
  MR. BAINESsaid, he believed the lodgers were a much more respectable class of people than was at first supposed. He was certain that any clause which compelled the attendance of the lodger at the Court must be amended.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALobjected to the suggestion. The effect of it would be to repeal a section in the Act of last Session, which had been deliberately adopted after considerable discussion.
  MR. BAINES MR. BAINES moved a clause to provide that lodgers who may have made a claim duly certified shall be entitled to vote unless notice of objection to his claim had been given to him three clear days before the sitting of the Revising Barrister's Court.
  SIR ROBERT COLLIERsupported the clause.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, he hoped the clause would not be pressed. The subject was deliberately considered and decided last year, and the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. M'Cullagh Torrens), who was much interested in the question, was then an assenting party to the decision then arrived at.
  Clause negatived.
  House resumed.
  Bill reported; as amended, to be considered To-morrow, at Two of the clock.
  House adjourned at half after One o'clock.

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Medway Regulation Act Continuance * (199); University Elections (Voting Papers) * (201); Curragh of Kildnre * (195); Bank of Bombay * (196); New Zealand (Legislative Council) * (197); Consular Marriages * (198): Bank Holidays and Bills of Exchange * (200); Local Government Supplemental (No. 3) * (194); Prisons(Scotland) Administration Acts (Lanarkshire) Amendment * (202).
Committee—Boundary (170); Judgments Extension *(160).
Report—Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) * (203); Judgments Extension * (160).
Third Reading—Drainage Provisional Order Confirmation* (158); Inclosure (No. 2) * (159); Local Government Supplemental (No. 4) * (165); Local Government Supplemental (No. 5) * (160), and passed.

ABYSSINIAN EXPEDITION—VOTE OF THANKS TO HER MAJESTY'S FORCES.
Moved, That the Vote of Thanks to the Army of Abyssinia take Precedence of the Orders of the Day: Agreed to.—(The Lord Privy Seal.)
THE EARL OF MALMESBURY: My Lords, if on the one hand I feel both pride and pleasure at finding it my duty to make to your Lordships a proposition so honourable alike to your Lordships' House and to those to whom it is addressed, on the other hand I know that the task has fallen into hands hardly worthy of the great occasion, and that it ought to have fallen to some other of your Lordships more competent to deal with it as it deserves. Therefore I must ask your indulgence while I shortly put before you the great events to which this Motion refers, and ask your Lordships to consider how fair and just it is to do honour to the Array of England and also to the Navy who have been employed by Her Majesty's Government on this occasion. My Lords, Sir Robert Napier himself says at the end of his despatch that "it is difficult to find words that can do justice to every arm of the service which has been employed;" and if he finds it hard to do so, far more difficult must it be for me—who have not been present during the operations, and can only judge of them by what I read in his despatches—to do full justice to the forces on this occasion. And here in passing I may remark that the despatches of Sir Robert shew that the use of the pen is as inseparable from the name of Napier as the use of the sword. My
474
Lords, it is now five years since I was one of the first—if not the first—to direct your Lordships' attention to what was passing in Abyssinia. That is a long period for Englishmen to suffer under the cruelties of a barbarous savage; but, if anyone is ready to find fault with our forbearance during that long time, he must recollect that it is always the duty of the strong man to bear patiently with the weak, and, until his insolence becomes intolerable, to refrain from any violent measures. But, my Lords, at last this conduct on the part of King Theodore did become intolerable—intolerable to the feelings of humanity, and intolerable to our feelings of honour as an independent country; and in the year 1867 my noble Friend (the Earl of Derby), being then Premier, determined to chastise this half-educated savage. My Lords, in this he was supported by public opinion; and although no doubt there were some hesitation and some apprehension entertained both in Parliament and out of Parliament as to the difficulties that would have to be encountered, and as to the success of the Expedition; yet on the whole the country received with indulgence all that the Government intended to do, and displayed the same spirit and confidence in British energy which it has always shown on like occasions. And, my Lords, no confidence of that sort was ever justified more completely and rapidly than by the results of this Expedition. Sir Robert Napier, if he had within him—which he has not—the epigrammatic bombast of Italian conquerors, might quote the three Latin words which Caesar used to describe his own victory "Veni, vidi, vici." He might have done so had his nature been the same; but I need only allude to his despatches to show how modest and how simple that nature is. Well, my Lords, it is remarkable that this Expedition was crowned with a rapidity of success of which I think there is hardly another instance. Lord Stanley's despatch to the Emperor Theodore informing him that war would be declared against him was written on the 16th of April, 1867, and on the 13th of April, 1868, Magdala was taken and the Emperor was no more. Exactly one year passed between the despatch of the Foreign Secretary of State, threatening Theodore with the vengeance of England, and the execution of that vengeance. Sir Robert Napier landed on the 3rd of January at Zoulla, and in exactly 100 days finished the war. My Lords, I need hardly say

475
more in favour of the Commander-in-Chief than by putting that simple fact before your Lordships. When this Expedition was determined upon by Her Majesty's: Government your Lordships are aware that the Bombay Government was intrusted with the management of the whole matter; and, taking it in the historical order of affairs, I must say that great credit is due to Sir Seymour Fitzgerald, who, under the advice of Sir Robert Napier, organized the Expedition in Bombay. Nothing could have been done with more sagacity, with more promptitude, or with greater judgment than the whole arrangement and organization of this Expedition under these two able men. Many of your Lordships have known Sir Seymour Fitzgerald in this country, and I for one can testify to his ability and industry when he was under me in the Foreign Office. I am, therefore, not at all surprised at the credit he has gained by the management of the arrangements and the organization of the Expedition. My Lords, Her Majesty's Government gave full powers to Sir Robert Napier to act in every respect as he thought fit, to determine as he pleased, and to act entirely upon his own judgment; and, my Lords. I think the event has proved how very important it is on such occasions, when you find a competent man, that you should give him as much liberty of action as possible. My Lords, the composition of the army was very remarkable. It consisted of men of different nations and of different creeds. There were Mahomedan and there were Christian troops; there were Christian Sepoys, there were Beloochees and Hindoostanees; but this army, though of such different materials, was bound together by so solid a chain of discipline that throughout the whole campaign the utmost cordiality prevailed in every part of the force. Doubtless, my Lords, we owe much of this cordiality and good feeling to the character of Sir Robert Napier, who commanded them. It may not be out of place to mention some general facts respecting the organization of the Expedition, independently of the troops. There were 23,600 animals, exclusively of forty-two elephants, employed. The ships of various sorts numbered 231, with a tonnage that amounted altogether to 209,600 tons. And when we speak of the forty-two elephants that were employed, we cannot help observing that no such use has been made of those intelligent and magnificent animals since the days of Hannibal. In India they are
476
used in a champagne country, and more for draught than carriage; but in this instance, when mortars and artillery of 18cwt. were put upon their backs, they showed an activity in climbing those dangerous and slippery paths over the mountains that astonished even the Indian officers who had seen them at work in their own country.
My Lords, I now come to the Resolulutions which I have to move, and I think it better to read them at once. My Lords, I propose to your Lordships to resolve—
"That the Thanks of this House be given to Lieut.-General Sir Robert Napier, G.C.B., G.C.S.I., for the exemplary Skill with which he planned and the distinguished Energy, Courage, and Perseverance with which he conducted the recent Expedition into Abyssinia, resulting in the Defeat by Her Majesty's Forces of the Army of King Theodore and the Vindication of the Honour of the Country by the Rescue from Captivity of Her Majesty's Envoy und other British Subjects, and by the Capture and Destruction of the strong Fortress of Magdala.
"That the Thanks of this House be given to Commodore Heath, R.N., C.B., for the indefatigable Zeal and great Ability with which he conducted the Naval Operations connected with the Transport of the Troops and Stores upon which the Success of the Expedition materially depended.
"That the Thanks of this House be given to Major-General Sir Charles Staveley, K.C.B., Major-General G. Malcolm, C.B., Major-General E. L. Russell, Brigadier-General W. Merewether, C.B., and the other Officers of the Navy and Army for the Energy, Gallantry, and Ability with which they have executed the various Services which they have been called on to perform throughout these arduous Operations.
"That this House doth highly acknowledge and approve the Discipline, Gallantry, and Endurance displayed by the Petty Officers, Non-commissioned Officers, and Men of the Navy and Army, both European and Native, during these Operations; and that the same be signified to them by their respective Commanding Officers."
My Lords, I think no further tribute of praise need be paid by me to Sir Robert Napier than is embodied in these Resolutions; but, passing for a moment the other officers engaged, I will ask your Lordships to recollect that General Slaveley was the officer who first arranged a base of operations at Zoulla, and being afterwards sent to the front, commanded the troops that fought the battle in front of Magdala, and was present at its capture. Let me also remind your Lordships that General, Malcolm had command of the chain of communication between Zoulla and the most advanced posts of the army, and though he and the officers under him were not present at the taking of Magdala, yet their services were equally im-

477
portant; for the communication here was like the chain attached to the anchor of a ship—if one link were broken, the army, like the ship, would be destroyed or at least be in the greatest danger. This communication was maintained with the utmost possible energy and intelligence, and was of the greatest importance in securing the safety of the advance. And now I would also mention the name of Major General Russell. Sir Robert Napier was most anxious that he should receive by name the Thanks of Parliament for his services, and Her Majesty's Government have thought proper to yield to that desire. Major General Russell was taken from his post at Aden at the request of Sir Robert Napier, who speaks of his services in maintaining the base of operations at Zoulla as of the greatest value. The name of Brigadier General Merewether is more familiar to your Lordships. From the very beginning, and, indeed, before the Expedition landed, he showed the greatest intelligence in maintaining what are called "political relations" with the various tribes and chiefs, first upon the coast and afterwards inland; and Sir Robert Napier speaks of his services also in the highest terms. Nor ought we to omit the great services of the navy on this occasion. The services of Commodore Heath and the other officers employed are spoken of by Sir Robert Napier in these words—
"I am very happy in this opportunity of saying how cordially Commodore Heath has conducted the naval duties of the Expedition in connection with the army. The spirit of their commander has been emulated by the officers and men of the Royal Navy under his orders. The labour under a hot sun of landing supplies and water, and re-embarking troops, followers, and cattle has never, for a single day, ceased since the arrival of the first transport in Annesley Bay.…Greatly, too, are we indebted to Captain Tryon, R.N., the able Director of Transports,"
I may also mention the name of Captain Edye, of Her Majesty's ship Satellite, who rendered most useful assistance in superintending the distillation of water for the army. In that country it is impossible in the dry season to find a sufficient quantity of water for the troops, and the distillation of water, therefore, became a point of vast importance. Not the least agreeable part of my task is to ask your Lordships to acknowledge the discipline and gallantry of the Petty Officers, Non-commissioned Officers, and Men of the Army and Navy. No campaign ever showed more conspicuously the energy of British
478
troops, and their constancy in enduring the privations and overcoming the natural difficulties of the country. Their labours were immense. Sir Robert Napier in his despatch describes them as all working with the spade, every regiment being furnished with tools; and I think we shall never again hear, as we have so often heard before, that the English soldier can only fight, but cannot dig, and is incapable of throwing up intrenchments like the soldiers of other armies. Again, the march of the 45th Regiment is one of the most extraordinary on record. Having been detained in the rear, and being anxious to come as soon as possible to the front, they marched 300 miles in twenty-four days, and accomplished seventy miles in four days over a pass 10,500 feet high. The exploits of the cavalry appear to be equally admirable. We can easily understand what a difficult country Abyssinia is for horses; and yet Sir Robert Napier described the manner in which the cavalry behaved as most extraordinary considering the obstacles they had to encounter in such a mountainous country. I have mentioned the names of the gallant Generals who have led our troops to victory; and I should now like to mention two names of another class in our force—the names of Drummer M'Guire, and Private Bergin of the 33rd Regiment, who were the first two men at the storming of Magdala. Nor was the humanity and good conduct of the troops throughout the Expedition inferior to their courage and endurance. Sir Robert Napier says—
"Not a single complaint has been made against a soldier of having injured or wilfully molested either property or person."
My Lords, I do not believe that of any army in Europe or in any other part of the world could the same be said. As your Lordships are aware, Magdala was taken, and finding himself in a desperate condition—believing, perhaps, that the same cruelty which he had inflicted on others would be exercised towards him—this savage King put an end to his life with his own hand. The atrocities he had perpetrated were such that I think there cannot be a single person who would extend to him the slightest compassion. The cruelties he committed within three days of his death are too horrible to be repeated; but, if anybody doubts that the monster was unfit to live, he has only to study the first part of the Papers laid on your Lordships' Table, and

479
I would refer more particularly to page 693 for a description of horrors almost incredible. I believe that, here and there, it has been objected that, when once King Theodore had given up the captives, an attack on Magdala was unnecessary. It has been suggested, no doubt from kindly motives of humanity, that Sir Robert Napier might have accepted the submission of Theodore instead of deciding to storm his fortress, and in this way put an end to his existence. But there can be no greater mistake than to suppose that such a course would have been pursued without risk of very great misfortune. In the first place, it is almost certain that if he had been left there with the whole or with any considerable part of his army still under his command, when we had begun our retreat in that very difficult country—a retreat almost as arduous as the advance, except that we then had to make no roads—the King, with the little faith to be found in barbarian rulers, would have attacked or have harrassed our troops as long as he could have done so. There was another reason why Sir Robert Napier could not adopt such a course—namely, that in his advance he had obtained the support of the chiefs of the country on the understanding, and a thorough confidence on their side, that he would put an end to the tyranny of King Theodore, who was as hateful to them as he was to ourselves. We should, therefore, have broken faith with those chiefs who supported us in our advance to Magdala if we had not destroyed the power of Theodore. One more criticism has been made very often during the progress of the Expedition by amateur soldiers, and that is that it was extravagantly large. Now, I think, that even if you had not received the statement of Sir Robert Napier himself to the effect that he had not one man too many, it would still have been evident that, looking at the long chain of communication, extending over 400 miles through that difficult country, from the coast to Magdala, it would have been impossible to have employed a smaller force with a fair prospect of success, or to listen to suggestions made that the prisoners might have been rescued with a couple of flying squadrons of cavalry. That has now been shown to have been wholly impracticable. I will allude to one point more, and that is the very small loss of life which has occurred during these operations. In other wars, we know how heavy has been
480
what is called "the butcher's bill," and we know what numbers have generally perished by the sword and. by disease. But there seems to have been a special Providence over this army, and it is not unbecoming to say that the justice of our cause and the crimes which called for punishment from us may have brought upon our army the Divine blessing, without which no science and no gallantry will avail. The army feels, and justly feels, that a debt of gratitude is due to the illustrious Duke who sits upon the cross-Benches. All are aware of the assistance he rendered, and the zeal he showed in prosecuting this Expedition to a successful end; and I have myself heard the strongest expressions of the value of his co-operation. It is with pride and pleasure I hand these Resolutions to the Lord Chancellor; and I am assured they will be accepted by your Lordships with the same readiness and satisfaction that I feel in proposing them.
The Resolutions having been read by The LORD CHANCELLOR,
EARL RUSSELL: My Lords, it gives me great pleasure to second the Motion which the noble Earl has proposed, and to express my concurrence in all the remarks he has made. The noble Earl has stated that on the 16th of April, 1867, the Expedition was resolved upon, and that on the 13th of April last Magdala was taken; and I may odd that on the 2nd of July we have the Expedition wholly completed, and we have welcomed on his return the gallant General by whom it was so ably commanded and have now only to vote our thanks to our officers and troops for their successful conduct of the enterprize. My Lords, I quite agree with the noble Earl that it was right to show forbearance before we resorted to the dreadful issue of war and the uncertainty of military operations in an unknown and inhospitable country. I, therefore, think it was right to postpone until the time when the Resolution was taken the determination to undertake this Expedition: and I also think that determination was come to exactly at the right time, when forbearance had reached its utmost limits, and there was nothing left for us to do but to vindicate the honour of the country. We can all rejoice now that that honour has been vindicated in so triumphant manner. The noble Earl referred, in the next place, to the preparations that were made for the Expedition;

481
and I think that to all the Departments of the Government that were concerned—to the Foreign Office, which carried on the communications with the Emperor Theodore; to the Indian Department, which was charged with the necessary preparations; to the War Department, and to the Department of the Commander-in-Chief—the Thanks of this House and of the whole country are due for the manner in which they performed the duties that devolved upon them. Then, again, when the Commander-in Chief was to be named, the Government acted at once with prudence and justice; for, having ascertained from authentic sources the character of Sir Robert Napier, they selected him and confided to his discretion the details of the manner in which the Expedition was to be carried out. Next we have to admire, through the period over which the Expedition has extended, the harmony that has prevailed among all the Departments of the Army concerned in carrying on the operations. The infantry, the cavalry, the artillery, the transport corps, and the pioneers all acted in harmony, and performed their duties in such a manner as to contribute to the achievement of the great result. And what is it which brought to bear upon bodies of men of this kind of many different nations, and trained in very different schools, distributed over a long tract of country—some of them Natives of it—makes them all act in harmony, and with that common purpose which conduces to success? It is due to the influence of the single mind which commands; and in this case it was the character of the man at the head of the Expedition which produced harmony, inspired confidence in all who followed him, and made them confide at once in his decisions, and do all in their power to carry out his purposes. I need not enter into any of the details of the Expedition, because Sir Robert Napier has narrated in the most simple, the most modest, and, at the same time, in the clearest language all the operations which he directed. I will only say that to all the brilliant achievements of the British Army in times past, I am glad that we have in our times added one other not less brilliant; that we have added another to the roll of those names which carry our military fame over the world. There might have been greater difficulties to overcome; there might have been greater obstacles to be surmounted; there may be some gallant officers and some
482
brave men who may lament that the resistance was not greater, that there were not more military exploits to be performed, and that there was no long siege to be undertaken; but, for my own part, when I consider the purpose for which this Expedition was undertaken, I think it a merciful interposition of Providence that no cruel act was committed against the prisoners to induce us to prolong the campaign, which was undertaken with the desire to carry it no further than was necessary to effect their release. I feel quite sure—and every man in this country feels quite sure—that, whatever number of assailants had come against the British Army, whatever difficulties of marching they had had to surmount, their courage and their endurance would have overcome them all. I must say we ought to be most thankful that this Army, without having had such obstacles to surmount, has succeeded in rescuing the unfortunate men and women who had been so long kept in captivity, and that it has returned to this country without great loss of life by climate or by war. With regard to the last catastrophe of the war, it is a happy thing the Emperor Theodore did not attempt any further retreat; and, as for the loss of his life, I must say it is a benefit to mankind that such an odious monster should be removed from the world. I therefore beg permission most cordially and heartily to second the Motion of the noble Earl. This Motion concerns only the military and naval authorities, who were engaged in the war, all of whom deserve the Thanks proposed to be given to them; and although it does not come within the scope of the Vote of Thanks, I may add that I think the Government—for the determination they took, for the time at which they took it, and for the preparations they made for the Expedition, deserve the acknowledgments of the House and the country.
THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGE: My Lords, your Lordships may naturally and reasonably expect that I should address some observations to the House on this subject, and I do to with a satisfaction which is rarely experienced, because I believe I may say, without fear of contradiction, that in the whole course of this Expedition there has not been a single military step taken, which may not be considered a success and a triumph. I admit that these are strong terms, which may be thought to have a more appro-

483
priate application to those stirring and brilliant military exploits which have often illustrated our history; but the triumph which has been achieved in the case of this Expedition is the result of sustained energy and unremitting endurance, as well as of courage; and may, therefore, claim its own special distinction. From the gallant General, who commanded, down to the youngest drummer, there has not been one man in the Army, who, from the day he landed to the day he re-embarked, did not devote his whole energies, physical and mental, to the service of his country. Success has been achieved in a most remarkable degree; and that success has been achieved by overcoming difficulties, and by contending with dangers, which nobody foresaw to the extent which were afterwards encountered. I have observed it has been occasionally said that the General might have been more rapid in his movements, and more pressing in his attack; but, so far from that being a charge against him, it is a proof of his talent and capacity, that he did not listen to advice—the very natural advice—of those who were not so cognizant as he was of the nature of what he had to do; and that he was not to be so far carried away as to attempt that which he was not assured he could accomplish, but would wait until the moment arrived when he knew he could attain his object, and then strike a blow with vigour. It is to the exercise of this discretion we owe the happy result of the Expedition. Such, in few words, are the qualities that have given distinction to the General who carried on these operations, whose anxiety of mind must have been great. At various stages of his advance he found himself called upon to diminish the comforts of the troops, to diminish their rations, to dispense with camp followers, and to leave behind various stores and necessaries ordinarily carried by an Army; and these sacrifices were made in order to attain the object in view; and I hope your Lordships will think he has attained it with no more bloodshed than in the performance of strict duty be was called upon to incur. I know it has been said he ought not to have done more than rescue the prisoners, and that having obtained them, he ought to have retired, without making any further demand. But I venture to think your Lordships will agree with me in saying that as a General, he could not have done that. As it was, even after the death of Theodore,
484
and the destruction of Magdala, and the dispersion of the followers of Theodore, there was considerable difficulty in protecting the return of the Army from the dangerous and wild tribes of the country through which it had to pass. If therefore, Sir Robert Napier had not struck the blow home—if I may use the expression—if he had not entirely broken up the nest of robbers who had recognized the authority of Theodore, it is to be supposed that the forces might have been exposed to very serious dangers, which might have resulted in the General returning with a shattered, instead of a perfect army. It was, therefore, necessary that Sir Robert Napier should do what he did before he retraced his steps. It has been commented upon as singular that the force sent to Abyssinia was not under the immediate control of the Government Departments of this country, but was placed under the Indian Government. When Her Majesty's Government did me the honour to consult me as to how the war should be conducted, and asked me for my opinion on the subject, I could not for a moment hesitate to say that one thing was quite clear—namely, that the Government must allow the Expedition to be planned by one authority and one authority only. The question then arose as to what that authority should be—whether it should be at home or in India. My Lords, I ventured to suggest that it should be in India, and for the simple reason that an expedition of that kind could not be undertaken without employing a very large proportion of Indian troops. It was, therefore, much more reasonable and wise that the whole conduct of this war should be in the hands of an Indian authority, instead of being confided to anyone at home. Moreover—and perhaps this is the most important point of all—it had been decided by Her Majesty's Government that Sir Robert Napier was to have the supreme command of the Expedition; and it therefore appeared to me that there could be no doubt that the General officer who was to command the Expedition was the proper person to have the sole and undivided responsibility of making all the requisite arrangements. I think the result of this experiment—if I may so term it—should be a lesson to us. It is quite evident that when any great operation of war is being planned you must place the greatest reliance in the officer upon whom you intend to confer the honour of commanding the troops. Of

485
course, it is natural, and, indeed, essential, that he should act in cordial co-operation with the authorities; but it is above all essential that he should be the ruling and directing spirit of the operations—that they should take their impress from him, and he will be stimulated to the exercise of his best energies by the knowledge that in the event of failure the responsibility will be his, Depend upon it that is the proper way to conduct such a military operation, and I do hope that the lesson which we have learnt upon this occasion will not be lost upon us should it hereafter become necessary to undertake an expedition of a similar kind. I wish also to point out that the Expedition has shown us how necessary it is to keep in a state of efficiency certain establishments, without which the Army cannot act. It is a very remarkable circumstance that at the beginning of this contest we were all of us—including, I believe, Her Majesty's Government, and certainly myself—considerably alarmed that the delay consequent upon our want of transport would render it doubtful whether the Expedition could be brought to a close with safety. There was no transport corps in India at all, and therefore everything had to be improvised. I may, perhaps, be allowed to mention that at a more distant period I experienced the same inconvenience; and it is evident that if we do not keep up at least the nucleus of a transport establishment in time of peace we shall find it very difficult suddenly to improvise one in time of war. The zeal, however, with which the officers of the Indian Army worked in order to form an efficient transport corps was quite remarkable. Sir Robert Napier told me this morning, when I had the pleasure of shaking hands with him, how zealously the officers of the transport corps, brought together from every part of India, worked to produce those results on which we are now able to congratulate ourselves. He told me of one officer, whom he met at Zoulla, wearing a "wide-awake," and looking extremely tattered and shattered, but whose only object was to get his forty or fifty mules to the proper place. Any officer of the British Army would, I am sure, be willing, in order to promote the success of an expedition, to enter into services which were somewhat different from the duties of the special corps to which they may happen to belong. I am certain that every officer, from the highest to the lowest, has worked very hard in this
486
Abyssinian Expedition. To add anything to what has been already said of the conduct of Sir Robert Napier would be quite superfluous on my part; but I cannot refrain from saying that this distinguished man, who has shown himself so competent to command and to express in suitable terms the exploits of the force under his orders, is at the same time one of the most simple, modest, and unassuming men I ever met. After seeing him this morning, the impression left on my mind is that he is an officer who thought nothing of himself, and everything of the troops under his command. I hope I may be also permitted to say that while I share in the feeling of your Lordships with regard to the ability of Sir Robert Napier, and the high merits of Commodore Heath, Major General Sir Charles Staveley, Major General Malcolm, Major General Russell, Brigadier General Merewether, and the other Officers, I cannot but express my admiration of the extraordinary determination, endurance, and vigour displayed by the Non-commissioned Officers and Men, many of whom were Natives. It should be borne in mind that these Native troops really vied with the European troops in the performance of their duty. They performed their duty as conscientiously and as well as the Europeans, and I am sure that both Natives and Europeans richly deserve their share of that praise and commendation which your Lordships, the House of Commons and the country have bestowed upon the Officers. In reference to the very slight assistance which I may have given to the Expedition, I can only say that I certainly did my best to give it every support in my power, and that in doing so I received the cordial support and assistance of all the Departments with which I had occasion to communicate.
THE EARL OF LONGFORD: My Lords, though this Expedition was planned and the troops were supplied by the authorities in India, yet there were certain supplementary services which were rendered by the Departments under the control of the War Office, and which have been recognized by Sir Robert Napier in his despatches. For instance, there was the Topographical Department, which has constructed from very scanty materials an excellent map of the country. The Royal Engineers also sent out a body of instructed men—telegraphers, signallers, photographers, and well sinkers, whose services were of the utmost value, while the Arsenal at Wool-

487
wich designed and constructed two small batteries of artillery. An order was likewise received at Woolwich to provide 8,000 baggage animals for delivery at Suez in the short space of three months. From our experience in the Crimea it was at least doubtful whether they could be supplied in the specified time but, nevertheless, the task was undertaken, and in consequence of the zeal of the various officers, successfully accomplished. I regret to say, however, that one valuable life was lost. Colonel Clark Kennedy, who was sent to Egypt to superintend the arrangements, died of a disease which was caused, or, at any rate, greatly aggravated by the anxiety consequent upon the duties which he had to perform. He was an officer of high reputation, and had served with distinction in India and China, and was as much distinguished by his energy and activity in peace as in war, and was doubtless known to many of your Lordships on account of the active part he had taken in the Volunteer movement. As the representative in this House of the Department with which I am connected, I beg to add my cordial congratulations to the gallant General and to the forces under his orders, and I will add the expression of my sympathy for the relations of those—fortunately few in number—who have lost their lives in the Expedition. In India, when it was reported that the troops would be furnished from one Presidency, the troops in the other Presidencies also at once remonstrated and claimed to have a share in the glory and the danger of the undertaking. In this country also, the moment the Expedition was announced, the public Departments were besieged by eager applicants who wished to join the Expedition in different capacities. A force animated with such a spirit could hardly fail to succeed. To ourselves—the Members of Parliament—it has been suggested that such an occasion as this has also its moral. The incidents of a military campaign, the calculation of forces, the preparation for attack and defence, the sagacity of the leader who foresees success, and the endurance of the rank and file, which enable him to retrieve a disaster are re-produced in the circumstances of political life—namely, in the discussion and the conduct of public affairs in a powerful and free State; and when we assemble here to pay such honour as we can pay to those who have been mighty in war, and to offer the
488
thanks of Parliament to the General and those under his command who have successfully conducted a difficult enterprize, we may bear in mind that men will follow us who will inquire with a keen scrutiny how we have conducted ourselves in the campaign of the national life.
THE EARL OF ELLEN BOROUGH: My Lords. I beg leave to say a few words on this Motion. I desire to be allowed to offer the tribute of my congratulations to the Commander of this Expedition, the English troops acting under him, and also—the more particularly because of the interest I have always taken in the Indian Army—to the soldiers of the Indian Army who took so prominent a part in this achievement. My Lords, you will recollect that I expressed an opinion that this Expedition ought not to have been undertaken. I did so because I thought the risks greatly exceeded the chances of success. I pointed out that the troops engaged in the Expedition would have to maintain a line of communication nearly 400 miles in length, between the point of basis on the coast from which their, supplies were to be received and the point of actual attack; and that there would be great difficulties arising from the character of the population and the nature of the country generally. Every danger that I anticipated has been encountered by our troops. Indeed, my Lords, the country has proved to be more difficult, the obstacles to the advance of our troops have been more serious, the embarrassments in respect of transport have been greater, and the supply of water has been more scanty than I had ventured to suggest. In fact, no one can read the despatches without seeing that sometimes—even up to almost the last moment—the Array was in the greatest peril. It is because I was more keenly alive to the difficulties of the campaign, that I can now regard the result of the Expedition with feelings of perhaps greater satisfaction than those entertained by your Lordships who did not share in my apprehensions; and that I feel, and am entitled to feel, greater pride and satisfaction at the triumphant success achieved by our arms. I think, my Lords, this Abyssinian Expedition has no parallel in. history. In all previous campaigns the contest was between man and man; with, perhaps, frequent difficulties arising from the nature of the country, but difficulties which had to be surmounted by both parties. But this was a contest, not with

489
man, but with Nature—a contest waged for 400 miles. I know nothing in history to be compared with the difficulties which the troops in this campaign overcame with such spirit and determination. I believe that this campaign entitles those engaged in it to the highest praise which can be given to soldiers. My Lords, I remember the Duke of Wellington telling me on one occasion that the British Indian Army when he knew it came nearer to his idea of what the Roman Legion was than any army he had ever seen. I am glad that on this occasion the British Indian Army has maintained its reputation of those days. I recollect that in one of those accounts which from time to time were furnished by private hands and published in the newspapers this fact particularly struck me—that in the attack on Magdala the Belochees behaved so well that they received loud cheers from the British Army. My Lords, in those cheers I hear the death knell of the memory of the Indian mutiny; because I believe that henceforth in the recollection of common services and common efforts the British soldier and the Indian soldier will once more feel for each other those feelings of brotherhood which made the two armies, when formerly thus united, invincible. I trust, my Lords, that everything will be done to improve the organization of the Native Army, and that they will not be left to want the means of transport, with out which an army is useless. I trust the greatest care will be taken to establish an esprit de corps, so that the soldiers and the officers may know one another and grow old together. I hope, also, that in the treatment of the Native troops every consideration will be given to their religious feelings and their laws of caste. We ought, I think, to still act on the principles which guided us in the early days of our connection with India. I remember reading the opinion of a philosophic historian, that it is easy to rule our Empire by the means through which it was acquired. I trust that principle will influence us hereafter in our legislation for British India; that we shall endeavour on all occasions to conciliate the Natives and to obtain their confidence; and that, above all, our rule shall be characterized by that which produces the greatest effect in an Eastern country—the principles of justice. If we follow these principles, I believe the British Empire in India will be secure, that for centuries we may extend the
490
blessings of our rule to a constantly increasing population, and that British India may last, endure, and be eternal.
THE EARL OF DERBY: My Lords, I do not apprehend that in your Lordships' House there will be any probability of a difference of opinion on this occasion; and though I am conscious that I am not entitled to speak on military matters with the authority of the illustrious Duke on the cross Benches, or with that of my noble Friend who has just sat down, yet I trust that, considering the post I had the honour to hold when this Expedition, was determined upon, I may be permitted to add my voice to the chorus of approbation which has been raised in Parliament and throughout the country to greet the victorious General and Army who have just completed an Expedition that will ever be memorable in the annals of our country. My Lords, perhaps I may be allowed also to congratulate my noble Friends in the Government on the success of an Expedition which I can assure your Lordships was, at the time we resolved upon it, a matter of deep anxiety to all the Members of the Administration. When entering upon this Expedition in a distant and unknown country, at a period of the year—and it could not have been undertaken sooner—which left only scanty time for preparation—we had to encounter all the difficulties alluded to by my noble Friend—difficulties some of which were exaggerated, others the anticipation of which fell short of the reality, and others which were not anticipated at all. We had also to encounter the doubts and obstacles of those who objected to the Expedition altogether, of those who thought the preparations too large, and of those who thought them too small. Some persons thought that the work to be done was absolutely insignificant as compared with the amount of power which we proposed to employ in its accomplishment. My noble Friend behind me (the Earl of Carnarvon) for instance, believed that the Expedition was on a scale of too great magnitude. He thought that the proper mode of action would be to make a dash with 1,000 men I over a distance of 400 miles.
The EARL OF CARNARVON: I beg pardon. I never made any such suggestion.
THE EARL OF DERBY: Then I must have lost my sense of hearing. I had indulged in the hope that my noble Friend, seeing how fallacious were his original apprehensions, would have come forward

491
and joined willingly and heartily in the general congratulations on the success of the Expedition. [The Earl of CARNARVON: Hear, hear!] On the other hand, my noble Friend who has just sat down (the Earl of Ellenborough) stated, and I admit most frankly, that he thought our provisions for the. Expedition were insufficient. He pointed out with the greatest force the difficulties in our path—the difficulties of landing, the difficulties which might arise from the want of a sufficient supply of water, and the difficulty of keeping up in a possibly hostile, and, at all events, in an unknown country, communications extending a length of 400 miles. But my noble Friend has now come forward in the handsomest manner and acknowledged that the difficulties he had anticipated have been overcome, and that the strength of the Expedition was sufficient, though not more than sufficient, to enable General Napier to bring the operations to a completely successful termination. My Lords, what was the inducement to us to enter on an undertaking so fraught with peril and uncertainty to our Army, and so fraught with danger to ourselves—I mean to our personal and political reputation—if by chance it had ended in signal failure? I will venture to say that never was a war undertaken more unwillingly by any Government, more with a sense of its inevitable necessity, or with purer motives—motives more entirely devoid of all feeling of ambition and all desire of political or military aggrandizement. The object for which we undertook the Expedition was, in the first place, to vindicate the honour of the country, which would have been sullied forever if we had not adopted such a course. In the second place we undertook it because of that feeling of humanity which was naturally excited by the sufferings of our countrymen and other Europeans who were kept in prison by the Emperor of Abyssinia. No men can be more ready than the Government, which has just been crowned with success in this Expedition, to acknowledge that there are some circumstances attending it for which special thanks are due to a superintending Providence. It is obvious that the population of the country might have fallen upon our force, have continually plundered and interrupted it, cut off the supplies, and in various ways have offered opposition, annoying to a stronger force, but which would have been destruction to a weak one. No one, again, could have failed to remark the special direction
492
which was given by Almighty God to the mind of Theodore at the very last moment, leading that capricious tyrant to abstain from exercising his brutality in putting to death the men we were anxious to deliver. The country, certainly, would have been deeply disappointed, and heavy blame would have fallen upon the organizers of the Expedition, if, instead of being able to rescue the captives from that imprisonment in which they had languished so long, the result of the Expedition had failed to accomplish the great object in view, and had only exposed them to a cruel death. I must say that whatever the merits of Sir Robert Napier—signally great as all your Lordships will admit them to be—I know of no point in the conduct of this Expedition that reflects more honour on his moral courage than the trial to which it was subjected at the very close of the Expedition, when he had to refuse the final offer of Theodore and to return to captivity those who had just been sent to his camp as envoys—being well aware, moreover, that his reply might lead to the destruction of those whom he desired to save. But the gallant officer exhibited the moral courage which was necessary to encounter so fearful a responsibility, and judged sagaciously of the demoralization of the enemy and of the effect which the previous success of our arms had produced on the mind of Theodore. Happily, his expectations were verified by the event, and the two officers who returned, as it appeared at the time, certainly to captivity, and possibly to death, had the satisfaction of meeting the whole of their fellow-prisoners on their way back, and of returning with them, in triumph to the camp. With regard to the Expedition itself, the only merit to which the Government can lay claim is that of having, by the advice of the illustrious Duke the Commander-in-Chief, selected the officer the most experienced and the best qualified for the service that his Royal Highness could point out, and intrusted to that General the absolute command and responsibility of the Expedition, merely saying to him—"What supplies you require that can be obtained from India you had better obtain them, and what cannot be had there shall be sent out from this country. Remember that you have only to ask and have; we tell you the object which we have in view, and we leave you entire control of the means by which, it is to be effected." I

493
will not attempt to occupy the time of your Lordships with details, but I will ask whether, from first to last, it was not evident that over the Expedition presided a master-mind who was not to be diverted by any remarks to the detriment of his judgment, or by the pressure of unwise advisers, from the well-considered course to which he had addressed his energies, and by means of which he anticipated—and, as the event proved, correctly anticipated—that at the right time he should accomplish his purpose. There are some circumstances which rendered this Expedition one of a very peculiar character. The force under the command of Sir Robert Napier consisted, as has been already pointed out, both of British and Indian troops, the whole of which vied with each other as to the manner in which they should best perform the duties devolving upon them. And it is no light matter that troops raised in the centre of Asia should, under the conduct of a British General, obtain a triumphal success in the heart of Africa, in a region which the boldest travellers had hardly ever penetrated. Then, with regard to discipline, it is, I believe, unheard of that an Expedition over such a country should have been conducted not only without breach of discipline among, but with almost entire friendliness towards, the barbarous tribes with whom they were brought into frequent contact. From the time of disembarkation till the re-embarkation of the Expedition there was not, I believe, a single complaint that any injury had been gratuitously inflicted by any soldier upon the inhabitants of the country through which they moved. Everything was paid for, and not a single instance of injustice or oppression occurred during the march. Hardly a soldier, in fact, was sentenced to any punishment during the Expedition. The difficulties which had to be encountered—not, indeed, from the enemy, but from the nature of the country—were enormous, and might hive appalled men less eager and determined to do their duty; but they were faced with excellent spirit. I refer especially to the extraordinary march of the 45th Regiment, accomplishing a distance of seventy miles in four days, over a pass 10,500 feet high, and across a country which justified the forcible, if somewhat homely description of the soldier who, being told that they were marching over the tableland of Abyssinia, observed that "the
494
table must have been turned upside down, and that they were now marching over the legs." Although the march was aggravated by thirst, and laborious in the extreme, not a single murmur or falling off from duty was heard; on the contrary, it was the earnest desire of everybody to press forward to the front. And upon the last day, when the troops, exhausted by their weary march, and almost fainting from thirst, found themselves in the presence of the enemy, and heard that he really meant to fight, those fatigued and way-worn men went with loud cheers into the conflict, which terminated with such glorious results. It has been said that the British soldier is very good at fighting, but knows nothing of the other business of war. All I can say is, that not only did Sir Robert Napier show entire oblivion of himself in his regard for others, but his despatches bear emphatic testimony on this point—that the different portions of the Army, while performing their own duties thoroughly, were, at the same time, ready to assist their comrades in the discharge of duties specially belonging to them. My Lords, I must not forget the services of the Naval Brigade. We are not accustomed to consider sailors particularly at home in managing animals of draught; but among the various subjects of praise distinct mention is made of the fact that the Naval Brigade, with regard to the handling and breaking of mules, proved themselves superior to the rest of the army: there were no persons by whom those animals were more carefully tended, or, owing probably to the kindly nature of seamen, by whom they were more successfully and prudently handled. I ought, perhaps, to apologize for having ventured to say anything upon a subject of this extraordinary character. But, at the same time, knowing the difficulties which had to be encountered in the first instance in preparing for the Expedition, and the difficulties, likewise, which had to be surmounted by the General, and those under his command, in conducting the Expedition to a triumphant success, I could not resist allowing myself the pleasure of bearing my testimony, however humble and unimportant, to the great services rendered by General Sir Robert Napier. And I am perfectly satisfied that he will receive every mark of approval, not only from Her Majesty's Government, but also the grateful thanks of the country, for the deeds which he has performed.

495
Resolved, Nemine Dissentiente. That the Thanks of this House be given to Lieut.-General Sir Robert. Napier, G.C.B., G.C.S.I., for the exemplary Skill with which he planned and the distinguished Energy, Courage, and Perseverance with which he conducted the recent Expedition into Abyssinia, resulting in the Defeat by Her Majesty's Forces of the Army of King Theodore and the Vindication of the Honour of the Country by the Rescue from Captivity of Her Majesty's Envoy and other British Subjects, and by the Capture and Destruction of the strong Fortress of Mngdala:
Resolved, Nemine Dissentiente, That the Thanks of this House be given to Commodore Heath, R.N., C.B., for the indefatigable Zeal and great Ability with which he conducted the Naval Operations connected with the Transport of the Troops find Stoics upon which the Success of the Expedition materially depended:
Resolved, Nemine Dissentiente, That the Thanks of this House be given to Major-General Sir Charles Staveley, K.C.B., Major-General G. Malcolm, C.B., Major-General E. L. Russell, Brigadier-General W. Merewether. C.B., and the other Officers of the Navy and Army for the Energy, Gallantry, and Ability with which they have executed the various Services which they have been called on to perform throughout these arduous Operations:
Resolved, Nemine Dissentiente, That this House doth highly acknowledge and approve the Discipline, Gallantry, and Endurance displayed by the Petty Officers, Non-commissioned Officers, and Men of the Navy and Army, both European and Native, during these Operations; and that the same be signified to them by their respective Commanding Officers.
Ordered, That the Lord Chancellor do communicate the said Resolutions to Lieut.-General Sir Robert Napier: and that he be requested by the Lord Chancellor to signify the same to Commodore Heath, Major-General Sir Charles Staveley, Major-General G. Malcolm, Major-General E. L. Russell, Brigadier-General W. Merewether, and to the several Officers of the Navy and Army referred to therein.

BOUNDARY BILL.—(No. 170.)
(The Lord Privy Seal.)
BOUNDARY BILL.—(No. 170.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to Order).
  Clauses 1, 2, and 3 agreed to.
  Clause 4 (Alteration of Boundaries of old Boroughs).
  EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid, that, in moving an Amendment to the clause, he desired to submit some suggestions for their Lordships' consideration. It was within the Committee's recollection that a Royal Commission had been appointed to arrange the boundaries of certain counties and boroughs in England and Wales; and he believed he gave expression to a unanimous feeling when he said that the ability
  496
  and impartiality of those who formed the Commission were unquestionable. They were men of sound judgment and great political experience Two of them were Members of the House of Commons, two had formerly been Members of that House; and the Chairman, though he now adorned their Lordships' House, presided for a long time over the other House, his eminent impartiality being but one of the many qualifications which recommended him for that position. Such Gentlemen might be expected to bring a great amount of ability and impartiality to their task, and he believed their voluminous Report had amply justified their selection for it. Now, their Instructions were to inquire into the boundaries of certain boroughs with a view to ascertain whether they should be enlarged so as to include within their limits districts which, due regard being had to situation and other local circumstances, ought to be included, for the purpose of conferring on the people residing therein the Parliamentary franchise. Those Instructions had been criticized as imperfect but from that opinion he differed, for he thought it was a wise course to lay down a broad principle and leave the Commissioners unfettered to act according to the best of their judgment. It might, perhaps, be an obvious arrangement that the Parliamentary should, in all cases, be made conterminous with the municipal boundary; but last year Parliament decided against that idea, but when the Report of the Commission came before the House of Commons it did not give satisfaction. In a large number of cases the Commissioners recommended no change, and in a large number they recommended changes which had been adopted without opposition. Twenty nine cases were referred by the House of Commons to a Select Committee, and that Committee approved the recommendations of the Commissioners with regard to fourteen of them. Now, he (Earl Beauchamp) thought that the other House, having appointed a Committee to revise the decisions of the Commissioners, it would be competent for their Lordships to revise the decisions of the Committee. He did not think, indeed, it would be respectful to send down to the House of Commons the whole of the proposals which they had already negatived, and he proposed to distinguish between some of the cases. The metropolitan boroughs of Marylebone and Lambeth were so exceptional, and so much might be said on both sides with, regard to

  497
  them, that he did not ask their Lordships to revert to the recommendations of the Commissioners, although personally he agreed with them. Warwick and Portsmouth were also peculiarly circumstanced, The Commissioners proposed to unite Leamington with Warwick; but this would practically swamp Warwick and; convert it into a suburb of Leamington. they also proposed to unite Gosport to Portsmouth. Now, the boundary of Portsmouth, through mere accident, was at present the high-water mark, not of the Portsmouth but of the Gosport side of the harbour. But the population of Gosport was so large that it would be a measure of grouping rather than a revision of boundaries if that place was added to Portsmouth; and as the House of Commons last year decided against the principle of grouping, he did not propose to interfere with the decision of the Committee in those cases. Reading he would also pass by, on the principle de minimis non curat lex. The other cases were very different, and raised an important question. Among these boroughs were the important towns of Birkenhead, Birmingham, Bristol, Gates-head, Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffield, and South Shields. The only objection to the Commissioners' recommendations appeared to be the fear entertained by the inhabitants of the outlying districts that they would hereafter be obliged to share the municipal burdens, while the people within the present boundaries thought the importance of their boroughs would be diminished, and their splendour tarnished by the enlargement proposed. If, however, the wishes of the people concerned were to be conclusive, the principle was capable of a much wider application, and would be attended with such difficulties that he was sure it could never be adopted by Parliament. Since he had given Notice of his Amendments he had had the advantage of studying the Reports of the Assistant Commissioners, who seemed to him to have done their work with great fairness and impartiality. In every case they visited the localities, they gave ample notice to all parties concerned, they heard all who went before them, and entered fully info all the circumstances of each case. But the Select Committee of the House of Commons, though they examined the Assistant Commissioners and the Members for the boroughs and counties affected, were unable to make such minute inquiries. The Assistant Commissioners
  498
  were instructed to take into consideration the nearness of the borough to the districts proposed to be added to it; how many of the houses had been built since 1832, and whether the inhabitants of the new districts had any community of interest with those in the boroughs. These, it appeared to him, were considerations dictated by common sense, and they could only be arrived at by a knowledge of local details. The Commissioners acted upon these principles, and they did not recommend extension unless there was a mass of houses and not a mere fringe joining the existing boundaries. He saw no reason to doubt their ability and impartiality, or the general wisdom of their recommendations. He would briefly refer to a few of the cases in which the Select Committee had departed from those recommendations. The first on the list was the borough of Birmingham, which happened to be one with which he had some little acquaintance. That borough was in the county of Warwick, and abutted on the counties of Worcester and Stafford. One of the recommendations of the Commission was that the manor of Aston and the district of Balsall Heath should be taken within the Parliamentary boundary, one of which was in Worcestershire and the other in Stafford. It was impossible for anyone who was not well acquainted with the town to say where Birmingham ended or began; and there was no reason whatever, if they were making an alteration of boundaries, why an exception should be made in the case of Birmingham. It was said, indeed, that the constituency would be made too large; but it was determined last year to augment very considerably the constituencies of the country, and therefore it would not now be proper to leave their handiwork undone. He believed it would be impossible for any person to come to any oilier conclusion than this—that if any borough was to have its boundaries altered it would be the greatest injustice to omit Aston Manor and the district of Balsall Heath from the borough of Birmingham. The case of Birkenhead was also one in which they ought not lightly to pass over the recommendations of the Commissioners. They recommended the addition of Wallaby Pool to Birkenhead; and it was beyond doubt that that district was an essential part of the town. If the Commissioners had in any way misconstrued their Instructions that would be a reason, for setting their recommendations aside; but if they had

  499
  acted up to their Instructions it was not right for anyone to come down with an ex post facto rule, and tell their Lordships that they ought to shrink from increasing the constituencies of the country. He begged to propose, therefore, in Clause 4, line 7, after the word "Bewdley," to insert "Birkenhead and Birmingham."
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, he was perfectly satisfied that the Commission which had sat during the autumn had given very great and impartial consideration to the subject on which they were employed. But the Commissioners were fettered by the terms of their Instructions—and for that he blamed the Government; they had not sufficient power—and the result was that their Report had created great dissatisfaction both in the House of Commons and in the largo constituencies with which they had dealt. The question of accepting the recommendations of the Commissioners with respect to those constituencies was raised in the House of Commons, objections were made and divisions taken with very large majorities against the proposition. The Government themselves proposed to refer the question to a Select Committee of the House of Commons, which made certain recommendations in which they were perfectly unanimous. On the 15th of June that great political General, of whose praises they had heard much that night—a little out of place he thought—who usually foresaw success when others despaired of it, and achieved the success which he had foreseen—he trusted, however, he would never resort to what, though fair in war, would not be fair in party politics, the free use of stratagems—that great political General had said with reference to the order and conduct of Business—
  "Now I adhere to the statement I originally made on the subject of Public Business—namely, that my first object was to carry the three supplementary Reform measures. Now, the Scotch Reform Bill and the Boundary Bill, though they have not yet left this House, may be considered as virtually settled; but we have still a third measure of Reform before us."
  Well, the Scotch Reform Bill was read a third time and passed on the 18th of June; and on the same day Mr. Disraeli, in answer to Mr. Milner Gibson, on the Business of the House, and referring to a former statement that they should proceed with the supplementary Reform Bills with as much despatch as possible, said—
  "And I must add that we have proceeded with considerable despatch, that we have made such
  500
  great advances with those Bills, and I do not anticipate that any great delay is now possible with respect to any of them."
  He did not intend to say that these words of the Prime Minister ought to bind their Lordships' House, but they ought to bind Her Majesty's Government. If the matter was virtually settled, how was it possible that they could re-open it by means of Amendments which had been placed in their hands only two days ago? They had heard a good deal the other day about that House being made the copy and the slave of the other House of Parliament. He entirely concurred in the justice of the observation; but he held it to be still worse that their Lordships should be made the copies and the slaves of small minorities of the other House. He could not conceive anything more injurious than that the Government should make use of their Lordships as instruments in carrying out the views of their minority in the other House; moreover nothing could be more injurious to the harmony of the two Houses than that the Government should make Use of their majority in that House to over-ride the decisions of the House of Commons in a matter that peculiarly belonged to them.
  THE EARL OF MALMESBURYsaid, he was quite sure that none of his Colleagues "elsewhere," whatever their position, would think of pledging the House of Lords to follow the decision of the House of Commons. There was not the slightest ground for saying that any unfair advantage had been taken. The opinion of the Government was well-known, and it was notorious that their desire was to support the recommendations of the Boundary Commissioners, and he had never heard that the opinion of any one of his Colleagues had changed upon this point. The question was now before the House, and it was the duty of the Government to listen to the opinions of the House upon it. The sentiments of the Government had not altered in any way, and he did not believe that any one of his Colleagues in the other House had maintained that the decision of the House of Commons was final and could not be discussed or even upset in this House.
  EARL RUSSELL: This is altogether a new way of carrying on the administration of the country. The Boundary Commission, over which my noble Friend (Viscount Eversley) presided, made a very elaborate Report; and when this was

  501
  questioned in the House of Commons no difficulty was made in appointing a Committee, at the head of which was a person of the highest character—Mr. Walpole. They came to a unanimous decision, and Mr. Walpole gave excellent reasons for adopting the Report of the Committee. There was a division, and a very considerable majority decided in favour of the Report of the Committee. The Government might thereupon have said, "We differ from this decision, and we shall fight against it on every point." We might then have been prepared to find a similar opposition in this House; but instead of that the Prime Minister said, "the question is settled." When, after this, the Government in this House dispute the decision so arrived at, we have a right to say that such a course is inconsistent with good faith; it is impossible to feel any confidence in any of the promises of the Government. In my opinion, if the Members of the Government mean to agree at all with the First Lord of the Treasury and to maintain his pledges, they must vote in favour of the decision of the Committee.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I think the energy of the noble Earl is somewhat misplaced, and that upon considering what has passed your Lordships will be fur from adopting his opinion. The facts of the case are as simple as possible, and there can be no dispute about them. A Commission was issued for the purpose of inquiring into the Parliamentary boundaries of boroughs in England. That Commission was the Commission of Parliament, because the names of the Commissioners were inserted in the Act, which also specified the duty which they were to perform. They were directed to inquire into the boundaries of boroughs—
  "With a view to ascertain whether the boundaries should be enlarged so as to include within the limits of the borough all premises which ought—due regard being had to situation or other local circumstances—to be included therein, for the purpose of conferring upon the occupiers thereof the Parliamentary franchise for such borough."
  These Instructions, I repeat, were not issued by the Executive Government, but were imposed by Parliament, and, of course, concurred in by your Lordships, as a guide to the Commissioners in the execution of the duty intrusted to them. The Commissioners made their Report. I will not say a word now upon the merits of it; but it showed, at least, that the cases of
  502
  all these boroughs had received the greatest care and attention. What happened then? The Government introduced a Bill for the purpose of giving effect to the Report of the Commissioners. The Government have always said that they were perfectly content with the recommendations of the Commissioners. But it was said that the principles which the House of Commons wished to adopt in fixing the boundaries of boroughs had not been sufficiently indicated by the House for the Instruction given to the Commissioners; and ultimately, in the course of conversation in the other House, a proposal was made, to which the Government assented, to refer, not the Boundary Bill, but the Report of the Commissioners, to a Select Committee. At the time of the appointment of the Select Committee—I am speaking off book, but I do not think I am mistaken—the question was asked whether the Report of the Committee was to be considered as final? and according to my recollection the Government would give no such pledge and no such undertaking. The Committee made their Report. It was a unanimous Report, I admit, and I speak with great respect of the Members of the Committee. So far, however, from that Report being acceded to by the Government, they proceeded with the Bill in the shape in which it was brought in. Thereupon a Resolution was proposed by a Member of the House of Commons to accept the Report of the Committee in cumulo, substituting the conclusions of the Committee with regard to fifteen boroughs, where they recommended that there should be no alteration, in lieu of the new and enlarged boundaries proposed in the Bill. Was that proposition assented to by the Government? Certainly not. The Government resisted it, maintaining strongly that the views of the Commissioners were right and those of the Committee were erroneous. The House divided on the question; the Report of the Committee was carried; but the proposition made was really one which took the House of Commons at a great disadvantage, because, instead of taking up the case of each borough, the Resolution embraced the whole fifteen boroughs; so that the House of Commons had no opportunity, as your Lordships might now have, of considering in each instance whether the Report of the Commission or of the Committee set forth the sounder view. The majority of the House of Commons having been in favour of the Report of the Select Committee, on

  503
  a subsequent day when the Business of the House of Commons and the prospects of the Business came under discussion, the Prime Minister said that those prospects might be considered with reference to that which had occurred—namely, that the House of Commons had at that time got rid of the question of the Boundary Bill. In that sense no doubt the Bill was settled. My right hon. Friend (Mr. Disraeli) did not mean that the Government had entered into any compromise or had altered their opinion, but that the subject no longer occupied the time of the House, and therefore the House of Commons might proceed to consider the other Business on the Paper. I am sure that nothing was further from the mind of any Member of the Government in the House of Commons than to abandon their opinion. The case now comes before your Lordships, and the question is, are you satisfied with the Report of the Commission appointed by you in conjunction with the House of Commons, or will you affirm the Report of the Select Committee? As I understand the noble Lord who proposes the Amendment, (Earl Beauchamp) he says, "The Committee of the House of Commons made a Report differing from that of the Commission as to the boundaries of fifteen boroughs. I will be satisfied with the Report of the Commission as to all; but as to five a question is raised of a peculiar kind—that of grouping, and to this there may be objections which may very possibly have influenced a good many Members of the House of Commons while dealing with the matter en bloc, because unions were proposed which were not acceptable." This is a question upon which the Government is perfectly free to re-assert the opinion it asserted in the House of Commons, and it is one for your Lordships' determination. Bear in mind that no extension of the Parliamentary boundary of any borough to the municipal boundary will in the slightest degree interfere with any question of taxation or municipal government. Any alteration of a municipal boundary must be a subject of separate legislation, upon which those concerned will have every opportunity of being heard. The Committee of the House of Commons, in six cases, extended Parliamentary beyond municipal boundaries. [A noble LORD: Because nobody objected!] We do not know that. The Commission do not tell us whether it is so or not. They have made a Report in which they mention eleven different considerations that have a
  504
  material bearing upon the Parliamentary boundaries of boroughs; but they do not tell us which consideration or what considerations influenced their decision in any one case. As regards the wishes of the inhabitants, compare the course taken by the Commissioners with that taken by the Committee. The Commissioners sent Assistant Commissioners to hold local inquiries of the character of public meetings, where any one might be heard. The Committee of the House of Commons held private conferences and consulted with Members, who would sometimes represent sections of their constituencies, and with the Assistant Commissioners. If local wishes are to be studied it is much more likely the local inquiry would elicit them than that the private deliberations of the Committee would do so. If you consider the merits of the question it by no means follows that persons living outside a Parliamentary boundary are to object to its extension because they fear increased rates, if their inclusion is desirable on other grounds; and the proposal to adhere to the Report of the Commission involves the enfranchisement, as the Report of the Committee and the Bill involve the disfranchisement of 18,610 persons. On that ground I think your Lordships will pause before you say that the decision of the Commission was not wiser than that of the Committee.
  VISCOUNT HALIFAXsaid, that the noble and learned Lord had not answered the observation of his noble Friend (Earl Granville). No one denied the competency of the House to entertain the question or to reverse a decision of the other House upon it; but what his noble Friend said was that in the other House the Government said the question had been settled by the decision arrived at. He believed in the impartiality of the Commission and of the Committee; but the Committee had S before it documents which the Commission had not, and it heard Members from both sides of the House. As to the Commission not giving the grounds of its decision in each case, neither did the Committee. Their Lordships were now called upon to reverse not the decision of the Commission nor the decision of the Committee, but the solemn determination of the House of Commons, without the slightest grounds being assigned for doing so. He had understood that the Government accepted that decision, and it seemed to him something like a breach of faith for the Upper House to reverse that decision. Their

  505
  Lordships had only just received the Reports of the Assistant Commissioners, and had not time to peruse them. It was desired to expedite the dissolution of Parliament, with a view to which it was absolutely essential that this Bill should be passed without delay; and yet, in the teeth of declarations made by the First Lord of the Treasury, Members of the Government were now adopting a course which would defeat the object they professed to have in view. He trusted their Lordships would not go into the merits until they had ascertained on what footing the matter stood after the declarations which had been made by the Government. If the government of the country was to be carried on in that way very great evils must result.
  THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH: My Lords, I think that if your Lordships had to consider, as the noble Viscount states, a solemn decision of the other House of Parliament, your Lordships would not feel yourselves in any way fettered in coming to a conclusion. But that is not the point which we have under discussion. The noble Lords opposite have challenged the conduct of the Government and their good faith in dealing with this question. The noble Viscount seems to think that some statement has been made by the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister in the other House of Parliament to the effect that your Lordships must consider this question as settled, and not re-open it again. Now, I do not believe that any such statement was ever made. I am not aware of the precise passage to which the noble Viscount referred, but I know that no such intention was ever entertained by Her Majesty's Government. Indeed, the whole of their conduct previously to the appointment of the Commission tends to disprove the accusation. If the right hon. Gentleman used the terra "settled" in any way whatever, he must have meant simply that the matter was concluded as far as the Business of the House of Commons was concerned; and he certainly did not intend to fetter the action of the Government or of this House on the subject. I will just state what was the intention of Her Majesty's Government, and of the right hon. Gentleman who conducts the Business of the other House of Parliament. When the subject was first brought before Parliament a question arose how far the recommendations of the Commissioners were to be accepted. Great
  506
  opposition was raised in the other House, and the final result was that one of the Commissioners moved that a Committee should be appointed. The Government accepted that proposal, and accordingly, on the Motion of the Home Secretary, a Committee was appointed to whom all the questions at issue were referred. The Government, however, at that time expressly precluded themselves by the words used by the Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Prime Minister from, being bound by the decision of that Committee. Now, what took place? The Committee finished their labours and reported to the House; and the very first day the Report came on for consideration a question arose as to how the Government proposed to deal with it. I trust that as the conduct and good faith of the Government have been called in question your Lordships will allow me to depart from, the ordinary rules of procedure, and to quote from the recognized channels of information the exact words made use of by the Prime Minister. According to the report in The Times he used the following words on the 9th of June, when the decision of the Committee was first brought under the notice of the House:—
  "The hon. Member for Birmingham made an appeal to me to announce the part which the Government would take, and argued that of course we could not oppose the Report of the Committee. That view is founded on an assumption which I think a most singular one—namely, that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State had announced to this House that Her Majesty's Government were prepared to receive the Report of the Committee as conclusive. Now, such an arrangement was never made by my right hon. Friend."
  The Prime Minister went on to state—
  "But I will tell the Committee what we are prepared to do. We are prepared to give to the Report of the Committee the same consideration and respect as we have given to the Report of the Commission."
  Having reminded the House that the Report of the Commission had been referred to a Select Committee, the right hon. Gentleman proceeded to say—
  "What I propose is indicated by the order of Business that has been prepared for this evening. The moment we concluded the Scotch Bill we proposed to go into Committee on the Boundary Bill. We shall have before us as we proceed the Schedule, with the conflicting recommendations of the Commission and the Committee, and the good sense of the House will come to a conclusion. I know no other mode by which we can arrive at a result more speedily or satisfactorily."
  Now, what was the course adopted by the House of Commons? The Committee re-

  507
  ported Progress that evening, and an hon. Member gave Notice of his intention to move that the whole Report of the Committee should be accepted in a lump. That was fairly objected to by the Government, who were, however, put in a minority. Now, I maintain that under these circumstances the Government have a right to raise the question again in your Lordships' House.
  EARL RUSSELL: I think the remarks of the noble Duke have entirely altered the question. It is said that the Home Secretary has been misunderstood, and that the First Lord of the Treasury was of opinion that the Government were not bound to accept the Report of the Committee. When the Report of the Committee was brought up the Government wished to deal with it in one way and the Opposition in another. As the noble Duke remarked, the Government were defeated on a division, and certain boroughs were, in accordance with the Report of the Committee, left out of the Boundary Bill. Well, after that, what happened? The right hon. Gentleman at the Head of the Ministry, said on the 16th of June—
  "Now, the Scotch Reform Bill and the Boundary Bill, though they have not yet left this House, may be regarded as virtually settled."
  During the progress of the Reform Bill last year there were many points on which the Government were defeated, but in regard to which they accepted the decision of the House of Commons. Every one accordingly thought that the Government would accept the decision of the House of Commons in the present instance. The noble Earl (Earl Beauchamp) now proposes to move an Amendment, the effect of which, if carried, would be to bring back the Bill into conformity with the Report of the Boundary Commissioners. Now, I confess that when I saw that Notice on the Paper I thought, indeed, that it was perfectly competent for any Member of your Lordships' House to disagree with the Bill, and to propose any alteration he might deem necessary; but, at the same time, I certainly was of opinion that the Government were pledged to abide by the decision of the House of Commons, and that, consequently, as the noble Earl would not receive the support of the Government, there would be a considerable majority against his proposal. All I can say now is that, as the Government have broken faith on this subject, I cannot be a party to admitting that any decision
  508
  which your Lordships may arrive at on this question is a fair decision. We have been taken by surprise and circumvented in this matter. All that I can say, therefore, is that I will be no party to such a breach of faith, and that I will leave rather than be a party to it.
  [The noble Earl then left the House, followed by Earl GRANVILLE, Viscount HALIFAX, the Earl of CLARENDON, and other noble Lords.]
  THE DUKE OF ARGYLL: Unquestionably an intimation was given to the House that the Boundary Bill was virtually settled—
  THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH: I say no!
  THE DUKE OF ARGYLL: I say yes! The Prime Minister said—
  "Now, the Scotch Reform Bill and the Boundary Bill, though they have not yet left this House, may be regarded as virtually settled."
  I would, however, venture to suggest to the House that the duty of the Government does not altogether depend upon the words of the Prime Minister. The present Government are in a peculiar position. They are the Government of a minority, and under these circumstances special obligations lie upon them; for had it not been understood by the majority of the House of Commons that the decisions come to by that House would be accepted by the Government, and that Ministers would not use their superior influence in the House of Lords to upset the decisions agreed to in the Commons, it is more than probable that that Vote of Want of Confidence of which we have heard would have been proposed long ago. I think it a breach of faith even if no promise had been given, that a Government in a minority should use its influence in the House of Lords in order to upset a decision to which they had assented in the House of Commons.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, the obvious and only meaning to be extracted from the words of the Prime Minister, under the circumstances in which they were used, is that after the decision come to by the House of Commons, the Boundary Bill might be considered settled so far as that House was concerned, and that it had; been removed from the Business of the House requiring discussion. The noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) spoke as if what your Lordships do now in respect of this Bill will be conclusive as against the House of Commons; but I

  509
  must remind your Lordships'—and I should have thought it unnecessary to remind even the noble Duke—that the Bill must go down to the House of Commons again. The House of Commons did not consider the case of each of those boroughs, but considered the whole of them in a mass. They will, however, have an opportunity of considering each case. What occurred last year as to the lodger franchise was this—There had been two propositions in the House of Commons, one for fixing a higher and the other for fixing a lower figure; but an arrangement was made, in the way things are sometimes arranged in that House, in consequence of which a figure between the two originally proposed was actually introduced. In ignorance of the arrangement come to in the House of Commons, your Lordships altered that figure when the Bill came before you; but, subsequently, on learning how matters really stood, your Lordships restored the figure which had been agreed to by the Commons. But that is not the case here. There was no compromise and no arrangement. The views of the House were tested by a formal decision.
  THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH: My Lords, the accusations made against the Government are very serious, and calculated to give rise to bitter feelings; and although my Parliamentary experience is not a very long one, I venture to think that the conduct of the noble Lords who made them in leaving the House after having done so is without precedent. A most erroneous interpretation has been put upon the words of my right hon. Friend at the head of the Government. Noble Lords opposite have referred to an extract from the remarks of my right hon. Friend without paying any regard to the context; but this should be borne in mind, for it has a most material effect upon the point at issue. The occasion on which those expressions were used was one on which questions were put as to the course of Public Business in the House of Commons. Questions were asked of the Prime Minister as to the arrangement of the days to be devoted to particular measures, and in replying to them he said, "The Scotch Reform Bill and the Boundary Bill, though they have not yet left this House, may be regarded as virtually settled." What did that mean but settled by this House—"the House of Commons?" The intention and meaning of these words are clear and apparent. They simply meant that neither of the
  510
  Bills to which he referred would occupy any more of the time of the House of Commons. No other meaning can properly be attached to his words, and that sought to be attached to them by noble Lords opposite is not warranted by the expressions themselves.
  EARL BEAUCHAMPobserved that there never was a greater mare's nest than that discovered this evening by noble Lords on the Opposition side. One thing was clear—that the Premier spoke of the Scotch Reform Bill and the Boundary Bill in the same terms. Why, then, had not his supposed undertaking been set up when Amendments were being made on the former Bill on Tuesday evening?
  THE EARL OF AIRLIEsaid, the Amendments made by their Lordships in the Scotch Reform Bill were merely verbal Amendments.
  VISCOUNT EVERSLEY: My Lords, I think I may assume from what has fallen from both sides that your Lordships' House is altogether satisfied with the conduct of the Commission, ["Hear!"] You seem, to consider that its Reports were fully justified by the Instructions which they received from Parliament. It should not, my Lords, be forgotten that the Commission was one appointed by Parliament and instructed by Parliament. Therefore, we were as responsible to your Lordships' House as to the other House of Parliament. The way in which we proceeded was this—We obtained the services of the best scientific men and the best legal men we could find to act as Assistant Commissioners. We sent those gentlemen to different parts of the country. The greatest publicity attended their proceedings. Their coming to a borough or town was notified previously; they always sat in public, and invited information and suggestions from all sides. Having, as far as possible, made themselves masters of the case, they reported to the Commissioners in London. We read their Reports and their recommendations; but we did not confine ourselves to those Reports. Whenever we thought it advisable we sent for the Assistant Commissioner, and had the benefit of his assistance before coming to a decision with reference to the particular borough. It is well known to your Lordships that many of our decisions were challenged in the House of Commons, and that a Committee was appointed by that House. I think the noble Duke (the Duke of Marlborough) was not quite correct when

  511
  he said that the Committee was appointed at the suggestion of the Commission. I remember being consulted by one of my brother Commissioners, and I said that I did not think we could object to the appointment of a Committee. Now, my Lords, nothing can be further from my intention than to wish to say anything in disparagement of the Gentlemen who composed that Committee; but I am bound to say that I differ altogether from the conclusions at which they have arrived. When their Report came out I was most anxious to see in what way the information we received from the Assistant Commissioners had been used; but I find nothing in the Report to show me that. I observed that the Committee conferred with the Members for the place, or, with more than one of the Members for the place, and memorials were presented to the Committee; but the book which contains the account of their proceedings does not appear to me to contain any evidence whatever. I believe that in ten out of fifteen of the boroughs referred to by the noble Earl (Earl Beauchamp) the Parliamentary and the municipal boundaries are conterminous. In fifty-three boroughs, exclusive of the Welsh boroughs, the municipal and the Parliamentary boundaries do not coincide. Several boroughs have had municipal privileges conferred upon them since the Reform Bill. What the particular objection may have been which governed the decision of the Committee we do not discover from their Report; but plainly this objection, that the municipal boundary and the Parliamentary boundary were not the same, vanishes the moment it is examined; for it has not been the practice of the country to make them conterminous. The noble Earl opposite (Earl Beauchamp) has very fairly stated the case of Birmingham. I this day presented a Petition upon the subject, which confirmed the view taken by the Commissioners, that the suburb of Aston was as much part of the town of Birmingham as Piccadilly was part of London. In the Petition which I had the honour to present it is stated that if the district of Aston were added to Birmingham, 5,000 or 6,000 persons would be added to the voters for that borough; whereas, if it continued to be excluded, and were left in the county, only 1,850 persons would obtain the franchise—being a difference of upwards of 3,000 votes. There is another borough in which the
  512
  case is still stronger, and that is Nottingham, one of the boroughs mentioned by the noble Earl. It happens, curiously enough, that in the year 1837, some time after the passing of the Reform Bill, I was appointed Chairman of the Municipal Boundary Commission. I told my noble Friend who made the proposition that I was very reluctant to undertake the duty, because I knew well that it was most difficult, except the Government of the day was a very strong Government, to carry any changes of the kind; they always excite opposition, and in some respects have to be carried against the wishes of friends of the Government itself. And what I predicted occurred. The Government then happened to be an exceedingly weak Government; pressure was put upon them, and they never attempted to carry out our recommendations. Our Report contained a passage with regard to the borough of Nottingham, with which I will trouble your Lordships—
  "The increasing population, unable to find room within the limits of the town, has resorted to the neighbouring parishes of Radford, Lenton, and Sneinton, and in these three parishes upwards of 20,000 people closely connected with the town of Nottingham are now congregated. Now Sneinton forms actually a portion of the town of Nottingham. New Radford may be said to form a portion of the town, although not quite so close as Sneinton. The extra-parochial district of Poole is nearly surrounded by the parish of Lenton."
  The House will scarcely credit it when I state that in the late Report of the Boundary Commission we hardly proposed any addition to the limits indicated in that Report of the Municipal Commissioners in 1837; yet this is one of the proposals which has been rejected and set aside. The case of Nottingham is less remarkable than the borough of East Retford, which occupies an entire hundred. For my part I have always been astonished that the Reform Bill of last Session, and, indeed, that any Reform Bill did not deal with those peculiar boroughs—East Retford, Cricklade, Shoreham, Much Wenlock, and Aylesbury—by reducing them to one Member each, and throwing them into the county. As matters stand, they sue nothing more nor less than electoral districts, and I am satisfied that their continued existence will ultimately have a tendency to lower the county franchise. For when you find what are absolutely elective districts, with persons on one side of the hedge having a borough qualifica-

  513
  tion, and persons on the other requiring a £12 rating, some day or other this will create great discontent and a desire for the reduction of the county franchise. Great alarm has been expressed as to the number of votes which will be lost by a transfer; to show that this alarm is not warranted by the facts I will take a case that I happen to be well acquainted with. In South Hampshire the total number of electors is 5.677, of whom 2,858, or just one-half, derive their qualification from the represented towns within the county. Therefore, it does not at all follow that by the suggested transfer of the population you reduce the number of votes for the county to the extent that has been anticipated. I mention this because it is a point which attracted considerable attention, and is believed to have had much influence both with the Committee and subsequently with the House. Speaking of my Colleagues in the Royal Commission, I can assure you that nothing could exceed the industry, the honesty of purpose, and the perfect absence of all party feeling which marked their conduct during the whole course of the inquiry committed to them. I am sure, therefore, that their finding merits the confidence of the country.
  EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid, a noble Lord opposite (Earl Russell) had said something about his Motion being a surprise, and he thought that a charge so put forward ought to be met, as it deserved, with a distinct denial. Complaint had been also made as to shortness of Notice of the Amendments. What were the facts? The Boundary Bill was brought up from the other House on the 23rd of June, but was not delivered to Members till the 25th of June. That was on Thursday. He had not time to read the Bill and consider what course he should take until Saturday, the 27th; and Notice of his present Motion was given upon Monday. On Wednesday their Lordships did not sit; but after the Notice had lain before them for two days he now brought it forward. Hence it would be seen that he had acted with all proper caution. Had he given Notice sooner he should have been charged with precipitancy. To remove, however, any excuse for complaint, he now proposed to move the adjournment of the debate. He regretted that noble Lords opposed to this matter should so far have forgotten themselves and the dignity of that House as to bring forward a groundless and nonsensical
  514
  charge, and then retire from the House without either supporting or discussing it.
  THE EARL OF MALMESBURYthought his noble Friend acted very wisely in the course which he proposed to take. He had certainly been surprised at the grave charges brought on the authority of a forced construction put upon the words of the Prime Minister. Noble Lords on the other side of the House have with great ingenuity mis-stated the tenour of the Prime Minister's remarks when simply alluding to the course of Business in. The House of Commons; it is perfectly impossible that the right hon. Gentleman could have intended to say anything with a view to fetter your Lordships; and I state positively from my own knowledge, in the most solemn manner, that the Government never meant at the time the Prime Minister spoke to regard the Scotch Reform Bill or the Boundary Bill as settled; it is monstrous to charge his words with so incongruous a meaning, because no one knows better than he that, whatever influence he may have with your Lordships from his position, he has no absolute control over the actions of this House. I am very glad my noble Friend has taken the course he has, because no one could be more annoyed than myself at the suspicion of surprise; and perhaps when the noble Lords who should be opposite have returned to their places they will be prepared to admit that the observations of the Prime Minister applied alone to the House of Commons.
  THE EARL OF LICHFIELDthought the only course open to their Lordships was to agree to an adjournment of the debate; for whatever had been done amiss, and whoever was blamable or free from blame, it would be most undesirable that the question should turn entirely upon an alleged breach of faith on the part of the Government. He could not help adding that if noble Lords on his side of the House had remained in their places, they would have better studied the dignity of the House than by running away.
  House resumed; to be again in Committee on Monday next.
  House adjourned at Nine o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.