Sitting of 15 June 1868

MINUTES.
SUPPLY—considered in Committee—Resolutions [June 4] reported.
PUBLIC BILLS—Ordered—Local Government Supplemental (No. 6).*
First Reading—Local Government Supplemental (No. 6)* [175].
Second Reading—Government of India Act Amendment [91]; Governor General of India [92]; Registration [167]; Inclosure (No. 2)* [162]; Courts of Law Fees, &c. (Scotland)* [158]; Curragh of Kildare [134].
Referred to Select Committee—Curragh of Kildare [134].
Committee—Representation of the People (Ireland) [71]—R.P.; Petroleum Act Amendment (re-comm.) [141]; County General Assessment (Scotland)* [84]; Local Government Supplemental (No. 4)* [159]; Local Government Supplemental (No. 5)* [160]; Alkali Act (1863) Perpetuation* [153]; Court of Session (Scotland)* [45]; Court of Justiciary (Scotland)* [46]; Drainage Provisional Order Confirmation* [169]; Judgments Ex-tension (re-comm.) * [163].
Report—Petroleum Act Amendment (re-comm.) [141–171]; County General Assessment (Scotland)* [84–172]; Local Government Supplemental (No. 4)* [159]; Local Government Supplemental (No. 5)* [160]; Alkali Act (1863) Perpetuation* [153]; Court of Session (Scotland) * [173]; Court of Justiciary (Scotland)* [174]; Drainage Provisional Order Confirmation * [169]; Judgments Extension (re-comm.)* [163].
Third Reading—Thames Embankment and Metropolis Improvement (Loans) Act Amendment* [133]; New Zealand Company * [156]; Duchy of Cornwall Amendment * [136]; Voters in Disfranchised Boroughs * [128], and passed.

COLLIERY PROSECUTION.

  QUESTION.
  MR. LOCKEsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been called to the case of a man named Hopley, who having been summoned before the Magistrates at the instance of Mr. Wynne, the Inspector of Mines for the Staffordshire district, for having refused to bring up a gang of Colliers from the Madeley Court Colliery when required to do so, had dismissed the summons; and whether the reasons had been given which induced the Magistrates to dismiss the summons?
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, in reply, that he was informed by the clerk to the magistrates in question that there was not sufficient evidence adduced before the Bench to justify a conviction. The circumstances appear to have been that the men down the mine disobeyed orders by not sending up the weight which should have been used to counterbalance the other shaft, and Hopley, therefore, would not send down the "doubles" to bring them up. The men below then procured "doubles" from another place, but Hopley gave them notice that he would not land them until they sent up the weight.

IMMORAL PUBLICATIONS AND PLAYS.

  QUESTION.
  MR. HUBBARDsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home

  1559
  Department, Whether his attention has been directed to the lamentable amount of juvenile criminality, largely attributable to the spread of cheap publications and theatrical representations of an exciting and immoral character, which corrupt the children of the lower classes, and stimulate them into courses of dishonesty and vice; and, whether the Government will propose any remedy for these growing and most serious evils?
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, in reply, that the hon. Member had been good enough to place in his hands samples of the publications of which he complained. The police authorities had also placed similar periodicals in his possession. The publications, although very bad in their character, were not of such a nature as to mate them liable to prosecution. They were merely sensational, and did not come within the provisions of Lord Campbell's Act, or they would be seized and destroyed. With respect to the theatrical representations referred to, he was informed that there was a great deal of exaggeration. With regard to those places that were known as "penny gaffs,"—the police had told him that those which they had visited the performances were not in themselves immoral, and therefore the authorities could not interfere. As to the publications, he begged to assure the hon. Member that if anything whatever could be done to counteract their tendency he should be happy to do so.

EGYPT—LAW COURTS.—QUESTION
MR. LAYARDsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he has received any proposal from the Egyptian Government on the subject of a modification of the Capitulations, and the introduction of improved Law Courts in Egypt, to which all foreigners shall be amenable; whether such proposal, if made, has been entertained; and, whether he will lay upon the Table of the House, Copies of a Despatch on this subject addressed to Her Majesty's Consul General in Egypt in the month of October of last year; of a Note on the same subject communicated by the Egyptian Government to the European Powers; and of any other Correspondence relating to the Capitulations and Consular jurisdiction in Egypt? He wished also to know whether the Papers could be produced at an early period, the matter being of such importance
1560
that he thought it called for discussion in the House?
LORD STANLEYsaid, in reply, that a proposal similar to that referred to by the hon. Member had been received, and that it had and was engaging the most serious consideration of the Government, who were consulting the Law Officers upon the subject. The question was also receiving the attention of the other Great Powers of Europe. He need not say that the subject was one of very great difficulty and perplexity, and that it would take some time to decide. He should be happy to produce a copy of the despatch which he addressed to the British Consul General in Egypt in October last containing the views of Her Majesty's Government upon the subject. He apprehended that there would be no difficulty in laying the Note of the Egyptian Government also upon the table; but he thought it better to wait as regards the production of the rest of the Correspondence, until it was completed.

SCIENTIFIC INSTRUCTION IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES.—QUESTION.
MR. SAMUELSONsaid, he wished to ask the Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education, What is the cause of the continued delay in the production of the information received from our Legations abroad on Scientific Instruction in foreign countries?
LORD ROBERT MONTAGU, in reply, said, the delay complained of arose from the immense mass of matter to be translated. As soon as the translations were prepared, they were forwarded to the Foreign Office, in which Department the responsibility of printing the papers rested.
MR. SAMUELSONsaid, he would like to know if any delay had arisen in the Foreign Office?
LORD STANLEYdid not know, but would make inquiry as to the fact. He believed the fact to be that a large portion of these Papers were already in print.
MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he would beg to ask, If the Reports received from the Secretaries of Legation could not be laid on the Table at once, leaving the other documents to follow as soon as ready?
LORD ROBERT MONTAGUsaid, there could be no objection to this being done. He believed that 260 pages had already been printed.

SMALLPOX HOSPITAL.—QUESTION.
SIR J. CLARKE JERVOISEsaid, he wished to ask the Vice President of the Privy Council on Education, Whether he has observed in the Annual Report of the Smallpox Hospital just issued the increase in vaccinated cases from 66·7 per cent in the epidemic of 1851–2 to 84·1 percent in 1867, and how this is accounted for; and, when the Report of the Medical Officer of the Privy Council, which Members were informed they might calculate on having in their hands immediately after the Easter Recess, will be delivered?
LORD ROBERT MONTAGUsaid, in reply, that the Privy Council Report had been delayed in consequence of the great number of chromo-lithographs which it was to contain, and in consequence of the work of lithography occupying much more time than he had anticipated. With regard to the Smallpox Hospital he had to say that he had seen the Report alluded to; but in consequence of the great number of cases he feared that the operation of vaccination must have been performed very imperfectly

THE BRINDISI ROUTE.—QUESTION.
MR. GOLDSMIDsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether, in consequence of the opening of the Fell Railway over Mont Cenis, Her Majesty's Government intend to adopt the Brindisi route for the Indian Mails; and, whether they have made any application to the French Government to put an end to the twelve hours' detention in Paris of Letters posted for Italy by the Evening Mails?
MR. SCLATER-BOOTHsaid, in reply, that he thought it was premature at present to form an opinion as to the necessity of changing the route for the Indian Mails. The subject was fully considered by a Select Committee which sat in 1866, and, anticipating the opening of the Fell Railway, a very elaborate Report was presented to the Post Office by Captain Tyler. On the settlement of the contract with the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Company last November, it was stipulated that the Brindisi route should be adopted in preference to Marseilles if circumstances rendered the change expedient. With regard to the latter part of the hon. Member's Question, he was informed that although the detention operated inconveniently for letters from London, this was not the case with respect to provincial letters, and that the present arrangement was most conve-
1562
nient for the French service and for all parties interested.

FOREIGN OFFICE AGENCIES.

  QUESTION.
  MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether any Correspondence has taken place between the Foreign Office and the Treasury on the subject of the amount of compensation to be granted to Foreign Office Agents in the event of their agencies being abolished; and, if so, whether he has any objection to lay such Correspondence upon the Table of the House?
  LORD STANLEYsaid, he would lay on the table the Correspondence between the Foreign Office and the Treasury on the amount of compensation to be awarded to Foreign Office Agents in the event of their offices being abolished.

IRELAND—POST OFFICE.—QUESTION.
GENERAL DUNNEsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the Report of a Commission or a Commissioner directed by his Grace the Postmaster General to inquire into the subject of a deduction of 25 per cent from the salaries of officers employed in the Irish Post Office, and to state any reason why that deduction was made in 1854, after a Minute of the then Postmaster General had stated that the salaries of the officials in London and Dublin should be the same?
MR. SCLATER-BOOTH, in reply, said, he understood that no reduction of 25 per cent ever was made from the salaries of the clerks in the Irish Post Office, nor was any Report of a Commission or Commissioner made to the Postmaster General on that subject. The supposed Minute of the Postmaster General did not exist. The question was probably founded upon the fact that there was a Treasury Commission which sat upon the salaries of the London Post Office officials, and which recommended that in the event of a rearrangement of the salaries of the Edinburgh and Dublin officials, similar alterations should be made, due regard being had to the relative cheapness of living in Dublin and Edinburgh as compared with living in London.

METROPOLIS—NEW COURTS OF JUSTICE.—QUESTION.
MR. WALDEGRAVE-LESLIEsaid, he wished to ask the First Commissioner of Works, Whether the statement in the Builder of the 13th of June, that Mr. E. M. Barry, A.R.A., has protested against the appointment of Mr. Street ns architect of the New Law Courts, on the ground that such appointment is at variance with the letter and spirit of the conditions of the competition entered into by the architects, be a correct statement?
MR. SCLATER-BOOTH, in reply, said, it was true that Mr. Barry had written a letter to the Treasury, which had been published that morning in the newspapers, protesting against the appointment of Mr. Street as architect of the Now Law Courts. This letter would be laid on the table, with other Correspondence on the same subject. With regard to an exhibition of the designs of the New Law Courts in the Library of the House, he might remark that the designs had already been on view for six months in Lincoln's Inn, and that no object would be gained by another exhibition in the Library.
MR. WALDEGRAVE-LESLIE: Was Mr. Barry's protest received before or after Mr. Street's appointment?
MR. SCLATER-BOOTH: After his appointment.

SPAIN—CASE OF THE "TORNADO."

  QUESTION.
  MR. SMOLLETTsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, with reference to the discussion in the House of Commons on the 23rd of July last, If any authoritative decision has been given by the Spanish Tribunals in the case of the Tornado; whether the claims of the crew for compensation for harsh and unjustifiable treatment ore still under consideration; and, if he is prepared to lay upon the Table of the House, any further Correspondence in the matter of the seizure of the ship, and the prolonged detention of the crew of that vessel?
  LORD STANLEY: Sir, I regret to say that no authoritative decision has yet been come to on the subject. I have more than once made representations to the Spanish Government, but the answer has always been the same—that the Government could not interfere with the ordinary Courts of Law. With regard to the granting of
  1564
  compensation, that, I apprehend, will depend upon the decision that may be come to as to the character of the vessel, A few weeks ago I laid upon the table such Papers as I had, and since that time nothing of importance has been received.

ELECTRIC TELEGRAPHS.—QUESTION.
MR. AYRTONsaid, he wished to ask the Vice President of the Board of Trade, When the Return relating to Electric Telegraphs ordered by this House on the 21st April will be presented; and what is the cause of the delay in preparing this Return, and the annual Returns relating to Railway Companies?
MR. STEPHEN CAVEsaid, in reply, that it would be impossible to say when the Return relating to Electric Telegraphs would be presented. Notwithstanding a second circular, the required information had not been received from the London, and North-Western, London and South-Western, Midland, Manchester Sheffield and Lincolnshire, Great Northern, Great Western, Caledonian, and other railway companies. It was evident that without particulars from these large railway companies the Return would be so incomplete as to be entirely useless. A similar Answer must be given to the second part of the hon. Member's Question. The delay in presenting the compiled annual Returns of the Railway Department was due to the failure of the companies to send in the particulars earlier. These particulars were compiled daily as they arrived at the Board of Trade; so that as soon as the last details were received the compiled Return was ready for presentation, allowing a few days for computing the totals. It was generally also in type at the same time ready for printing. Last year no less than five reminders were sent out before the whole of the Returns were made.

THE ABYSSINIAN DESPATCHES.

  QUESTION.
  MR. LAYARDsaid, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Despatches from Abyssinia have yet been received; and, if not, whether he can account for the great delay in their transmission? If they have been received, perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will be able to inform the House when he proposes to move the Vote of Thanks to Sir Robert Napier and the Army of Abyssinia?
  MR. DISRAELI: Sir, the Despatches have not jet been received. Some portions of the Despatches have been received; but not the Despatch which ought to be placed before the House before the Vote of Thanks is moved, and which refers particularly to the recommendations of Sir Robert Napier as to the services of the individuals engaged. The moment the remaining Despatches are received they will be placed on the table, and the House will see that it is absolutely necessary to have them. When they are received, I will give Notice of a day for moving the Vote of Thanks.
  MR. LAYARDsaid, the delay was a little remarkable. Was the right hon. Gentleman aware that there were some persons now in town who had been present at the taking of Magdala?
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE: As I have seen the officers who have returned from Abyssinia, I will venture to answer the Question. Sir Robert Napier informed me, in a Despatch which has been laid on the Table of the House, that it was his intention to send an officer—Colonel Milward—with a Despatch containing details of the engagement which resulted in the capture of Magdala. On Saturday evening last Colonel Milward arrived, having been detained in consequence of the vessel in which he sailed getting aground. The Despatch gives full details of the action before Magdala; but the closing paragraph states that Sir Robert Napier proposed to send by the following mail a further Despatch, which would give the re-embarkation of the troops, and at the same time full particulars of the services of those whom he wished to recommend to notice. In a private letter tome Sir Robert Napier said he hoped to send this by Colonel Fraser. Very late on Saturday Colonel Fraser arrived, and left some letters at my house. The Despatch in question was not among those letters; but I have hopes that it may be among some other Papers that were sent to the Horse Guards.

REVENUE OFFICERS' DISABILITIES REMOVAL BILL.—QUESTION.
MR. MONKsaid, he would beg to ask, Whether the First Lord of the Treasury would appoint a Morning Sitting for the discussion of this Bill?
MR. DISRAELI: Sir, it is always most agreeable to me to accommodate Gentlemen on both sides of the House who are
1566
intrusted with the conduct of any public question of importance. At the same time I have a primary duty to fulfil—to carry through the necessary Business of the House with all possible despatch consistent with mature legislation. It is therefore very difficult to give those facilities which I should otherwise be happy to afford. I do not understand that the hon. Gentleman has any grievance to complain of. He experienced, I am informed, unexpected facilities in passing his Bill through a second reading, and that, of course, cannot be a cause of complaint on his part, but one rather of rejoicing. Inasmuch, however, as there was no discussion upon a Bill which it is admitted is one of grave importance, he could hardly doubt that on the Motion for going into Committee a discussion would ensue. I believe that there was an opportunity of going into Committee on Friday an hour after midnight, when it is our custom not to enter upon discussions of a grave character. I am, therefore, justified in saying that the hon. Member has no cause of complaint so far as the course of Public Business is concerned. The measure is, however, one which is of interest to Gentlemen on both aides. I should be sorry to be churlish in the matter, and on Friday there is an opportunity of placing this as the first Order of the Day after the Notices of Motion. I trust that this facility will meet the wishes of the hon. Gentleman

ARMY—VOLUNTEER REVIEW AT WINDSOR.—QUESTION.
LORD ELCHOsaid, that Her Majesty had graciously signified her intention of reviewing the Volunteer Force in Windsor Great Park on Saturday. As it was desirable that there should be as large an attendance as possible, he wished to know, Whether it is intended to give the gentlemen engaged in the Government Offices who are Volunteers a holiday on Saturday, in order that they may have an opportunity of going to Windsor? If the Government set the example by giving the holiday, it would be followed, he trusted, by employers in the metropolis.
MR. DISRAELI: Notice, Sir, has already been given to all those engaged in Public Offices who are Volunteers, that their public services will not be required on Saturday next, in order that they may have an opportunity of attending the review. That Notice has been generally

1567
communicated to all engaged in the Public Service, and if there have been any omissions I will take care they are supplied. I trust that the good example thus set by the Government may be followed by others.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA BILLS.

  QUESTION.
  SIR EDWARD COLEBROOKEsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, Whether it is his intention to go on with those Bills that night?
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEsaid, in reply, that, although he was anxious to proceed with those Bills, there were others of greater importance on the Paper—the Irish Reform Bill for example—which stood before them on the Paper, and the Registration Bill, which stood next. If he found that the Committee on the Irish Reform Bill was concluded at such an hour as would leave the Registration Bill sufficient time to pass a second reading, he would proceed with the India Bills, but not otherwise.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he wished to know, Whether the Electric Telegraphs Bill would be taken on Thursday?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Yes.
  MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, he wished, in consequence of an Answer just given to a Question by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, in case the Committee on the Irish Reform Bill should not be finished that night, which was highly probable, he did not think it would be right to place it first on the Orders for Thursday?
  MR. DISRAELI: I think there are reasons why the arrangement which has been made should be adhered to at present; but I will certainly take care that the Committee on the Irish Reform Bill shall not be neglected.

PARLIAMENT—BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
MR. MORRISONsaid, he would beg to ask, When the Government intended to bring on again the Election Petitions and Corrupt Practices at Elections Bill; and also, if they were to have Morning Sittings?
MR. DISRAELI: In answer, Sir, to the hon. Member for Plymouth (Mr. Morrison), I would just make one remark
1568
on the proposition which I am about to make, because it greatly affects the conduct of Public Business. The Motion is, that on Tuesday, the 7th of July, and on every succeeding Tuesday during the Session, Orders of the Day shall have precedence of Notices of Motion, and that the Orders of the Day of the Government shall have precedence over other Orders of the Day. That is an indulgence which, if the House felt any considerable indisposition to grant us, I should be sorry strongly to press for, because I attach much value to the privileges of private Members. At the same time, it is an indulgence which was extended to the Government some years ago almost perpetually in the month of July. It interferes, no doubt, to a certain degree with the privileges of hon. Members; but, on the whole, I think the Government may be permitted to have this great assistance in winding up the Public Business. The hon. Gentleman asks me whether I am going on with the Corrupt Practices at Elections Bill, and whether I will have Morning Sittings? 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 regarded as virtually settled. But we have still a third measure of Reform before us which may require from us a great deal of consideration; and when I see that measure in the same position as the Scotch Reform Bill and the Boundary Bill, I shall then be able to take a general view of the Business before the House, and to state the course of Public Business which I think will be satisfactory to hon. Gentlemen generally. Therefore, I would rather postpone saying anything about the Corrupt Practices Bill, or about having recourse to Morning Sittings at this moment. If the Motion with which I shall presently conclude is acceded to, the Government may be able, without unnecessarily using what, no doubt, is a most efficient instrument for carrying on the Public Business towards the end of a Session—namely, Morning Sittings—to attain the results which we all desire. I would remark that Morning Sittings, under the system which, with the favour of the House, I instituted last year, are certainly a most powerful instrument under certain circumstances. They are admirably efficient when dealing with an im-

1569
portant Bill in Committee. Then you may make very great progress; and if it be necessary we can have recourse to them for the Corrupt Practices Bill. But they are really productive of very slight results, when devoted to the second reading of a Bill; because there is something so captivating in the discussion of a general principle that time is whiled a way in a most extraordinary manner; and such a sacrifice of the comfort, the convenience, and the time of the House has generally a very injurious effect upon the efficiency of the Evening Sitting, if the Morning Sitting has been occupied in debating a second reading. Therefore, though the weapon in our armoury is one of great value and powerful temper, still I think we should not unnecessarily and with levity resort to it. At present, if the House consents to the Motion which I am now making, there is a fair prospect that we shall not need to task the energies of the House in an extraordinary manner with respect to Morning Sittings. But, at the same time, I should not refrain, if I thought there was not a fair chance of our disposing of the Corrupt Practices Bill without them, from proposing Morning Sittings.
MR. GLADSTONE: No doubt, Sir, the Motion just made by the right hon. Gentleman is one that is agreeable to the usage of the House at a certain period of the year; and that time is generally fixed by a reference to the amount of Business before the House in the hands of the Government, by the general views of the House as to the termination of the Session, and by the amount of Business also before us in the hands of private Members. As far as I am aware, I know of no reason connected with any of these topics to prevent us from acceding to this Motion; and if it should happen that there is any Bill in the hands of a private Member that it is desirable to send forward, which would be impeded by this arrangement, I have, no doubt the Government will be glad to take it into their consideration. But I wish, in giving a cheerful assent to this Motion, to say one word. I trust the right hon. Gentleman will adhere with some rigour—and, perhaps, with greater rigour of construction than he seems disposed to adopt—to the rule that we should make it our main object to progress with the Bills relating to Parliamentary Reform. It is obvious that when we enter into Committee on the Irish Reform Bill, which I trust will not take a long time—although it
1570
would be sanguine, perhaps, to expect to finish it to-night—our proceedings in regard to it ought, at any rate, to be continuous, and we ought not to have other Business in the hands of the Government interpolated, unless it is Business of great urgency. The Government are quite right in asking for a full discussion of the subject of Electric Telegraphs; but I am at a loss to know why it should be necessary to take that subject on Thursday, in preference to going on with the Irish Reform Bill. I also hope that when the details of the Irish Reform Bill have been disposed of the right hon. Gentleman will not only keep in mind the Corrupt Practices at Elections Bill, but, if possible, place it next in order, for undoubtedly it stands in close relation to the other measures of Parliamentary Reform, and our legislation on Reform will not be complete until the House has had an opportunity of fully considering and disposing of that question. I trust, therefore, that the Corrupt Practices Bill will be allowed to trend on the heels of the Irish Reform Bill either immediately or with the intervention of no other measures except those of urgent and pressing importance,
MR. OTWAYsaid, he wished to know, Whether any Morning Sittings would he devoted by the Government to discussions on the Army Estimates?
MR. DISRAELI: I will take the inquiry of the hon. Gentleman as a suggestion, and I will consider it.
MR. MORRISONsaid, he thought the right hon. Gentleman seemed to have misunderstood the Question which he bad addressed to him a few moments before. He by no means wished to convey the idea that the Government were not anxious to proceed with the Corrupt Practices at Elections Bill. On the contrary, he was quite convinced of the sincerity of their intentions in the matter, and he knew that there was a large number of Members on the Liberal side of the House who were equally desirous that they should go on with it.
SIR HENRY WINSTON-BARRONsaid, he would suggest that the Irish Reform Bill should he passed through Committee before any new Business was entered upon.
Resolved, That upon Tuesday the 7th day of July next, and every succeeding Tuesday during the present Session, Orders of the Day have precedence of Notices

1571
of Motions, the right being reserved to Her Majesty's Ministers of placing Government Orders at the head of the List.—(Mr. Disraeli.)
MR. DISRAELIsaid, that if the House assented to another Motion of which he had given Notice, and should meet at two o'clock to-morrow and sit till seven, as was done last Session, he proposed that the Public Schools Bill should be the first Business taken. That would not occupy, he thought, the whole, perhaps not even the greater part of the time, and he should be quite ready to proceed with the Irish Reform Bill in Committee after the Public Schools Bill had been disposed of.
Resolved, That this House do meet Tomorrow at Two of the clock, subject to the Resolutions of the 27th day of May 1867.—(Mr. Disraeli.)

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM—REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE (IRELAND) BILL.
(The Earl of Mayo, Mr. Disraeli, Mr. Attorney General for Ireland).
PARLIAMENTARY REFORM—REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE (IRELAND) BILL.

  [BILL 71.] COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
  MR. R.EARDENrose, pursuant to Notice, to move the following Amendment:—
  "That no Bill can be satisfactory to the people of Ireland which does not provide for a rental franchise of £6 or upwards in counties, instead of a rating franchise of £12 or upwards, and a rental franchise of £3 or upwards and a lodger franchise of £3 or upwards in boroughs, instead of a rating franchise of £4 or upwards; that votes at Elections be taken by ballot; and that no borough be disfranchised, but that the boundaries of boroughs having less than 6,000 inhabitants be extended so as to include within the limits of such boroughs all premises, for the purpose of conferring the franchise on the inhabitants thereof."
  MR. SPEAKER: Before the hon. Member moves his Resolution I wish to point out to him that it exceeds the limits prescribed for such Motions by the Rules of the House. It is a Resolution which in reality anticipates discussion on every clause of the Bill, and on some points with respect to which Notice of Amendment has been already given, It seems to me to go beyond the rules laid down by the practice of this House. It would, I think, be more regular to move that the Committee on the
  1572
  Bill be postponed than to propose a Resolution couched in such terms.
  MR. REARDENsaid, he would withdraw his Motion in deference to the opinion of the Speaker. He hoped to be able to carry the Amendments embodied in the Resolution in Committee on the Bill; for without them he did not believe it would be worth the paper on which it was printed,
  MR. SANDFORDsaid, he rose to urge upon the Chief Secretary for Ireland the expediency of proceeding only with the enfranchising portion of the Bill. The redistribution part could not stand, inasmuch as those boroughs which it was proposed to disfranchise were not the smallest, and appeared to have been selected for disfranchisement on some capricious system, in support of which no valid argument could be advanced. He felt assured, he added, that nobody could be more thoroughly actuated by a desire to act justly in the matter than his noble Friend the Chief Secretary for Ireland; but then, he must acknowledge that it was a somewhat arbitrary mode of proceeding to propose to give a third Member to Dublin on the minority principle, and to divide the counties in those cases in which an addition was made to their representation. Then, although it was intended to disfranchise six boroughs, only one of the seats—that conferred on Dublin—was to be given to a town, although, as things at present stood, the counties were represented in nearly the proportion of two to one. What he would suggest was, that the town of Portarlington alone, which only possessed 100 voters, should be disfranchised, and that the seat thus obtained should be conferred on Kingstown, Dalkey, Monkstown, and Bluckwell, which contained a population of something like 28,000. If that suggestion were adopted matters might be much simplified; but if the Bill were proceeded with as it stood, it was clear, from the number of Amendments of which Notice had been given, that the discussions on it must occupy several nights.
  MR. HENLEYsaid, that taking into account that they had reached the middle of June, and that everybody was anxious to prepare the way for an early dissolution, it was desirable that the discussions on the Bill should be shortened as much as possible. There were various Amendments on the Paper which would clearly, if brought on, raise questions of principle and lead to long debates; and it would be a great blessing, he thought, if they could be set

  1573
  aside so that hon. Members might be the earlier released from their labours. He saw no hope of their getting through the Bill in anything like a reasonable period if they were to proceed with the proposals of the Government, as to re-distribution of seats. Ireland would not suffer by leaving the remainder of the scheme to be dealt with by the better or worse men who were to follow in the new Parliament,
  MR. PIMsaid, that in England 37 per cent of the Members would, under the new Bill, be returned by counties; whilst in Ireland the county Members were in the proportion of 62 per cent. It was, therefore, a very extraordinary thing to propose an increase of the number of Irish county Members. There was no doubt that the small boroughs in Ireland were not independent; but no party on either side of the House seemed to take into consideration the arrangements by which they might be made independent. The same arguments brought against five of the boroughs which it was proposed to disfranchise could be brought against all boroughs with less than 10,000 inhabitants. There were many boroughs in Scotland and Wales with under 2,000 population. His own opinion was that these boroughs in Ireland could not be rendered independent by any other plan than that of grouping, which had been found so successful in Scotland nod Wales. Though he should prefer to see Portarlington grouped instead of being disfranchised, yet he was willing to admit that that borough afforded by far the least strong case for the retention of representation, while Kingstown afforded by far the strongest case for enfranchisement; and he should be well content if the whole principle of re-distribution were given up, with the exception of the transference of the representative from Portarlington to Kingstown. The question of the Irish Church was at present one of absorbing interest in Ireland, and there were also other questions engaging the attention of the lower classes in that country, and preventing them from taking an interest in the subject of Parliamentary Reform, their feeling rather being not to be connected with that House at all. He therefore thought that it would be advisable that the whole matter of redistribution should be put off until those questions were settled and the mind of the Irish people was in a fit state to express their feelings with regard to Parliamentary Reform. Under these circumstances he should be glad if the suggestion of the
  1574
  hon. Member for Maldon (Mr. Sanford) were acceded to.
  MR. BAGWELLsaid, that when the Bill was introduced he objected to the disfranchisement of a number of boroughs in Ireland. The proposal to disfranchise boroughs while the county representation was increased could not he borne out by reference to the principle adopted in the case of England or of Scotland. He thought that such an arrangement would be fatal to the establishment of a fair system of representation. In the counties the landed interest and the landlords had a preponderating influence, and he did not wish to see that influence increased; but in towns the population consisted of people of varied interests and varied opinions. He still entertained the same objection to the Bill as he expressed on the night of its introduction. The suggestion made by the hon. Member for Maldon (Mr. Sandford) was one which was well worthy the attention of the Government. It would meet with very considerable support in Ireland, and, if adopted, would facilitate the progress of Business in that House. It was not to be regarded as in any sense a party question: and he hoped both sides of the House would concur in adopting the suggestion which had been made. He believed that the Bill would double the constituencies in boroughs; and therefore the number of voters would be so large as to form a good argument against disfranchisement.
  SIR FREDERICK HEYGATEsaid, he hoped the House would not forget the strong claims which Ulster possessed to increased representation. The present proposal of the Government by no means commended, itself as likely to be a permanent measure. He would take the statistics of the hon. Member for Dublin (Mr. Pim) himself, and he found that the number of Members, if allotted to the four provinces in proportion to population, and also to the annual value of property in each, would be as follows. According to the population in 1861, Leinster, with a population of 1,457,635, would have 26 Members; Munster, with a population of 1,513,558 would have 27 Members; Ulster, with a population of 1,914,236, 34 Members; and Connaught, with a population of 913,135, would have 16 Members. According to the annual value Leinster (£4,386,986) should have 35 Members; Munster (£3,263.804), 27 Members; Ulster (£3,830,040), 30 Members; Connaught

  1575
  (£1,416,301), 11 Members; and combining the population and annual value Leintster should have 34 Members Munster, 27 Members; Ulster, 29 Members; and Connanght, 13 Members. The numbers who could read and write in each province were—Leinster, 638,436; Munster, 533,516; Ulster, 712,999; and Connaught, 221,013; so that Ulster deserved more Members on every ground—of population, annual value, menu of population, and annual value, and education, as also on the ground of freedom from crime and number of electors. He altogether objected to the principle of grouping, which was accurately enough described by Mr. Whiteside when he said—
  "You add one melancholy little town to another melancholy little town, and their union makes a still more melancholy state of things than did their separate existence."
  The practice in Scotland could not properly be adopted in Ireland, because the state of things in Scotland was different. In Scotland among grouped towns the religion, the politics, and frequently the trade were one; but in Ireland it was proposed to group towns which were twenty miles away, and, which were in no way connected. This could only be regarded as a very temporary measure. Speaking for Ulster, she could happily afford to wait, and the longer she waited the more Members she would have allotted to her.
  MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, he could not allow the question which had been brought before the House by the hon. Member for Maldon (Mr. Sandford) to pass without some expression of opinion. The impression he had and which was considerably strengthened by what had been stated on both sides within the last half-hour, was that there was a great deal of force in the appeal made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley). From the state of the Notice Paper there certainly appeared no prospect of a very speedy agreement upon the re-distribution scheme of the Irish Reform Bill; and he had other grounds for feeling anything but enthusiastic in entering on the consideration of the re-distribution clauses. The proposals themselves were objectionable, and he found it utterly impossible to assent to them, while, on the other hand, he well knew the difficulties a private Member had to encounter in proposing to substitute other provisions. Although the present system was exceedingly faulty, the possible changes must inevitably
  1576
  lie within a narrow compass, and therefore he thought it right to say that if the Government were disposed to let that part of the Irish Reform Bill stand over for future consideration there would be but little objection made on that side of the House, and the public interests of Ireland would not be imperilled thereby. But, at the same time, if the Government thought it right to go on with that part of the Bill, he should—feeling the proposals made by them extremely unsatisfactory—do his best, in conjunction with others on that side, to substitute some plan of re-distribution which he considered more suitable to the circumstances of the case and fairer to the various interests, especially with reference to the proportion of seats held by county and borough Members.
  GENERAL DUNNEsaid, that he had been surprised to hear of any commercial interests requiring protection in the greater number of the towns in Ireland. With the exception of Belfast, Dublin, and Cork, there were no such interests. The interest towns were very nearly as agricultural as the counties, for what trade they had depended on the prosperity of the agricultural population. But he could not agree that there was a proper Irish representation. The immense county of Cork was under-represented, so was the county of Tipperary, and also the county of Down: these counties had but two Members each. The hon. Gentleman below him (Mr. Sandford) had said that he was surprised there should be so many representatives of the agricultural classes in Ireland; but what was the proportion of electors in boroughs and counties? In the boroughs there were 32,000 electors, with four representatives; in the counties 134,000, with only sixty-four representatives. He contended that the counties ought to get more Members, not by taking them from the boroughs, but by giving Ireland additional representatives. Scotland had no better right to additional Members than Ireland. If they were to take population as the test, Ireland ought (not according to any calculation of his, but according to a Return that had been laid on the table of the House) to have 131 Members. The Scotch Members coolly set down the Irish Revenue at £6,500,000, and placed their own at £7,500,000; but the fact was that the Irish Revenue was nearer £9,000,000. Therefore, comparing both population and revenue, Ireland was clearly entitled to a large increase of Members.

  1577
  When speaking to other Irish Members on this subject they said that the claim of Ireland to additional representatives was perfectly just, but pointed out that there was no use in pressing it, because they would not get them. But, for his part, he could not allow the debate to close without protesting against giving Scotland additional Members when they were denied to Ireland, However, if the Government chose to accept the suggestion of his right hon. Friend the Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley), to leave the present distribution of seats within Ireland as they now exist, he felt that he could not hope for support even from Irish Members, and therefore would not at present throw any impediment in the way.
  MR. GREGORYsaid, that they ought to adopt one of two courses—either to proceed to the disfranchisement, or at once to abandon that portion of the Bill. He had, however, one exception to take to the suggestion of the hon Member for Maldon (Mr. Sandford) that they should execute the wretched borough of Portalington, and leave untouched all the other small boroughs, which were not, a bit better. He dissented altogether from the idea that the present House was not perfectly competent to deal with a few boroughs, instead of leaving them over for a future Parliament. After settling the great questions of English and Scotch Reform, were they to pronounce themselves unable to decide about a few small boroughs? He did not agree with the plan of Her Majesty's Government; but the points upon which he differed from them were but few, and he was prepared to meet them upon those points. He quite agreed in the proposal that Kingstown and Rathmines should have a Member, because they were among the most rising townships in Ireland. The right hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Chichester Fortescue) had said that there was no necessity for any re-distribution; but he recollected the same right hon. Gentleman on a former occasion saying that these were small trumpery boroughs, of which six if put together would not make a decent constituency. As a county Member, and not looking to the North or the South, he was always for giving to every borough that had a claim its due representation. He hoped, therefore, that a Member would be given to night to Kingstown, and also a second Member to Londonderry, although in al probability he should disagree in opinion
  1578
  with the Gentlemen who might represent them. When the hon. Member for Clonmel (Mr. Bagwell) spoke of the county representation as satisfactory, did his hon. Friend mean that the great county of Cork, with 490,000 inhabitants, was to remain content with only two Members? In England they had the land represented by a number of highly respectable Gentlemen, somewhat slow, but very sure—were it not for some recent indications he should say they were a remarkable honest body. But it was from the representation of the towns in England that they got all the vigour and energy of the nation. He had chanced that morning to look over the income tax accounts in England, and he found that while in 1815 the national income was derived from £137,000,000 of property it was distributed in this way—land was represented by £39,000,000, profits of trade under Schedule D by £37,000,000, and houses, funds, &c, by £61,000,000, the proportion being land, £39,000,000, as compared with £98,000,000 from other sources. But in 1867 the national income was derived from £291,000,900, of which the land represented £46,000,000, profits of trade under Schedule D £84,000,000, and houses, funds, &c, £160,000,000, or a proportion of £46,000,000 to £244,000,000. While, therefore, between 1815 and 1867 the increase from land had been only £7,000,000, the increase from all other sources was no less than £147,000,000. Now the increase in the borough representation strengthened every one of those great sources of income. But was that the case in Ireland? Nothing (if the kind. There were in Ireland 39 Members of boroughs, the population of which was only 707,000, the valuation being £1,600,000. Supposing the voters in these boroughs were taken on a £4 franchise the whole number would not be more than 66,000. On the other hand, the counties had only 64 Members, their population was about 5,000,000, their valuation £11,500,000, and the number of voters would, under this Bill, he 176,000. Therefore the claims of the Irish counties, especially the flourishing counties of Cork and Down, for additional representation could not be put aside.
  SIR HERVEY BRUCEsaid, he thought that, as the re-distribution scheme of the Government apparently gave satisfaction: to neither side of the House, it was advisable to abandon it. If it were proceeded with he should he prepared, at the proper

  1579
  time to urge the claims of Ulster to increased representation; for he believed that Ireland, and especially that province, had as good claims as Scotland, if not better. The valuation Returns for the last ten years showed that in Ulster there had been an increase of £1,500,000, while in other parts of the country there had been a decrease.
  MR. LAWSONsaid, there was not the same reason for disfranchising small boroughs in Ireland as in England. In England there were large and growing towns, with enormous populations, which sent no representatives to that House, and it was in order to provide representatives for those places that the disfranchisement of small boroughs in England was urged. But that was not the case in Ireland. It appeared that the only town in Ireland over 10,000 inhabitants which did not send a representative to that House was Kingston and Rathmines, in the county of Dublin. He protested against borough seats being transferred to counties for it had always been held that variety of representation should be studied. The Irish county Members were, almost without exception, the proprietors of landed estates in the counties they represented or in adjoining ones. Members of the trading, professional, and mercantile classes were only returned by the boroughs. He did not believe the proposal to transfer five seats from boroughs to counties would meet with approval, and he was not surprised to find hon. Members desirous to get rid of the difficulty by asking the Government to withdraw their scheme. He objected to any middle course being taken, and he protested against his own borough being made the scapegoat. Portarlington was not smaller than some English boroughs which, until the recent decision of the the House, had returned Members, nor was it much smaller than Dungannon.
  MR. SYNANsaid, that although the discussion was premature and not altogether in Order still he did not regret that it was raised, and he hoped it might lead to some advantageous arrangements between the two sides of the House. The proportion between the urban and the county representation had been fixed in 1800 and in 1832, and there had been no change since. As a county Member he objected to the annihilation of boroughs to increase the county representation. Such a change would lead to lamentable consequences in every sense with respect to the interests of Ireland. The
  1580
  desultory propositions of several Members ought not to be attended to, inasmuch as they had given no Notice of them and placed no scheme whatsoever before the House for the consideration of Members. In fact, there were only two schemes before the House, one, the scheme of the Government and the other the scheme of his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Longford (Colonel Greville-Nugent). The scheme of the Government was devoid of all principle, and that of the hon. and gallant Member for Longford was founded upon a fallacious principle. The scheme of the Government was against all constitutional principle, inasmuch as it proposed to merge the borough representation in the county representation; and the scheme of his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Longford was founded on a fallacious principle, inasmuch as it placed the English and Irish boroughs on the same basis as to population. A population of 5,000 in an English borough represented a decaying village, but not so in Ireland. An Irish borough with 5,000 inhabitants, according to the proportion of the urban population in the two countries, was equivalent to an English borough with 10,000. He recommended that the defective scheme of the Government should be struck out of the Bill, and in that case he recommended his hon. and gallant Friend not to persevere with his scheme, but to withdraw it.
  MR. H. BAILLIEsaid, the Government re-distribution scheme seemed to be condemned by Gentlemen opposite, because they disliked the transfer of borough seats to counties, and by his own (the Ministerial) side, because it gave additional representation to the South and not to the North. He thought Ireland should be treated in same way as England—boroughs with less than 5,000 inhabitants being disfranchised, and the seats being given partly to the large towns and partly to the counties. Kingstown ought certainly to be represented, and additional representation should be given to Cork city, Dublin city, and, perhaps, to Belfast, as well as to the counties of Cork and Tipperary.
  COLONEL GREVILLE-NUGENTsaid, he hoped the Government would tell the House what they really intended to propose, and not lose time by discussing points that might hereafter be given up, and that could only be dealt with in Committee.
  COLONEL FRENCHsaid, he could not

  1581
  understand the object of the discussion, unless it was to throw cold water on the whole plan for the reform of the Irish representation. For hon. Members to pick out and discuss particular portions of the question was certainly to prejudice it. He did not see why this Bill should be divided, and a half left to be passed by another Parliament. He was anxious to go into Committee, and he should then be able to meet the statements and arguments of the hon. Members for Dublin (Mr. Pim) and Londonderry (Sir Frederick Heygate), and show that the claims of Ulster were not paramount. The English Reform Bill had occupied almost the whole of last Session; and he had no reason to suppose that the Government or the House would be reluctant to give sufficient time for the fair and full consideration of the Irish Reform Bill.
  MR. DISRAELI: I do not understand what ground there is on the part of the hon. Member for Longford (Colonel Greville-Nugent) for blaming the Government in regard to the course they have taken. They have moved that the House go into Committee on the Irish Reform Bill, where upon a discussion not originated by the Government, but in which the Irish Mom hers on both sides have taken a great interest, has arisen. It would not have been becoming in us to stifle that discussion, because it has enabled us to learn the general opinion of the House on the matters which have been raised. All that has been said shall receive respectful and careful consideration; but I do not understand that anything has occurred to prevent the. House from going into Committee, on the Irish Reform Bill. I hope that the Committee will now go on with the business before us.
  Bill considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Clause 1 agreed to.
  Clause 2 postponed.
  Clause 3 (Occupation Franchise for Voters in Cities, Towns, and Boroughs).
  MR. LAWSONsaid, he rose to move an Amendment. The existing franchise in boroughs in Ireland was a rating of £8. When the Chief Secretary for Ireland moved for leave to bring in the present Bill he stated that he proposed to lower the borough franchise from £8 to £4; but instead of lowering it to £4, the noble Earl had made it necessary that a voter should be rated at something "more
  1582
  than £4." [The Earl of MAYO: I said "about £4."] The clause now made the franchise above £4, for which there was no sufficient reason. The valuation in Ireland was conducted by persons appointed by the Government, and the valuation usually proceeded by steps of from 10 s. to £1. The effect of the clause would be that in order to entitle a man to the franchise he must be rated at, say, £4 10 s. It was desirable that the Government valuators should not consider whether the effect of their rating would be, to give the franchise or not. His Amendment would render it necessary to alter the law of rating, and he had put upon the Paper a Notice in conformity with his present Amendment. The effect of the clause, as it was now worded, would be to disfranchise all who were rated at £4, of whom there are considerable numbers. Such an amount would be quite high enough, because it would usually indicate a house of between £5 and £6 rental. He begged to move on page 2, clause 3, line 4, to leave out the words "more than," which would place the borough franchise on an intelligible and rational basis.
  Amendment proposed, in page 2, line 4, to leave out the words "more than,"—(Mr. Lawson.)
  THE EARL OF MAYOsaid, the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman, taken in conjunction with a Notice he had given of an Amendment in Clause 26, would practically alter the law of rating in Ireland as it had existed ever since the Poor Law was established in that country. That law of rating was that in the case of all tenements rated above £4 the pour rates were paid, one half by the landlord and the other half by the tenant; whereas in the case of all tenements at or below £4, the whole of the rates were paid by the immediate lessor, and no demand was ever made on the occupiers for poor rates, That principle had worked very satisfactorily, and it practically exempted from the payment of poor rates the greater number of persons who were unable to pay them. That system got rid of the difficulty in the way of the collection of rates which existed in many instances both in England and Scotland, and he believed the day was not far distant when some such system—he was then speaking only in regard to the collection of rates—would be adopted for the entire United Kingdom. The great closeness between the rates struck and the

  1583
  rates paid in Ireland was, perhaps, one of the most remarkable features presented by the administration of the Poor Law. Since the introduction of the Poor Law into Ireland the total amount of rates made was £20,300,000, of which £19,500,000 sterling had been actually collected; so that the total amount of poor rate declared irrecoverable out of that very large sum in a period of more than thirty years, including the time of the famine, was under £1,000,000. The Committee ought, therefore, to pause before it interfered with a system which had worked so admirably. The increase which the right hon. Gentleman's proposal would cause to the constituency, although not very large, would include the very poorest class, and as a rule precisely those whom the law had declared to be unable to pay their rates. The increase to the borough constituency which would be made by giving household suffrage to every man in Ireland who paid rates would, in round numbers, be about 9,700 or 10,000; and the adoption of the right hon. Gentleman's Amendment would add to that number some 2,000 persons scattered all over Ireland, the greater portion of them living in the city of Dublin. The great objection to the Amendment was that it did not affect only the persons who were rated at £4 in boroughs. Taken in connection with the Amendment proposed in the 26th clause, it would interfere with the system of rating over the whole of Ireland, and would render the occupiers of 39,000 tenements who were now exempted from poor rates, liable to pay those rates. No cause had been shown why they should create so great a disturbance in the Irish Poor Law and inflict so great a hardship on thousands of poor people. Nobody had asked for such a change. On the contrary, all whom he had spoken to were perfectly satisfied with the working of the present law, and not a single petition had been presented to the House since then. He therefore hoped that the Committee would reject the Amendment.
  MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, he thought the proposal ought to be limited to boroughs, and believed his right hon. Friend the Member for Portarlington (Mr. Lawson) was quite willing that it should be so limited. Thus altered, the noble Earl the Chief Secretary for Ireland had given no sufficient reason for opposing it. It was true that was not a very large question, but that fact told both ways; and in speaking of the great disturbance the
  1584
  Amendment would cause in the rating system, the noble Earl much exaggerated its effects, especially if it were confined to boroughs. He could confirm what the noble Earl had said in regard to the admirable manner in which the poor rates were collected in Ireland; but he could not believe that that inconsiderable departure from the present line at which the occupier became personally liable, but which would make a considerable addition to the borough franchise, would seriously impair the collection of poor rates. Again, the noble Earl himself proposed a much greater departure than his right hon. Friend (Mr. Lawson) now did from the present system of rating in regard to five large cities, of which Dublin was one; for in those five places the limit of liability was to be reduced from £8 to over £4. The entire addition to the borough constituencies resulting from that Bill was a very moderate one indeed, and he should welcome the extension, how ever small, that would be given to it by the Amendment of his right hon. Friend, which he hoped the Committee would support.
  MR. VANCEsaid, that on the second; reading of the Bill, the late Chief Secretary for Ireland entirely approved the principle of the proposed borough franchise for Ireland. Occupiers at and under £4 would not wish to have the franchise on the condition of paying rates, and the Amendment before the Committee would be regarded in Ireland among all the parties concerned as a breach of faith.
  MR. MURPHYsaid, that the consequence of retaining these words in the clause would be to do great injustice to five large towns in Ireland. It would disenfranchise the occupiers of 319 tenements in Cork alone, and practically fix the rating qualification at £4 10 s., which would be equivalent to a £7 rental.
  LORD JOHN BROWNEsaid, he wished to ask the right hon. Member for Portarlington (Mr. Lawson) whether he was prepared to accept the suggestion of the right hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Chichester Fortescue) with respect to limiting his Amendment to the case of boroughs?
  MR. LAWSONwas understood to answer in the affirmative.
  GENERAL DUNNEsaid, that if the Amendment were adopted, it would lead to much confusion, as well as open the door to fraud and corruption, inasmuch as the very poor class of householders could never pay the rates for themselves.
  MR. O'BEIRNEsaid, that the operation to which the noble Lord the Chief Secretary for Ireland now so much objected, he had himself proposed to carry out with regard to no less than two-thirds of the whole of the voting population of boroughs.
  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. WARREN)said, that all the Government were proposing to do was to assimilate the law of rating all over Ireland, so that a principle which had been found by experience to act well might prevail in counties and boroughs alike. The proposal that came from the other side was to compel occupiers of houses in boroughs to pay rates and to leave those in counties exempt.
  MR. SULLIVANsaid, this clause did, not follow a single principle which had been laid down with respect to the English Bill. A most inconvenient "hard and fast line" would be imposed by it. The proposition of the Government was to give every man a vote who was rated over £4, and the Amendment was to give every man a vote who was rated at £4. In Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Belfast, and Waterford, those who occupied tenements valued under £8 paid no rates and the Government proposed to give every man in those towns a vote who was rated at more than £4. In other words, in giving a man a right to vote they put upon him the hard condition that he should submit himself to a rate to which he was not now liable. This would apply to eight-tenths of those admitted to the franchise. Why not accept the convenient figure of £4? By this clause, the noble Lord was inflicting a great hardship on eight-tenths of those admitted to the franchise.
  Question put, "That the words 'more than' stand part of the Clause."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 188; Noes 177: Majority 11.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 4 (Lodger Franchise for Voters in Cities, Towns, and Boroughs).
  MR. REARDEN MR. REARDEN moved, in line 30, to leave out the word "ten" in order to insert the word "three."
  Amendment negatived.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 5 and 6 agreed to.
  Clause 7 (Successive Occupations in Counties).
  MR. REARDEN MR. REARDEN moved, in line 30, after the word "year," to leave out to the end of the Clause.
  Amendment negatived.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 8 agreed to.
  Clause 9 postponed.
  Clause 10 (Disfranchisement of certain Boroughs).
  MR. DISRAELIsaid, he proposed that this and the two following clauses should be postponed, in order that the Government might have the opportunity of considering the suggestion which had been made to-night. He proposed, however, to go on with Clause 13, and to accept the Amendment of the hon. and learned Member for Portarlington (Mr. Lawson) so as to do away with the Boundary Commissioners.
  MR. BAGWELLsaid, he did not understand why Clause 13 should not be postponed also.
  THE EARL OF MAYOsaid, he would explain that when they came to the clause.
  Clause postponed.
  Clauses 11 and 12 postponed.
  Clause 13 (Appointment of Boundary Commissioners).
  MR. BAGWELLinquired what the Government proposed with regard to this clause?
  THE EARL OF MAYOsaid, that with the permission of the Committee, he would explain the course the Government meant to take with respect to the question of boundaries. He was sure the Committee felt it would be a matter of great convenience if any inquiry into the question of boundaries could be dispensed with. There was really, as he would show, no necessity for any extensive alteration of the Parliamentary limits of boroughs. He found that in fourteen out of the thirty-three boroughs in Ireland the Parliamentary boundaries were the same as the municipal boundaries. These boroughs were Armagh, Carlow, Clonmel, Tralee, Wexford, Bandon, Dungannon, Ennis, Enniskillen, Kinsale, Mallow, New Ross, Portarlington, and Youghal. In these fourteen cases they would be disposed to leave the boundaries as they were, being the same for municipal and Parliamentary purposes. In a considerable number of them the population had

  1587
  increased since 1841, so that there was really no case whatever for altering any of their boundaries. In fourteen of the remaining boroughs the Parliamentary boundaries were larger than the municipal—namely, Carrickfergus, Cork, Drogheda, Galway, Kilkenny, Limerick, Waterfoid, Dungarvan, Lisburn, Newry, Sligo, Cashel, Coleraine, and Downpatrick. In these fourteen boroughs, with the exception of Carrickfergus and Lisburn, the population had decreased; in no instance had they extended beyond the present municipal boundary; therefore, they did not require to be enlarged, and no one suggests their reduction. That leaves only five boroughs to be dealt with—that is, Dublin, Belfast, Londonderry, Dundalk, and Athlone. In Dublin there were some small portions of the city north of the North Circular Road and south of the South Circular Road which were contained within the municipal boundary, but were beyond the Parliamentary borough. These parts of the city should be included in the Parliamentary boundary. As regarded Belfast and Londonderry, the Parliamentary boundaries should be extended, as in both these places the towns, from considerable additional buildings and a largely increased population, had gone beyond the present Parliamentary limits. The Government proposed that in these cases also the Parliamentary boundaries should be extended, so as to correspond with the municipal. In Dundalk and Athlone a small extension will take place by assimilating the municipal and Parliamentary boundary. The Government were prepared to omit the 13th clause, and to adopt the first portion of the clause of which the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Portarlington (Mr. Lawson) had given Notice, which provided that where the boundary of any municipal borough did not coincide with the Parliamentary borough, all that part of such municipal borough extending beyond the limits of the Parliamentary borough, but within the municipal limits, should hereafter form part of the Parliamentary borough. The second part of the right hon. and learned Gentleman's clause would provide that in the case of any borough not municipal, but under Town Councils or Commissioners, the boundaries as settled for the purpose of local government should be the Parliamentary boundaries also. This would bring in such towns as Carrickfergus, Lisburn, Coleraine, Galway, Newry, Down-
  1588
  patrick, and Cashel, and as it would have the effect of curtailing the limits of those boroughs he should not think the Committee ought to agree to it. He believed that in the case of the borough of Cashel it would have the effect of reducing the number of voters to the extent of one half. He thought that if the Committee adopted the first part of the right hon. and learned Gentleman's clause, and agreed to the suggestion of the Government, they would get rid of nil necessity for a Boundary Commission in the case of the Irish boroughs.
  MR. LAWSONsaid, he would withdraw the latter portion of the clause of which he had given Notice. He had not intended that it should apply to the boundaries of existing Parliamentary boroughs, but introduced it to meet the case of Kingstown if it should get a Member.
  GENERAL DUNNE: What does the right hon. Member for Portarlington (Mr. Lawson) really want?
  THE EARL OF MAYOsaid that the general principle on which the Government proposed to act in cases where the municipal now exceeded the Parliamentary boundaries was to extend the latter so as make them conterminous with the former.
  Clause 13 negatived.
  New clause inserted—
  (Boundaries of Parliamentary Boroughs).
  "Where at the time of the passing of this Act the boundary of any municipal borough does not coincide with the Parliamentary borough, all that part of such borough situate beyond the limits of the Parliamentary borough but within the municipal limits, shall form part of the borough for all purposes connected with the Election of a Member or Members to serve in Parliament for said borough."
  Clause 14 agreed to.
  Clause 15 postponed.
  Clause 16 agreed to.
  Clause 17 postponed.
  Clause 18 (Payment of Expenses of conveying Voters in Boroughs to the Poll illegal).
  MR. GREGORY, in the absence of Mr. G. MORRIS, moved an Amendment, having for its object to except from the operation of the clause the towns of Carrickfergus, Drogheda, and Galway, and the cities of Cork, Kilkenny, Limerick, and Waterford.
  Amendment proposed,
  In page 7, line 4, after the word "borough," to insert the words "except the several boroughs

  1589
  of the county of the town of Carriekfergus, county of the city of Cork, county of the town of Drogheda, county of the town of Galway, county of the city of Kilkenny, county of the city of Limerick, county of the city of Waterford."—(Mr. George Morris.)
  VISCOUNT GALWAYsaid, that when the English Reform Bill was under discussion he voted for an Amendment having a similar object with regard to certain places in England to that of the Amendment now proposed by the hon. Member in favour of certain Irish boroughs; but the agents on both sides were now of opinion that it would have been better to provide additional polling places.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he hoped that the noble Earl the Chief Secretary for Ireland would not assent to the Amendment. He thought the exception made last year in the English Bill was of doubtful policy; but the Amendment now proposed did not rest even on the same ground. The boroughs included in it were not, he presumed, of the extent of Manchester or Liverpool.
  MR. G. MORRIS, who had entered the House after his Amendment had been proposed, said, that some parts of the Parliamentary borough of Galway were seven or eight miles from the town. If voters living at that distance were not conveyed to the poll by car they would in winter have to start from home before daylight in order to vote at an election. If expenses of conveyance were allowed at all, they ought to be allowed in boroughs comprising a large rural district. He hoped the Government would agree to his Amendment.
  MR. MURPHYsaid, that although the Parliamentary boundary of the city of Cork extended for seven English miles, no polling places were allowed beyond the limits of the municipal boundary. He would suggest that in Cork and similar places the candidates should be allowed to convey to the poll voters who lived beyond the municipal boundary. The only other way of meeting the difficulty would be to create additional polling places: but his own opinion was that adopting such a course would lead to inconvenience;
  MR. SYNANsaid, that these county towns were really districts of counties, and it would be impossible to provide polling places for the sparse population scattered over them. The candidates for such districts should be allowed to provide cars for voters, as the candidates for counties were allowed to do.
  SIR HENRY WINSTON-BARRONsaid, that as the representative of one of the boroughs affected by the Amendment, he was quite sure that candidates for these places would rather not have the privilege of increasing the expenses of their election in this way. He could speak feelingly, for he knew the extravagance and imposition which attended this form of expenditure. He hoped the Committee would reject the Amendment. Those voters who wished to come in and vote were perfectly able to do so.
  COLONEL TOTTENHAMsaid, he wished for a clear explanation of how the Amendment would operate. Would candidates be debarred from paying the travelling expenses of voters who happened to be away in the country?
  MR. PIMsaid, that with regard to the remarks of the hon. Member for Waterford (Sir Henry Winston-Barron), though his (Mr. Pim's) election had cost a great deal of money, he had found the carmen of Dublin less inclined to imposition than many in a higher social position. Still he doubted not that the voters in outlying districts always contrived somehow to attend every fair and market in the borough, and he did not see why they should not he left to find their way to the poll. Scarcely any of them were without a horse.
  LORD JOHN BROWNEsaid, that many of the electors in these boroughs were poor men, who could not afford to pay the expense of a cart, especially as carters demanded higher terms at election time. Unless the candidates were allowed to pay these expenses a number of voters would practically not be allowed to exercise the franchise. The exception made in favour of certain English boroughs ought to be extended to analogous cases in Ireland.
  MR. SERJEANT BARRYsaid, he thought Dungarvan should be included in the Amendment, as if comprised a large rural district.
  MR. G. MORRISsaid, he had no objection to strike out Waterford and insert Dungarvan, since the hon. Member for the former town (Sir Henry Winston-Barron) seemed to have a painful recollection of the impositions which had been practised upon him.
  COLONEL FRENCHsaid, it was ridiculous to suppose that Galway voters were unable to walk five miles. They frequently walked such a distance to

  1591
  markets and fairs; and such an exertion, for an election happening perhaps once in three or four years, was surely not unreasonable.
  VISCOUNT GALWAYhad learnt, since he recently addressed the Committee, that the five polling places in Galway were all in the city, whereas in the English boroughs they were so distributed that no voter had to walk more than two miles or two and a half. It was manifestly unjust to expect voters to walk five miles.
  SIR HENRY WINSTON-BARRONsaid, that he objected to the clause alto-gather, as subjecting candidates to imposition, and not merely to its application to Waterford.
  MR. GREGORYsaid, the discussion ought not to turn on the virtues or vices of carmen. He thought the fault of the Amendment was that it went on a general principle, regardless of the particular circumstances of each borough. Drogheda, for instance, had an area of only 5,000 statute acres. He thought the Amendment was defective, inasmuch as it proposed to except small as well as large boroughs. In places of great size, like Limerick, which comprehended 33,000 acres, he thought that exception might fairly be allowed.
  MR. WHITWORTHsaid, that the Amendment if carried would only be a temptation to bribery and corruption.
  MR. G. MORRISsaid, he was willing to omit Waterford as well as Drogheda from the Amendment.
  MR. VANCEsaid, he did not know why Dublin should not be one of the excepted places, especially as Dublin was itself a county. The better course would be to strike out the clause altogether and allow these expenses to be paid where they were not paid corruptly.
  MR. O'BEIRNEsaid, he thought that this clause was a very peddling way of dealing with bribery and corruption. That question could not be satisfactorily dealt with in a clause such as this, nor could a clause be framed to carry out even the limited object at present in view if justice were to be done to the peculiarities of different boroughs.
  MR. M'LARENsaid, it appeared from a Parliamentary Return that out of ten boroughs in England exceeding thirty square miles in extent, only two were exempted. He objected altogether to the exemption of Drogheda which had an area of but nine square miles.
  MR. M. CHAMBERSsaid, he was of opinion that their principle should be to diminish the expenses of candidates, and then they would not get a corrupt House of Commons. The proper remedy for the evil complained of was the increase of polling places. That was the only way to grapple with the question of candidates' expenses. He would divide the boroughs into districts and establish polling places in each. He would have additional polling places even where there were only three or four voters. Why should electors have to go five or six miles to record their votes?
  LORD JOHN BROWNEsaid, that at present it was no easy thing in Ireland to establish a number of new polling places, though it might be easy to pass an Act to effect that object. A good deal of formality had to be gone through before they could be erected; and the inhabitants of the neighbourhood in which the polling places were usually situated would always oppose with the utmost violence the granting of any new polling places by the Quarter Sessions, because their sale of whisky would thereby be effected. But it was a mistake to suppose that the expanses of the candidates would be diminished by an increase in the number of polling places. Booths must be erected, each candidate must have an agent and a polling clerk at every polling place, and in fact the remedy would be worse than the evil.
  MR. J. STUART MILLsaid, he thought that if the House was in earnest on this subject of Parliamentary Reform in Ireland there ought to be no hesitation in dealing with the question now before the Committee. If they decided upon granting the suffrage to the Irish people, they ought to give all possible facilities for the exercise of the voting power. Those facilities ought not, however, to be provided at the expense of the candidates, but of the public; and even if carriages were necessary for the conveyance of voters to the poll, these also ought to be provided at the public cost. Additional; polling places were provided in the English Reform Bill, and if, being necessary in Ireland, they were not provided by the Legislature, what would the Irish Reform Bil be worth after all? There were numbers of places in England much larger than those in Ireland for which exemptions were now sought, and, in his opinion, exceptions ought only to be made in extreme cases.
  MR. MURPHYsaid, ha was of opinion

  1593
  that if the Amendment of the hon. Member for Gal way (Mr. G. Morris) were adopted it should be limited to those cases in which there were voters outside the municipal limits of the boroughs. No payment should be made for car hire within those limits.
  THE EARL OF MAYOsaid, he could not consent to withdraw the clause which was framed on the English Act. The best course that the Committee could adopt was to follow the precedent of the English Act as a general rule, but he admitted that there were cases in which such a rule would be equivalent to depriving residents outside the municipal boundaries of their votes. Under these circumstances he proposed to omit the boroughs of Drogheda, Kilkenny, and Waterford from the clause, leaving Limerick, Galway, and Cork under its operation. He did not think the plan suggested by the hon. Member for Cork (Mr. Murphy) would work satisfactorily. It would only lend to difficulties if one portion of the voters of a borough were subject to a different law from those who lived in another portion of it.
  MR. BRADYsaid, though car hire was of some importance, Reform in Ireland was more important. They could not introduce corruption into a borough more readily than by sanctioning the payment of car hire. In his opinion the constituency ought to pay the expenses of conveying voters to the poll.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that no sensible man could entertain a doubt with regard to Drogheda. In the English Bill of last year an exception was made in favour of four places, which were called boroughs, but were to all intents and purposes more like counties than boroughs. If an exception was made with regard to Irish boroughs they ought to be in the same category as the places to which he had alluded, otherwise the rule that had been laid down by Parliament would be broken through. Cork was the only borough which came within that rule.
  THE EARL OF MAYOsaid, that he proposed to limit the exception to three towns—Cork, Limerick, and Galway. They were the largest in extent of any in Ireland. Cork had an area of 70,000 acres. Limerick 33,000, and Galway 34,000. The case in their favour had been very much pressed, and he thought it would be better to conclude the matter by making an exception in their regard.
  MR. GLADSTONEsaid, that if twenty-
  1594
  four square miles was considered a sufficient area to justify an exception being made in favour of one of these boroughs, it would be impossible for Parliament to resist any applications for a similar exception that might be made by English towns.
  MR. G. MORRISsaid, that in the borough which he represented there were voters living at a distance of five Irish miles, which was equivalent to something like seven English miles, from the only polling place in the borough; and to have to walk that distance to and from the poll was no slight matter. He should divide the Committee with regard to Galway.
  MR. HIBBERTsaid, that until he was persuaded that an Irishman could not walk so far as an Englishman he must oppose the Amendment. The largest of the boroughs contained only 47,965 acres, while the smallest of the boroughs excepted in England contained 51,246.
  MR. CANDLISHsaid, that in his opinion no case had been made out except on behalf of Cork, for Gal nay comprised thirty-five and Limerick forty one square miles, so that if the polling place were central voters could be only about three miles from it.
  MR. SYNANsaid, that the polling place was at one extremity of the borough, and this made all the difference.
  Amendment amended, by leaving out the words "county of the town of Drogheda,"
  Another Amendment proposed to the said proposed Amendment, to leave out from the words "county of the town of Galway to Waterford, inclusive"
  Question put, "That the words 'county of the town or Galway' stand part of the proposed Amendment."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 134; Noes 86: Majority 48.
  MR. VANCEsaid, that nearly all the counties of cities and towns in Ireland had been exempted from the operation of the clause except Dublin, It was true Dublin was not of a large area; but the Parliamentary boundary extended several miles beyond the municipal boundary, and there were many more voters, who would have to go six or seven miles to the poll. He should move, therefore, that Dublin be added to the list of exemptions, and he was sure the hon. Member for Dublin (Mr. Pim) would support him.
  MR. PIMsaid, he would do no such thing. It was true that Dublin deserved to be exempted as much as Cork or Limerick, but as he was opposed to the exemption of those places he could not agree to include Dublin.
  THE EARL OF MAYOsaid, he hoped his hon. Friend would not press his Amendment, which there was nothing in the circumstances of Dublin to justify.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  LORD CLAUD JOHN HAMILTON LORD CLAUD JOHN HAMILTON moved to include in the Amendment his borough, Londonderry which was peculiarly situated. Its area was not very large, but the town was divided by a river, over which there was a bridge, and as on this bridge a toll was levied, persons wishing to record their votes on the occasion of an election would be subjected to a fine. [Laughter.] Hon. Gentlemen opposite might laugh; but seeing to what extent the franchise had been lowered, 1d. was a great object to some who would in future exercise it. He thought the candidate standing for Londonderry should be allowed not only to engage carriages to convey voters to the poll, but also to pay the toll of the bridge.
  MR. PEEL DAWSONsaid, he thought the noble Lord had made out a strong case, and as he (Mr. P. Dawson) was well acquainted with the locality he would give him his support.
  MR. O'REILLYsaid, if there was to be any payment at all it should be the payment of 1d. to each voter to enable him to cross the bridge. It would be for the noble Lord, or some other candidate—and he hoped it would be another candidate—to pay the voters their toll.
  COLONEL GREVILLE-NUGENTsuggested, as a way of getting over the difficulty, that there should be a rider, making the bridge free on polling days, as Chelsea Bridge was thrown open on Sundays.
  Amendment withdrawn.
  Amendment, as amended, by striking out Drogheda, Kilkenny, and Waterford agreed to.
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, he thought it would be necessary to insert words restricting the payment for conveyance to the case of voters brought from places within the Parliamentary borough, or else it might include voters brought from the Continent. He would move to add words to that effect on the Report.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 20 (Notice of Claim in Cities, Towns, and Boroughs).
  MR. LAWSON MR. LAWSON moved to omit the words "for any city, town, or borough," and to insert the words "or on behalf of" before the word "claimant," Claimants might be abroad and it was only fair that some one on their behalf should assert their claim to be put on the register.
  THE EARL OF MAYOsaid, he thought the proposed alteration would be very disadvantageous, and that it would be much better to assimilate the law in boroughs to that in force with regard to counties. There was no reason why there should be a distinction between them. It was desirable to get rid of fictitious notices, sent in by mere political agents, and often signed without the knowledge of the person, on whose behalf they were ostensibly made. The public were put to great expense in respect to fictitious claims, there being no power to give costs against those who resorted to the practice.
  GENERAL DUNNEsaid, that if an agent were permitted to sign a notice, it should be provided that he should be required to prove that he had received authority to act as agent. Otherwise a political agent might of his own accord send in claims for half a county on the plea that he was acting "on behalf" of the persons concerned.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, such an Amendment as that had always been steadily opposed in England, because its practical effect would be that a political agent would sign any number of claims without the parties hearing a word of the matter, and when once he got their names on the register he would regard them as his voters, and they would never escape from him.
  MR. LAWSONsaid, he would withdraw his Amendment.
  MR. MURPHYsaid, that there was no penalty against a clerk of the Union for omitting the name of a qualified person from a list of electors. He begged to direct the attention of the Chief Secretary for Ireland to the subject in order that a remedy might be provided.
  THE EARL OF MAYOsaid, the offenders could be called to account by the Poor Law Commissioners.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 21 to 24, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 25 postponed.
  Clause 26 (Where value of Premises do not exceed Four Pounds, in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Belfast or Waterford, immediate Lessor to be rated).
  MR. MONSELLsaid, that as proposed by the clause, the rate in certain boroughs was to be made on the immediate lessor, where the value of the property was not more than £4, and it would be a very hard case if the lessee, through the act of the immediate lessor, should be deprived of his right to vote.
  THE EARL OF MAYOsuggested that the clause should stand for the present, and he would bring up a new clause.
  MR. SERJEANT BARRY: It is better to postpone it.
  THE EARL OF MAYO: In regard to the ensuing election, it would be necessary to pass a temporary clause relating to the position of the voters this year, while this clause will refer to them in future. There is no necessity for postponing this clause.
  THE CHAIRMANput the Question that the clause stand part of the Bill.
  MR. SERJEANT BARRYproposed to add a proviso, to the effect that the occupants of land or tenements in a borough rated at the net annual value of less than £8, and more than £4, should be entitled to be put on the register and vote at the election of Members of Parliament, notwithstanding the immediate lessor should not have been rated,
  THE CHAIRMAN: The Question has been put that the clause stand part of the Bill.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 27 to 31, inclusive, agreed to.
  On Question, "That the Chairman do report Progress,"
  COLONEL FRENCHasked when the now clauses would be brought up and the consideration of the Bill resumed. He gave Notice that as soon as the postponed clauses were disposed of he should ask the House to adopt in the Irish counties a franchise of £8 instead of £12.
  MR. DISRAELI: I think it is due to the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, and also to the importance of the question generally, that no time should be lost in coming to a conclusion upon this question of the Irish representation, and therefore I will remove the Order which I had arranged for Thursday, and will put this Bill first for that day.
  House resumed.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Thursday next.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT AMENDMENT BILL— [BILL 91.]
(Sir Stafford Northcote, Sir James Fergusson.)
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT AMENDMENT BILL— [BILL 91.]

  SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Sir Stafford Northcote.)
  MR. AYRTONsaid, that when the question of the Government of India was under discussion some ten years ago it was evident that it was the intention of Parliament that it should be at liberty to reconsider the mode in which the Council at home should be appointed, and the time at which their offices were to expire. He could not understand, therefore, why it was now proposed to grant the members of that Council pensions at once. The term of office which was suggested in their case by the Bill was in his opinion too long. The great object which it was desirable to attain he apprehended to be the introduction into the Council of men who had recently returned home from India, and who would be able to give the Secretary of State the benefit of the latest knowledge obtained in that country. That object could not, however, be secured if the members of the Council were to receive their appointments for a great number of years. He ventured to think that seven years would be ample time, and as the Council consisted of fifteen members, he would have two of them retire every year, so that a new element might thus constantly be introduced into that body, and that freshness communicated to it which it was of great importance, in his opinion, that it should possess. This plan would open a door for the employment soon after their return home of those who had served their country in India. He wished also to point out that the Under Secretary of State for India was not by law entitled to take any part in the proceedings of the Council, even in the absence of his chief from. London. That he regarded as a most anomalous and unsatisfactory state of things, and he should submit that as the Secretary of State was empowered to appoint eight out of the fifteen members, the eighth should be, ex officio, the Under Secretary, who should take his place in his absence, just in the same way as the Under Secretary for the Home Department transacted its business in the absence of its head.
  MR. J. STUART MILLsaid, he agreed with his hon. Friend in thinking that seven years was a sufficiently long period for the tenure of office in the case of members of the Council; but he would suggest that there should he a power of re-appointment, because, while it was desirable to bring in those whose information was fresh, it would often be a great disadvantage to the Council to lose the services of some particular Member. Instead of two members being obliged to retire every year, one of the two might be eligible for re-appointment.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, that when introducing the Bill his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for India stated it to be his intention, in the event of its passing, to propose that the accounts of Indian expenditure should be dealt with in the same way as the Imperial accounts, in the respect that they should be submitted to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts appointed every year by the House. Before that was done, however, it was, in his opinion, desirable that that Committee should have an opportunity of considering the whole of the arrangements which the Government meant to make for the audit of Indian accounts. It was intended that the auditor of those accounts should stand in an independent relation to the Secretary of State for India, and that the audit should be one of a real and effectual character; but his impression was that the auditor at the India Office held some other appointment, that so far he could not fairly be called an independent officer, and that the audit was reduced to something like a mere shadow. What he should under those circumstances suggest was, that before any further action was taken in the matter the whole question of the audit of Indian accounts should he referred to the Committee on Public Accounts, so that it might be dealt with thoroughly previous to the third reading of the Bill. Proposals had been made to the effect that there should be an independent auditing of those accounts, as in the case of the Imperial accounts.
  COLONEL SYKESsaid, he thought that the term of twelve years was too long for the tenure of office by members of the India Council. Under the East India Company directors went out every four years and could not be re-elected for a year. The civil servants in India, some of whom returned to England every year, were thoroughly acquainted with the change which
  1600
  the progress of education was making in the minds of the Natives of India, and it would be a great advantage to have such men taken into the India Council at short intervals. At the three Universities of Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay, numbers of Native graduates every year look honours in the examinations, in the same way as at Oxford or Cambridge, who necessarily from their self-respect looked to fill situations of influence, honour, and emolument. Where was the opening for the employment of such men unless the Covenanted Civil Service in India was thrown open to them? He intended, in the Committee upon the Bill, to propose that the duration of the tenure of office by the members of the India Council should not exceed five years, the time for which the Governor General and Governors of the Presidencies and staff appointments were tenable in the army. It might be desirable, as suggested by the hon. Member for Westminster (Mr. Stuart Mill), that certain individuals distinguished by capacity for Office should be permitted to retain their posts in the Council for a longer period than others; and power might be given in the Bill to enable the Secretary of State for India to grant this permission in exceptional cases.
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEsaid, that the main principle of the Bill was to provide for the service in the India Council of a succession of men coming fresh from India. There were various ways in which that might be done, and when the Bill went into Committee he would discuss the several propositions which had been made; and be prepared to state why, on the whole, he thought the proposal in the Bill the most convenient. In a Council of fifteen members, each employed for twelve years, there would probably be rather more than one new appointment per annum, and, allowing for vacancies, there might be two appointments in every three years. A man trained a great deal of experience in the India Council, and often got more complete views of Indian business after being a year there than he had when first appointed. He should be perfectly ready to adopt the suggestion of the hon. Member for Pontefract (Mr. Childers), and to refer the mode of auditing the Indian accounts to the Committee on Public Accounts, who, after considering the subject, might make such recommendations as they thought desirable. Though the position of the auditor might be unsatisfactory in respect to his

  1601
  holding another situation, the audit was, nevertheless, efficiently conducted.
  Bill read a second time, and committed for Thursday.

GOVERNOR GENERAL OF INDIA BILL.
(Sir Stafford Northcote, Sir James Ferqusson.)
GOVERNOR GENERAL OF INDIA BILL.

  [BILL 92.] SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Sir Stafford Northcote).
  MR. AYRTONsaid, he hoped that when the Bill got into Committee the Secretary for India would offer some explanation respecting the power proposed; to be given to the Governor General to make laws for Natives of India wherever they might be, whether in India or in any other part of her Majesty's dominions. Hitherto this power had been limited in its application to Natives in India, and he wished to know why it was now to be extended. The provision in the Bill giving to the Lieutenant Governors of different Provinces very summary powers to make laws appeared to be a rather retrograde proceeding. The Bill provided for a difficulty—which now existed—in case of a difference between the Governor General and the majority of his Council; but it contained no provision to remedy an important defect in the present constitution of the Governor General's Council. Some further provision was requisite by which the Governor General should be empowered to conduct the ordinary business of government, by dividing his great administration into several Departments and playing one member of the Council at the head of each. The provision for introducing Natives into the permanent Civil Service required great consideration, for it was of no use subjecting candidates at home to stringent examinations if there was to be a back door in India by which the Governor General could usher Natives into the Civil Service. He thought it would be very much better to guarantee to the Natives that to which; they were clearly entitled—namely, the uncovenanted branches of the Civil Service. He was afraid that at present it was too much the practice for those in power to appoint their own dependents to this part of the service; and the result was that the Natives had little confidence in the manner in which public business was conducted.
  COLONEL SYKESsaid, he thought it objectionable that the Governor General should have power to introduce Natives of India into the higher branches of the service without proper provision being made to test their capabilities and qualifications. With regard to the Uncovenanted Service, he took a similar view to that of the hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton). Of the civil servants in that brunch, 75 per cent were European adventurers, ignorant of the languages of India, and usually the protegées of men in Office.
  SIR EDWARD COLEBROOKEsaid, he thought that, in the absence of any Papers bearing on the question of the admission of Natives into the Civil Service, such an explanation ought to be given as the importance of the change deserved, particularly with reference to the extent to which it was to be carried.
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEadmitted the propriety of the suggestion that Papers bearing on the question ought to be produced. He had laid before the House Papers relating to the administration of Bengal, which ranged to a considerable extent over the more important questions raised by the Bill; but there were Papers relating to the appointment of Natives which it was desirable the House should be in possession of before passing the Bill. He would take care that they should be laid on the table, and in the meantime it would, perhaps, not be convenient that be should discuss the general subject.
  Motion agreed to.
  Bill read a second time, and committed for Thursday.

SUPPLY.-REPORT
Resolutions [June 4] reported.
MR. CHILDERSsaid, that on Thursday week, when the Votes now reported were taken, he took occasion to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer for what period the Government proposed to take Supplies, The right hon. Gentleman was not in a position to answer him then; but on Monday night he stated that he proposed to take them for twelvemonths. It was not his (Mr. Childers') intention to make any objection to Supplies being taken for that period; but be wished to point out that the arguments adduced by the right hon. Gentleman on that occasion would, if accepted as valid, establish a precedent which might be dangerous on future occasions.

1603
He desired also to note briefly some of the expressions which fell from the right hon. Gentleman whilst he was making his statement, and which he could hardly have intended to bear their literal signification, He said he did not know why the Government should not receive the same frank and honourable treatment which had been received by former Ministries under similar circumstances; but he was sure his right hon. Friend did not mean to impute that there was anything but frank and honourable treatment in the putting of the Question as to the time for which Supplies were to be taken, As soon as the Government had definitely made up their minds as to the period for which the present Parliament would last, he asked, stating that it was not a party, but strictly a constitutional Question, what course they would pursue, having regard to former precedents; and he did not mean to insinuate that his right hon. Friend either had departed or would for a moment depart from that uniformly straightforward course which in this and all other matters he pursued. In reply to the Question the right hon. Gentleman gave reasons why the Government would not follow the course which had been pursued on former occasions, but would ask for Supplies for the whole period of twelvemonths. He (Mr. Childers) had cited the precedent of 1841, and quoted the speeches of Sir Robert Peel and Lord John Russell, in which they said they followed the precedent of 1830; and his right hon. Friend said the precedent he had quoted was not applicable, and if it were it would not point to the conclusion that the Supplies should be taken for nine months, for in 1841 Supplies were granted four months before the time when a dissolution was possible, to last two months after the time when Parliament would meet again. That, however, was not strictly correct, because the Supplies were voted on the 7th of June, and the dissolution did not occur till the end of the month, so that the Supplies were really voted only for three months after the dissolution. As the House met in that year on the 19th or 20th of August, he admitted that there was a difference of some ten or fifteen days between that time and the time which would have elapsed had only nine months' Supply been granted on the present occasion; but at the same time he must say that the reasons adduced by his right hon. Friend were not reasons which could on constitutional grounds be adopted by the House.
1604
His right hon. Friend had said that in 1841 a Vote of Want of Confidence had been passed, so that the Ministry of that day could not carry through the House the measures which they deemed important for the public welfare; but that on the present occasion there had been no such Resolution, and although the Government had been defeated on one important measure, they had, with the acquiescence of the House, proceeded with other important Business. Now, that was not a correct description of what had occurred during the present Session. The right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government, when describing the circumstances under which the dissolution was about to occur, distinctly said that he had told Her Majesty that his advice and that of his Colleagues was that Her Majesty should dissolve the present Parliament and take the opinion of the country as to the conduct of her Ministers and the question of the Irish Church, and he added that no business would be taken except in connection with the Reform Acts. Therefore, his right hon. Friend was not correct in stating that this was simply a dissolution on one particular question in regard to which the Government had been defeated. He wished, however, to point out that whenever a dissolution had been announced, whatever had been the reasons for such a step, the invariable and constitutional principle had been acted upon, and the existing Parliament had not been asked to grant more Supplies than were necessary to carry on the public services until the new Parliament met. His right hon. Friend, in speaking on this subject the other day, had only alluded to the precedent of 1841, but he wished to call his right hon. Friend's particular attention to that of 1830 which he (Mr. Childers) had quoted. In 1830 there was no Resolution adopted by Parliament either of want of confidence, or approval of a policy which the Government could not support. The dissolution was caused by the King's death; but the Government and the Opposition were equally anxious to lay down the constitutional principle that that dissolution having been notified to Parliament the result followed that Supply should only be granted for the period of the existence of the then Parliament. In June, 1830, Sir Robert Peel distinctly stated that a Vote on account would be not for the whole year, but for such time only as the circumstances rendered necessary, and on the following 2nd

1605
of July he remarked that the taking of Votes for a limited time was a pledge that Parliament would be assembled at an early date. The simple question which arose in the present instance was whether, if Supplies were now voted for nine months, there would be time in December next, when the Parliament was to be called together, to take the remaining Votes, Now, if Parliament met on the 8th of December he confessed it would be impossible between that day and Christmas to go through the necessary forms for taking additional Voles for the financial year. Four or five days would be occupied in swearing the new Members; it was a tedious process to sot up the Committee of Supply in a now Parliament, and it would be necessary to pass a new Appropriation Act. He therefore admitted that the reasons of convenience given by his right hon. Friend were conclusive, and that if Supplies for nine months only were granted it would be impracticable to obtain a fresh Vote in December for the remaining quarter of the year; and accordingly although he was of opinion that Government were wrung when they urged that the cause of the dissolution had anything to do with the taking of Supply, he should not offer further objection to the Votes being taken for the whole twelve months.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERassured the hon. Gentleman that he had not intended to make any remarks to which exception could be justly taken. He believed that the words he had used on a former occasion would not bear the interpretation which the hon. Gentleman had put upon them. He had merely said, "Why should the frank and honourable course pursued in 1841 be departed from now?" In that year the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons stated openly the intention of the Government to call a new Parliament, and the Leader of the Opposition accepted that statement and relied upon it most implicitly. He certainly was of opinion that a like course should be taken now, and that the statement of the Government ought to be accepted without question. He was still unable to agree with his hon. Friend that the precedent of 1841 was applicable to the present case, because the House then determined that the ordinary Business should not be carried on until the autumnal Session, and therefore there was an opportunity towards the close of the year of proceeding with the regular Business; and
1606
fully discussing the Estimates. But this year the Government were not in a position to appeal at once to the new constituencies, and, therefore, the two cases were by no means parallel. As to the precedent of 1830, the dissolution was then caused by the decease of the Sovereign, and entirely new arrangements had consequently to be made for the transaction of the Business of Parliament.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, the House would observe that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer and his hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract (Mr. Childers) were perfectly at one with regard to their practical conclusion, and it might, therefore, be deemed unnecessary that he should prolong the conversation; but the principle involved has of great importance, and it was even possible that the proceedings of the present Session might be hereafter referred to as a precedent. Therefore it was expedient that not only should a certain line be taken, but the reasons for that line should be recorded. He agreed with his hon. Friend that it was on the whole convenient that Supply should be voted for the entire financial year; but he felt bound to demur to the reasons which had been urged by the right hon. Gentleman in favour of the adoption of such a course the right hon. Gentleman had asserted that the dissolution in 1841 ought to be regarded rather as an interruption of the Government with a view to the resumption of Business in the autumn. But this was not by any means the case, as, in point of fact, the ordinary Business was not resumed during the autumnal Session, Nothing was done in the way of what might be termed ordinary business except the passing of a Bill about the Bishop of Jerusalem. Then, the importance of the precedent of 1830 did not seem to be duly appreciated by the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. That precedent showed, in reality, that the principle of voting Supplies for a; limited period was the deference paid to the authority of the new Parliament by the expiring Parliament. He was not at all; prepared to admit the distinction drawn; by the right hon. Gentleman, for he did not think the Constitution recognized anything but this—that when an adverse vote was given on any vital point the Government had the power of dissolving, or might elect to resign. He would not go into the question of what were the particular reasons that justified the alternative of a dissolu-

1607
tion. That was not the matter to be discussed at the present moment; but when the Government recognized it all arrangements should be made for dissolution. There were not two seta of circumstances applicable to such a situation. In 1841, the right hon. Gentleman says that the conduct of Sir Robert Peel was frank and honourable in accepting the declaration of the Government; but that was accompanied by a guarantee in the voting of the Supplies only for a short term. It involved no confidence, no reliance, and was entitled to no other praise than that of propriety or prudence, because the promise given by the Government was accompanied by a practical measure which absolutely insured the fulfilment of the promise.
Vote 8. £511,324 (Public Education in Great Britain).
MR. POWELL MR. POWELL moved that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £1,500. He found that the expense put down for the preparation of the examination papers amounted to £3,000; while there was another item for inspection and examination which amounted to £5,450, and another of £2,800 for travelling expenses. He thought these items were excessive, and he wished to have some explanation concerning them, and for that purpose he moved the reduction of the Vote.
MR. E. POTTERsaid, he wished to call attention to the mode adopted of remunerating those persons who examined art collections for the South Kensington Museum. He had been invited to examine a certain collection which the Heads of the Department thought of purchasing; and after sending in his Report he received a cheque for £5 5s., which he need hardly say he returned. He thought such a plan as that was rather dangerous, and liable to great abuse; for cheques for such professional services were showered abroad right and left.
LORD ROBERT MONTAGUsaid, that the Examiners of King's College and other Colleges, and the Examiners in the Science and Art Department at South Kensington, were not paid out of this Vote. They received no salaries, but only fees in proportion to the number of students they examined. The Vote last year was exceeded, and this year the number of schools examined and of pupils presented for examination had very much increased This year 300 science schools were examined in different subjects of science,
1608
having 851 classes and 14,000 students under instruction, of whom 8,000 presented themselves for examination. The examinations, which were in 24 branches of science, were held at 275 centres; 1,154 examinations were thus held, and 13,113 worked papers were returned. The Examiners by whom the examination papers were prepared and by whom the worked papers were looked over were some of the most eminent men in the country in their respective subjects. They were Mr. J. Anderson, Professor Ansted, Mr. Buckland, Professor Bradley, Rev. B. M. Cowie, Dr. Frankland, Professor Huxley, Dr. Percy, Professor Ramsay, Mr. Warrington Smyth, Dr. Thomson, Dr. Tyndale, and Rev. Joseph Woolley. In art the professional examiners were the President of the Royal Academy, Mr. Maclise, R.A., Mr. Horsley, R.A., Mr. Westmacott, R.A., Mr. Leighton, A.R.A., Mr. Digby Wyatt, and Mr. Marshall, F.C.S. In art the examinations were very large; 125,000 papers being issued. The cost and preparation of all those papers was defrayed by this Vote. He was sorry he could not hear what was said by the hon. Member for Carlisle (Mr. E. Potter). Indeed, he could hardly catch a word that fell from him, further than that he had been asked to give his opinion on some collection; but he would make inquiries, if the hon Gentleman would give him Notice of his Question, and let him know the result.
First twenty-four Resolutions agreed to.
Vote 25 (£19,377, Miscellaneous Expenses): Resolution read a second time.
MR. ALDERMAN LUSKsaid, he wished to draw attention to the item of £6,070 for "robes, collars, and badges." He thought that persons who received Orders ought to pay for their own investiture. He believed, however, that English Orders were sent to some countries in which they were not appreciated as much as we might suppose. At all events, he thought it was monstrous to call on the taxpayers of the county, in one year, to disburse so large a sum for ornaments, for whomsoever they were intended, or whether they were prized or not. As this item had been £1,500 on the average for some years past, he moved the reduction of the Vote by the sum of £4,500.
Amendment proposed, to leave out "£19,377," and insert "£14,877,"—(Mr. Lusk,)—instead thereof.
MR. SCLATER-BOOTHsaid, it was quite true that the average of the item for robes, collars, and badges had been about £2,000 for some years past; but at intervals of a few years a larger amount was required in order to replenish the stock of decorations. Of the item of £6,070, a sum of £1,500 was to replace the decorations which had been distributed to Knights of the Bath. He admitted that the largest portion of the item objected to by the hon. Member was not very regularly placed in the Votes for this year. It ought rather to have appeared in those of last year; but the account for this service last year had not been rendered in sufficient time to put them in the Votes of the Session of 1867, or even in the Vote for Civil Contingencies presented in March last. A sum of £3,000 was for investing the Sultan, the Emperor of Russia, the Emperor of Austria, and Prince Arthur, with the Order of the Garter. He might observe, too, that some few years ago Her Majesty had been pleased to dispense with the statutes which required the heirs of deceased knights to return the decorations of the Orders, as it was thought desirable that these decorations should he left as heirlooms in the families of the knights.
MR. GUILDERSsaid, that the portion of the item which was for expenses properly chargeable last year ought to have been included in the Vote for Civil Contingencies.
MR. SCLATER-BOOTHsaid, he had already explained why it had not been so included.
Question, "That '£19,377' stand part of the Resolution," put, and agreed to.
Resolution agreed to.
Subsequent Resolutions agreed to.

REGISTRATION BILL— [BILL 167.]
(Mr. Secretary G. Hardy, Sir James Fergusson.)
REGISTRATION BILL— [BILL 167.]

  SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. Galhorne Hardy.)
  MR. BAINESsaid, he wished to call attention to the fact that neither in this Bill nor in the Reform Act of last year was there any provision for the serving of notices of objection on lodgers, who consequently would not know until they went
  1610
  into Court whether they were objected to or not. Now, this new class of voters, to whom the franchise had been conceded after much consideration and controversy, would number many thousands in the metropolis, and would be very numerous in the principal towns, and they would be grievously disappointed if they found themselves practically debarred from their anticipated privileges. The service of notices of objection answered two good purposes—it apprised the claimant that his claim was disputed, so as to enable him to attend the Court, and establish his right, and it relieved from the necessity of attending those whose claims were not objected to. Now, as many of the lodgers would be working men, it could not be expected that they should attend the Court day after day in order to see whether they were objected to or not. He was sure the Home Secretary and the Solicitor General would be anxious to have this defect supplied, and he had called attention to it in order that it might be considered by the Select Committee to which the Bill was to be referred.
  MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, he wished to call attention to another point. He was advised by a barrister well fitted to give an opinion that in thickly-populated counties, such as Middlesex, where many persons had qualifications in one district and their place of business in another, in which latter they would vote, a poll could not he got there as the Bill stood in one day. Under Clause 6, the numbers in each polling district would begin with 1, so that throughout the county there would be many of a particular number; but those who voted in a polling-place other than the district where their qualification was situated would have no number at all. Supposing a quarter of the constituency were in that position, and assuming the constituency of Middlesex to number 20,000, there would be 5,000 without numbers; and how would it be possible for the poll clerks, without a numerical list to guide them, to find the name of any such person who presented himself? He trusted this point would be considered by the Committee. Moreover, under Clause 15, claims might be made until; the 25th of August; but the Act of last year altered the day for making objections from the 25th of August to the 20th, consequently there would he no opportunity of objecting to persons who might send in claims between the 20th and the 25th.
  MR. PUGHsaid, he hoped the House would not proceed with unnecessary precipitation in this matter. If ever there was a time for exercising due deliberation and caution it was now, when the country would have to manipulate three most important Acts conferring great privileges on the people. Therefore he objected to decapitating the revising tribunal. He objected to cutting off the head of the Common Fleas. He had every confidence in the legal ability of the Revising Barristers; but he was certain they would be glad to be supplemented by the learning of that high Court. And it would be satisfactory to the country to know that amid the changes and chances of electioneering life there was an august tribunal, unruffled by the popular breeze, to which the more difficult questions of their franchises could be referred—
  "Apparet Divum numen, sedesque beatæ,
  Quas neque concutiunt venti, neque nubila nimbis
  Aspergunt."
  There was a practical matter to which he wished to refer. He feared the time was coming when the Election Petitions and Corrupt Practices Bill must be withdrawn. If all the Election Petitions, with which they would certainly be inundated, were to be tried as usual by this House, would not the Public Business be seriously interfered with? He agreed with an ancient critic that a hastened maturity generally results in failure—celerius occidere festinatam maturitatem. He believed the Government wished to do what is right; but they were mistaken in thinking that there was any desire in the House, or out of it, that the new Parliament should meet before February. For his own part, he would say, "Stay a little, that we may make an end the sooner."
  MR. J. STUART MILLsaid, he thought the point relating to lodgers a very serious one. Unless the lodger franchise was to be merely nominal, the law ought to require that notices should be served upon them when their right to vote was objected to; for otherwise, though the greater portion of them would be poor men, they would have to attend the Court from the very beginning of the revision to the end, in order to know whether they were objected to or not. Knowing this, very few of them would register at all. The obstacles in the way of the lodger were much greater than in the way of any other class, for instead of being put on the register by
  1612
  the overseers he had to make his own claim, and to repeat it every year. He ought not, then, to be liable to unknown objections at an unknown time.
  MR. LOCKEsaid, that the Act of last year required the lodger to appear before the Revising Barrister, and substantiate his claim by proving the value of his lodging and the other conditions which he had to satisfy. The service of a notice of objection would thus make no difference, for under any circumstances he was bound to attend the Court, whereas the ordinary voter was placed upon the register by the overseer and had no need to attend unless objected to.
  THE SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, that on the lodger franchise being considered last year it was thought impossible that the overseers should make out the list of lodgers, and that it was necessary that lodgers should make their own claims. The fear that lodgers who had made a claim would waste much time in waiting on the Revising Barrister for fear their claim should be disputed had no foundation; a certain day would be appointed for lodgers to prove their claim, and objectors would be heard on that day and no other. He did not think the objections raised by the hon. Member for Middlesex (Mr. Labouchere) were to any extent insurmountable, and he had no doubt the Select Committee would soon find a way to meet them.
  SIR GEORGE BOWYERsaid, he thought the Bill demanded most serious consideration. It was agreed on both sides of the House that an early dissolution was desirable; but the question arose, what was necessary and what unnecessary delay? To decide on this question, he appealed to a great principle, which he proposed to lay before the House. The next Parliament would be the most important ever yet elected by the English people; and this he said without fear of contradiction. Parliament had resolved on making the greatest change in the Constitution ever resolved on since Parliament had existed the change might be described as a statutory revolution, because it transferred political power from a mixture of classes to at least a body in which one class preponderated. He would not take as certain the opinion of the wisest man in the country, as to what the next Parliament would be; no one could speculate with accuracy upon it; they were, indeed, taking a leap in the dark. The next Parliament might

  1613
  be a success; it was just as likely to be a failure, and result in the total subversion of the state of things which had raised England to its present eminence. Under these circumstances, it was of the utmost importance this new Parliament should be elected according to the law; and that could not be done without carrying out in the most stringent manner all those safeguards with which the wisdom of Parliament had surrounded the admission of; electors to the franchise. So far from passing a law to hasten the process of making up the register, he would, on the contrary, have extended the time; the change was so momentous that, instead of having the electoral roll compiled with increased haste, he would have the work done with greater deliberation, and have no pains spared to secure a more genuine constituency than any that had ever before existed. How did the case stand, as regarded the Court of Appeal? To hasten the formation of the new electoral rolls, several additional Revising Brrristers were to be appointed; the chance of diversity t of opinion would, therefore, be proportionately increased. Under such circumstances the need of appeal would become more urgent; but, strange to any, the Government proposed to do away with it altogether; and the new House would find itself in the extraordinary position of having among its Members some who would not he entitled to their seats, if the appeals from Revising Barristers had been duly heard. He had yet another point to offer for the consideration of the House. Immediately a difficulty arose in the new Parliament, the Government of the day would be able to point to the extraordinary circumstances he had detailed as a valid reason for saying the country had no confidence in the Parliament as a true representation of its opinion; another dissolution might therefore be reasonably expected in the course of a year, simply because Parliament had been elected in a hurry and a scramble. He did not, however, intend to oppose the second reading of the Bill, weighty as were the reasons for condemning it; he merely wished to point out what a grave responsibility rested upon the Select Committee to which it would be referred, and to urge that Committee to consider the question without respect to party, and with a full appreciation of the tremendous results their acts might bring about.
  MR. MELLYsaid, he thought that no
  1614
  greater tax should be imposed upon the artizan who claimed to vote under the lodger franchise than was now imposed upon the householder. It would be extremely hard that a man in receipt of good wages should lose his day's earnings, and, in some cases, his earnings for two or even more day a because he received no notice, whereas a shopkeeper, who could easily and without loss leave his shop for an hour or two in the course of the day, was entitled to the notice.
  MR. LEEMANsaid, that as an old clerk of the pence—perhaps the only one in the House—he wished to congratulate the Government on their having brought forward this Bill, which he believed would effectually accomplish the object that both parties had in view. He could scarcely believe that the hon. Baronet the Member for Dundalk (Sir George Bowyer) had read the Bill, or he would have seen that there was no interference with the preliminary stages of registration, and that it was not till the Revising Barrister came into play that them was any change in the periods allowed for the purposes of registration. The changes that had been made were such as he thought would effectually enable the clerks of the peace to have the register ready by the time required in order to have the elections in November. With regard to the lodger any defects in regard to his case might easily be remedied in Committee. They were all agreed that as the lodger was not rated he would not be put on the register without sending in his claim; but having done that, he would be put upon the register, and there ought to be no necessity for his appearing unless his claim were objected to, in which case there was no reason why he should not receive notice. There was no difficulty in the Bill that might not be remedied in Committee.
  MR. KENDALLadmitted that the authority of the hon. Member for York (Mr. Leeman) as an old clerk of the peace was very high; but the hon. Member had himself convinced him on a former occasion that an election at the time proposed was impossible.
  MR. LEEMANexplained that he was then referring to a proposition that came from his own side of the House, to have the elections in the middle of October.
  MR. KENDALLwas sorry if he had misunderstood the hon. Gentleman. He confessed that he could not understand why Her Majesty's Government had shortened the time at all. There were many hon. Members who, like himself, had supported

  1615
  the Government in carrying the Reform Bill through the House, who were anxious that the full advantages of the measure should be extended to those who were to be enfranchised under its provisions. Now upon this question he would cite the authority of the clerks of the peace in the most important counties of England, nineteen of whom had met last week to consider the subject. These gentlemen were of opinion that it would be extremely dangerous to shorten the time usually allowed for the purposes of registration, the decision they had arrived at being as follows:—
  "Resolved, that in the opinion of this meeting it is not practicable to accelerate the preliminary stages of the registration prior to the day (the 1st of September) prescribed for the delivery of the lists by the overseers to the clerks of the peace, except at the cost of depriving of the franchise a certain class of persons on whom the right to vote has been newly conferred. 2. That this year, if extra exertions were used to obtain the delivery of the lists punctually by the 1st of September, it might be arranged for the Courts of the Revising Barristers to commence not later than the 21st of September, as an interval of at least twenty-one days is requisite for collating the lists, extracting the claims and objections for the guidance of the Revising Barrister, and the appointment and advertising of the Courts; and that such Courts should terminate by the 17th of October. That by extra exertion and expense the printing of the registers for delivery to the sheriff might be effected by the 30th of November; but that, having regard to the length of registers in the more populous counties, the printing and binding could not be executed at an earlier date; and that the meeting believed it to be extremely doubtful whether the printing could in some counties be completed by the day suggested, if the names were to be numbered consecutively throughout as at present."
  It certainly appeared, therefore, in the opinion of these high authorities, that the shortening of the time of registration would have the effect of depriving a large number—he believed about a third—of those entitled to the franchise under this measure of their privilege as electors. He apologized for having troubled the House; but he never rose except for a practical purpose, and always endeavoured to apply his remarks to the particular point under discussion.
  MR. HIBBERTsaid, he would remind the hon. Member for East Cornwall (Mr. Kendall) that no alteration had been made in the time allowed for the preliminary stages of registration, and that it was to those stages that the objections of the clerks of the peace chiefly applied. The work of the Revising Barrister, could be accelerated by the appointment of addi-
  1616
  tional barristers. He wished, however, to refer to a point noticed by the hon. Member for Middlesex, and to suggest that while the voters should be taken according to their respective parishes the numbering had better be left in the hands of the clerk of the peace. This might be done by beginning at 1001; and the difficulty with regard to the districts might be got rid of by asterisks. He could see no reason why the hon. and learned Member for Dundalk (Sir George Bowyer) should fear that justice would not be done to the new electors in case of an election coming on before there had been time to decide the appeals from the decisions of the Revising Barristers. He did not believe that any difference would be made between the new voters and the electors under the present system, and it was now the practice, in case an election came on before an appeal had been decided, to permit the elector to record his vote. Some improvements were required in the arrangements as to polling booths. The Act of last year left the law in that respect as it was settled by the Act of 1832.
  MR. P. WYKEHAM MARTINsaid, he had voted in two places without a number, and therefore there could be no practical difficulty with regard to the absence of the number. As to the lodger being obliged to "dance attendance day by day in the registration booth," all he could say was that he had himself proved that any voter himself on the register could defend any other person claiming the franchise. He had done it himself. If so, the lodger must be a most unfortunate individual if he could not get a neighbour to defend his claim in the Revising Barrister's Court. The thanks of the House were due to the Government for bringing in the Bill, and for their statement that they would secure a General Election as soon as possible. What object could there be in delaying the dissolution till January? There was great discontent out-of-doors at the prospect of delay in the assembling of the new Parliament. Trade was partially paralyzed, and therefore the sooner the present state of suspense was put an end to the better.
  MR. DENMANsaid, he hoped there would be power given to the Committee to examine witnesses. The Bill was a very good Bill; but it contained points requiring alteration. If one or two Revising Barristers, one or two county clerks, and one or two parliamentary agents were examined some difficulties which had been

  1617
  pointed out as likely to arise might easily be got rid of.
  MR. DODSONsaid, it would be important to have the House meet, if possible, at even an earlier date than was proposed. He thought it not desirable to shorten the time for making claims, nor the time for the Revising Barristers revising those claims. The object should be to gain time after the Revising Barristers had given their decision. At present, the clerks of the peace were allowed two months to make up the registers; under the Bill only from the 7th to the end of October. This time might be considerably shortened. The registers might be made up and completed in a week or ten days after the last day of the revision. All that was wanted was an increase in the staff of clerks in the office of the county clerks. All knew the rapidity with which the debates were taken down in that House late at night, copied, and printed, so as to be ready for transmission by the early trains. At all events the time might be shortened considerably. And this was the point to which the attention of the Select Committee should be directed. A list of persons entitled to the franchise, according to the information which reached the overseers, was published, according to law, on the 31st of July. This he would not interfere with. But in counties claims on the part of ratepayers omitted from the list were to be sent in by the 20th of August; in boroughs by the 25th of August. He could not see why the two things should not be assimilated by making the date in both the 20th of August. The overseers were allowed now to the 1st of September to copy out and fix the lists of objections on the church doors. He did not see why four or five days would not be enough for that work, and thus there would be a saving of a week; the Revising Barristers would be able to commence their duties on the 7th instead of the 14th of September, and, allowing them three weeks, their task would be completed by the 28th of September, and the registers might be published by the 5th of October. Allowing a week for the copies to be made, everything might be completed by the 12th of October, when the writs might be issued, and, allowing an interval of twenty-eight days, as proposed by the Government, the new Parliament might be brought together by the 9th or 10th of November.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid that
  1618
  generally the objections which had been taken to the Bill were such as would naturally come under discussion in the Select Committee, With respect to those which had been made by his hon. Friend who had spoken last, he would only say that there was not one of them which had not been most carefully considered by the Government. As for the saving of time which might be effected in the printing, while aware that in towns where there were great appliances much might be done, he must say there were parts of the country where it would be extremely difficult to expedite mailers, With respect to the points raised by the hon. Member for Oldham (Mr. Hibbert) be would venture to say that the hon. Gentleman had not read the clause with his usual attention, otherwise he would have found that if 300 could vote in a compartment under the statute of William, 500 could vote under the proposed Bill. He did not mean to go into all the objections which had been urged, because they were much more fit for discussion in the Select Committee; but in reply to what had fallen from his hon. Friend the Member for East Cornwall (Mr. Kendall)he would say that the Government having conceived it their duty had brought in a Bill to shorten the time within which Parliament might be assembled; and having done so on a principle which they thought right for themselves and the country they were quite prepared to submit the Bill to the consideration of the Select Committee. Me should leave the question of examining witnesses entirely to the Committee.
  Motion agreed to.
  Bill read a second time, and committed to a Select Committee.
  And, on June 23, Committee nominated as follows:—Mr. Secretary GATHORNE HARDY, Sir GEORGE GREY, Mr. SOLICITOR GENERAL, Sir ROBERT COLLIER, Mr. GRAVES, Mr. WILLIAM EDWARD FORSTER, Mr. BOUVERIE, Sir RAINALD KNIGHTLEY, Mr. LEEMAN, Captain SURTEES, Mr. AYRTON, Sir GEORGE BOWYER, Mr. GARTH, Mr. HIBBERT, and Sir CHARLES RUSSELL:—Power to send for persons, papers, and records; Five to be the quorum.

PETROLEUM ACT AMENDMENT (re-committed) BILL.
(Sir James Fergusson, Mr. Secretary Gathorne Hardy.)
PETROLEUM ACT AMENDMENT (re-committed) BILL.

  [BILL 141.] COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
  MR. M'LAGANsaid, he should oppose the Motion on the grounds that the Report of the chemists to whom the Bill had been referred was directly opposed to that of the Committee of last year, and that certain Amendments had been lately put on the Paper which altered the character of the Bill, and made the igniting point lower than under the present Act, He moved that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee.
  Amendment proposed,
  To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "the Bill be committed to a Select Committee,"—(Mr. M'Lagan,)
  —instead thereof.
  MR. HORSFALLsaid, he hoped the Under Secretary would not consent either to withdraw the Bill or to refer it to a Select Committee. He was quite satisfied that the point of 100 which had been agreed on would be a sufficient protection to the public.
  MR. GORSTsaid, he must ask for a longer time for the consideration. The Bill might either be postponed or referred to a Select Committee.
  MR. AYRTONsuggested that the Bill should be put through Committee that night, then re-printed, and that a week should be allowed for the re-consideration of the Report.
  VISCOUNT GALWAYsaid, he hoped the Bill would not be referred to a Select Committee.
  SIR JAMES FERGUSSONsaid, it was admitted on all hands that some legislation on the subject was necessary. The substances proposed to be dealt with by the Bill were of a very dangerous character; and these oils were used in lamps sold at a very cheap rate, and used to a great extent by poor people. Great precautions were therefore necessary. The Bill was originally framed in accordance with the recommendations of the Select Committee of last Session; but it being urged by various deputations that the test proposed was too rigorous, the question was referred to chemists representing both sides, and to the chemist generally consulted by the War Office. The recommendations of these gentlemen had been adopted in their integrity, and he believed the measure as now settled would ensure perfect surety. The modifications which had been made would effect the same end as the more rigorous test originally pro-
  1620
  posed, while the machinery already in use would not have to be materially altered; and he had the authority of the Petroleum Association for stating that the trade would not be injuriously affected. If the House should decide on referring the Bill to a Select Committee he should be compelled to withdraw it, since there would be no hope of its passing this Session; but he hoped they would agree on going into Committee.
  Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question," put, and agreed to.
  Main Question, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put, and agreed to.
  Bill considered in Committee, and reported; as amended, to be considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 171.]

CURRAGH OF KILDARE BILL— [BILL 134.]
(Mr. Sclater-Booth, The Earl of Mayo, Mr. Attorney General for Ireland.)
CURRAGH OF KILDARE BILL— [BILL 134.]

  SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(The Earl of Mayo)
  MR. COGANobjected to the Bill being read a second time at so late an hour, and without explanation.
  THE EARL OF MAYOsaid, he thought that the right hon. Gentleman was rather unreasonable. The Bill was a hybrid Bill, and notices had been duly given in the Irish papers. Its objects were to make better provision for the preservation of the Curragh, and to appoint a Commission to ascertain the rights of the parties interested.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Lord Otho Fitz Gerald.)
  Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
  Bill read a second time, and committed to a Select Committee of Eleven Members, Six to be nominated by the House and Five by the Committee of Selection.
  Select Committee nominated:—Earl of MAYO, Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL for IRELAND, Sir GRAHAM MONTGOMERY, Lord PROBY, Mr. COGAN, Lord OTHO FITZGERALD, and Five Members to be added by the Committee of Selection:—Power to send for persons, papers, and records; Five to be the quorum.

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT SUPPLEMENTAL (NO. 6) BILL.
  On Motion of Sir JAMES FERGUSSON Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders under "The Local Government Act, 1858," relating to the districts of Harrogate, Layton with Warbrick, Bury, Lower Brixham, Hexham, Tipton, Gainsborough, Worthing, Aberystwith, Cockermonth. Burnham, Wedncsbury, Burton upon Trent, Hornsey, and Keswick; and for other purposes relative to certain districts under the said Act, ordered to be brought in by Sir JAMES FERGUSSON and Mr. Secretary GATHORNE HARDY.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 175.]
  House adjourned at Two o'clock.

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—On Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings, The Marquess of Bath added.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Metropolitan Regulations* (149); Metropolitan Roads*(150); Industrial Schools Act (1866) Amendment* (151).
Second Reading—County Courts (Admiralty Jurisdiction) (108); Unclaimed Prize Money (India)* (121).
Committee—Sale of Poisons and Pharmacy Act Amendment* (103–148)

PUBLIC SCHOOLS.—OBSERVATIONS.

  ADDRESS FOR PAPERS.
  EARL STANHOPErose to call the Attention of the House to the Report of the Public Schools Commission in 1864,

  1539
  with the View to some further Measures beyond the Bill now pending in Parliament; and to move for Copies of any Petitions or Memorials on the subject of Public Schools which have been received by Her Majesty's Government since the 1st of July, 1866. He had no intention of discussing the Bill now pending in the other House—had he desired to do so he should certainly have waited until it came before their Lordships; but all he had to say about the Bill was that he heartily wished it success, for it was substantially the measure which was framed two years ago by a Select Committee of their Lordships' House, to which the Bill introduced on behalf of the Government by his noble Friend (the Earl of Derby) was referred. As the Bill was received from the Government, it was intended to legislate for a great number of cases; but the Committee adopted a more general and he thought a much sounder principle—that of leaving each case to be decided as it arose by a Commission which commanded confidence. It was on that principle the Bill which had been introduced into the Commons this year was framed, and he trusted it would come to their Lordships without any material alteration. But, important though the Bill was, it gave no power to the Commission it appointed to deal with the question of the course of studies at public schools. Yet the subject occupied much of the time of the Commission of 1864, and no one would deny that it was one of paramount importance. He did not complain, that no power over the course of studies was given to the Commission, for the subject was one which properly belonged to the governing body of a school, and he disclaimed all idea of constraint or compulsion. The question he desired to submit to their Lordships was whether, without any constraint or compulsion, some measures of a practical character might not be introduced which might facilitate the improvements we desired to see effected in the course of studies, and which might enable the governors of public schools to do what he believed many of them were desirous of doing. It did seem most essential, as was well urged by the Commissioners' Report of 1864, that the studies of the public schools should continue to have a classical basis, and that they should still proceed from the languages of Greece and of Rome. A striking testimony to the value of that classical foundation, even where the teaching was of a far less elevated order, was supplied incidentally in that other Report
  1540
  of the Commissioners on Endowed Schools, so ably presided over by his noble Friend opposite (Lord Taunton). In one passage the Commissioners said of such schools—and the words though few are most weighty—"Where Latin is best taught French and mathematics are best taught also. Where Latin is not taught, other subjects are rarely well taught." While concurring in the desire that Greek and Latin studies should be made the foundation of the curriculum of these schools, he would say it did not follow that they should be, as they were fifty years ago the only studies. It was gratifying to find how many other branches of study recommended by the Commission of 1864 were being taught. Until 1836 mathematics were not taught at Eton; it was only provided that the writing master might be permitted to add them to his other teaching. It would appear incredible in the next age that the countrymen of Sir Isaac Newton could be content to leave mathematics at this great public school to be a mere makeweight and appendage to the duties of the writing master. Since then, both at Eton and other public schools, mathematics had become part of the school course. Modern languages had also been introduced at Eton. It was not the least of the many services which the Prince Consort had rendered to the cause of intellectual progress in this country that he had founded prizes at Eton for the study of modern languages. Notwithstanding these prizes, the study of French had been pursued at Eton under, he might say, great discouragement from the school authorities. But at present it was otherwise. Since the subject was last discussed by their Lordships, French had been made a necessary part of the school course. If disparaging terms were to be used of Eton, they could apply only to the past, and not to the present or future; for the system had undergone a most salutary change, and it was probable—nay more, he would say certain—that Eton would henceforth take the lead in all improvements of study. Modern history and geography had been introduced, and natural science had made more progress at Eton and other public schools than he could have ventured to anticipate. When he last addressed their Lordships on this subject he expressed doubts whether natural science could be introduced into the course of studies; but now he found with great pleasure that this object was actually accomplished, Accord-

  1541
  ing to a Return kindly supplied to him by the Provost of Eton—
  "French is taught compulsorily throughout the school" to the top of Division 4. The first three divisions comprise together just 100 boys. Some branch of physical science is taught compulsorily throughout the fifth form to the top of Division 4. The branches now being taught are physical geography, mechanics, hydrostatics, optics, astronomy. These divisions (4 to 11) comprise about 280 boys."
  In fact, be many new brandies if study had been introduced that it had become absolutely necessary to consider what portions of the present curriculum could be laid aside while retaining the classical foundation—for the conclusion was irresistible, that, with due regard to the health and physical training of the boys, it was impossible to increase materially the time devoted to study. Much might be done by increased application and by improved methods of teaching; but substantially the question was what branches of study were to be given up for the branches which were to be adopted. He could not but think it was desirable with that view to deal with the practice of Greek composition in prose and in verse, which he believed could be wholly set aside, Latin composition might be, not set aside, but restrained within smaller bounds, and especially should it be confined to those who showed an aptitude for it. But he maintained there was no good argument for continuing the practice of composition in Greek verse. To illustrate that point he would take the case of the noble Earl the late Prime Minister (the Earl of Derby), who, it was universally allowed, had gained great credit by his spirited and successful translation of the Iliad into English verse, and who, he might remark in passing, would greatly gratify gentlemen of all political parties if he would employ his present leisure in translating the Odyssey also. Now, supposing that the noble Earl, instead of giving an English version of the Iliad, had been so misled by his school recollections as to have undertaken the translation of Paradise Lost into Greek iambics, he would doubtless have been subjected to very disparaging remarks—and, indeed, he observed that the very idea caused his noble Friend to smile. A very painful impression was in like manner produced on his mind by the description of the ludicrous efforts of a school-boy who, being required to celebrate the inauguration of a neighbouring railway in some prize verses, endeavoured
  1542
  to convey the notion of a railway in pure and classical Greek; and it certainly was a strong condemnation of the system that, whereas other branches of study, if pursued in after-life, brought praise and honour to those who cultivated them, the pursuit of Greek and Latin composition would be productive of ridicule. Then when so many other branches of study demanded our attention, what argument could be adduced in favour of continuing this system of Greek and Latin composition at our public schools? The sole argument which he had heard was that it tended to promote good scholarship. But was that the fact? He would venture to bring forward evidence to the contrary, and he felt sure it would be listened to with respect by their Lordships, There was a very important letter, dated the 8th of November, 1862. from Dr. Whewell, the late Master of Trinity College. It would be found in the second volume of the Commission of 1862. In that letter Dr. Whewell said—
  "The very great amount of time and care which is bestowed on this accomplishment [of writing Latin verses] is disproportioned to the value of it as a condition and element of an exact knowledge of the Latin language. Still more are the writing of Greek prose and Greek verse not necessary to the scholar; and it cannot be doubted that a most exact knowledge of Greek may exist in persons who could not fluently translate Addison into Greek prose or Pope into Greek verse.…. The great amount of time and attention bestowed on these accomplishments in this University has, I think, an unfavourable effect upon the knowledge of classical literature which our scholars acquire. The result of its occupying so much of their time is that they bestow comparatively little of their time and thoughts upon the reading of Greek and Latin authors with a view to their matter. They are much better acquainted with the Greek and Latin written by themselves and their companions than with any Greek or Latin written by ancient mithors."—[p. 43.]
  He trusted their Lordships would mark well these words. If even Greek and Latin scholarship were to be taken as the sole and entire aim of public schools, see what so high an authority pronounced to be the effect upon that scholarship of the system of Greek and Latin composition. Dr. Whewell declared that it was actually unfavourable. The result of that system was in general to make the scholars mere copyists of copies—to turn them from the study of such writers as Virgil to the study of such writers as Vincent Bourne If he wished to describe our present system of compulsory compositions in Greek

  1543
  and Latin by two words only, he would take the two words in which that great critic Boileau described some bad poets of his time—he bade us to beware of their "sterile abundance." Nothing certainly could be more abundant than the crop of Greek and Latin verses at our Universities and public schools; nothing could be more sterile than the supposed advantages they brought. Why was the existing system maintained? He thought he could clearly show that some of our greatest public schools were themselves disinclined to encourage or extend it. Here, for instance, were some extracts from a circular letter, dated April 10, 1867, and addressed by the very able Head Master of Harrow, Dr. Butler, "to masters and tutors engaged in preparing boys for Harrow." He said—
  "It may be convenient for you to receive early information of an important change which we propose to introduce into our school instruction. Boys in the fourth form will be henceforward exempted from Latin verses altogether. In the shells the great majority will be exempted; instruction in verses being reserved for such young boys in this part of the school as shall appear to their tutors to have a decided talent for them."
  Dr. Butler then proceeded to show that by some other classes Latin versification might be still pursued; and he said in his final paragraph—
  "You will not, I trust, infer from this circular that I am an opponent of Latin verses. On the contrary, I have a strong sense of their value as a means of imparting and developing a taste for refined scholarship. But experience has convinced me that with a very large proportion of our hoys they are thrown away, and I cannot resist the conclusion that the intellectual interests of this large number demand some modification in our long-established system."
  The reason why the present system was continued was that the public schools were looking to the Universities, while the Universities were looking to the public schools. Each expected the other to make the first step. Anyone conversant with our public schools, if interrogated as to the reason why the system of Greek composition, which had become the laughing-stock of the best scholars of France and Germany, was still continued in this country, would reply that the public schools were bound to train boys for the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, where prizes were awarded for Greek composition—as the Poison Prize at Cambridge and the Gaisford Prize at Oxford—and where Fellowships and other posts of dignity and profit were to some extent depend-
  1544
  ent upon such acquirements; and therefore that if such instruction were not given the boys would not learn what they expected, and would be sent elsewhere. If, on the other hand, any one at the Universities were asked why any encouragement was still afforded to Greek verses, the answer might be—"Why, what can we do? Is not this the very accomplishment to which the young men who come to us from public schools have been most carefully trained? Would it be fair to exclude them from the chance of obtaining academical distinction from that branch of classical study to which they have previously given so much of their time and care? There was much force and weight in those arguments urged on both sides; and though both the public schools and the Universities might desire a change of system neither of those bodies could effect it singly. There was, however, a practical suggestion which much reflection had led him to think would meet the difficulty; and he desired to submit it to their Lordships' attention. The Public Schools Commission, as he had reminded their Lordships, had nothing whatever to do with the course of study; and what he desired to submit to the House and to the Government was, that when the Public Schools Bill had been in operation for some time—say after an interval of a year or more—there should be nominated another Commission, consisting solely of persons connected with the governing or teaching bodies of the public schools, and with the governing or teaching bodies of the Universities. He would have no one on the; Commission who was not connected with either the schools or the Colleges, because he thought there ought to be nothing like pressure in the case. If a Commission of able men wholly connected with the public schools and the Colleges were so appointed, and if, assisted by an able secretary, they met from time to time, he thought it highly probable that great improvements would be made in the course of study. He did not mean to suggest that the Report of the Commission should be binding on the governing bodies; but they would have an opportunity of considering it, and he had no doubt that good results would follow. If it was true—and he thought it could not be denied—that those public bodies were desirous of finding time for the more important branches of study, without trenching unduly on the hours of exercise and recreation which it was im-

  1545
  portant to preserve—if it was true that those public bodies were desirous of improvements, and yet could not effect them singly, he asserted that there was no other means by which improvements in the course of study could be brought about than by giving those bodies an opportunity of discussing details with the view of retrenching superfluities in other brandies in order to obtain time for those more important subjects to which he had adverted. He owned there was one reflection which occurred to him with great force on reading passages in the Report recently presented in reference to Endowed Schools. He thought it very striking to observe how very much—and he said it to their honour—the middle class of this country at the endowed schools were striving to obtain intellectual superiority, and to push forward for an intellectual lead. Now, he would desire that the sons of the gentry of this country should maintain, ns heretofore, the leading position in public affairs—that they should be, as they had hitherto been, the leaders in the intellectual and political movements of this country. If they were to do so—and he did not doubt that such was their desire—it must be by honourable competition in those useful courses of study in which the youth of the middle class were striving to excel them. In the endowed schools they found young men studying the principles that regulate the wealth of nations in the admirable work of Adam Smith; discerning the early revolutions of this planet, and the substances that go to compose it in the recent discoveries of Murchison and Lyell; or with Airey and Adams and other eminent astronomers exploring the still sublimer rules which are obeyed in the starry sphere, and which enable us, mere atoms, to calculate with minute precision the slightest movements of the heavenly bodies. When the young men studying these objects at the middle-class seminaries came to compete with those from the public schools, that competition should find the latter engaged in the same course with perhaps still superior advantages of study. Let not that competition find our grandsons as it would have found our grandfathers—toiling merely in the composition of wearisome Greek iambics, or explaining in full detail the five varieties of the Asclepiadean metres! Let it be remembered, also, that those studies of imitative verse and prose were naturally Stationary, while science was progressive.
  1546
  Their Lordships would remember the noble words used by Lord Bacon—Multi pertransibunt et augebitur scientia. Some short time ago he took occasion to explain to his noble Friend the President of the Council the object he had in view. He was very far from expecting his noble Friend on the part of the Government to give him any definite reply at present. He was well aware how numerous and pressing were the subjects which now occupied the attention of the Government; but he hoped he might hear from his noble Friend the assurance that this matter would not hereafter be neglected. He thought, moreover, that he was justified in bringing the question under the consideration of their Lordships, because there could be no place better fitted for its discussion than an assembly in which there were so many Prelates who, so greatly to their honour and credit, had at the outset of their careers been teachers of youth in our public schools and Colleges. The education in those institutions was of immense importance; for there was nothing which conduced, in the long run, more effectually to the object their Lordships all had in view—to maintain unimpaired the greatness of the English nation and of the English name.
  Moved, "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for, Copies of any Petitions or Memorials on the Subject of Public Schools which have been received by Her Majesty's Government since the 1st of July, 1866."—(The Earl Stanhope.)
  THE EARL OF CLARENDONsaid, that as one who took a great interest in our public schools, he could not help expressing his thanks to his noble Friend for having again brought this question before their Lordships. The noble Earl (Earl Stanhope) had alluded to the Report of the Commission over which he (the Earl of Clarendon) had had the honour to preside. That Report was the result of a very laborious and impartial inquiry, in the course of which evidence was taken of a very remarkable character; but he regretted to say that hitherto the labours of the Commission had been almost barren of results. A Bill was brought in and referred to a Select Committee. He admitted that the measure was much improved by the Committee. Machinery was introduced by which great and important reforms might have been effected; but, to the regret and surprise of those interested in the public schools, valuable clauses were struck out

  1547
  by their Lordships after the Bill came from the Select Committee. It was now two years since that Bill had passed their Lordships' House; and although during the last two Sessions the House of Commons had been almost exclusively engaged in the discussion of questions of Reform, he thought that if the Government had been earnest on the subject, and had attached to the Bill of last year the importance it deserved, there would have been no insurmountable difficulty in passing it. This Session the Bill had been introduced in the House of Commons and had been referred to a Select Committee; but whether, after coming down from the Committee, it would undergo another discussion and reach their Lordships in time for consideration, or whether it would be one of those measures abandoned at the close of the Session, he was of course unable to say. Sure he was, however, that no further delay ought to occur in legislation which was universally admitted to be necessary, and in which the middle classes of this country took a great interest, notwithstanding the strange apathy with which it appeared to be viewed by the country, and particularly by the parents of children who would be affected by the public school system of education. To show how deeply interested parents were in improving that system, he would quote a single passage from the Report of the Public Schools Commission—
  "If a youth, after four or five years spent in school, quits it at nineteen, unable to construe an easy bit of Latin or Greek without the help of a dictionary, or to write Latin grammatically, almost ignorant of geography and of the history of his own country, unacquainted with any modern language but his own, and hardly competent to write English correctly, to do a simple sum, or stumble through an easy proposition of Euclid, a total stranger to the laws which govern the physical world and to its structure, with an eye and hand unpractised in drawing, and without knowing a note of music, with an uncultivated mind and no taste for reading or observation, his intellectual education must certainly be accounted a failure, though there may be no fault to find with his principles, character, or manners. We by no means intend to represent this as a type of the ordinary product of English public school education; but, speaking both from the evidence we have received and from the opportunities of observation open to all, we must say that it is a type much more common than it ought to be, making ample allowance for the difficulties before referred to, and that the proportion of failures is therefore unduly large."
  He thought he could appeal to many of their Lordships whether there was any exaggeration in this description of the results
  1548
  of our public school education. He would not weary them with any further quotations from the Report or the evidence; but he had quoted enough to show that an education confined to Latin and Geeek was unnatural; that, though these were everywhere professed to be taught, they were not taught thoroughly; and that, in any case, it was a miserable mis-spending of the best years of a boy's life. They were all agreed that the study of Latin and Greek should be the basis of a liberal education. He was convinced that if these were taught upon a better system, there would be abundance of time for them and for studies which were more directly fitted for boys for the practical age in which they lived; and, without overtaxing the brain or encroaching upon the recreation of boys, they might be much better qualified than they now were for the battle of life. He would not follow his noble Friend into the details of Latin and Greek composition and verse-making, because he could not quite agree with his noble Friend that there was any practical utility in such a discussion. Nor could he concur with his noble Friend in thinking that such a Commission as he desired to appoint would be useful at the present moment. Hereafter it might be of use; but just now the whole subject of education had been overloaded by inquiry, and the time had arrived when investigation might safely be suspended, and when legislative action should properly follow. What was really wanted was the passing of this Bill, re-constituting the governing bodies; and by and by the time might arrive when a further number of professional men might be appointed, as his noble Friend suggested. At the present moment he thought there was some risk that the chances of a sounder system of education would be rather retarded than promoted, if men of such eminence and authority as his noble Friend desired to appoint were to commit themselves very strongly in favour of the existing system. A Report by them would have such weight upon the new governing bodies and the executive Commission as rather to hamper than advance the reform of the existing system. It was also quite true that some of the schools had not been inactive or unmindful of public opinion, so far as it had been elicited by the inquiries of the Commission. His noble Friend had alluded to some of these. At Rugby natural science and modern languages were now part of the regular course. At Harrow that

  1549
  cruel infliction of verse-making upon boys, who had about as much aptitude for making verses as they had for flying in the air, was now greatly abated. Modern languages had also been introduced; and he was glad to hear that great changes were in contemplation—he feared, rather than in active operation—at Eton. [Earl STANHOPE: French is now compulsory.] He was glad to hear the fact quoted by his noble Friend, as a triumph of the new system, that 100 boys were now studying French compulsorily at Eton. [Earl STANHOPE: 180.] Such a fact showed that public opinion had operated upon the public schools, and that they could act independently of other bodies. The great point, in his opinion, was to see the governing bodies re-constituted, and the new system brought into action, not in opposition to the Head Masters, but in concert with them, and profiting by their knowledge. When such a system had been brought into operation, the time might arrive for appointing such a Commission as his noble Friend suggested; and he believed that the very men who would now be put upon it would be better fitted a year hence to undertake the task. A great change of opinion was in progress, and the volume of essays upon public education, which no doubt most of their Lordships had seen, would greatly assist in promoting that change. What was wanted was to infuse such new life into our public schools as would be able to deal vigorously with existing prejudices. This could only be done by legislation, and if his noble Friend's speech had the effect of contributing to the passing of the Bill now before the other House this year, he would have done better service than by promoting further inquiry.
  THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGHwas glad that his noble Friend had alluded to the Bill which was the practical result of the inquiry of the Public Schools Commission, over which his noble Friend had himself so ably presided. They must remember that the Bill to carry out the recommendation of the Commission had been introduced into Parliament in three successive Sessions. In 1865 the noble Earl who has just sat down (the Earl of Clarendon) presented the Report of the Commission and a Bill which was the complement of that Report followed upon it. That Bill was referred to a Select Committee and underwent a laborious investigation during the greater part of the Ses-
  1550
  sion; indeed, so much time was consumed in investigation that the Bill could not be further proceeded with. In 1866 the late Government, acting consistently with what they had done in the preceding Session, re-introduced the Bill into this House, and it was passed and sent down to the Commons; but, owing to the change of Government, the further progress of the Bill was stopped. The noble Earl (the Earl of Clarendon), however, was hardly fair to the Government of which his noble Friend (the Earl of Derby) was the head, when he said that if they had used a little more exertion they might have secured the passing of the Bill; for in 1867 his noble Friend Introduced the Bill on the 7th of February, immediately after the meeting of Parliament; the third reading passed on the 8th of March; and it was sent down to the other House of Parliament. Anybody who remembered the proceedings of the other House last Session must be fully conscious how the time of the other House was overtasked with the discussion on the Reform Bill, and could not be surprised that a measure of this importance, occupying the whole time of Parliament, precluded the fair consideration of any other measure. Therefore, considering the magnitude of the question, he was bound to say the Government of his noble Friend (the Earl of Derby) used every exertion to pass their measure; and one of the first acts of the present Government this Session was to re-introduce the Bill in the House of Commons, where it was now under consideration. Their Lordships would, of course, listen with the greatest respect to everything which fell from his noble Friend (Earl Stanhope) on the subject of education in public schools; but, at the same time, considering Parliament was already engaged in legislating on the subject, he thought it would have been better if his noble Friend had postponed his observations until the Bill had come from the Commons where it was being considered, and perhaps considerably changed, by a Select Committee. The Commissioners had strongly and wisely urged the modernizing of the studies in public schools; and the mere introduction of a Bill to carry out the Report of the Commissioners in three successive Sessions had already exercised a beneficial influence on the governing bodies. At both Eton and Harrow the course of instruction had been modified; and the result so far induced him to recommend their Lordships not to press the

  1551
  heads of schools too far, but to deal with them very tenderly. The noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Clarendon) had admitted that his original Bill had been improved by the Select Committee to which it was referred; it was, therefore, reasonable to hope the present measure would introduce into the government of public schools those salutary changes so ably advocated by the noble Earl. He was sure his noble Friend would not press him, under the circumstances, to give a reply on behalf of the Government to his statement; and, respecting his request for Papers, he assured him that no memorials whatever on the subject had been received by the Government.
  LORD LYTTELTONsaid, he thought that his noble Friend (Earl Stanhope) was wrong on one point, when he said that the Bill now before the Legislature gave the Commissioners no power to deal with the studies of the schools; for one of the clauses expressly gave the Commissioners power to make regulations with respect to the introduction of new classes of studies.
  THE EARL OF MALMESBURYrose to Order. The noble Lord was not in Order in discussing the details of a Bill which was now in the other House of Parliament.
  LORD LYTTELTONsaid, he asked leave of the House to point out, as the noble Earl had already referred to the Bill, that the governing bodies and the Commissioners had power to make regulations concerning studies; and, that being so, he contended a measure such as that proposed by the noble Earl was not needed. As regarded the Bill, he desired to express his regret that it had been hitherto dropped, and his hope that it would pass this Session and become law. He believed that it was the necessary and the adequate sequel to the Commission, which could not be said to be a failure till this Bill had been considered on its merits and rejected by Parliament. He thought the chief difference between his noble Friend and the late Commission was as to the time necessary for the different studies. His noble Friend argued that there was not time for the new studies, unless at the expense of the old ones. Now in the Report he would find a carefully prepared scheme with respect to Eton, in which the new studies were introduced, without any unnecessary curtailment of the time given to the old ones. He regretted that the noble Earl had shown himself as inveterate an opponent as ever of Greek and Latin com-
  1552
  position. He disagreed from the opinion—eminent though the person (Dr. Whewell) was who had given it—that the boys in public schools and at the Universities were in the habit of imitating the Latin verses of each other rather than of the ancients. It was admitted on all hands, that too much time was now given to Greek and Latin composition, and he and those who thought with him, were prepared to see allotted to them a diminished portion of time—but not that they should be altogether disregarded. It would no doubt be strange if, as his noble Friend had said, Paradise Lost should be translated into Greek iambics, but a translation of it into Greek hexameters would not be at all absurd; indeed, if time were given him, he would undertake to do it himself, in a manner he hoped his noble Friend should approve. The noble Earl had referred, in ridicule, to the idea of the account of the opening of a railway being rendered into Greek verse. Well, he would say that one of the most beautiful modern Latin compositions ever seen was a minute description of a steam engine, in hexameters, by the present Bishop of Rochester; and if that could be done in Latin verse much more might be accomplished in the more potent and flexible language of Greece. All he desired was that Greek and Latin composition should be treated just the same as physical science, modern languages, &c. No doubt it was lamentable to hear of a grown-up man who, born with a strong natural turn for science, had been compelled, during all the best learning years of his life, to occupy himself only with studies to which he was disinclined, without opportunity of following that natural turn; and therefore he desired that all branches of knowledge should be placed so far on the same footing, that there should be opportunity for all. Such boys as had a taste for classical composition should be able to indulge it; while others whose inclinations were for science, or physics, or modern languages, should receive full encouragement to acquire them. He thought that the chief responsibility for inaugurating a change upon the present system rested with the Universities. Until they awarded not only honours—for that was already done—but a fair proportion of emoluments, to other subjects besides the classics, it was hopeless to expect that the study of Greek and Latin would cease to occupy the almost exclusive attention of schoolmasters. The schools must necessarily devote the greatest

  1553
  attention to those subjects which were in the greatest favour in the Universities.
  EARL STANHOPEwished to say in reference to the observations of his noble Friend opposite (the Earl of Clarendon), that he had not in any case contemplated the immediate appointment of a Commission. He had been careful to explain that he did not wish for its appointment for a year or more after the first Commission to be appointed under the Public School Bill had been at work for some time. His object had been in a great measure attained by the opinions which he had elicited. After the discussion that had been held, and on learning from the noble Duke that no petitions or memorials had been received by Her Majesty's Government since the 1st of July, 1866, he should withdraw his Motion.
  Motion (by Leave of the House) withdrawn.

COUNTY COURTS ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION BILL. (The Earl Granville)

  (NO. 108.) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  EARL GRANVILLE, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, explained that the object of the measure was to transfer to County Courts, nominated and appointed by Her Majesty in Council, the power and jurisdiction given to two Justices and a County Court Judge by certain sections of the Merchant Shipping Act 1854, and the Merchant Shipping Act Amendment Act 1862. The operation of the Bill would be to enable small suitors in Admiralty cases to make their claims before County Courts. To enable the Judge to perform his functions satisfactorily, he was to be aided by assessors, who were to be approved by the Judge of the High Court of Admiralty. An appeal lay from the County Court to the High Court of Admiralty.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a—(Earl Granville.)
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that in the course of last Session a Bill was introduced by the Government into the other House of Parliament for the purpose of giving County Courts jurisdiction in Admiralty cases; but the measure was obliged to be placed in abeyance in consequence of the exciting subjects which arose at that
  1554
  time, and which fully occupied the attention of Parliament. After the close of the Session, a Commission was appointed for the purpose of considering this among other important subjects connected with the law, and he should have been more satisfied had the present Bill not been introduced until after the Report of that Commission had been made, As, however, there was evidently a strong feeling throughout the country in favour of some Admiralty jurisdiction being conferred upon the County Courts, and as the House of Commons had passed the present measure, he should not wish to oppose the second reading of the Bill. While assenting to the second reading of the Bill, however, he should reserve to himself the right of proposing several Amendments upon it in Committee.
  LORD CHELMSFORDalso thought that it would have been desirable to have deferred legislation upon this subject until after the Report of the Commission had been presented. He thought it unfair to impose this additional labour upon the County Court Judges, whom he might describe as judicial beasts of burden, upon whom, whenever any new work of judicial business was devised, and it was not known to whom to allot it, the burden was thrown. He objected to the Admiralty jurisdiction in Liverpool being conferred upon the Court of Passage, and to the large fees likely to arise out of the litigation being given to the corporation of that town.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he proposed to introduce an Amendment in Committee relative to the Liverpool Court of Passage,
  Motion agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly.

SALE OF POISONS AND PHARMACY ACT. (The Earl Granville.)

  (NO. 103.) COMMITTEE.
  Order of the Day fur the House to be put into Committee read.
  EARL GRANVILLEexplained that the object of the Bill was to provide for the safety of the public by compelling all persons keeping shop for the sale of poisons, and all chemists and druggists to undergo an examination before the Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain as to their practical knowledge; and no person was to be permitted to keep a shop for the sale of poisonous drugs, or to call himself a "chemist and druggist" unless duly certified.

  1555
  The Bill proposed the further precautions of requiring that every box or bottle in which any poison was sold should be labelled with the name of the article, the word "poison," and the name and address of the seller. The Bill further proposed Amendments on the 15 &, 16 Vict. c. 56, known as "The Pharmacy Act."
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(Earl Granville.)
  LORD VAUX OF HARROWDENexpressed his general concurrence in the Bill, and his wish that its provisions might be extended to Ireland.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, as far as he was concerned, he should only be too happy to extend the operation of the Bill to Ireland on the suggestion of so high an authority.
  THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGHsaid, he would not question the discretion of his noble Friend in extending the Bill to Ireland, but he should have thought that would not facilitate its progress in the other House. [The noble Duke proceeded to quote the Report of the Medical Officer of the Privy Council for 1866 to show the danger to life from the indiscriminate sale of poisons in village shops, and referred to the fatal case at Bradford, in which arsenic was sold by mistake for plaster of Paris, and used in the making of lozenges.] The Pharmaceutical Society was a voluntary one, and if there had been any other of the same character, it would have been fair to consider its claims to be put upon an equal footing but as this Society occupied the ground alone, having come forward in the public interests to promote examinations, it was desirable that it should have the advantage which the Bill would confer of conducting throughout the country such examinations of chemists as were necessary for the protection of the public. But it was necessary, as these examinations were to be made compulsory upon all persons undertaking the trade of chemists and assuming that name, that the Government should have some control over the mode in which the examination was to be conducted; and to carry out that view he had given notice of an Amendment, which was assented to by the noble Earl opposite. It proposed that the Privy Council should be the authority to see that these examinations were conducted in a proper manner, and also that the Society should have the power to make regulations for the general sale of poisons, subject to the approval of
  1556
  the Privy Council. He concurred in the view that it would be better to look to these regulations as the means of effecting general security in point of detail than to attempt the embodiment of every minute provision in the strict terms of an Act of Parliament. He rather questioned whether the noble Earl (Earl Granville) had included in the Schedule of the Bill all the poisons which were sold and used to the destruction of human life. For instance, there was ample evidence that opium and its preparations were most extensively sold in several parts of England. It was not only largely used by men and women but it was given to infants, and great destruction of life was the result. The reports on the subject were most distressing, and he should, therefore, have been glad to see opium added to the Schedule. He did not know whether there was any special reason for omitting it; but, in the absence of any such reason, there was good ground for adding it if the House thought fit to do so. With these qualifications, he approved the measure as one calculated to be generally useful.
  LORD REDESDALEsaid, he had given Notice of a clause, which many noble Lords and others were anxious to see introduced, and if any objection were taken to inserting it in Committee, he would move it on the Report. The Pharmaceutical Society had not proposed it because at first it might give a little trouble to adopt one form of bottle as a "poison bottle," but when once it became known that poisons were to be sold only in a particular form of bottle, which would be known as the "poison bottle," and when it was made unlawful, not only to sell poisons in other bottles, but to sell things not poisonous in "poison bottles," there would be far less risk than there was at present of persons been poisoned by mistake, as too many unfortunately were. Fatal mistakes were sometimes made in the dark, and these would be avoided by having a bottle of such a character that anyone who took hold of it would know it was the "poison bottle."
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEfeared that if the Bill were extended to Ireland it would require more Amendment than the mere assertion of the name.
  House in Committee.
  Amendments made: The Report thereof to be received To-morrow; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 148.)

VOLUNTEER REVIEW AT WINDSOR.

  QUESTION.
  LORD TRUROasked, Whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government In grant a general holiday to those employed in the Offices of the Public Departments on the occasion of the Queen's Review of the Volunteers at Windsor on the 20th of June? The Government were as much interested in the success of this Review as anybody, and large employers of labour would be a good deal influenced by the decision of the Government in granting a holiday to their employés.
  THE EARL OF MALMESBURYsaid, that the object of the noble Lord was a very desirable one, and he was glad to say that the Government, having taken the matter into consideration, had already given their subordinates who were Volunteers leave to join their respective regiments Besides this, a Treasury Minute had been sent to the Public Departments directing that a holiday should be granted to the clerks and others who were Volunteers.
  METROPOLITAN REGULATION BILL [H. L.] (NO. 149)—A Bill to provide Regulations for the Government of the Metropolis in certain Matters: Also,
  METROPOLITAN ROADS BILL [H.L.] (NO. 150)—A Bill to improve the Roads of the Metropolis: And also,
  INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS ACT (1866) AMENDMENT BILL [H.L.] (NO. 151)—A Bill to amend the Industrial Schools Act, 1866:
  Were severally presented by the Marquess TOWNS-HEND; read 1a.
  House adjourned at halt past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock,