Sitting of 1 July 1870

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Resolutions [June 30] reported—New Zealand Loan (Guarantee) *.
Ordered—First Reading—New Zealand (Guarantee of Loan) * [190].
Second Reading—East India Contraots * [186].
Committee—Elementary Education (re-comm.) [167]—R.P.
Withdrawn—Municipal Franchise (Ireland) * [176].
THE House met at Two of the clock.

CASE OF THE WELSH FASTING GIRL.

  QUESTION.
  MR. JONESsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, On what principle a larger scale of costs was allowed in the "Sarah Jacob," the Welsh fasting girl case, than is paid or allowed to witnesses in other prosecutions; and, why it was considered necessary to employ counsel to conduct the preliminary investigations instead of "the local agent" mentioned in the Return?
  MR. STANSFELDsaid, in reply, that the larger and more liberal scale of costs allowed in the inquiry into the case of the Welsh fasting girl arose from the fact that the inquiry was conducted by the Treasury Solicitor, and the rule was that in inquiries of that kind, so conducted on the part of the Treasury or the Home Office, the scale of costs adopted was different to the scale usually adopted in the case of ordinary prosecutions. In these cases, also, it was a matter within the discretion of the Treasury Solicitor whether to employ counsel in the preliminary investigation or not. Looking to the difficulty of the law involved in the case, to the peculiar nature of the case, to the great public interest excited in it, and to the strong local feeling which it aroused, the Treasury Solicitor, in the exercise of his discretion, thought he was fully entitled to employ counsel in conducting the preliminary investigation.

NAVY—COAL FOR THE ADMIRALTY.

  QUESTION.
  SIR JOHN HAYsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, How many tons of coal have been purchased for the Admiralty since the ap-

  1305
  pointment of the Buyer, and what sum has been paid to the Buyer for his services as salary and as percentage?
  MR. BAXTER: Sir, I have to state, in reply to my hon. and gallant Friend, that 188,888 tons of coal have been purchased, for the Admiralty during the past financial year since the appointment of the buyer, and during that period a sum of £1,695 has been paid to him as commission for assisting in purchasing, for viewing cargoes in South Wales and the North of England, and for inspecting and reporting upon the coaling arrangements, not only at all the dockyards, but at Portland, Milford Haven, and other places where there are depots, some of which arrangements were found to be very defective. Deducting this commission from the profit shown by the coal purchases of the last over the same quantity bought during the previous financial year, there remains a margin of £17,501 14 s. 3d., being the clear saving in purchasing alone during one year of the present system as compared with the former. A detailed account of this comparative statement has been compiled, and is quite at the service of any hon. Member. We anticipate a further and much larger saving from the mixture of bituminous with anthracite coal.

MUNICIPAL FRANCHISE (IRELAND) BILL.—QUESTION.
SIR FREDERICK W. HEYGATEsaid, he would beg to ask the hon. Member for Belfast, Whether he intends to persevere with the Municipal Franchise (Ireland) Bill at this period of the Session?
MR. W. JOHNSTON, in reply, said, he found that he should not have the assistance of the Government in endeavouring to lower the municipal franchise to the level of the Parliamentary rating occupation franchise, and as he was also aware that the Bill would be opposed from his own side of the House, he would state that it was not his intention at that late period of the Session to proceed further with the measure.

PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS—STANDING ORDERS—IRELAND—WATERFORD ELECTION PETITION.—QUESTION.
MR. MATTHEWSsaid, he would beg to ask the hon. Member for Wal-
1306
sall, If he will state what authority there is, in the Standing Orders or elsewhere, for the distinction suggested by him on Thursday between cases in which it is, and cases in which it is not, proper to present Petitions in the mode commonly adopted by laying them upon the Table of the House, without openly reading the prayer; whether the Committee of Public Petitions act upon any fixed rule in selecting the Petitions to be presented; and, whether there is any rule that no Petition shall be printed which complains of the manner in which a public servant has discharged his official duties?
MR. C. FORSTERsaid, in reply, that the hon. Member seemed to desire to put him through a sort of Civil Service examination on the Standing Orders. In answer to the first Question, he could only say that the hon. Gentleman had failed to understand the purport of his remarks yesterday in answer to a Question on the same subject. He had never suggested that there was any authority in the Standing Orders or elsewhere for a distinction in the mode of presenting Petitions to that House. There was only one mode of presentation recognized—that the Petitions should be personally presented by hon. Members in their places;—when the Question was put, "That the Petition do lie on the Table." But in the case of a Petition containing such grave charges on the character of a Judge in the discharge of his judicial duties it would have been more consistent with Parliamentary practice and propriety if the hon. Member, in presenting the Petition, had drawn attention to the allegations which it contained, in order to give an opportunity to any hon. Member to challenge the House on the Question whether the Petition should or should not lie on the Table. It was not the custom of the House to receive Petitions which were disrespectful to the Judges, and he found from the Journals of the House that in February, 1821, a Petition complaining of Mr. Justice Best was put forward, and after a debate and Division was rejected. In this, of all Petitions, there was the least need for departing from the usual rule. As to the second Question, it was always the wish of the Committee on Public Petitions to make their Reports the faithful echoes of the public opinion of the country, by print-

1307
ing those Petitions which required to be brought specially under the notice of the House. The Committee also printed Petitions of individual grievances when necessary. In reply to the third Question, he had to say that there was no such rule as the Question referred to; but there was a rule on which the Committee had acted, and which he as Chairman of the Committee should always do his best to carry out—a rule not to print any Petition which contained libellous matter or attacks on individual character. When the Committee refused to print a Petition it was always competent for any hon. Member to move that it be printed.
COLONEL FRENCHsaid, he would beg to ask Mr. Speaker, If it is competent for the House to decline to receive any Petition which is respectfully worded, and which does not make any demand on the Consolidated Fund?
MR. SPEAKER; The Standing Orders relating to Petitions presume, in every case, that a Member presents a Petition, rising in his place and presenting the Petition to the House; and the Question is then put, "That the Petition do lie on the Table." The Standing Orders, therefore, confine themselves to such regulations as will confine Members within certain limits. Hon. Members may state the material allegations of a Petition and read its prayer; but it is the understood form that every Member in presenting a Petition does it publicly in his place; and he cannot do that without stating that it is for or against some Bill or other subject-matter. Where allegations are directed towards individuals, the ordinary course would be for the hon. Member to state material allegations, and to have the Petition read by the Clerk at the Table, and then it would be a question for the House whether the Petition should lie on the Table or not. These are the Standing Orders relating to Petitions.

ELEMENTARY EDUCATION (re-committed) BILL— [BILL 167.]
(Mr. W. E. Forster, Mr. Secretary Bruce.)
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION (re-committed) BILL— [BILL 167.]

  COMMITTEE. [Progress 30th June.]
  Bill considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Clauses 15 and 16 agreed to.
  Clause 17 (Fees of children).
  MR. DIXONsaid, he rose to move an Amendment, that children should be "admitted free of payment." He did not expect much support for his proposal then—but he believed that before long the wisdom of it would be generally recognized, and it would be carried out. He assumed that education would in future be compulsory, especially in large towns; and what would be the effect of that if the clause under consideration were adopted? He did not think the Government could be at all aware of the number of children for whom free admission would be claimed. Some time ago the Birmingham Education Aid Society distributed free orders to all children whose parents, without being in the receipt of parish relief, had so small an income as to be below the condition of paupers in the workhouse. Six thousand orders were distributed within a few months; and it was ascertained that there were about 2,000 children whose parents were actually in the receipt of out-door relief, making a total of 8,000. Moreover, the society, on account of the limited character of its funds, did not issue as large a number of orders as a school Board would probably have done under similar circumstances; and he had reason to believe that, under a Board, 10,000 children, at least, would have been admitted free. Let the Committee take into consideration the enormous amount of labour and cost involved in the distribution of 10,000 orders, if there were the requisite care and discrimination. That, however, was not all. There were, no doubt, a large number of additional parents whose circumstances were precisely similar to those of the parents whose children were admitted free; and there must be a sense of injustice pervading the minds of such persons. In the State of New York the system of free admission and the system of school fees had been tried simultaneously; and the result was that in districts where parents had been called upon to pay a certain proportion of the cost of schooling, there had been great dissatisfaction; and that, after considerable inquiry on the subject, education had been made entirely free. A great deal had been said about the magnificent results which had attended the working of the educational system of Prussia, where the parents paid school fees. The amount of the school-pence in Prussia

  1309
  was extremely small, varying from 1s. 6d. per annum in the agricultural districts to 5s. in the towns. There had been an agitation going on in Prussia for some time for the remission even of that small payment. In a pamphlet published by Professor Geist, of Berlin, who was very well acquainted with the whole subject, it was stated that the sum paid by the parents of the children in the parish schools was about one-third of the whole cost, which was the same proportion as that in England; and it was further remarked that in Berlin 40 per cent of the school-pence was already remitted by the school authorities. It appeared that 13 persons were employed in Berlin in issuing about 30,000 orders for free admission; and that the expense of collecting the 60 per cent of school-fees amounted to one-seventh of the whole sum applied for education. The consequence was that a Commission was appointed to consider the whole question, and it came to a unanimous conclusion that it was advisable entirely to abolish the system of fees. In France some schools were entirely free—but generally school fees were charged to those children whose parents were supposed able to pay them. Some years ago the Minister of Public Instruction was instructed to make inquiries on the subject; and in the report which he presented to the Emperor he met the same arguments as had been urged lately in this country against free education. It having been argued that, if schooling were free, parents would not value it—he said that in France experience had proved the reverse of that, and that it had been found that in schools where education was free the attendance was better than in other schools. The present system in this; country was based on no principle whatever. They had heard a great deal about the opposition of free schools to the principle of parental responsibility; and they had also heard it continually remarked that if parents did not pay for the schooling of their children they would not care for it. But what was the present state of things? The schooling of children was believed to cost about 6d. per head per week; but parents were only required to pay one-third of the cost; and therefore the principle of parental responsibility, which had been so much dwelt upon, was not carried out—and it could not be, unless parents paid the en-
  1310
  tire cost of education. What weighed with parents in that matter was not so much the school-pence as the question of the loss of the wages or earnings of their children. If education were free, the poorer classes would no longer be the recipients of the charity of the rich, as regarded education. A great parade had been made during the last twelve months of the fact that the wealthy in this country paid £500,000 a year to assist the education of the poor. But what did that mean? It meant that there were no children in this country who were educated as free citizens of the State—that in that respect the children of the working-classes were the object of the charity of their neighbours, and that they were trained in early life to look upon charity as a matter of course.
  Amendment proposed, in page 6, line 12, to leave out from the word "shall" to the end of the Clause, in order to insert the words "be admitted free of payment."—(Mr. Dixon.)
  LORD ROBERT MONTAGUsaid, the object which the hon. Member (Mr. Dixon) professed to have in view was that those who were stricken by poverty should not be the recipients of the charity of the rich. Well, but the effect of the Amendment, if carried, would be that not only the children of those afflicted with poverty, but all the other children—the children of affluent parents who resorted to these schools, would be the recipients of aid out of the rates. The first effect of this would be that the rates, which pressed heavily on the poor, would immediately be trebled. He was rather inclined to congratulate the hon. Member on his recent conversion. Until now it had been supposed that they (the Opposition) alone were trying to favour the denominational schools; but, if this Amendment were carried, which school, he should like to ask, would be the most popular in a parish?—the school whose expenses were partly covered by grants and partly by subscriptions from the rich and in small part only by school fees; or the school, half the expense of which was to be met by a Parliamentary Grant and the other half to be paid out of the rates? He had spoken to working men on this subject, and he was convinced that the proposal of the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Dixon) was one

  1311
  which would not be acceptable to the working classes throughout the country. They were sensible enough to value their independence, and would be ashamed to be paid out of the rates for the performance of their paternal duties. The Bill as it stood proposed to give the local Boards power to remit the school fees in the case of children whose parents were stricken with poverty; and those who were not too poor to pay the school fees did not like to have those fees paid for them. The working man already saw that the one thing necessary for his children and for their advancement in life was education; but to give education gratuitously would only degrade the education so given in the estimation of the parents.
  MR. E. POTTERsaid, he would support the Amendment, because where there was plenty of school accommodation it was impossible to secure the attendance of children without compulsion, and he did not see how you could compel attendance if fees were to be paid. Mr. Cobden was an advocate of free secular education. He believed, if all the poor and neglected children were gathered into the schools, the better class of artizans would send their children to the voluntary schools, and pay for them rather than have them brought up with the poorer children. He should have no hesitation in voting for the proposition of his hon. Friend; but he was strongly in favour of compulsion.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he was sorry his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not been present during the able speech of the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Dixon)—he certainly would have been delighted to learn what he ought to do with the overflowing resources of the State—and that there were people in the kingdom who did not know what to do with their money. He (Mr. W. E. Forster) could not understand the grounds upon which the hon. Member for Carlisle (Mr. E. Potter) who, he had supposed was not in favour of denominational teaching in voluntary schools, supported the Motion, seeing that his argument was that the rate-supported schools would be filled by the children of the poorest of the population, and that the better class of artizans would pay for the education of their children at the voluntary schools. There was a fallacy under-
  1312
  lying the argument of his hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, when he stated that if the education was paid for out of the taxes, the parents would still pay the whole cost of the education of their children. In this matter they ought strictly to abide by facts; and he was convinced that when they had taken into account the whole sum to which working men would be liable under an education rate it would be found that they contributed a very small proportion indeed of the cost of the education of their children. He did not complain of this; but he thought the House should understand the facts. One word as to the principle upon which the Government had made the proposition as it stood. The opinion of the Government was that it would be a very dangerous thing for them to begin, at any rate, by establishing the principle that they took upon themselves, as the State, the burden of the education of the children of any portion of the population. If they were broadly to lay down the principle that the State ought to pay the cost of the education, they would, in effect, say to the great body of parents throughout the country—"We think it our business rather than yours to educate your children;" and he did not think they would be serving the cause of education by allowing such a belief to be spread abroad. If the State undertook such a task the cost would be enormous. Nor would it be confined to primary education; secondary education must also be provided free. Looking to the history of other countries, he did not think the facts bore out his hon. Friend; he could not, therefore, adopt his Amendment.
  COLONEL BARTTELOTsaid, he did not think the question had yet been placed on the right ground. The first duty of every parent was to see that his child had a proper education, and to contribute, as far as his means would allow, towards the cost of such education. It struck him forcibly that this was only another blow aimed at the existence of denominational schools. ["No, no!"] That was his impression. For what was proposed? It was that every child attending a rate-supported school should pay nothing, while the children attending the denominational schools would have to pay the school-pence. The denominational schools would consequently be deserted. He was glad to be able to infer from the remarks

  1313
  of the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Dixon) that he would support the proposition in favour of throwing the burden of educating the children of the country on the Imperial Exchequer instead of upon the local rates; and he would only further say that if the hon. Member would use his influence to get the League's £50,000 expended in building 50 elementary schools in large towns he would be doing more service than by preventing the passing of this Bill.
  MR. AUBERON HERBERTsaid, he believed the proposal of the hon. Member (Mr. Dixon) would raise the standard of education and he was sure that none who had stood in an American free school and noticed how the children of all classes mingled in them would speak of the system with disrespect. As for the cost, there was not the least need to trouble the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the ratepayers, when the country could command the hundreds of thousands of pounds which swelled the revenues of our great Universities. The yearly revenue of Oxford was £300,000; of Cambridge he could not speak so precisely; and, besides this, the country had various charitable endowments at its disposal, and another large fund which in the hands of the Church was not fulfilling the wants and wishes of the people.
  SIR HENEY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, the hon. Member's (Mr. Auberon Herbert's) statement as to the manner in which children of different social stations attended the free schools of America did not agree with the reports of other hon. Members; the opinion had been expressed more than once that the well-to-do labouring classes would not send their children to the free schools. His own belief, and that of the majority of school managers in England was, that parents slighted education that was perfectly free, but learned to value and take an interest in the instruction of their children, when some small payment was demanded from them.
  MR. MIALLsaid, the proposal of the hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Dixon) would cast the expense of educating the children of the poorer classes upon those who chose to bear the expense of educating their own children. Many a parent in the middle class had to struggle hard—to pinch and deny him-
  1314
  self, in order to provide education for his children. The double burden would fall also upon all those of the labouring class who preferred to send their children to schools where fees were paid in preference to free schools. This would create a feeling of injustice, and on that account he was obliged to vote against the Amendment. In countries where education was free, all the schools were on the same footing. As a Member of the Duke of Newcastle's Commission, he might state that the whole of the evidence produced before the Commission upon the subject of free schools went to show that they were the worst possible schools—that parents who had to pay something for the education of their children valued the instruction thus given much more, and that by casting education down before the people as an alms, they would degrade rather than elevate it in their eyes.
  Question put, "That the words 'pay such weekly fee as may be prescribed by the School Board' stand part of the Clause."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 257; Noes 32: Majority 225.
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, he rose to move another Amendment, the effect of which would be to limit the power of the school Boards in one direction and greatly to widen it in another. He now proposed to omit the words which allowed school Boards to remit the school fees if, in their opinion, the parents of the children were unable to pay; and he should afterwards propose to omit the power of the school Boards to establish entirely free schools. The reason for his Amendment was obvious; he thought that the conditions attaching to the granting of free tickets tended to affix the stigma of pauperism, and that this, together with the right of the Boards to establish free schools, would not only tend to demoralize the parents, but would react upon school Boards themselves and lower them to the level of a second Board of Guardians—a position which would seriously interfere with the efficiency of the school Boards and the advantages they might otherwise confer on the country. The principle of the Bill was that they should give large discretionary powers to the school Boards. He had objected from the first to the giving of that power; but as it had now been

  1315
  affirmed by the House, the best thing they could do was to make it as good and as consistent with the other principles of the Bill as possible. He thought, therefore, it would be better that all school Boards should be left free to consider the circumstances of their respective districts and the peculiar feelings of the inhabitants. He thought it would be better, therefore, not to tie their hands, as was done by the words that they were empowered to remit the fees where the parents, in their judgment, were unable to pay. These words he proposed to omit, leaving the school Boards free to act in each matter as they thought fit. He begged to move, in page 6, line 14, to leave out from "fee" to end of Clause.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he thought the Government must adhere to the ground they had already taken up on this matter. He did not see why poverty should be accounted a stigma in itself when it was made the ground for remitting the school fees. He doubted if in legislation anything was gained by not stating facts fairly and just as they were. The way in which the Government proposed to meet the case was this—they thought that the parent ought not to be relieved of the education of his children, but still the school Board was not to allow the non-payment of fees to stand in the way of education. It was proposed, therefore, to allow the school Boards to remit the fees, if they were satisfied that the family was prevented by poverty from paying. If the compulsory clauses were brought into operation—and he was delighted to hear the hon. Member (Mr. Dixon) say there was no doubt they would be brought into operation in Birmingham—then any parent who refused to pay for the education of his child because he preferred to spend his earnings on drink or other indulgences, would be made to pay in the same way as if the child were sent to a reformatory. It was no use blinking the real state of the facts—that was the right thing to do. He also thought the school Boards ought to have authority to create free schools on certain conditions, for he believed that what he might call a well-managed ragged school might be of great benefit. On the whole, therefore, the Government must advise the Committee to adhere to the clause as it stood.
  MR. H. R. BRANDsaid, he was sorry the Government had come to that deter-
  1316
  mination, for he felt sure that in the rural districts this system of free tickets would affix the stigma of poverty upon those children whose parents availed themselves of it. The Bill was founded upon two principles, which were entirely antagonistic to each other. There was, first, the principle of direct compulsion; and, next, there was the principle of the children's pence. Now, the school Boards might be able to compel attendance, but they would never be able to enforce payment for that which they were compelled to attend. This system of free tickets would have no other effect than to demoralize and pauperize the class which they were all striving to elevate. The Amendment would, at all events, have the good effect of giving more discretion to the local Boards in a matter in which they might be regarded as the best judges. He should suggest that between the ages of five and six a free education should be offered to children, at the option of the parents, and that after that age a graduated scale of fees should be imposed, regulating the fees so that a certain number of attendances in any past year or years should constitute a claim to a remission, or reduction of fees. This system would not have the effect of pauperizing any class; would be a premium on early attendance, and would have the effect of making those who attended irregularly pay for the education of those children who were noted for regularity of attendance. It was probable that only those parents to whom the fee would be an object would take advantage of the plan, and they would feel that their children were honestly earning the remission of fees.
  MR. CHARLES REEDsaid, he hoped that the Government would maintain the clause as it stood. It went upon the principle that where the parents did not from culpable negligence send their children to school they ought to be made to pay, while those who were really unable to pay ought to receive assistance. It was done in a thousand instances now, where benevolent persons gave free tickets for the education of the children, and the cases were never, and need never be known except as between parent and the teacher.
  MR. W. H. SMITHsaid, he also hoped that the Government would adhere to the clause. In order to render the measure successful, it was desirable

  1317
  that the burden thrown upon the ratepayers should be as small as possible.
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, he would not trouble the Committee to divide.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 18 (Maintenance by school Board of schools and sufficient school accommodation).
  MR. CAWLEY MR. CAWLEY moved, in page 6, line 19, after "time," to insert "with the sanction of the Education Department."
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he did not think a school Board should always be asking the sanction of the Department.
  MR. CAWLEYsaid, the control might be needed to prevent the possible vagaries of a Board, elected by a political or sectarian party, which might unnecessarily elect a school for their own purposes. He, therefore, trusted the point would be considered.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 19 (Powers of school Board for providing schools).
  VISCOUNT SANDONsaid, he had several Amendments on this clause, which all hung together, and he would shortly explain their purport to the Committee. He was glad that his right hon. Friend the Vice President of the Council had introduced a new clause into the Bill, in accordance with the suggestion he (Lord Sandon) had thrown out when the Bill was introduced, giving to school Boards compulsory powers to procure sites for new schools. Now, the point of all his Amendments was this—that he wanted to obtain the same powers for the managers of voluntary schools as this clause conferred upon school Boards. It was in accordance with the principles of the Bill that the voluntary and the rate-founded schools should be put on the same footing, and he believed his scheme, if adopted, would be regarded as a great aid to the ratepayers themselves, for it would be an advantage to them if the voluntary schools should be increased, and the pressure of the rates, especially in poor and populous districts, thus lightened. He would, hardly trouble the House further, except to assure them that he proposed by an Amendment on the 20th clause to provide that the sites
  1318
  so acquired should never cease to be used for the purposes of public elementary schools, as it would, of course, be wrong to give compulsory powers to acquire land which might be used for a private school or some other purpose hereafter. He begged to move, in page 6, line 40, to leave out "Every school Board."
  MR. BUXTONsaid, he thought the Government were bound to accept the proposition of the noble Lord (Viscount Sandon), or else they would depart from the main principle of the Bill, which was that in everything the rate-founded schools and the voluntary schools should be put upon the same footing; and it would not be fair to give the school Board compulsory powers to take sites while those powers were withheld from the managers of the voluntary schools.
  MR. DIXONsaid, he did not agree that the Government were in any way pledged to the principle of the Amendment, which contemplated a great increase in the number of voluntary schools. To that policy a large party in the House objected. The Bill agreed to give six months, in order that schools, now in course of erection, might be completed; but to give them facilities in the way of buying land, in order to increase their number, was a very different matter, and he must resist the Amendment.
  LORD ROBERT MONTAGUsaid, he thought that the principle contained in the Amendment would be good, both for the school Boards and for the managers of the voluntary schools, particularly in those poor and populous districts where a rate would be high, and consequently unpopular. In such places it was often difficult to obtain a site for a school, either because a landowner would not part with valuable building land, or because small owners asked too much for their house property. It was true that, as the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council said that if a school were not erected in a district within six months, the Government would order a school Board to be formed and a school built out of the rates. He (Lord Robert Montagu) could conceive nothing that would be more likely to make the Government and the whole educational system unpopular in such districts as he had referred to. He was therefore of opinion that this Amendment should be agreed to in

  1319
  order to afford to associations of philanthropic persons, facilities for erecting schools out of their own funds. For the last 30 years this plan had been adopted by every Government; and the result had been that schools had been spread throughout the country through the efforts of religious zeal, and now the noble Lord (Viscount Sandon) was opening up anew a platform on which that religious zeal and fervour could work in furthering the spread of education.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he did not wish to entertain the question of competition between voluntary and rate-schools. His object was to provide education for children as quickly as possible; but he did not think this was a matter in respect of which they were bound to put the two systems on an equality. Common justice required that the Boards should have power to acquire land, the possession of which was necessary to enable them to discharge the duty imposed upon them; but in England, such power had never been given to a voluntary body. The Government had fully considered the matter, and they felt that they could not ask the House to assent to such a principle. He was aware that in different parts of the country, and especially in the metropolis, the existence of such a power might be advantageous for the purpose of education; but the principle was so novel that he was afraid he could not ask the House to adopt it.
  MR. PELLsaid, that in several country districts the existence of this power would be as useful as in the metropolis. There were many estates in the kingdom where the owners, having a limited interest, were unable to part with land for building schools.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he would remind the Committee that by an Act called the School Sites Act limited owners were enabled to part with land in perpetuity for the erection of schools. He would also point out that the Amendment did not require that the persons desiring to take land for schools should have any connection with the district where the land was situated, and it would enable the National Society in London to acquire sites all over the kingdom.
  MR. STEVENSONsaid, he regarded the Bill as being intended to lay the foundation of a national system of education, and he trusted nothing would be
  1320
  done to encourage the multiplication of voluntary schools.
  VISCOUNT SANDONsaid, he would not divide the Committee, though he thought it only fair that voluntary schools should be put on the same footing as rate-aided schools.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 20.
  Clause A. (Compulsory purchase of sites. Regulations as to the purchase of land compulsorily. Publication of Notices. Service of Notices. Petition to Education Department. No order valid until confirmed by Parliament. Costs how to be defrayed.)
  MR. CANDLISHsaid, that as the clause was drawn no land could be obtained under compulsory action except by the consent of Parliament, and he would move an Amendment which would enable the Privy Council, without the sanction of Parliament, to effect the purchase of sites—namely, in page 8, line 35, to leave out sub-Section 6.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, that the Privy Council had already taken so much power under the Bill that he did not like to support a proposal to give that body more power, though, unquestionably, the powers now proposed to be conferred on the Privy Council would be a convenience, if the Committee thought proper to grant them. He would recommend that the Amendment should be withdrawn and brought up on the Report.
  MR. CANDLISHsaid, he had no objection to adopt the suggestion.
  MR. CAWLEYsaid, the question was whether such an extraordinary power should be given to a Department as would enable it to make compulsory orders independently of Parliamentary sanction, for hitherto Provisional Orders had always required the sanction of Parliament.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  COLONEL BARTTELOTsaid, in the absence of his hon. Friend (Mr. G. B. Gregory), he would propose an Amendment providing for the case of frivolous claims for sites, putting the owners to needless expenses. He moved, in page 8, after line 40, to insert—
  "The Education Department, in case of their refusing or modifying such order, may make such

  1321
  order as they think fit for the allowance of the costs, charges, and expenses of any person whose land is proposed to be taken of and incident to such application and inquiry respectively."
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he was willing to accept the Amendment.
  Amendment agreed to.
  MR. CANDLISHsaid, he objected to the rate of interest proposed to be charged on advances. Government could not desire to make money by such means. He begged to move, in page 9, line 5, to leave out "five" and insert "four."
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he could not accept the Amendment without consulting the Treasury. He would look to this matter on the Report.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  Clause 21 agreed to.
  Clause 22 (Managers may transfer school to school Board).
  MR. CAWLEY MR. CAWLEY moved, in page 9, line 20, before "managers," to insert "trustees and."
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he did not think it necessary to require the assent of the trustees, who were very often very difficult to be found. But he was prepared to adopt the Amendment of the hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. M'Arthur), in line 24, and insert—
  "Acting in such manner and with such consent, if any, as is defined by the instrument declaring the trust."
  LORD ROBERT MONTAGUsaid, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would insert the word "trustee." The consent of "trustees" was necessary as well as that of the "managers." The trustees were a permanent body, invested by a legal deed with the necessary power and responsibility to secure the welfare of the school. The managers were an ephemeral body, elected every year according to conditions prescribed in the trust deed of the school. The managers therefore had little at stake, and as they were an ephemeral body, they could not have the permanent interests of the school at heart. Besides, did it not seem unreasonable to ignore the trustees, who were made parties to the trust deed, because they were especially interested in the school, and to give the whole power of transfer to persons whose position as managers was accidentally and temporarily derived from the trust
  1322
  deed, and whose only interest might be to get rid of the trouble and expense of the school? He supposed this was done because that the Government thought that all schools would thereby be brought completely into the Government system. Yet such a plan was utterly contrary to the principles of the law; for it permitted certain persons to give away the property of others. The schools were legally vested in the trustees, and were the property of the trustees, and yet the managers were to be allowed to divert this property to other uses.
  MR. BARROWsaid, that in many cases the trustees were quite independent of the managers and had nothing to do with them.
  MR. ASSHETON CROSSsaid, that the managers being responsible for the expense, would be glad to get rid of the responsibility and throw it on other parties, who might not be the best parties to hand it over to.
  MR. CAWLEYsaid, that the power exercised by the managers was a kind of voluntary power. Trustees were enrolled in the Court of Chancery and took no part in the management. It was the duty of the trustees to see that the school was used for the purposes denned in the deed.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he believed the words he had mentioned would meet the difficulty.
  MR. RATHBONEsaid, that as one object of hon. Members was to promote the cause of education we ought to consult those who were actively engaged in educational work.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, it often happened that the managers were merely subscribers of a guinea or so a year, who could not be supposed to take so deep an interest in the schools as the trustees or original donors. Therefore, the words proposed by the right hon. Gentleman would hardly meet the views of hon. Members on that side of the House.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, that in the majority of cases the managers were responsible for keeping up the schools, because, unless they did so, they did not receive the Parliamentary Grant. The clause, as he proposed to amend it, would practically meet the difficulty. From the number of letters he had received on the subject, he believed it would meet the wishes of the public.
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEsaid, he wished to ask whether the right hon. Gentleman was prepared to accept the further Amendment about to be proposed by the right hon. Member for South Hampshire (Mr. Cowper-Temple) to insert—"and with the assent of a majority of the annual subscribers to such school, given at a meeting specially convened for the purpose." If the right hon. Gentleman accepted that principle the words now proposed would probably be sufficient; but, if not, it might be very dangerous to let the clause pass in its present shape.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he was prepared to accept the proposal of his right hon. Friend the Member for South Hampshire. It would be necessary, however, to modify the wording of the Amendment, so as to make it clear that the assent of the majority of the managers attending the meeting would be sufficient.
  SIR CHARLES ADDRELEYsaid, he did not see how the persons who had only the management of the schools could be authorized to transfer the property which was vested in the trustees.
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEsaid, he would put his own case. He built his school at his own expense, and received no aid whatever from the Government. No trust deed had ever been executed, but when he was required to appoint managers, he made two gentlemen nominal managers of the school. If, in his absence, they were disposed to hand the school over, there was nothing in the Bill to prevent them. He apprehended the school was his own private property, and that no one had a right to interfere with it. What he wanted was the introduction of words into the clause which would prevent anything being done by surprise.
  MR. CAWLEYsaid, he would accept the Amendment of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. W. E. Forster) on the understanding that his own Amendment would be fully considered hereafter.
  MR. BIRLEYsaid, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would withdraw the clause, and bring it up amended on the Report.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERthen proposed an Amendment to the effect that the managers of a school may transfer it to
  1324
  a school Board with the assent of such number of their body as under their constitution is binding on them, acting in such manner and with such consent, if any, as is required by the terms of the trust of the school.
  LORD ROBERT MONTAGUsaid, that this only provided for a supposed case where the trust deed already provided for the mode of transfer of the school; but he did not believe that in all the 16,000 schools there was a single trust deed, which set out any mode of transfer; or if it did, then such a clause as this would be superfluous, or rather would introduce an element of confusion into the powers and trusts of the school.
  SIR ROUNDELL PALMERsaid, if he rightly caught the words which had been proposed, they seemed to be based on a right principle. They simply affirmed that where a trust existed its terms ought to be followed.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, he thought that full notice—say of two or three months—ought to be given of every intended transfer, so that the parties really interested might, if they chose, come forward to dispute the right of those who proposed to make the transfer. He would suggest that the best course to pursue would be to bring the clause up again on the Report.
  MR. DISRAELIsaid, he concurred in his right hon. Friend's suggestion. It appeared to him that the words of the clause would invest mere managers of schools with rights which appertained only to the owners of the property. The words suggested by the right hon. Gentleman really did not touch the difficulty; they evaded it with great ingenuity.
  MR. GATHORNE HARDYsaid, he would point out that if no Amendments were made in the clause it might be postponed and brought up in an amended form at the end of the Committee.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Clause postponed.
  Clauses 23 to 25, inclusive, agreed to.
  Clause 26 (Establishment of industrial schools).
  MR. HEADLAMsaid, he would suggest that they should also be authorized to establish industrial school ships.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he thought the Amendment was unnecessary, inas-

  1325
  much as an industrial school ship, if certified, would come within the operation of the clause.
  MR. CORRANCE MR. CORRANCE moved, in line 80, after "1866," to insert—
  "And an Act—namely, twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth Victoria, chapter forty-three, section one, referring to pauper children, all provisions of section fifteen of the former Act notwithstanding."
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, the Bill was intended to promote the objects of education, and it would not do to put the school Boards in the place of the Poor Law Guardians, which would be the effect of the hon. Gentleman's proposal.
  In reply to Mr. HIBBERT,
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he had already stated that the result of passing an Education Bill would be to render it necessary to revise the Industrial Schools Act.
  Amendment negatived.
  SIR CHARLES ADDERLEYsaid, the clause would make the industrial schools established under the school Boards a very important part of the new school machinery of the kingdom, and yet the Proviso at the end of the clause left them subject to the Home Secretary, and so kept the children for whom the Bill was chiefly intended out of the new national system, and placed them in a special category of police treatment. He proposed that school Boards should not only be able to contribute to industrial schools and to establish them, but also to make use of all the powers of the Industrial Schools Act, thus constituting them a competent authority to provide education—compulsorily if necessary—for all poor children. The Proviso placed the children most worthy of such provision among the criminal class, though they were not in any sense criminals. The only objection he had heard to transferring industrial schools from the Secretary of State to the Education Department, was that destitute children should be treated as a separate class, but that, in his opinion, had no force. Industrial schools were meant for the most neglected children, not criminals; they might be, and they were practically used as day schools as well as boarding schools, and there was no reason whatever to treat them as distinct institutions foreign to the Education Department. The tendency of the present time was to
  1326
  making one great Educational Minister preside over all the State-aided schools of the country. Moreover, when the Education Estimates were brought before the House it was impossible to check them when one class of schools came under one Department and another class was placed under a different Department. The real reason why the change proposed in his Amendment was opposed by the managers of industrial schools was the unpopularity of the Education Department, though the present Vice President would have redeemed it from this unpopularity had it been possible to do so. But if there was objection of this kind, it ought to be got over by altering the Department, instead of allowing certain schools to escape the school Minister in another Department, with which education had nothing to do. There was also a natural wish felt by those who had got industrial schools under their separate management not to let them merge in the general Department. The school Boards and the Education Department, and not the Home Office should stand in loco parentis to destitute children, who should not be regarded and stigmatized as a degraded class, and industrial schools ought to be supported out of the same rates and come before the House in the same Estimates as other elementary schools. On these grounds he begged to move, in page 10, line 33, leave out from "Provided" to end, and insert—
  "And every school Board where there is an Industrial School established shall, if necessary, by an officer of their own, put in force the fourteenth section of the Industrial Schools Act, twenty-ninth and thirtieth Victoria, chapter one hundred and eighteen, and cause children under fourteen years of age found begging or wandering, with no settled abode or proper guardianship, or visible means of subsistence, or found destitute, to be brought before a magistrate, in order that they may be sent to such Industrial School, if possible, and kept there under the terms of that Act. Children found so begging or wandering, having a parent or guardian, may be sent to such schools, for instruction only, during such hours in the day as the magistrate committing them may think fit. Whenever in the said Industrial Schools Act the Secretary of State is named the Education Department shall be understood; and the Inspector of Industrial Schools shall be such Inspector as the Education Department shall appoint."
  MR. LIDDELLsaid, he had no objection to the first part of the Amendment, but he had the strongest possible objection to the latter parts The system pursued in respect to industrial

  1327
  schools was to take children from vicious parents and teach them morality and religion; but if a number of children were admitted into them from off the street for instruction only during the day the whole discipline of the schools would be destroyed.
  MR. MELLYsaid, he concurred in what had just fallen from the hon. Member (Mr. Liddell). Rather than support the Amendment he would ask the Vice President of the Council to withdraw the clause altogether. He held that school Boards would have quite enough to deal with without meddling with the industrial schools.
  MR. DIXONsaid, he hoped his right hon. Friend the Vice President would not accede to the suggestion of the hon. Member for Stoke. At Birmingham there was an industrial school which was maintained by the Town Council; but they were in this difficulty—that they were deficient in any authority to take care that the children of the streets should be sent there. The result was that a society had been formed to do that which might be done by a school Board. He hoped his right hon. Friend would accept the first part of the Amendment.
  MR. CORRANCEsaid, while agreeing that the whole of the provisions of the Industrial School Acts should be revised, he did not think that the Amendment would carry out the object contemplated.
  MR. BUXTONsaid, that the Industrial Schools Act required great revision. In many cases it had proved a great failure, and rather an encouragement to crime than anything else.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he hoped the Committee would not strike the clauses out. The first had already passed, and the power was merely permissive. The Government had considered whether they could include in the present measure a revised Industrial Schools Act; but they had reluctantly come to the conclusion that that could not be done. The main object of the Industrial Schools Act was to take entire possession of the child; whereas, all that they attempted to do in this Bill was to see after the daily education of the child. It might be a question whether the Department should in future superintend by their Inspectors the education given in those schools; but that need not be entertained in this Bill, because the Indus-
  1328
  trial Schools Act would soon have to come before Parliament for revision. He could not state whether it would be advisable to adopt any portion of that Amendment; but there might be an advantage in retaining the first part of it. He would suggest that the right hon. Baronet (Sir Charles Adderley) should withdraw his Amendment, subject to the first part being considered on the Report.
  MR. M'LARENsaid, he hoped that school Boards would be enabled to devote a portion of the rates to the education of the blind, who formed the most destitute class in society, and of whom only 1 in 15 had been taught to read. If a special gratuity of, say, £5 a-year, were given to schoolmasters of ordinary schools for each blind child who should be taught to read, all blind children might in this way easily be taught to read from embossed characters, and the Vice President could not confer a greater benefit than by so enlarging the clause as to give to local Boards the power of making such payments. The industrial training of the blind he would leave to the voluntary efforts of those societies which were formed for that purpose; but as to teaching them to read, and especially to read the Scriptures, the Committee owed a duty to the blind more than to any other class of society. He entreated the right hon. Gentleman to recollect the hopes he excited when a deputation waited on him some months ago on that subject.
  SIR CHARLES ADDERLEYsaid, the Vice President of the Council, in remarking that the Education Department did not undertake to maintain the children, overlooked the fact that by Clause 26 he undertook to establish the schools. He would, however, accept the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion and withdraw the Amendment, subject to the first part of it being brought up again.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  MR. CAWLEYsaid, he would beg to move, in Clause 26, at end, to add—
  "Provided always, That if the school Board of a borough not having a prison belonging to it, and which is assessed to the county rate of the county within which it is situate, exercise the power given by this or the last preceding section, the rating authority of that borough shall be recouped by the justices of the county out of the county rate the proportionate amount contributed by such borough towards the expenses incurred by the prison authority under and for the purposes of "The Industrial Schools Act, 1866."
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, it was impossible to accept that proposition. This was not an imposed duty, but something undertaken. There was no reason to exonerate people from a self-imposed duty.
  MR. HIBBERTsaid, that the clause was objectionable. It would be a hardship on boroughs to be called upon to pay twice over.
  MR. BRUCEsaid, every borough had the power to make arrangements with the county before undertaking the liability.
  Amendment negatived.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clause 27 (School Board).
  MR. DIXON MR. DIXON moved that Progress should be reported. ["Go on!"]
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, he was ready to go on; but as his Amendment was in some degree connected with that of the noble Lord the Member for the Northern Division of the West Riding of Yorkshire (Lord Frederick Cavendish) the discussion might be affected thereby.
  MR. COLLINSsaid, he thought it hardly reasonable to go into a new subject at that stage.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, it would be quite hopeless to think that the discussion on the next clause could be finished, and he therefore would consent to Progress being reported.
  MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he hoped his right hon. Friend (Mr. W. E. Forster) would, on some suitable occasion, be rewarded for the liberal concession he had just made. It might be convenient to the Committee to know what the Government thought should be the order of Public Business next week. They proposed that the Report of the University Tests Bill should be taken first on Monday; immediately after which, the Committee on this Bill would be resumed.
  House resumed.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.

  NEW ZEALAND LOAN (GUARANTEE) BILL.
  Resolution reported;
  "That it is expedient to authorise the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury to guarantee the payment of the principal and interest of a Loan of £1,000,000 sterling, such interest not to exceed the rate of four per centum per annum, to be contracted by the Government of New Zea-
  1330
  land for the construction in that Country of Roads, Bridges, and communications, and for the introduction of Settlers into the said Country; and to make provision for the payment, out of the Consolidated Fund, of such sum or sums of money as shall be required from time to time for giving effect to the said Guarantee."
  Resolution agreed to:—Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. DODSON, Mr. MONSELL, Mr. CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, and Mr. STANS-FELD.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 190.]
  And it being now Seven of the clock, the Sitting was suspended.
  MR. SPEAKERresumed the Chair at Nine of the clock.
  Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members not being present—
  House adjourned at five minutes after Nine o'clock till Monday next.

MINUTES.
Sat First in Parliament—The Lord Hawke, after the death of his cousin.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Passengers Act Amendment * (176).
Second Heading—Local Government Supplemental * (150); General Police and Improvement (Scotland) Supplemental * (155); Public Health (Scotland) Supplemental* (154).
Committee—Ecclesiastical Titles Act Repeal (105–175).
Third Reading—Metropolitan Board of Works (Loans) * (131), and passed.

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL.—MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
LORD WESTBURY, in rising to call the attention of their Lordships to the state of the appellate business before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, said, that this was a question which involved no technicalities of the law, but one which their Lordships would easily appreciate; and it was one in which he was confident their Lordships would take interest, because it approached that which was the first object of all civilized government, the duty of providing for the effectual administration of justice. But before he entered into the details of his statement he would first explain the origin of the jurisdiction of the Privy Council, and its present extent and importance. All were aware that the ordinary Courts of Justice of the Kingdom—the Courts of Chancery, the Queen's Bench, the Common Pleas, and others—though, some of them had power under recent Acts of Parliament of serving process abroad, had no jurisdiction beyond the limits of the United Kingdom—not even over the Channel Islands—and the whole of our immense Empire—all our vast territorial possessions, our Colonies and dependencies—look, as far as the ad-
1284
ministration of justice was concerned, to the Prerogative of the Crown. It was the right of the Crown to establish Courts of Justice in all our territories; and though the exercise of that prerogative had sometimes been restricted by special Acts of Parliament, all those Acts reserved to the Sovereign in Council the ultimate appellate jurisdiction. Thus for India, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, our American settlements, and every foreign possession, and even those foreign countries in which Consular Courts had been established by treaty—in all these the final determination of causes rested with the Queen in Council. The importance, therefore, of the constitution of a tribunal exercising jurisdiction over such immense territories and so many millions of people could not be over-estimated. The effectual discharge of its duties concerned the honour of the Crown and the dignity of the nation. Now, within the last 20 years the amount of business coming before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council had been augmented ten-fold. Originally very few appeals came for the decision of the Queen in Council, but a vast number now came from India and a great many from our various Colonies, and they were likely to increase with the increase of our wealth and commercial relations. In proportion to that increase of our national expansion was the necessity of establishing a final tribunal to check the local Courts and to provide effectually for the administration of justice on well-known principles in every part of our Empire. He was happy to say that there was ample evidence that through the whole of our Colonial Empire the value of this final tribunal was so greatly appreciated that the inhabitants of the various Colonies held it in the greatest respect, and had the utmost confidence that any error or excess on the part of their local jurisdictions would be readily corrected by a resort to it. Indeed, the existence of this great tribunal and the necessity of resorting to it from all countries formed a great bond of union between the mother country and our colonial Empire. Their Lordships would judge of the imperfect manner in which our duty in this respect was performed when he told them what was the condition at this time of the business before the Judicial Committee. From Returns dated the 17th June last he found that

1285
the appeals now waiting to be heard before the Committee were no less than 370. He found, also, from Returns that he had received, that there were at the present moment from Bengal appeals preparing for presentation which amounted to 150 more. Now, the appeals which came from India raised questions of the most complicated and interesting character. The law administered in India was most difficult to understand. There were two great codes or divisions of the law—the Hindoo and the Mussulman. The Hindoo had at least five different schools, and the Mussulman code was also exceedingly difficult to understand and to administer with certainty. But beyond this there was this peculiarity, that both the Hindoo and the Mahomedan laws were founded in great measure upon their religions and their religious usages, which the people adhered to be would not say with bigotry, but with such pertinacity that they would rather part with anything than have any of their religious usages in the smallest degree impaired or violated. Hence the administration of a law founded upon these religious institutions and observances was a most difficult duty, the neglect of which or the intrusting it to incompetent or inexperienced hands might influence the people in a manner the consequences of which might be most momentous. The peculiarity, too, of the Native mind was manifested in another particular. The people would have no confidence in our tribunal if it was constituted solely of Judges taken from their own Courts. He felt confident that no tribunal would give satisfaction in India unless it were partly constituted of those judicial authorities here to whom we and they alike were accustomed to look up to with respect. They desired to have Judges who had been among them, controlled and guided by the most eminent judicial authorities at home. Now, of these 350 appeals 267 were from India, including Ceylon and the Punjaub. Deducting one-fourth, both of the 267 and of the 150 others in preparation, as the proportion likely to be dropped or abandoned, 300 appeals were waiting to be heard from India alone. This was a serious prospect, for he had found, having some experience in hearing these appeals, that one appeal seldom lasted less than an entire day, many occupying longer; so
1286
that India alone would find occupation for a Court sitting throughout the judicial year of 140 days for more than two years to come. To these were to be added the appeals from other portions of our Colonial Empire, and those from the Ecclesiastical Courts, and from the Admiralty Courts. Now the appeals as they stood on the 17th June last from the rest of our colonial Empire amounted to about 90 in number, including therein the Admiralty and Ecclesiastical appeals. Of these 90 some of them might not take any great length of time; but the shortness of these would be abundantly compensated by the great length of time that would be required for determining ecclesiastical appeals, which had of late greatly increased in number. To this business, therefore, less than another year could not be assigned. Thus there were materials for the occupation of the Court for more than three years. The consequence of this block, and of the inability of the Court to deal with new appeals as promptly as the proper administration of justice would require was that a premium was given to every litigant who could afford to give security for £400 to enter an appeal in any case in which he might have been defeated, for the purpose of delaying or wearing out his adversary through the time and expense consumed in the litigation. The amount of property involved in these appeals was several millions in value. That this state of things should have arisen, or should be allowed to continue, was surely a national disgrace. There were, however, circumstances accidental and altogether beyond control which had, to some extent, led to the present state of business before the appellate tribunal. Illness had deprived the Judicial Committee of many efficient members, and death had lately deprived it of probably its most efficient Member, Lord Kingsdown. It was necessary to supply these losses by the appointment of Judges who would command the respect and willing submission of the various communities who looked up to the Judicial Committee for final decisions. It would be impossible to invoke the aid of this House in disposing of any of these arrears; for the Colonies would not endure to have their cases heard before this House—they would regard it as unconstitutional, for they had been accustomed to refer to the Prerogative of the Crown,

1287
and upon that they placed their reliance. His noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack had proposed the creation of a new appellate jurisdiction in connection with the High Court of Justice; but he (Lord Westbury) feared that Bill might not be successful in "another place." It proposed a new Court, consisting of the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice, four Justices of Appeals, four Lords Justices, and. an addition from time to time of three Puisne Judges from the other Courts. But a prompt remedy was required—because things had been in their present condition for a considerable time. He would press the Government to create at once those additional Judges of Appeal and add them to the Judicial Committee, which could then be divided into two sections, one sitting every day throughout the legal year, and attending exclusively to Indian business, the other devoting itself to the remaining business. This was the only way he saw of clearing off the arrears—he hoped, in two years. He must, however, warn his noble and learned Friend that, to find efficient men, he must offer much larger salaries than he proposed in his Bill. He must tell him, indeed, in vulgar phrase, that it would not do to have a "cheap and nasty" article for this purpose. The Court must consist of men commanding general respect and submission. He found by a former Return that the Judicial Committee had now before it an untouched arrear of cases for at least four years, one appeal only having been heard from a decree delivered in 1866, and none from decrees delivered in 1867, 1868, or 1869, and there was still a crop of appeals springing up which would require to be heard. On a question so closely affecting the national honour and the welfare of our colonial Empire, he hoped the Government would take prompt measures to meet an evil which was universally admitted. He had endeavoured to ascertain whether it was possible to meet it by redressing any mismanagement or maladministration in the local Courts, especially in India; but he saw no possibility of making any change there which would diminish the amount of appellate business. The Courts in India underwent a great change in 1862; but at Calcutta alone there were, at least, 16 Courts in the full discharge of their duty, from any of whose decrees appeals might be brought. Of
1288
late years, undoubtedly, care had been taken to improve the position of the Judges in India, and we might hope that hereafter there would be a greater disposition to be satisfied with their decisions; but this would be more than counterbalanced by the progress of commercial activity and wealth, especially in the Central Provinces, Oude, and the Punjaub, and the North-western Provinces, which would entail a corresponding amount of litigation. He saw no means of fulfilling our obligations in this matter, except by constituting two divisions, and enabling them to sit-throughout the legal year. At present, the Judicial Committee sat only a portion of the legal year, through its not being provided with a regular staff of Judges, and these arrears had consequently arisen. He trusted that his noble and learned Friend (the Lord Chancellor) and the Government would not endeavour to meet the evil by patching and tinkering measures; but that they would make satisfactory provision not only for the present pressure, but for the future, in a manner becoming the honour of the Crown and dignity of the nation.
Moved, "That an humble Address he presented to Her Majesty praying that immediate provision may be made for the more rapid despatch, of business before the Judicial Committee."—(The Lord Westbury.)
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, their Lordships must feel greatly indebted to his noble and learned Friend, (Lord Westbury) for calling attention to a subject which, he assured him, had not escaped the attention of the Government—for it was a subject which it was desirable should be carefully and immediately considered. Early this year he was first apprised of the state of Indian appeals, which was shown to be most unsatisfactory, though, as he would point out presently, not exactly so bad as described by his noble and learned Friend. Before the present Notice appeared on the Paper he had considered the best mode of meeting the difficulties connected with the constitution of the Judicial Committee, and had given instructions for the preparation of a Bill which he hoped shortly to submit to their Lordships. Indeed, the same idea occurred to him as to his noble and learned Friend—that of strengthening the existing Judicial Committee, and di-

1289
viding it into two sections, which might be sitting at the same time. The constitution of the Judicial Committee, though by no means the least of the results of Lord Brougham's zeal in legal reforms, was not altogether that which practice had shown to be most desirable. It consisted of the Lord Chancellor and all the Judges of our higher Courts who were Privy Councillors—these being usually the chiefs of the three Common Law Courts—the Lords Justices of Appeal, the Master of the Bolls, and the Judges of the Divorce and Admiralty Courts if, as was usual, they were Privy Councillors. The consequence of this constitution of the Court was, that as most of these persons were engaged in other judicial duties, requiring all but their constant attendance, they had little leisure for attendance on the Judicial Committee, and it was therefore by no means easy to secure a quorum. To that section of Lord Brougham's Act which provided that retired English Judges, being Privy Councillors, should be members of the Committee they were indebted for some of its regular and able attendants. Of late years, however, from increasing age and infirmities some of these members had withdrawn from the working staff of the tribunal. The only means provided by the Act of reinforcing the Committee was the power given to the Crown by Sign Manual to appoint two members, and the two thus appointed had been very assiduous in attendance. One of them, Sir James Colvile, formerly Chief Justice of Calcutta, was a constant and eminent attendant, he having last year sat 74 days—19 days more than any other member. The other was Sir Joseph Napier, who attended 55 times. His noble and learned Friend (Lord Chelmsford) attended 44 times, though at the same time he was most constant in his attendance at the Appeal Sittings of this House. The limitation in the number of members to be appointed by the Crown was most unnecessary, and he thought it advisable that, in addition to retired Indian Judges, Her Majesty should have unlimited power to appoint any Judge who had performed eminent service, either in the Colonies or at home, to be members of the Committee. He also thought that power should be given to appoint distinguished barristers who had retired from practice. To this he looked forward as likely
1290
to furnish several eminent members. Perhaps the most eminent man who had sat on the Committee since its formation was Lord Kingsdown, who had never, theretofore, held any judicial position, and he would afford a satisfactory precedent, if any were required. Thus, by abolishing the restriction both as to number and as to the having previously filled a judicial position he saw no difficulty in constituting a Committee which could divide itself into two sections. Without desiring to deny or palliate the arrears in Indian cases, he felt it right to mention that they were largely attributable to the dilatoriness which characterized the proceedings in India, and the necessity of transcripts—namely, translations of all the evidence and documents used in the case—being sent over from India prior to the hearing of an appeal. This was always a source of difficulty and delay. An intelligent officer of the Judicial Committee had informed him that the non-arrival of the transcripts was one great cause of no appeal later than 1866 having been heard. The transcripts for the last two years had not yet arrived; and even when they did arrive there was considerable difficulty in forcing the cases on for hearing, for out of the 250 provided with transcripts only 37 were set down to be hoard, 11 of these being set down ex parte. This meant that only one party would appear at the hearing—a circumstance which would not necessarily make the proceedings short, as the Committee, when only one side appeared, were specially anxious to see that justice was done. He was bound, however, to add that a larger number would have been set down had not these 37 been already down, which seemed as many as were likely, to be got through in the current year. Still, there was wonderful dilatoriness in bringing these matters to a hearing. Considering that only 37 Indian and 20 other cases were set down for hearing, though the business in arrear was so large in amount, yet he did not regard it as alarming. He concurred with his noble and learned Friend's hope that steps would be taken in India which would diminish the appeals. He had learnt from Sir Barnes Peacock, an eminent Judge who had just returned from India, that at Calcutta only such passages of the evidence given and documents used in the lower Courts as

1291
the parties might desire to interpret came before the Supreme Court; so that, with such partial information, one could not wonder at appeals being numerous, and at the decisions of the Court being sometimes reversed. Considerable alteration and revision were, therefore, called for in India. Before he sat down he wished to make an explanation with regard to the position of business in the Court of Chancery as regarded the appointment of a new Lord Justice. In August last they had the misfortune to lose a Lord Justice of great eminence (Lord Justice Giffard); but at that time, having in contemplation the Bill which was now before the other House, he did not think it right that the office should be filled up while there was uncertainty as to what would be done as regarded the constitution of the new Courts; and there appeared no necessity for making an appointment, because at Michaelmas Term only 33 appeals remained to be heard, and they were of the most recent date. At the commencement of 1868, when the noble and learned Lord who preceded him on the "Woolsack (Lord Cairns) occupied the position of Lord Chancellor, there were arrears of 90 appeals; but, before the Long Vacation, he had disposed of 133 appeals, including appeals that had newly arisen, leaving only 33 undisposed of. It seemed to him, therefore, that, with the assistance of his Friend Lord Justice Giffard, he (the Lord Chancellor) would be quite able to keep down the appeals. He was happy to say that he had not been disappointed in that expectation; for, notwithstanding the illness of Lord Justice Giffard, coupled with other adverse circumstances, the appeals in arrear at the present moment were only 46 in number, the latest dating not quite four months ago—namely, the 9th of March last. Of course, as Lord Justice Giffard was not now able to attend, it had become necessary to appoint another Lord Justice, which carried with it an addition to the strength of the Judicial Committee. He had no doubt that, when the alterations had been made, to effect which a Bill had been prepared, they would be able to constitute such a Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as would keep down the arrears. Those arrears, although discreditable, were not so formidable as his noble and learned Friend (Lord Westbury) seemed
1292
to think; and he trusted their Lordships would not feel it necessary to concur in the Motion for a Commission of Inquiry.
LORD ROMILLYregretted to find, from the general tone of his noble and learned Friend's speech, that he proposed merely to patch up the existing system. In order to administer justice satisfactorily it was necessary that confidence should be felt equally in the primary Court and the appellate Court, and both must have a proper force of officers. Not one of the Judges on the Judicial Committee received a penny for his services. They could not expect to have an efficient tribunal unless there were Judges attached to it, whose duty it was to preside there, without attending any other Court, and in receipt of liberal salaries. Lord Kingsdown was an exceptional instance, for he had a large fortune and took a great interest in the administration of justice, and devoted himself to it for many years gratuitously; but the members of the Judicial Committee were mostly persons who attended by snatches from their ordinary engagements, or returned Judges who were anxious to go into retirement. He had himself been called on to attend for a few days every year; but he could only do so by taking some days which ought to be devoted to the preparation of judgments, or days when he ought to be sitting in his own Court. Sir James Colvile, of whom all must speak with praise, had been performing the functions of Chief Judge in India for many years, and had returned home, entitled to retire on his pension and reputation. Instead of doing so he gave his services to the hearing of Indian appeals gratuitously, and without any obligation of any kind to give his attendance. He (Lord Romilly) must say that it was not desirable to appoint to the Judicial Committee Judges who had retired because they had felt themselves too infirm to perform the duties of their office. They ought rather to put in young blood and new blood, and to pay well those whom they appointed. With respect to the appellate tribunal in India, the Supreme Court of Calcutta, it was a remarkable circumstance that, when a cause was referred to them on appeal, the documents which had been before the primary Court were not put in in full or translations, but only so much as the parties thought expedient. It was

1293
no wonder, then, that that Court, not having before it the evidence on which it could give a well-considered decision, should frequently fail in its decrees, and so give rise to the numerous appeals that came from India. That the Supreme Court had not the confidence of the public there was shown by the fact that, since 1862, the appeals from it had increased enormously, upwards of 600 having come from that Court alone in 7½ years; while, from the rest of India and in our other dependencies, there had been no material increase. This was not the fault of the Court or of the Judges, but because, as he had already shown, they had not the full circumstances of the case before them. Additional Judges were wanted there, and a greater power of obtaining documents. He concurred in the recommendation of his noble and learned Friend (Lord Westbury) that a Court should be constituted specially for these appeals, with proper salaries, with the addition of as many retired Judges as might be thought fit. Appeals were at present limited, on account of the delay and expense involved, to cases where the property in dispute exceeded £1,000 in value; so that whatever injustice might be done in minor cases there was no appeal. Security for costs to the extent of £400 had also to be given. With regard to the statement that there were only 37 appeals set down for hearing, if these were disposed of tomorrow the remaining 195, in which the transcripts had been sent over, would rapidly be brought on; but the parties did not think it necessary to employ counsel and deliver the brief until there was a prospect of an early hearing. He trusted that the Government would grapple with the evil in an energetic manner.
VISCOUNT HALIFAXsaid, he was sorry to hear that the delay in the Indian judicial business was so great. The circumstance had been attributed to the inadequate number of Judges in the High Court at Calcutta, and to the fact that the proper translations or transcripts of the cases before the local Indian Courts were not obtainable by the High Court. He was Secretary of State for India at the time the Act constituting that Court was passed, and all he could say was that the Judges of the High Court ought to have the power of sending for any documents which they might
1294
require. The only complaint made at the time was that the number of Judges appointed would be too large rather than too small.
LORD CAIRNSsaid, he rejoiced very much that this question had been brought before their Lordships, because there was great danger that some misapprehension might arise with reference to the state of business before the Judicial Committee. The business that came before that Court did not directly concern the subjects of the Queen at home, but those only who dwelt in India and the Colonies; and, as in most matters affecting those at a distance, we in England were apt to overlook the evils which other people suffered. Were our own Courts in the same state as those in which Indian cases were determined—if there were an arrear in one appellate Court of 350 cases—the force of public opinion would be so great as to compel the Government to take steps within 24 hours to remedy the evil; but there was danger of our treating lightly the grievances of those who had no voice in forming public opinion in this country, and in that way a feeling might be generated in the Colonies which we should have cause to regret. The matter was of the more importance because, owing to the line which our colonial policy had taken during late years—as to the propriety of which he should not then attempt to give an opinion—it had come to pass that one of the most real and tangible points of connection between the mother country and the Colonies remaining un-severed was the right of the Colonies to bring their judicial proceedings by way of review before Her Majesty in Council; and that was a right which was deeply appreciated by the Colonies at present, and which they would be sorry to surrender, but which they would be bound to surrender if they believed that it had become a mockery and a delusion. He had not the least doubt that the bare statistical fact as to the number of appeals in arrear, as stated by his noble and learned Friend the Lord. Chancellor, was strictly accurate; but the House must not deceive themselves about the matter. The question was not so much what the suitors in the appeals which had been mentioned felt or whether they were themselves chargeable with negligence and delay, but whether a much greater evil might not arise. The

1295
mischief was, that when the number of appeals in the Judicial Council amounted to 100 or 150, and it was known that in ordinary course the arrears could not be wiped out in less than a year or two, no matter by whose fault those arrears had accumulated, and that therefore there was a solid barrier interposed to the progress of further cases which might be coming forward—when once a certainty existed that no fresh appeal could be heard for some years a premium was offered to unsuccessful suitors in the Indian Courts to appeal, because, taking into consideration the high rate of interest in India, it became worth while, as a mere commercial speculation, to delay the payment of the money for two or three years by appealing to the Privy Council, even if it had to be paid eventually. With the amount of arrears that at present existed there was practically no appeal whatever from the Indian Courts to the Privy Council, and there could be no doubt that some of those who might think that they had good grounds for appealing chose to suffer wrong rather than subject themselves for so long to uncertainty, and that others who had been unsuccessful in litigation took the dishonest course he had referred to, because they knew they could by so doing delay payment for an indefinite period. He had heard that night for the first time the suggestion of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack that the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council should be divided into two Courts, with the view of enabling the arrears to be wiped out. He should be glad if any means could be adopted by which the arrears might be cleared off; but he hoped that his noble and learned Friend would consider well, before he attempted to carry his suggestion into effect, whether that method was the best that could be proposed—whether that aim could not be much better accomplished by strengthening the Judicial Committee. In his opinion there was great danger of creating by that means two weak Courts in the place of one strong tribunal. It must also be borne in mind that the number of counsel who had devoted themselves to the study of Indian law before the Privy Council was extremely limited, and that therefore great mischief might result from the division of the business, because counsel would be unable to be in two places at once.
1296
He cordially agreed with the remark that it would be a great evil if the decisions of the Privy Council came to be looked upon with less respect than they now obtained; and therefore he ventured to put it to the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack and to Her Majesty's Government, whether it would not be a more desirable course, instead of dividing the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council into two branches, if they were to strengthen the existing tribunal as much as they could by making it worth the while of those who now formed it to sit constantly like any other Court, instead of merely sitting as they now did for a few weeks in each year. He could only reiterate what had been said of the retired Indian Judges. Those public men, like Sir James Colvile and Sir Lawrence Peel, who had earned hardly their very moderate pensions by their service in India, had a perfect right to say that they had returned home to this country after years of labour for rest and case, and that they did not choose to resume their labours in the Privy Council. They were, therefore, entitled to the highest praise and to the thanks of the country for serving on the Judicial Committee without any kind of compensation being awarded them. But by strengthening the Judicial Committee by such men as these, and by giving salaries adequate to induce unintermitting diligence he believed they might clear off all these arrears in two years.
LORD BROUGHAMobserved that at the time when the late Lord Brougham was turning the subject of the appellate jurisdiction for India in his mind, he had urged upon him the necessity for having a paid Court of Appeal. In answer to that suggestion, Lord Brougham, alluding to the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, said—"What will Althorp say? He will never consent to stand £15,000 or £20,000 a year to pay the members of the Privy Council. The appellate Court must be framed upon the model of the House of Lords, the Judges in which are volunteers; and the Court must be constituted out of the retired Judges, retired Chancellors, and retired Indian Judges," as had actually been the case. He urged upon his brother that he greatly distrusted the value of eleemosynary work, which was never satisfactory. Answering his suggestions on this point, his

1297
brother said—"We will give it a trial. If afterwards the business increases, it will then be time to come to Parliament and ask it to pay the Judges." In his opinion the time had now arrived when that change had become necessary, and he trusted that the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack would take the matter into his consideration.
LORD WESTBURYsaid, he was not satisfied with what had fallen from the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack; he wanted his noble and learned Friend to say something definite, to give him a distinct promise that immediate action would be taken in this matter. Would his noble and learned Friend engage to bring forward a Bill to remove the obstacles he had pointed out? It was never too late to provide means for the administration of justice; but if the only answer now made to suitors having cases hung up in Court was—"Wait patiently," their reply would be—"We have waited patiently for four years." He should be very sorry to do anything that would look like opposition to Her Majesty's Government; but, unless he received more definite promise of immediate action on their part, he must frankly say he should be compelled to trouble their Lordships to divide for the purpose of ascertaining who were persuaded of the necessity, the obligation, and the duty of providing more effectually for the administration of justice. The subject had been deferred too long, and it was high time that something should be done of a definite character. His noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack said there were only 37 appeals waiting for hearing, and that that number was not very formidable. He begged to point out that his noble and learned Friend appeared to be under a misapprehension, inasmuch as he had not taken into account the fact that there were as many as 250 appeals from India alone, or at any rate the transcripts of the records for that number of cases had already been transmitted, and were now lying at the office in readiness for hearing. The number on the paper was 37; but solicitors would not enter for hearing appeals which there was no probability of getting hoard, because when they did so large sums of money had to be paid with briefs, and so forth. The parties to no fewer than 260 appeals were at present debarred from obtaining
1298
justice. The evil was a crying one, and it ought not to be trifled with or delayed. He did not accuse his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack of either trifling with or delaying it; but he thought the Government ought to give a promise of immediate relief. With regard to the remarks of his noble and learned Friend opposite, he wished to observe that his suggestion for a division of the Court was only a temporary expedient, intended to last until the arrears were cleared of. He proposed that there should be a sub-division, and that the Indian appeals should be taken by one sub-division. For that there was at present sufficient judicial power, and there was also a sufficient number of barristers ready and willing to attend the Court. Meanwhile he would be content with a definite promise from the Government, and in that case would not ask their Lordships to divide upon the question.
LORD DENMANsaid, that it was very desirable that Her Majesty should have the power of increasing the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and if it were necessary, he felt sure, that in "another place," a sufficient income would be found for those who sat upon appeals; but he thought, that as in the case of retired Ministers, those who were to be paid should declare that their private income was not sufficient to enable them to bear the expenses of their station. The first Earl of Eldon, in 1823 as to other appeals, had said, that in the case of any future Chancellor—although the retiring pension was then only £4,000 a year—the Minister should make his attendance a condition of his pension; but that noble Earl retired at the age of 76, and for 11 years never attended any case of appeal in the House of Lords. He (Lord Denman) believed it was the duty of the Lord President of the Council to constitute a sufficient Court of Appeal. He had been told by Sir Barnes Peacock, that before the fusion of the Native Court with the Supreme Court, original causes were four years in being heard, but that latterly only three weeks elapsed between the commencement and the decision—the delay, therefore, was only in the Court of Appeal. With regard to the length of the documents they were, probably copied at greater length for the Court of Appeal, because, being fully understood in the Supreme

1299
Court, it was not needful to transcribe them at great length. He thought that with regard to the Members of the Committee, honour was far better than profit.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he was anxious to explain that he had given what he intended to be understood as a promise on the part of the Government. He had said that in a few days he would introduce a Bill by which they proposed to remedy the evil. That Bill was in course of preparation; and, such being the case, he thought it would hardly be necessary for him to enter into the details of the measure at present. He begged to explain also that, in the division of business, his idea was not to have two divisions of the Court, both hearing Indian appeals. His idea was to have one division hearing appeals from India, the other appeals from the Admiralty and Ecclesiastical Courts, or any other appeals that might come before the Committee. The same set of counsel did not usually attend to those two classes of cases. He did not think he had shown himself remiss in this matter. He had not had the honour of holding his present Office four years, and he was not aware that the subject had been mooted by any of his predecessors on the Woolsack.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLLsaid, certain facts had come before him which led him to believe that steps might be taken which would have the effect of limiting the number of appeals from India. Accordingly, he had communicated with the Government of India with the view of effecting that object. He confessed that he was quite unable to understand why the Supreme Court of Calcutta could not have the same information before it as that furnished to the Privy Council; nor could he see how similar decisions could be expected on two different sets of documents. He believed the only difficulty in the way of supplying the Supreme Court with all the documents arose from the expense of translating documents used before the district Courts.
LORD WESTBURYsaid, that after the statement of his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack he would not press his Motion.
Motion (by Leave of the House) withdrawn.

ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES ACT REPEAL BILL—(No. 105.)
(The Lord Privy Seal.)
ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES ACT REPEAL BILL—(No. 105.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to Order).
  On Question, That the Preamble be agreed to,
  LORD CAIRNSsaid, that in consequence of the legislation of last year with reference to the Irish Church, the Government had made a promise of proposing legislation on the subject of the Ecclesiastical Titles Act. He admitted that, as the Irish Church had ceased to be an Established Church, it was absolutely necessary that something should be done in this matter; but, if it had not been for the Act of last year, it would have been better to leave the Ecclesiastical Titles Act alone. As, however, it was necessary to do something, he did not object to its being done. But he had a proposition to make in connection with the Bill which he hoped their Lordships would not think an unreasonable one. If they were to repeal the whole of the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, without carefully explaining that the declaration contained in it, either inferentially or positively, as to the state of the common and general law of England were not meant to be departed from, they might give rise to serious misapprehension out-of-doors, where it might be thought that Parliament had changed its mind with regard to the truth and propriety of those declarations. In repealing the Penalty Clauses of the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, therefore, they ought to be very cautious not to fall into that danger, and to show on the face of their legislation that the declaration which accompanied those penalties in that Act were well founded and still continued in full force. He wished to preserve all that was valuable in the substance of the declaration embodied in that Act, and while removing penalties imposed on the use of ecclesiastical titles which were intended merely as titles of office, and not as titles of authority, honour, or dignity, still to maintain the established law of this country, which was to the effect that all titles of dignity, honour, and authority flowed from the Sovereign alone, and that it was not in the power of any person other than the Sovereign of these realms to confer such titles.
  Amendment moved, in page 1, line 5, to leave out from "certain" to "although" in line 28, and insert—
  "Enactments were made prohibiting under penalties the assumption of the title of archbishop or bishop of a pretended province or diocese, or archbishop or bishop of a city, place, or territory, or dean of any pretended deanery in England or Ireland not being the see, province, or diocese of an archbishop or bishop, or deanery of any dean recognized by law; and whereas no ecclesiastical title of honour or dignity derived from any see, province, diocese, or deanery, or from any city, place, or territory within this realm can be validly created, assumed, or used, nor can any see, province, diocese, or deanery be created, nor any coercive power or pre-eminence in reference thereto be conferred otherwise than under the authority and by the favour of her Majesty, her heirs and successors, and according to the laws of this realm; and any title of honour or dignity derived from any see, province, diocese, or deanery, or from any city, place, or territory within this realm attempted to be created, assumed, or used, and any see, province, diocese, or deanery attempted to be created, and any coercive power or pre-eminence in reference thereto attempted to be conferred under colour of any alleged authority out of this realm, or of any alleged authority within this realm, not being the authority of Her Majesty, her heirs and successors, and of the laws of this realm, is and ought to be taken to be unlawful and void; and it is expedient to substitute a declaration to that effect for the Act fourteen and fifteen Victoria, chapter sixty, in order that the use by ministers of religion of various denominations of designations regarded as titles of office merely."—(The Lord Cairns).
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEYsaid, that the object of the Government, in preparing the Bill, was precisely in accordance with what had just been stated by the noble and learned Lord opposite; and he did not think they should have any occasion to quarrel about the words used for carrying out that object. In repealing the penalties of the Ecclesiastical Titles Act they ought not to invalidate the declarations made in that Act, as to the law of the land at the time when it was passed: he should, however, feel some reluctance in consenting to the re-enactment of those declarations in a somewhat stronger form than the necessity of the case perhaps required, and he should prefer the form in which it was done in the Bill. He was, however, content to accept the words of the Amendment proposed by the noble and learned Lord in the Preamble, but not those he proposed to insert in the enacting part of the Bill. Instead of the word "unlawful" in the first clause, as proposed by the noble and learned Lord, he thought it would be better to substitute
  1302
  "invalid, void, and of no effect to all intents and purposes."
  The Preamble was then amended by inserting instead of "unlawful and void" the words "invalid, void, and of no effect" and agreed to.
  Then the Clauses 1 and 2 struck out, and clauses as proposed by the Lord Cairns amended and agreed to:—
  "1. That no ecclesiastical title of honour or dignity derived from any see, province, diocese, or deanery, or from any city, place, or territory within this realm, can be validly created, assumed, or used, nor can any see, province, diocese, or deanery be created, nor can any coercive power or pre-eminence be conferred in respect thereto, otherwise than under the authority and by the favour of Her Majesty, her heirs and successors, and according to the laws of this realm; and any title of honour or dignity derived from any see, province, diocese, or deanery, or from any city, place, or territory within this realm attempted to be created, assumed, or used; and any see, province, diocese, or deanery attempted to be created, and any coercive power or pre-eminence in reference thereto attempted to be conferred by or under colour of any alleged authority out of this realm or any alleged authority within this realm, not being the authority of Her Majesty, her heirs and successors, and of the laws of this realm, is and ought to be taken to be unlawful and void.
  "2. That the said Act of the Session of Parliament held in the 14th and 15th years of the reign of Her Majesty, cap. 60, shall be and the same is hereby repealed."
  The Report of the Amendments to be received on Monday next: and Bill to be printed, as amended. (No. 175.)

IRELAND—DISTURBANCES AT CORK.

  QUESTION.
  THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAMasked Her Majesty's Government, Whether the statements which had appeared in the public prints concerning the state of the city of Cork are correct; and whether the measures taken by the authorities have proved sufficient to secure the protection of the persons and property of the inhabitants?
  EARL SPENCERsaid, it was true that during the last few days some disturbances had broken out in the city of Cork; but he did not think his noble Friend could expect from him any detailed account of what had taken place. He could simply state that a strike occurred among the tailors of that city, and that while considerable crowds of the unemployed paraded the city, the opportunity was seized by the evil-dis-

  1303
  posed in the place to commit acts of riot. He was happy to say that the riots had now ceased. The Irish Government, on hearing the report of the disturbances, sent down a large increase of constabulary to aid the local force. On the 27th and. 28th ultimo, as many as 150 extra constabulary were despatched to Cork: and he had no doubt that the force of constabulary, combined with the military stationed in the place, would be amply sufficient to meet any emergency which might arise. He had received a telegram that day from Cork, stating that the city was quiet, that the people on strike were returning to work, that the excitement was subsiding, and that every precaution had been taken to stop intimidation and prevent disorder. He need not assure his noble Friend and the House that the Irish Government would use every effort to protect property and restore tranquillity and order.
  THE MARQUESS OF CLANRICARDEsaid, that no blame could be thrown on the Irish Government for the disturbances in Cork; but all accounts, both private and public, showed that the Mayor of that city, who was the principal authority there, was greatly to blame. It would be well, as the municipal authorities of that town, on more than one occasion, seemed to have been Sadly deficient in repressing disorder, that they should know that they could be proceeded against by indictment for default in the execution of their duty. The law had been expressly laid down by the Judges of the land in the case of the Bristol riots, which were much more formidable than any that had occurred in Cork, that proceedings could be taken by indictment or information in the King's Bench against the Mayor, if he had not shown proper activity in the performance of the duty he had assumed.

PASSENGERS ACT AMENDMENT BILL [H.L.]
A Bill to authorize the carriage of Naval and Military Stores in passenger ships—Was presented by The Earl GRANVILLE; read 1a. (No. 176)
House adjourned at Seven o'clock, to Monday next, Eleven o'clock.